criterionforum.org

I think the snobbery of this whole place becomes apparent when discussing what the worst Criterion film is, since the only suggestions seem to be the few "Hollywood" picks, such as Armageddon, Robocop, and now The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (all of which are quite good). No one ever seems to think that such and such French or Japanese film is pretty stupid and boring, or if they do, they don't bother saying it. But I was born with a set of balls, so I'll say it: the WORST Criterion film that I've seen, a film that was boring, stupid, and pointless, is Tokyo Drifter.

Flame on.

cdnchris wrote:

kaujot wrote:And in the Rock, a man melts!

Ooooh! I forgot about that. Plus it has the "prom queen" line.

Don't forget the line about Zeus' butthole!

willoneill wrote:I think the snobbery of this whole place becomes apparent when discussing what the worst Criterion film is, since the only suggestions seem to be the few "Hollywood" picks, such as Armageddon, Robocop, and now The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (all of which are quite good).

Actually I happen to like Armageddon quite a bit...but only if I'm watching it late on a Friday night with a bag of weed.

willoneill wrote:No one ever seems to think that such and such French or Japanese film is pretty stupid and boring, or if they do, they don't bother saying it. But I was born with a set of balls, so I'll say it: the WORST Criterion film that I've seen, a film that was boring, stupid, and pointless, is Tokyo Drifter.

Well, Tokyo Drifter does have nice colors in it.

Tribe wrote:Actually I happen to like Armageddon quite a bit...but only if I'm watching it late on a Friday night with a bag of weed.

I've always liked you Tribe. I think we would get along great. Steve Buscemi is fucking awesome in Armageddon.

willoneill wrote:I think the snobbery of this whole place becomes apparent when discussing what the worst Criterion film is, since the only suggestions seem to be the few "Hollywood" picks, such as Armageddon, Robocop, and now The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (all of which are quite good). No one ever seems to think that such and such French or Japanese film is pretty stupid and boring, or if they do, they don't bother saying it. But I was born with a set of balls, so I'll say it: the WORST Criterion film that I've seen, a film that was boring, stupid, and pointless, is Tokyo Drifter.

Does being born with a set of balls entitle you to troll? I haven't seen Tokyo Drifter, but your comment is just trying to stir shit up, the very definition of trolling.

Moving on...

The Rock and Robocop are excellent films by directors whose later work descends into self-parody (the same could be said of the John Woo films in the collection). Armageddon, however, wasn't even the best asteroid-headed-toward-Earth movie released that year. But it's pretty universally accepted in this forum that Criterion needs to release the occasional Armageddon, Chasing Amy, or Button in order to subsidize their "boring" and "pointless" releases.

That said, as this thread indicates, you can find defenders of Criterion's "Hollywood" releases; just read the dedicated threads! Your comments suggest you're just making generalizations about this forum (and about art-house cinema in general) without having taken the time to become acquainted with what is, after all, a huge diversity of tastes and opinions. Plenty of members loved the Paul Morrissey films, plenty more are quite ambivalent about Jeanne Dielman. If I had to guess at the two most universally-loathed films in the collection, Button would be nowhere close. It's probably Border Radio and Solo con tu pareja, neither of which are remotely Hollywood. Next time you post, put your balls away and use your brain instead.

jbeall wrote:Plenty of members loved the Paul Morrissey films, plenty more are quite ambivalent about Jeanne Dielman.

On the other hand, Jeanne Dielman works best on a work night...with a couple lines of crank.

Tribe wrote:

jbeall wrote:Plenty of members loved the Paul Morrissey films, plenty more are quite ambivalent about Jeanne Dielman.

On the other hand, Jeanne Dielman works best on a work night...with a couple lines of crank.

My point exactly!

jbeall wrote:Does being born with a set of balls entitle you to troll? I haven't seen Tokyo Drifter, but your comment is just trying to stir shit up, the very definition of trolling.

The Rock and Robocop are excellent films by directors whose later work descends into self-parody (the same could be said of the John Woo films in the collection). Armageddon, however, wasn't even the best asteroid-headed-toward-Earth movie released that year. But it's pretty universally accepted in this forum that Criterion needs to release the occasional Armageddon, Chasing Amy, or Button in order to subsidize their "boring" and "pointless" releases.

That said, as this thread indicates, you can find defenders of Criterion's "Hollywood" releases; just read the dedicated threads! Your comments suggest you're just making generalizations about this forum (and about art-house cinema in general) without having taken the time to become acquainted with what is, after all, a huge diversity of tastes and opinions. Plenty of members loved the Paul Morrissey films, plenty more are quite ambivalent about Jeanne Dielman. If I had to guess at the two most universally-loathed films in the collection, Button would be nowhere close. It's probably Border Radio and Solo con tu pareja, neither of which are remotely Hollywood. Next time you post, put your balls away and use your brain instead.

So personal, jeez, lighten up. Ok, less balls, more brain: I think that in general (yes, I've done some reading around these parts), it seems to me that the films that get shat on the most are mostly English-language, and mostly Hollywood Studio productions. And I think that some of the foreign-language, had they been made with the exact same way, but in English with a big star, would be insulted just as much. Maybe not by you personally, but by others. But as you pointed out, there are varying tastes, which brings me to another point:

Isn't it possible that whichever Criterion exec chose Ben Button, didn't so so for financial reasons, but rather because they (like me, and many others) actually liked the film?

I would say that keeping in line with Criterion's mission statement to release "important" films, Benjamin Button maybe,will be considered as such, in say,NEVER.

jbeall wrote:

Tribe wrote:

jbeall wrote:Plenty of members loved the Paul Morrissey films, plenty more are quite ambivalent about Jeanne Dielman.

On the other hand, Jeanne Dielman works best on a work night...with a couple lines of crank.

My point exactly!

But I like Jeanne Dielman...the crank just takes the edge off a tad.

jbeall wrote:If I had to guess at the two most universally-loathed films in the collection, Button would be nowhere close. It's probably Border Radio and Solo con tu pareja, neither of which are remotely Hollywood. Next time you post, put your balls away and use your brain instead.

Oh, I forgot about Solo con tu whatever-it's-called. What a turd! That would be my worst pick. I'm also pretty indifferent to Jubilee and And the Ship Sails On. Haven't seen Border Radio. Yet. One day maybe. Suzuki can be hit and miss with me, too. I do love The Rock and must admit Armageddon is growing on me.

Actually, I've been working on something for this site where you can rate the film's in the collection for shits and giggles (along with the DVD's themselves, similar to how the Facebook app works.) I'm curious as to how that will turn out once its done and people start using it. Then we can stop arguing and find out what is truly the worst film in the collection.

cdnchris, a voting mechanism will only ignite further arguments, not curtail them.

Antoine Doinel wrote:cdnchris, a voting mechanism will only ignite further arguments, not curtail them.

But imagine all the fun.

I'll be the guy who gives one ratings to the ones I haven't seen but think I would hate, if imdb has them then we need them here, too!

Antoine Doinel wrote:cdnchris, a voting mechanism will only ignite further arguments, not curtail them.

my "stop arguing" remark was tongue-in-cheek. But I doubt it would do either.

I had no idea people hated Solo con tu pareja so much. I thought it was kinda shallow and stupid, but not entirely unenjoyable. My vote for worst is a toss-up between Jubilee and Sweet Movie (although I still haven't seen Border Radio... or Benjamin Button for that matter).

cdnchris wrote:

Antoine Doinel wrote:cdnchris, a voting mechanism will only ignite further arguments, not curtail them.

my "stop arguing" remark was tongue-in-cheek. But I doubt it would do either.

Do it anyway though.

Tribe wrote:

cdnchris wrote:

Antoine Doinel wrote:cdnchris, a voting mechanism will only ignite further arguments, not curtail them.

my "stop arguing" remark was tongue-in-cheek. But I doubt it would do either.

Do it anyway though.

Although I'm sure such a feature will attract more dot com members to stink up the forum for thirty posts before leaving in a pissy huff, I agree with Tribe that you should try out this idea. I like the idea of a list present on the main page (as in the review page, not the forum index) that could stand out as a clear indicator for Criterion of what movies and discs stand out and which ones were total disasters. Of course, after all the cover art bitching and Tamara jokes, Criterion may not give a damn about our opinion at all. But I still think it has a shot at deterring future Howard's Ends.

Oh, well. At least we get The Human Condition.

Highway 61 wrote:

Tribe wrote:

cdnchris wrote: my "stop arguing" remark was tongue-in-cheek. But I doubt it would do either.

Do it anyway though.

But I still think it has a shot at deterring future Howard's Ends.

Is Howard's End really this unsettling? I've never seen it. But if it's anything like A Room With A View, I'll pass.