criterionforum.org

The Blu-ray (and maybe DVD as well) of Grabbers has an excellent commentary hosted by director Jon Wright.

It reminds me of the old Criterion commentaries, sometimes screen-specific, sometimes non-specific edited together audio piece.

Jon Wright interviews various members of the crew talking about various aspects of the production (sometimes while drinking), and then edited the audio into one track. There's a lot more work in this commentary track than the average one these days.

Watching a lecture TV series featuring Drew Casper on NHK TV at the moment. Anyone know what this show is called in English, or if it's even on in other countries?
In Japanese it's called "Hollywood Hakutetsu Kyoushitsu"

skuhn8 wrote:Tougher list to come up with: actor commentaries. I really only have one that comes to mind: Giamatti and Haden Church on Sideways. I've actually gone back and listened to that one more than once. Hilarious.

Ok ok, there's the Spinal Tap commentary as well (on the non-Criterion, as I haven't heard the Criterion one if it differs).

Even tougher: musician commentaries. This could apply to film composers or musicians for concert DVD's and such.

flyonthewall2983 wrote: Even tougher: musician commentaries. This could apply to film composers or musicians for concert DVD's and such.

The one on Stop Making Sense is pretty great, I would say.

I've always been impressed with the Cliff Martinez commentary on Traffic, if that helps!

davidkalat wrote:[doesn't matter what he wrote]

Well, I know who I'm voting for for member of the year.

Thanks buddy!

David K is member of the millenium.

I've heard it said by close friends and co-members here and elsewhere that I may have had a minscule little something to do with the promulgating of Jean Epstein's name and films around six or seven years or more ago via my ranting and raving on forums and trackers (and Usher is still in my top 3 of all time) about how completely blown away I was . . . leading to something like a discovery by a sliver of core cineastes . . . if that is truly the case that's only because David had the conjones to release Usher on DVD twelve years ago. That was probably the most exciting single discovery of a director I had previously heard absolutely zilch about but for a single ballsy disc producer following his belief that if he released something this good, at least SOMEBODY will respond.

And me overflowing with Epstein love, I reached out to him, and he responded immediately (this is something like six or seven years ago).

And everything I just said about Usher-- ditto that for CHRIST IN CONCRETE. Hats of to ya David!

(I know this is off topic, and if this gets split off into a "Lets Embarrass David Kalat With Love & Kudos" thread I'd be totally delighted!)

I can certainly trace my current love of Epstein back to the two of you.

Hey bro-- that's completely awesome! Epstein is the most delightfully terminal contagion.

HerrSchreck wrote:(I know this is off topic, and if this gets split off into a "Lets Embarrass David Kalat With Love & Kudos" thread I'd be totally delighted!)

Me too. After exhausting Mr Kalat's commentaries, I started to get withdrawal symptoms and so was forced to go and buy his books. I'm almost through his Godzilla history and have found it exemplary. I've especially come away with a much better appreciation for the post Ghidorah, the Three Headed Monster films (up to Hedorah anyway).

jonah.77 wrote: I really wish that folks doing commentary tracks would sit down with the film a few times and plan out and finesse their remarks

I've always felt this way too and the one on For Ever Mozart is one of the greatest in terms of this

I don't think I like commentaries anymore and I'd rather watch video essays. What are the advantages of a commentary? I like Zulawski's semi-meandering anecdotal commentaries for some reason. Is it at least fun to watch the film alongside Hartley?

I'm afraid I'm unfamiliar with this concept, "fun."

the best commentaries justify the form. I've heard great ones from filmmakers like John Frankenheimer and Steven Soderbergh, and superb ones from critics like David Bordwell and Casper Tybjerg. some commentaries are fascinating beyond what they have to say about the films, like the Verhoeven/Neumeier ones for RoboCop and Starship Troopers, where it often seems that the two parties are making competing claims for authorship.

Like jonah.77 said, the better ones add to the enjoyment and understanding of a film. Like anything else, some are useless, some just ok, and some are truly excellent. And at least a few are truly "fun." Like Roger Ebert's commentary for Beyond the Valley of the Dolls

Also fun: any John Waters commentary. Nine times out of ten, they're better than the actual movie.

What commentaries needed to be commentaries and couldn't be video essays?

Ensemble making-of/behind-the-scenes commentaries, super detailed scholarly and technical commentaries (which can practically become full-length video essays), commentaries that don't have terribly much to say about the visual aspects of the film, etc., etc.

Nah... I can't remember any scholarly ones that needed to be so long.

The Wild Bunch is the first one that springs to mind, but I could say the same about any of the Peckinpah scholars' commentaries and dozens of others. Whatever, though. If you want to continue making sweeping and largely baseless generalizations, then why should we care that you're missing out on this Criterion-pioneered way to experience and educate yourself about films?

I don't see why it isn't better if the commentator has total control over the choice of images and sounds. The order and speed and everything.

Because not every commentator is purely concerned with the formal aspects of the film at every moment of his/her commentary. Because sometimes seeing the film again as it was meant to be (you know, in the cut where the director presumably had total control) creates a new insight. Because -- wait, why am I even replying at this point when it's clear that nothing will change your mind and, like I said above, none of us care that you've suddenly sworn off commentaries forever for no good reason.

Whoa, it's a big deal apparently. Not all video essayists are purely concerned with formal etc.

Brevity. And I've heard Stephen Prince's Straw Dogs commentary if that matters.

Mathew2468 wrote:Nah... I can't remember any scholarly ones that needed to be so long.

Great rebuttal