It is currently Thu Oct 19, 2017 5:38 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: 40 Armageddon
PostPosted: Sat Feb 12, 2005 8:20 pm 

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:53 pm
Location: all up in thurr
Armageddon

Image

Bruce Willis and and an all-star cast of roughneck oil drillers blast off on a mission to save the planet in Michael Bay's doomsday space epic.

DIRECTOR-APPROVED DOUBLE DISC SPECIAL EDITION FEATURES

DISC ONE: THE MOVIE

- The exclusive director’s cut, containing previously unseen footage, in a new digital transfer personally supervised by Michael Bay
- Discrete 5.1 channel Dolby® Digital soundtrack
- Two commentary tracks: One featuring Michael Bay, producer Jerry Bruckheimer, Bruce Willis, and Ben Affleck; the second featuring cinematographer John Schwartzman, NASA consultant Dr. Joe Allen, and asteroid consultant Ivan Bekey
- Subtitles for the deaf and hearing impaired
- Optimal image quality: RSDL dual-layer edition

DISC TWO: SUPPLEMENTS

- Michael Bay’s gag reel
- Deleted scenes compiled by Michael Bay
- Storyboards and production design drawings
- Analyses of the special effects by visual effects supervisors Richard Hoover, Pat McClung, and Hoyt Yeatman
- Production designer Michael White on the look of Armageddon
- Trailer, teaser, and television spots
- The Aerosmith music video “I Don’t Want to Miss a Thing,” plus interviews with band members

Criterionforum.org user rating averages



Last edited by Martha on Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 7:07 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:01 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
May seem like a strange question, but is this in a double width or single width case? The reason I ask is, it features the 'old style' criterion font on the front cover - but I have most of the first lot of releases, and none with this 'old style' are double width. Can't picture the spine in double width. Can someone feed my curiosity so I don't have to buy the damn thing for myself?


Last edited by daniel p on Tue Mar 08, 2005 4:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 8:07 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:01 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
I assumed so, but just can't imagine that style in double width.
Still can't bring myself to buy it though - even if it means an incomplete collection. I'll treat it as OOP, along with the other gaps on my shelf.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 2005 9:16 am 
was Born Innocent
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 11:57 pm
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Well, here's the single-alpha version. I know the old ezboard noted that this disc used to be a double-alpha and is now a single, but I don't know if that info was ever replicated here (the ezboard section was called "Printings and Versions"; if anyone knows how to get into the old ezboard site i think the info is here but I can't load the page.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 2005 9:59 am 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
It was double on original release (the one I have is) but it went to single later (it was assumed so places like Wal-Mart could stock more) and then I assume back to double (the video store near me that actually stocks Criterions got more Armageddons in and they were all doubles)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 15, 2005 9:32 am 

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:21 pm
Location: Canada
found this at a used record store yesterday for $14 CDN :) it's probably my most reviled film of all time but i just couldn't up the chance to get a Criterion at that price. the set looks nice and, from what i read from reviews, informative.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 15, 2005 9:33 am 

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:21 pm
Location: Canada
btw, mine's double-width.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:50 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 5:11 pm
Location: Florida
No, Armageddon isn't the best film ever, in the collection, hell it's not even in the top 500, but you have to say one thing... It does have style, and that's why it's in the collection. Michael Bay, has a style to his films... A blockbuster style, if you will... and that's why the Criterion Collection holds this film... Because it has it's own style.... Michael Bay has his own style... Try looking at it that way.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:12 pm 
Alleged Socialist
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 2:43 am
Location: Denmark
I didn't get this movie until the second viewing. Very complex stuff.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:23 pm 

Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:21 pm
Location: Canada
heard the film was closer to Bergman's original idea for the Seventh Seal than Bergman's own interpretation.


Last edited by lull on Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:24 pm 
Waster of Cinema
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:03 am
Sales from this title must have paid for so many pet projects at Criterion and many much-loved SEs. I love the fact that it and The Rock are in the collection. But how pretentious is it for a filmmaker to insist that his films are released by Criterion. If that is what Bay did. Wes Anderson, too. Can any filmmaker make this request?

Criterion are worth a bundle now. The profits are huge, no doubt. A digitally restored, hi-def transfer of The Browning Version with extras?! And it has sold about 40 copies so far, I bet. I asked Mulvaney about this and he said that he isn't at liberty to discuss sales and profits. One too many Browning Versions and we'll be seeing more Armageddons in the collection, you can bet your butt on that.


Last edited by Gordon on Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:31 pm 

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:55 am
I'm never quite sure whether the chest-beating USA-ism's, over use of rawk, and slow-mo are supposed to be ironic or not.

Bay is a master at keeping the viewer off balance like that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:01 pm 
Big fan of the former president
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:54 pm
Location: Provo, Utah
A few years ago there was a hilarious piece about Bay's movies in Film Comment where the author called Armageddon Bay's masterpiece because it had the balls to go so far over-the-top than any other film he's done. He also said it fit in a loose-knit trilogy -- The Girl in the Control Room. :wink:

If I can find it, I'll dig it up.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 3:07 pm 

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: London, UK
Absolutely. It's the Scream of disaster movies - both ripping the piss out of itself, and still delivering all the thrills and spills one expects from the genre. Bay goes way, way, way overboard, and it's fantastic. The Rock is so po-faced and charmless in comparison. The attempts at building characters felt terribly forced, as if all involved were aiming for Higher Things, while still throwing in a bunch of dull stereotypes for cheap laughs anyway (the camp hairdresser, for example) - in Armageddon, characters are defined by their quips, as it should be.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 3:13 pm 
Happy-Fun Sunshine Minion of Intolerance
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:44 pm
Location: Confusing and open ended = high art.
The Invunche wrote:
I didn't get this movie until the second viewing. Very complex stuff.


no, you're just slow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 3:52 pm 
Alleged Socialist
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 2:43 am
Location: Denmark
godardslave, you have lots to learn about trolling.................and grammar. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:00 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:07 pm
After a few years of my friends telling me that Armageddon was a total blue-collar wet dream and that I should see it, I finally did on September 10, 2001. After sitting through 14 hours of who-needs-to-do-what talking and yelling head television the following day, I watched it for a second time and it was as much of a blast as the first time and I've enjoyed it the dozen times I've seen it since. And I ain't no give 'em hell flag-waving yipper. Tho I do work at NASA.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:05 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:38 pm
Location: Back in Milan (Ind.)
So just to make sure I understand, Michael Bay and Armageddon have style, right? Also, the only reason Criterion can justify including this film within their holy collection of films is that the DVD for the movie is a cash-cow that subsidizes other "artistic masterpieces" and "under-appreciated gems". Correct? I'm just so glad we're clearing up these confusing issues.

Gordon wrote:
But how pretentious is it for a filmmaker to insist that his films are released by Criterion. If that is what Bay did. Wes Anderson, too. Can any filmmaker make this request?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure any filmmaker can make this request... and then it's up to Criterion do decide if they want to produce the DVD or not.

Anyone else find it funny that the word "pretentious" is being used here?

McMurphy wrote:
One too many Browning Versions and we'll be seeing more Armageddons in the collection, you can bet your butt on that.

Sounds good.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:13 pm 
Waster of Cinema
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:03 am
Andre, dry yer eyes, would ya? :cry: I acknowledge my pretentiousness. I love it.

You will be silent now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:31 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:38 pm
Location: Back in Milan (Ind.)
Gordon McMurphy wrote:
Andre, dry yer eyes, would ya?

Yeah, I'll get right on that.

Gordon McMurphy wrote:
I acknowledge my pretentiousness. I love it.

That's sad.

Gordon McMurphy wrote:
You will be silent now.

Good luck with that.

Narshty wrote:
Absolutely. It's the Scream of disaster movies - both ripping the piss out of itself, and still delivering all the thrills and spills one expects from the genre.

You know Narsh, I've heard you state this before, but I still don't see it. The movie is over-the-top, but it certainly isn't as overtly self-aware as Scream, where it's painfully obvious for any audience member. I doubt very many viewers see Armageddon as having a laugh at its own expense, or at the expense of its genre.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:06 pm 
Alleged Socialist
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 2:43 am
Location: Denmark
I just wanna know why they had gatlin guns fitted on the space cars.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:52 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:07 pm
NASA imperialism. Gatling guns have been on all of the landing craft since 1964 with the exception of the Mars rovers which, due to budgetary and size constraints, were equipped only with saturday night specials.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 2:58 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:53 pm
Location: Oh Where, Oh Where?
I love the Aerosmith/Diane Warren song.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 5:59 am 

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: London, UK
Andre Jurieu wrote:
Narshty wrote:
Absolutely. It's the Scream of disaster movies - both ripping the piss out of itself, and still delivering all the thrills and spills one expects from the genre.

You know Narsh, I've heard you state this before, but I still don't see it. The movie is over-the-top, but it certainly isn't as overtly self-aware as Scream, where it's painfully obvious for any audience member. I doubt very many viewers see Armageddon as having a laugh at its own expense, or at the expense of its genre.

Well, I have to justify my irrational love for this great lurching toxic monster of a film somehow. "It rocks" failed to cut it beforehand. Watch it (or as much as you can bear to) again - it's fascinating how Steve Buscemi and Peter Stormare seem to be the only ones who realise what kind of picture they're in.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 6:00 am 

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:55 am
Andrei wrote:
Narshty wrote:
Absolutely. It's the Scream of disaster movies - both ripping the piss out of itself, and still delivering all the thrills and spills one expects from the genre.

You know Narsh, I've heard you state this before, but I still don't see it. The movie is over-the-top, but it certainly isn't as overtly self-aware as Scream, where it's painfully obvious for any audience member. I doubt very many viewers see Armageddon as having a laugh at its own expense, or at the expense of its genre.
No they don't, and I remain unconvinced that this was Bay's intention in the first place. If it was perhaps he should have cast Leslie Nielsen in the Willis role to get his point across?

I agree with Narshty (about The Rock as well). And I like Con Air for the same reasons as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  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