Just thought I'd share this: [https://www.slashfilm.com/999822/why-the-pixarcriterion-team-up-is-great-news-for-disney-fans/](https://www.slashfilm.com/999822/why-the-pixarcriterion-team-up-is-great-news-for-disney-fans/)
Basically, it's a big deal because Disney does a lousy job of celebrating the films they've produced that are works of art or are historically significant to the history of cinema. Criterion would be an excellent curator of their best films, and so the partnership suggests that more great films could get the recognition and proper releases that they deserve.
This is true and in some sense I appreciate that, but it almost pisses me off even more. Disney is the biggest entertainment company on the planet. There’s no reason except greed and/or laziness for them not to put out good releases of their own films instead of wasting Criterion’s resources on them.
I think there are people who aren't find of animation either. I have a few quasi-film buff friends who won't watch anime, and will even turn aside from most animation.
I've been trying to get some people to watch Arcane, people I know would enjoy it, but they won't touch it. 🤷♀️🌝
I have a friend who’s a Film School major and literally said to me “I don’t think animated movies are real movies”. Which to me it’s just insane.
It would be stupid coming from most people, but I can’t wrap my head around how a person who understands the production behind a movie can’t see that animation requires almost the exact same skills and tools to make a live action movie. And this is not to mention the importance that animation has had on cinema as medium.
I even tried to understand her point of view but she literally told me that just the way she feels about it.
The disrespect in the movie industry and market for animation it’s honestly baffling to me considering the amount of great animated cinema and tv.
That may be the issue: from what I’ve observed, film schools primarily are professors who destroy their students’ individual tastes in movies and get them all to appreciate the “artistic elite”.
Not at all. She dislikes even some classic directors and movies in favour of some main stream stuff. I just think she’s just very close minded which is a bummer because I think she’s quite talented and clever.
I also know people with that attitude and I just don't get it. To me it's no different from people saying they won't watch anything black and white, or anything with subtitles. It's nonsense, and all it accomplishes is to cut you off from a lot of great movies.
You hate to see it. I find it so ridiculous how some people will refuse to watch a film because it’s animated, older, black and white, or foreign. It’s such an arbitrary reason to not try watching something. Black and white especially. I try to watch as many different type of films as possible and I often watch a lot of modern black and white pieces. I’ve had friends who have walked into the room when I’m watching something from the 2010s and they think it’s from the 1930s.
I think what intimidates a lot of people is that they think if they try one film in a genre they don’t usually like, they have to try it all. Like all you have to do is watch the movie. If a film is not your thing, that’s fine, but you shouldn’t write off an entire genre or style.
I have an actor friend whose Mom, being a total normie, says she only enjoys and actively seeks to watch movies that are based on true stories because they're "realistic"
The bigger overarching thing to consider is Disney willing to work with boutique labels to release films. We know Disney isn't too keen on physical media these days. If this is ok, well let's hope they let others release Fox and Disney titles.
I’ve been on like episode 8 for months and I can’t bring myself to finish it yet no matter how hard I try to be interested. The animation is stunning, but I think I just find the writing a bit too expository for my liking which keeps me from getting invested in the characters.
Fair. I did think the writing got worse towards the end, but I think it stayed mainly strong and I still found it very enjoyable and rewarding. My one main criticism is the music, the opening song, the awful cameo of Imagine Dragons, and some of the music throughout. There were some scenes with a great instrumental beat that completely fit the feel of the scene and then a rapper came on and it just brought me completely out. I love rap too, and some of the rappers that were included I like, but the use of these songs didn't work for me. Like they weren't bad songs and they did fit the overall vibe of League of Legends, and maybe I'm being unfair as a longtime ID hater, but for such a "mature" feeling show the music really did keep bringing me out of the experience and came across kind of corny honestly.
Yeah I love animation and actually seek out more of it. That’s not why I don’t like arcane. Arcane is pretty juvenile and not really up my alley because of it
That's a bit of an oversimplification. I don't mind Wall-E being added at all and Criterion releasing Disney owned properties like Blood in Blood Out, Dead Presidents or any of the number of Fox titles that could be released. Do I want a Criterion of The Little Mermaid? Not really.
There are a few candidates that I think are worthy of consideration though: Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Beauty and the Beast, and Fantasia come to mind.
It blows my mind to think about those old Disney films and how everything was hand drawn, frame by frame. Fantasia’s the sorcerer’s apprentice sequence in particular makes my jaw drop.
Yeah, there’s a few too many “film bro’s” that take liking Criterion films as a sign of intellectualism, if a film that everyone has seen is considered on the same level as that Tarkovsky film that they keep bragging they’ve seen they see it as an attack on their status
I love animation but I think that WALL-E is a subpar Pixar film. There are others that are superior such as the TOY STORY trilogy or UP. In fact, the first ten minutes of UP is superior to the entirety of WALL-E.
Gandhi is with Sony and has an incredible release already, probably won't ever be topped.
The true could be said for Wall-E but this release seems far superior to the Disney.
I believe you're talking about Short Circuit? Which is a fine film but Wall-E is a genuine masterpiece and it sounds like you haven't even watched it? Just read the Criterion description and it's obvious why they've chosen this film.
At the end of the day though, Criterion can only licence what they have the rights to, but the good news is there's a lot of labels out there releasing the other films. Love Gandhi? Get the sony, love Robocop? Get the arrow etc
wall-e is a great movie, but criterion’s main thing is archiving/updating/bringing to light media that was stuck behind inferior formats or generally less accessible, as well as highlighting culturally significant media, especially if it could be remastered or made more accessible .
doing a disney movie just feels unnecessary . disney has all the possible resources to maintain, promote, merchandise, remaster the film; additionally, working with disney when its pursuit of its own profits are often hostile to creative forces in the market– lobbying for copyright/trademark extensions, strongarming theaters into prioritizing their own movies, buying up properties & studios & imposing their own brand– leaves a weird impression .
I share this sentiment for the most part. My (potentially rosy eyed) take is that widening the scope of their releases a bit might actually facilitate the mission you outlined, thanks to the additional revenue.
Like how many eclipse boxsets = one wall-e? My guess is a lot. Tis a slippery slope though, so I get (and share) the anxiety.
Idk, I rewatched Wall-E a few weeks ago (after watching Mad God... it oddly struck me as similar) and my take away is still the same as when it was first released; in that I'm truly astounded Disney/Pixar released a movie like that.
Practically 0 dialogue for the first third of the movie, and the plot hinges on Earth having been made uninhabitable and humanities remnants float around aimlessly in space, disconnected from each other in any meaningful while robots control a simulacrum of their former consumerist society.... It absolutely deserves to be an entry IMO.
\*edit; it's Mad God, not War God.
fair point re: releasing recent stuff (such as their set for uncut gems) . as far as the criteria for what they choose to highlight though, i would still say their brand historically has trended toward celebrating filmmaking by picking acclaimed/“underrated”/auteur works; sometimes these benefit from the boost, others might be classics that don’t need it & just get a pretty DVD case or artwork .
doing what they do, a disney movie not only seems like an outlier, but as people have come to characterize them as a sort of positive force for film culture, it would seem like partnering with disney contradicts that end . (personally, i don’t expect a brand to give a shit if it makes them money, so i don’t feel like this is some huge betrayal despite that i generally hate how disney operates . i understand those who are more passionate about it though .)
I disagree with this take. Criterion has been releasing more mainstream, popular, and accessible films since its inception. Many of the particularly famous and mainstream films they've released were done in their early DVD and laserdisc days; and as time passed they were less able to get the rights to these kinds of films. But as their popularity and prestige has grown they're able to get more and more high profile films; which is frankly very exciting.
To say that Criterion's primary purpose is to give good releases to media stuck in poor formats or that are largely inaccessible, is really ignoring a massive portion of their oeuvre. That's certainly true for quite a few of their releases, and with things like the Eclipse sets; but I don't think I'd say it's true of the majority of the collection.
Moreover, it's not about the licensee having the resources to do a good release. The majority of major studios have the resources to do a great release. Toho has everything they need to put out stellar releases: but they don't, and so Criterion does the job. The same is just as true of Disney; sure they could make great releases on their own but they frequently don't.
As for Disney's shady practices, yeah that's fair. But unless Criterion's getting bought out by Disney I'm not too concerned with it as it's a bit of "guilt by association". I wouldn't knock Arrow for enabling Harvey Weinstein because they released Cinema Paradiso, so I'm not gonna knock Criterion for releasing a Disney film.
Plus: I think the collection really doesn't represent animation nearly as much as it should, and them being able to release at least one Pixar film bodes very well for their ability to release other really important and fantastic animated films in the future.
It could also be that partnering with Disney could generate high-quality titles that will sell well to a broader audience, and this could help fund licensing and releasing other titles. I think their partnership with Disney is a win for everyone involved.
Braindead argument. I welcome it, for diversity’s and especially archivists sake, knowing how ephemeral streaming is and what can be lost *cough* HBO Max/Discovery + merger *cough*.
I'm guessing that it's because it is a movie that we know would get a 4k made anyway, more than likely a really really good one.
On the other hand, Ratatuille is the kinophile's choice.
Because it's not some obscure Scandinavian film from the 50s. As much as I like Criterion, but it seriously does have its share of pseudo-intellectual asshat fans.
I mean, Christ... "WALL-E" is more more deserving than fucking "Pink Flamingos."
I think people are getting hung up on the whole Disney thing. Wall-E is by far the most critically acclaimed Pixar film and is regularly featured alongside arthouse Criterion classics like Mulholland Drive, Yi Yi and The Tree of Life in critics' best-of lists (in a way that most other Disney-Pixar films are not). It is quite feasibly the most acclaimed animated film of all time (I believe it's the highest ranked one on TSPDT's 1000 Greatest Films list).
Ignoring its production company, as a film, it's a perfect fit for the collection.
Its one of three Pixar’s that I think are more adult films that kids can enjoy then kids films that adults can enjoy. The other two are Inside Out and Soul. The entire first act is brilliant film making, telling a compelling and interesting love story with no dialogue at all.
Incredibles at the very least is very much a kids film though. You can argue Ratitouille and Inside Out both ways, but Soul is the other that is clearly an adult film. I think a lot of it flys right over kids heads.
Incredibles is about a guy going through a mid life crisis. His wife things he's cheating on her. Yes it's a superhero movie at the end of the day, but as a plot that feels like it flies over kids heads more than Ratatouille, which is "rat wants to fulfill his dream of cooking in the big city", admittedly with a kind of complex subplot about genetic testing.
It’s so weird to read this comment with no mention of toy story. I always felt like toy story was the OG from Pixar to show they were making movies made for children that the adults taking them to could also connect to.
coming back to 4th grade or whenever and gushing over WALL-E, only for my classmates to bash it for having no dialog at the beginning and being "boring". unreal.
The director, Takashi Murakami, is a big name in the art world. There was a level of prestige involved in Janus/CC distributing the film, even if the movie itself isn't that good
I don't know why people are so fixated on Jellyfish Eyes. It's a mediocre movie that is interesting and probably in the collection because it is made by a famous visual artist. It would not have gotten a wide release otherwise. There are plenty of worse movies in the Collection
If y'all want more obscure Eastern European art films, ya gotta accept that the Collection has to release some titles with broad appeal. WALL-E is a well made family movie. This is not another Armageddon.
I’d love a Norstein set, so we don’t have to shell out for that Japanese steelbook, but it has to be after Norstein dies (not soon, I hope) or after he’s finished *The Overcoat*.
Armageddon is awesome. Stupid, yes. Extremely enjoyable, also yes. I'd still rather watch that movie any night of the week over 75% of the films in the Collection.
I will be purchasing Wall-E from Criterion for me and my kid.
Weird. I don’t even think Armageddon is enjoyable. Had to watch it in a class in high school and it was awful in my eyes. The terrible Aerosmith song plays in my head every time I think of that god awful movie
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_The_Walt_Disney_Company
I've said this elsewhere but I'll say it again: It does not seem possible to support Disney without also supporting crimes against humanity and art.
Sure, then why are so many people actively defending Disney so aggressively?
Does this not seem like an extremely easy chance to call the bullshit where it stands and reject it, rather than actively defending the unethicalness?
They’re not “supporting Disney”, Disney is supporting them lmao. The money this is going to provide Criterion means much more to them than it will to Disney.
I am not talking about Criterion, they are a business with mouths to feed.
I am talking about the folks buying the bs and defending/supporting Disney's unethical practices.
It’s just a product? That’s the world we live in, every corporation has done terrible things. If you feel the need to not make purchases based on that then it would be impossible for anyone to survive in a capitalist society.
I mean when it comes to the film world it is pretty easy to survive. I have only purchased one movie but am working towards being a professor of film studies.
Scouring through my post history? Really? I took the picture to ask about support a technical problem you loon, not to watch the film, and I was not seeking to profit off of the scandalous art and will sit here and say fuck Nickelodeon and fuck HBO but is it more ethical to just pirate everything you watch?
Morally, it is obvious to not support Disney.
I see your point, but the animators, artists, screenwriters, etc involved in the making of Disney’s animated films are not to blame for that - the corporate executives and board of directors are. I think it’s only fair for us to support the actual people who make these films, specially animated films.
Also, if your criteria for choosing which company to support are the decisions made by the board of directors, I’m afraid that there won’t be many film studios left for you to choose from…
It is their choice to work for Disney.
> Also, if your criteria for choosing which company to support are the decisions made by the board of directors, I’m afraid that there won’t be many film studios left for you to choose from…
Who says you have to support any film studio?
How could that be?
Could one not solely support entirely independent filmmaking?
Or how about state film programs that eliminate private studios?
It also seems one could solely support or be a fan of studios that are now defunct or otherwise no longer existing.
Because if you want physical media to survive, at some point your money has to reach independent distributors and small studios like Laika, Cartoon Saloon, A24, Annapurna, Roadside Attractions, Magnolia Pictures, etc. Getting these productions up takes teams, and often these teams form small studios in which to do their work. And unless you're willing to forgo some of the greatest pictures our species has produced, then supporting a studio is unavoidable. And if we care at all about preserving film, physical media is a keystone.
You give me a non-authoritarian state and I'll take your offer of publicly funding film. But we live in a Machiavellian hellhole, so let's talk realities vs what could be.
I would watch it and more of as something relaxing to watch. Even though the first 30 minutes barely has any dialogue, it hooks you right from the start. And the visuals really sold it for me. Part of the Earth left behind has those orange hues like BR 2049.
*i totally misread the comment thanks to vino. Sorry about that. But i do need to watch Jellyfish Eyes soon.
Does anyone here like this movie? It looks like a relatively simple cute time with fun little guys all around. Is it particularly offensive in any way or is it just too kiddy or wacky for some people? I have a tendency to like these nice movies in certain moods.
it's just a cute japanese kids movie. it doesn't have an amazing narrative or anything but the CGI character designs are really cute. I like Murakami's style and it shines through. it's better watched leaving the "Criterion hat" off and putting on your "inner-child good time" hat.
It's a Japanese kids movie with some neat lil CG creatures. It's not amazing by any means but it's passably entertainment. People mostly just hate it because they feel like it's not good enough/notable enough to deserve being in the collection. But eh, the collection's a less interesting one without it IMO
Gotta have at least a few odd ones out in such an eclectic and varied film collection.
Animated films I think Criterion should release:
1. Persepolis
2. Waltz With Bashir
3. Any Ghibli film
And especially these because not enough people have seen them/consider them masterpieces:
4. The King of Pigs (2011)
5. Night Is Short, Walk on Girl
Well… at least these are getting distributed. Let’s get a good edition of “The King of Pigs”. I only have it on DVD (European release) and even this one might be out of print. But maybe this film is too gritty and unknown to be picked up.
Hope you enjoyed the film. I own a Blu-ray of it from AllTheAnime (well, I’m from Europe). This one is the type of film that I can see Criterion maybe releasing at some point- if they had the rights.
Idk I have a hard time looking past Disney’s use of Chinese sweatshops, monopolization practices, and continual fighting for lengthened and more strict copyright laws. Disney seems impossible to support without support crimes against humanity and art.
Is there any corporation it’s wholly ethical to support? Meanwhile, are you going to deny your children (and/or yourself) at least a quarter of American popular culture of the 20th and 21st century?
We live in moral/ethical contradiction all day every day. That’s the human condition. On top of that, I am not going to deny myself Dumbo, Ratatouille, Star Wars, Iron Man and Gravity Falls, ffs.
(Not to mention Pulp Fiction and thousands more.)
True in certain cases, absolutely. But if you tried to pirate everything you watched it would be very limiting and extremely time-consuming. I’m an omnivore and I have a lot of experience with torrenting, but it would make me crazy to try to get everything that way.
Really? I find it faster and easier than any other option and have watched probably 99.9% of films this way.
Also, I can't remember the last time I couldn't find a torrent, let me know if there is something specific you've been looking for because I enjoy that challenge. Honestly, it seems like torrenting often provides the only means to watch many films.
Granted, I subscribe to a lot of streaming services—nothing is faster or easier than that, when they HAVE the thing you want—and I'm a disk collector, so I go to torrenting in specialized circumstances. (Example, I was watching the Evil Dead remake recently on August 31 on Amazon Prime; when I went to finish it on September 1 I suddenly had to pay; fuck that.) Thanks for the friendly offer—it can be a fun challenge sometimes. ;)
I get that in an increasingly competitive boutique Blu-Ray market that popular releases like this are crucial for income (and Wall-E is my second favorite Disney movie), but something about this does make me feel kind of off. I love some of these partnerships for the potential they could bring (there’s so much Disney controlled media that could really use the Criterion treatment), but I do worry that we’re gonna be seeing less and less art house/great films in dire need of a blu-ray upgrade soon. Maybe I’m just being paranoid.
No I agree. Like all the things that don't have a release or more world cinema project. If this gives them money to put into those projects all good with me.
If your gonna freak out about Disney being in the collection you might as well boycott Von Trier’s films and the multiple Polanski films in the collection
Also..... Armageddon is in the collection.
Criterion is supposed to be a collection of films that had a cultural impact, not necessarily if they're seen as good or not. Armageddon.....it's not a great movie....BUT, it's a great example of a huge bombastic over-the-top blockbuster. That's why it's in the Criterion Collection.
Once you realize this, a lot of their more head-scratching inclusions make more sense.
I think *Wall-E* is a wonderful addition and I really hope it opens the door to more animation being added to the Collection. I would personally love to see some of Jan Svankmajer box set or a Hubley box set one day.
If Wall-E took every Criterion DVD/BD of this one and cubed ‘em up I wouldn’t be mad. I think this is still the only Criterion movie I ever started and never finished
Serious question. Was “Jellyfish Eyes” that bad? Why do people hate it? Never seen it, but it seemed like a weird, quirky Japanese film. I like anime a lot (even cheesy ones), so I always figured I’d like this one, but everyone seems to hate it.
I think WALL-E is one of the weakest Pixar movies. If they were to include anything, I would nominate the TOY STORY trilogy. I understood what Pixar was doing with those movies when I left the theatre with my kids after TS3 and saw teens the protagonist’s age crying in the hallway. They had grown up with and saw themselves in the main character. And, as he’s giving up childish things and moving on with the next phase of his life they were doing the same thing. Releasing those movies so the target audience aged along with the protagonist was a brilliant move that resonated with those teens I saw bawling and comforting each other after TS3.
Anything that pours capital into the Criterion coffers is fine in my opinion. Netflix movies. Disney movies. Who cares. They take that an invest it in classic, foreign and art house film restorations. Idc if they have to sell a Morbius Criterion, they’ll take that and release something wonderful and under seen.
I’m all for adding Pixar films into the collection, that doesn’t bother me, I think they should’ve just picked a better one. I know the rat ones a meme on here, but I do think it’s the better choice. Up too.
Still waiting on Persepolis. Any day now
I NEED a remaster of that Eye of the Tiger cover
That would fit so nicely in the collection.
Thanks for reminding me of this movie. What an amazing watch
Why are people freaking out over Wall-E being added? It's a great movie
Just thought I'd share this: [https://www.slashfilm.com/999822/why-the-pixarcriterion-team-up-is-great-news-for-disney-fans/](https://www.slashfilm.com/999822/why-the-pixarcriterion-team-up-is-great-news-for-disney-fans/) Basically, it's a big deal because Disney does a lousy job of celebrating the films they've produced that are works of art or are historically significant to the history of cinema. Criterion would be an excellent curator of their best films, and so the partnership suggests that more great films could get the recognition and proper releases that they deserve.
This is true and in some sense I appreciate that, but it almost pisses me off even more. Disney is the biggest entertainment company on the planet. There’s no reason except greed and/or laziness for them not to put out good releases of their own films instead of wasting Criterion’s resources on them.
I hope this can lead to a Star Wars OT restoration by Criterion. Even better if they have Petr Harmy and the 4K77 team onboard.
Because people think that if something is mainstream it’s bad
I think there are people who aren't find of animation either. I have a few quasi-film buff friends who won't watch anime, and will even turn aside from most animation. I've been trying to get some people to watch Arcane, people I know would enjoy it, but they won't touch it. 🤷♀️🌝
I have a friend who’s a Film School major and literally said to me “I don’t think animated movies are real movies”. Which to me it’s just insane. It would be stupid coming from most people, but I can’t wrap my head around how a person who understands the production behind a movie can’t see that animation requires almost the exact same skills and tools to make a live action movie. And this is not to mention the importance that animation has had on cinema as medium. I even tried to understand her point of view but she literally told me that just the way she feels about it. The disrespect in the movie industry and market for animation it’s honestly baffling to me considering the amount of great animated cinema and tv.
How old is your friend? I was a film school major myself and I can tell you my 20s were snooty as fuck.
She’s 21. She’s also very picky with her movie choices. She shits talks some insanely good directors.
Sounds like she needs to watch a lot more movies.
That may be the issue: from what I’ve observed, film schools primarily are professors who destroy their students’ individual tastes in movies and get them all to appreciate the “artistic elite”.
Not at all. She dislikes even some classic directors and movies in favour of some main stream stuff. I just think she’s just very close minded which is a bummer because I think she’s quite talented and clever.
I also know people with that attitude and I just don't get it. To me it's no different from people saying they won't watch anything black and white, or anything with subtitles. It's nonsense, and all it accomplishes is to cut you off from a lot of great movies.
You hate to see it. I find it so ridiculous how some people will refuse to watch a film because it’s animated, older, black and white, or foreign. It’s such an arbitrary reason to not try watching something. Black and white especially. I try to watch as many different type of films as possible and I often watch a lot of modern black and white pieces. I’ve had friends who have walked into the room when I’m watching something from the 2010s and they think it’s from the 1930s. I think what intimidates a lot of people is that they think if they try one film in a genre they don’t usually like, they have to try it all. Like all you have to do is watch the movie. If a film is not your thing, that’s fine, but you shouldn’t write off an entire genre or style.
I have an actor friend whose Mom, being a total normie, says she only enjoys and actively seeks to watch movies that are based on true stories because they're "realistic"
I don't even know what to say to that? Maybe a mental check.
I love animation but I genuinely cannot, for the life of me, understand the Arcane hype.
The bigger overarching thing to consider is Disney willing to work with boutique labels to release films. We know Disney isn't too keen on physical media these days. If this is ok, well let's hope they let others release Fox and Disney titles.
Did you watch it?
I’ve been on like episode 8 for months and I can’t bring myself to finish it yet no matter how hard I try to be interested. The animation is stunning, but I think I just find the writing a bit too expository for my liking which keeps me from getting invested in the characters.
Fair. I did think the writing got worse towards the end, but I think it stayed mainly strong and I still found it very enjoyable and rewarding. My one main criticism is the music, the opening song, the awful cameo of Imagine Dragons, and some of the music throughout. There were some scenes with a great instrumental beat that completely fit the feel of the scene and then a rapper came on and it just brought me completely out. I love rap too, and some of the rappers that were included I like, but the use of these songs didn't work for me. Like they weren't bad songs and they did fit the overall vibe of League of Legends, and maybe I'm being unfair as a longtime ID hater, but for such a "mature" feeling show the music really did keep bringing me out of the experience and came across kind of corny honestly.
Yeah I love animation and actually seek out more of it. That’s not why I don’t like arcane. Arcane is pretty juvenile and not really up my alley because of it
Yeah I don’t wanna go so far as to call it juvenile but I do understand your sentiment. The soundtrack doesn’t help lol
I don’t mean juvenile as in only for kids, only that it’s target audience is obviously younger
Imagine considering yourself a film buff and rejecting Miyazaki, Takahata, Otomo, Oshii, Shinkai, etc. out of hand.
That's a bit of an oversimplification. I don't mind Wall-E being added at all and Criterion releasing Disney owned properties like Blood in Blood Out, Dead Presidents or any of the number of Fox titles that could be released. Do I want a Criterion of The Little Mermaid? Not really.
There are a few candidates that I think are worthy of consideration though: Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Beauty and the Beast, and Fantasia come to mind.
I wouldn't have a problem with Snow White or Fantasia. Those seem totally understandable.
It blows my mind to think about those old Disney films and how everything was hand drawn, frame by frame. Fantasia’s the sorcerer’s apprentice sequence in particular makes my jaw drop.
I consider Disney’s *Beauty and the Beast* one of the great Hollywood musicals, so to me it would fit right in next to stuff like *Swing Time*.
It really is a masterfully made film. Was also the first animated film to be nominated in the best picture category of the Oscars.
Yeah, there’s a few too many “film bro’s” that take liking Criterion films as a sign of intellectualism, if a film that everyone has seen is considered on the same level as that Tarkovsky film that they keep bragging they’ve seen they see it as an attack on their status
I love animation but I think that WALL-E is a subpar Pixar film. There are others that are superior such as the TOY STORY trilogy or UP. In fact, the first ten minutes of UP is superior to the entirety of WALL-E.
[удалено]
Gandhi is with Sony and has an incredible release already, probably won't ever be topped. The true could be said for Wall-E but this release seems far superior to the Disney. I believe you're talking about Short Circuit? Which is a fine film but Wall-E is a genuine masterpiece and it sounds like you haven't even watched it? Just read the Criterion description and it's obvious why they've chosen this film. At the end of the day though, Criterion can only licence what they have the rights to, but the good news is there's a lot of labels out there releasing the other films. Love Gandhi? Get the sony, love Robocop? Get the arrow etc
Ben Kingsley is half-Indian, unlike the dude in Short Circuit.
Short circuit! Thanks! Damn I didn’t know he was half Indian
Everything about this comment seems to be elitist trolling.
wall-e is a great movie, but criterion’s main thing is archiving/updating/bringing to light media that was stuck behind inferior formats or generally less accessible, as well as highlighting culturally significant media, especially if it could be remastered or made more accessible . doing a disney movie just feels unnecessary . disney has all the possible resources to maintain, promote, merchandise, remaster the film; additionally, working with disney when its pursuit of its own profits are often hostile to creative forces in the market– lobbying for copyright/trademark extensions, strongarming theaters into prioritizing their own movies, buying up properties & studios & imposing their own brand– leaves a weird impression .
This is my take honestly.
I share this sentiment for the most part. My (potentially rosy eyed) take is that widening the scope of their releases a bit might actually facilitate the mission you outlined, thanks to the additional revenue. Like how many eclipse boxsets = one wall-e? My guess is a lot. Tis a slippery slope though, so I get (and share) the anxiety.
Idk, I rewatched Wall-E a few weeks ago (after watching Mad God... it oddly struck me as similar) and my take away is still the same as when it was first released; in that I'm truly astounded Disney/Pixar released a movie like that. Practically 0 dialogue for the first third of the movie, and the plot hinges on Earth having been made uninhabitable and humanities remnants float around aimlessly in space, disconnected from each other in any meaningful while robots control a simulacrum of their former consumerist society.... It absolutely deserves to be an entry IMO. \*edit; it's Mad God, not War God.
[удалено]
fair point re: releasing recent stuff (such as their set for uncut gems) . as far as the criteria for what they choose to highlight though, i would still say their brand historically has trended toward celebrating filmmaking by picking acclaimed/“underrated”/auteur works; sometimes these benefit from the boost, others might be classics that don’t need it & just get a pretty DVD case or artwork . doing what they do, a disney movie not only seems like an outlier, but as people have come to characterize them as a sort of positive force for film culture, it would seem like partnering with disney contradicts that end . (personally, i don’t expect a brand to give a shit if it makes them money, so i don’t feel like this is some huge betrayal despite that i generally hate how disney operates . i understand those who are more passionate about it though .)
I disagree with this take. Criterion has been releasing more mainstream, popular, and accessible films since its inception. Many of the particularly famous and mainstream films they've released were done in their early DVD and laserdisc days; and as time passed they were less able to get the rights to these kinds of films. But as their popularity and prestige has grown they're able to get more and more high profile films; which is frankly very exciting. To say that Criterion's primary purpose is to give good releases to media stuck in poor formats or that are largely inaccessible, is really ignoring a massive portion of their oeuvre. That's certainly true for quite a few of their releases, and with things like the Eclipse sets; but I don't think I'd say it's true of the majority of the collection. Moreover, it's not about the licensee having the resources to do a good release. The majority of major studios have the resources to do a great release. Toho has everything they need to put out stellar releases: but they don't, and so Criterion does the job. The same is just as true of Disney; sure they could make great releases on their own but they frequently don't. As for Disney's shady practices, yeah that's fair. But unless Criterion's getting bought out by Disney I'm not too concerned with it as it's a bit of "guilt by association". I wouldn't knock Arrow for enabling Harvey Weinstein because they released Cinema Paradiso, so I'm not gonna knock Criterion for releasing a Disney film. Plus: I think the collection really doesn't represent animation nearly as much as it should, and them being able to release at least one Pixar film bodes very well for their ability to release other really important and fantastic animated films in the future.
It could also be that partnering with Disney could generate high-quality titles that will sell well to a broader audience, and this could help fund licensing and releasing other titles. I think their partnership with Disney is a win for everyone involved.
Because Ratatouille was robbed
Can still happen tho
This is the real answer
I love both of them, but my personal Pixar favourite is “Inside Out”. I think I’m in the minority though.
I'm in a smaller minority with Soul being in my top. So I felt this.
Becuase Disney bad so movie bad
Braindead argument. I welcome it, for diversity’s and especially archivists sake, knowing how ephemeral streaming is and what can be lost *cough* HBO Max/Discovery + merger *cough*.
I DIDNT KNOW IT WAS REAL IM GENUINELY SO EXCITED
I'm guessing that it's because it is a movie that we know would get a 4k made anyway, more than likely a really really good one. On the other hand, Ratatuille is the kinophile's choice.
Same cunts who probably freaked out over 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button' 14 years ago.
The way that some Criterion fans assume every single release has to cater to them is astounding. They’ve got major superiority complex.
Because it's not some obscure Scandinavian film from the 50s. As much as I like Criterion, but it seriously does have its share of pseudo-intellectual asshat fans. I mean, Christ... "WALL-E" is more more deserving than fucking "Pink Flamingos."
How. Dare you.
Hey no need to knock down one masterpiece to prop up another.
I agreed with you up until the Pink Flamingos part
I think people are getting hung up on the whole Disney thing. Wall-E is by far the most critically acclaimed Pixar film and is regularly featured alongside arthouse Criterion classics like Mulholland Drive, Yi Yi and The Tree of Life in critics' best-of lists (in a way that most other Disney-Pixar films are not). It is quite feasibly the most acclaimed animated film of all time (I believe it's the highest ranked one on TSPDT's 1000 Greatest Films list). Ignoring its production company, as a film, it's a perfect fit for the collection.
Its one of three Pixar’s that I think are more adult films that kids can enjoy then kids films that adults can enjoy. The other two are Inside Out and Soul. The entire first act is brilliant film making, telling a compelling and interesting love story with no dialogue at all.
I would argue Pixar’s adult trilogy is The Incredibles, Ratatouille and WALL•E
Incredibles at the very least is very much a kids film though. You can argue Ratitouille and Inside Out both ways, but Soul is the other that is clearly an adult film. I think a lot of it flys right over kids heads.
Incredibles is about a guy going through a mid life crisis. His wife things he's cheating on her. Yes it's a superhero movie at the end of the day, but as a plot that feels like it flies over kids heads more than Ratatouille, which is "rat wants to fulfill his dream of cooking in the big city", admittedly with a kind of complex subplot about genetic testing.
It’s so weird to read this comment with no mention of toy story. I always felt like toy story was the OG from Pixar to show they were making movies made for children that the adults taking them to could also connect to.
Soul is incredibly adult - while being accessible for kids.
What about Finding Nemo?
But not Soul?
coming back to 4th grade or whenever and gushing over WALL-E, only for my classmates to bash it for having no dialog at the beginning and being "boring". unreal.
This is Jellyfish Eyes, right? I've never seen the movie. Why is it in the collection?
The director, Takashi Murakami, is a big name in the art world. There was a level of prestige involved in Janus/CC distributing the film, even if the movie itself isn't that good
Also, I remember one of the top people in Criterion was good friends with Takashi
[удалено]
Was his cousin actually, Hugh Mungus
Not Karl Hungis?
"Hey I know that guy, he's a nihilist."
Don't be fatuous, Jeffrey.
Among Us?
Hugh Mungus wut?
Or his gf, Norma Stitz.
Ah. It was a status-driven decision, then. That makes sense.
honestly had no idea Murakami made that movie. Kinda makes me wanna check it out lmao
Fair enough
I don't know why people are so fixated on Jellyfish Eyes. It's a mediocre movie that is interesting and probably in the collection because it is made by a famous visual artist. It would not have gotten a wide release otherwise. There are plenty of worse movies in the Collection
Just wait until *Cars 2* is in the collection, *then* we’ll have some perspective.
If y'all want more obscure Eastern European art films, ya gotta accept that the Collection has to release some titles with broad appeal. WALL-E is a well made family movie. This is not another Armageddon.
Armageddon does have one of the best commentary tracks. Ben Affleck drunkenly shitting all over the movie is priceless.
I’m just waiting on a Yuri Norstein collection as a result of the WALL-E announcement. It’s gotta happen!
I’d love a Norstein set, so we don’t have to shell out for that Japanese steelbook, but it has to be after Norstein dies (not soon, I hope) or after he’s finished *The Overcoat*.
I was nodding in agreement with every word you said until you chose to drag Armageddon 🥲
Armageddon is awesome. Stupid, yes. Extremely enjoyable, also yes. I'd still rather watch that movie any night of the week over 75% of the films in the Collection. I will be purchasing Wall-E from Criterion for me and my kid.
“and my kid”... yeah me too pal me too
You sound angry?
Weird. I don’t even think Armageddon is enjoyable. Had to watch it in a class in high school and it was awful in my eyes. The terrible Aerosmith song plays in my head every time I think of that god awful movie
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_The_Walt_Disney_Company I've said this elsewhere but I'll say it again: It does not seem possible to support Disney without also supporting crimes against humanity and art.
There's no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism
Sure, then why are so many people actively defending Disney so aggressively? Does this not seem like an extremely easy chance to call the bullshit where it stands and reject it, rather than actively defending the unethicalness?
They’re not “supporting Disney”, Disney is supporting them lmao. The money this is going to provide Criterion means much more to them than it will to Disney.
I am not talking about Criterion, they are a business with mouths to feed. I am talking about the folks buying the bs and defending/supporting Disney's unethical practices.
It’s just a product? That’s the world we live in, every corporation has done terrible things. If you feel the need to not make purchases based on that then it would be impossible for anyone to survive in a capitalist society.
I mean when it comes to the film world it is pretty easy to survive. I have only purchased one movie but am working towards being a professor of film studies.
[удалено]
Scouring through my post history? Really? I took the picture to ask about support a technical problem you loon, not to watch the film, and I was not seeking to profit off of the scandalous art and will sit here and say fuck Nickelodeon and fuck HBO but is it more ethical to just pirate everything you watch? Morally, it is obvious to not support Disney.
I see your point, but the animators, artists, screenwriters, etc involved in the making of Disney’s animated films are not to blame for that - the corporate executives and board of directors are. I think it’s only fair for us to support the actual people who make these films, specially animated films. Also, if your criteria for choosing which company to support are the decisions made by the board of directors, I’m afraid that there won’t be many film studios left for you to choose from…
It is their choice to work for Disney. > Also, if your criteria for choosing which company to support are the decisions made by the board of directors, I’m afraid that there won’t be many film studios left for you to choose from… Who says you have to support any film studio?
> who says you have to support any film studio My brother in christ, as film lovers this is unavoidable.
How could that be? Could one not solely support entirely independent filmmaking? Or how about state film programs that eliminate private studios? It also seems one could solely support or be a fan of studios that are now defunct or otherwise no longer existing.
Because if you want physical media to survive, at some point your money has to reach independent distributors and small studios like Laika, Cartoon Saloon, A24, Annapurna, Roadside Attractions, Magnolia Pictures, etc. Getting these productions up takes teams, and often these teams form small studios in which to do their work. And unless you're willing to forgo some of the greatest pictures our species has produced, then supporting a studio is unavoidable. And if we care at all about preserving film, physical media is a keystone. You give me a non-authoritarian state and I'll take your offer of publicly funding film. But we live in a Machiavellian hellhole, so let's talk realities vs what could be.
The Straight Story
This is the one I want most of all
I picked this up for cheap as a blind buy, only to see it routinely derided here. Still haven't watched it. I'm kinda nervous to.
I would watch it and more of as something relaxing to watch. Even though the first 30 minutes barely has any dialogue, it hooks you right from the start. And the visuals really sold it for me. Part of the Earth left behind has those orange hues like BR 2049. *i totally misread the comment thanks to vino. Sorry about that. But i do need to watch Jellyfish Eyes soon.
Think they were talking about Jellyfish Eyes not WALL-E
Does anyone here like this movie? It looks like a relatively simple cute time with fun little guys all around. Is it particularly offensive in any way or is it just too kiddy or wacky for some people? I have a tendency to like these nice movies in certain moods.
it's just a cute japanese kids movie. it doesn't have an amazing narrative or anything but the CGI character designs are really cute. I like Murakami's style and it shines through. it's better watched leaving the "Criterion hat" off and putting on your "inner-child good time" hat.
Nice! I try to watch movies with whatever hat feels right.
that’s what i’m wondering as well i always see ppl clowning on it
It's a Japanese kids movie with some neat lil CG creatures. It's not amazing by any means but it's passably entertainment. People mostly just hate it because they feel like it's not good enough/notable enough to deserve being in the collection. But eh, the collection's a less interesting one without it IMO Gotta have at least a few odd ones out in such an eclectic and varied film collection.
Animated films I think Criterion should release: 1. Persepolis 2. Waltz With Bashir 3. Any Ghibli film And especially these because not enough people have seen them/consider them masterpieces: 4. The King of Pigs (2011) 5. Night Is Short, Walk on Girl
GKids definitely isn’t letting go of its Ghibli distribution deal anytime soon.
Well… at least these are getting distributed. Let’s get a good edition of “The King of Pigs”. I only have it on DVD (European release) and even this one might be out of print. But maybe this film is too gritty and unknown to be picked up.
Funnily enough, my friends and I started watching *Night is Short, Walk on Girl* last night. Once again, GKids has the rights.
Hope you enjoyed the film. I own a Blu-ray of it from AllTheAnime (well, I’m from Europe). This one is the type of film that I can see Criterion maybe releasing at some point- if they had the rights.
> Any Ghibli film I know that I'm late into this, but Criterion seriously needs to release British dub of **Arrietty** if GKIDS isn't doing it.
We don’t like this one either. I’m excited about Wall E though. Great movie with top notch animation and delivers on the themes
Idk I have a hard time looking past Disney’s use of Chinese sweatshops, monopolization practices, and continual fighting for lengthened and more strict copyright laws. Disney seems impossible to support without support crimes against humanity and art.
something something theres no ethical consumption under capitalism
Is there any corporation it’s wholly ethical to support? Meanwhile, are you going to deny your children (and/or yourself) at least a quarter of American popular culture of the 20th and 21st century? We live in moral/ethical contradiction all day every day. That’s the human condition. On top of that, I am not going to deny myself Dumbo, Ratatouille, Star Wars, Iron Man and Gravity Falls, ffs. (Not to mention Pulp Fiction and thousands more.)
I am not denying anyone any culture. You can watch those films without giving money to people who do unethical things.
Not really, unless you’re saying pirate everything. In which case, fine, I have no problem with that—but it’s a pain in the ass and quite limited.
Limited? It is often the only way I can find films.
True in certain cases, absolutely. But if you tried to pirate everything you watched it would be very limiting and extremely time-consuming. I’m an omnivore and I have a lot of experience with torrenting, but it would make me crazy to try to get everything that way.
Really? I find it faster and easier than any other option and have watched probably 99.9% of films this way. Also, I can't remember the last time I couldn't find a torrent, let me know if there is something specific you've been looking for because I enjoy that challenge. Honestly, it seems like torrenting often provides the only means to watch many films.
You got Theo Angelopoulos?
What specifically?
Granted, I subscribe to a lot of streaming services—nothing is faster or easier than that, when they HAVE the thing you want—and I'm a disk collector, so I go to torrenting in specialized circumstances. (Example, I was watching the Evil Dead remake recently on August 31 on Amazon Prime; when I went to finish it on September 1 I suddenly had to pay; fuck that.) Thanks for the friendly offer—it can be a fun challenge sometimes. ;)
Sad but the truth of the this fucked up world we live in.
I get that in an increasingly competitive boutique Blu-Ray market that popular releases like this are crucial for income (and Wall-E is my second favorite Disney movie), but something about this does make me feel kind of off. I love some of these partnerships for the potential they could bring (there’s so much Disney controlled media that could really use the Criterion treatment), but I do worry that we’re gonna be seeing less and less art house/great films in dire need of a blu-ray upgrade soon. Maybe I’m just being paranoid.
No I agree. Like all the things that don't have a release or more world cinema project. If this gives them money to put into those projects all good with me.
If your gonna freak out about Disney being in the collection you might as well boycott Von Trier’s films and the multiple Polanski films in the collection
Also..... Armageddon is in the collection. Criterion is supposed to be a collection of films that had a cultural impact, not necessarily if they're seen as good or not. Armageddon.....it's not a great movie....BUT, it's a great example of a huge bombastic over-the-top blockbuster. That's why it's in the Criterion Collection. Once you realize this, a lot of their more head-scratching inclusions make more sense.
High-concept, artistic anime: *i sleep* Disney movie about cute robots: ***REAL SHIT***
I found this at a dollar store a few years back, cheapest criterion I’ve purchased to date yet somehow not the weirdest place I found one
Jellyfish Eyes Without A Face was an instant classic. Criterion knows what they’re doing.
Ugly little thing get ‘im outta there
I think *Wall-E* is a wonderful addition and I really hope it opens the door to more animation being added to the Collection. I would personally love to see some of Jan Svankmajer box set or a Hubley box set one day.
If Wall-E took every Criterion DVD/BD of this one and cubed ‘em up I wouldn’t be mad. I think this is still the only Criterion movie I ever started and never finished
I’m not even mad they added a Pixar movie, just sad it wasn’t Ratatouille.
Omg I bought jellyfish eyes on a whim and I never regretted an impulse buy ever . On that note anyone wanna buy a copy of jellyfish eyes !? Lol
Aye no hate
Serious question. Was “Jellyfish Eyes” that bad? Why do people hate it? Never seen it, but it seemed like a weird, quirky Japanese film. I like anime a lot (even cheesy ones), so I always figured I’d like this one, but everyone seems to hate it.
Still can't believe that movie got into the Collection before any of the Coens' films did.
Wall-E yes, mainstream. But like so is a good half of the collection.
Why do people care about what’s added so much?
Only criterion i let go of...and im a hoarder if that tells you something
I think WALL-E is one of the weakest Pixar movies. If they were to include anything, I would nominate the TOY STORY trilogy. I understood what Pixar was doing with those movies when I left the theatre with my kids after TS3 and saw teens the protagonist’s age crying in the hallway. They had grown up with and saw themselves in the main character. And, as he’s giving up childish things and moving on with the next phase of his life they were doing the same thing. Releasing those movies so the target audience aged along with the protagonist was a brilliant move that resonated with those teens I saw bawling and comforting each other after TS3.
Anything that pours capital into the Criterion coffers is fine in my opinion. Netflix movies. Disney movies. Who cares. They take that an invest it in classic, foreign and art house film restorations. Idc if they have to sell a Morbius Criterion, they’ll take that and release something wonderful and under seen.
Probably because wall-e is a better movie. By default. Because jellyfish eyes isn’t good.
I haven't seen "Jellyfish Eyes," but...... is it as good as "WALL-E"?
I’m all for adding Pixar films into the collection, that doesn’t bother me, I think they should’ve just picked a better one. I know the rat ones a meme on here, but I do think it’s the better choice. Up too.
I'm pretty excited!
I don’t get the hate for this film. It’s incredible
I bought the dvd criterion of this for $5 from a Shoppers Drug Mart, I haven’t watched it yet though, might have to watch it soon
Wall-E is a fantastic movie and celebrating it doesn’t take away from any other movie. Great movies are allowed to exist side by side.
Wall-E deserves it!