free counter with statistics Benjamin Button Gets Criterion Release | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

bradpittold_2.jpeg
What Was I Supposed to Do? The Dead Horse Twitched

Beat It Again / Dustin Rowles

Trade News | March 19, 2009 | Comments (34)

You guys know what the Criterion Collection is, don’t you? It’s a company that distributes “authoritative” films … “important classics and contemporary films.” Classics being the operative word. The Criterion Collection, for instance, has the definitive versions of Citizen Kane, Dr. Strangelove, A Hard Day’s Night and Seven Samurai. There are very few movies from the current decade among the Criterion Collection (11, all told, I believe, and two are Wes Anderson flicks). Suffice to say, most of the nearly 500 DVD titles in the Criterion Collection are worthy inclusions (save for Armageddon, a misguided attempt to expand the Criterion audience).

But the Criterion Collection decided to do something a little different - they’ve decided to release a Criterion version of a very recent film. Last year, in fact. Now, if you were going to choose among last year’s releases for a movie worthy of Criterion, what might you imagine would make a decent entry? The Dark Knight, perhaps? Maybe Slumdog Millionaire? Hell, I’d even go with The Visitor as a movie that might be considered a classic two decades from now.

How about The Curious Case of Benjamin Button? Uh huh. That’s right. The two-disc Criterion Collection will be out on May 5th, and it will include a four-part documentary , audio commentary from David Fincher and (!) footage from the red-carpet premiere. Because why not? Over 150 critics cited it as one of the best films of the year. Critics like Rex Reed, Lou Lumenick, Holland Oates, and YouTubeCritic89! You gotta be kidding me, Swillpill.

Not only can you own The Curious Case of Benjamin Button on May 5th, you can pay out your ass for it, because that red-carpet coverage is worth it, damnit!

Thousands of film snobs all over the country have just realized the cultural value of their Criterion collection has plummeted faster than suburban housing.


← Kings Review | Sorority Row Trailer →



Comments

This is some Benjamin Button's shit.

Posted by: Lucas at March 19, 2009 5:27 PM

At this point, we might as well be wailing on a bottle of Elmer's.

Posted by: branded at March 19, 2009 5:28 PM

Ah, didn't this film get nominated for like 5,000 awards and walk away from awards season empty-handed except for some technical shit? And didn't most reputable critics laud its makeup/special effects/costumes while otherwise ripping it a new asshole? HATE.

Seriously, WHO is pulling strings to get this movie more recognition than it should have ever gotten? I don't understand Hollywood politics AT ALL, but this is some fucked up shit. There is no way this happened without something screwy going on behind the scenes.

But then again, Armageddon.

Posted by: tt_marie at March 19, 2009 5:32 PM

Lucas - hee :) That always makes me laugh. But you forgot to do it in all caps.

Posted by: tt_marie at March 19, 2009 5:33 PM

Source? Sorry, I check the criterion website almost every day because I'm a ridiculous, spending-student-loan-money-on-criterion douchebag, and I haven't heard anything about this.

Nevermind, I'll google it.

Posted by: Kevin Longrie at March 19, 2009 5:37 PM

wake me when the house bunny criterion dvd is announced.

Posted by: gp at March 19, 2009 5:50 PM

Best. Film. Ever.

Me and YouTubeCritics 62 through 91 are going to cut you, Rowles. Except for YouTubeCritic69, he's just a pervert.

Posted by: YouTubeCritic89 at March 19, 2009 5:52 PM

No, absolutely not. Why the fuck is this thing still alive? Does it want to give me new reasons to hate it? Benjamin Button has gone from a somewhat good film to an evil curse upon my life. And I checked. Forest Gump, you know, the actual good Eric Roth screenplay, isn't even in the collection. Se7en and Fight Club, David Fincher's actual great movies, are also not on the Collection. Are you telling me that out of all of those great movies, Benjamin Button is the only deserving entry? Are you mentally deficient snobs telling me it was the best film of 2008 What... the... fuck?

Armageddon is a far superior flick to have in the collection, that's how low Benjamin Button has sunk! Armageddon was at least a harmless blockbuster, not a 3 hour soul sucker that did nothing new, yet managed to wow every single critic. (Except, fortunately, Roger Ebert.) Benjamin Button stole the nominations from The Dark Knight! For that, it can't be forgiven! Now it's in the Criterion Collection too, fuck them!

Posted by: George at March 19, 2009 6:10 PM

One of my friends insists this was a much better movie than Slumdog Millionaire. He also enjoys Two and a Half Men. I really don't have anything else to say, just putting that out there.

Posted by: the_wakeful at March 19, 2009 6:13 PM

Armageddon was not harmless. It was criminal. It killed Bruce Willis! (And stole My Heart)

Posted by: Optimus Rhyme at March 19, 2009 6:17 PM

The first DVD Release of The Life Aquatic was Criterion, so it's not really breaking any new ground by releasing a recent movie.

Also, Forrest Fucking Gump fucking sucks fucking balls, and fucking would destroy the fucking integrity of the fucking Criterion Fucking Collection fucking just as fucking fast.

Fucking get your fucking head the fuck out of your fucking ass, George.

Fuck.

Posted by: Bucko at March 19, 2009 6:17 PM

It was a toss up Bucko, forget it. At least in that year, 4 great films were nominated and one of them one. Even if Forest Gump didn't deserve it, it wasn't a Crash or Titanic like film.

It hurts to say Good Will Hunting was robbed after watching Daredevil and RV, how could you Ben Affleck and Robin Williams?

Posted by: George at March 19, 2009 6:28 PM

They lost me completely at "Armageddon". Now I will never, ever take them seriously.

Posted by: figgy at March 19, 2009 7:20 PM

Um...having just perused the list of The Criterion Collection releases since 1998, it reads like a bunch of titles I've either never heard of (Throne of Blood), hate (The Royal Tenenbaums), or don't understand (Robocop). Mostly, it's just a bunch of obscure movies to which I'm pretty sure Benjamin Button will make an obvious and comfortable edition.

Posted by: The Pink Hulk at March 19, 2009 7:53 PM

Haaaaaang on......you just bashed both "Throne of Blood" and "Robocop"?

You got some meatballs, son.

Posted by: Jay at March 19, 2009 8:03 PM

Oh, come on Benjamin Buttons on the same list as Kurosawa and Chasing Amy?

Posted by: lawyergirl06 at March 19, 2009 8:54 PM

And hell if you think Armageddon is bad, they also include The Rock and Traffic. Shit, I really need a fucking hobby.

Posted by: lawyergirl06 at March 19, 2009 8:58 PM

Hmm...there's nothing about this on the Criterion site, and you'd think this would be plastered all over it. Instead, they're as lovable as always, with their news items about Kurosawa due to their recent release of Dodes'ka-den. Thank god, too. Netflix didn't have it for the longest time...

But I digress. Are you sure about this, Dustin? Is it Janus films that's releasing it or that other company that's linked to them? Either way, I don't really care about it. I'm still thankful as hell that they exist and release mostly awesome, interesting and obscure films that no one else does, though I'm sure several others would be only too glad to release Benjamin Button. But again, are you SURE?!

Posted by: vic at March 19, 2009 10:02 PM

Well, it seems this might be true. The film is supposedly release #476, and that spine number is conspicuously missing from the Upcoming Releases section of the CC website. However, #477 and 478 are there, so maybe Criterion is waiting on making some grand announcement about it.

But again, I don't really care. If it'll get them more revenue, they can release more great stuff. Besides, in this economy, they'd need to stay afloat somehow. Also, I haven't seen tCCoBB, so I'm not really all that outraged.

HOWEVER! On the other hand, they may become pressed to release other films of this ilk in order to keep up with customer demand, if this marketing ploy is too successful. Ah...dammit! Fucking stupid economy...

Posted by: vic at March 19, 2009 10:37 PM

I haven't seen official stuff from Criterion, who has nothing on their entire site about it. The only things they show coming out in May are Wise Blod, The Friends of Eddie Coyle, and an Imamura box set. They don't even have a page for it, despite having paging for things coming out in June. Amazon bills the DVD as a special edition, but says nothing about criterion anywhere on the page, something they normally indicate.

I think this is just an internet rumor.

Posted by: Kevin Longrie at March 19, 2009 10:41 PM

Think...or just hope.

Posted by: Kevin Longrie at March 19, 2009 10:43 PM

It better be an internet rumor. And Lawyergirl06, I will not have you put Traffic in the same category as Armageddon.

Posted by: George at March 20, 2009 12:31 AM

All of you bashing Armageddon Criterion have obviously never watched it. That release has one of the funniest commentaries I've ever heard. Ben Affleck, Bruce Willis, Michael Bay, all recorded separately. Michael is serious, Bruce is sorta serious, Ben is just ripping on the movie mercilessly. It's well worth watching just for that.

Posted by: TylerDFC at March 20, 2009 7:08 AM

Not for some time have I seen a PR team trying to mold,push,sell,work,twist,warp & force a film into the status of 'classic'.Forgetting the awards for a moment, it's obvious that someone really really really wants TCCOBB to be looked upon as a film for the ages. Can someone tell Fincher's people to GET OFF OF IT ALREADY, & that most people didn't buy into the hype, & saw the film for what it was, mediocre but technically innovative?
You can't forcefully manufacture a classic film, & this film just isn't in that league, no matter how desperately hard its people try to associate itself to reputable DVD companies.

Posted by: Makka at March 20, 2009 8:46 AM

Pink Hulk, allow me to try and explain the nuance of Robocop.

The film is a massive dystopia where crime is rampant, mostly because big business is winning the struggle of power and they don't give a shit about people, only dollar signs. Detroit has become a dilapitated metropolis full of drugs, violence, and a media gone wild. At the center of it all is a malfeasant corporation that's tinkering with robotic law inforcement, and after one of their models malfuntions they decide to go with a cybernetic approach.

Alex Murphy, loving father, good husband, and all around white hat; is brutally murdered by Clarence Boddicker (aliases "Red Foreman", "Senator Blaine Mayer") and his gang of thugs. This presents a young, enterprising and cocaine addicted OCP exec to turn Officer Murphy into, "One bad motherfucker". Thus was the birth of Robocop.

The film struggles with the morality of robotics, and what happens when the ghost in the machine isn't so much a ghost as the last remanents of one's humanity. Can the organic coexist with the mechanical? Does one need to maintain dominance? How do you uphold the law when the bad guys own the police? And most importantly, will those "bitches leave"? All of these ethical and sociological issues are addressed within a future inspired by the 1980's, and in the end the film asks us all the important question, "Would you buy that for a dollar?"

Posted by: Mike R. at March 20, 2009 9:00 AM

Plus, boobies and 'splosions!

Posted by: Snath at March 20, 2009 9:10 AM

Yes Snath...boobies, 'splosions, and blood.

Posted by: Mike R. at March 20, 2009 9:12 AM

Plus, boobies and 'splosions!

This is fantastic. It made me instantly think of an I Love Lucy type sitcom starring Bay.

"Michael Bay, you got some 'splosions to do!"

Posted by: branded at March 20, 2009 9:31 AM

Wow, Mike R., that was insightful and a little scary. And I am actually more than a little hard right now. Would you like to explain "The Life Aquatic" to me next? You know, just so I can finish.

Posted by: The Pink Hulk at March 20, 2009 10:18 AM

Not just the boobies and robotics, Mike R. and Snath, Robocop is also one of the funniest satires of all time, and when it's not satirizing, it's either using hilarious slapstick comedy, or it's combining the two.

Why the hell hasn't Robocop become a Pajiba Blockbuster yet?

Posted by: George at March 20, 2009 10:32 AM

True George, I almost completely forgot about the dark satire, which the Criterion Commentary Track is good at pointing out. (As well as highlighting how Paul Verhoven's motto on the film was, "More Blood!")

Posted by: Mike R. at March 20, 2009 11:19 AM

*SIGH* You know what? I'm not going to respond to this shit anymore. The snobbery is too fucking ridiculous, even for me, and I'm as big of a music snob as you can get. You really make me sick sometimes.

Posted by: ChristianH at March 21, 2009 1:47 PM

There you go beating the dead horse again. When are you going to learn that multiple posts about this lame ass movie bore half of your readers to death!?

Posted by: ph at March 22, 2009 5:05 PM

Well, it's been posted on the Criterion site now. Guess it was true.

Posted by: vic at March 25, 2009 7:12 PM