Are we slaves to Criterion?

Started by dufresne, June 02, 2003, 02:48:05 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3
User actions

chainsmoking insomniac

#15
June 02, 2003, 07:30:41 PM
"Important" and "good" are adjectives better left up to individuals to decide.  Thanks.  8)
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote: 'The world's a fine place, and worth fighting for.'  I agree with the second part."
    --Morgan Freeman, Se7en

"Have you ever fucking seen that...? Ever seen a mistake in nature?  Have you ever seen an animal make a mistake?"
 --Paul Schneider, All the Real Girls

Cecil

#16
June 02, 2003, 07:36:00 PM
yeah, i know, but....

well, i guess youre right. its like were members of the criterion cult, eagerly awaiting for the next film worthy enough of their blessing

nice avatar, BTW

sphinx

#17
June 02, 2003, 07:45:21 PM
if you think you're a slave to criterion, you're a voluntary slave.

Cecil

#18
June 02, 2003, 08:14:19 PM
Quote from: sphinxif you think you're a slave to criterion, you're a voluntary slave.

yes, youre more of a.... partner in crime.

dufresne

#19
June 02, 2003, 08:28:46 PM
Quote from: sphinxif you think you're a slave to criterion, you're a voluntary slave.

haha...i like that.  some of you essentially just posted your Criterion Collection and not necessarily answered the second part of my question.

Do you feel like you're cheating yourself because Criterion is essentially holding your hand through the film school (nice analogy godardian) process?  The Gold Trumpet feels that Criterion has been lackluster in making their selections.  So are we putting ourselves in danger by assuming that Criterion is the end all when it comes to important films?  Are there other "Collections" or panels of film goers out there who have more to add?  

I'm obviously at an impasse and your input is very helpful.

:)
There are shadows in life, baby.

Cecil

#20
June 02, 2003, 08:38:47 PM
well of course there are other issues, such as copyrights and cost of production that would make certain films unreleasable by criterion even though they would "deserve" to be

Ravi

#21
June 02, 2003, 10:20:29 PM
Quote from: dufresne
Quote from: sphinxif you think you're a slave to criterion, you're a voluntary slave.

haha...i like that.  some of you essentially just posted your Criterion Collection and not necessarily answered the second part of my question.

Do you feel like you're cheating yourself because Criterion is essentially holding your hand through the film school (nice analogy godardian) process?  The Gold Trumpet feels that Criterion has been lackluster in making their selections.  So are we putting ourselves in danger by assuming that Criterion is the end all when it comes to important films?  Are there other "Collections" or panels of film goers out there who have more to add?  

I'm obviously at an impasse and your input is very helpful.

:)

I don't think anyone is under the impression that the films Criterion releases are the ONLY good films.  Image releases many good ones and so do the major studios.  But I assume that for the most part, Criterion is releasing films that have generally been praised by cinephiles and critics, or films by acclaimed filmmakers.  They're not the be all and end all to great films, but they're a great starting place, especially since Janus originally brought many important films to America.

Cecil

#22
June 02, 2003, 10:30:19 PM
and they give those films the best treatement possible

Rudie Obias

#23
June 03, 2003, 12:10:29 PM
why do you guys as nothing about ROBOCOP being on criterion but have a big problem with ARMAGEDDON or THE ROCK being on criterion?  all these films are in the same vein.
\"a pair of eyes staring at you, projected on a large screen is what cinema is truly about.\" -volker schlöndorff

SoNowThen

#24
June 03, 2003, 12:18:46 PM
Except Robocop can make fun of itself.

Michael Bay is incapable of this. That being said, I own the Rock, and enjoy it as escapist fare.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

modage

#25
June 03, 2003, 12:18:48 PM
because ROBOCOP rules.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

Rudie Obias

#26
June 03, 2003, 12:56:08 PM
i think you guys are just film snobs and can't take the genius of micheal fuckin' bay!
\"a pair of eyes staring at you, projected on a large screen is what cinema is truly about.\" -volker schlöndorff

phil marlowe

#27
June 03, 2003, 12:56:09 PM
Quote from: themodernage02because ROBOCOP rules.
second.

one of the very few trilogys i fully support.

MacGuffin

#28
June 03, 2003, 02:55:25 PM
Quote from: mogwaiGot the "Fishing with John" dvd in the mail today. Yeah. But I'm not a slave to Cri.

No, just a slave to us who told you to buy it. :yabbse-wink:
"Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art." - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

SoNowThen

#29
June 03, 2003, 02:59:40 PM
We used to play a game in film school, to see who could make the others buy the most dvds and cds with their suggestions. It was fun as hell.

So far on this board, I'm down $28 to GT, and soon to be down $45 to Godardian, when I go on my next buying spree...
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3
User actions