B&N 1/2 off Criterion plus $5 coupon

[quote name='rifle21']For those of you questioning, my position on Criterion Blu-rays:

For movies made either in B&W, or in fullscreen, there is going to be little difference. I for one own the Seventh Seal on Blu and I don't think it looks at all better than the DVD copy (Yes, I own an HDTV). However, on a movie like the Man Who Fell to Earth you most certainly notice a difference. The main point as it pertains to this sale is that they're the same damn price, so it doesn't matter. Seven Samurai can absolutely not look better than the 3-Disc DVD does, and Criterion usually does immaculate work so your DVDs will never go out of style until we start watching movies in 1260p or some crap like that.[/QUOTE]

Wow... I cannot disagree more. While The 400 Blows seems like a marginal improvement over the DVD, The Third Man is *drastically* improved. Why? Two words: night scenes. Simply put, Blu-ray handles blacks, and in particular night scenes, much better than DVD.
 
[quote name='zenintrude']Wow... I cannot disagree more. While The 400 Blows seems like a marginal improvement over the DVD, The Third Man is *drastically* improved. Why? Two words: night scenes. Simply put, Blu-ray handles blacks, and in particular night scenes, much better than DVD.[/QUOTE]

Maybe he's got a crappy TV that doesn't handle blacks well? It takes good equipment on all ends to notice some of the differences that blu-ray makes.
 
[quote name='zenintrude']Wow... I cannot disagree more. While The 400 Blows seems like a marginal improvement over the DVD, The Third Man is *drastically* improved. Why? Two words: night scenes. Simply put, Blu-ray handles blacks, and in particular night scenes, much better than DVD.[/QUOTE]

I own the Third Man Blu-ray, but I've never seen the DVD so you may be right.

Also...I have a very nice TV.
 
This sale is awesome -- picked up the last few titles that I need to have a (nearly) complete current Criterion blu-ray collection this afternoon. The only titles that I don't have now are the Monterrey Pop Festival set and For All Mankind, neither of which I care about in the least (I'm not convinced that either of those titles fit Criterion's qualification of being "important" films). Of course, by the time the next sale comes around, if there aren't too many new titles to add and the deals are just as good, the collector in me will probably be cringing at the almost complete collection to the point that I'll end up buying them anyway. :lol:

Too bad that Gomorrah comes out right after the sale ends, but oh well, there's always next time.

An interesting note -- apparently the member coupons don't even have to actually be applied to the items that they specify. I went into a store today with the $5 DVD coupon, the $5 CD coupon, and the 25% off coupon, and picked up Playtime and The 400 Blows on blu-ray, and the new CD by The Cribs. When I got home, I looked at the receipt and discovered that both $5 coupons had been applied to the blu-rays (one each), and the 25% coupon had been applied to the CD. A little annoying, since it would have cost me about a dollar less if she'd applied them in the correct manner, but still interesting to note that apparently the coupons aren't even tied in to the categories or items they specify.

On another note, I got the first cashier today that I've encountered who probably would have given me an issue over the membership dates for the coupons. He looked them over very carefully, and then gave me some line about how they had to do something manually with the "new member" coupons that they don't with the others (um, bullshit, I've watched other cashiers ring in both the exact same way . . . ). Fortunately, the new round of coupons are out for the time period in which I'd bought my membership, and I had happened to have printed those before going out, so there was no problem. I don't get why a just-over-minimum-wage employee would even care that much whether the coupons were valid for me or not as long as they rang in, but whatever.

I'd really like to get Down By Law and Night on Earth yet, but I'm almost hesitant to buy any standard DVDs on the chance that they get a blu-ray release soon. From a relative popularity standpoint, anyway, I would think that those two titles would be fairly high in the queue.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='arcane93']For All Mankind, neither of which I care about in the least (I'm not convinced that either of those titles fit Criterion's qualification of being "important" films).[/QUOTE]

LMFAO... I'm sorry man, but that's amazing. For All Mankind is *the* most "important" documentary, if not film, ever released by Criterion. It's an amazing single-handed achievement and one of the most dramatic and beautiful films I have ever seen.

And yet you bought Play Time... a movie that's practically a live action cartoon that boils down to "Hur, hur! The modern world sure is a silly, confusing place!" Sorry, man, but you need For All Mankind.

[quote name='arcane93']I'd really like to get Down By Law and Night on Earth yet, but I'm almost hesitant to buy any standard DVDs on the chance that they get a blu-ray release soon. From a relative popularity standpoint, anyway, I would think that those two titles would be fairly high in the queue.[/QUOTE]

Both of these movies are amazing and part of my collection... while I would (of course) enjoy having them on Blu-ray, Night on Earth is one of the most incredible SDVD transfers I have ever seen and I would have to really think long and hard about upgrading it to Blu if the opportunity arises.
 
Eh, to each their own. I'm not all that into either documentaries in general or that subject in particular. That being said, as I said, the completionist in me will almost certainly end up buying it anyway.
 
[quote name='arcane93']The only titles that I don't have now are the Monterrey Pop Festival set and For All Mankind, neither of which I care about in the least (I'm not convinced that either of those titles fit Criterion's qualification of being "important" films). Of course, by the time the next sale comes around, if there aren't too many new titles to add and the deals are just as good, the collector in me will probably be cringing at the almost complete collection to the point that I'll end up buying them anyway. :lol:

[/QUOTE]

Sometime opinions are best to be kept to yourself. For All Mankind is amazing, it may not be your cup of tea but to consider it unimportant just because you didn't like it is foolish.

You're going to buy two movies you don't like because you're a completionist? Cool story bro.
 
I scratch my head about some movies that Criterion adds to their collection. Like The Rock, and Armageddon for instance. Any reason why those made it in?
 
[quote name='Gorge']Sometime opinions are best to be kept to yourself. For All Mankind is amazing, it may not be your cup of tea but to consider it unimportant just because you didn't like it is foolish.[/QUOTE]

Well, my question is this -- what qualifies it, over all of the other documentary films out there, to be a Criterion release? They have so few documentaries in their catalog that making this a Criterion title seems to be putting it in a special place above all of those others. It's not even, for the most part, the original work of the filmmaker, it's a splicing together of NASA footage, and at that it's well known that he mixed footage in "creative" but inaccurate ways. The majority of the other documentaries in their catalog are either related to films and filmmakers in the catalog (i.e. the Bergman documentaries), or they're highly influential films that border on art in themselves (i.e. Night and Fog). I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with this film, or that it's not a good documentary, but rather just that I don't see how it fits in with the criteria set by those other titles to be a Criterion title (especially enough to be one of the first blu-ray releases in the catalog).

[quote name='Gorge']You're going to buy two movies you don't like because you're a completionist? Cool story bro.[/QUOTE]

I actually probably would like the Monterrey Pop Festival set, I just, again, don't see why it qualifies to be a Criterion title.

It just seems to me that these films have made it into the catalog more for the historical significance of the moment that they portray than for their merits as films in and of themselves, and my understanding has always been that merit as a film was the primary qualifier (but then, no accounting for The Rock and Armageddon in that case, as the previous poster points out -- it's not clear what the qualifiers for those could possibly be). But again, as I said, to each their own.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='arcane93']Well, my question is this -- what qualifies it, over all of the other documentary films out there, to be a Criterion release? They have so few documentaries in their catalog that making this a Criterion title seems to be putting it in a special place above all of those others. It's not even, for the most part, the original work of the filmmaker, it's a splicing together of NASA footage, and at that it's well known that he mixed footage in "creative" but inaccurate ways. The majority of the other documentaries in their catalog are either related to films and filmmakers in the catalog (i.e. the Bergman documentaries), or they're highly influential films that border on art in themselves (i.e. Night and Fog). I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with this film, or that it's not a good documentary, but rather just that I don't see how it fits in with the criteria set by those other titles to be a Criterion title (especially enough to be one of the first blu-ray releases in the catalog).[/QUOTE]

There are several reasons why For All Mankind is an amazing achievement, but I will list what I feel are the most important:

- If left to their own devices/opinions, NASA would have never bothered releasing this footage to the general public. They simply felt there was no value in the footage other than from a scientific/engineering standpoint, and that the common man would place no value on that footage, which in your case seems to still be the case I suppose. Still, there are many, many people who find the space program extremely fascinating, and even more than the program itself, the individuals involved in that program who become the stars of For All Mankind.
- You've already paid for it! (That is, if your family was living in the United States in the 1960s.) This is footage that your... for lack of a better word... ancestors paid for though their tax dollars, and don't you feel entitled to the fruits of that investment (especially at the current discounted price?)
- It is absolutely gorgeous to look at... honestly, some of the footage from the moon's surface is jaw-droppingly beautiful. If nothing else, the Criterion edition preserves this rare and important footage for future generations... I know that it made me appreciate even more the bravery (and audacity) of NASA and America in the 1960s.
- The Criterion edition actually identifies the "'creative' but inaccurate" edits that were made in the production of this film, which may be of interest to you. However, the *goal* of the movie was to give the audience a complete Apollo experience, from launch to splash-down, with all the possible hiccups and activities along the way, in an easily digestible 90-minute format. Sure, they could have made a mini-series that was more based in fact and historical account, but that was not the *point* of the piece.
 
Fair enough, those are all good points and I won't argue with any of them. I'm still not convinced that they really qualify it to be part of the Criterion catalog when the Criterion catalog is so light on documentaries overall, but they make sense.

I guess my main thing is that there are so many good documentary films out there (which I recognize even though I'm not, as I said, overall a fan of the genre) that disappear into obscurity and never even get released in a home format. It seems to me that this one would have gotten a significant release anyway, even if Criterion hadn't gotten involved. Why not put the effort into those other films that have less of a chance?

What Criterion should probably do (though I suppose that there's not enough money in it) is to create a separate but equal imprint for documentary films, and release more of them. Since the traits that make a good and worthwhile documentary film are not necessarily the same as those that make a good fictional film, it would make sense to judge them under a different set of qualifications.
 
I will argue that movies like The Rock and Armageddon were significant as major action films of their time. If you notice, Criterion hasn't had a 'pop' movie like those in quite a while (unless you count Benjamin Button). Criterion put those out when the DVD format was still new along with Robocop. Probably good cash cows for them at the time and have since lost the rights to put them out again. Hey, even Criterion's gotta make a buck! They seem to be expanding further into genres that don't fit that 'pop' mould, most likely due to being able to afford so now that they have a long standing reputation and fanbase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top