5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
09-02-13 | 02:53 AM
#151
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
I don't understand the complaints that Criterions are intimidating or that enjoying good movies is "elitist." You never hear that enjoying the novels of James Joyce or Vladimir Nabokov is elitist; or that going to a Kandinsky or Picasso exhibition at a museum is intimidating.
Try hanging out in my neck of the woods sometime. The only reason so many people here wouldn't admit that they find such things intimidating is because they're too self-conscious. Mention the fine arts, though, and you invite reflexive "You think you're better'n me, don't you?" reactions.
In spirit, I agree with [Gobear's above comment]. But I also have to say that this hard line conviction is precisely why such things are perceived to be the domain of intimidating elitism. It's one thing to be knowledgeable and passionate; it's another to scorn those who aren't and that's where the divide originates.
And as Travis rightly points out, it's not the attitudes themselves that are the problem, it's how each 'side' treats the other. It is just as wrong to belittle people for not enjoying/understanding/watching something as it is to mock someone for doing so. Not everyone has the time or inclination to even try various things, let alone the right mindset or experience to fully enjoy doing so.
Ballet and opera, for instance leave many people cold for reasons that have nothing to do with 'reverse-snobbery'; so it is with (certain) films.
09-02-13 | 03:01 AM
#152
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
For those with Amazon Prime, I offer this list of films I've just created for myself of applicable titles:
Blood for Dracula
Flesh for Frankenstein
The Killing
Quadrophenia
Pulp Fiction
My Man Godfrey
Dr. Strangelove
Certified Copy
Citizen Kane
Spinal Tap
Things to Come
A Canterbury Tale [Powell/Pressburger]
Une Femme est Une Femme
Decameron
Canterbury Tales [Pasolini]
Tiny Furniture
Emperor Jones
Casablanca
Cul-de-Sac
Che 1
Che 2
Night Train to Munich
Crumb
Days of Heaven
P.S. I also noticed that the picture for the streaming Scanners has the "C" logo on it. Wonder if that's due soon..?
Bear in mind that, if the past is anything to go by, some of these will cease to be free before too long...
...hence I've just finished watching the two OOP Warhol films. Very odd..! Flesh for Frankenstein was particularly creepy-nasty, albeit tame in comparison to more recent similar films. The plot never seemed entirely stable - I presume the Baron was trying to create a masterrace, but one presumes most evil scientists would be keener to propogate their own line than create one anew - but the ending was particularly well done. And grim. Blood for Dracula was crazy! It had similar leaps in logic, but they were papered over by such ludicrous lines (and performances) that it really did seem like a particularly low-key comedy rather than just a bad horror film. For that reason, I enjoyed it considerably more. I wondered, though, whether arm severing was something Mr Morrissey or Mr Warhol held particularly dear, given the fairly high instance of arms and hands being cut off all over the place...
Singin' in the Rain remains to my mind one of the best films ever made. It rings true, it has superb performances in all the main (and supporting roles), there are good songs well-used, phenomenal dance numbers and a surprisingly realistic and touching love story at the centre of it all.
Blood for Dracula
Flesh for Frankenstein
The Killing
Quadrophenia
Pulp Fiction
My Man Godfrey
Dr. Strangelove
Certified Copy
Citizen Kane
Spinal Tap
Things to Come
A Canterbury Tale [Powell/Pressburger]
Une Femme est Une Femme
Decameron
Canterbury Tales [Pasolini]
Tiny Furniture
Emperor Jones
Casablanca
Cul-de-Sac
Che 1
Che 2
Night Train to Munich
Crumb
Days of Heaven
P.S. I also noticed that the picture for the streaming Scanners has the "C" logo on it. Wonder if that's due soon..?
Bear in mind that, if the past is anything to go by, some of these will cease to be free before too long...
...hence I've just finished watching the two OOP Warhol films. Very odd..! Flesh for Frankenstein was particularly creepy-nasty, albeit tame in comparison to more recent similar films. The plot never seemed entirely stable - I presume the Baron was trying to create a masterrace, but one presumes most evil scientists would be keener to propogate their own line than create one anew - but the ending was particularly well done. And grim. Blood for Dracula was crazy! It had similar leaps in logic, but they were papered over by such ludicrous lines (and performances) that it really did seem like a particularly low-key comedy rather than just a bad horror film. For that reason, I enjoyed it considerably more. I wondered, though, whether arm severing was something Mr Morrissey or Mr Warhol held particularly dear, given the fairly high instance of arms and hands being cut off all over the place...
Singin' in the Rain remains to my mind one of the best films ever made. It rings true, it has superb performances in all the main (and supporting roles), there are good songs well-used, phenomenal dance numbers and a surprisingly realistic and touching love story at the centre of it all.
09-02-13 | 03:40 AM
#153
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Still. Twenty-five of them isn't bad at all.
09-02-13 | 03:46 AM
#155
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Blood for Dracula was crazy! It had similar leaps in logic, but they were papered over by such ludicrous lines (and performances) that it really did seem like a particularly low-key comedy rather than just a bad horror film. For that reason, I enjoyed it considerably more [than Flesh for Frankenstein.
09-02-13 | 03:51 AM
#156
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
It took me a lot longer than is typical for me, but I finally reviewed Gomorrah. From my Letterboxd diary:
Gomorrah
-X- 2000/2010 (2008)
-X- 451-500 (#493)
-X- Language: Italian
-X- Essay: Gomorrah: Terminal Beach (Gomorrah) by Chuck Stephens
Spoiler:
Gomorrah
-X- 2000/2010 (2008)
-X- 451-500 (#493)
-X- Language: Italian
-X- Essay: Gomorrah: Terminal Beach (Gomorrah) by Chuck Stephens
09-02-13 | 06:04 AM
#157
DVD Talk Special Edition
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Watched The Forgiveness of Blood and all its supplements, including commentary and read the included booklet. It's amazing what still goes on in some parts of the world. I said to my wife later, "I watched a movie about blood feuds in Albania" to which she said "Why?" She is clearly in the category of those who, as ntnon mentioned above, expect movies to only be entertainment.
09-02-13 | 07:06 AM
#158
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
This morning I watch In the Mood for Love (2000) while my family was attending church. Closed all the curtains and had a nice time watching it in that “just woke up with nothing to do” euphoria. It’s the second film I’ve seen by director Wong Kar-wai. I watched Chungking Express for last year’s challenge (was surprised to see that the Criterion BD is OOP) and enjoyed it, though it was overly quirky at a time when I didn’t want quirk in my films. This film is more my speed: meditative and stylish. I’ve felt like I’m on a cloud since watching.
The film presents such a compelling sense of romance and intimacy. Much of the information about the film’s characters and their relationships remains largely unspoken. The sets and costumes are stunningly beautiful. As with Sweet Smell of Success, I wanted to live in the world the film presents, and I would survive much better in it. The central characters actions and reactions reminded me of the myself in college when I would fall into a deep, unspoken love for another guy. There is a scene where Maggie Cheung Man-yuk silently weeps, and I found myself weeping with her.
Several reviewers on Amazon insisted that the deleted scenes ruin the experience of the film. However, I found it really interesting to see how the film could have developed into something completely different in both story and sensibility. I will say that I cannot imagine working with Wong Kar-Wai who apparently often shoots without a formalized script and does not seem to articulate what he wants to the actors. That work ethic and style must create a lot of frustration. However, the end product is definitely brilliant. Based on my reaction to the film, I’ve already ordered a couple of his other films from my local library.
The film presents such a compelling sense of romance and intimacy. Much of the information about the film’s characters and their relationships remains largely unspoken. The sets and costumes are stunningly beautiful. As with Sweet Smell of Success, I wanted to live in the world the film presents, and I would survive much better in it. The central characters actions and reactions reminded me of the myself in college when I would fall into a deep, unspoken love for another guy. There is a scene where Maggie Cheung Man-yuk silently weeps, and I found myself weeping with her.
Several reviewers on Amazon insisted that the deleted scenes ruin the experience of the film. However, I found it really interesting to see how the film could have developed into something completely different in both story and sensibility. I will say that I cannot imagine working with Wong Kar-Wai who apparently often shoots without a formalized script and does not seem to articulate what he wants to the actors. That work ethic and style must create a lot of frustration. However, the end product is definitely brilliant. Based on my reaction to the film, I’ve already ordered a couple of his other films from my local library.
As for your comment about wanting to live in the world the film represents, I daresay that Manhattan in 1957 (SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS) was a much easier place to live in, J.J. Hunsecker notwithstanding, than Hong Kong in 1962 (IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE). A young person just arriving in New York could much more easily get a cheap apartment --even near Times Square--than they could in Hong Kong at the time. Of course, the idea of doubling up in a cramped apartment with Maggie Cheung (or Tony Leung, if you'd prefer) could be very appealing.
09-02-13 | 07:36 AM
#159
DVD Talk Special Edition
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
My one thought about the checklist was to put a cat among the pigeons.. 
Given that it's been said a number of times that Criterion is the primary challenge where it's obvious what's included and what isn't (with Oscars presumably tying it), I wonder if it wouldn't be interesting to include a wildcard or two for films that (seem like they) ought to be in the collection but aren't. So Kurosawa and Bergman films that have been passed over, or maybe Terry Gilliam's and Meaning of Life, etc., etc.
Given that it's been said a number of times that Criterion is the primary challenge where it's obvious what's included and what isn't (with Oscars presumably tying it), I wonder if it wouldn't be interesting to include a wildcard or two for films that (seem like they) ought to be in the collection but aren't. So Kurosawa and Bergman films that have been passed over, or maybe Terry Gilliam's and Meaning of Life, etc., etc.
09-02-13 | 08:13 AM
#160
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
For anyone who doesn't have it on DVD, but does get Epix Drive In. Tonight at 8 PM Eastern, Godzilla, King of the Monsters is being aired.
09-02-13 | 08:47 AM
#161
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Looking forward to it. But after looking it up, I'm wondering why the 26th and final isn't included... it seems a bit sad to include 25/26. Presumably there are rights issues - but Wikipedia suggests that, even though there was a 13-year gap (which usually implies company change or rights oddities) the company was Shochiku, which I know only from it being the company in the title of Eclipse Set #37!
Still. Twenty-five of them isn't bad at all.
Still. Twenty-five of them isn't bad at all.
09-02-13 | 09:38 AM
#162
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
I see Seven Samurai is included in Hulu's Criterion selection, so sometime may give it a shot.
09-02-13 | 09:42 AM
#163
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
I've only seen one or two Zatoichi films on Hulu, but I have enjoyed what I have seen.
09-02-13 | 09:59 AM
#164
DVD Talk Special Edition
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
From Criterion's news page: "Ingmar Bergman’s masterpiece Persona has just joined our ever expanding Hulu channel..."
09-02-13 | 10:04 AM
#165
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Just finished watching Equinox on Hulu, and noticed, that this could also have been used for double credit with the Animation Challenge, as there was a lot of stop motion animation used in the movie. I was actually in the mood for King Kong, but I couldn't quickly locate my DVD.
09-02-13 | 10:17 AM
#166
DVD Talk Special Edition
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
It took me a lot longer than is typical for me, but I finally reviewed Gomorrah. From my Letterboxd diary:
I need to see IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE again. Not sure whether that's my favorite Wong Kar Wai film or ASHES OF TIME. I'd need to see both again.
As for your comment about wanting to live in the world the film represents, I daresay that Manhattan in 1957 (SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS) was a much easier place to live in, J.J. Hunsecker notwithstanding, than Hong Kong in 1962 (IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE). A young person just arriving in New York could much more easily get a cheap apartment --even near Times Square--than they could in Hong Kong at the time. Of course, the idea of doubling up in a cramped apartment with Maggie Cheung (or Tony Leung, if you'd prefer) could be very appealing.
As for your comment about wanting to live in the world the film represents, I daresay that Manhattan in 1957 (SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS) was a much easier place to live in, J.J. Hunsecker notwithstanding, than Hong Kong in 1962 (IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE). A young person just arriving in New York could much more easily get a cheap apartment --even near Times Square--than they could in Hong Kong at the time. Of course, the idea of doubling up in a cramped apartment with Maggie Cheung (or Tony Leung, if you'd prefer) could be very appealing.
You are totally right about 1950s New York being the easier world in which to live. I should have said it would be easier for me to live in the situation the characters themselves in In the Mood for Love than in Sidney Falco's shoes. As for that cramped apartment, I'm pretty gay so would probably go with Tony Leung. However, while watching the film, I fell in love (and lust if honest) with Maggie Cheung. Haven't had that reaction to an actress since Pam Grier in Jackie Brown.
09-02-13 | 10:52 AM
#167
DVD Talk Special Edition
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Not trying to hijack the thread but I have a question: do you watch your films alone or with others? I just watched one of the Ozu's Tokyo Chorus and my family was really distracting. They don't do well with silent films. Now I'm watching Slacker in my room... alone. Just wondering if others deal with similar situations.
09-02-13 | 01:24 PM
#168
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
I saw Flesh for Frankenstein more than a month before I saw Blood for Dracula, and I too preferred the latter. I don't know whether it's because I needed to acclimate to the tone of the two (in which case, I wonder whether I'd have preferred whichever of the two I watched second) or if there really is something more enjoyable about Dracula than Frankenstein
09-02-13 | 01:29 PM
#169
DVD Talk Special Edition
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Not trying to hijack the thread but I have a question: do you watch your films alone or with others? I just watched one of the Ozu's Tokyo Chorus and my family was really distracting. They don't do well with silent films. Now I'm watching Slacker in my room... alone. Just wondering if others deal with similar situations.
09-02-13 | 02:47 PM
#170
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Dagnabit. I knew I should've looked up last night to see if Le Havre was a Criterion. It is. And I already missed a half-hour of it on TCM 
I fall into that category. BFD bores on repeated viewings for me, but I find FFF always fun.
I fall into that category. BFD bores on repeated viewings for me, but I find FFF always fun.
09-02-13 | 03:26 PM
#171
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Edit: Okay, I see that several volumes were released. I've only seen the first one at a price I'm willing to pay. At least now I know to keep looking.
I had the same experience as you two. Flesh for Frankenstein wasn't very enjoyable at all, but Blood for Dracula seemed much better and was actually a lot of fun. Your theory about watching one before the other might be true though since I do know someone who watched Blood first and hated it, but then enjoyed Flesh.
I too preferred Flesh for Frankenstein, but I need to watch them both again sometime because I've only seen Blood for Dracula P&S on cable, but I saw Frankenstein in a theater (and in 3D), so that could've influenced me.
Last edited by Dimension X; 09-02-13 at 03:38 PM.
09-02-13 | 03:34 PM
#172
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Given that it's been said a number of times that Criterion is the primary challenge where it's obvious what's included and what isn't (with Oscars presumably tying it), I wonder if it wouldn't be interesting to include a wildcard or two for films that (seem like they) ought to be in the collection but aren't.
From Criterion's news page: "Ingmar Bergman’s masterpiece Persona has just joined our ever expanding Hulu channel..."
Though rather unethical, I kept the two films and bought a BD player later that year, partly because miniaturized Criterions are so darn cute.
I've also found since I began my foray into The Criterion Collection (and from there, silent films, foreign flicks, art house fare and the like in general) that I focus better and enjoy them more later at night. I don't generally do well with daytime viewings. It's a psychological barrier of some kind, I think.
09-02-13 | 05:36 PM
#173
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Was the entire TV series ever released in the U.S.? I have Volume 1, but I've never seen a Volume 2 or higher, and that's all that's holding me back from being complete.
Edit: Okay, I see that several volumes were released. I've only seen the first one at a price I'm willing to pay. At least now I know to keep looking.
Edit: Okay, I see that several volumes were released. I've only seen the first one at a price I'm willing to pay. At least now I know to keep looking.
09-02-13 | 06:09 PM
#174
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Re: Zatoichi TV series: I have Collection One and Collection Two, totaling the first 26 eps. I thought I had the whole series, but according to IMDB, there are 100 episodes. I never saw the later volumes in stores, so I assumed that was it. Now I've gotta look up the others.
On the positive side, even if they never release the whole series, I have something to look for I guess.
09-02-13 | 06:42 PM
#175
Re: 5th Annual Criterion Challenge - Discussion Thread
Not trying to hijack the thread but I have a question: do you watch your films alone or with others? I just watched one of the Ozu's Tokyo Chorus and my family was really distracting. They don't do well with silent films. Now I'm watching Slacker in my room... alone. Just wondering if others deal with similar situations.