577 Cul-de-Sac

Discuss releases by Criterion and the films on them. Threads may contain spoilers!
Message
Author
User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 6:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

577 Cul-de-Sac

#1 Post by cdnchris »

Cul-de-Sac

Image Image

Roman Polanski orchestrates a mental ménage à trois in this slyly absurd tale of paranoia from the director’s golden 1960s period. Donald Pleasance and Françoise Dorléac star as a withdrawn couple whose isolated house is infiltrated by a rude, burly American gangster on the run, played by Lionel Stander. The three engage in a game of shifting identities and sexual and emotional humiliations. Cul-de-sac is an evocative, claustrophobic, and morbidly funny tale of the modern world in chaos.

- New digital restoration, approved by director Roman Polanski (with uncompressed monaural soundtrack on the Blu-ray edition)
- Two Gangsters and an Island, a 2003 short documentary about the making of Cul-de-sac, featuring interviews with Polanski, producer Gene Gutowski, and cinematographer Gil Taylor
- Interview with Polanski from 1967
- Theatrical trailers
- PLUS: A booklet featuring an essay by film critic David Thompson

DVD
Criterionforum.org user rating averages

Feature currently disabled
Blu-ray
Criterionforum.org user rating averages

Feature currently disabled
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:42 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#2 Post by domino harvey »

This is a weird (even for Polanski) film, and not a particularly successful one, but Jesus, why did they even license this one if that's all they're bothering to include?
User avatar
SpiderBaby
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:34 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#3 Post by SpiderBaby »

This should of been the 2nd of the $20 releases they seem to be doing (with little to no features, and to add crappy artwork). But Polanski's name I guess pushes the price alone.
User avatar
Cronenfly
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 4:04 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#4 Post by Cronenfly »

The way I see it, for a title as marginal as this it was between Criterion releasing it or going the BOD route, so despite the slim supplements I'm happy to see it arrive on Blu (though I admittedly have a soft spot for minor Polanski).
User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 3:26 am

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#5 Post by matrixschmatrix »

The Two Gangsters documentary was on the previous DVD release, too, so Criterion really didn't add much. On the other hand, maybe firsthand material from Polanski has been a little harder to get for the last few years...
User avatar
perkizitore
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: OOP is the only answer

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#6 Post by perkizitore »

How much would a commentary have cost? =;
User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#7 Post by swo17 »

Too much to support prices like this:

Cul-de-sac Criterion DVD for $1
User avatar
Tom Hagen
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:35 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#8 Post by Tom Hagen »

Guess I'm getting the standard def version of this one.
User avatar
ccfixx
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:37 am
Location: Rhode Island, USA

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#9 Post by ccfixx »

I saw that, too. Criterion's cost for DVD production has really gone down much more than they originally led us to believe. It's too bad I'll be spending $26.99 more for the stinkin' blu-ray.
User avatar
Murdoch
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:59 am
Location: Upstate NY

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#10 Post by Murdoch »

Awaiting my cancellation, but since I don't care for the film it doesn't bug me either way.
rrenault
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:49 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#11 Post by rrenault »

Isn't this one of Polanski's more high profile films. I've never seen the film, but I always sensed there was a lot of anticipation surrounding Criterion releasing this.
User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:49 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#12 Post by knives »

Sort of. It's definitely one of his more popular titles and it's a fun ride into his insane little brain. More successful than What? at least, but it's nothing more than that. It's a film I'll be happy to see again and own eventually, but it's not a great film by any means.
User avatar
Doctor Sunshine
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 2:04 am
Location: Brain Jail

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#13 Post by Doctor Sunshine »

rrenault wrote:Isn't this one of Polanski's more high profile films. I've never seen the film, but I always sensed there was a lot of anticipation surrounding Criterion releasing this.
I'd been holding out for it since they released Knife in the Water. Despite the collective mehs, I've consulted the charts and is indeed categorized as Great. Possibly they're going by the European standards where I believe it's noted as Really Crackerjack Effort or Good Showing. I think it deserves special mention for reclaiming the toothbrush mustache alone, even if they can never be fully rehabilitated.
User avatar
Der Spieler
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:05 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#14 Post by Der Spieler »

I've been hesitating about whether or not I should buy Repulsion and Cul-de-Sac or just keep my Anchor Bay reg 2 set. I really liked Knife in the Water but I didn't think much of the other two. They were entertaining and well crafted, but in the end they kinda left me unimpressed. Repulsion had great chilling moments but I thought the beginning was overlong and Deneuve doesn't do much to me as an actress. In fact, I always thought she was rather bad.
rrenault
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:49 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#15 Post by rrenault »

Hmm, I'd say her acting's gotten better over the years. She certainly wasn't bad in A Christmas Tale, but she's never brought down a film, and having a better actress certainly wouldn't have made Repulsion any better. I agree Repulsion is far from essential. I love the camera work though.
User avatar
Murdoch
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:59 am
Location: Upstate NY

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#16 Post by Murdoch »

My two cents: Repulsion is Polanski's best film (or at least my favorite)
User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:49 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#17 Post by knives »

Second favorite here. The only reason I can conceive for Chinatown and Rosemary's Baby's extended popularity is that they're American.
User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 8:43 pm
Location: Miami, FL

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#18 Post by mfunk9786 »

Oh please: Rosemary's Baby is perfection.
User avatar
Murdoch
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:59 am
Location: Upstate NY

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#19 Post by Murdoch »

I love Chinatown, but the film succeeds largely because of its script, and I've never been a fan of its noir pastiche (which is why I don't like most neo-noir). As for Rosemary's Baby, I can see what people like about it, but it didn't do much for me either. Of course I really like Frantic so don't listen to me.
User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:49 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#20 Post by knives »

I wasn't trying to say those two are bad, just that in his career they don't stand out as anything special. Real good popcorn entertainment and all of that. Stuff like The Tenant and Repulsion strike me as greater works both from a stylistic stand point and as personal statements.
User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 11:24 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#21 Post by zedz »

Huh? I thought this film was highly anticipated. For me, Polanski's reputation has always rested on Knife, Repulsion, Cul-de-Sac and Rosemary's Baby, and it was all (gradually) downhill from there, with the noble exception of Chinatown. If you're exclusing those 60s films, I don't really see what you'd be basing his reputation on. (The Tenant? Really?)
User avatar
Tom Hagen
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 4:35 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#22 Post by Tom Hagen »

Chinatown has always seemed to me to be one of those great anti-auteurist (multi-auteurist?) films along the lines of Night of the Hunter or Taxi Driver where you have the perfect confluence of director, screen writer, and actor each contributing their voices to a crowning moment for each. I think that's why it's harder to place in the Polanski canon than the rest.

I agree with you about his reputation resting on his '60s output zedz, though I would argue that his '00s have been quite a run as well.
User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:49 pm

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#23 Post by knives »

I'm lazy right now so here's what I had to say earlier on The Tenant.
User avatar
Harmonov
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:26 pm
Location: Bloomington, IN

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#24 Post by Harmonov »

My Amazon order was cancelled...
User avatar
manicsounds
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 2:58 am
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: 577 Cul-de-Sac

#25 Post by manicsounds »

Post Reply