Travis McClain

You know, to be honest, I'm only marginally comfortable as a participant in the other challenges. I'd be a horrible host for those. And even though I dig playing along with the Horror Challenge...that one scares me!

The debate I had wasn't about this challenge, but rather how another website ought to adopt a more holistic view of the Criterion Collection. I argued in favor of expanding the section on Criterion and, to put it mildly, it did not go well. I don't care to elaborate beyond that, because it's bad form to do so, but I do feel entitled to share that I had a frustrating time over this very issue elsewhere.

I sometimes forget just unique the civility on this forum is!

shadokitty

I just ordered a couple used copies of Robocop and Life of Brian, both Criterion Collection editions at Amazon for $3 each. My first ever Criterion DVDs. I might try the Hulu plus trial as well.

Dimension X

I take it you left me off that list because you wanted to keep the plum position as MYOC Second-in-Command for yourself.

Trevor

Doh! I knew I was forgetting at least a couple Challenge leads, Caligulathegod another; but yes, MYOC is a favorite of mine. Not sure if I could pick just one though.

Gobear

Just to whet the appetite, any ideas on this month's newsletter hint. I'm thinking Fail-Safe ("I am the matador!")

CardiffGiant

Sounds good.

After I checked out the Hulu+ website, I see what you all are saying and I would agree. Generally speaking, I default to Trevor's perspective towards all challenges. I'd rather be the inclusive person and bring in as many participants as possible. These titles do have Criterion listed as the studio. So, I'm happy with that. I wasn't sure exactly what we were talking about there.

Last year there was some talk of scrapping the Genres. The reason for this is that there are some fairly massive underrepresented genres within the collection and many are difficult to define. If we want to keep the Genres I would at least propose that we refine them a bit for representation.

I kind of like it. What do others think?

Agreed. It was pretty simple putting things together last year, mainly because you laid the foundation the previous year. If anyone wants to take the reins on the sponsor part, please do.

I completely agree with your perspective here. Part of my reason for wanting to switch it a bit was because I feel that genres are subjective. Is Life Aquatic Action/Adventure, Drama, or Comedy? I realize that the answer is all three would be acceptable, but the real problem for me is the underrepresented Genres like "Science Fiction" and "Horror." I realize that there are a couple dozen titles out there, but there are literally hundreds of "drama" titles. I thought that if we shifted that to people like Bergman, Godard, Kurosawa, (Ozu...for GoBear...), then it might be easier to define those things.

Would merging some of the categories make more sense for everyone? I feel like this should be more democratic than dictatorial. This isn't my checklist, it's our checklist. Also, I like leaning towards Trevor on these because he set up the challenge in the first place.

My apologies for the length of the post...wanted to respond to as many of these items as possible.

CardiffGiant

Not at all. I started participating in challenges, in part, because you were always inclusive to people and I hope that same sentiment is communicated here. I didn't complete the checklist last year, but I don't feel bad about it. I think of the checklist as something to push me to explore new content, not as something that I have to complete to be a "real" participant.

To anyone reading this thread thinking of joining the challenge, please do, we're not a bunch of snobs only talking about films you've never heard of. There are plenty of mainstream films released by Criterion on laserdisc, DVD, BD, etc. There's something for everyone.

Travis McClain

Regarding genres, maybe the solution would be to simply open it up to "Watch movies from five different genres" with the clause that you can only use one movie for one genre. So if you wanted to count Life Aquatic for Comedy, that's fine but you couldn't also count it for Adventure.

Fist of Doom

You might want to PM one of the other challenge hosts, like Chad or Mister Peepers. They can guide you on how to ask for sponsors. This is a pretty limited challenge, but it's worth making a try.

Travis McClain

Rich (GoldenWheels) at Hamilton Books is awfully generous. Not sure what prizes might be appropriate for a Criterion Challenge, of course, but I'm sure he can find something!

Trevor

Good point, the genre sections of each Challenge checklist are often confusing or difficult, particularly the Challenges with multiple similar subgenres.

We created this one to be simpler, but to still get people to broaden their tastes.
I think as long as a broad genre has at least a dozen options in the Criterion extended catalog, it could be ok to leave in.
I love the director idea, again as long as there are at least a dozen options.
The original genres here were sort of thrown together with little thought or discussion, so tweaking is definitely in order. Any specific ideas?
Exactly. I like this checklist being simpler and easier than the other Challenges, not exactly sure why, but still a bit of a challenge.


Great point! When I first got into film and DVDs, I thought of Criterion fans as artsy fartsy snobs. My first Criterion purchases were mainstream titles like Silence of the Lambs, Robocop, and, I'll admit it, Armageddon. Thanks to their great job on supplements on some of those titles, I took chances on some of their other releases when they went on sale. Before I knew what was happening, I was loving the "artsy" films as much as my Godzilla films.
Great idea!

But I think I still prefer mandating a range of genres, just to force people out of their box. The main point of the checklists is to broaden people's ranges, the next is to add some challenge to participation.

Travis McClain

Well, the nice thing is that there are really only so many genres anyway, so if we have to pick five different genres--each represented by a unique movie--I think that addresses the point of expanding one's horizons. I mean, really, the only genres are:

Action
Adventure
Comedy
Crime*
Drama
Fantasy
Historical Epic*
Horror
Science-Fiction
Western

*Not entirely sure these are genres.

Everything else is just a sub-genre of these. Animation isn't a genre; it's a medium, and in any event, there's not a lot of it in the Criterion Collection. (Is there any?)

So if we take that group of ten genres--or swap out the *s for two we prefer--then my suggestion would have participants having to watch one movie for half of them. That seems like a pretty reasonable nudge to explore.

Also, for what it's worth, Criterion.com makes no reference to genre, except within essays or the occasional synopsis. You can't sort the collection by genre, and there are no genre labels on the pages for each movie. The message seems to be either, "Genre is irrelevant" or "Too much hassle." Given the lengths to which they go for their releases and website, it's hard to imagine they drew the line at assigning genres. I think instead they favor a more holistic view of films that ignores genre labels--which all too often become barriers.

Trevor

^ True, but people who hate horror and sci-fi can still easily steer clear of those, and pick 5 very similar films. It seems like lots of films have multiple genres listed, and the same type of film could be listed for Action, Adventure, Crime, and Drama; with Comedy and even Western being combo'd with other genres easily.

I like forcing people to choose genres that are dissimilar, and out of the dramedy or action mainstream.

Maybe make comedy, horror, and sci-fi mandatory; but leave the other two up to the individual?

Travis McClain

Well, don't forget that the next challenge after this one is Horror, so requiring that specific genre for this challenge seems a little much. I suspect most participants will get the itch and start with some horror near the end of September for this challenge as a prelude anyway. I recall several of us discussed doing so last year. In fact, the last movie I watched was Bram Stoker's Dracula, which I timed so it overlapped the end of this and beginning of Horror and counted it for both.

I dunno, it feels like at this point maybe we're getting too much into micromanaging the challenge, rather than guiding it. Maybe I'm just not properly enthused at the moment, though, so feel free to dismiss my misgivings on the matter!

I forget: do we have "Watch a short film" on the checklist? There are several included as bonus features throughout the collection. Also, I think last year I suggested we consider adding, "Read an insert booklet" to the list. It occurs to me that, for those who will be streaming or renting their selections and won't have access to the booklets that the essays are all available to read on Criterion.com. So if we do add that to the checklist, perhaps it should instead be something more generic like, "Read an essay."

Lastly, had it not been for venturing into the Criterion Collection during last year's challenge, I might still have not begun watching Ingmar Bergman movies. I wouldn't have ever guessed it would actually bother me that Persona isn't in the Criterion Collection, but it does. In fact, I had no idea that movie existed, much less hadn't received the Criterion treatment.

There is something intimidating about Criterion, and I think a big part of it comes from the fact that so many fans tout it as the most elite level of being a movie fan. It's as though once you truly appreciate Criterion selections, anything else is mindless drivel to be scorned whenever possible. I know last year we had a lively discussion thread where several of us worked through that perception and found that we really did enjoy a lot of our first time viewings.

I have no problem saying I also loved Transformers: Dark of the Moon when I saw it. Finding out you dig Bergman doesn't have to make you a pretentious snob who's too good for a movie about robots beating the hell out of each other. If I had one hope for this challenge, it's that newbies like me would learn that those two kinds of fandom are not mutually exclusive.

The Man with the Golden Doujinshi

I'd disagree with it not being a genre, based on the definition of genre from dictionary.com

As for the second part, I don't think there is any.

What about Music/Musical or Documentary? I do seem them as potentially being too limited to make it to the list.

Trevor

While many of us do multiple Challenges, I think it's best to think of them as completely independent. We shouldn't assume that any participant is going to go on to the Horror Challenge.

Many of us will of course, and the smart ones will watch our horror Criterion so that it ends just after midnight on the 31st/1st.
I don't think we're there yet, just brainstorming. But then, I micromanage my 25 year old receipts, so perhaps I'm mot a good judge.
I think it's on there, if not, sounds like a good addition to me!
We've always had a checklist entry to devour a release entirely, every special feature and booklet, but I like the thought of adding "read an essay" as well.
Hopefully this Challenge will expose at least one person a year to something new to them and great like Bergman or Kurosawa.

Yeah, no animation at all iirc.

Musicals and Documentaries probably have at least a dozen choices each, but if we make them non-mandatory or part of a choose-your-own they would work well.

Travis McClain

I looked for "animation" on dictionary.com but their definition wasn't terribly helpful. I did, however, turn up "animated cartoon":

That sounds more technical than stylistic to me; ergo, a medium rather than genre. After all, there are animated fantasies, animated science-fiction, animated comedies, animated action movies, etc. Being animated may have specific aesthetic implications, but those are different from storytelling choices.

Of course, our little debate over semantics is rendered moot entirely here because:

Music/Musical and Documentary both sound viable to me. Neither is particularly dominant in the Criterion Collection, but at least they're something distinctive. I'd suggest replacing Historical Epic on that list I offered with one of these. Crime seems more prevalent than either Music/Musical or Documentary but I may be entirely wrong about that.

davidh777

There are a handful of musicals and documentaries that would qualify (Gimme Shelter, Le Million, etc.)

Another checklist possibility that came to mind was by country, but we do have by language, which is pretty similar.

CardiffGiant

The problem is that Criterion hasn't defined the genres for us. I like the fact that one can look on the checklist, see that they need a decade, spine number, or language and find that from the Criterion website. Also, if you're watching 8 1/2it's spine #140, Italian, and there is no debating that, so it makes it simple to know what you need.

I'm backtracking on my own director idea only because if someone hates Bergman, I don't want to "force" them to watch something they hate. For the record, Bergman is my favorite director, but when people say they don't like him, I understand.

We could either merge a number of categories, or, we could go along with the Criterion website and have people seek out different themes:

http://www.criterion.com/explore/themes

We could do the same thing that you did with the "Watch films in at least five languages" and have "Watch films from at least five different themes from Criterion's website"

I think enough variety grows naturally out of the collection. Forbidden Games and The Battle of Algiers are both war films, but have a dissimilar focus and feel to them.

I agree, but statistically, it isn't. I looked back at last year's challenge and nobody finished the checklist.

Let me know what you all (everybody) think is best.

CardiffGiant

Yes, we do have "watch a short" and I've read that Hulu+ has been slowly putting supplemental material on its site. Essays can be read on Criterion's website and I like the idea there. I will add that, it's a rather innocuous category, with an explanation that essays can be found in booklets and on Criterion's website.

CardiffGiant

I had originally thought of switching it (Criterion's website does it by country), but one could probably find 5 English-speaking countries and get around having to venture out into other languages. So, I think the way Trevor originally conceived it, was a good choice.

Trevor

Good point. Keeping all the checklist items easily discernable from the Criterion sortings would make things very convenient.
Good point. We could have a list of the ten most represented directors, and let each participant choose five.
I haven't looked at their website themes closely, but I think this sounds perfect.
True, but then, this Challenge gets less fanatical participation and marathoning that is perhaps more understandable with the specific genre Challenges.

I think the checklist here is the simplest one by far, right?
The more I hear about Hulu Plus the more certain it is that they are going to get my money. I recently cancelled cable, so I guess I can justify the $13 a month or whatever it is.
One minor aspect of that that I'm proud of, and it may not have been my idea, was to not mandate English. I think all of the other Challenges make it "x number of languages besides English", and I wish we would change that.

davidh777

Ha ha

CardiffGiant

I like it. It looks like there are 11 directors with 11 or more films in the collection (Truffaut and Rossellini are tied with 11). It breaks down like this:

Akira Kurosawa - 36
Ingmar Bergman - 26
Yasujiro Ozu - 22
Louis Malle - 18
Federico Fellini - 13
James Ivory - 13
Jean Renoir - 13
Michael Powell - 13
Jean-Luc Godard - 12
François Truffaut - 11
Roberto Rossellini - 11

11 doesn't have the same ring as ten, but it is 11 directors with 11 or more, which has a nice ring to it.

Cool...I'm going to throw together a draft of the new checklist later tonight and then we can all fine tune the other details.

Agreed, absolutely. Also, if I'm remembering correctly, you (or we) had conceived of this being more about depth than breadth. I still like that approach.

It's $7.99. I feel the same way, I'm going to do the trial during the challenge and see how it goes, but I watch a lot of Criterion and I would say that a good percentage of the discs that I receive from Netflix are from Criterion.

I do wish Hulu was on more devices and I could more easily watch it from my TV; right now that's one of the main things holding me back. I love the partnership they have with Criterion right now and I could easily justify the cost by the fact that I would be less inclined to binge on physical media during the B&N sales.

CardiffGiant

Scratch the above list...Criterion is double-counting some titles. I'll do some investigating later tonight and find out the real top ten (with numbers). Basically, it counts the box as a title for box sets, the 50 years of Janus box set, etc. as additional titles.