criterionforum.org

Calvin wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 10:54 am The stars are Columbus. They could have chosen any other number if it were just to show it was night.

This would make sense seeing as :kogonada has obviously worked with Criterion before.

Calvin wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 10:54 am The stars are Columbus. They could have chosen any other number if it were just to show it was night.

Is this based only on Indiana being the 19th state? Sure, Criterion is going to release Columbus at some point, but is there any reason to connect the two based on this clue? Otherwise this seems more akin to the above quoted Grand Budapest Hotel trail of conjecture.


Still anyone's guess on the board game; the clock's time; and the actors' faces of the angel + Jesus (if anyone)

Stars equaling states seems a pretty obvious connection to make to me? No more conjectural than any of the others, and certainly not as much jumps in (il)logic as that Grand Budapest Hotel joke.

Just realized the Indiana flag has 19 stars. I still think this is a big stretch, but its also the best answer we're going to get.
And looking for a board game with stars on the board + being a linear style board game. I think Funny Games is likely the best answer for that one - as angel + Jesus are both smiling / laughing. Clock time still doesn't have much of an answer other than 9 to 5.

I'll put down these until someone comes up with anything better. The rules from the last New Years clue apply again this year btw. For these "maybe" clues - if it doesn't get announced in 2019, I'll remove it from the list. (the obvious ones like Swing Time, etc will stay on until announced, even if eternally delayed like 16 Candles).

Columbus
Funny Games
9 to 5

I wouldn't be surprised if the angel's necklace was another clue, though I've got no idea what for. We got Rosemary's Baby from a necklace in 2012.

Regarding Spike Lee I think it's important to remember that Kino is putting out five of his films this year. Bamboozled is not included on this list but Summer of Sam is.

I’m sorry but I got to plead ignorance on this one but what does a rabbit have to do with the name Warren?

Luke M wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 3:08 pm I’m sorry but I got to plead ignorance on this one but what does a rabbit have to do with the name Warren?

A series of rabbit burroughs is known as a "warren".

Luke M wrote:I’m sorry but I got to plead ignorance on this one but what does a rabbit have to do with the name Warren?

Former US President Warren Harding is famous among culinary historians for his eccentric insistence on eating only rabbit and peas for dinner every night. This earned him the contemporary nickname “Bunny”, and was commonly caricatured in cartoons and opponents’ advertising as having rabbit ears. Since his administration overlapped with the rise of popular photography, it’s commonly thought that the popular kids’ prank to this day of putting bunny ears during picture-taking originated as a joke on Harding.

I would say the angel isn't wearing a necklace, that's just the neckline of her robe.

I'm not entirely convinced about Funny Games. Angel & Jesus aren't LAUGHING, they're smiling and seemingly having a conversation. However, I've got nothing better to offer. I've been trying to think a game that looks like that (winding path, stars on the board, multiple pieces) and I've got nothing. If it's meant to be a specific game, it'd have to be something recognizable to be an effective clue. The closest I can think of is Life, maybe Candyland. So probably Funny Games, but I sure wish they conveyed the "funny" part better.

Long shot, but the guy on the far right looks a bit like Art Garfunkel. Bad Timing upgrade?

Janus has the rights to the Glaciation Trilogy and The Castle so I don't think Funny Games is really out of the question. The issue I guess is how they'd market it. I think Funny Games is a great film but it's not something that I think would market well. Not that anything Haneke has done is really that way but with Funny Games I think it's reached it's zenith.

mteller wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 3:44 pm Long shot, but the guy on the far right looks a bit like Art Garfunkel. Bad Timing upgrade?

I'm fairly certain an HD version exists as it appeared on what, Criterion's disc for Insignificance? Again not one I'd wager is easily marketable.

Since when does Criterion care if something is "marketable"?
They literally just announced Japon, I don't think it's very marketable... Most criterions are aimed at cinephiles, with some popular releases aimed at the general public / collectors.

dda1996a wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:34 pm Since when does Criterion care if something is "marketable"?
They literally just announced Japon, I don't think it's very marketable... Most criterions are aimed at cinephiles, with some popular releases aimed at the general public / collectors.

I don't mean to imply Criterion is mass marketing everything just that some things are harder to market even to cinephiles.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bad Timing showed up as an upgrade, given Roeg's death and the fact that it's their only Roeg not on Blu-ray (assuming they haven't gotten rights back to The Man Who Fell to Earth). But I also don't think that's Art Garfunkel.

Similarly, I'd love for the angel to be Lubitsch's Angel, but I don't think she looks like Dietrich.

Big Ben wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:43 pm

dda1996a wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:34 pm Since when does Criterion care if something is "marketable"?
They literally just announced Japon, I don't think it's very marketable... Most criterions are aimed at cinephiles, with some popular releases aimed at the general public / collectors.

I don't mean to imply Criterion is mass marketing everything just that some things are harder to market even to cinephiles.

I don't really know what Criterion's marketing is aside from getting every cinephiles to acknowledge their existence. As I said, Funny Games is way more marketable than Japon.

I’ve seen Criterion ads in Cineaste and/or Film Comment before. Plus the usual social media stuff. It’s not like they’re running Super Bowl ads but they do some marketing.

Big Ben wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:43 pm

dda1996a wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:34 pm Since when does Criterion care if something is "marketable"?
They literally just announced Japon, I don't think it's very marketable... Most criterions are aimed at cinephiles, with some popular releases aimed at the general public / collectors.

I don't mean to imply Criterion is mass marketing everything just that some things are harder to market even to cinephiles.

I'm afraid I find this argument pretty bizarre. Haneke is one of the very few remaining contemporary arthouse 'brands', and Funny Games is one of his most notorious films. Moreover, it's the only one of his films that's had an English remake. It's an extremely high concept film and can be readily marketed as a genre piece or a subversion of one (and personally, I think it works a lot better as the former). I'm going to take a wild guess that the audience for home-invasion horror films dwarfs the audience for old-lady-dying-of-cancer films. Almost all of his other films pose a much greater marketing challenge, in my opinion, and yet have been very successful.

Calvin wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 10:54 am The stars are Columbus. They could have chosen any other number if it were just to show it was night.

I dunno. If they were pointing to COLUMBUS I'm guessing they wouldn't have drawn 19 stars to symbolize the state of Indiana and the city of Columbus. That just seems like a streth. Surely there would have been more playful ways to point to COLUMBUS.

Do the number of stars really matter? Could the stars in the sky merely refer to the East German film STARS (1959), which won the special jury prize at Cannes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_(film)

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Criterion got both Citizen Kane and King Kong '33 licensed from WB at some point, though I don't see this clue having any solid hint toward either aside from the sled being a double clue for Bamboozled and CK. But here's my logic - as RKO films, WB has more limited worldwide rights to these two films than other catalog titles. They've already done the best Blu-ray releases they could probably muster, and aside from a 4K release for each I don't see WB returning to them again. Right now WB isn't exactly rushing to put 70+ year-old black and white films on UHD, either, especially ones they do not hold world rights to. So, in my view, this all adds up to Criterion getting the chance to be the final say on a Blu-ray release for these classic Laserdisc titles, if not in 2019 then perhaps in 2020. All total guesswork, of course.

In regards to Spike Lee, I find it interesting that Kino isn't doing a release of 25th Hour, even though they are releasing Summer of Sam; after all, Disney actually released both of these on Blu-ray already. So why would Kino pass on one and not the other? When was the last non-Anderson Disney owned film added to the Criterion Collection?

mteller wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 3:44 pm If it's meant to be a specific game, it'd have to be something recognizable to be an effective clue. The closest I can think of is Life, maybe Candyland.

Maybe you're right and it is Candyland. Perhaps this is a clue for QT's Django Unchained.

FigrinDan wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 8:59 pm Perhaps this is a clue for QT's Django Unchained.

Oh god can I lock this thread yet

mfunk9786 wrote:Oh god can I lock this thread yet

Don’t look at me, bro, I’ve been doing my best to make it happen.

You can’t lock this thread until Domino and Swo have a chance to mock us.

Do the number of stars really matter? Could the stars in the sky merely refer to the East German film STARS (1959), which won the special jury prize at Cannes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_(film)

I think that's a much more interesting, and less far-fetched, suggestion, justeleblanc. I agree that 19 stars is an obscure stretch to indicate Indiana, let alone Columbus. The 9 to 5 argument is equally specious. If you're going to use a clock to show "time," it can't have a blank face; it has to have an hour hand and a minute hand, but 9 to 2 has now just got to be 9 to 5.

But who are we against so many?

Bressonaire wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:02 pm

Do the number of stars really matter? Could the stars in the sky merely refer to the East German film STARS (1959), which won the special jury prize at Cannes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stars_(film)

I think that's a much more interesting, and less far-fetched, suggestion, justeleblanc. I agree that 19 stars is an obscure stretch to indicate Indiana, let alone Columbus. The 9 to 5 argument is equally specious. If you're going to use a clock to show "time," it can't have a blank face; it has to have an hour hand and a minute hand, but 9 to 2 has now just got to be 9 to 5.

But who are we against so many?

The clock hand placement is why I think it may be After Hours. It's just a few minutes after the hour. Maybe it's a reach, but I think it's more plausible than 9 to 5 since the clock isn't actually at 9 to 5 or even 9 and 5.