Probably because some people around here will buy any (and all) criterion sight unseen and praise it like it's the greatest thing since sliced bread just because it has criterion slapped on the box.

Personally, I don't care if a movie is a Criterion or not. If I like the movie, I'll buy it. I bought Last Temptaton of Christ sight unseen, not because it was a Criterion, but because I'd always wanted to see it, and I was always fascinated by the controversy surrounding it. Granted, the Criterion version is the only one you can buy, but there you go.

oh, also the threads from people who want to own every criterion might have something to do with it.

I completely agree with you.


On a side note, Beverly Hills Ninjas ownz noobz. Woo!

And you own..A.I, Big Top Pee-Wee,Cabin Boy...etc..etc...AMAZING taste.

Yeah, I remember such threads when I first started visiting DVD message boards back in 2000. It was always funny to see someone try to defend the coherency of a collection that ranged from Armageddon to The Passion of Joan of Arc, but I haven't seen one of those threads in years. Have you?

fairly recently, if I recall

this might be the one I'm thinking of http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=496450

Yea, these threads are pretty pointless, because obviously everyones taste is going to be different. You can't judge someone else easily because they like different things, and everyone owns movies that are awful, but that is why we own them, but yet these are the ones they bash. I think a better thread would be, "recommend me some new movies to expand my horizons".

Thanks for finding that link. I had guessed that it was probably one of those "why do U posers want evry Criterion for???" threads that were even more common than their opposite number at one time, but you were right. It's funny to me that caiman made it seven years here before falling head-over-heels for the CC. How very strange.

Why is coherence a virtue? My tastes are wide-ranging, from cheesy 50s drivein sci-fi schlock to Ealing Studios comedies. I can watch Dawn of the Dead and The Passion of Joan of Arc in the same day, and find both rewarding in different ways on varying levels, the same way that I enjoy beef carpaccio with basil-infused aioli accompanied by a robust Merlot one day, and a burger and fries with a cold beer the next.

Frankly, I would respect the opinion of someone who can defend I Married a Monster from Outer Space as a psychological study on male sexual anxiety in regard to emerging protofeminism in Cold War America than I would that of someone who owns movies merely because they bear the Criterion imprimatur of quality.

In any event, I suspect that people who are unfamiliar with international films use the Criterion label as a shorthand for quality cinema. To be sure, that reputation is exaggerated. One can find good films in extras-rich editions from mainstream studios these days. Warner recently released The Jazz Singer in a stunning 3-disc set that easily bests the extras on many of Criterion's titles, and because Warner's revenues are not derived solely from its sales of art titles, it can sell The Jazz Singer for a lower price than Criterion could. Not too long ago, I bought La Dolce Vita, which was released by Koch Lorber in a stunning package laden with documentaries and extras, with restored picture and sound. Don't get hooked on labels.

I say, enjoy the films that speak to you, and don't buy movies to make your collection look more prestigious. Movies are meant to be entertainment, not medicine.

Well said.

I wasn't so much making an argument in that post for the virtue of consistency as I was reporting reoccurring lines of arguments in those threads. However, it does strike me as strange that one would commit oneself to obtaining every existing and future Criterion Collection DVD without believing that there is some coherency in the collection since, as you pointed out, they are not always the best quality discs available; otherwise, it's little more than collecting simply for the sake of collecting.

No doubt your tastes are broader than mine. I don't begrudge you that. However, I get more pleasure out of selecting a few areas that I really enjoy and exploring them in greater depth, than I do from skimming the surface of a larger pool of material that I find only mildly or inconsistently interesting.

I share your broad palette for food, but I treat art and food differently, though I understand that others do not.

I would as well.

You do realize Peter Jackson said if he never made Bad Taste he would have never gotten into film? That means no LOTR fanboys or any of his other movies. Honestly, this movie's budget was lucky if it was a 1,000 dollars. What do you expect for a 1,000? High end actors and effects? You should honestly put that into consideration when you look at movies. Not every single movie can afford 200 million to spend on a movie.

I'm guessing I'm the only one that "gets" NoirFan's use of Bad Taste vs bad taste. ??? Or maybe not.

THFM - If you would bother watching films from the 40's and 50's - particularly noirs - you would realize that you're wasting your breath there about budgets... In particular, Bad Taste was budgeted at ~ $150K. That's a gold mine compared to most if not all of the B pictures from the golden age of Hollywood. Of course, one would need to adjust for inflation and all that...

or some liver with fava beans and a fine chianti

Yeah, that would be a shame....

Might have helped if NoirFan had sign posted the pun a bit better by putting the title in bold, (Bad Taste), but I think most people got it (*groan*) right away except for DVDsAreMyLIFE, and perhaps THFM who seems confused by a later post by NoirFan. Oddly enough though NoirFan appears to have also been a bit confused by Frenzal Rhomb's last post. *shrug*

Now I'm confused.

This one's for Yakuza...

Very solid. Very few titles that I dislike, and lot's to like. I'd give it an A-.

I recently reduced my collection by about 60% for space reasons. Those were the ones that made the cut. I sold off a lot of things including most or all of my Warner and Kino box sets. Might've gotten an A, haha...

Oh, I understood. But he also took a shot at me, so I had to give one back. Cause that is the obvious immature thing to do.

Ack! I wish I'd known about this; we've always shared rather similar taste in things, ill.

When I say "sold" I really mean "am in the process of selling." Send me an email; I'm sure I still have some stuff you would want.