criterionforum.org

colinr0380 wrote:It was a glowing review of the films and set overall - I think the nipple tweaking is being mentioned because of the extremely negative comments on all the scores for the films (except for the one by Neil Brand) and the especially scathing remarks made on the new score to Die Puppe.

They went straight for Nick's pop? Ouch. I suspect conservative churlishness on the review's part but looking forward to seeing/HEARING it for myself.

Caged Horse wrote:Eh, I wish people had gotten this worked up at Sight and Sound for devoting pages of coverage to the likes of Death Proof, Johnny Mnemonic and Southland Tales..! :-k

Hindsight is all very well, but lead times mean that cover features are usually set in stone before the relevant film is made available for viewing, and all three films had obvious points of interest on paper.

As did, to cite a particularly notorious example, Hanif Kureishi's London Kills Me - although it seems bizarre now that S&S gave it such a prominent cover feature, Kureishi was undoubtedly one of the major creative players in late 1980s British cinema, and so his upcoming directorial debut was clearly a big deal. Unfortunately, it turned out to be toe-curlingly terrible (and he hasn't directed since, probably wisely), but that's the kind of gamble magazines have to take if they want to scoop their rivals. You might well be surprised by how much the cover can make a demonstrable difference to sales.

In fact, if I remember rightly, Death Proof provided a perfect excuse for some terrific (and hugely nostalgic) grindhouse-related articles of a kind that S&S doesn't normally run, so while I had no interest in Tarantino's film (which I still haven't seen), I got a fair bit out of the issue as a whole.

(Disclaimer: though I write for the mag, it's on a freelance basis and I have no editorial role - so the above is strictly a personal opinion)

skuhn8 wrote:They went straight for Nick's pop? Ouch.

I don't for one second imagine that Jay Weissberg had the faintest idea that there was a personal connection between the score and the disc's producer.

MichaelB wrote:

skuhn8 wrote:They went straight for Nick's pop? Ouch.

I don't for one second imagine that Jay Weissberg had the faintest idea that there was a personal connection between the score and the disc's producer.

ahh, dont underestimate the connections within a specific scene - the people in this business are very close.

Mozart wrote:ahh, dont underestimate the connections within a specific scene - the people in this business are very close.

What "specific scene" would this be? Weissberg is an American writer, and MoC is a UK-based DVD label. Granted, it's not impossible that there's a connection, but I'm not aware of one.

And we havent heard the new scores of the films so far.
So we do not know how good they are....

tajmahal wrote: MOC doesn't have a greater supporter who drives sales than Gary Tooze. MOC were awarded best Dvd relese, best Blu-ray release, best audio commentary, best cover design, and best extra in the 2009 pole)

That's true. At least MoC was made visible as top-notch label through Gary Tooze to me.

Nick, how about advertise with all the awards of DVDbeaver?
(on your website, in magazines, in a own forum thread, etc.)

MichaelB wrote:

skuhn8 wrote:They went straight for Nick's pop? Ouch.

I don't for one second imagine that Jay Weissberg had the faintest idea that there was a personal connection between the score and the disc's producer.

Nor do I--just innocent riffing on my part.

MichaelB wrote: What "specific scene" would this be?

The producing of home cinema software and reviewing of home cinema software scene.
Maybe the reviewer has read the thread here.... you never know!
But its not important at all.
Whats important is the review.

No, what's important is the films.

Decisions about musical accompaniments to silent films are _often_ grounds for heated controversy (and even acrimony).

In fact, the S&S letters page has recently been hosting an ongoing row on this very issue.

peerpee wrote:
There's an abominable review of this set in the latest edition of Sight & Sound by a very petty writer called Jay Weissberg, whose nipple will get twisted if I ever meet him.

... has come to be known as the ultimate Lubitschple touch.

peerpee wrote:There's an abominable review of this set in the latest edition of Sight & Sound by a very petty writer called Jay Weissberg, whose nipple will get twisted if I ever meet him.

Wouldn't it be more appropriate to Lubitschslap him?

perkizitore wrote:Here

Is that Noah Baumbach at the very end?

Received my copy of the set today (bought it directly from the Eureka website) and I have to say that it looks like a great set. Looking forward to get started with it tomorrow.

zedz wrote:

peerpee wrote:There's an abominable review of this set in the latest edition of Sight & Sound by a very petty writer called Jay Weissberg, whose nipple will get twisted if I ever meet him.

Wouldn't it be more appropriate to Lubitschslap him?

Or maybe both a la here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldFWvHa4Svg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And this is still considered a "Rumor" release? Why is it still in this section?

I echo manicsound's surprise that this is still a "rumor." It has spine numbers, right?

My question is to peerpee: with the exception of Die Puppe, are these ports from the Transit set? Or did you make changes to the image in any way? In particular: Die Bergkatze is excessively windowboxed on the Transit set. It would be nice to know your was not. (Either way, I will probably end up getting the set.)

It certainly isn't a rumour, unless the final production copy on my shelf is a mirage.

For those who are able to move the thread the spine numbers that can be added to the title are 94-99!

Thanks. The Image Galleries for each entry will be added to individual pages tomorrow. In the meantime, the site has been updated on both Catalogue pages for the 94-99 entries, and the homepage News entry. If someone could add this to the regular MoC films thread, that would be great. (And if possible, please drop the " - 6 Films" — we're not calling it that... but since it's kind of got both a sub- and a sub-sub-title, obviously just "Lubitsch in Berlin" will more than do... Many thanks!)

ck.

I'm somewhat confused by the Lubitsch covers as presented on the MoC webpage, as the first disc which contains "ich möchte kein Mann sein" and "Die Puppe" appears twice, but there's no sign of the sixth disc which, if I'm not mistaken (I don't have the set) was to contain the 'Lubitsch in Berlin'-documentary. Or does that one not have a spine number, and you gave a double spine number to the first two films, even though they are on the same disc? Just curious.

Tommaso wrote:I'm somewhat confused by the Lubitsch covers as presented on the MoC webpage, as the first disc which contains "ich möchte kein Mann sein" and "Die Puppe" appears twice, but there's no sign of the sixth disc which, if I'm not mistaken (I don't have the set) was to contain the 'Lubitsch in Berlin'-documentary. Or does that one not have a spine number, and you gave a double spine number to the first two films, even though they are on the same disc? Just curious.

The spine numbers are for film titles rather disks, otherwise the likes of Nosferatu etc would have two spine numbers:

#94 Ich möchte kein Mann sein
#95 Die Puppe
#96 Die Austernprinzessin
#97 Sumurun
#98 Anne Boleyn
#99 Die Bergkatze

In the set itself:

Disk 1 = Ich möchte kein Mann sein + Die Puppe
Disk 2 = Die Austernprinzessin
Disk 3 = Sumurun
Disk 4 = Anne Boleyn
Disk 5 = Die Bergkatze
Disk 6 = Lubitsch in Berlin Documentary