|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by BobO'Link
(Post 12912100)
I finally saw that one a couple of years ago. It was a "hot" movie when I was a kid and got lots of attention. I may have been expecting too much because, like you, I thought it was pretty much a dud. The "comedy" it contains is supposed to be derived more from juxtaposition of scenes rather than dialog/actions. I felt most just didn't work - at least not as comedy. It's very much a product of its time and has lost much of the impact and message it had in the late 60s. I enjoyed it more for the Simon and Garfunkel songs.
|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by davidh777
(Post 12912031)
Decided to slip in one more, for double credit: Island of Lost Souls (1932), another first-time watch!
The odd thing is that the director, Erle Kenton, never made another film anywhere near as impressive. So I'm wondering who the real auteur on that one is. The production designer? The makeup artist? Charles Laughton? Re: THE GRADUATE - I haven't seen it since the early 1970s and have no idea how it holds up. It was very much a product of its time and was not marketed as a comedy, but more of an early counterculture "youth protest" type of film. Even then many felt it was overrated. Andrew Sarris had quite an incisive critique of it at the time. And yes, Shadokitty, "Mrs. Robinson" was composed for that film. (Anne Bancroft plays Mrs. Robinson, the married neighbor young Hoffman has an affair with. "Mrs. Robinson, are you trying to seduce me?" In retrospect, I wish Bancroft's husband, Mel Brooks, had directed it.) |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by davidh777
(Post 12912031)
Decided to slip in one more, for double credit: Island of Lost Souls (1932), another first-time watch!
Originally Posted by Ash Ketchum
(Post 12912118)
First time?! Wow. What was it like for you? I watched ISLAND OF LOST SOULS for a horror challenge a few years ago for the first time in decades and I loved it. I even went and bought the Criterion disc and rewatched it for a Criterion challenge.
The odd thing is that the director, Erle Kenton, never made another film anywhere near as impressive. So I'm wondering who the real auteur on that one is. The production designer? The makeup artist? Charles Laughton?
Originally Posted by Ash Ketchum
(Post 12912118)
Re: THE GRADUATE - I haven't seen it since the early 1970s and have no idea how it holds up. It was very much a product of its time and was not marketed as a comedy, but more of an early counterculture "youth protest" type of film. Even then many felt it was overrated. Andrew Sarris had quite an incisive critique of it at the time.
I recently read Roger Ebert's two reviews of the film. One when it was originally released and another on a re-release decades later. He pretty much said "What was I thinking when I first saw this film? It's just not that good and doesn't hold up well." and downgraded his rating. I remember all the talk about the film, most of which focused on the "forbidden" relationship between Hoffman's character and Mrs. Robinson.
Originally Posted by Ash Ketchum
(Post 12912118)
And yes, Shadokitty, "Mrs. Robinson" was composed for that film. (Anne Bancroft plays Mrs. Robinson, the married neighbor young Hoffman has an affair with. "Mrs. Robinson, are you trying to seduce me?" In retrospect, I wish Bancroft's husband, Mel Brooks, had directed it.)
Interestingly the entirety of "Mrs. Robinson" wasn't used in the film. Both the instrumental and vocal version fade out about 1:12 into the track. It wasn't until "Bookends" was released in April 1968 that the full version was heard. The song, "Mrs. Robinson," wasn't actually composed for the film but *did* make its first appearance there. When Nichols purchased rights to use some S&G songs in the film, something Simon wasn't too keen on as he saw it as "selling out", and requested some originals be written specifically for the film, Simon returned with "Punky's Dilemma" and "Overs," neither of which Nichols was particularly taken with (both songs later appeared on "Bookends" with the completed "Mrs. Robinson"). Simon had written "Mrs. Robinson" before the movie deal and the pair had been working on it using the name "Mrs. Roosevelt" but because of the film had taken to using "Mrs. Robinson" instead. During the meeting where the other two songs were rejected Nichols asked if they had anything else and Garfunkel asked "What about Mrs. Robinson?" using the newly substituted name. Nichols jumped on it asking to hear the song. They played what they had so far and Nichols was sold. The song title and name used were frozen as "Mrs. Robinson." Simon's inclusion of the phrase "coo-coo-ca-choo" is an homage to the Beatles' "I Am the Walrus." |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
I fell into an abyss the last two weeks. I only made it to nine of Steve Buscemi's Top 10. I streamed The Vanishing late last night; I'd seen it during a previous challenge. It felt less frightening and more darkly comedic this time. Maybe because I'd already seen it and knew what happened, but I also think it's because I'd acclimated to the flavor of Buscemi's taste. Context matters, y'all.
I'm too feeble right now to elaborate further, but I hope everyone enjoyed the challenge. How'd you do with your personal objectives? Do you have any new favorites? Did your relationship with any previously seen movie change this time? Did you learn anything neat or notice anything peculiar? |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by BobO'Link
(Post 12912100)
I finally saw that one a couple of years ago. It was a "hot" movie when I was a kid and got lots of attention. I may have been expecting too much because, like you, I thought it was pretty much a dud. The "comedy" it contains is supposed to be derived more from juxtaposition of scenes rather than dialog/actions. I felt most just didn't work - at least not as comedy. It's very much a product of its time and has lost much of the impact and message it had in the late 60s. I enjoyed it more for the Simon and Garfunkel songs.
Originally Posted by shadokitty
(Post 12912116)
Isn't that the movie that the song Mrs. Robinson is from?
Someone mentioned Mel Brooks and how it'd have better if he had directed it. I would agree! I read at IMDb that he left Hoffman audition for this one as he was already set to be in The Producers. Brooks didn't think he'd get the part, so he let him. I think I'm ok with Hoffman being in this one...couldn't see how he'd fit in The Producers! |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
I'll be the voice of dissent and say that I have loved The Graduate each of the few times I've seen it, and none of those viewings were back in its day. That sort of tone and humor just works for me.
And speaking of humor, and I'm sure unpopular dissent, Mel Brooks' films stink in my opinion. Young Frankenstein is good, but everything else I've seen by him is bad to mediocre at best. But then humor is very hit or miss for me. Comedy is perhaps my second most represented genre, but I guess it's limited to a few very specific types of humor; Monty Python, the Muppets, Adult Swim, MST3K. Most mainstream sitcoms and comedies just don't float my boat. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 12912235)
I'll be the voice of dissent and say that I have loved The Graduate each of the few times I've seen it, and none of those viewings were back in its day. That sort of tone and humor just works for me.
And speaking of humor, and I'm sure unpopular dissent, Mel Brooks' films stink in my opinion. Young Frankenstein is good, but everything else I've seen by him is bad to mediocre at best. But then humor is very hit or miss for me. Comedy is perhaps my second most represented genre, but I guess it's limited to a few very specific types of humor; Monty Python, the Muppets, Adult Swim, MST3K. Most mainstream sitcoms and comedies just don't float my boat. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by BobO'Link
(Post 12912287)
Have you seen the original The Producers (not the horrible musical version based on the play)? I'd put it up there with Young Frankenstein as one of his best. While I generally like his body of works I find he tends to be *very* repetitive with his gags. Many disagree but I'd put The Twelve Chairs and his remake of To Be or Not To Be (although the Ernst Lubitsch version with Carol Lombard and Jack Benney is better) in the group of his best works. Add Blazing Saddles and you have the Brooks films I watch regularly.
That said, I do plan to watch my Mel Brooks BD set some November. Maybe I was just in a strange mood everytime I've watched his films. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 12912296)
I haven't watched a few of those, but given that I've disliked several of his films that most people love, and claim as his best, make me wary to keep digging.
That said, I do plan to watch my Mel Brooks BD set some November. Maybe I was just in a strange mood everytime I've watched his films. Unfortunately, The Producers was not included in that set! They managed to license Spaceballs, not a favorite of mine, for the set and left The Producers out! Since both are Fox productions distributed by MGM you'd think if they were able to include one they could include both. But then neither was included in the DVD set which makes the BR set that much better for the Spaceballs inclusion. What hurts is The Producers typically sells for almost what I paid for the 9 film BR set. They also didn't include Life Stinks, which is probably a good thing. I didn't care for either High Anxiety or Silent Movie when they were released. They've grown on me over the years, especially Silent Movie, but still are not favorites and get few viewings. I like *some* of History of the World: Pt. 1 and Robin Hood: Men in Tights but not enough to make them regular watches. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
I was put off by The Graduate when I first saw it a few years ago, and for me the biggest problem was that the only one in the entire picture I could bring myself to care about was the daughter, played by Katherine Ross, and I didn't buy her about face in the finale whatsoever. I kept feeling that every time the film raised the specter of an interesting theme, it squandered it in favor of pointed ambiguity. Yeah, I get it. The world is shades of gray, not black and white. But even in those shades of gray, there are, you know, actual consequences for things. That's how cause and effect works. The only real consequence was that for most of Act III, Hoffman's character didn't get to hook up with mother or daughter, and then comes the insulting finale to relieve him of even that. Whatever.
As for Mel Brooks, I like the idea of Mel Brooks films more than I tend to actually like the films themselves. I saw Young Frankenstein for the first time a year or so ago and was surprised by how much I did enjoy it (overall, anyway), and I can link that enjoyment directly to recognizing so many specific nods to the old Universal films that I adore so much. I'm planning to go see a screening of that on Wednesday, and I hope to enjoy it even more with an audience. For the most part, though, I can find a gag or two here and there that amuse me and otherwise I just kind of run down the clock. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 12912235)
And speaking of humor, and I'm sure unpopular dissent, Mel Brooks' films stink in my opinion. Young Frankenstein is good, but everything else I've seen by him is bad to mediocre at best. But then humor is very hit or miss for me. Comedy is perhaps my second most represented genre, but I guess it's limited to a few very specific types of humor; Monty Python, the Muppets, Adult Swim, MST3K. Most mainstream sitcoms and comedies just don't float my boat.
I had the good fortune to see Young Frankenstein shortly after seeing Frankenstein, The Bride of Frankenstein, and Son of Frankenstein (WNET regularly did a horror movie marathon on Halloween), so that I even recognized some shots from those films copied in Young Frankenstein, which is rare for me. If you can, your best bet is to begin with The Producers (if you've seen it, can't watch it too many times). It's a rare example of a totally original (as far as I know) Mel Brooks movie. I think that the main problem with most of Brooks' films is that they are parodies, and he is content with silly jokes about genre conventions. I don't understand the love for Blazing Saddles, which for me had only one scene of real worth, Cleavon Little holding himself hostage. The townspeople freely used the word which must not be spoken, and the discordance between the racism apparent in their language and the conventional sentiment that they are expressing makes a real point in a movie that is otherwise mostly mocking a dead genre. Gene Wilder, Cleavon Little, Harvey Korman and perhaps a few others did brilliant work, but in service of a minor concept. High Anxiety tries to do to Hitchcock what Young Frankenstein does to Frankenstein, but is much less successful. It's been a long time since I've seen it, but my recollection is that I found The Twelve Chairs the third most enjoyable of Brooks' movies, probably because it wasn't a parody, and was quite manic. I haven't seen most of his other movies, because the idea of something like a parody of Robin Hood movies seems like killing a fly with an atomic bomb. The other problem that I have with Brooks is the Yiddishisms. He thinks that he is being hilarious, but if, like me and presumably most of his audience, you know at best ten Yiddish words, he is being deliberately obscure. I have read that blucher means glue in Yiddish, so that is the joke of the reaction of the horses to Frau Blücher's name in Young Frankenstein, but if I knew that at the time that I was watching the movie at best it would have earned the smallest of smiles. I would recommend My Favorite Year, which Brooks produced. Benjy Stone is supposed to be based on the young Mel Brooks working on Your Show of Shows. He is sweet, as is his romance with Jessica Harper, and Peter O'Toole is touching as Alan Swann (Errol Flynn). Sometimes I think Robin Hood: Men in Tights might be worth watching because of this connection to Brooks' youth, but then I think probably not, based on the reviews that I read when it came out. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by ororama
(Post 12912529)
The other problem that I have with Brooks is the Yiddishisms. He thinks that he is being hilarious, but if, like me and presumably most of his audience, you know at best ten Yiddish words, he is being deliberately obscure. I have read that blucher means glue in Yiddish, so that is the joke of the reaction of the horses to Frau Blücher's name in Young Frankenstein, but if I knew that at the time that I was watching the movie at best it would have earned the smallest of smiles.
In a interview, Wilder had this to say about the name: When I was writing the first draft, I said, 'I wonder if anybody would get it when someone said "Frau Blücher" and the horses neigh.' Mel (Brooks) said, 'Keep it in.' Well, the audience loved it in the previews. Actually, I chose the name because I wanted an authentic German name. I took out some of the books I had of the letters to and from Sigmund Freud. I saw someone named Blücher had written to him, and I said well that's the name. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Watched a lot of good - almost-all new - films this year. Highlights include:
Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down! The Exterminating Angel Simon of the Desert In the Realm of the Senses Il Sorpasso Juliet of the Spirits The Rules of the Game Harakiri The Player Le Grand Amour Zatoichi 1 8 1/2 Ali: Fear Eats the Soul The Hidden Fortress Corridor of Blood The Haunted Strangler Top three is tough, but top five would probably Harakiri, Le Grand Amour, Ali, Juliet of the Spirits and 8 1/2. And Zatoichi. And The Exterminating Angel... |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Ash Ketchum
(Post 12912118)
First time?! Wow. What was it like for you? I watched ISLAND OF LOST SOULS for a horror challenge a few years ago for the first time in decades and I loved it. I even went and bought the Criterion disc and rewatched it for a Criterion challenge.
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 12912235)
I'll be the voice of dissent and say that I have loved The Graduate each of the few times I've seen it, and none of those viewings were back in its day. That sort of tone and humor just works for me.
Originally Posted by Trevor
(Post 12912235)
And speaking of humor, and I'm sure unpopular dissent, Mel Brooks' films stink in my opinion. Young Frankenstein is good, but everything else I've seen by him is bad to mediocre at best. But then humor is very hit or miss for me. Comedy is perhaps my second most represented genre, but I guess it's limited to a few very specific types of humor; Monty Python, the Muppets, Adult Swim, MST3K. Most mainstream sitcoms and comedies just don't float my boat.
Originally Posted by BobO'Link
(Post 12912287)
Many disagree but I'd put The Twelve Chairs and his remake of To Be or Not To Be (although the Ernst Lubitsch version with Carol Lombard and Jack Benney is better) in the group of his best works. Add Blazing Saddles and you have the Brooks films I watch regularly.
|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
The new streaming service is going to be $10.99 but there's also a free two week trial. Unlike Hulu, they'll have extras like the commentary from Silence of the Lambs
http://www.filmstruck.com/?utm_sourc...ent=newsletter |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by The Man with the Golden Doujinshi
(Post 12916437)
The new streaming service is going to be $10.99 but there's also a free two week trial. Unlike Hulu, they'll have extras like the commentary from Silence of the Lambs
http://www.filmstruck.com/?utm_sourc...ent=newsletter I'm curious about whether the basic service will still have extras.. |
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
I was kinda figuring the price for FilmStruck with the Criterion channel would be $18-$20 so I was very pleasantly surprised with the $10.99/month and especially the $99.99/year price. I still have a large backlog of Criterion discs to watch, but I will subscribe.
|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
With over 600 Criterions, at least half unopened, I couldn't live with myself if I subscribed, even if it was $1.
|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by davidh777
(Post 12916163)
I liked it quite a bit, hokey makeup aside. :) For all the 1930s musicals I've watched, the horror of the era is a bit of a void for me. I've been trying to catch up on the Universal monster classics, at least.
|
Re: The 8th Annual Criterion Collection Challenge Discussion Thread
iTunes has 100 Criterion titles on sale for $9.99 apiece right now!
$9.99: Bestsellers $9.99: Essentials $9.99: Zatoichi - The Blind Swordsman $9.99: More to Explore |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:13 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.