It's all so tiresome.
>>223997478Hate to break it to you, but Criterion has been a normie brand for almost as long as it's been around.
you are seething at random people who happily share their purchases and who will never read your coping incel post, yet you have the arrogance to pretend like you are smarter than them or somethingwhy is this website filled with autistic retards with zero theory of mind?
>>223997695Horst wessel lied
>>223997478Criterion shit all look so fucking ugly though. Would never have any of that shit on my shelf.
>>223997695Sally will look in the box because that's where Anne has put it duh
>>223997695>>223997571The film community needs more gatekeeping.
>>223997695You can have theory of mind and still look down on other, as I do with you, the OP, and the mindless dongs buying up Criterion as brand product.
>>223997478You people complain about normies watching nothing but capeshit and other slop, but when they watch le real cinema, that's wrong too?
>>223997478Nice hauls
>>223998127Nearly all the movies in OP are basically capeshit.
>>223998127There are levels. The ones who complain about capeshitters are typically the ones showing off their Criterion hauls. Vanity of the midcult.
>>223998228The capshitters ARE the same people posting ~*haul*~ on reddit.
>>223998176Stfu pseud
>>223998374NTA but please consider not posting on here
>>223997695sally has trust issues from being scammed in diablo 2 and runescape so she looked in the box because she assumed anne was a snake from the get go
>>223998374you need to go back
>>223998402Feel called out? Exposed?
>>223998419Not at all, I am just undertaking a Quixotic quest to get annoying retards to either post better or leave the site
>>223998531Sure, starting with this retard >>223998176
>>223998548he's right, you know
>>223998673No he's not. Having boring or no taste masquerading as good taste, isn't the same as having terrible taste.
>>223997478Kino International is better than Criterion.
>>223998855In terms of discs, absolutely not.
>>223997478who spends thousands of dollars to display movies in their house instead of just torrenting them whenever they feel like watching them? and why?
>>223997478Criterion was cool in the '90s but fell off once studios started taking home media seriously. They're early stuff wasn't anamorphic either, so screw em.
>>223999081I have money to burn, and I like seeing movies in 4k on my television. Buying a disc is easy.
>>223999113ya i guess. i just don't repeat watch the same movies enough for it to ever make sense to me. If I had kids I'd get a bunch of the old disney/pixar stuff or other good kids movies because kids actually do really enjoy watching the same shit over and over and I'd like to associate the physical media with what they can watch. I like owning books so maybe I have no point but it just seems pointless. Good for you enjoying your hobby though :D
>>223997478I got The Elephant Man 4K. It seems stupid to go to a criterion forum to get upset about people buying criterion movies.
>>223998722bad taste is bad taste
>>223999113This is the correct answer.
>>223999175And? That's not what I said.
>>223999171The problem isn't getting upset about "people buying Criterion movies"; it's staying vigilant to normies not ruining our hobby.
>>223999205It's the implication.
>>223999223No. Having boring taste, or no taste, is not the same as bad taste. Liking Kubrick, Videodrome, Personal Shopping, Mulholland Drive, etc. isn't bad taste.>>223999206>ourIf you're talking taste in films, /tv/ is basically just normies. Embittered, poor normies.
>>223997478>normiesKill yourself, faggot.
>>223997695I tell Sally that Anne crammed her ball and watch
>>223999299>I'm in this picture, and I don't like it.
>>223997478well I mean they do plug videos with celebs to hock their wares. People see those closet videos and want to be like their fav celebs so they go out and consume whatever is mentioned. When a good amount of people in their videos mention the same film out of an entire closet of movies its not a coincidence but rather a method. Criterion is a business like any other and trying to market to a wider audience other than the hardcore movie watcher. The question you ask is not what they got in their "haul" but how did they hear about it. If they say from the closet videos you can discount their opinion and judge away.As well I personally think that if you have bought a criterion after Life Aquatic you are poser and their discs are such shit comparatively to what they used to be in the way of special features
>>223999515The Life Aquatic is shit. I buy Criterion when it's a movie I like and the transfer is good. Don't give a fuck about special features.
>>223999572If its a movie you like why don't you already own it?If you don't care about special features why even bother with the criterion tax? The only thing they do that is different from other publishers is film preservation
>>223999620To take an example, I recently bought Safe on 4k. I did already own it... on VHS. I wanted it on 4k, and it's only available through Criterion. Not exactly rocket science.
>>224000172why do you own VHS still if you are mostly interested in fidelity?
>>224000326It was a tape from the 00's, back when that was the only available format the film was released in.
>>224001036thats fair if it wasn't available anywhere else. Did you watch the tape more than once before purchasing the re-release?
>>223997478So? Maybe some of them will do the needful and rip the movies and upload them somewhere.The last movie I've bought was probably around 2007 or so.
>>224001386It's my money to spend. I don't need to validate my purchases. No, I only watched the movie once on VHS. By the time I wanted to rewatch it, it was available on streaming in better quality.
>>224001778no need to get defensive, was just asking a question. Did you get rid of the VHS after upgrading?I'm questioning because, my view point is contrary to yours and I want to better understand the physical media collector mindset. I would never buy physical unless the special features are unavoidably great, essentially the only reason in my mind to fork out the extra money for a boutique edition. If you only care about fidelity hoarding digital seems like a more space efficient method, is the point i'm trying to make
>>223997478Hate to break it to you, but if you consoom television and film, you are the normie no matter how hard you cope
>>223999515>If they say from the closet videos you can discount their opinion and judge away."The Criterion Closet," in which retarded "celebrities" selected movies and fabricated personal backstories about them, all on video for normies to consume on YouTube, was one of the worst things to happen to this hobby.
>>224003349you're posting in the wrong board
>>223997478>the commercial products were... bought??it truly is the end of days
>>224003209Most people don't put this much thought into shit they buy. I don't consider myself a collector. I bought the movie because I wanted to see it, and that was the only way to do so back in like 2008. The internet wasn't always what it is now. Some movies were hard to track down. I didn't throw out my VHS copy of Safe, because I don't care that much about saving space and it's almost a nostalgic piece of memorabilia at this point. I bought the 4k disc of Safe... because I wanted to see the the film on 4k. And since that's about as good as it's going to get, I'm fine with owning it and having it on a shelf whenever I feel like watching it. As I already said in this thread, it's easy to buy a disc, and I like watching movies on my television screen, not my computer.
>>224003833again fair enough. There are definitely some movies which were a pain to track down a physical copy, even digital versions as well. Lindsey Andersons "If..." comes to mind, which Criterion released back in the day and was a day one buy for me because besides my beta recording it was hard to find in my region and threw the beta tape out once I had the dvd in hand.I guess the difference is that later on once that movie was easy to find digitally I donated my physical copy to the library as I didn't need it any more and had already watched the extras on the disc. Why, besides nostalgia as you mentioned, would someone keep a duplicate copy of a film on an outdated format?
>>224004818You've put more thought into this than I ever have. And that's basically your answer. Why should I throw it away? It costs nothing to have it. Did you throw away all your school yearbooks too? If... was easy to find by 2006, as it was youtube by then. >I donated my physical copy to the libraryWhy waste your time? You put more effort into that than I did simply having something.
>>223997695I don't care what people do, but it does feel like a lot of collecting has become less about people buying what they themselves find interesting, and more about what they think is currently popular and can easily show off in videos/photos on social media, and/or what they can flip for profit. That's fine and all, but these types inevitably infest hobbies and contribute to prices going up, because things that nobody cared about just a few years ago become the MUST HAVE hot items thanks to social media trends.Picrel is what happened to the price of the Gamecube version of a Piglet videogame that nobody gave two shits about until it was memed on social media as muh kiddie survival horror
>>224005805>contribute to prices going upNot a significant factor. 4k's are considered expensive, but really they're not. People have just gotten used to paying little for media. The same market forces that have pushed media down in price over the decades also push certain items up when they become hard to find. That's hard to predict though, so I think flippers are wasting their time.
>>223998127Thats the thing, they dont watch them. They dont even take them out of the plastic wrapper
>>223997478Why are you browsing Reddit, OP?
>>223999113>he doesn't have an external drive dedicated to downloading 4k ripsngmi
>>224008196ESLs think we lurk over there and report back here, so he wants to fit in
>>223997478Criterion was only ever good for their restorations of old Jap movies, because Japs never cared that much about film preservation, and like to jew their domestic market as much as possible when it comes to blu-ray releases. This means that a lot of their movies are more accessible via Criterion than they are on in Japan itself. Too many of the American and Yuro movies put out by Criterion are just trash that get overhyped by film school nerds. The actual good American movies are all closely guarded by Warner Bros, Universal, Disney, etc. anyway and will never get Criterion releases. Criterion is more of a style over substance label these days and is mogged by Kino Lorber if you want to find lesser-known gems.
>>223997478They're not "Criterion" films you normie retard. Kill yourself.
>>223997695SP = BP
