364-368 Monsters and Madmen

Discuss releases by Criterion and the films on them. Threads may contain spoilers!
Message
Author
User avatar
Tribe
The Bastard Spawn of Hank Williams
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:59 pm
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Contact:

#76 Post by Tribe » Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:31 am

jcelwin wrote:Criterion seems to be having a difficult time finding 'important' and 'great' films to fill their catalogue.

Instead of looking for films from around the world that really are important and great (but probably are not so obviously so), they are starting to release films that look like they should be important and great (because of their age, budget or the fact that they are relatively unknown).

Also, I don't think the fact that someone worked on a 'minor' film means it deserves recognition if it isn't great or important.
An interesting post from someone who barely a month ago noted:
That said, art is subjective. ... You don't have to like something because someone else does. Regardless of who they are.
Tribe

jcelwin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:09 pm

#77 Post by jcelwin » Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:40 pm

Nice work looking up old posts...

I'm going to stand by both posts, you can try to shoot holes in them if you want. I'd rather you did try instead of just posting quotes, thinking they are contradictory, and that it leaves my points incorrect, untrue or whatever you are implying.

I am glad that you found my post interesting though...

User avatar
godardslave
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:44 pm
Location: Confusing and open ended = high art.

#78 Post by godardslave » Tue Oct 31, 2006 6:59 pm

jcelwin wrote:Criterion seems to be having a difficult time finding 'important' and 'great' films to fill their catalogue.

Instead of looking for films from around the world that really are important and great (but probably are not so obviously so), they are starting to release films that look like they should be important and great (because of their age, budget or the fact that they are relatively unknown).

Also, I don't think the fact that someone worked on a 'minor' film means it deserves recognition if it isn't great or important.
I pretty much agree with most of this.

If i was being cynical i would say they are running out of the established canonical art-house Janus Films Library, having now released most of them, hence the recent increase in american Indie/Docs/B movies type films.

Personally, I would rather see a shift by Criterion to focusing on world cinema such as films from Africa, South America and the middle east which are currently woefully under-represented and poorly treated on dvd in general.

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

#79 Post by zedz » Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:34 pm

godardslave wrote: If i was being cynical i would say they are running out of the established canonical art-house Janus Films Library, having now released most of them, hence the recent increase in american Indie/Docs/B movies type films.

Personally, I would rather see a shift by Criterion to focusing on world cinema such as films from Africa, South America and the middle east which are currently woefully under-represented and poorly treated on dvd in general.
This discussion has taken place before - there's probably a thread that could be revived if a rehash is imminent.

I agree with your second paragraph and disagree with your first. It's only if one has an extremely narrow view of the canon (i.e. Bergman, Kurosawa and Fellini) that Criterion would appear to be on their last lap of it. There are enough great, major - even canonical - films to last Criterion another fifty years, and indeed some of them come from Africa, South America and the Middle East.

The American indie thing seems to me to be a very conscious 2006 'theme' (just as Japanese genre films were in 2005), and I doubt it signals a major change of direction. Personally, I hope that 2007's 'theme' is one I'm more interested in (don't we all?), but I doubt we're going to see a rush of contemporary Iranian classics, Cinema Novo or 60s Eastern European masterpieces.

And, getting back to the ostensible topic of the thread, more 'frivolous' or 'marginal' films like the Madmen and Monsters set have been part of Criterion's brand mix all along. We have not yet entered the Latter Days.

User avatar
Tribe
The Bastard Spawn of Hank Williams
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:59 pm
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Contact:

#80 Post by Tribe » Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:43 pm

zedz wrote:
godardslave wrote:Personally, I would rather see a shift by Criterion to focusing on world cinema such as films from Africa, South America and the middle east which are currently woefully under-represented and poorly treated on dvd in general.
This discussion has taken place before - there's probably a thread that could be revived if a rehash is imminent.
I'd rather see bad, campy scifi movies like those in the Madmen and Monsters collection every night of the week than have to watch some third world film released just to satisfy somebody's idea of political correctness or because some nationality is poster child for victim of the month.

Tribe

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

#81 Post by colinr0380 » Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:54 pm


User avatar
thethirdman
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 4:26 pm

#82 Post by thethirdman » Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:28 pm

That podcast was more interesting than The Haunted Strangler. I rented it last week and I was pretty disappointed. The butter knife scalpel is one of the silliest things that I have seen in a horror film. I will probably still buy the set. I just hope the other titles are more interesting. I would like to hear more comments on Wood, Lugosi, and Karloff by Gordon.
I have to admit it was interesting to unexpectedly see Elizabeth Allan at the two ends of her career after watching Mark of the Vampire and The Haunted Strangler back to back. Her death scene in The Haunted Strangler may be the best scene in the film.

THX1378
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:35 am
Location: Fresno, CA

#83 Post by THX1378 » Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:09 am

Here is the first review I've found for the set from DVD Beaver

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#84 Post by HerrSchreck » Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:44 am

Dammit-- Gary didn't provide caps of Yvonne "Jiggles" Romain from her modern interview.. ah my teenage wet dream. Dammit.

How jealous I was of that hairy greazy fuck in CURSE OF THE WEREWOLF. And she couldn't even scream-- how much better does it get??

EDIT: Thinking about this again, and how these films stack up against some of the absolutely fabulous scifilms on disc this year (the wonderful UNIVERSAL CLASSIC SCI FI ULTIMATE COLLECTION with the astounding MOLE PEOPLE and the masterpiece THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN each for about 4 bucks, MISSION MARS COLLECTION (with the Menzies INVADERS), plus the collectors FORBIDDEN PLANET, PLANET OF THE APES, THIS ISLAND EARTH, WHEN WORLDS COLLIDE, etc all at dirt cheap prices, paying this price for these films "because it's Criterion"... I'm not 100% sure I'll be going for this one. Eclipse "themed set" would have been far more sensible (if the price would have been lower-- haven't priced E yet).

User avatar
skuhn8
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:46 pm
Location: Chico, CA

#85 Post by skuhn8 » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:07 am

I love the packaging on this, absolutely beautiful (I know this isn't the place for it)...but regarding the price-point contention: is this really overpriced? It's selling for $52 at DVDPlanet. Those transfers look stellar and--though I suspect the commentaries are a joke--the special features are pretty good for films of this nature; definitely would like to see the video pieces. When they first announced this I had no intention to dive into this but after seeing some of those screen caps I might take a dive...in a few months.
Last edited by skuhn8 on Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

Narshty
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: London, UK

#86 Post by Narshty » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:08 am

Image

Ten minutes later and I'm still laughing. If that's Karloff's "evil" face then this boxset is going to be worth every penny.

User avatar
skuhn8
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:46 pm
Location: Chico, CA

#87 Post by skuhn8 » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:11 am

Evil? I thought that was one of those behind the camera shots of an actor concentrating in preparation of his next scene.

User avatar
jt
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:47 am
Location: zurich

#88 Post by jt » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:37 am

It is a backstage but it's a candid.

When the camera pulls back during the animated menu screen, you see that he's having a particularly uncomfortable shit...

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#89 Post by HerrSchreck » Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:57 pm

skuhn8 wrote:I love the packaging on this, absolutely beautiful (I know this isn't the place for it)...but regarding the price-point contention: is this really overpriced? It's selling for $52 at DVDPlanet. Those transfers look stellar and--though I suspect the commentaries are a joke--the special features are pretty good for films of this nature; definitely would like to see the video pieces. When they first announced this I had no intention to dive into this but after seeing some of those screen caps I might take a dive...in a few months.
As we were saying a couple days ago on the Criterion & Paramount thread, with the telecine conducted nowadays by Paramount & Universal, not to mention Warners, the transfer issue isn't as powerful an argument for me. Despite the lack of personell & equipment fetishism (which I confess to be a sucker for... for some reason I love hearing about the source prints/negs, the telecine unit used, and not only the operator but the supervisor(s)) on these labels, the end product is every bit as skillfully assembled & balanced as Criterion's output these days.

I rarely listen to commentaries anymore-- and even if I did, so many professors-writers are straining & chomping at the bit to earn the prestige-"I've Arrived"-ratcheters of conducting a CC commentary that I'm sure the expense isn't all that enormous to justify in my mind the shelling out premium tier bucks for such minor SF chuckles. A set I left out in my above comparison (but mentioned last year in a similar discussion) is the WARNER LEGENDS OF HORRO COLLECTION. This is one badass set with six films, five commentaries, and crisp pitch pefect transfers. That collection, along with the sets & single films mentioned above simply render this kind of pricing obsolete. I just don't care what label it is. The CC aura sort of wore off on me this year, and I look at lot closer at my buys because space is getting pretty fuckin cramped around here. There is just no comparison to the monstrously excellent products I've mentioned abo ve and these pretty okay lite fun films. SOmetimes Criterion can wave their magic wand over both seen and unseen films and get a blind buy out of me because "it's Criterion" or "thank god-- this film at last AND it's CC.." but god knows half the folks blind buying this wouldn't give these flicks a second look if de3livered by another label and lets face it & call a spade a spade-- these same folks were probably quite unaware that they have been in digital circulation via Image for some time.

I'm a collector of both Bad Old Films and Sci Fi and have been for many years. My collection between dvd & vhs is absurdly huge. I actually see Bad Old Films of the exploitation & horror/sci fi genres as the final frontier of exploratory cinema. I love to look at a goofy picture of Karloff schvucking out a silly bucktoothed blank snarl and say "LOOK at that PICTURE! HOW can I resIST-- this is WAY WAY WAY better than OZU by a mile!" because it's fun to treat obscure crap that has a little half-deliberate/half-accidental style like it's way way way better than KANE.

But if someone is going to price-elevate a set of a few of these films way above both the best, and worst, and midline of the genre (all of which have their charms and benefits) there better be something far beyond transfer-quality to justify it.

There's still a faint chance I may go for these... if caught weak with extra cash and a certain hunger and naked habit yelling; but I'm trying to cut down on this dvd addiction. I can't even fit my shit into a 3-sectioned wall unit, and I've evicted record player, vhs tapes, and Alpha-type discs. If I'm not going to wind up like many a poor bastard creating a "FOR SALE OR TRADE-- MANY CC's ETC" I've got to continue to stop falling for the "Wow it's a CC... must... buy... now..." impulse, which I overcame in the late spring of 06.

This is overpriced Light Fun. Not trying to rain on anybody's fun or challenge anyone's excitement. But that's just my opinion... duly explaining myself etc.

User avatar
skuhn8
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:46 pm
Location: Chico, CA

#90 Post by skuhn8 » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:27 pm

Just took a look on the Beave at a couple of the titles you mentioned and would have to say that I agree with you on the image side of things. The CC's are definitely tight and sharp as a Japanese knife on TV...as are the Warners/Paramount sets. Hmmmm.

And it's funny about these deals that are going down now. As much as many of us dream of the CC getting such and such a title from this or that label the question is rapidly becoming: "why?" The Pandora's Box commentary is the last one I will listen to for quite some time as I was really pissed that I wasted so much time hearing "[so and so] is a consumer of mass produced goods" over and over again with little substance besides. Kind of a relief when Paramount comes through with barebones DVD with kickass transfer for about the price of a single movie ticket.

User avatar
Scharphedin2
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 7:37 am
Location: Denmark/Sweden

#91 Post by Scharphedin2 » Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:15 pm

HerrSchreck wrote:There's still a faint chance I may go for these...
Schreck, who ya' tryin to fool!?

Let's face it, you already cleared out the old photo of your mum that was a-sittin' way up on da top shelf to the left in that old worm-eaten bookcase you keep hollerin' about. All that still needs doin' is to run a half-moist rag over the spot a couple a times (oh, well, heck, ain't even necessary), and it'll make a very nice home to this fine little set.

Reading these posts resembles nothin' so much as watching an old vino struggling to pick himself up off the barroom floor after a three day binger.

User avatar
Ornette
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 10:41 am

#92 Post by Ornette » Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:04 pm

Aren't you all missing something here (including Gary) -- Mr. Picturebox ain't present. Not that it raises any hopes that Criterion have finally come to an end of this practise -- most probably an exception for some reason. But one can dream, one can dream...
HerrSchreck wrote:...I've got to continue to stop falling for the "Wow it's a CC... must... buy... now..." impulse, which I overcame in the late spring of 06.
I too, recently, jumped off that train. It sure feels good, doesn't it? I mean, ever since the day that I first discovered Criterion (on DVD) they've been on my mind -- thinking about what DVD to buy, making buy lists, looking at Beaver reviews and figuring out how to avoid custom duties etc... I sure do hope I won't get bitten again.
skuhn8 wrote:The Pandora's Box commentary is the last one I will listen to for quite some time as I was really pissed that I wasted so much time hearing "[so and so] is a consumer of mass produced goods" over and over again with little substance besides.
EDIT: Correcting a silly spelling mistake I later noticiced that I somehow managed to erase what was written here, which was basically me saying that the commentary wasn't my cup of tea either. Yackety-yak...
Last edited by Ornette on Wed Jan 10, 2007 1:17 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
CSM126
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:22 am
Location: The Room
Contact:

#93 Post by CSM126 » Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:19 pm

Ornette wrote:Aren't you all missing something here (including Gary) -- Mr. Picturebox ain't present. Not that it raises any hopes that Criterion have finally come to an end of this practise -- most probably an exception for some reason. But one can dream, one can dream...
I think these transfers were made some time ago - if the commentaries were recorded in 2002/2003 as the menus state then the transfers likely were made earlier than that. Criterion didn't picturebox back then.

User avatar
Ornette
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 10:41 am

#94 Post by Ornette » Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:48 pm

CSM126 wrote:I think these transfers were made some time ago - if the commentaries were recorded in 2002/2003 as the menus state then the transfers likely were made earlier than that. Criterion didn't picturebox back then.
Yes, I'm sure that's probably the reason. A nice surprise anyhow.

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#95 Post by HerrSchreck » Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:24 am

Scharphedin2 wrote:
HerrSchreck wrote:There's still a faint chance I may go for these...
Schreck, who ya' tryin to fool!?

Let's face it, you already cleared out the old photo of your mum that was a-sittin' way up on da top shelf to the left in that old worm-eaten bookcase you keep hollerin' about. All that still needs doin' is to run a half-moist rag over the spot a couple a times (oh, well, heck, ain't even necessary), and it'll make a very nice home to this fine little set.

Reading these posts resembles nothin' so much as watching an old vino struggling to pick himself up off the barroom floor after a three day binger.
Wtf? Scharf, I think a south Bronx sociopath has hacked your password. If he has tied you up before hijacking your username, wait until he's done and passes out from the glogg, inch your way forward across the floor by lancing your front teeth into the carpet and pulling yourself forward, headbutt the landline off it's cradle and with nose dial B-R-A-I-N--P-O-L-I-C-E.

re skuhn8's comments on the Pandora commentary-- probably OT (although the eerie silence on the unanswered questions on Pandora thread should stand, locked, as a monument & reminder of the awful collective state of our silent film scholarship) but I actually think that that is a candidate for worst commentary ever. Between the contrived professorial mummering about "the gaze", which I actually first thought was being meant as "the gays" I swear to god... as well as the nitzing between the neutered Thomas Elsaesser and the hyperdomineering Mary Ann Doane about "agency" (shoot me now) the whole thing is awful to listen to. I found it even more annoying than the molting of Alain "Hairy Disco Whale" Silver's feathers over Ursini's suspicion that a theramin is being used in NIGHTMARE ALLEY. Being of course a silent film fan-- and due also to high hopes raised by Gary's championing of the PANDORA commentary track as perhaps the best of the year-- I did set down to check out the track but quite frankly after two failed attempts I gave up, never getting close to halfway through it.

They can't all be hyperentertaining, hyperinformed fanatical David Kalats, unfortunately.

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#96 Post by HerrSchreck » Wed Jan 10, 2007 1:02 am

Some kind of nonsense about LuLu's backstage tantrum not being about jealousy, power or posessiveness, but about the perceieved power of The Gaze. Although this hifalutin noun is tossed around all over the place by Doane as an all purpose bow to wrap Lulu's machinations in. Not the first time a Doane has been called to heel for making Spurious Claims. In the dna I guess?

And always remember: "if it's a non-sound-speed silent then it can't be progressive!" Somebody forgot to tell them that not only this film but tons of others exist at non 24/5fps-- progressive. I can't believe she actually wrote that note to Dent, as if the film frame-rate distribution across the corresponding video fields is inflexible. That was pretty bad, actually.

Yes D I know you snooze on Kalat, notwithstanding your desire to smack the lad with a shileleigh for his perceieved faux pas on Graf Told being a knockwurst hunter.

Napoleon
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:55 am

#97 Post by Napoleon » Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:52 am

Ornette wrote:Aren't you all missing something here (including Gary) -- Mr. Picturebox ain't present. Not that it raises any hopes that Criterion have finally come to an end of this practice -- most probably an exception for some reason. But one can dream, one can dream...
Its likely that these were completed prior to the arrival of the picture boxing practice, but yes one can dream!
skuhn8 wrote:...but regarding the price-point contention: is this really overpriced? It's selling for $52 at DVDPlanet.
Releases from all other companies get on-line discounts as well, so comparatively it is over priced. For example dvdplanet have City of the Dead for $6. A release of a first rate film with a top-tier transfer & excellent extras from a tiny company.

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#98 Post by HerrSchreck » Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:17 am

Napoleon wrote:. For example dvdplanet have City of the Dead for $6. A release of a first rate film with a top-tier transfer & excellent extras from a tiny company.
Oh mein gott what a movie this is... and a stellar 16x9 enhanced progressive transfer (of the slightly longer and properly titled cut of the film) that the finest CC has nothing on, two commentary tracks, three modern interviews with director and two stars (one w Sir Lee), etc. Perhaps VCI's finest effort to date, and for pennies. When I first joined this site I was going on and on about this disc. I think Bret Wood from Kino jumped companies for a few weeks and had something to do with helping to put together this disc, so obviously a huge fan. A package put together with a lot of love...

As for the film, I along with of course many others will never forget that nite in the early seventies when it was broadcast as the slightly shorter US edit called HORROR HOTEL (either Creature Feature or Chiller-- "chillllllllllllllllllllllllllllerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"-- Theater) and the thing gave me nightmares. The ravishingly haunted deep focus photography filled with fog and deep shadows, the terrible murder of the lead halfway thru, as well as poor mute Lottie later on, that wonderful catacomb beneath the Ravens Inn, the ancient looking graveyard filled with haze and leaning tombstones, the haunting music (both the jazz as well as those terrifying gregorian-style chants of presumably satanic texts).. even the names Whitewood ("You'd think they'd do something about these roads," "few people come here anymore... for Whitewood, time stands still," "Watch out here comes another bump"... bump indeedy, darlin') Selwyn, Wormport Road, all of it. The fishbowl effect of the fireplace in the parlor when Nan first enters the inn-- fabulous work by DP Desmond Dickinson of Olivier's Hamlet, The Importance of Being Earnest, The Browning Version...

When her brother Dick is going by matchlight beneath the hotel in the cobwebbed chambers and bumps into the body of poor little Lottie (one of the most evil murders in all film, cruel... strangulation!) I damn near crapped my 5 year old pants. It is a masterpiece of horror, to this day makes my neck hairs stand up.. if witches exist, and are evil, this is the way they should look and act. Not anywhere near enough Good Witch Movies like this.

This disc gives the lie to every overpriced horror film in the market owing to "transfer" "extras", "progressive", etc. In my opinion the M&M box is truly stuck with a for-me prohibitive price tag.

User avatar
Fletch F. Fletch
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah

#99 Post by Fletch F. Fletch » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am

HerrSchreck wrote:I'm a collector of both Bad Old Films and Sci Fi and have been for many years. My collection between dvd & vhs is absurdly huge. I actually see Bad Old Films of the exploitation & horror/sci fi genres as the final frontier of exploratory cinema. I love to look at a goofy picture of Karloff schvucking out a silly bucktoothed blank snarl and say "LOOK at that PICTURE! HOW can I resIST-- this is WAY WAY WAY better than OZU by a mile!" because it's fun to treat obscure crap that has a little half-deliberate/half-accidental style like it's way way way better than KANE.
This passage alone has pretty much convinced me to buy this box set. I too love good ol' B-horror... esp. the vintage stuff from the '50s. It harkens back to the days of the Creature Double Feature -- plenty of bad acting, crappy effects and wonderful cheesy, quotable dialogue. That's why I loved and was pleasantly surprised by the inclusion of Equinox into the Criterion Collection.

Not to mention you've got Karloff AND Christopher Lee finally in the Collection. Good enough for me.

Cinesimilitude
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:43 am

#100 Post by Cinesimilitude » Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:22 pm

Schreck's entire post convinced me to cancel my pre-order... well, that and the fact that I got fired from my job a few days ago. but Even if I was employed I wouldn't be buying this. I'm right at the point of breaking the impulsive CC purchases habit myself, and I'm only going to be getting Naked City and Bicycle Thieves of what's been announced for 2007.

Post Reply