LIFE AQUATIC and DARJEELING are both messes of movies, especially LIFE AQUATIC. I thought FANTASTIC MR FOX was pretty good, but it’s not on Criterion, but I’d bet money it will be someday.
I would agree that Life Aquatic is a mess, but it is still very fun to watch. But, I though Darjeeling Limited held up quite well despite all its digressions. In both cases, Anderson filled in his characters in retrospect with some good insights along the way. Worked better in Darjeeling since it was essentially a tale about these brothers coming back together after their father’s death. Both were much more complex stories than Bottle Rocket or Rushmore. I would agree that Holel Chevalier seemed superfluous.
“Jack Nicholson’s “directorial achievements” are part of the Criterion Collection and no Greek and Portuguese masterpieces are yet to be seen there????”
To be fair Dimitris, it was released as part of a boxset, not on its own.
Portugal is represented in the criterion collection with the Pedro Costa set of films, none of which I have actually seen, even though I’d like to at some point, and I suppose if you want to count Z then Greece is also represented, but many probably don’t count that.
^^Theo Angelopoulos should have at least one film in the Criterion Collection now i think. I’m not saying other Greek directors don’t deserves attention from C.C but he really should have one by now, and is quite under represented on dvd in general, which i believe is mostly his fault anyway.
I’d love to see more films from Portugal too. Costa is quickly becoming one of my favourite modern directors, but his films are definitely not for everyone.
Perhaps a Manoel de Oliveira title in the Criterion Collection?
“and I suppose if you want to count Z then Greece is also represented, but many probably don’t count that.”
Z is NOT a Greek film. Gavras is NOT a Greek Cinema director.
Yes, it’s quite shocking that Costa was actually added although it’s partly because of all this Apichatpong, Jia, Tarr, Denis and others’ recent successful presence in the art-house circles, so I wouldn’t be surprised if this Criterion move was to push…diversity up a notch.
I thought Costa’s was part of the Eclipse series, no?
No, the Costa set is part of the main line.
^^it’s probably one of the least selling main line titles too i bet ;-)
I dont understand the need to be on criterion
there are better companies, does being a criterion film validate the film in some way for people?
I usually avoid criterion for Kino or Something Weird video, even Facets
You do realize that some of the greatest films ever made are on criterion, and part of the need to be on criterion is that criterion is one if not the only company in north America that would take the financial risk of releasing optimum transfers of so many of the obscure films people on mubi love. Companies like Kino and Fox Lorber have releases many great films, but the transfers are absolutely horrendous, and many of kino’s films aren;t even enhanced for widescreen televisions. It’s not a need to be in criterion per se, but a need for great films to receive proper treatment so they can be viewed in all their glory short of being seen in a movie theater.
not for me I guess
the only release on criterion I was excited about in the last year of two was Downhill Racer. Severin Films is proving most reliable to me, by and large tho I appreciate the way Criterion handles its releases the films are not of interest.
L’Eclisse, Red Desert, Vivre Sa Vie, L’Avventura, Contempt, Pierrot Le Fou, My Night at Maud’s, Solaris, among others are all crap you’re trying to say? Sure, there have been many lame releases, which is what this thread is about, but you shouldn’t discount all the masterpieces they’ve released.
not what I said or meant at all Rossi
I have seen all those films. I am just not interested in buying them or viewing them again. All I mean is Criterion in and of itself is not a guarantee of a great film (the way it is often treated to be). And other places have better track records imo.
Actually, I got the von Sternberg collection and it’s really good. I’ve come to accept that they’re going to release a certain amount of questionable films because there are five people out there who will buy a Benjamin Button for every von Sternberg I get. If it keeps them in business, I’m willing to live with it. I do wish they had the resources to expand deeper into the foreign films however. They must do research into this and have undoubtedly found that Wes Anderson titles sell really well. He has a fan base and they are likely to purchase anything that comes out.
Well there you have it, fifteen wes andersons for every pedro costa/dillinger is dead.
^^1 Pedro Costa for every 15 Andersons? sounds generous to me ;-)
In Amazon’s top twenty Criterions, Tenenbaums and Life Aquatic are 7 and 11 right now, so there might be some credence to this : |
Do you have a link?
If I have to deal with the fact that Y Tu Mama Tambien is gonna get “the Criterion treatment,” and I’ll have the chance later on to purchase a copy of a movie like Make Way For Tomorrow, I’d say that’s a very fair trade off.
@Rossi – sure
The panel on the right hand side shows their updated sales.
-No, the Costa set is part of the main line.-
Well, let’s not overlook that the Costas are an $80.00 box set, and prior to the set, not at all widely seen in the US. Not many people are going to blind buy a box set.
Ossos by Pedro Costa – i really had a hard time sitting through this one mostly because of the badly-forced close-ups of character despair for extended amounts of time. i’m really wondering if i’ll get anything out of Costa’s other two films from the box set. ugh.
others i didn’t care for:
Tokyo Story (bring the hate!)
Tout Va Bien
Made in the U.S.A.
The Taste of Cherry
Bad Timing (I waited A LOOOONNNNGGG time to see that & jeez…big disapointment)
We’ll need to have INSIGNIFICANCE added.
Not many people are going to blind buy a box set.
Sounds like people just want an excuse to stomp on Wes Anderson, who is a brilliant director. Life Aquatic is an acquired taste and a masterpiece, I’m so utterly tired of people spewing their ham-handed comments about it. On the thread’s note, I’ve never seen a film Criterion released that wasn’t a 3/5 or higher. I’d say that’s success, to have all more or less ‘good’ films in their collection. (granted, I haven’t seen them all, but I’m just speaking from what I have seen).
I just realized I have lied, I totally erased from my memory that Criterion had the balls to release Armageddon and The Rock. So obviously these are the titles people should be crying about, not works of art by Wes Anderson.
I figure that no movie is necessarily Criterion-worthy, that the whole point of giving a movie the Criterion Treatment was that it provided movie-lovers an opportunity to give a lesser film a closer look, or to own a great film with premier packaging. It seems off-topic to get lost in yet another pointless better-than/best-of tennis match.
I guess I’m on the wrong thread; where’s “Movies You’d Like to See on Criterion”?
To Brian Evans: OK, I’ll bite: What’s wrong with “Tokyo Story”?
And yes, “Life Aquatic” is a good movie: highly stylized visuals and loose-limbed performances play off each other nicely. Fun to look at and listen to (thank you, among others, Mark Mothersbaugh—plus Sigur Ros at the perfect moment).
Maybe you have to be old enough to remember Rod Serling intoning his narration in all those “Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau” episodes.
i think my problem with Tokyo Story (which i rated a 5/10, blasphemously to most) lies mostly in conflict of tastes – i felt like i was being exposed to a dull, robotic, Japanese puppet show – the actors seemed to lack emotion, and spouted off lines carelessly. I found an episodic lack of power in Ozu’s too-delicate cuts from character to character, allowing too much reaction time with characters’ facial responses (where the camera sticks on one character for too long after the character has completed his/her moment of dialogue). This, in particular, ruins the fluidity of the film for me, making it feel far too long of an experience to sit through (mind you, i’ve sat through and enjoyed all 6+ hours of Satantango, so length really isn’t an issue with me). I also don’t respond much to Ozu’s method of filming each character 3 feet from the ground – i see what he was trying to do… trying to level the visual focus to the Japanese tradition of kneeling – but it became tiresome and far too dull. Also, i would’ve preferred more exterior shots, as the film felt too claustrophobic. Perhaps a film called ‘Tokyo Story’ could have been a little more exterior, especially to give some breathing room from all the dull, robotic exchange of dialogue from its puppeteer’d characters. All these technical elements truly hurt the film’s potentially engaging story. I literally gained not a single thing from watching this film.
i did, however, give Ozu another chance and watched Good Morning (which i rated an 8/10). i enjoyed it thoroughly, and i noticed he directs a younger cast to exchange dialogue far more naturally than he does with adults (just judging by these two films). There were more exteriors shots to stimulate the visual flow, and there was such a great story involving the changing of times that i felt more interestingly conveyed in Good Morning than in Tokyo Story.