|
Criminal Minded posted:Laserdisc, please. Criterion did release Sunday Bloody Sunday on laserdisc actually
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 12:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 02:21 |
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euhGPrgVZj0&t=22s
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 13:02
|
|
|
Are there announcements today? Usually we get a hint about them at this point...
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 18:41
|
|
|
September films are up on the Criterion website. friendo55 fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Jun 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 20:11
|
|
|
friendo55 posted:September films are up on the Criterion website. Apparently the person who made the The Game cover thought "The Game" was Tempest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 20:22
|
|
|
Oh good, I get to save money in September: Umberto D. - It's okay, no desire to own it Les Visiteurs du Soir - Been meaning to see it, rental Children of Paradise - Another one for the "I should probably rewatch this" pile, but I probably won't The Game - It's okay, no desire to own it Eating Raoul - Never seen it but always been curious, rental
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 20:27
|
|
|
Fantastic cover for "The Game". It's probably one of Fincher's lesser films but it's been years since I've seen it so I think I would enjoy watching it again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 20:52
|
|
|
Yay, Carné! Les Visiteurs du soir and Les Enfants du Paradis are both great!
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 20:52
|
|
|
Cacator posted:Fantastic cover for "The Game". It's probably one of Fincher's lesser films but it's been years since I've seen it so I think I would enjoy watching it again. It's not a great movie, but it's at least gorgeous. Fincher makes being fantastically wealthy look like a really good time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 20:54
|
|
|
Though I really think The Game is a nice, effective thriller, I always felt like the ending was way too convenient and tacked-on. I figured it was a studio move and Fincher originally intended something else. I see this release features an alternate ending. I wonder if it's any better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 21:06
|
|
|
I love The Game, mostly because of the ambitiousness of the idea. It's by no stretch a great movie, but I love to watch it. However, I think that's a terrible cover for it. It looks like a bad 80's sci-fi film, and it doesn't really feel like it conveys a good sense of the film's tone. Not to mention that kind of imagery is hard to get people to read as anything other than a 9/11 reference. The Mad Men promo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelsurtees/6708053391/) got enough grief for it, but at least it wasn't in front of a skyscraper. (I actually just looked up the 9/11 photo for reference, and boy is it weirdly similar: http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0903-SEP_FALLINGMAN)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 21:14
|
|
|
infopost #141 - Children Of Paradise (Sept 18)  -New high-definition digital transfer from Pathé’s 2011 restoration, with uncompressed monaural soundtrack on the Blu-ray edition -Audio commentaries by film scholars Brian Stonehill and Charles Affron -Video introduction by director Terry Gilliam -Once Upon a Time: “Children of Paradise, a 2010 documentary on the making of the film -New visual essay on the design of Children of Paradise by film writer Paul Ryan -The Birth of “Children of Paradise,” a 1967 German documentary that visits Nice, where the film was partially shot, and features interviews with cast members Arletty, Jean-Louis Barrault, Pierre Brasseur; production designer Alexandre Trauner; and others -Restoration demonstration -U.S. trailer -New English subtitle translation -PLUS: A booklet featuring an essay by film scholar Dudley Andrew and excerpts from a 1990 interview with director Marcel Carné #201 - Umberto D (Sept 4)  -New high-definition digital transfer, with uncompressed monaural soundtrack on the Blu-ray edition -That’s Life: Vittorio De Sica, a fifty-five-minute documentary made for Italian television in 2001 -Video interview with actress Maria Pia Casilio from 2003 -Trailer -PLUS: A booklet featuring an essay by critic Stuart Klawans and reprinted recollections by De Sica and Carlo Battisti, who plays Umberto D. #626 - Le visiteurs du soir (Sept 18)  -New high-definition digital restoration, with uncompressed monaural soundtrack on the Blu-ray edition -L’aventure des “Visiteurs du soir,” a documentary on the making of the film -Trailer -New English subtitle translation -PLUS: A booklet featuring an essay by film critic Michael Atkinson #627 - The Game (Sept 25)  -New, restored digital transfer, supervised by director David Fincher and director of photography Harris Savides, with original theatrical 5.1 surround theatrical soundtrack, in DTS-HD Master Audio on the Blu-ray edition -Alternate 5.1 surround mix optimized for home theater viewing, supervised by sound designer Ren Klyce and Fincher, in DTS-HD Master Audio on the Blu-ray edition -Audio commentary by Fincher, Savides, actor Michael Douglas, screenwriters John Brancato and Michael Ferris, digital animation supervisor Richard “Dr.” Baily, production designer Jeffrey Beecroft, visual effects supervisor Kevin Haug, and visual effects producer Robyn D’Arcy -An hour’s worth of exclusive behind-the-scenes footage and film-to-storyboard comparisons for four of the film’s major set pieces, with commentary -Alternate ending -Trailer and teaser trailer, with commentary -PLUS: A booklet featuring an essay by film critic David Sterritt #625 - Eating Raoul (Sept 25)  -New, restored digital transfer, supervised by director of photography Gary Thieltges, with uncompressed monaural soundtrack on the Blu-ray edition -Audio commentary featuring screenwriter Richard Blackburn, art director Robert Schulenberg, and editor Alan Toomayan -The Secret Cinema (1968) and Naughty Nurse (1969), two short films by director Paul Bartel -Cooking Up “Raoul,” a new documentary about the making of the film, featuring interviews with stars Mary Woronov, Robert Beltran, and Edie McClurg -Gag reel of outtakes from the film -Archival interview with Bartel and Woronov -Trailer -PLUS: A booklet featuring an essay by film critic David Ehrenstein - - - I've been waiting on the Children of Paradise blu-ray for a while now. Port Of Shadows did little for me but Children looks interesting. Probably a rental. I've never been able to whip up much enthusiasm for Umberto D, another rental if I'm feeling academic. I know nothing about Le visiteurs du soir, but I like the cover art. It's nice to see a new edition of The Game and I might give it a rental just for the transfer and extras. Awesome cover, too. The only must-buy here, for me anyways, is Eating Raoul, which I saw on the Criterion Hulu channel a couple months ago and loved. I know the logo's pretty iconic but this would've been a good time for an illustrated ensemble cover like the one for Rules of the Game given the array of costumes and characters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 21:22
|
|
|
lessthankyle posted:I love The Game, mostly because of the ambitiousness of the idea. It's by no stretch a great movie, but I love to watch it. However, I think that's a terrible cover for it. It looks like a bad 80's sci-fi film, and it doesn't really feel like it conveys a good sense of the film's tone. Not to mention that kind of imagery is hard to get people to read as anything other than a 9/11 reference. The Mad Men promo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelsurtees/6708053391/) got enough grief for it, but at least it wasn't in front of a skyscraper. (I actually just looked up the 9/11 photo for reference, and boy is it weirdly similar: http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0903-SEP_FALLINGMAN) I don't know, it directly ties into a scene, expresses the foreboding, conspiracy-thriller atmosphere, and is bathed in the blue-green tones that much of the movie is. I like it. And 9/11? Really? edit: I just noticed that Fincher's name isn't on the cover. I wonder what's up with that? Origami Dali fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Jun 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 21:34
|
|
|
lessthankyle posted:I love The Game, mostly because of the ambitiousness of the idea. It's by no stretch a great movie, but I love to watch it. However, I think that's a terrible cover for it. It looks like a bad 80's sci-fi film, and it doesn't really feel like it conveys a good sense of the film's tone. Not to mention that kind of imagery is hard to get people to read as anything other than a 9/11 reference. The Mad Men promo (http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaelsurtees/6708053391/) got enough grief for it, but at least it wasn't in front of a skyscraper. (I actually just looked up the 9/11 photo for reference, and boy is it weirdly similar: http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0903-SEP_FALLINGMAN) Well, as you know, The Game predicted 9/11.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 21:35
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:I don't know, it directly ties into a scene, expresses the foreboding, conspiracy-thriller atmosphere, and is bathed in the blue-green tones that much of the movie is. I like it. I don't think it really captures the effect or tone of that scene very well, though. It always seemed that the skylight was the most visually striking aspect of it. This cover just shows an endless drop, but the movie pretty clearly shows what he's jumping onto. Maybe a light source from the bottom would help. I agree it's an important scene, I just think there are better options for representation. Also, the perspective of the text doesn't work if you follow the letters down. And yes, 9/11, really. I'm not saying it's some secret message or anything, but that falling man image is one of the most famous images from that day and people are going to associate that with this cover. Whether we like it or not, that kind of imagery is intimately tied to 9/11. Criterion is even located in NYC, it strikes me as weird that they wouldn't make that connection. Maybe that was the hijackers plan all along? Ruin The Game's Criterion cover? lessthankyle fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Jun 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 22:14
|
|
|
As someone who had a friend say last week that Freddy Got Fingered predicted the War on Terror, I have no doubt Fincher could have done the same.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 22:34
|
|
|
lessthankyle posted:I don't think it really captures the effect or tone of that scene very well, though. It always seemed that the skylight was the most visually striking aspect of it. This cover just shows an endless drop, but the movie pretty clearly shows what he's jumping onto. Maybe a light source from the bottom would help. I agree it's an important scene, I just think there are better options for representation. Also, the perspective of the text doesn't work if you follow the letters down. It's also a nod to his father's suicide.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 02:36
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:#201 - Umberto D (Sept 4) A really simple cover but I like it much more than the current one, I think it fits the movie perfectly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 19:02
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:And 9/11? Really? I think it's one of those things. The image of a man falling is such a commonly appearing image throughout all media that I think it depends on the individual. There are a good many people who will associate it with 9/11 and there are a good many people who will not. Those of us who do not should bear in mind that those who do will be reasonably offended and we should think twice about using that image, lest we pull discussion away from the work and onto a singular image.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 04:29
|
|
|
I gotta admit, 9/11 was the first thing I thought of when I saw it. Which is a shame, because it's definitely a beautiful cover. I wish I could appreciate it for what it is and not see that when I look at it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 05:34
|
|
|
Cemetry Gator posted:Those of us who do not should bear in mind that those who do will be reasonably offended and we should think twice about using that image, lest we pull discussion away from the work and onto a singular image. I guess I underestimated how many people would see this, but I disagree about thinking twice. Should artists really have to kowtow to a guesstimated portion of the population's hair-trigger sensitivities? Then again, this might not be the thread for that discussion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 07:20
|
|
|
How on earth is a 9/11 visual connection harmful to the cover? I think it's even better for it - Douglas's character is a protected, ignorant bigshot whose life suddenly crumbles for no apparent reason. Also it's not like merchandising based off 9/11 is a new thing, Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close might as well have shoved the remains up its rear end in pursuit of orgasm.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 07:50
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:I guess I underestimated how many people would see this, but I disagree about thinking twice. Should artists really have to kowtow to a guesstimated portion of the population's hair-trigger sensitivities? Then again, this might not be the thread for that discussion. When the purpose of that image is to sell a movie? We're not talking about an independent work of art, a Blu-Ray cover is marketing first and foremost. I mean, I don't personally think the cover is an issue even though I think the connection to 9/11 imagery is pretty obvious (and it doesn't matter that the movie came out before 9/11, the artwork was still made after and it's the first promo material for the movie to actually use guy-falling-from-a-skyscraper imagery, everything before this has been jigsaw puzzle themed), but it's absolutely something that should be kept in mind.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 09:24
|
|
|
sethsez posted:but it's absolutely something that should be kept in mind. Why? Why should we search for coincidental correlations between 9/11 and COMPLETELY UNRELATED things?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 03:08
|
|
|
caiman posted:Why? Why should we search for coincidental correlations between 9/11 and COMPLETELY UNRELATED things? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 03:20
|
|
|
That episode was "banned" from being aired in syndication for a long time (not because of that image, just the use of the WTC in general). Even back after 9/11 happened I didn't understand poo poo like this. Is someone going to see a reference to the towers and start crying and sue FOX?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 03:23
|
|
|
caiman posted:Why? Why should we search for coincidental correlations between 9/11 and COMPLETELY UNRELATED things?  The 'falling man' image is probably the most iconic 9/11 image, aside from shots of the planes going into the buildings. Any way you slice it, its an odd choice of inspiration for a cover of a film that has nothing to do with 9/11.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 03:25
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:The 'falling man' image is probably the most iconic 9/11 image, aside from shots of the planes going into the buildings. Any way you slice it, its an odd choice of inspiration for a cover of a film that has nothing to do with 9/11. Yeah... I know about the picture. What I'm saying is the cover has absolutely nothing to do with that picture. It's not an odd choice for the cover because it correlates directly with the movie. I don't understand why 9/11 should even remotely be a consideration, to the cover designers or to us.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 03:28
|
|
|
codyclarke posted:
That's fine. And here's an actual screenshot from the scene in question.  The cover lifts the image directly from the movie. Just because it reminds people of something doesn't mean it's actually inspired by it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 05:52
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:The cover lifts the image directly from the movie. Just because it reminds people of something doesn't mean it's actually inspired by it. Alright, I was confused then. I didn't remember that shot from the movie, it's been a long while since I've seen it. That's why I thought it was so strange.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 06:07
|
|
|
caiman posted:Even back after 9/11 happened I didn't understand poo poo like this. Is someone going to see a reference to the towers and start crying and sue FOX?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 14:39
|
|
|
caiman posted:That episode was "banned" from being aired in syndication for a long time (not because of that image, just the use of the WTC in general). Even back after 9/11 happened I didn't understand poo poo like this. Is someone going to see a reference to the towers and start crying and sue FOX? I think that was more about sensitivity than anything else, out of a sense of "OK, they're seeing these images constantly on TV and don't need to be reminded of it even more with something innocuous". Hell, I've had people who lost friends or family members in the towers tell me that yes, seeing images of the World Trade Center (and not just in 9/11 footage) tends to put them on edge and make them sad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 21:35
|
|
|
Goddamn. Just seeing that again brings up all sorts of feelings about 9/11  .I just discovered that my library at the University of Michigan pretty much has every Criterion DVD out there right now (including Tokyo Olympiad, which is currently out of print and unavailable on NetFlix). Seriously debating killing my NetFlix account.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 04:44
|
|
|
caiman posted:Why? Why should we search for coincidental correlations between 9/11 and COMPLETELY UNRELATED things? caiman posted:Yeah... I know about the picture. What I'm saying is the cover has absolutely nothing to do with that picture. It's not an odd choice for the cover because it correlates directly with the movie. The point is that it doesn't matter what it represents, it matters how it'll play to people who look at it on the shelf at Best Buy, because a DVD cover is a marketing tool, not an isolated piece of art. And it's a reference that only makes sense after the fact... for someone who hasn't seen the movie it's just going to look like the Falling Man image. It's a wrong interpretation, but a lost sale because a customer misunderstood the cover is still a lost sale, stupid or not. And cover designers should worry about it because worrying about customer manipulation through graphic design is pretty much their entire job.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 18:31
|
|
|
sethsez posted:The point is that it doesn't matter what it represents, it matters how it'll play to people who look at it on the shelf at Best Buy, because a DVD cover is a marketing tool, not an isolated piece of art. And it's a reference that only makes sense after the fact... for someone who hasn't seen the movie it's just going to look like the Falling Man image. It's a wrong interpretation, but a lost sale because a customer misunderstood the cover is still a lost sale, stupid or not. Thank god that Criterion, for the most part, tends to make decisions in the name of artistic integrity rather than what some overly sensitive idiot will get their panties in a bunch about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 18:53
|
|
|
If you're browsing Criterion DVDs at all chances are you are already familiar with the brand and its appeal. The artistic covers are part of that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 19:07
|
|
|
caiman posted:Thank god that Criterion, for the most part, tends to make decisions in the name of artistic integrity rather than what some overly sensitive idiot will get their panties in a bunch about. You do know that bringing DVDs to market is a business, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 19:22
|
|
|
STEVIE B 4EVA posted:You do know that bringing DVDs to market is a business, right? Yes I do. Criterion's business strategy is artistic integrity, so it's win/win.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 19:30
|
|
|
sethsez posted:The point is that it doesn't matter what it represents, it matters how it'll play to people who look at it on the shelf at Best Buy, because a DVD cover is a marketing tool, not an isolated piece of art. And it's a reference that only makes sense after the fact... for someone who hasn't seen the movie it's just going to look like the Falling Man image. It's a wrong interpretation, but a lost sale because a customer misunderstood the cover is still a lost sale, stupid or not. It's not a "wrong interpretation" if that's what the viewer/customer thinks. And I don't mean "the customer's always right" or whatever, I mean it doesn't matter whether Criterion intended it or not, if that's the connection people make on their own then it's valid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 20:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 02:21 |
|
|
RichterIX posted:It's not a "wrong interpretation" if that's what the viewer/customer thinks. And I don't mean "the customer's always right" or whatever, I mean it doesn't matter whether Criterion intended it or not, if that's the connection people make on their own then it's valid. It's valid in the sense that they thought of it so it's a legitimate mental correlation. But "Hmm, that reminds me of 9/11" is entirely different from "Why is Criterion reminding me of 9/11  "
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2012 20:50
|
|