|
Stalker is an essential Criterion, anyone who's missing that has a hole in their collection. I don't know that I'd call Tarkovsky an acquired taste, his style is pretty clear immediately and speaking for myself I fell in love right away within the first 10 minutes of Solaris. Maybe it's a taste that can be acquired, but I didn't have to work very hard myself.
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 13:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 22:51 |
|
|
I've only seen two Tarkovsky films - Ivan's Childhood and Stalker, but both I thought were amazing. They just pull you in. I've been meaning to catch up on more stuff via Filmstruck...
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 15:44
|
|
|
The opening hour of Solaris is great, I love it because it plays a bit like a Lovecraft short story where you're hearing this crazy story second-hand, but if you really focus on what the person is saying the implications are baffling and disturbing. And of course our main character is headed there... It's a perfect sci-fi set-up imo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
Stalker was my first Tarkovsky, which I watched for the first time about 7 years ago. I went into it thinking "science fiction", so my expectations were tugging in a drastically different direction than the movie was going. My opinion overall was positive, but it didn't quite click. Since then I've watched Andrei Rublev, The Mirror, Ivan's Childhood and Solaris. Last month I got the Stalker Criterion and rewatched it. Now that I "get" Tarkovsky and I knew what I was in for, this viewing of Stalker was absolutely mesmerizing and wonderful. It finally clicked, and now I think it's one of my favorite movies ever. I'm anxious to revisit all the others I've seen to see if I have a similar experience. So yeah, at least for me Tarkovsky has been an acquired taste. Spatulater bro! fucked around with this message at 16:10 on Sep 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 16:05
|
|
|
There's not a lot of filmmaker who do what Tarkovsky do, which is why his work may seem so off-putting at first. I had a similar problem with Bresson; I had to watch three of his films before he finally started to resonate with me.Basebf555 posted:I don't know that I'd call Tarkovsky an acquired taste, his style is pretty clear immediately and speaking for myself I fell in love right away within the first 10 minutes of Solaris. Maybe it's a taste that can be acquired, but I didn't have to work very hard myself. In my experience, most people manage just fine with Solaris until they reach the highway scene, at which point they start to zone out. That kind of slow cinema is definitely an acquired taste for many. Samuel Clemens fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Sep 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
I loved Antonioni before I'd ever seen a Tarkovsky film, so I suppose I'm probably just an outlier in that I was already primed to like films with a more meditative pace.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 16:17
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:In my experience, most people manage just fine with Solaris until they reach the highway scene, at which point they start to zone out. That kind of slow cinema is definitely an acquired taste for many.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 16:26
|
|
|
I don't disagree, but you're approaching the film as someone who's already accustomed to Tarkovsky's MO. If you're coming at it with a mindset primarily informed by the storytelling conventions of traditional Hollywood cinema, you may not love the exposition scenes, but they at least seem comfortably familiar (after all, starting your story with a meeting where characters explain the basic setup is sci-fi cliché #1), whereas characters wordlessly driving in a car for minutes on end very much don't. I'd go as far as arguing that its frequent exposition is what makes Solaris such a good introduction to Tarkovsky. It showcases his usual style while remaining relatively accessible in terms of plot and themes. This isn't meant to be an elitist "dumb people just don't get it, man" screed; what I'm trying to drive at is that film-watching is much more of a skill than we generally assume, and like any skill, it's honed by experience. Most of us were trained in a very specific cinematic language from early on, so exposing yourself to a work that doesn't conform to some of our most basic assumptions (like "don't show a completely mundane act, such as driving along a normal road, if it doesn't serve to advance the plot") can seem very jarring.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 17:19
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:I don't disagree, but you're approaching the film as someone who's already accustomed to Tarkovsky's MO. If you're coming at it with a mindset primarily informed by the storytelling conventions of traditional Hollywood cinema, you may not love the exposition scenes, but they at least seem comfortably familiar (after all, starting your story with a meeting where characters explain the basic setup is sci-fi cliché #1), whereas characters wordlessly driving in a car for minutes on end very much don't. I'd go as far as arguing that its frequent exposition is what makes Solaris such a good introduction to Tarkovsky. It showcases his usual style while remaining relatively accessible in terms of plot and themes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 17:26
|
|
|
I thought it was meant to symbolize the time to travel through space, otherwise it'd be just a weird jump cut from earth to landing on the station
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 17:34
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I loved Antonioni before I'd ever seen a Tarkovsky film, so I suppose I'm probably just an outlier in that I was already primed to like films with a more meditative pace. I'm only just recently starting to gel with Antontioni. L'avVentura almost killed me a few years ago. I watched Blow Up last month and enjoyed it slightly more, and I watched L'Ecllise very recently and actually quite liked it. I've never had much trouble with Bresson. His is less a languid pacing style and more a "bring your own emotion" style. If that goddamn donkey doesn't make you cry you have no heart. And no discussion of slow cinema can be complete without mentioning Bela Tarr. Now there's a director whose odd style immediately resonated with me. Sitting through Satantango was a dream.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 18:11
|
|
|
Spatulater bro! posted:I've never had much trouble with Bresson. His is less a languid pacing style and more a "bring your own emotion" style. If that goddamn donkey doesn't make you cry you have no heart. Then call a cardiologist because you'd have to pay me to watch another Bresson film.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 22:34
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Then call a cardiologist because you'd have to pay me to watch another Bresson film. Too bad. Which others have you seen?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 22:58
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:I don't disagree, but you're approaching the film as someone who's already accustomed to Tarkovsky's MO. If you're coming at it with a mindset primarily informed by the storytelling conventions of traditional Hollywood cinema, you may not love the exposition scenes, but they at least seem comfortably familiar (after all, starting your story with a meeting where characters explain the basic setup is sci-fi cliché #1), whereas characters wordlessly driving in a car for minutes on end very much don't. I'd go as far as arguing that its frequent exposition is what makes Solaris such a good introduction to Tarkovsky. It showcases his usual style while remaining relatively accessible in terms of plot and themes. Understanding cinematic language is absolutely a skill, no question about it. Similarly, even something as basic as reading is an incredibly complex adaptation of the plastic brain to symbolic language.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
Spatulater bro! posted:Too bad. Which others have you seen? Balthazar twice, Country Priest, and most recently Pickpocket. He does nothing for me and I have absolutely no idea what other people see in his works. I understand the concepts, but they don’t hit me on any other level, so watching them is like eating shredded paper.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
Oddly enough, while it's usually considered one of his coldest films, L'Argent was the first Bresson that genuinely moved me. The ending is like a punch to the gut.
Samuel Clemens fucked around with this message at 00:47 on Sep 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 00:44
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Balthazar twice, Country Priest, and most recently Pickpocket. He does nothing for me and I have absolutely no idea what other people see in his works. I understand the concepts, but they don’t hit me on any other level, so watching them is like eating shredded paper. I feel similarly (didn't connect with either Balthazar or Pickpocket), but I still recommend A Man Escaped. If you don't like that one...never watch him again, haha.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 00:47
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:Oddly enough, while it's usually considered one of his coldest films, L'Argent was the first Bresson that genuinely moved me. The ending is like a punch to the gut. I'm right there with you, I feel like it's pretty much a perfect movie while the best I'd say about any of the other three I've seen of his is that I didn't hate Pickpocket. I still need to see A Man Escaped and The Devil, Probably though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 04:31
|
|
|
the soderbergh Solaris should be on Criterion too
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 22:52
|
|
|
Does Criterion have any movie and it's remake too?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 23:08
|
|
|
Detective No. 27 posted:Does Criterion have any movie and it's remake too? A Story of Floating Weeds / Floating Weeds
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
Oh neat. I need to watch some Ozu. Plus I just remembered I own Blow Up and Blow Out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
Detective No. 27 posted:Does Criterion have any movie and it's remake too? In addition to the above, they have The Killers, which has the '46, '64, and Tarkovsky versions. Their 12 Angry Men release also includes the original TV version. There's probably another one I can't remember right now, but those are the two I own.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
Good Morning is a remake of I Was Born But... Bottle Rocket includes the original short His Girl Friday includes The Front Page (and if we're considering Blow Out a remake of Blow Up then The Awful Truth / HGF as well) The Lower Depths, Magnificent Obsession, and Berlin Alexanderplatz all include two adaptations
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 02:54
|
|
|
Edit: I should actually read this thread before responding.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 03:38
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:You're a more open viewer than I am. Ordet is one of my favourite films, but every time I rewatch it, it takes me about half an hour before I manage to adjust to its idiosyncratic style. I just really like human faces. If a movie has a cast with a lot of interesting looking people (and I don’t mean beautiful) and it shoots them well I’ll probably like it everything else notwithstanding
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 05:39
|
|
|
Tbh I think the similarities between Blow-Up and Blow Out are kind of overstated. I wouldn't even say they're in the same genre. Like there's probably more of The Conversation in Blow Out's DNA than anything, and even then its hardly a 1:1 copy. Blow Out is also not very good but whatever. Raxivace fucked around with this message at 06:00 on Sep 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 05:57
|
|
|
Detective No. 27 posted:Does Criterion have any movie and it's remake too? The Lower Depths.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 09:06
|
|
|
If Criterion finally put a decent Region A version of Far From Heaven out they'd have two remakes of All That Heaven Allows but not the original
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 09:49
|
|
|
But All That Heaven Allows is in the Collection.  Raxivace posted:Blow Out is also not very good but whatever. Whoa, whoa, whoa!
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 10:43
|
|
|
I Before E posted:If Criterion finally put a decent Region A version of Far From Heaven out they'd have two remakes of All That Heaven Allows but not the original Kino Lorber just announced it from their new Universal deal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 11:56
|
|
|
Raxivace posted:Blow Out is also not very good but whatever. m-m-mods!?!?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 13:21
|
|
|
DeimosRising posted:I just really like human faces. If a movie has a cast with a lot of interesting looking people (and I don’t mean beautiful) and it shoots them well I’ll probably like it everything else notwithstanding You must love Leone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 13:50
|
|
|
Saw Jonah who will be 25 in the year 2000 yesterday and it got me wondering - why is there no Alain Tanner in the collection?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
Raxivace posted:Blow Out is also not very good but whatever. drat straight - it's amazing! I'm really glad they rescued that movie from obscurity, because it is such a great thriller. It takes all the cool tricks from Dressed to Kill, but doesn't run out of steam before the end and aged really well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 17:25
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:But All That Heaven Allows is in the Collection. My mistake then Egbert Souse posted:Kino Lorber just announced it from their new Universal deal. Oh hell yeah
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
Cloks posted:Saw Jonah who will be 25 in the year 2000 yesterday and it got me wondering - why is there no Alain Tanner in the collection? If it's not a rights issue, probably because no one on the Criterion staff is a strong proponent of his work. Even among film buffs in continental Europe, Tanner isn't exactly a household name, and I assume he's even more obscure in North America.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 20:39
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:If it's not a rights issue, probably because no one on the Criterion staff is a strong proponent of his work. Even among film buffs in continental Europe, Tanner isn't exactly a household name, and I assume he's even more obscure in North America. That makes sense. If anyone is in Columbus, there's a month long retrospective of his work at the Wexner Center, after seeing that first film I can't recommend it enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2018 20:50
|
|
|
Couldn't resist the TCM sale... Tootsie Blood Simple The Breakfast Club Midnight Cowboy Bull Durham A lot of it was stuff I was planning to eventually get but I wasn't sure when. I figured the sale was the best opportunity. Watching Bull Durham right now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 01:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 22:51 |
|
|
Is it just me or does the Sisters criterion blu-ray look pretty bad? Some shots look fine, others look terrible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2018 05:23
|
|