criterionforum.org

I'll bet that had the good people at DVDBeaver not publicized the reversed shots in Jules and Jim there would have been very little moaning about this release. The vast majority would not have had a clue about the mixup.

I'm not saying that the goof should not have been pointed out...the rest is just fetishism run rampant.

Tribe

Wrong. The Criterion company prides itself on being the best at presenting such classics, and since they certainly charge enough money for such, they better get it right. I can't imagine such a fuck up with Seven Samurai, and if there was, you better believe I would be outraged.

exte wrote:Wrong. The Criterion company prides itself on being the best at presenting such classics, and since they certainly charge enough money for such, they better get it right. I can't imagine such a fuck up with Seven Samurai, and if there was, you better believe I would be outraged.

Before you were aware of the screw-up, what complaints did you have about the disc?

Tribe

Where are the runners up for best commentary? I'm a commentary nut, folks, and I NEED this info!

I've just posted the MoC DVD OF THE YEAR AWARDS, and F FOR FAKE didn't feature in the Top 12! -- Very strange.

http://www.mastersofcinema.org/

peerpee wrote:I've just posted the MoC DVD OF THE YEAR AWARDS, and F FOR FAKE didn't feature in the Top 12! -- Very strange.

I don't know if the results, or the exclusion of Welles in an MoC list, seem that strange to me. MoC and its devotees focus on a very particular (highbrow) type of cinema which they deem to be the pinnacle of the medium, and the majority of their efforts concern the promotion and appreciation of this particular form of cinema. The style of Ozu, Dreyer, Bresson, Antonioni, and Tarvoksky seem to be more patient and meditative, and the championing of Mizoguchi has much to do with exposing an audience to a under-appreciated director in terms of presence in the DVD market. To me, Ugetsu and L'Eclisse are very much MoC types of films and their selection as #1 and #2 on the MoC list is very much a reflection of MoC's character and personality. I would never expect to see Ran at the top of an MoC list even though I enjoy the film immensely.

Meanwhile, Welles is a brash, flashy type of filmmaker, who some feel to be gaudy and overly-showy. He is a showman. His reputation is also cemented in the mainstream of film criticism. I doubt MoC or their devotees feel the need to promote Welles' labours, even if F for Fake is not amongst Welles' most famous films (at least in the mainstream).

Interesting point Andre. MOC clearly pitches itself towards the 'highbrow', one has only to look at their choice selections in the website's release calender. That said this forum is considered 'highbrow' in some quarters, one has only to glance at some of the films recommended or constantly flagged up as a demand for a quality release by this or that company.
My point - thank god that we and MOC exist, in the world of film/cinema it amazes me that we are getting the releases we cry out for...I agree MOC's poll is not in the least surprising (a very European outlook in fact) and as for F for Fake... that is just one quality release in a global jungle of superb releases this year.
Supremacy in quality DVD releases is shifting from Criterion, or at least being equally shared, no bad thing!

Well, I agree with pretty much everything you've said Subbuteo. I guess my point is that there are various positions within the "highbrow" spectrum. There's "a continuing series of important classic and contemporary films" and then there's "collating and disseminating information for discerning cinephiles the world over". I'm just saying I doubt MoC would ever associate themselves with the Beastie Boys or Steven Soderbergh. Some may see this as a good thing, some may not. I doubt Welles is allowed the same status as Ozu within the MoC crowd. I'm making a sweeping assumption, but it seems like Welles - like the original King Kong - is deemed to be "a little too mainstream" for MoC (though I'm sure Rosenbaum disagrees).

Andre, do you keep posting in this thread so see if you've won member of the year?

The most notable absence in both the forum and MoC polls just has to be the Wajda boxset, which is so fantastic that it almost entirely mitigates Criterion's fretful 'abandonment' of Eastern European cinema in comparison to the output of certain other regions one could mention...

Then again, not having forwarded the war trilogy in any category of voting, I'm the last person who should now lament this title's lack of recognition. Ach, c'est la vie...

where are the member of the year and richard cranium awards?

Jettisoned in favour of seasonal goodwill, it seems.

The Invunche wrote:Andre, do you keep posting in this thread so see if you've won member of the year?

Actually, I'm more interested to see if I've stolen the Richard Cranium award from you, just to see if you go all Susan Lucci on me (which I guess that would make me Sarah Michelle Gellar in this scenario).

Hehe.

If I win that it means all the pussies voted for me cause I didn't get a single vote in the public thread.

I'll second the request for the runners up for commentary - at least a couple. And I'll add a similar request for the supplements.

F for Fake is a masterpiece of a DVD

This year Criterion releases a good number of reissues (Amarcord, Seven Samurai and Playtime to name a few). I wonder if the reissues are eligible to vote for the best release of the year because I find Amarcord and Playtime which I received yesterday total knock out - like the best Christmas packages you could ever imagine.

I also think they should count. Re-release or not, we're supose to vote for the best releases of the year, right?

Michael wrote:This year Criterion releases a good number of reissues (Amarcord, Seven Samurai and Playtime to name a few). I wonder if the reissues are eligible to vote for the best release of the year because I find Amarcord and Playtime which I received yesterday total knock out - like the best Christmas packages you could ever imagine.

I don't see why they wouldn't be eligible. A good release is a good release is a good release.

Tribe

Oh good. Now it's gonna be super hard for me to decide between Amarcord and Playtime...even though the year is not over yet.

How about separate awards? Like original and adapted screenplay?

Nearly 9 months on and we still don't know who won the Richard Cranium and Member of the Year awards. Therefore, by Napoleonic fiat, I hereby crown myself the winner of the 2005 Richard Cranium and Member of the Year awards.

I'm pretty sure I was nominated for both anyway.

I'm sure whomever decides to organize the event this year can make room for a "Best Reissue" award. All 2006 calendar releases, new or reissue, boxed or single, would be eligible for "Release of the Year."

Or the runner-up commentaries....

Matt wrote:Nearly 9 months on and we still don't know who won the Richard Cranium and Member of the Year awards. Therefore, by Napoleonic fiat, I hereby crown myself the winner of the 2005 Richard Cranium and Member of the Year awards.

I'm pretty sure I was nominated for both anyway.

I dropped the categories because the vast number of ballots didn't respond to either. But I do believe you were leading in both with two votes apiece.