criterionforum.org

See the film has uses beyond being wonderfully funny - a non addictive sleep aid

The non-addictive part is surely the key. It's repellent.

To you. Opinions are like assholes...

Some are shittier than others.

Joe Lugoff wrote:But that ten-year stretch is one of the greatest for any individual filmmaker in Hollywood history. What exactly is wrong with THE DEFIANT ONES, ON THE BEACH, INHERIT THE WIND, JUDGEMENT AT NUREMBERG, MAD WORLD, SHIP OF FOOLS and GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER?

Seven decent films in ten years (I'm taking your word for their quality) is hardly an amazing record for a studio director. I'm actually scratching my head trying to come up with a Hollywood director of any particular standing whose filmography doesn't include a ten-year stretch that easily matches (or in most cases completely trounces) that particular package of films.

You seriously think those seven films measures up to these?
- Bringing Up Baby, Only Angels Have Wings, His Girl Friday, Sergeant York, Ball of Fire, To Have and Have Not, The Big Sleep.
- The Roaring Twenties, They Drive by Night, High Sierra, The Strawberry Blonde, Gentleman Jim, Objective, Burma!, Pursued.
- Shockproof, All I Desire, Magnificent Obsession, All That Heaven Allows, There's Always Tomorrow, Written on the Wind, The Tarnished Angels.
- Reign of Terror, Winchester 73, The Tall Target, The Naked Spur, The Man from Laramie, Men in War, Man of the West.
- Sunset Blvd., Ace in the Hole, Stalag 17, Sabrina, The Seven Year Itch, The Spirit of St Louis, Some Like It Hot.
- The Great McGinty, Christmas in July, The Lady Eve, Sullivan's Travels, The Palm Beach Story, The Miracle of Morgan's Creek, Hail the Conquering Hero.

That last bundle was completed in five years. Seriously, I've yet to come up with a major director who couldn't eclipse Kramer's run of "greatness." Even poor old Orson Welles, who didn't even last a decade as a Hollywood player, made five great films in that time. Five and a half, if you include the remnants of It's All True.

This is the worst worst worst worst thread

The last shot of The Defiant Ones is better than Mad World. \:D/

swo17 wrote:This is the worst worst worst worst thread

Oh please, you're just such a snob that you can't appreciate endless bickering about a not particularly well-loved movie and its not particularly well-regarded director.

-MASH, Brewster McCloud, McCabe And Mrs Miller, Images, The Long Goodbye, California Split, Thieves Like Us, Nashville, 3 Women, A Wedding, A Perfect Couple

(Buffalo Bill And The Indians & Quintet are in there, but yeah)

The first 8 films were in 5 years.

Hell within roughly the same time frame Nick Ray came out with Johnny Guitar, Run for Cover, Rebel Without a Cause, Bigger Than Life, Bitter Victory, Wind Across the Everglades, Party Girl, The Savage Innocents, and King of Kings. With the speed with which films were made at the time most any director of any level of talent could have a gaggle of great films which makes Kramer's frankly awful output during the period all the more surprising given that he didn't have the problem of producers and low budgets or bad actors many film makers of the period did. When Spencer Tracy talking about ice cream is the highlight of a directing career with the offensive highlights that Ship of Fools and Judgement of Nuremberg provide not to mention the terrible film making on display it really isn't a career up for discussion. This film maybe, but laughter is such a subjective thing I'm not sure if the discussion at present really is worth anything. Also Rat Race is way better.

Joe Lugoff wrote:What exactly is wrong with THE DEFIANT ONES, ON THE BEACH, INHERIT THE WIND, JUDGEMENT AT NUREMBERG, MAD WORLD, SHIP OF FOOLS and GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER?

Inherit The Wind is a film I strongly dislike, but I suspect only most of that is Kramer's fault -- some blame perhaps lies with the source material.

The Scopes Monkey Trial is rife with conflicts that could be richly mined by a good filmmaker - Urban vs Rural, Tradition vs Future, Knowledge vs Faith, Pride vs Pragmatism. What's required to explore these themes, and what Kramer seems totally incapable of, is treating the simple townsfolk like human beings, with actual emotions, thoughts, and pasts at stake. Imagine what a powerful, humane experience could have been derived from the material had he approached the subject matter the way Kazan approached Wild River. But Kramer is never able to trust his audience with that kind of ambiguity, so he reduces the people of Tennessee to shrill, histrionic cartoons. They are straw men, set up for the righteous Tracy to eviscerate - and because they are stripped of human complexity, Tracy's fight is stripped of meaning. What Kramer gives us is a secular liberal form of Bible thumping, and it's just as obnoxious as the ol' time religion he caricatures in the film.

Contrast this to Leo McCarey's much derided Anti-Communist film My Son John. McCarey is careful to show us sympathetic parts of John (his commie 'heavy'), and the dopey, buffoonish parts of John's father (the anti-communist voice in the film). It's because of this trust the filmmaker shows the audience that a staunch liberal like me can actually find (at least the first 3/4ths of) the film quite persuasive as an aesthetic experience.

That being said, the only thing I wanted from Mad World was to laugh, and it gave me nothing. The Simpsons parody episode was much funnier, and more concise about it.

I sure hope I'm dead 50 years from now when the Criterion curated hologram of Rat Race is being discussed.

cdnchris wrote: It's in style to pick on it, I know, but The Greatest Show on Earth is genuinely lousy. And it won, too!

I love any movie that features a vicious argument during a spontaneous blood transfusion.

I actually think all things considered it's an alright film though I totally understand why it is looked down upon.

I went through all of the BP winners recently and enjoyed it quite a lot more than I felt I was probably supposed to.

Yeah, I'd rather take its light fun house pleasures over something as self serious awful as Crash.

I'm probably as close as it comes around here and even I don't know what the "We all follow Cahiers" argument means. I mean, obviously I know what the person who made that thinks it means, but I doubt anyone here is an actual Cahiers disciple, in that few if any of us primarily view our films through a strident ideological lens. Also, if we all pledged strict allegiance, we'd have to forsake all the classic films the Young Turks thumbed their nose at, like the Apartment

And the Greatest Show on Earth is actually a good movie. Notice how I'm not claiming those who think otherwise are braindead hipster heathens

It's a Mad^4 World isn't the greatest comedy, but I think it's quite enjoyable and worth a proper release. I don't think Criterion would bother with this unless they were backing a restoration of the roadshow cut, which is worth praising.

This conversation kind of reminds me of the one we had back when Hopscotch came out, down to the same terms.

Boy, I can't wait for Persona.

Mathew2468 wrote:Boy, I can't wait for Persona.

Now that's True Art™

So overrated.

I'm only interested in Criterion's Persona Blu if they reinstate all those hilarious Phil Silver scenes

Mr Sausage wrote:This conversation kind of reminds me of the one we had back when Hopscotch came out, down to the same terms.

People don't/ didn't like Ronald Neame? I get the issue people had with that specific title at the time, but I would think at least his work as a cinematographer would get Neame a free pass.

knives wrote:

Mr Sausage wrote:This conversation kind of reminds me of the one we had back when Hopscotch came out, down to the same terms.

People don't/ didn't like Ronald Neame? I get the issue people had with that specific title at the time, but I would think at least his work as a cinematographer would get Neame a free pass.

This is the criterion forum. When have we ever passed on a chance to bitch?