The DVDTalk Criterion Film Club selection for the second half of February was chosen by IronWaffle:

Short Cuts (1993)

Synopsis:

Since this thread is strikingly bare, I'll throw in my memory of the movie. This will hopefully ignite some discussion.

First, I should say I'm not as big of a fan of this movie as most. I try to look at Short Cuts from two perspectives. First -- how it translates Carver's short stories. Second -- how it stands alone without prior knowledge of Carver's aesthetic.

As a standalone experience, I think it falls somewhat short because I craved better connections between the individual stories. (I could be completely off here, because this is largely conjecture from the standpoint of someone who hasn't read Carver.) This point is arguable because it's the degree of artificial connectivity to which I object. I don't see enough to make me care about their thematic trends. Also, I find some of the threads within so much weaker than others. The Tom Waits storyline, for example, I found nearly perfect (but this was because I found the relationship between Tomlin and Waits to be the most interesting connection in the movie). Jennifer Jason Leigh and Chris Penn's thread just left me flat. As someone who had read all of these stories, I also had to look up the particular story on which it was based because I'd forgotten that as well. The principal tenant explored by all of these stories is how these "what if..." questions rule our lives. And generally I enjoy Altman's rambling jazz-like narrative transgressions, but IMO, Short Cuts suffers from an over-abundance of the Altman staples -- narrative jumps and army of characters. These dozens of "what if..." questions of personal and moral obligation weigh on the viewer that wants to put them all together. These same Altman-isms clutter Nashville, but I never felt overwhelmed when watching Nashville because the story still felt like it flowed naturally.

All of these same criticisms can be applied when viewing the movie from an intellectual exercise in Carver-ology. When taken as a mental exercise in literary/cinematic adaptation, Altman, however, becomes more of a structural genius for being able to create something fascinating out of nine story-nuggets that were probably considered near-impossible to adapt. From this perspective, I understand this movie's appeal. For those without the prior knowledge, however, I'm having a hard time understanding the love. I'd love for someone who hasn't read Carver to weigh in on my suppositions above. Despite my appreciation for the film, I never find myself wanting to rewatch Short Cuts when I feel like watching some Altman. I always reach for The Player, M*A*S*H or Gosford Park instead, perhaps a side of Nashville, but Short Cuts never enters the conversation.

I haven't read Carver, but I'm not sure if I can weigh in on your suppositions. When I'm this tired, my 'some college' level understanding slips to 8th grade level, but your post sounds more grad level anyway.

I'll try to post more later, but for now I'll just say that I really enjoyed it, and I cried twice. Not just welling up a bit, which ESPN commercials can make me do, but full blown cries, which are quite rare for me.