Criterion DVDs That Don't Deserve It

[hedwig]

No, it wasn't a knock on your thread. It's a good thread and its proven by my presense. I was just saying criterion is not exempt from making asshole dvd's. But they do it for the bank most definetely. But they did do an awesome job on those asshole dvds. It's not like they halfassed it.

yeah i know it wasn't a knock on the thread...do you own the Armegeddon and Rock DVDs? what makes them awesome? .. interesting.

[Stefen]

No, but i've rented them. They are awesome in a criterion way. Lots of features. The Armageddon one in particular had one of the best blooper reels I have ever seen. They were feature packed and they did a good job.

[Ravi]

Criterion got the actors to make some interesting bloopers?  Wow, they are amazing.

If the two Bay films help fund some releases of excellent films, then I don't mind. Just as long as they aren't regularly releasing mediocre films.

Criterion released The English Patient on LaserDisc.  I haven't seen it so I don't know if it is undeserving.  Thoughts?

[Stefen]

No, but the way it was presented was what made it great. It's not just a blooper real, oh forget it. To hell with you ravi!!!


Hey, English patient was an academy award winning film, like American Beauty and A Beautful Mind. Of course it's deserving! OH well.

[Pubrick]

not yet mentioned

[life_boy]

With The Rock and Armageddon I would guess Criterion had to work out a special deal to get the rights to those titles, since they are both multi-million dollar action blockbusters.  Considering they are "Director Approved" sets, maybe Bay brought them to Criterion wanting to assure a quality release, or made sure Criterion released them because he liked what they did with the laserdiscs.  

Whatever the case, it really doesn't bother me that Criterion released a couple of Michael Bay films.  I like that they have continually made a point to include all kinds of films next to each other as equals under the Criterion label, both those considered critically acceptable to be called "great films," and those that may be misunderstood or despised by elitists who can't take it that RoboCop sits between David Lean's Summertime and Akira Kurosawa's High & Low.  If nothing else, it just keeps things interesting.

[ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ]

I wonder how I forgot to add the Beastie Boys anthology when I own it...

You're right, it shouldn't be Criterion, though I did pick it up because I wanted all (well almost all) the Beastie Boys videos, and I can trust they got good supplements (which they did) because it was Criterion.

I liked Life Aquatic and would've gotten it anyway, but I don't really think it was Criterion par like the Tenenbaums or Rushmore.

[Ravi]

With The Rock and Armageddon I would guess Criterion had to work out a special deal to get the rights to those titles, since they are both multi-million dollar action blockbusters.  Considering they are "Director Approved" sets, maybe Bay brought them to Criterion wanting to assure a quality release, or made sure Criterion released them because he liked what they did with the laserdiscs.  

Criterion released Armageddon when Buena Vista hadn't started making special edition DVDs or even 16:9 transfers.  Criterion's version is not 16:9 either, but it sure had a lot of extras.  I believe Criterion released both The Rock and Armageddon on LaserDisc as well.  Their DVD release of The Rock came a few years later.

[Brazoliange]

I can't possibly fathom why they would give The Rock a Crit. release and not Face-Off

i'm not arguing that.  i dont see how it possibly fits the Criterion criteria, but i was arguing that 'they're not good movies' statement.

what I meant was that there are hordes of better action movies they could have picked.... they aren't horrible, laughable movies, but there are lots of action movies that entertain me more that I consider better movies (and when I say this, I mean the majority of other action movies I've seen)

[I Don't Believe in Beatles]

How to Get Ahead in Advertising.

[cowboykurtis]

i agree with insomnia - i blind bought it years ago, thinking the premise sounded interesting - it wasn't

[killafilm]

The Beastie Boys totally deserve the Criterion treatment.  If only for Sabotage.  And there's the usual crazy amount of extras that you expect for CC releases.  All of your choices on angles and remixes, so Awesome.

[Find Your Magali]

I thought this one was a bit of a stretch for Criterion, but who the hell am I?

[MacGuffin]

i've harped on this before - I don't understand  the people that criticize Bay - are they expecting something subtle and philosophical? He is an action director, there are certain genre archetypes that are inherent to action films - And Bay is one of the best in that said genre. Most criticisms i hear directed towards Bay (over-the-top, gratuitous,etc) are a essential component to the action genre. What good action film isn't gratutious - John Woo, another great action director is over-the-top as one can get, a little more poetic than Bay? Yes. But they're cut from the same cloth.

If one thinks the action genre is shallow shit then you can't judge Bay for following those genre conventions - Criticize the action genre if anything - But, there are a hell of a lot more inept directors working in the action genre than Bay.

Toward that end, in his first meeting with Parkes and MacDonald, who produced "The Island," Bay didn't discuss cinematography. He didn't outline stunts. He wanted to argue plot.

"I was expecting Michael to start talking about shots and cranes and camera rigs," Parkes says. "But he was focused on the story and its moral questions. That really surprised me."

[Ravi]

We don't read articles about Michael Bay.