Criterion Additions

Kinda want to get the postwar Kurosawa Eclipse set but...there's gotta be an enormous Bergman-esque Kurosawa box just around the corner, surely?

Like this one? https://www.criterion.com/boxsets/678-ak-100-25-films-by-akira-kurosawa

Probably not reissuing that any time soon...

I went back to check on stuff that was listed as out of stock online and most of 'em got "restocked"

that kurosawa box is still missing a few things - Ran, Silent Duel, Dersu Ursula (spelling!), Rhapsody in August, Dreams...

(looks like criterion in the us has slightly more rights to things than bfi does in the uk (The Idiot, for instance), but still not everything)

October: Parasite, Claudine, The Gunfighter, Pierrot le Fou, The Hit

I had just been looking for Claudine recently! Lovely news.

That Pierrot le Fou cover is beautiful

Shoulda sold my old CC Pierrot when I had a chance.

Essential Fellini in November: https://www.criterion.com/boxsets/3626-essential-fellini

Learned League Criterion today!

god there are so many filmmakers I'd rather see get that treatment before fellini but I get it, $$$

I know Fellini (and Bergman) are what will hopefully bankroll Kiarostami at some point.

Akerman is the dream

Fellini Forever!

Was thinking about how both Fellini and Bergman feel a bit out of fashion, rarely hear anyone enthuse about them anymore. But I guess they're still huge in the ppl with vast disposable income demographic.

Feels like Bergman falls in and out of fashion every few years. Fellini otoh feels like he's been passe for a long time.

me rolling my eyes whenever I hear yet another interview about Fellini to the effect of "and there was no script, we just made it up!" well NO SHIT, that's exactly what the film looks like.

yet his films credit 14 screenwriters per flick

NOVEMBER: The Irishman; Ghost Dog: The Way of The Samurai; Moonstruck; and Girlfriends.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/08/20/movies/criterion-collection-african-americans.html

You always have the feeling that it's bad on that end, but the hard numbers examined here were not good.
Two things stood out for me: the bit about there being more directors named "Anderson" than African-Americans (sad lol)
And that at one time - the early '90s - they actually did put out more black films, but so many of them didn't make it past laserdisc or DVD.

On that note: https://letterboxd.com/jlalibs/list/1500-films-directed-by-black-american-filmmakers/

Tongues Untied definitely needs to be on Criterion.

Haha Moonstruck is such a weird weird film. Nicholas Cage's iron fist, why why why?

Man I really hate that "interactive" format. They've somehow managed to translate NPR cadence into text. Infuriating

Good piece though

Why do we want Criterion to release all the best, most important, should-be-canonized films? Doesn't that do harm to smaller companies doing excellent work like Milestone, Kino, etc.

— Brian Darr (@HellOnFriscoBay) August 20, 2020

Last pt: The reality that Black performers did pioneering work before many Black directors were allowed to also matters. Claudine is coming in October; Lady Sings the Blues and Sounder ought to follow. Defining canonical work solely by directors can also be a form of exclusion.

— Mark Harris (@MarkHarrisNYC) August 20, 2020

I was going to mention other companies, but I thought the piece did a good job explaining CC’s significance and prestige within the industry.

Harris makes a good point. Auteurism by definition erases so many contributions (no reason not to give visibility to Black directors though)

Criterion is hardly restricted to auteurs, anyway

https://www.criterion.com/films/578-armageddon

Enthusiastic description for that disc.

Apologies if I’m missing the point but how is Michael Bay not an auteur?

that was my point! criterion is MOSTLY restricted to auteurs, i thought!

Got it!

xp It isn't, never has, biggest misconception and someone always brings up Armageddon whenever the Criterion Collection comes up. as the NYT piece points out, they're just one private company with an outsized influence on influencing what enters the cinematic "canon," whether the films are by "auteurs" or not. I don't even know what that means, it's like talking about the "golden age of Hollywood." which one? are all independent filmmakers "auteurs" by definition? it's a useless phrase to categorize film even if it still has use in acknowledging that directors--even within studio constraints--exhibit recurring themes/motifs (is Michael Curtiz an auteur because of his consistent use of shadows and introductory crane/tracking shots? sure). like any business curator it's a largely arbitrary process based on pop culture, personal taste of the owners and their friends (the piece certainly explained the mystery of why every fucking Wes Anderson movie is in the CC).

there is a difference between gatekeeping and curation, and CC has much more of an influence on contemporary film culture than Kino or Arrow or Twilight (rip)

In general I like their approach, because ultimately all movies are equal. Gen X taste bullshit is over, thank god--people can enjoy Moonstruck and The Battle of Algiers without neurosis. all movies are equal

But there are massive holes in all of those labels catalogues, particularly african films and black american filmmaking post-Super Fly

(the first mainstream film shot with an all black crew)

thx flappy bird that's sort of what i wanted to say but couldn't think of the words

Vinegar Syndrome is a boutique label largely devoted to lovable garbage but they've also kinda cornered the market on '70s black cinema (Melvin van Peebles, Rudy Ray Moore, Jamaa Fanaka, etc.).

This particular topic makes me wonder how, for instance, Criterion got the streaming rights for Bill Gunn's films after they've been released on blu-ray by Kino.

Yeah Vinegar Syndrome has put out a ton of great stuff, I was going thru an old DVD comp and was wondering if they'd done any Oscar Williams or Fred Williamson movies

OL I've been wondering the same thing w/r/t rights and what's potentially available on the Channel. I have no idea. they have like half a dozen Fassbinder movies that haven't had a physical release beyond shitty DVD, and tons more obscure stuff with overlap with Kino and others.

the only thing i'm saying wrt criterion being "auteur" driven is that they pick their films by Director and that seems to be their only (wait for it) criterion. Milestone and Kino do the work surrounding restoring films of historical significance, that's not Criterion's thing. And that's fine!

i'm not really interested in quibbling about the distinction between auteur and director.

they don't pick films by director, it's a totally mixed bag. just one example, they put out Destry Rides Again a couple months ago, one of Marlene Dietrich's most famous movies (and the debut of "See What the Boys in the Back Room Will Have")

They used to put "a (director) film" prominently on covers even when the director didn't mean much, but I see the Destry disc doesn't do that.

the piece certainly explained the mystery of why every fucking Wes Anderson movie is in the CC

never thought this was a mystery, assumed the obvious answer was $$$$$, and accepted that every Wes Anderson being in there was the price to pay for Criterion to feature some non-lucrative projects

Anecdotally speaking, people who only own like one Criterion release own an Anderson Criterion release.

Okay, i'll retract my "only" from my earlier statement as there are "cinema gems" or specific collections where they can apparently get the license - godzilla and zatoichi come to mind - but come on flappy: surely it hasn't escaped your attention that criterion's publishing focus is dominated by director driven releases?

The director focus is a strong marketing strategy as much as it is of legitimate importance to understanding the context of the work.

xp Directors, sure--but your point was that the CC is "mostly restricted to auteurs," which isn't true.

Lady Sings the Blues is not good

This line in the NYT story is funny

"If there is a cinematic canon even more highbrow than the Oscars, it’s the Criterion Collection,"

the directors they choose are almost exclusively auteurs! don't know why you wanna die on this hill.

they really aren't, look at anything they put out before 1960