To be honest I didn’t like the movie much..I thought the cinematography was really not good.
I love the film to death, but there’s a decent DVD version out and I’d rather Criterion focus on the hard-to-find stuff. The Criterion Collection isn’t a canon.
“Your thoughts?”
Mark, why does a film that is readily available as a single disc or in the Paradjanov boxset need to be in the Criterion Collection? Wouldn’t you prefer they seek out filmmakers who have created work just as strong but who aren’t available so that you could discover new masterpieces while re-watching Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors anytime you want?
Same question for Sunrise and any other film that is available from other companies.
I have the Kino versions of both Dersu Uzala and Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors but I feel that they both deserve the treatment that only the Criterion Collection can give to them (being an obsessive cinephile I’m left feeling empty handed with the Kino versions of the films, especially Dersu Uzala which has no special features at all!).
As for Sunrise, I consider it the quintessential silent film and, therefore, I find it incomprehensible why it would not be represented it in the Criterion Collection (plus, like the two aforementioned films, it deserves a fuller remastering and the essays and other special features that are unique to the collection).
Are there any silent films on Criterion?
One of the greatest—Pandora’s Box.
Also The Passion of Joan of Arc.
Hmmm, I should get that!
Yes, you should.
“Mark, why does a film that is readily available as a single disc or in the Paradjanov boxset need to be in the Criterion Collection?”
Mike,the whole question about Criterion’s TRUE research abilities will never be answered as long as the public chooses the same old regions of film-making over and over……it’s evident from the fact that Criterion has ignored Greece in favor of a Macedonian film but i can’t expect much myself besides Zorba,huh?
i suppose Parajanov would make a great addition which would alternatively mean more countries in the boring Criterion list of recycling stock..
but with stupid,stuck-up reactions like Chickenbaby’s,what can you expect?
It ain’t easy being greek.
>>Mark, why does a film that is readily available … need to be in the Criterion Collection?<<
Mike, Mike, Mike … Haven’t you learned that unless a film is on the Criterion label, it doesn’t truly exist?
No way. Kino did a great job getting that restored print and masters material over here to the US. We should be happy for that and proud of them (despite the cover art, uh, um…). BUT, Criterion would be wise to participate in a proper—the FIRST proper—release of COLOR OF POMEGRANATES in the US, or even internationally. I don’t think there is a valid home video release of the film on any region of DVD, and there are barely any prints with good color circulating in the US anymore. A crying shame, given that it’s the most beautiful flick ever.
No way. Kino did a great job getting that restored print and masters material over here to the US. We should be happy for that and proud of them (despite the cover art, uh, um…). BUT, Criterion would be wise to participate in a proper—the FIRST proper—release of COLOR OF POMEGRANATES in the US, or even internationally. I don’t think there is a valid home video release of the film on any region of DVD, and there are barely any prints with good color circulating in the US anymore. A crying shame, given that it’s the most beautiful flick ever.
Look guys, the fact is that there’s a certain amount of honor bestowed upon directors and films that are recognized by Criterion (if you overlook Armageddon and Benjamin Button). So yeah, I would love to see Parajanov represented in this collection. To me, it is the go-to collection. It is the first thing I recommend to anyone who tells me they like movies but are still stuck on Tarantino or Memento. I owe a huge amount of my knowledge of movies to Criterion.
Also, I loved this movie. I had seen Color of Pomegranates multiple times, but during a double bill of it, they showed Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors first. It is certainly the more approachable film of the two. Parajanov said that he was inspired by Ivan’s Childhood, and there are certainly some dreamy scenes and an overall feeling of surreal, figurative images. It is certainly one of the most involving words ever created in cinema, and as the title says, it takes us back in time to another place, as envisioned by a true auteur.
For a long time after I saw it, I would go on Youtube and search for the last scene of Ivan’s death. I really love it.
It’s just that I don’t expect better SHADOWS materials to emerge than that Ruscico master Kino used for their disc. Criterion’s participation in any Paradjanov release would be best suited for COLOR, the only Paradjanov still languishing in substandard condition on home video…it looks no better than the Kino VHSs of the 90s or the Connoisseur Collection VHS release from about the same era. It’s inferior quality has never been corrected, in 20 years, and it would be incredible to see that change.
Otherwise, maybe an Eclipse set of the pre-SHADOWS “propaganda” films Paradjanov directed but disowned. Just judging from a few clips in the documentary in the Kino box set, actually look as inventively staged and shot as some of his later work.
Graveyard Poet
Sergei Paradjanov created a rare cinematic experience with Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors—it’s one of those few films that actually deserve the epithet “one-of-a-kind”. It’s his masterpiece and it’s one of the greatest films of 1960s art house world cinema. Paradjanov, like Tarkovsky, existed in a completely different cinematic realm than other directors and needs to be represented in the Criterion Collection.
Your thoughts?