Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

News on Criterion and Janus Films
Locked
Message
Author
Flike
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:47 pm

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#676 Post by Flike »

I really, really enjoyed Che (crosses fingers). Contemporary releases like this I can get behind, just wish the year didn't seem so packed with them.
Cameron
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:01 pm

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#677 Post by Cameron »

Yeah, the motorcycle diaries is pretty terrible. I love Soderbergh's Che, but even that film's detractors have to admit that it's more artistically viable than the fucking motorcycle diaries.
User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:49 pm

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#678 Post by knives »

LQ wrote:
Chinga la puta madre
For those of us (namely myself) who don't speak Spanish and used an online translator for this...please briefly explain!
I'm not sure what he may be referring to, but it basically means some ones mother is a whore.
Also since Criterion tends to group releases together does this mean we'll get Gray's anatomy when they release this?
User avatar
LQ
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:51 am
Contact:

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#679 Post by LQ »

Yes, the online translator helped me sort out the mother-whore-business; I was interested in what swo was referring to.
ianungstad
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:20 am

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#680 Post by ianungstad »

IFC just recently terminated their agreement with Genius products right? i believe they already have signed with another distributor but I suppose key titles could have been licensed to Criterion. Great news on Che! Now if only the deal includes My Winnipeg, The Boss of it All, Antichrist, etc.

Good possibilities here.
User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#681 Post by swo17 »

LQ wrote:Yes, the online translator helped me sort out the mother-whore-business; I was interested in what swo was referring to.
Well yeah, literally, it means words I would never dare utter in the company of a woman. But figuratively, it means, um, I'm excited.
User avatar
oldsheperd
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:18 pm
Location: Rio Rancho/Albuquerque

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#682 Post by oldsheperd »

I'm guessing its "pinCHE Huevos"
User avatar
LQ
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:51 am
Contact:

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#683 Post by LQ »

swo17 wrote:
LQ wrote:Yes, the online translator helped me sort out the mother-whore-business; I was interested in what swo was referring to.
Well yeah, literally, it means words I would never dare utter in the company of a woman. But figuratively, it means, um, I'm excited.
Thanks for the explanation, my Spanish vocabulary just doubled in size. Didn't mean to stray too far OT!
User avatar
kaujot
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Austin
Contact:

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#684 Post by kaujot »

ianungstad wrote:IFC just recently terminated their agreement with Genius products right? i believe they already have signed with another distributor but I suppose key titles could have been licensed to Criterion. Great news on Che! Now if only the deal includes My Winnipeg, The Boss of it All, Antichrist, etc.

Good possibilities here.
I hadn't heard about this. Also great news if they can work out a licensing deal with Criterion.
User avatar
Antoine Doinel
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 5:22 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Contact:

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#685 Post by Antoine Doinel »

ianungstad wrote:IFC just recently terminated their agreement with Genius products right? i believe they already have signed with another distributor but I suppose key titles could have been licensed to Criterion. Great news on Che! Now if only the deal includes My Winnipeg, The Boss of it All, Antichrist, etc.

Good possibilities here.
They've signed a new agreement with MPI. If the clue is Che, it's probably a one off, rather than something that will develop into a trend.
User avatar
justeleblanc
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:05 pm
Location: Connecticut

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#686 Post by justeleblanc »

Someone please explain this relationship between IFC and Criterion. As far as i know, there is no relationship.

Second, Joe Swanberg is a hack, and is one more sign of Criterion's downward track.
User avatar
The Elegant Dandy Fop
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 7:25 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#687 Post by The Elegant Dandy Fop »

justeleblanc wrote:Someone please explain this relationship between IFC and Criterion. As far as i know, there is no relationship.

Second, Joe Swanberg is a hack, and is one more sign of Criterion's downward track.
Hasn't IFC only licensed "Solo Con Tu Pareja"?

I haven't seen this, but I have low expectations. Everything he's directed after Traffic stunk pretty bad.

Also, I haven't seen the newsletter, but please don't tell me Joe Swanberg is this month's top ten pick...

Now with more Criterion foray into contemporary cinema, who wants to bet that The Brother Bloom will get a Criterion release? I just have a gut feeling. It would be a real shame considering how awful it was.
User avatar
justeleblanc
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:05 pm
Location: Connecticut

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#688 Post by justeleblanc »

Could it also be Polanski's CHE?
jmj713
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 2:47 am

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#689 Post by jmj713 »

Please let it be Soderbergh's Che! Criterion is the only company that would (very likely) release a mult-disc set containing, apart from numerous extras, both the two films as separate entities and as a complete film. I can see it being a four-discer.
User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#690 Post by swo17 »

That might be a bit of a stretch (the two separate versions) though not impossible I suppose. I'm just hoping we get this thing on Blu-ray.
User avatar
kaujot
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Austin
Contact:

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#691 Post by kaujot »

I would imagine to save costs that they'd present it the way Soderbergh intended, as one complete film. Weren't the parts separated in the first place merely because of marketing concerns?
User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 6:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#692 Post by cdnchris »

justeleblanc wrote:Second, Joe Swanberg is a hack, and is one more sign of Criterion's downward track.
I'll be honest: I don't know who he is.
User avatar
The Elegant Dandy Fop
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 7:25 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#693 Post by The Elegant Dandy Fop »

cdnchris wrote:
justeleblanc wrote:Second, Joe Swanberg is a hack, and is one more sign of Criterion's downward track.
I'll be honest: I don't know who he is.
He's your typical trust-fund kid/douche who went to film school. He even admits to not having seen many films in the Criterion Collection, and it shows in his choices. They're all pretty much fall backs for entry level cineastes.
Last edited by The Elegant Dandy Fop on Wed Jun 10, 2009 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mteller
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:23 pm

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#694 Post by mteller »

Clearly this is CHElsea Girls.

Or possibly a double release of The Young Girls of RoCHEfort and The Umbrellas of CHErbourg.
jmj713
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 2:47 am

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#695 Post by jmj713 »

The reason for two separate films as well as a single film is that, to my understanding (since I haven't seen the films), the two films use different aspect ratios. It would be weird. Separate and combined is the way to go!
User avatar
oldsheperd
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:18 pm
Location: Rio Rancho/Albuquerque

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#696 Post by oldsheperd »

Does anyone have an idea if that supposed "contentious" Q&A from the New York premiere was recorded?
User avatar
kaujot
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Austin
Contact:

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#697 Post by kaujot »

The Elegant Dandy Fop wrote:He's your typical trust-fund kid/douche who went to film school. He even admits to not having seen many films in the Criterion Collection, and it shows in his choices. They're all pretty much fall backs for entry level cineastes.
I can't comment on his douche-ness, but what's wrong with his choices? I love every release he picked, with the exception of The Harder They Come, as I haven't seen it. I guess I just don't understand how Brakhage is a fall back. Or Pialat. Or Fishing with John. Nevermind that much of the collection could be described as "for entry level cineastes."
jmj713 wrote:The reason for two separate films as well as a single film is that, to my understanding (since I haven't seen the films), the two films use different aspect ratios. It would be weird. Separate and combined is the way to go!
Regardless, it would cost them a lot more to produce (to secure the rights, etc.) and the release would be priced accordingly.
User avatar
The Elegant Dandy Fop
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 7:25 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#698 Post by The Elegant Dandy Fop »

kaujot wrote:
The Elegant Dandy Fop wrote:He's your typical trust-fund kid/douche who went to film school. He even admits to not having seen many films in the Criterion Collection, and it shows in his choices. They're all pretty much fall backs for entry level cineastes.
I can't comment on his douche-ness, but what's wrong with his choices? I love every release he picked, with the exception of The Harder They Come, as I haven't seen it. I guess I just don't understand how Brakhage is a fall back. Or Pialat. Or Fishing with John. Nevermind that much of the collection could be described as "for entry level cineastes."
I might be little hard on the guy because his movies suck. But yeah, his movies suck.

And don't get me wrong, I love some of those films too, but those are all typical film school viewing. Then again, a lot of the collection is.
User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 6:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#699 Post by cdnchris »

Jun-Dai wrote:Or maybe it's the Omar Sharif film :-)
This was actually the first film that went through my head and was more than puzzled, though I guess having Palance as Castro is sorta neat. I'm embarrassed to say I wasn't aware of a Polanski Che film. EDIT: I just understood what Polanski "Che?" film that was referred to before in a previous post.

Once I got my act together I figured it was probably the Soderbergh film and, though I haven't seen it (waiting for video), it makes more sense and could potentially be a nice release.

I didn't think of it originally until going back through the thread but I do hope it's not The Motorcycle Diaries.
User avatar
justeleblanc
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:05 pm
Location: Connecticut

Re: Criterion Newsletter (Part 2)

#700 Post by justeleblanc »

My hunch is Motorcycle Diaries since it's a Focus title. I haven't seen it so I don't know if it's any good.

I did however see CHE, and that film is pretty weak, even for Soderbergh's standards. In fact, this whole business model of Criterions, which is releasing films onto DVD that already have decent DVD editions, or that will already have decent DVD editions is a complete farce.

If only Tamara still worked there. Good times.
Locked