Quote:
Originally Posted by CineSicko
The phrase "silly little schoolgirl catfight" rendered you deserving of the "shaddap" in question. Contest that all you want, but it's what garnered you that command. You seem like a nice guy, though, so I'll retract the statement and even offer up a slight and halfhearted apology. That's me at my most sensitive.
Back to the subject at hand: You said you're not fond of the Criterion, so is that to say that you like the MGM disc?
|
I do like the MGM disc. I would never have known there was any so-called "DVD-era magenta push" on it if I had not read it in this thread. I'm not that sophisticated a videophile. At the very least I can acknowledge that might even be true. But to call it unbearable and unwatchable compared to the Criterion is utter, errant nonsense. It's just so smug it gets under my skin. The MGM is perfectly watchable and everyone knows it, considering it has been watched that way for decades. Admittedly, I prefer the MGM because it is closer to my own memories of early viewings of the film and thus makes more sense
to me, and also because the image is a lot more in line with other city-set films of the era. I accept that the Criterion is the "approved" version by proxy but it simply isn't my favored presentation. That doesn't make me some kind of ignorant idiot as has been suggested by some in this thread. Even the most ardent Criterion fans can't and shouldn't deny their history of releasing heavily color-manipulated versions of recently-restored films. I don't have to repeat the titles but I will: Dressed To Kill, Scanners, Tree Of Wooden Clogs, and there are probably more of which I'm not aware. Whether Midnight Cowboy belongs in that group I can't decide and won't pretend to know enough about that, but it's certainly food for thought.