The Ten Most Dubious Films included in the Criterion Collection
I just wrote a snarky little listicle for Vice:
To be released by Criterion is the benchmark of excellence. Their 25-year-old catalog includes indispensable work from masters including Cocteau, Renoir, Maysles, Kubrick, Cronenberg, Godard, Kurosawa, Bergman, Tarkovsky, Hitchcock, Sturges, and, of course, Fellini.Check out the list here.It’s an impressive list of talent, which is why you can imagine my surprise when I arrived at the director responsible for film #40 in their catalog. Michael Bay. That’s right, Michael Bay, the dung beetle of cinematic vapidity, best known for his unparalleled skill at rolling oversized balls of shit into our nation’s cineplexes. If you’re not familiar with his work--is this possible?--Bay is responsible for Bad Boys I & II, Pearl Harbor, and Transformers, not to mention the career of Megan Fox. (She hates him too). Currently, Bay is remaking The Birds, which I’m assuming will be re-imagined to include a bikini-clad Maxim covergirl who blows away blood-sucking zombie pigeons with a grenade launcher.
Comments
I don't actually believe you had the attention span to watch The Man Who Fell To Earth the whole way through
Posted by: tres tragique | October 30, 2009 05:01 PM
"It is a good thing that Criterion's authority is not impeccable."
That's really what's at the heart of all this, isn't it? Authority. Got news for ya, kiddos- when it comes to art and entertainment, there's no such thing. Not you, K. Not you, Brian Reis (as he's the probably the ass behind writing something so juvenile and aggressively insecure as this entry).
You're completely trying to decide artistic merit on how much you personally enjoyed works. What a load of self important horse shit. You're going to have a seizure when I tell you this, but, sorry- your opinion holds no more weight than some anyone else's, including fans of Steven Seagal.
Michael Bay and his whole thing wouldn't exist in the first place if there wasn't such an overwhelming demand for the type of crap he makes. Have you not noticed his sales numbers? So don't blame Michael Bay. Blame the species you're part of for wanting so much of it, and then go kill yourself out of shame by association. Please do.
BUT ALL THAT SAID, it's clear that none of this discussion is what you wanted when you posted this. You wanted to publicly demonstrate your abilities of spewing vitrol, as demonstrated by proudly announcing your review is "snarky." Well, congratulations. You're good at being a douchebag. A condescending, juvenile douchebag who is not anywhere near as smart as you think.
In your eagerness to establish your superiority over others, why don't you actually go do something substantial that proves it? Instead of poo-pooing everyone else?
Posted by: lkj | October 29, 2009 10:41 PM
what are you, fucking retarded? fear and loathing? you put fear and loathing in between benjamin button and the rock?
it's easy to shit on things you don't like. just make sure you don't pretend that your subjective opinion is an objective truth. it ain't. neither is mine.
but you're way off base on this one. putting 'fear and loathing' in the same company as benjamin button, chasing amy, and armageddon is deeply, deeply erroneous.
Posted by: your mom | October 29, 2009 04:40 PM
you were writing for Vice so perhaps a reasonable response is not in order but, here we go.
For one, Criterion is associated with Janus films who were the primary distributor of European art house in America throughout the 50's and 60's, so they have access to all the classics, and of course that list is going to be solid.
But as for getting outside of the established canon of euro film, well that is a trickier proposition. Since in order to get the distribution rights to a film, they have to make deals and conduct business and sometimes that in order to get one film you really want you have to promise to release two more you don't care all that much about. So it goes, they wanted Rushmore, they may have had to cut a deal to release the next couple Anderson films.
Second it is a good thing that Criterion's authority is not impeccable, they could easily become the single storehouse of great film, and replace academic archives entirely for instance, if they were thought of as infallible. Of course they release a generally great product, but its good they have a few clunkers, so we don't forget they are just human, and their list of films is not exhaustive, nor is it a rigid canon.
Finally, though maybe they only need one Bay film, your argument doesn't follow, the genre Bay is arguably the paragon of, is not a small sub-niche, but an overwhelmingly dominant force at the box-office, I may despise his movies, and despise the part of American culture that makes them so popular, but clearly they are of some historical/cultural significance. (Indeed I think they capture the ideology that sent us into the Iraq war pretty damn well, and I would rather remember that existed and learn from it, than completely forget about it.)
So Criterion does have some historical investment in a film like The Rock.
Posted by: k | October 29, 2009 04:33 PM
megan fox sucks balls (literally/figuratively) too though
Posted by: josh | October 29, 2009 02:04 PM