criterionforum.org

ben d banana wrote:I think I love you. Those are four nipples on your avatar, right?

Apparently Koko likes nipples

If Koko likes nipples, she would love this Totoro, as it has a whole extra row of alleged nipples right below the ones already in question. However, I believe this particular Totoro is a male, leading us to this century's most celebrated tome of sage advice, Why do Men Have Nipples?

Dear Catastrophe Totoro wrote:Why do Men Have Nipples?

Cause we all start out as females before the sex is decided.

Thank you Catastrophe...You've pretty much taken the words right out of my mouth.

criterionradiohead wrote:I don't post much around here for the simple reason that if I did, many of my posts would resemble the overwhelming number of two liners in the vein of, "____ director is UBER 7331 ... ____ director suxorz and shouldn't be in the collection." These posts have no basis of argument and in my opinion are a complete waste of time and brain power.

I confess I really don't understand this argument, which seems pretty pervasive hereabouts. Why do these posts have no basis in argument, and why in gods name are they a complete waste of time and brain power? Are we all here to merely say "Jeez boss thanks uh that was great!"

The thumbs up/down discussion is a duplication of what goes on behind CC's doors every week. They no doubt very emotionally wrangle with each other back and forth around the conference room table, hashing it out what's "worthy" and "unworthy" of the collection. Know beyond all doubt that folks from CC get pissed that some films don't make it in, and flabbergasted that others do get picked up. What's wrong with CC devotees wanting to share in the argument, and getting a little emotional here & there? It's just hardcore passion, and you won't die from it. A spot of momentary anger at a perceived droll month is, it seems to me, not anywhere near as goofy as anger at another dude for exposing a fiery passion about the movies.

This whole faux-argument neutralizer which runs along the lines of "Why shouldn't xyz be in the CC-- simply because you have some imaginative rule you made up about what's a masterpiece?" should be laid to rest. Putting pressure on an individual to quantify this greatness (or lack of it), then snarling in wicked triumph that he cannot adequately define that greatness which he uses as a defining template for admission into the collection, is a bit weird.

Greatness is of course not quantifiable on an explicable, provable level ie "how can you prove to me that (insert controversial recent CC title) does not contain as much greatness as Renoir or Ozu?"

Causing an individual to feel backed into a corner because he (obviously) cannot for the sake of argument quantify his concept of greatness-- in his effort to prove it is theoretically not there in some new release-- is silly.

There is indeed a Criteria which determines what goes into the Criterion Collection. Folks sit around the company offices getting paid trying to define what it is. Why is it not okay for people who spend what they get paid on their products to debate the meaning of that Criteria, and how it seems to be changing slightly? What is wrong with a healthy artistic debate about What Is Great Art? Impatience with the lack of quantifiability?

I want to state this: I have no problem with what CC is doing (saw YI YI few years ago, wasn't overwhelmed but think it's at least as worthy as Wong or Van Zandt... KOKO I uh havent seen). I'm looking heavily forward to three upcoming releases in particular. I'm noticing a change, but if it becomes a "problem" there are other equally satisfying Supreme Quality Distributors Of The Most Excellent Cinema On The Planet who seem to have their eye right on those spots that CC is either currently working on or dropped the ball on, so I'll be fine.

I just don't understand this screeching defense of CC on every release and this need to pounce on folks using a demand they explain the inexplicable viz their passions, then taking that inability as proof of rightness. It's actually kinda corny. You guys sound like you think CC folks are listening and are trying to get them to Dig You.

Why attack passion-- as long as the person has seen, or at least knows something about what he's talking about?

Shh... The Man might take away my secret fan club membership.

HerrSchreck wrote:Why attack passion-- as long as the person has seen, or at least knows something about what he's talking about?

That's the rub, Max. If you look over this thread you'll see that's a big if. And, personally, my intent was not to attack anyone but to urge them to try to say clearly and carefully why they dislike a film, filmmaker, etc. Of course you can't prove these things once and for all, but going beyond stating mere approval or disapproval is what makes this potentially worthwhile. On other forums people often agree with someone by quoting what they said and writing "+1" under it. Is anyone taking a poll?
Well, I said I'd shut up on this subject and I'm shutting up.

Isn't the value of these arguments obvious? "What's Yi Yi? It's some stupid movie I've never seen I want more Ozu!" "OMG you've not seen Yi Yi the best movie EVAR!1 u r defanately retardad!"

Isn't the conclusion that there's a reason to see Yi Yi? Ok, well, maybe my retort there wasn't the most convincing thing, but that's why I value this board: because even the inane debates are worth reading. That some ignorance is expressed just allows for it to be dispelled - of course, the mode of its dispelling rarely rises above ego overkill righteousness, but "It's the Internet, stupid."

My butt itches.

If we could answer the question "What is great art?" don't you think then that the "art" in question would lose all flavor of its mystery and fun. Some of us are very articulate about what makes a great movie. We all have different motives for watching what we watch. Criterion has different motives for releasing what they release. I for one am happy with Yi Yi because I can give it to any number of friends who love cinema or Japanese cinema. Arguing about this or that is enjoyable, but getting everyone to agree on what a "great movie" may mean loses sight of the fact that the disagreements have helped many of us find a great number of interesting films we might not have been aware of already. I know I've stated the obvious, but are we losing track of this?
Hey, it'd be great if Criterion could pull off every month a trick like Yi Yi, Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, and Double Indemnity and make people happy. But other parties are releasing these movies. I'm glad to see them coming to DVD just like anyone else. Criterion has released what some of us would consider duds - hey, they're human, give 'em a break. I think we're in good hands barring a release of something like Cannibal Holocaust. I'm kidding. But take those Criterion releases with a grain of salt. Just as we don't agree with our favorite critics all of the time, we can't hope to agree with Criterion all of the time. They have their mission statement, yes, but do you remember the times that a loved one has given you a present that wasn't expected at all and you were like, "How did you know I'd like something like this?" Or they get you something weird and you have your doubts, but you listen to it/watch the movie and come back and ask them "How did you know?" and all they can say is, "It just seemed like something you might like." That's how the Criterion Collection can work for some of us. I'd hate to see them trying to give us what we want all of the time.

AMB wrote:They have their mission statement, yes, but do you remember the times that a loved one has given you a present that wasn't expected at all and you were like, "How did you know I'd like something like this?" Or they get you something weird and you have your doubts, but you listen to it/watch the movie and come back and ask them "How did you know?" and all they can say is, "It just seemed like something you might like." That's how the Criterion Collection can work for some of us. I'd hate to see them trying to give us what we want all of the time.

I have to say that is probably one of the best ways to describe how I feel about their announcements from time to time. There is just something exciting/refreshing to have an unexpected movie appear, especially one I might not be familiar with, read the description and end up checking it out and really enjoying it. That's how I felt with Visconti's Le Notti Bianche last year. I knew he made the movie yet knew nothing about it. I viewed it and fell in love with it.

Like I said before, if Criterion were to just up and release a director's entire filmography all at once, say to just stand up and give us a gigantic Antonioni or Melville or *insert favorite director* boxset, what would we have to look forward to? Plus considering the price tags, imagine how much such a set would cost. By spacing things out, by not cramming each month with titles everyone wants, the waiting game we're all playing is favorable not only to our wallets but also our viewing pleasure, giving us plenty of time to soak one film in before the next big release comes along.

ben d banana wrote:Shh... .

First the uncomfy silence... then the most mph-tender & moist-meatloafy squishy noise.. sorta-like-a-swish-the-spit-around-your-teeth-glisteny cheedle, gravy-taste-shakin baconny-skwish-the-skwashy-mash-potatoes-from-between-your-pink-squeezy-fingers schlupping sound of a sad boy falling into his own gaping spppppph(whistling sound)incter.

Um... "cheedle"?

Like the Sniglet?

Ooh, you terrible racist. I mean I know Don Cheadle is a relatively short dude, but this goes too far.

Pass the beat writer's decoder ring and a hit of tea.

I hate it when I see a joke coming and can't do anything about it.

ben d banana wrote:Pass the beat writer's decoder ring and a hit of tea.

The worst Ivunche imitation I ever heard in my life-- you don't even owe him royalties. Jump up & down clapping in your buckle shoes to flap your male tits.

Son, you need a hero in your life. I'll PM Big Brothers info to you. We'll talk.

Oh Schreck, it's always a contest.

You're a passionate guy, you've seen loads of films, you possess a wealth of knowledge about them, and you have a heavy old is better than new bias, so it's safe to assume there are countless releases you'd prefer to the newer titles on Criterion's slate this year. However, as I believe Gregory pointed out earlier in this thread, Criterion is not a subscription service. When someone doesn't like a release, or more probably assumes they won't, they simply don't have to purchase it. Voting with one's dollar is the most effective method. Emailing a request or comment to the company lets them know directly of one's disappointment or interest. However, whinging into the void, passionately or not, achieves zilch. Just because you're yelling doesn't make it any more true.

ben d banana wrote:Just because you're yelling doesn't make it any more true.

Try telling that to a televangelist!

ben d banana wrote:Oh Schreck, it's always a contest.

You're a passionate guy, you've seen loads of films, you possess a wealth of knowledge about them, and you have a heavy old is better than new bias, so it's safe to assume there are countless releases you'd prefer to the newer titles on Criterion's slate this year. However, as I believe Gregory pointed out earlier in this thread, Criterion is not a subscription service. When someone doesn't like a release, or more probably assumes they won't, they simply don't have to purchase it. Voting with one's dollar is the most effective method. Emailing a request or comment to the company lets them know directly of one's disappointment or interest. However, whinging into the void, passionately or not, achieves zilch. Just because you're yelling doesn't make it any more true.

I? Moi? Me. Yo? I love cheesball horror films in color, bad films, new films, old films, all films, all kindsa fun films.

Ben I'll be honest with you. I expressed a neutral point about the whining on the board. You whined about it. You stepped in the toilet now you wanna get out.

Here is what I wanna be honest about with you-- you're among the two or three guys I constantly note to myself who "pounce" with genuine bitterness upon an opinion. I think it's pathetic. I can hear the boring life humming in the background, feel the strain of your desired connection to a passion whereby a competitive statement seems to set you off with rage. Contrary to what anybody can say about me I never open a dialog with a stranger by making them feel like an idiot. I'm not an old guy, I love all film, can't wait for ECLIPSE, love Renoir as well as SIMPSONS & KILLER CLOWNS FROM OUTER SPACE, etc. We wouldn't be here if you didn't fire a meaningless opening shot designed to get to me in someway.

Your entire ramble seemed to be aimed at people who are tired of the senseless griping by self-righteous film snobs who feel that Criterion is robbing them blind by releasing crap, not that they've seen it to have a genuine personal opinion, and forcing them to buy and love it. Which makes this, "fuck the man, I'm a rebel" comment:

Herr Schreck wrote:It's actually kinda corny. You guys sound like you think CC folks are listening and are trying to get them to Dig You.

a clear dig at anyone who's voiced the opposite opinion. You know, if you want to bicker about who started it.

You've made it very clear you're crazy about all kinds of movies, and when you're enthusiastically posting about them, it's rather infectious. However, all this other bullshit you like to carry on with Andre, Skuhn, Narshty, etc, and calling people Junior like you're the age old, omnipotent, Grand Wizard of film and psychology is tired.

Do I care if i get into a pissing match soon to be relegated here just because you're from the mean streets of NYC and find zany imagery filled run-on sentences to be the bee's knees? Not really. But don't worry, I'll let you measure from the base of the balls.

ben d banana, you're not the one to talk. I remember my first post on this thread was one apologizing for picking on new movies:

pzman84 wrote:I think people are not just complaining about the releases of Dazed, Equinox, and the eventual release of Kicking and Screaming. There is no way just these three releases could cause so much controversy. However, it has been Criterion's whole attitude this year.

First, there were the extensive delays (this is off the top of my head, so feel free to correct me):

Young Mr. Lincoln
The Children Are Watching Us
The Complete Mr. Arkadin
Fists in the Pocket
Viridiana

Then, the horrible packaging for the two discs:

Kind Hearts & Coronets
Young Mr. Lincoln

Also, there was the pictureboxing:

Forbidden Games
The Virgin Spring
La bête humaine
Kind Hearts and Coronets

We also had that whole Viridiana Cover Art controversy. On top of that, we have the new editions of Grey Gardens, The 400 Blows and certain sections of the Monterey Pop Festival, releases no one was calling for.

Looking back on my rants of Dazed, Equinox, Kicking, and Metropolitan, they were, in many ways unfair. However, it is easy to pick on these titles because they are not respected classics like Virgin Spring and La bête humaine. No other service would release classics like these. I guess my fear, as is many, Criterion will sell out and stop releasing the films we come to enjoy or release the classics without the quality we expect (and pay for) from Criterion.

No matter how you slice it, so far the year has been very bad for Criterion. They have really fumbled. It is becomming so disconcerning because we expect so much out of Criterion. People are not ranting about MGM or Universal all that much because we expect them to do a lousy job on DVDs. Criterion is the standard bearer when it comes to DVDs. It is time Criterion changes or else it will stop being the Criterion we all love.

Of course, you just had to be disagreeable:

ben d banana wrote:So they shouldn't:

Delay something if it's not fully ready due to manufacturing hold-ups, last minute corrections, tardy materials, etc;

Try new packaging to see how it goes over;

Compensate for all of the whinging they hear over cropping and overscan (perhaps they slightly overdid it, but it's really not much and I'm watching on a 42" plasma via HDMI so I'm getting the full effect of the pictureboxing);

Use cover art that their entire customer base doesn't agree upon (perhaps they should submit ideas to this and the .com forum and then merge all of our disparate ideas into one perfect whole);

Release expanded versions of celebrated films, which many people watch repeatedly and are eager for more of, now that additional material is available;

Release individual versions of previously box set only items, for which, especially in the case of The 400 Blows, people were clamoring upon the original box announcements;

Heed the evidence which clearly shows no other company would release most of their contemporary and cult titles, nor would anyone show them the care Criterion and the filmmakers feel they're due?

You know, just checking.

How can you justify pictureboxing? And, how can you justify this? Don't come out here and make yourself the victim of "snobbish film students" (I am a poli-sci major BTW). Why should we act any differently than you do?

Am I the only one who's okay with the "Figure 8" packaging for 2-disc sets? What's the big deal? I have a copy of Traffic with that packaging and the discs come out easily and safely and they don't rub on each other, so what's the difference except that Double Alphas feel heavier?

Figure 8 packaging really sucks. Just to access the second disc, you have to remove the first one. Sounds like minor inconvenience, but it can get annoying especially for sets that are more than 2-discs that use this packaging (TV shows on DVD are turning to this format more and more). I prefer having the "flipper" instead for 2 disc sets that come in single amaray cases.

Antoine Doinel wrote:Figure 8 packaging really sucks. Just to access the second disc, you have to remove the first one. Sounds like minor inconvenience, but it can get annoying especially for sets that are more than 2-discs that use this packaging (TV shows on DVD are turning to this format more and more). I prefer having the "flipper" instead for 2 discs that come in single amaray cases.

It could be worse. I have come across sets that stack the discs directly on top of each other on a single spindle. When you try to get the third disc down or more, you have to practically bend the discs in half to get them off. I'll take Figure 8 over that any day.

I think the baffling promised addition of Kicking & Screaming doesn't help. The less selections from the American "indie" film movement the better (unless they are very carefully selected. I will try "Metropolitan" and had always planned to watch that one anyway).

I think probably why most people are having a negative reaction is there are too many recent or promised titles that elicit the reaction, "Ew, I wouldn't touch that one with a 10-foot pole." Even though we are quite happy with Mr. Arkadin, Viridiana, Fists in the Pocket, Virgin Spring, Late Spring, it's just you don't like to see so many "stinkers" such as Equinox (yes, I have actually seen it) and Kicking & Screaming (No, I have not seen it, but I've never had any interest in seeing it), and then kind of a lot of "ehs" or lackluster middle ground ones. Not bad films, but not really that great necessarily. Maybe only 2 out of 10 Criterion customers will really flip for them. Amongst titles like this you could incontrovertibly put Koko (yes, I have actually seen it recently), the Louis Malle films, and perhaps the Maurice Pialat (have seen Loulou, haven't seen A nos amours.) So, films that I've either seen and they're average, or I've seen other films by the filmmakers and am not wild about them, and maybe many other people aren't either since I have exquisite taste and so do a lot of you I suspect! Perhaps we're spoiled, but we're used to Criterion releasing titles we get very excited about pretty consistently.

(I'm hesitant about Malle because I just don't get anywhere near as excited about him as I get about Godard or Resnais. Black Moon is a film I've seen by him that is horrid, and Au Revoirs les Enfants seems like typical mainstream Oscar Foreign Language Film fodder. I did see it in school growing up and will try it again just to make sure, but I didn't really like being made to watch that in school. But I was young. But certainly you could say that there were no radical experiments in "form" such as would be present in much Godard and Resnais. So, there's my hesitancy. I will watch the Malles, but I am not yet excited. Hopefully I will be after seeing them, but I'm unfortunately doubtful.)

Yours truthfully,

Donald Trampoline

P.S. - I think this conversation is going on far too long, and I have no idea why I'm adding my two cents to it. Perhaps we've spun our wheels long enough on this whole griping thing for 2006. (Until Kicking & Screaming is officially slated side-by-side with some other equally lackluster American indie offering from the '90s.)

P.P.S. - And if somebody tells me or anyone else "Don't buy them" for the umpteenth time I will hit them over the head with a wooden plank. The short answer is: There are far too many masterpieces out there that are completely unavailable or available in poor quality or only on VHS that we excitable enthusiastic film buffs desperately want to see put onto DVD (or just be given access to see at all!) to justify the release of the ones we are complaining about. It is that simple. Like what? Try any 5 Lubitsch silent films, any five Abel Gance silents besides Napoléon, such as La Roue, or the 1919 restored J'Accuse, (and other examples of the French Impressionist films, such as the Renoir shorts), some Straub-Huillet, some other early French New Wave stuff like Les Cousins, Beau Serge, much more Mizoguchi, Rivette's Paris Nous Appartient, other Kalatozov films, and how much Dziga Vertov is out there that you can't see!., and many Kiarostami films such as Homework are hard to get access to, and how underrepresented is Rossellini on DVD worldwide, etc.) Anyway, just listing examples. So, of course we won't buy the crap we're complaining about, but we have plenty good reason to complain and not be shouted down with shouts of "Don't buy them, you idiots." We're not buying them!!