You're a slackjawed troglodyte.




btw I don't even like Fellini.

Hell no. I hate "collectors" in the sense that I believe your using that term. It's true that I've got well over 100 Criterions, but I pick and choose only those films that I love enough to watch at least once a year. And the DVD must represent the very best DVD version in existence (and Criterion's DVDs usually are, but with some exceptions including in my collection non-Criterion versions of "Kwaidan", "Black Narcissus", "Onibaba"... and, for the transfer only, "Dead Ringers").

And I think I'm fairly merciless when it comes what goes into my collection. For example, I have all the Criterion Hitchcock's except for "Spellbound". I'm a big Hitch fan, but I've always considered that film - popular as it is - to be almost laugh-out-loud ridiculous. I'm no completist, and I certainly don't purchase just any ol' Hitchcock film, so I have 20-some odd, but no "Jamaica Inn", "Paradine Case", or any of the others I consider second- or third-rate.

Simply put, Criterion's the best. The best quality transfer of the best quality films. Other company's have been mentioned here that attempt the same, Eureka's Masters of Cinema line most notably IMO. MoC is good stuff - and I have their releases of "Kwaidan" and "Onibaba" instead of Criterion's - but on balance MoC is nowwhere near Criterion in quality. They generally license all their transfers, many of which are not done in 4K like Criterion's been doing for quite some time. They select excellent titles and their booklets are about as good as it gets, but generally speaking their about a step behind Criterion. Kino releases interesting titles, but again almost invariably license existing transfers, usually PAL, and then fail to properly convert them to NTSC causing "ghosting" on most of their transfers. Mk2 should also be mentioned, and I'm very impressed by their releases, but unfortunately many do not include English subs. When Criterion releases "The Double Life of Veronique" this Fall, that should provide us with an ideal comparison against Mk2's. I'm holding out to see if Criterion's is better... and I suspect that's a pretty good bet, even though there are really no criticisms of Mk2's wonderful release (some quibbling over the color timing aside).

So, yeah, I got alot of Criterions, but I've never purchased even one without looking to see if anyone anywhere in the world has produced a better DVD of that particular film. So I'm not a collector of Criterions; if anything, I'm a collector of films I love. Criterion just happens to release alot of those, and usually the very best versions. So, it's not surprising that I have more Criterion's on my shelf than I do discs from any other company (lagging way behind are Warners, Masters of Cinema, and Kino).

That doesn't really seem to hold true in this thread, does it? It seems more like it is you who is claiming superiority for not being an "art house snob," and you who is expressing disdain for people who make or enjoy watching "ultra art house snob movies" that are "'appreciated' by only a small segment of the movie-watching audience." So I guess, as it turns out, it is possible to be a condescending jerk without owning any "ultra art house snob movies."

Prove this statement.

You can't.

Good bye.

What has this to do with Criterions? For Jah's sake, Criterion released The Rock and Armageddon, along with drive-in classics like The Blob and Fiend Without a Face, so to claim that Criterion appeals only to people who "feign cultural superiority and express disdain toward mainstream films" is nonsensical. Morever, it's silly to dismiss the appreciation older films or foreign films as mere "elitism." I enjoy Seven Samurai because it's the most awesome action film ever made, not because owning it enhances my cool. Who on earth judges other people by their DVD collections? If you don't like what Criterion offers, then move on. It's not for you. If you don't enjoy non-mainstream films, that's fine, but to insult and belittle people who do is childish in the extreme.

Are Criterions worth the price? Good question. Warner Brothers and Fox have been releasing lavish editions of older movies like Gone With the Wind or The Fly that eclipse any Criterion release and cost half of the typical Criterion MSRP. OTOH, Warner and Fox can count on a much wider fan base and bigger sales.

It seems to me that the anti-classic film posters are right inasmuch that Criterions do appeal to a smaller demographic than mainstream films do, so they need to charge more per disc to recoup their production costs and make a small profit. I love the works of Akira Kurosawa, as do many here, but I also know that out in the wide world very few people have any interest in owning, let alone watching, Seven Samurai or Red Beard. This is even truer of Criterion's more obscure offerings like Coup de Torchon or Tale of Floating Weeds.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/38626

Harsh Light Of Morning Falls On One-Night Stand's DVD Collection

April 23, 2003 | Issue 39•15 | Special Section: Nightlife

MILWAUKEE, WI–The harsh light of morning fell on the terrible DVD collection of Marc Koenig Monday, when Traci Pearle discovered it upon waking up from their one-night stand.

Her powers of observation impaired by alcohol and darkness, Pearle took little notice of Koenig's furnishings. It was not until 8 a.m. that the hung-over Pearle, en route to the bathroom, came across Koenig's disturbingly random, mediocrity-filled DVD collection.

"The glare from the living-room window made my eyes smart," Pearle said. "I rubbed them, and the first thing I saw was Narrow Margin sitting on Marc's sunlit coffee table."

A nearby DVD shelf revealed similarly banal choices, including Driven, Evolution, Swordfish, Tomcats, Point Break, Pushing Tin, Bedazzled, Flatliners, My Blue Heaven, and Proof Of Life.

While acknowledging that the majority of Koenig's movies were "not out-and-out horrible," Pearle wondered why anyone would own those particular titles.

"They're the sort of things you'd rent, not buy, if you watch them at all," Pearle said. "Out of the thousands of movies you could own, why would you spend your money on this stuff? Don't you buy a movie because you're somehow passionate about it and want to watch it again and again? Does this guy feel that way about Hard Rain?"

Continued Pearle: "I slept with a guy who, at some point in his life, walked into a store and said to the cashier, 'Hi, I would like to purchase this copy of The Legend Of Bagger Vance.'"

Pearle admitted that her decision to leave Koenig's apartment around 8:20 a.m. was heavily influenced by the discovery of the DVD collection.

"As I got dressed, Marc sat up in bed and took my hand, telling me he had the day off from work if I wanted to stay in with him," Pearle said. "I considered it, but then I noticed the Vince Vaughn version of Psycho on the nightstand..."

:lol:

So, that's how you get the girl to leave. Hmm...

Good overview Richard, but too bad Criterion had seemed to dropped the ball on a number of non-anamorphic releases, Time Bandits being one. Now if only they can get around to releasing more Mizoguchis.

i hadn't heard much about Kino or Master of Cinema so I will have to check them. needless to say, i am in the camp with many others about criterions having good transfers and good films that i like.

So what was the first in the line to be anamorphic?

And how many more of the early titles need to be re-released? (Hope that Alphaville will soon be on it's way)

Who the hell here (or most anywhere) pays full retail for ANY dvd? And when you realize that most single-disc Criterions can be had for $19, and most double-discs for around $24, your "crazy price" argument also dies.

Dude, that was almost ten years ago now. Can you show me a studio that hasn't had a couple non-anamorphic dvds from that that long ago?

Insomnia maybe (first anamorphic title)???

It seems that they didn't use anamorphic transfers for the first few dozen widescreen titles at least, although some might argue that some of the 1.33 titles from the early days of the line might need a redo, as well.

I am hoping for a new Walkabout with 16 X 9 transfer, although I do own the current letterbox disc as I love that film too much to be without it.

I don't own a lot of Criterions; I usually buy them either because I have seen the movie and like it, or because I'm interested in exploring more works by a director I have been introduced to elsewhere. I don't buy them just for the sake of owning them. Must say that I've yet to be disappointed in their product.

Liking Criterion doesn't have to equal snobbery; it's fun to explore ALL kinds of movies. One day I'll want to watch Spielberg, another Renoir or Roeg. Like having a meal, I wouldn't want to eat the same thing for dinner every night, and I am curious about trying other kinds of cinema to expand my movie "diet." Criterion is great for that.

They are not always cheap, but they have to license the films they release as they don't own the rights, and the general consensus is that they will deliver the quality that makes the price worthwhile. I remember when Altman's Short Cuts came out; I'd been waiting for a region one release of that movie for years. After only seeing it on crummy old VHS numerous times, popped in that Criterion disc and my jaw hit the floor when I saw how good it looked.

Here's hoping they keep re-working some of those early titles!

I've got news for people who decry "art house cinema"... it's the scholars in this world that will decide which films stand the time via teachings, continued exposure via screenings, essays etc. Along Came Polly might sell more DVDs that L'Avventura but guess which DVD will still be in print in 20 years.

In a word: horsehockey.

The English speaking world has a long history of not just ignoring but reviling attempts by academics to create a pantheon of great art. If in twenty years Fight Club and Donnie Darko are considered classics, it'll be because the general public is still watching them, not because some guy at USC wrote a book on Fincher, or a film festival in South Carolina is having a Richard Kelly retrospective.

I don't think so. I think in say 100 years films will be studied in college classes as common as art and literature is. And it will be the movies with meaning that get the most attention. Sure, Titanic and Pirates of the Caribbean will get mentioned for their outstanding popularity but that won't matter much anymore. 20 years is not long enough to judge a film.

I love how dude failed to list any of the ultra snob art house films. My guess is he hasn't seen any of them. But then that would make him an idiot, wouldn't it?

Don't Criterion's appeal mainy to a niche market, thus the high prices? Supply vs. Demand...look at Chasing Amy, one of they more "mainstream" titles, and it can be picked up for around $12.

I've always thought it interesting that the majority of their titles consist of what could be considered "classics", with that, I've found it stange that all of Wes Anderson films find their way to the Criterion treatment, with the exception of Bottle Rocket, which is even weirder, because Bottle Rocket is my favorite of his films.

This thread could also open the debate to the difference between a movie and a film. ;)

im still just a regular arthouse snob, but im proudly working my way up!

well they're synonyms, so I'm not sure how much discussion has just been opened.

Those classes already exist. They do look for meaning in film, but they don't just do it with films meant to be meaningful. The one time I took a film study course in college, we watched Josie and the Pussycats, and a bunch of films that starred rappers like DMX.

Titanic and PotC will be studied in twenty years if they're still popular, just as colleges still have classes on Dickens. But that's a big if.

Many Criterion released films do have considerably more depth to them than many other flicks. There is a reason that many of the Criterion released flicks are studied in classes and the such.

i only buy Criterions to pick up chicks...
...it's the same reason i got a guitar...

Another pointless thread. I wonder why so many ol' timers don't post here anymore. ;)

Remember how we used to make fun of joe-6-pack for not understanding why us cinema lovers prefer widescreen? These are the people who post here now. Before those assholes call me a snob, I would like to say that I also own the Police Academy Collection, Road House, the Bill & Ted movies, Showgirls, etc., etc., so FU you close minded pricks. Go listen to your Britney Spears records :).

This message has been brought to you by an intelectually honest movie lover.