criterionforum.org

mfunk9786 wrote:It's got room for around 30 minutes of cuts (easily), which is sadly ironic because we never quite feel like we were there for the development of the central relationship beyond the initial courtship, a big leap in time, and then its quiet demise. There's something missing when a film finds time to devote 20 minutes plus to nursery school classes being taught by its main character but doesn't seem to have the time to let us live in its lead relationship during its midpoint

Although I agree that the film would benefit from some cutting I think this is a serious misreading of the film. The film wasn't about their relationship, the film was about Adèle and to do what you're wishing it did would make it a completely different movie, one that most certainly have been more banal and trope ridden. In fact the nursery school scenes were some of the film's most genuinely beautiful as the contrast of showing Adèle operating in her world independently of Emma, and her feelings for her, only further illuminated her pain. It was a clever way for Kechiche to make the audience feel compassion for his young, immature character.

mfunk9786 wrote:You know that people like, have sex, right? And that when they don't have penises, they do stuff with their vaginas, and sometimes they get wet, right? And that in a movie that's trying to depict that realistically, that's going to happen? Just because gay sex is being shown doesn't make it automatically some unusual or extreme sexual act, and to describe it as such is sort of crazy - 99 out of 100 sexually active lesbians do exactly what you saw in this film on a regular basis. I'll admit that it was surprising in a movie that's getting released in the US, the way it was staged so openly, but it's not meant to be compared to some porno featuring two straight women nervously flicking their tongues at each others' clitorises.

Nah dude, I wasn't aware people, and especially the gays, screw. In fact I'm so out of touch with the concept that I wore my silk robe to the premier because I mistakenly thought there'd be a large contingent of bisexual hotties wanting to get it on with my beanpole because you know, I'm a man.

In other words I don't care if it was straight sex, gay sex, emu sex or whatever the fuck it was, a 15 minute sex scene that for the most part was gratuitous and vacuous mostly because it was so flamboyantly extravagant. Disagree with that fine but to try to present your case in the manner that you just did is as intellectually lazy, boring and stupid as anything I've ever read on this board which includes both twilight time threads. Grow up.

MOD NOTE: Please cool it. Any more personal attacks from either side will be deleted

Matt wrote:The lesbian author of the graphic novel the film is based on thinks the sex scenes are unconvincing. But you know, no couple has sex the same way as the next, and few have sex exactly the same way every time. It's kind of ridiculous to say "lesbians have sex this way" or "lesbians don't have sex that way," because there are always exceptions.

I'm just a little surprised at the impression that what's on screen is somehow shocking when looked at through the lens of what folks are up to in their bedrooms. It's certainly somewhat groundbreaking for a mainstream arthouse film like this, but I suppose all I was trying to say is that what's being depicted on screen here isn't outside of the sexual 'norm,' to the point that it's trying to be shocking. It looked to me like a heated and loving sexual encounter without a ton of unusual activities, ideas, or frankly, insertions. That's why I found that reaction to be an exaggeration, though I can't say I expected it to blow up into some sort of argument, which I'll take Domino's advice and not even engage in, because I didn't have combative intentions in the first place. I just thought it was worth mentioning (however in-eloquently) that the sex in the film is actually pretty ordinary.

Black Hat wrote:If that was 'very vanilla' or 'just some licking and fingering' I'd love to hear what would qualify or what kind of lesbian porn you've seen as I think you two live on a different planet than I do. From a cinematic standpoint the centerpiece scene was way too long and took you out of the movie, even the very first solo scene seemed off to me. As far as explicit, they were doing a double sided dildo and yes it wasn't 'fisting' but sans thumb she had her hand all the way in there, he even added the sounds of a soaking wet vagina, good lord. I wonder if when this film is released in Japan they'll blur out their nether regions.

I found the sex scenes to be too mechanical, and maybe more fit for a one night stand than making love with the love of your life but it's still felt far from what you wrote. There's a world between a 5 minutes sex scenes with girls fingering and licking each other in a 69 (and trying what seemed to be a lot of different positions for Adèle's first time with a girl) and :

Black Hat wrote:The scenes were so long and so graphic that more than a few members of the Lincoln Center crowd, myself included, started laughing. Reason being that more than a few times you literally think ok they're done, oh no she's back fisting her again. Wait seriously? There's more? It's unreal.

Which looks like a 20 min hardcore lesbian porn scene.

I actually watched the movie with your feedback on these sex scenes in mind. The centerpiece you're talking about is 5 min long, there's no "here it goes again" (I was expecting, based on your feedback, that the sequence would be split in 2, with a climax in between), certainly not several times where you'd think it's over, and there's only 2 other times 2 min of sex scenes later on, plus a nude painting scene.

That's it. During the screening I attended, nobody laughed, nobody giggled, nobody walked out.

It's very far from what you're describing. So either we have clearly different sensibilities (which is a decent possibility), or you're not writing exactly what you want to express.

tenia wrote:(and trying what seemed to be a lot of different positions for Adèle's first time with a girl)

I think this observation was a very keen one and can really amount to a fair criticism of the film, giving a deeper meaning to my view that the scene took me out of the film. Meaning that it didn't really depict the significance or even sensuality you would think someone in Adéle's shoes would have, especially when you contrast it to her feelings later on. Then again clearly the point he was trying to make was that this was about two people in love lust but it came off to me as lust lust.

tenia wrote:not several times where you'd think it's over

Here's what I meant by that and I was intentionally vague, as my initial intentions posting about a new release that most people haven't scene is to give the board a general feel for what I saw.

Spoiler

There are a number of moments during the sex scene where they're in one position and there's a small beat, almost a lull in the action where I thought ok it's over, or moreover I've been conditioned by other films to anticipate it would be over and then there'd be a sharp edit, a camera move and boom they're back at it doing something completely different. I felt that this style of shooting and editing to not only be jarring but also distracting to the point of comedy.

tenia wrote:So either we have clearly different sensibilities (which is a decent possibility), or you're not writing exactly what you want to express.

To be clear I'm certainly not coming at this from a place of being offended. Having said that I think it's also clear that we have different sensibilities for I definitely don't see the scene being your average, everyday depiction of sex on screen. Over the past day or so where we've had the opportunity to delve a bit deeper, I can certainly see that my depiction of it could very well have been exaggerated because I felt the scene didn't work from a cinematic standpoint.

Gregory wrote:I guess I'm glad I don't watch movies surrounded by the "Lincoln Center crowd." I mean, even if there was "giggling" at some screenings, how is that necessarily a sign of any problem with the film?

Because if a member of a community that is really the internet bar for serious, intellectual, fair minded discussion about cinema and frankly so many other topics is expressing that they felt compelled to laugh during a scene that was clearly not intended to be funny it might be worth discussing.

This is also why I mentioned the "Lincoln Center crowd", they not only skew much older but are a notoriously serious bunch of cinephiles and they were all out in full force for the film that won Cannes.

This is perhaps what I failed to express appropriately, the people weren't laughing because they were watching two lesbians having sex, they were laughing because they felt that the depiction of two lesbians having sex was ridiculous.

To illuminate my point further, I certainly wasn't laughing the first time I saw In the Realm of the Senses or to give a more current example neither was the Lincoln Center crowd laughing during Bastards.

In my view, agree or disagree, I want to hear what everybody here thinks.

The discussion of audience reactions has been moved here, where you're free to heckle and check your phones all you want.

Black Hat wrote:

tenia wrote:(and trying what seemed to be a lot of different positions for Adèle's first time with a girl)

I think this observation was a very keen one and can really amount to a fair criticism of the film, giving a deeper meaning to my view that the scene took me out of the film. Meaning that it didn't really depict the significance or even sensuality you would think someone in Adéle's shoes would have, especially when you contrast it to her feelings later on. Then again clearly the point he was trying to make was that this was about two people in love lust but it came off to me as lust lust.

As I wrote, I would tend to agree with you on this : it's difficult to feel feelings in the sex scenes. There doesn't seem to be any tenderness, any closeness except the physical one. However, it didn't seem especially ridiculous.

Black Hat wrote:

Spoiler

There are a number of moments during the sex scene where they're in one position and there's a small beat, almost a lull in the action where I thought ok it's over, or moreover I've been conditioned by other films to anticipate it would be over and then there'd be a sharp edit, a camera move and boom they're back at it doing something completely different. I felt that this style of shooting and editing to not only be jarring but also distracting to the point of comedy.

I understand better what you mean, but I think it made it sound much more extreme than it actually is in the movie.

Black Hat wrote:Having said that I think it's also clear that we have different sensibilities for I definitely don't see the scene being your average, everyday depiction of sex on screen. Over the past day or so where we've had the opportunity to delve a bit deeper, I can certainly see that my depiction of it could very well have been exaggerated because I felt the scene didn't work from a cinematic standpoint.

It's not about it being offensive, or average, but as I wrote above, it just seemed to me (and other people it seems) much less extreme than what you wrote, but yes, maybe your feeling about the use of the scene itself made it further worse for you.

Blue Is the Warmest Color

The colorful, electrifying romance that took the Cannes Film Festival by storm courageously dives into a young woman’s experiences of first love and sexual awakening. Blue Is the Warmest Color stars the remarkable newcomer Adèle Excharpoulos as a high schooler who, much to her own surprise, plunges into a thrilling relationship with a female twentysomething art student, played by Léa Seydoux. Directed by Abdellatif Kechiche, this finely detailed, intimate epic sensitively renders the erotic abandon of youth. It has captivated international audiences and been widely embraced as a defining love story for the new century.

Disc Features

- New high-definition digital transfer, approved by director Abdellatif Kechiche, with 5.1 surround DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack on the Blu-ray edition
- Trailer and TV spot
- New English subtitle translation
- PLUS: A booklet featuring an essay by critic B. Ruby Rich

A full special edition treatment of this film will follow at a later date.

So its only Blu-Ray. What's wrong with the price tag? Its wonderful if its not a typo

chatterjees wrote:So its only Blu-Ray. What's wrong with the price tag? Its wonderful if its not a typo

There's a separate DVD release. The price tag is low because they are selling an incomplete product.

eerik wrote:

chatterjees wrote:So its only Blu-Ray. What's wrong with the price tag? Its wonderful if its not a typo

There's a separate DVD release. The price tag is low because they are selling an incomplete product.

Why? I mean, they are already DUAL. Why are they releasing separate editions again? Weird.

Because no sane person would buy this as opposed to renting it.

My guess would be demand.

chatterjees wrote:

eerik wrote:

chatterjees wrote:So its only Blu-Ray. What's wrong with the price tag? Its wonderful if its not a typo

There's a separate DVD release. The price tag is low because they are selling an incomplete product.

Why? I mean, they are already DUAL. Why are they releasing separate editions again? Weird.

Simple really. In order not to charge full price for a bare bones dual format release, they will release these for award season, to get quick sales. Only for them to re-release this in the future with features (and that will most likely be the dual edition). Makes sense? Just think of it like those studios do with Oscar releases.

At the very least, Criterion is quite upfront with its intentions. If this was released by Paramount, they'd promote the upcoming features-packed edition on the featureless disc.

Maybe if the special edition only has the extended director's cut, though...

IFC probably insisted that Criterion have something available for retail during awards season.

I hope they don't give the eventual reissue a new spine number. They should just retire the barebones releases when they are ready for the special edition and treat it like any other redux.

No way, this is an ingenious way to screw over the collectionistas and for that we should all applaud Criterion

Well, at the very least this confirms that the Essential Arthouse line is dead, if anybody was holding out hope for it.

Uh... I think EAH was long dead already. I'm sure this is just a compromise of sorts between Criterion and IFC, where the latter wants to get its product out as quick as it can, but Criterion still wants time to maintain its brand image.

It's like laserdisc days. One spine for no-frills and another for feature packed! (I hope not)

ianungstad wrote:IFC probably insisted that Criterion have something available for retail during awards season.

I hope they don't give the eventual reissue a new spine number. They should just retire the barebones releases when they are ready for the special edition and treat it like any other redux.

^ I'm sure this is the plan and the rationale. This stopgap release isn't for us. It's for Academy members and Netflix.

I wouldn't be surprised if this quickly goes out of print and the dual-format special edition comes later in 2014. Though Criterion also told me that a special edition of The Red Balloon would follow at a later date, and I've been waiting by my mailbox like Charlie Brown on Valentine's Day ever since.