criterionforum.org

Randall Maysin Again wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 5:25 pm

knives wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 3:55 pm I absolutely love this film and would rank it as one of Lumet’s best (with the caveat that I think of him as generally poor, but with the further caveat I’ve seen all but six of his features).

What an utterly quirky opinion!

But surely no quirkier than the guy who explicitly ranked The Wiz above Twelve Angry Men in Lumet's output.

And who was this absolute lunatic?

Spoiler

Sidney Lumet!

Speaking of Carol Reed, is Oliver next up for Criterion rather than The Outcast of the Islands? Why have The Treasure of the Sierra Madre in the Collection if you can have Annie?

Come on, this film is not a Criterion now because it’s a Sidney Lumet film. It’s not like Criterion has their pick of everything and purposely chose The Wiz over Dog Day Afternoon. This is a recent, high-profile restoration made available to Criterion, and it is an important film to a lot of people. Maybe not to the people who post on this forum, but to a lot of people who perhaps otherwise do not buy ABBAs Kiarostami or Claude Berri films.

I also think it’s time to let go of the “NYT article blowback” claims. It’s been almost 5 years since that article. Razzing Criterion for releasing mainstream films that the studios themselves should be putting out (like the Musketeers films and Funny Girl) is totally appropriate, but applying a different standard to films made by or starring Black people really does give off the same odor as shouting about “DEI hires” on Facebook.

Matt wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 9:04 pm Come on, this film is not a Criterion now because it’s a Sidney Lumet film. It’s not like Criterion has their pick of everything and purposely chose The Wiz over Dog Day Afternoon. This is a recent, high-profile restoration made available to Criterion, and it is an important film to a lot of people. Maybe not to the people who post on this forum, but to a lot of people who perhaps otherwise do not buy Abbas Kiarostami or Claude Berri films.

I also think it’s time to let go of the “NYT article blowback” claims. It’s been almost 5 years since that article. Razzing Criterion for releasing mainstream films that the studios themselves should be putting out (like the Musketeers films and Funny Girl) is totally appropriate, but applying a different standard to films made by or starring Black people really does give off the same odor as shouting about “DEI hires” on Facebook.

alright, I really didn't mean for it to come off that way. believe me, I couldn't be further from that and have called for Criterion to release No Other Land twice on this board now. I'm sorry anyone took offense to it, but I still legitimately believe this isn't a movie they would've released a few years ago. and sure, I'll agree to the same with Musketeers and Funny Girl, which are both very fair comparisons cause they're also big studio junk made by Criterion-friendly directors. that's probably a more fair playing field than mentioning the NYT article, but I still don't think they would've gone for this before. which isn't me criticizing them for releasing it - I may not like the movie (I don't), but I also think it's fine they release it, it certainly has an audience, and as a fan of Diana Ross and Michael Jackson's music normally, it's cool that both are included

Matt wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 9:04 pm ABBAs Kiarostami

Where Is Fernando?

swo17 wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 9:24 pm

Matt wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 9:04 pm ABBAs Kiarostami

Where Is Fernando?

crimlaw wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 8:30 pm Speaking of Carol Reed, is Oliver next up for Criterion rather than The Outcast of the Islands? Why have The Treasure of the Sierra Madre in the Collection if you can have Annie?

we don't have a like option here, but I'll just say these are two of my favorite posts ever on this forum, even though they're in the same thread where two posters have beat around the bush to try to call me something I'm not

Dog Day Afternoon is coming to 4K later this year via WB direct, there’s a leaked PowerPoint slide that shows it and some other notable films (One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is one), so that was never going to happen anyways

MichaelB wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 8:25 pm

Randall Maysin Again wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 5:25 pm

knives wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 3:55 pm I absolutely love this film and would rank it as one of Lumet’s best (with the caveat that I think of him as generally poor, but with the further caveat I’ve seen all but six of his features).

What an utterly quirky opinion!

But surely no quirkier than the guy who explicitly ranked The Wiz above Twelve Angry Men in Lumet's output.

And who was this absolute lunatic?

Spoiler

Sidney Lumet!

I like the cut of this man’s gib.

domino harvey wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 9:40 pm Dog Day Afternoon is coming later this year via WB direct, there’s a leaked PowerPoint slide that shows it and some other notable films (One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is one), so that was never going to happen anyways

Mrs. Domino, if you notice the image presented, the film is listed under additional anniversaries not 4K releases. Therefore with this and the additional knowledge that Criterion has dripped down about them having the film, I have reason to believe it will be a Criterion release.

swo17 wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 9:24 pm

Matt wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 9:04 pm ABBAs Kiarostami

Where Is Fernando?

Dabmit, I fixrd that auticorrect threee tibes,

That particular Fernando should have been Francisco (Rabal), but a lower-tech version of autocorrect intervened.

DRW.mov wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 5:23 pm

ryannichols7 wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 3:39 pm

Randall Maysin Again wrote: Fri Mar 14, 2025 3:28 pm It just seems like an odd, perhaps uncharacteristic pick for Criterion, based on its overall reception. What do you think the reason for their releasing it is?

NYT article blowback and it's also directed by Sidney Lumet. it's a perfect storm

I'm pretty sick of almost any black film being added to the collection being met, here, on other forums, or on twitter, as cynically just "NYT article blowback." It questions the legitimacy of the film's credentials (an inherently subjective artistic metric anyway) and implies preferential treatment in a way that recalls Republicans decrying DEI practices for "taking jobs belonging to white people".
Its so tired at this point. There is not a single "black" film that's been added to the collection post-2020 that shouldn't have been there to begin with. The implication that they're haphazardly trying to slap C's into the upper left corner of any black film, quality be damned, to pacify a public outcry is more than a little disingenuous, and also, pretty racist.

Merits to be part of Criterion has always been debatable, but it's somewhat surprising that the Wiz has been added after decades of being panned by critics and viewers alike. Criterion has always applied diversity, equity and inclusion when selecting films to the collection as way to represent world films. I don't give a rats ass how the GOP/racists have "redefined" DEI as a pejorative/negative thing. With the Wiz, it's pretty clear that the Broadway comeback, the death of Quincy Jones, the star studded lineup of black icons, the NYT article and that it's a Lumet film certainly contributed to this release. Finding reasons as to why a film is added to the collection has been a hobby of this forum since its inception and I don't believe that saying that race was a factor is either detrimental or said in racist tones by the members here.

The mission statement has always been a continuing series of important classic and contemporary films, and for all the reasons you mentioned, it is a unique film and important for both its place in film and social history. Say what you will: for all its flaws, there’s not really another film like it.

I mean, this doesn’t fit Criterion of fifteen years ago, but I didn’t blink seeing it announced this morning so it’s def of a piece with the label now (however you wish to assess that shift). Look back at the cursed Fake Criterion Covers thread (from before many users’ time) and you’ll see so many choices that were laughed away as impossible at the time now present in the Collection. What’s one more?

One thing I noticed is that no one is second guessing this release based on Michael Jackson's accusations, which years ago cause such a stench, that it made Disney take out his Simpsons episode completely out of circulation on both syndication and digital. Has society simply stop giving a shit or did no one really cared to begin with and that was mostly a bs corporate stance?

That episode was removed at the behest of the show’s producers, I believe, not Disney, based on the accusation that Jackson used showing the episode as part of his alleged crimes

Thanks for clearing that up domino!

dx23 wrote: Sat Mar 15, 2025 2:53 am One thing I noticed is that no one is second guessing this release based on Michael Jackson's accusations, which years ago cause such a stench, that it made Disney take out his Simpsons episode completely out of circulation on both syndication and digital. Has society simply stop giving a shit or did no one really cared to begin with and that was mostly a bs corporate stance?

I think you answered your own question there: it's obviously the second and always was.

But the fact that films like this (whatever their merits) can be released is, I hope we can all agree, a much better state of affairs than various filmographies being disappeared.

Some 80’s Lumet would fit right in. We have contemplated a Criterion of Prince of the City a lot but a few others would be maybe less uncontroversial choices. Like Running On Empty, or Daniel.

Running on Empty would make a lovely companion to Dogfight for sure.

I quite like The Wiz, especially its urban/The Warriors take on a mythical journey fantasy (although Criterion really should also do Zardoz and especially rescue the only film directed by Walter Murch, the much maligned Return To Oz, now if they are going to fully go down the revisionist L. Frank Baum route!), but the main issue with the film is that it becomes a fundamentally different kind of story (and much darker-delusional toned) when the main character is an adult in their mid-30s rather than a starry-eyed teen, as Diana Ross unavoidably comes across as here. Its got some of that ineffable awkward sadness about it that seeing your mum dress up as Sandy in Grease and start singing "Summer Lovin'" might have.

Honestly, this release is not that surprising nor does it seem out of step for Criterion. They released The Rose ten years ago, and outside of an Oscar-nominated, star-making turn from Midler, that’s a fairly standard pseudo-biopic that played frequently on VH1 back in the day and was directed by someone with nowhere near the cinephile admiration as Lumet. Its release always baffled me. While many people (myself included) are not fans of this adaptation of The Wiz, there can be no denying that it has significant cultural relevance even if it is not a masterful film, something the Rydell film can’t lay claim to.

That being said, I far prefer The Wiz Live, which aired on TV a few years ago. It’s not perfect either and takes a more conventional visual approach to Oz than this film’s urban landscape, but it is so much more energetic and joyful.

colinr0380 wrote: Sat Mar 15, 2025 6:55 am although Criterion really should also do Zardoz

Colin is this a spoiler? I wasn't aware of an Oz connection to that film (sorry if that's utterly moronic.)

Only a minor one, mostly resonating due to the giant head terrorising the countryside, issuing proclamations and spewing out guns getting its equivalent revelation of who the 'man behind the curtain' is (and the anicent book they got the idea from!) in the final section.