criterionforum.org

colinr0380 wrote: Sat Oct 16, 2021 5:29 am
(for an example of how this can work the other way too, you are pretty much never going to get anything but the most positive comments from Mark Kermode on The Exorcist, The Wicker Man or Local Hero, even if others may potentially have reservations, so he'd be the obvious go-to guy to talk about them because you know its a pretty safe bet that he's not going to surprisingly turn around after decades of being a vocal supporter and shockingly say how terrible the films now are, or something equally out of leftfield. Though maybe he'd have some tangential comments on Exorcist II, Gregory's Two Girls or The Wicker Tree that would need to be cut out? But I would assume that if he had such opinions he would probably tactfully skirt around them unless forced to tackle such films head on!), but I can see why it can be frowned at if its just personal foibles being presented as cold, hard 'truths'.

Reminds me if this vulgar display of kermodeness

https://youtu.be/KH_0dS1d3X8

For one thing, it's funny that he accuses of Boorman of being pretentious and above genre films, when he himself fetishizes and endlessly brands himself on the most "respectable" horror film of them all (after Rosemary's Baby and The Shining) and seems to like only those Boorman films which conform to the dominant aesthetic ideology... New Hollywood, shot by Vilmos Zsigmond, etc.

dustybooks wrote: Sat Oct 16, 2021 9:08 pmSchickel also seems to really dislike, or at least to be wholly unimpressed with, A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. I’m frankly surprised that Eureka felt that track was worth porting.

Yeah, especially considering that Eureka didn't bother to port his commentary for their "Wild River" release.

Whomever did Lang’s Manhunt also seemed rather dismissive of the film.

If I remember correctly, in the commentary of Cthulhu (2007) the director is highly critical of his own movie.
I felt like saying to him "Hey man, it's really not that bad!"

Robin Davies wrote:If I remember correctly, in the commentary of Cthulhu (2007) the director is highly critical of his own movie.
I felt like saying to him "Hey man, it's really not that bad!"

Herschell Gordon Lewis opened his commentary for The Gore Gore Girls by describing it having been “excreted” rather than released.

But Lewis was always cheerfully clear-eyed about the artistic value of his films, which is why his commentaries are such fun. Rather more fun than watching the films with the actual soundtracks, in fact.

I love Lewis' description of Blood Feast - "It's like Walt Whitman poetry. No damn good, but the first of its kind."

Makes me regret that Ed Wood or Andy Milligan didn't live long enough to record some commentaries!

MichaelB wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 6:53 pm

ryannichols7 wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 3:22 pm I hope they manage to do another commentary or two

I'd be very surprised. I suspect production budgets are similar across all four boxes, so if they've only budgeted for one commentary per box, that's what we're going to get.

Couldn't they just pay four people who aren't very good at commentaries to do four bad ones?

swo17 wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 7:11 pm Couldn't they just pay four people who aren't very good at commentaries to do four bad ones?

Ah, the Kino Lorber method.

soundchaser wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 7:48 pmAh, the Kino Lorber method.

Five months ago, I might have laughed.

But now, I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask my seconds to call upon your seconds to arrange pistols at dawn.

Obviously we're not referring to the Jancsó box--that one has six commentaries

By four people...

Yes, but the parameters of my joke specified that only four of the commentaries would be bad, so I think you're in the clear 8-[

Alexandra Heller-Nicholas

Just found out there's an old man film forum where a group of about 5 old men regularly bitch and moan about me "only talking about feminism" on my blu-ray commentaries, and all I can think is how broken would your dick be to give a shit about what a 5'2" Australian woman thinks

I don't recall any negativity about of her work on here (let alone regular airing of grievances as with Welles/Armond/Svet), so I guess we're off the hook.

I saw that at the time, and I'm pretty sure it's not here. The kind of flagrantly misogynist abuse (the kind that says far more about the abuser than the target) that she and Kat Ellinger routinely get purely for having the temerity to be women doing commentaries is, thankfully, pretty much absent here - which isn't to say that their work hasn't been criticised here, but there's generally some actual substance to the criticism.

I've got to say the image of a hateful old man nursing the crippled and ravaged remains of his penis has me cracking up.

She does focus on sexual politics quite a lot, but obviously that's a worthwhile perspective... and she's good at it, imho.

I have no problem criticizing any commentator for sticking to one topic too much or reading too far into things, but it would never be specifically towards that particular topic (nor am I old). kore-eda commentators on the BFI set with their constant lazy Ozu comparisons or Marian Keane reading sex into every single thing she commentates are probably better examples of this

Alex does indeed go far more into that lane than others but I think she brings a good perspective, certainly. I could certainly understand some critiques of her tracks, but I'm sure it is another forum just criticizing her for being a woman recording tracks for their precious genre movies...this forum isn't that old nor are we that blindly mean

Maltic wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:20 pm She does focus on sexual politics quite a lot, but obviously that's a worthwhile perspective... and she's good at it, imho.

But, as has already been pointed out on the Twitter, she literally wrote the book on rape-revenge films, and in any case it's hard to imagine a worthwhile commentary on that particular topic that doesn't tackle the underlying sexual politics.

No, the people with the jerking knees have a basic problem with women tackling what they see as "their" genres, probably because they smell funny and have cooties. One of the most embarrassing things I've ever seen online was the reaction in a Hammer Facebook group - the guy in charge being one of the worst offenders - to the announcement of a book of essays on Hammer films exclusively written by women. It really was on this level, only not satire - and I can probably reveal now that it directly inspired Indicator's still ongoing "Hammer's Women" series of featurettes, whose first instalments were commissioned on the day that that discussion first kicked off.

Personally, I'm all for intelligent and informed critiques of commentary tracks, especially from people who've actually listened to them all the way through, but such things are few and far between. The number of times I've read a review of a track that sticks exclusively to stuff mentioned in the first five minutes is somewhat dispiriting, although I laughed out loud when someone obligingly outed himself as not having listened to even the first five seconds of the commentary under review when he misgendered Samm Deighan. (I think that's my second favourite reviewer self-own, although the unbeatable champion is the guy who "reviewed" - as in passed actual critical judgement on - an extra that didn't exist because it had been cancelled between announcement and release thanks to the interviewee's poor health.)

Maltic wrote:She does focus on sexual politics quite a lot, but obviously that's a worthwhile perspective... and she's good at it, imho.

I guess I've only listened to a few of her tracks, but for the films (off the top of my head) where she focused on sexual politics it was certainly more than appropriate: Romeo is Bleeding and Torment for example. I was really surprised by the Romeo is Bleeding track because, considering the film is so-so at best, I was expecting some IMDB rundown and got a terrific deep dive instead.

I recall the subject of secual politics coming up in The Proposition around Watson's character but it was brief and I remember that track being more about Australian politics at the time the film was made, the period represented in the film, treatment of aborigines, and such.

Maltic wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 6:59 pm Alexandra Heller-Nicholas

I don't recall any negativity about of her work on here (let alone regular airing of grievances as with Welles/Armond/Svet), so I guess we're off the hook.

I didn't really care for her "Cloak and Dagger" commentary on Eureka's release. I could tell that she wasn't a fan of the film because she relied heavily on biographical info (sometimes stating outright that she's reading from Wikipedia), excerpt/quotes from other cited work, and a decent amount of just letting the film play (including not saying anything at all during the opening title sequence). I also didn't care for her using slang such as "simp" to describe Cooper's character at one point.

MichaelB wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:27 pm No, the people with the jerking knees have a basic problem with women tackling what they see as "their" genres, probably because they smell funny and have cooties.

I feel that this is a symptom of a larger problem. Many fandoms online, especially when it comes to "genre" cinema, seems to take any perceived outsider (usually a women) criticizing their favorite films and/or genre, no matter how legitimate those criticisms may be, as an attack against them as an individual. I'm not too aware of the intricacies of Hammer horror fans, but this sounds exactly like that kind of toxic mentality being spewed out by genre fans the world over online. It makes discussing what are potentially problematic or outdated elements of older genre fare a losing battle: these fans immediately perceive such talk as some sort of threat to them enjoying these films, completely disregarding the fact that the person bringing up these critiques also enjoy the work itself, or at least enough to add some healthy critical analysis to the discussion. But to these people, unless you are unconditionally praising the work, you might as well be condemning those who enjoy it to death. This, of course, worsens once the issue of gender gets added into the equation.

It's this toxic brew of gatekeeping, perceived inadequacy, and unrepentant misogyny that, ultimately, drives people away from watching and critically dissecting these films, many of which are generally interesting pieces of cinema.

MichaelB wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:08 pm I saw that at the time, and I'm pretty sure it's not here. The kind of flagrantly misogynist abuse (the kind that says far more about the abuser than the target) that she and Kat Ellinger routinely get purely for having the temerity to be women doing commentaries is, thankfully, pretty much absent here - which isn't to say that their work hasn't been criticised here, but there's generally some actual substance to the criticism.

Ellinger gets a fair amount of criticism here for being the modern Drew Casper (ie let’s read from IMDB), but none of it has anything to do with her gender, at least not that I’ve seen

Computer Raheem wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 9:15 pm

MichaelB wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:27 pm No, the people with the jerking knees have a basic problem with women tackling what they see as "their" genres, probably because they smell funny and have cooties.

I feel that this is a symptom of a larger problem. Many fandoms online, especially when it comes to "genre" cinema, seems to take any perceived outsider (usually a women) criticizing their favorite films and/or genre, no matter how legitimate those criticisms may be, as an attack against them as an individual. I'm not too aware of the intricacies of Hammer horror fans, but this sounds exactly like that kind of toxic mentality being spewed out by genre fans the world over online. It makes discussing what are potentially problematic or outdated elements of older genre fare a losing battle: these fans immediately perceive such talk as some sort of threat to them enjoying these films, completely disregarding the fact that the person bringing up these critiques also enjoy the work itself, or at least enough to add some healthy critical analysis to the discussion. But to these people, unless you are unconditionally praising the work, you might as well be condemning those who enjoy it to death. This, of course, worsens once the issue of gender gets added into the equation.

It's this toxic brew of gatekeeping, perceived inadequacy, and unrepentant misogyny that, ultimately, drives people away from watching and critically dissecting these films, many of which are generally interesting pieces of cinema.

There's definetly a vocal and unpleasant reaction to the "woke" prescence of women in series like Star Wars, Doctor Who, Ghostbusters and Predator...or as I call it, "girls in the treehouse."

domino harvey wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 10:50 pm Ellinger gets a fair amount of criticism here for being the modern Drew Casper (ie let’s read from IMDB)

I think she's got some competition with Toby Roan for that title.

ChunkyLover wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 2:30 am

domino harvey wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 10:50 pm Ellinger gets a fair amount of criticism here for being the modern Drew Casper (ie let’s read from IMDB)

I think she's got some competition with Toby Roan for that title.

I've listened to a lot of Ellinger's commentaries over the past several years, and I think very few fall into the IMDB trap. At worst, she can be free-form and personal, but that can still be entertaining. Most of the time I find her engaged, informed and passionate. Her Flaubert fangirl commentary for Chabrol's Madame Bovary definitely increased my appreciation of that film.

In terms of the thread topic, the array of commentaries on the recent Jancso set (including two contrasting ones from Ellinger) were excellent and diverse. Michael Brook's breathlessly dense commentary on The Round Up might hold the record for the most quality information per second of any commentary I've heard (and is an astounding feat of learned pronunciation!), and Samm Deighan's take on Winter Wind displayed a lot of deep scholarship on internecine inter-war Hungarian politics that was fascinating and essential to appreciating the film's nuances. Johnathan Owen's commentary for The Red and the White was the most conventional, and for the most part explained what was happening on screen, but for this particular film, that's an extremely useful approach.