It is currently Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:05 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 100 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:22 pm 

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:03 am
Lamourderer wrote:
I'm glad this has finally been announced officially, Kaurismäki rightfully being the first Finnish director in criterion canon. And now, maybe, just maybe there is a possibility of getting a Matti Kassila or Risto Jarva box set sometime in the future, after several years have passed. In my opinion, they are Finnish directors who "need" eclipse treatment more than Kaurismäki, even though, as Michael Kerpan said before, I'm glad criterion is now giving more availability for Kaurismäki's films.

how about 'The Smoldering Melodramas of Teuvo Tulio'


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:59 pm 

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 3:59 pm
Location: Columbus, OH
After William Klein, Larisa Shepitko and now this set, hopefully people will stop accusing Eclipse of being too mainstream and predictable.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:02 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
ByMarkClark.com wrote:
After William Klein, Larisa Shepitko and now this set, hopefully people will stop accusing Eclipse of being too mainstream and predictable.

Not a chance. ;~{


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:17 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm
Set 13: Not Too Silent but Not Too Late Ozu.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 3:37 am 

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:47 pm
Location: Philly
tavernier wrote:
Set 13: Not Too Silent but Not Too Late Ozu.

Leftover Ozu.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 3:49 am 
Dot Com Dom
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Mo'zu


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 9:35 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 2:49 am
Location: Bowling Green, Ohio
Set 13: domino harvey's Ozu jokes.

Okay, I actually liked the last one. :oops:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 9:35 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Ireland
zedz wrote:
A nice set. The Match Factory Girl is the best Kaurismaki film I've seen, and Ariel isn't far behind. But pink?

EDIT: Snap!

If you reckon 'The Match Factory Girl' is better than Ariel then it must be really special as Ariel probably ranks with 'Man Without A Past' as my favourite Karismaki


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 2:42 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
I certainly rank The Match Factory Girl above Ariel. I loved the latter when I first saw it (it was my first Kaurismäki, way back in 1989, and it's a perfect intro to his work), but I was rather underwhelmed with it when I revisited it a few years ago.

By contrast, The Match Factory Girl is an extraordinary piece of work, just about the most ruthlessly focused film in his entire output, and Kati Outinen's performance is a masterclass in conveying maximum information through minimum means (the film has barely any spoken dialogue - in fact, I think there's no significant dialogue in the entire first third). First time round, it seemed almost suicidally grim and depressing, but it now comes across as a comedy so black that it stretches the definition to its limit - and I think that was the intention.

Of the three films on the new Eclipse set, I predict it'll be the one that polarises viewers most - but I think it's easily the standout. (That said, fans of Ariel and The Man Without A Past, possibly the most feelgood Kaurismäkis, might find it heavy going at first...)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:01 am 

Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 7:51 am
Ariel is certainly the least interesting film of the boxset (even Kaurismaki thinks its one of his weakest efforts). Shadows in Paradise and The Match Factory Girl are, however, essential viewing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 6:52 am 

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:38 pm
domino harvey wrote:
Mo'zu

Superb.

I just watched these for the first time on the AE set last week (been meaning to pick them up for a while, then the Eclipse announcement was the thing that made me make the purchase, strangely enough). I liked all of them a lot, yes Ariel was probably the weakest, and maybe the least "real" of the 3... What I did find interesting, however, is the way the framing of the narrative only changes at the end of the last film - was this Kaurismaki's illustration of the literal end of the trilogy, as this was the only of the protagonists whose story had really ended?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 10:41 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Ireland
MichaelB wrote:
I certainly rank The Match Factory Girl above Ariel. I loved the latter when I first saw it (it was my first Kaurismäki, way back in 1989, and it's a perfect intro to his work), but I was rather underwhelmed with it when I revisited it a few years ago.

By contrast, The Match Factory Girl is an extraordinary piece of work, just about the most ruthlessly focused film in his entire output, and Kati Outinen's performance is a masterclass in conveying maximum information through minimum means (the film has barely any spoken dialogue - in fact, I think there's no significant dialogue in the entire first third). First time round, it seemed almost suicidally grim and depressing, but it now comes across as a comedy so black that it stretches the definition to its limit - and I think that was the intention.

Of the three films on the new Eclipse set, I predict it'll be the one that polarises viewers most - but I think it's easily the standout. (That said, fans of Ariel and The Man Without A Past, possibly the most feelgood Kaurismäkis, might find it heavy going at first...)

I'm in the middle of a Japanese film kick right now with all of these great new directors I've been discovering; just watched my second Uchida, but I'll be interested to see whether I agree with you on the respective merits of the two Kaurismakis
I have the three Region 2 box-sets, so I'll be checking "The Match Factory Girl" out there.
Of course it could be we have different sensibilities as to what we like best about Kaurismaki but I loved 'Ariels' ending and I thought Matti Pellonpää stole the movie with his marvellously dry performance.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:18 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Yojimbo wrote:
Of course it could be we have different sensibilities as to what we like best about Kaurismaki but I loved 'Ariels' ending and I thought Matti Pellonpää stole the movie with his marvellously dry performance.

Well, you're in for a treat with Shadows in Paradise!

I think I was very lucky that Ariel was my first Kaurismäki, as it's a near-perfect encapsulation of his regular preoccupations (and I agree that the ending is glorious) - but now that I've seen all sixteen features I have to admit that it doesn't have anything like the emotional impact of, say, Shadows in Paradise, The Match Factory Girl, Drifting Clouds (not just my favourite Kaurismäki but arguably one of the best films of the last 15-20 years) or The Man Without a Past.

Frankly, I'm jealous - I'd love to see those for the first time again, and Kaurismäki is nowhere near as prolific as he was.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 3:02 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Beaver.

Not sure why he's "surprised" that the discs are all single-layer - with the films running between 68 and 74 minutes, what exactly would the second layer be needed for?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 8:01 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 2:49 am
Location: Bowling Green, Ohio
Not to mention, the camera is fairly static.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 8:18 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
sidehacker wrote:
Not to mention, the camera is fairly static.

Well, when you have a hangover you don't really want to move the camera too much.

(or at least that's what he told Jonathan Ross in that marvellous documentary where Kaurismaki systematically rubbished his entire output! It's an extra on the third Artificial Eye set)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 10:00 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:05 pm
Location: Connecticut
MichaelB wrote:
sidehacker wrote:
Not to mention, the camera is fairly static.

Well, when you have a hangover you don't really want to move the camera too much.

(or at least that's what he told Jonathan Ross in that marvellous documentary where Kaurismaki systematically rubbished his entire output! It's an extra on the third Artificial Eye set)

Calamari Union was the film he rubbished. But I don't think he rubbished Match Factory Girl.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 5:42 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
justeleblanc wrote:
Calamari Union was the film he rubbished. But I don't think he rubbished Match Factory Girl.

Oh, he rubbished a lot more than that!

From memory:

Crime and Punishment - "I only did this because Hitchcock said that he'd never film the Dostoyevsky novel because it was too difficult, so I said 'I'll show you, old man'. And it was too difficult."

Hamlet Goes Business - "It's a comedy, but it's not a very funny comedy - it's quite an unfunny comedy."

Leningrad Cowboys Go America - "Well, they say it's doing well in Paris, but I'm sure in a couple of weeks it will fail. Because nobody can make films as bad as this without punishment."

I suspect that's far from everything.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 12:24 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:05 pm
Location: Connecticut
He appears to be one who takes great pleasure in ridiculing his works.... not that any of this means he doesn't think they are good films.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 3:27 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Aki Kaurismaki's Proletariat Trilogy


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 7:32 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 1:55 am
cdnchris wrote:

For some reason, I kept thinking of Hal Hartley when looking at those screencaps.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 9:27 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: Austin
I have to say, I think the ratings system should be altered for Eclipse releases, as they have we know they're not coming with extras. You highly recommend it, yet it comes with a 4.3 (or whatever it ended up being). I dunno. Too anal?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 2:42 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
I'm still playing with the rating system but the basic idea behind it is I enter in scores for each aspect and then the system calculates the score based on a formula. I thought about ignoring supplements for Eclipse titles (and even getting rid of the scoring) but then there'd be a lack in consistency and there are certain sites that have no consistency (*cough*digitalbits*cough*) in their scoring which makes them useless. I know the 4 doesn't jive with me recommending it (and I do, it's a great set despite the lack of supplements) but at the same time I can't give it a 7.6 (which I think is what the system would round it out to if it ignored the supplements) because that would give the impression that it's just about as impressive a release (overall) as The Furies when it's not.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 3:44 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: Austin
cdnchris wrote:
I'm still playing with the rating system but the basic idea behind it is I enter in scores for each aspect and then the system calculates the score based on a formula. I thought about ignoring supplements for Eclipse titles (and even getting rid of the scoring) but then there'd be a lack in consistency and there are certain sites that have no consistency (*cough*digitalbits*cough*) in their scoring which makes them useless. I know the 4 doesn't jive with me recommending it (and I do, it's a great set despite the lack of supplements) but at the same time I can't give it a 7.6 (which I think is what the system would round it out to if it ignored the supplements) because that would give the impression that it's just about as impressive a release (overall) as The Furies when it's not.

I see. I didn't realize you had the site (a script, I presume?) calculate the score for you. I just assumed you were hardcoding it with a form and doing the calculations yourself (what's wrong with me?). Understandable, then. For Eclipse, then, it might be worth getting rid of the scoring, as we (well, I assume all of us that would be on this site) know that the video is probably sub-Criterion standard, along with probably sub-audio and no extras.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 4:29 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
I would have thought the fact that the Eclipse boxes contain several features should count for something. I mean, you're not exactly short-changed by the Kaurismäki box, are you?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 100 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection