Criterion never fails to impress me

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Vlvetmorning98, Aug 7, 2004.

  1. Vlvetmorning98, Aug 7, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Douglas Bailey, Aug 7, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Vlvetmorning98

    Guest

    , Aug 7, 2004
    #3
  4. Vlvetmorning98

    jayembee Guest

    Douglas Bailey <> wrote:

    > Vlvetmorning98 wrote:
    >> http://www.criterionco.com/asp/release.asp?id=258
    >> http://www.criterionco.com/asp/release.asp?id=257
    >> (one of their best laserdiscs finally comes to DVD)

    >
    > Yeah, I'd been hoping for a while that these two would
    > make it to DVD as Criterion releases. Two more for the
    > pre-order list...


    It doesn't surprise me that they would maximize interest
    in these titles by releasing them during election season.
    I wonder if they'll manage to get the rights to the TANNER
    sequel, or if someone else has already nabbed them.

    -- jayembee
     
    jayembee, Aug 7, 2004
    #4
  5. Vlvetmorning98 wrote:
    > perfect timing, too
    >
    > http://www.criterionco.com/asp/release.asp?id=258
    >
    > http://www.criterionco.com/asp/release.asp?id=257
    > (one of their best laserdiscs finally comes to DVD)


    Another politically motivated choice from Criterion, taking away
    precious distribution rights money and restoration funds from far more
    deserving movies.

    --

    "One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom,
    a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural
    causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith, has not
    yet been written."

    --Hubert P. Yockey, Journal of Theoretical Biology
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Aug 7, 2004
    #5
  6. >Another politically motivated choice from Criterion, taking away
    >precious distribution rights money and restoration funds from far more
    >deserving movies.
    >


    that's absurd. SECRET HONOR is one of Altman's best films, and one of the best
    films of the 80's. And since HBO was too lazy to release TANNER, I'm glad that
    Criterion has picked it up.
     
    Vlvetmorning98, Aug 7, 2004
    #6
  7. Vlvetmorning98

    jayembee Guest

    Grand Inquisitor <> wrote:

    > Another politically motivated choice from Criterion,


    Oh, please. There's probably far economic motivation ("'Tis
    the season," as the saying goes) than political.

    > taking away precious distribution rights money and
    > restoration funds from far more deserving movies.


    In other words, you're pissed off because they're wasting
    precious resources on films you don't happen to like.

    I respect Criterion's choices, even when I don't like them
    Apparently, you can't do the same.

    -- jayembee
     
    jayembee, Aug 7, 2004
    #7
  8. jayembee wrote:
    > In other words, you're pissed off because they're wasting
    > precious resources on films you don't happen to like.
    >


    I just wish they would stick to good movies rather than
    politically-motivated choices. Nobody in their right mind (key phrase
    there) actuallys likes all that Warhol crap, or I Am Curious Yellow, etc.

    > I respect Criterion's choices, even when I don't like them
    > Apparently, you can't do the same.


    Tell me, do you respect The Rock; Armageddon; Robocop; Bodies, Rest, and
    Motion; and Chasing Amy?

    --

    "One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom,
    a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural
    causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith, has not
    yet been written."

    --Hubert P. Yockey, Journal of Theoretical Biology
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Aug 8, 2004
    #8
  9. Vlvetmorning98

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Grand Inquisitor wrote:
    > jayembee wrote:
    >> In other words, you're pissed off because they're wasting
    >> precious resources on films you don't happen to like.

    >
    > I just wish they would stick to good movies rather than
    > politically-motivated choices. Nobody in their right mind (key phrase
    > there) actuallys likes all that Warhol crap, or I Am Curious Yellow,
    > etc.


    All of which have nothing to do with anything. We're talking about 2 of
    Altman's best movies, certainly deserving of the Criterion treatment. That
    they would market during the election, that's just good business, not
    "politics".

    Mike
     
    Mike Kohary, Aug 8, 2004
    #9
  10. Grand Inquisitor <> wrote:

    > jayembee wrote:
    > >
    > > I respect Criterion's choices, even when I don't like them
    > > Apparently, you can't do the same.

    >
    > Tell me, do you respect The Rock; Armageddon; Robocop; Bodies, Rest, and
    > Motion; and Chasing Amy?


    I do, I do. But then again, I am somewhat more open-minded than a lot
    of people on this newsgroup, who feel they have to pick apart every
    little thing.

    Now where's that kill file... I know you were in it before...
     
    Frank Malczewski, Aug 8, 2004
    #10
  11. In article <9V5Rc.131232$> (Sat, 07 Aug 2004
    14:44:21 +0000), Grand Inquisitor wrote:

    > Another politically motivated choice from Criterion


    Not enough car crashes or T&A for you?
     
    Hamilcar Barca, Aug 8, 2004
    #11
  12. Vlvetmorning98

    Joshua Zyber Guest

    "Grand Inquisitor" <> wrote in message
    news:tbdRc.3539$...
    > jayembee wrote:
    > > In other words, you're pissed off because they're wasting
    > > precious resources on films you don't happen to like.

    >
    > I just wish they would stick to good movies rather than
    > politically-motivated choices. Nobody in their right mind (key phrase
    > there) actuallys likes all that Warhol crap, or I Am Curious Yellow,

    etc.

    Listen, idiot, please stop changing your posting profile. I tire of
    continually adding you to my killfile. Just stay in there with the rest
    of the morons like a good boy.
     
    Joshua Zyber, Aug 8, 2004
    #12
  13. >Nobody in their right mind (key phrase
    >there) actuallys likes all that Warhol crap, or I Am Curious Yellow, etc.


    I do like the I AM CURIOUS films. they're quite humorous and blurred the line
    between real life and movies years before THE 4TH MAN or ADAPTATION.
     
    Vlvetmorning98, Aug 8, 2004
    #13
  14. >
    >Tell me, do you respect The Rock; Armageddon; Robocop; Bodies, Rest, and
    >Motion; and Chasing Amy?
    >


    ROBOCOP and CHASING AMY are excellent films. I haven't seen THE ROCK since its
    theatrical release, but it's a cool popcorn movie. I've never seen BODIES,
    REST, and MOTION.
     
    Vlvetmorning98, Aug 8, 2004
    #14
  15. Grand Inquisitor wrote:
    > jayembee wrote:
    >> In other words, you're pissed off because they're wasting
    >> precious resources on films you don't happen to like.

    >
    > I just wish they would stick to good movies rather than
    > politically-motivated choices.


    So what, exactly, are the political motivations behind the decisions to
    release _Eyes Without a Face_ and _Fat Girl_? For that matter, what makes
    you so certain that _Secret Honor_ and _Tanner '88_ are being released for
    political reasons, rather than for aesthetic or economic ones?

    And even if they are, since when are "good movies" and
    "politically-motivated choices" mutually exclusive? _The Battle of
    Algiers_, another upcoming Criterion release which centres on conflict
    between Western and Muslim cultures, has a 100% approval rating on
    rottentomatoes.com and is widely recognised as a classic film. "Good movie"
    or "politically-motivated choice"?


    > Nobody in their right mind (key phrase there) actuallys likes all that
    > Warhol crap, or I Am Curious Yellow, etc.


    Nice use of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy there: I might with equal
    validity state that nobody in their right mind actually doesn't like
    _Singin' in the Rain_.

    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman>

    And even if Criterion heeded your wish and only released likable movies,
    there appear to be plenty of people who like the films you mention: six out
    of eleven of the reviewers rated at rottentomatoes.com gave positive
    ratings to _I Am Curious Yellow_, two of the four rated reviewers gave
    positive ratings to _Blood For Dracula_, and four of four rated reviewers
    gave positive ratings to _Flesh For Frankenstein_. Not unanimous approval
    by any stretch of the imagination, but certainly evidence that *somebody*
    likes those films. But then, I don't suppose any of those people are in
    their right minds.

    (Incidentally, _Singin' in the Rain_ also has a 100% approval rating. Just
    thought you'd want to know.)


    >> I respect Criterion's choices, even when I don't like them
    >> Apparently, you can't do the same.

    >
    > Tell me, do you respect The Rock; Armageddon; Robocop; Bodies, Rest, and
    > Motion; and Chasing Amy?


    As Jerry says, I respect their choices of those films as Criterion
    releases. I'm not crazy about _The Rock_ and _Armageddon_ as films, but if
    revenue from those two big-ticket releases helped Criterion cover the
    expenses of releasing, say, _Fishing With John_, then I'm content. And it's
    not as if anyone held a gun to my head and forced me to buy the Bay
    films...

    Oh, and while I haven't seen _Bodies, Rest and Motion_ or _Chasing Amy_ and
    can't comment on them, *yeah*, you'd better believe I respect _RoboCop_.
    Damn straight. :)

    doug

    --
    "The answer to your question is -- what can you afford?"
    --H-A-L-O
     
    Douglas Bailey, Aug 8, 2004
    #15
  16. On 08 Aug 2004 02:13:32 GMT, (Vlvetmorning98)
    wrote:

    >>Nobody in their right mind (key phrase
    >>there) actuallys likes all that Warhol crap, or I Am Curious Yellow, etc.

    >
    >I do like the I AM CURIOUS films. they're quite humorous and blurred the line
    >between real life and movies years before THE 4TH MAN or ADAPTATION.


    I agree. I'm absolutely delighted that Criterion issued "I am curious
    Yellow/Blue." And it is not up to someonee else to tell me that my
    choices in film are "insane."

    .. Steve .
     
    Steve(JazzHunter), Aug 8, 2004
    #16
  17. Joshua Zyber wrote:
    >>I just wish they would stick to good movies rather than
    >>politically-motivated choices. Nobody in their right mind (key phrase
    >>there) actuallys likes all that Warhol crap, or I Am Curious Yellow,

    >
    > etc.
    >
    > Listen, idiot, please stop changing your posting profile. I tire of
    > continually adding you to my killfile. Just stay in there with the rest
    > of the morons like a good boy.


    "Change my posting profile"? The problem is on your end, not mine.

    And those two movies are crap (typical of Altman). People only like
    them because they are liberal, the same way some Republicans swear Newt
    Gingrich is a great novelist. Yes, I really mean that.

    --

    "One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom,
    a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural
    causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith, has not
    yet been written."

    --Hubert P. Yockey, Journal of Theoretical Biology
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Aug 8, 2004
    #17
  18. Douglas Bailey wrote:

    > Grand Inquisitor wrote:
    >
    >>jayembee wrote:
    >>
    >>>In other words, you're pissed off because they're wasting
    >>>precious resources on films you don't happen to like.

    >>
    >>I just wish they would stick to good movies rather than
    >>politically-motivated choices.

    >
    >
    > So what, exactly, are the political motivations behind the decisions to
    > release _Eyes Without a Face_ and _Fat Girl_?


    Since I didn't even mention those movies, I won't answer your question.
    Please stick to reality.

    > For that matter, what makes
    > you so certain that _Secret Honor_ and _Tanner '88_ are being released for
    > political reasons, rather than for aesthetic or economic ones?
    >


    Because they're crap, they're forgettable movies from an over-rated
    director.

    > And even if they are, since when are "good movies" and
    > "politically-motivated choices" mutually exclusive? _The Battle of
    > Algiers_, another upcoming Criterion release which centres on conflict
    > between Western and Muslim cultures, has a 100% approval rating on
    > rottentomatoes.com and is widely recognised as a classic film. "Good movie"
    > or "politically-motivated choice"?


    Good movie. What's your point?

    > Nice use of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy there: I might with equal
    > validity state that nobody in their right mind actually doesn't like
    > _Singin' in the Rain_.
    >
    > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman>
    >


    And anybody who likes Warhol or I Am Curious Yellow is therefore not in
    their right mind.

    > And even if Criterion heeded your wish and only released likable movies,
    > there appear to be plenty of people who like the films you mention: six out
    > of eleven of the reviewers rated at rottentomatoes.com gave positive
    > ratings to _I Am Curious Yellow_, two of the four rated reviewers gave
    > positive ratings to _Blood For Dracula_, and four of four rated reviewers
    > gave positive ratings to _Flesh For Frankenstein_. Not unanimous approval
    > by any stretch of the imagination, but certainly evidence that *somebody*
    > likes those films. But then, I don't suppose any of those people are in
    > their right minds.
    >


    Now you're learning. The sooner we bury and forget about people like
    Warhol the sooner genuine art (not pretentious, talentless frauds) can
    become popular again.

    > (Incidentally, _Singin' in the Rain_ also has a 100% approval rating. Just
    > thought you'd want to know.)
    >


    I know. Don't care. Singin in the Rain was boring. It wasn't funny.
    And it convinced me that musicals are not movies, they are a stage craft
    put on film, they have nothing to do with the art form of film, which as
    Tarkovsky says, is really about the expression of actual time, having
    little or nothing to do with plots or stars, etc.

    --

    "One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom,
    a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural
    causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith, has not
    yet been written."

    --Hubert P. Yockey, Journal of Theoretical Biology
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Aug 8, 2004
    #18
  19. Hamilcar Barca wrote:
    >>Another politically motivated choice from Criterion

    >
    >
    > Not enough car crashes or T&A for you?


    Typical liberal, anybody who disagrees is a NASCAR-loving yokel. Well
    if you want to have a snob-off, I'll mention that my tastes lean towards
    Tarkovsky, Fellini, Malick, Kubrick, Chaplin, Keaton, Welles, Ford,
    Huston, and Weir.

    --

    "One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom,
    a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural
    causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith, has not
    yet been written."

    --Hubert P. Yockey, Journal of Theoretical Biology
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Aug 8, 2004
    #19
  20. In article <> (Sun, 08 Aug
    2004 02:13:32 +0000), Vlvetmorning98 wrote:

    >>Nobody in their right mind (key phrase
    >>there) actuallys likes all that Warhol crap, or I Am Curious Yellow, etc.

    >
    > I do like the I AM CURIOUS films.


    I'm pleased Criterion released them, and I don't have even the
    smallest regret for buying the set, but I didn't like them at all.
     
    Hamilcar Barca, Aug 8, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Sharon Russell

    OpenOffice Products-Writer,Calc,Impress,Draw

    Sharon Russell, Sep 3, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    557
  2. J Rusnak
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    607
    J Rusnak
    Jan 2, 2007
  3. Christopher Jahn

    OpenOffice Impress problem

    Christopher Jahn, Nov 22, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    968
    stefano
    Nov 27, 2007
  4. Fred A Stover
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    863
    pcbutts1
    Dec 26, 2007
  5. Andrew Tang
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    653
    Andrew Tang
    Jul 5, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page