criterionforum.org

boo to that, along with Warner's barebones next collection, this is another that deserves more.

It's a shame that these aren't sold separately. I would've bought "Human Desire" even though it's minor Lang just for the sake of having everything. Speaking of which, does anyone have a copy of "Hangmen also die" that they're willing to sell?

Classic Flix has the cover art, plus this:

New details also reveal that the bonus features will consist of introductions and trailers.

Hard to think of a stylistic figure more alien to film noir than the lens flare, and yet there it is, prominently featured in the center of the box... ah well.

jonah.77 wrote:Hard to think of a stylistic figure more alien to film noir than the lens flare, and yet there it is, prominently featured in the center of the box... ah well.

That seems to be symptomatic of all of Sony's recent classic box sets, not just their noir collections. Witness the Sam Fuller, Budd Boetticher, and Michael Powell sets.

Bless Sony Pictures! They are still releasing pressed box sets. Out on August 10 will be Kim Novak Film Collection. Details on that release is here:

Along with Picnic and Bell Book and Candle, the new set will include the George Sidney production of Jeanne Eagels (a personal favorite of Ms. Novak), Pal Joey and the Paddy Chayefsky-written Middle of the Night, also starring Frederic March. Some are new to DVD, but all five have been newly-restored and remastered for this new set.

Right now, it's available for pre-order at Deep Discount. List price is listed at $39.95 - Jack Lemmon Film Collection with the same number of films and a 6th bonus disc had a list price of $59.95.

Will this be another Jack Lemon set? I.E. terrible.

Some of these are good films, but Christ, can I really justify owning a set devoted to the worst actress of the studio era?

For a widescreen Picnic, sure, why not...

HypnoHelioStaticStasis wrote:For a widescreen Picnic, sure, why not...

http://www.sonypictures.com/homevideo/c ... roduction/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...in their proper formats (2.55:1 widescreen original CinemaScope in the case of Picnic.)

domino harvey wrote:Some of these are good films, but Christ, can I really justify owning a set devoted to the worst actress of the studio era?

Why, I'm sure you don't have to justify anything to anybody but yourself, now that you're asking. (As of this moment it can be pre-ordered at ClassicFlix for less than thirty bucks. :-$ )

Extras on the Novak set:

* Kim Novak's Hollywood Picnic
* Reflections In The Middle of The Night
* Backstage and At Home with Kim Novak
* Select Scenes Commentary with Kim Novak and Author Stephen Rebello
* Bewitched, Bothered and Blonde

What would be the best place to buy the first Noir set? Anybody has any tip on that? I could get it from Amazon US (I live in Canada) for 44$ shipped but I was wondering if perhaps a better price had shown up somewhere.

A month or two ago the first Columbia noir set was under 25 USD from Deep Discount, so unless you need it urgently, I'd wait for another Sony sale somewhere.

domino harvey wrote:Some of these are good films, but Christ, can I really justify owning a set devoted to the worst actress of the studio era?

YOU HAVE TO BE KIDDING?!?!?!?!?!? I'm sorry, but those, for me, are fightin' words!

Acting, schmating who gives a flying FUCK? Novak emerges at exactly the point in cinematic history that "acting," before the camera implodes and post-Stanislavsky "being" begins to assert itself.

The undervaluation/misunderstanding of Kim Novak's supreme value is the sport of fools (rethink it man - RE-THINK IT!)
She is THE goddess who articulates, with precision unparelleled, the burden of being of being a beautiful woman/commodity in a world ruled, all but exclusively, by men. PLEASE read Richard Lippe (Lippe, Richard, "Kim Novak: A Resistance to Definition," in cineAction (Toronto), no. 7, December 1986) or even David Thomson.

Novak, unlike MM (whose all-but-useless-ass she could kick from one side of the frame to the other [Howard Hawks's films notwithstanding]) survived, and with a respectable body of work. The two Marilyn's (Baker & Novak) form the pivot point that delineates the old, studio-era goddess, received passively, dreamily by the spectator [all but the Dietrich of Sternberg] and the modern goddess, such as Vitti, etc and supremely Karina, who must be reckoned with in a new way - dare one say intellectually? When Scottie Ferguson (in VERTIGO) says "your hair..it can't matter to you" to the brunette Judy and, invariably, audiences laugh,... whether they understand it or not people are not laughing at the conventions of old Hollywood or the clumsiness of the dialogue but the horrifying spectacle of one human being's inability to recognize the essential need of another human being's need to be loved, to simply be recognized for themself - the naked horror that is the solipsism of male sexual privelege. This dilemma articulates itself time and time again in the roles that Novak was cast in. (Did she choose these roles consciously? Does it matter? These are the roles she played - the life she has led on-screen.) In PICNIC - "I'm just so tired of being told I'm pretty" - in BELL, BOOK AND CANDLE - the witch who learns to cry (read, to be human and who needs to be loved), THE LEGEND OF LYLAH CLARE, the supremely melancholy heroine of STRANGERS WHEN WE MEET [a masterpiece btw] who simply wants to be seen as a woman, not a "thing" [watch her pain as Kirk Douglas's son surprises her in the hall, saying "You're pretty"]. Kim Novak, in a manner unchallenged by any other actress of the studio era, articulates the soul-obliterating anxiety that can confront beautiful woman.

The cult of Marilyn, (one of the defining, and most lamentable, cults of the latter half of the 20th Century,) and its worship of the failure and the vanquishing of the female, leads inexorably to veneration of the cold, hollow, facsimile presented by Madonna (who along with Ronald Reagan and HIV combines to form the three great plagues of the '80s - the callous degradation and dismissal of basic human need). Novak, on screen, articulates the path - mistakenly, tragically - not taken, the lesson not learned, the need to strip away the illusions promulgated throughout the studio era; and to recognize the essential humanity of the female of the human species as something other than the receptacle for male fantasy.

And, totally, as a PS...Novak the worst actress of the studio era??? Really? REALLY?? Have you ever seen a movie with Merle Oberon, Loretta Young (MAN'S CASTLE notwithstanding - she was just a kid then, and who could refuse Borzage a human presence?) or Geraldine Page ferchrissakes? Not to mention the excremental Maria Schell (Astruc notwithstanding - pardon me, all rules have their exceptions)?

domino harvey wrote:Some of these are good films, but Christ, can I really justify owning a set devoted to the worst actress of the studio era?

PPS "Christ" should never be capitalized except by those unfortunate enough to have drunk the tainted Kool-Aid.

George Kaplan wrote:PPS "Christ" should never be capitalized except by those unfortunate enough to have drunk the tainted Kool-Aid.

*Starts a totally irrelevant 15 page argument about religion*

matrixschmatrix wrote:

George Kaplan wrote:PPS "Christ" should never be capitalized except by those unfortunate enough to have drunk the tainted Kool-Aid.

*Starts a totally irrelevant 15 page argument about religion*

Arguing about religion and its function is never without relevance.

George Kaplan wrote: Arguing about religion and its function is never without relevance.

Jesus christ, an anti-religion crusader. [-o<

Ashirg wrote:Bless Sony Pictures! They are still releasing pressed box sets. Out on August 10 will be Kim Novak Film Collection.

This reminds me of when Fox tried a Joan Collins set (I originally wrote "Joan Collins box", and creeped myself out).

George Kaplan wrote:

matrixschmatrix wrote:

George Kaplan wrote:PPS "Christ" should never be capitalized except by those unfortunate enough to have drunk the tainted Kool-Aid.

*Starts a totally irrelevant 15 page argument about religion*

Arguing about religion and its function is never without relevance.

what about the Church of Novak?

HistoryProf wrote:

George Kaplan wrote:

matrixschmatrix wrote: *Starts a totally irrelevant 15 page argument about religion*

Arguing about religion and its function is never without relevance.

what about the Church of Novak?

Yes, but of course. Perhaps most of all. I rather ran off at the keys there, no?

My sincere apology to Domino. I realize on re-reading my rant that it sounds far more personal than I ever intended. I had hoped the thems fightin' words and such corn to indicate a more rhetorical attitude of frustration, most with what has been, for so long, almost received wisdom about Novak and her awkwardness - what David Thomson refers to as her diffidence. So please excuse the tone as failed comedy and the result of too much Knob Creek until too late an hour. (Though following a spirited, in another way, evening of friendly debate.)

I do stand by my frustration at the lack of discussion about the unique qualities she managed to bring to so many roles. And by the idea that so many of her films manage to concern themselves with her discomfort as an expression of pain and torment in response exploitation and objectification. This is not, however, to argue that she is the auteur of her films. But that she does have however, a force of personality and presence that is prototypical and marks her as a great star; one whose uncanny register is incredibly rich for cultural study and discussion.

George Kaplan wrote:or Geraldine Page ferchrissakes?

Geraldine Page? You defend Kim Novak, and that's who you choose to denigrate?

George Kaplan wrote:

HistoryProf wrote:what about the Church of Novak?

But what she does have however, a force of personality and presence that is prototypical and marks her as a great star; one whose uncanny register is incredibly rich for cultural study and discussion.

Give the gal some credit, dammit! Kim Novak is no less than a fucking goddess! See for yourself, for heaven's sake! [-o<

I just saw the new documentary on Candy Darling and learned that if it weren't for Kim Novak, there probably would not have been a Candy Darling (at least not the particular iteration we got), so she gets a pass from me.