Criterion's mandate is, and has always been, to release movies that have been noteworthy in some way--whether famous or infamous. "Good" is in the eye of the beholder, and they know that.
Their mission statement (which has evolved a bit over time) currently states : Since 1984, the Criterion Collection, a continuing series of important classic and contemporary films, has been dedicated to gathering the greatest films from around the world and publishing them in editions that offer the highest technical quality and award-winning, original supplements. Over the years, as we moved from laserdisc to DVD, Blu-ray disc, and online streaming, we’ve seen a lot of things change, but one thing has remained constant: our commitment to publishing the defining moments of cinema for a wider and wider audience.
The first sentence suggests a pursuit of excellence, the second is cleverly squishy enough to include just about anything.
I also just found this comment left at Blu-ray.com by someone called "rblenheim." I'm copying it here just so we all know some of the attitudes about where Criterion is going aren't limited to just this board.
But this is a really strong month of this company's releases with the great Coen Brothers classic, Tourneur's the Cat People, the Mizoguchi and the Decalogue. But the "Valley of the Dolls"???? It's a mind-blowing stinker. Camp has its supporters but should a company like Critierion put this low-grade schlock out? NO. Okay, people like it; they also like slasher pictures and porno films. Should the 'Rolls Royce' of classy Blu-rays put mediocre stuff like this out when there's still Antonioni's "Il Grido", Ken Russell's "Women in Love" and King Vidor's "The Crowd" unreleased? NO WAY.
I also just found this comment left at Blu-ray.com by someone called "rblenheim." I'm copying it here just so we all know some of the attitudes about where Criterion is going aren't limited to just this board.
But this is a really strong month of this company's releases with the great Coen Brothers classic, Tourneur's the Cat People, the Mizoguchi and the Decalogue. But the "Valley of the Dolls"???? It's a mind-blowing stinker. Camp has its supporters but should a company like Critierion put this low-grade schlock out? NO. Okay, people like it; they also like slasher pictures and porno films. Should the 'Rolls Royce' of classy Blu-rays put mediocre stuff like this out when there's still Antonioni's "Il Grido", Ken Russell's "Women in Love" and King Vidor's "The Crowd" unreleased? NO WAY.
Whoever this person is, they are a little late to the party--and evidently haven't delved too far into Criterion's past. If they ever sit down to watch "Salo" or "Blood For Dracula", their brain may just explode!
Frankly, I'm glad people like that don't get to decide what Criterion releases. I can discern what is worthwhile all by myself quite nicely, thank you very much!--and all without pushing some sort of agenda onto others.
BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS, I guess, is some kind of "defining moment": the first major studio film by arguably the most famous "adult" filmmaker of all time.
Beyond the Valley of the Dolls actually does make a funny kind of sense as a Criterion release - Russ Meyer, whatever one may think of his movies, is a 100% bona fide auteur. Mark Robson, on the other hand...
That reminds me, I wanted to mention Mark Robson and his films, but first, on Russ Meyer...
The first Russ Meyer movie I ever saw was CHERRY, HARRY AND RAQUEL! I've only seen it once -- thirty-seven years ago on cable -- but once seen, it can't be forgotten. Now, who knows? Maybe it's "coming" (pun intended) from Criterion?
Anyway, to the subject of Mark Robson...
The thing I find the funniest about what is almost the king of beloved "camp" movies, of course, VALLEY OF THE DOLLS, is that it was directed by the same guy who directed PEYTON PLACE ten years earlier in 1957 (and for which he received an Oscar nomination, as he did the following year for THE INN OF THE SIXTH HAPPINESS -- which was a must-have for me on Blu-ray).
I've had PEYTON PLACE on DVD as long as I've had VALLEY OF THE DOLLS, and I think both movies are stylistically about the same, so much so that what I think is the biggest failure of VALLEY OF THE DOLLS is that although it deals with racier, more sordid material, it looks more like a movie from 1957 than 1967! For me that's what makes VALLEY so bad, it's really too hopelessly unaware of how out of date its approach is in 1967. Mostly that's the fault of a terrible script, and the brain trust at Fox that must have thought Robson was the right guy to helm the picture, but obviously he wasn't. I have to wonder how "seriously" Dick Zanuck took the production of VALLEY at all.
However, having said that, I think Robson's VON RYAN'S EXPRESS for Fox in 1965 is generally underrated (another must-have for me on Blu-ray -- and of course I have it), and I'm hoping TT will release on Blu-ray his other highly underrated Fox film, from 1963, NINE HOURS TO RAMA.
Mark Robson directed many fine films, including having been the editor on CAT PEOPLE (1942), among these Criterion releases, and an uncredited editor on no less than CITIZEN KANE and THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS, but unfortunately, he's the guy who directed VALLEY OF THE DOLLS and EARTHQUAKE, another camp classic! Poor Mark Robson.
BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS, I guess, is some kind of "defining moment": the first major studio film by arguably the most famous "adult" filmmaker of all time.
Criterion says that "Transgressive and outrageous, this big-studio version of a debaucherous midnight movie is an addictively entertaining romp from one of the movies' great outsider artists." And we can also add the the film sports the first screenplay by America's most famous film critic.
As the Fox advertising for the film put it: "This is not a sequel--there has never been anything like it."
Criterion says that "Transgressive and outrageous, this big-studio version of a debaucherous midnight movie is an addictively entertaining romp from one of the movies' great outsider artists." And we can also add the the film sports the first screenplay by America's most famous film critic.
As the Fox advertising for the film put it: "This is not a sequel--there has never been anything like it."
I'd like to say what I think that blurb from Criterion says of the mentality behind it, but then I'd sound like a snob.
Anyway, I have something to say about America's most famous film critic related to a TT Blu-ray I just watched this morning, but I'm busy watching OITNB right now, so later.....
Criterion's mandate is, and has always been, to release movies that have been noteworthy in some way--whether famous or infamous. "Good" is in the eye of the beholder, and they know that.
Their mission statement (which has evolved a bit over time) currently states : Since 1984, the Criterion Collection, a continuing series of important classic and contemporary films, has been dedicated to gathering the greatest films from around the world and publishing them in editions that offer the highest technical quality and award-winning, original supplements. Over the years, as we moved from laserdisc to DVD, Blu-ray disc, and online streaming, we’ve seen a lot of things change, but one thing has remained constant: our commitment to publishing the defining moments of cinema for a wider and wider audience.
The first sentence suggests a pursuit of excellence, the second is cleverly squishy enough to include just about anything.
I also just found this comment left at Blu-ray.com by someone called "rblenheim." I'm copying it here just so we all know some of the attitudes about where Criterion is going aren't limited to just this board.
But this is a really strong month of this company's releases with the great Coen Brothers classic, Tourneur's the Cat People, the Mizoguchi and the Decalogue. But the "Valley of the Dolls"???? It's a mind-blowing stinker. Camp has its supporters but should a company like Critierion put this low-grade schlock out? NO. Okay, people like it; they also like slasher pictures and porno films. Should the 'Rolls Royce' of classy Blu-rays put mediocre stuff like this out when there's still Antonioni's "Il Grido", Ken Russell's "Women in Love" and King Vidor's "The Crowd" unreleased? NO WAY.
If they did what this poster wanted, then Criterion would likely never have released the 2 Beatles films or The Man Who Fell To Earth or probably a dozen other titles with creds beyond the art house crowd. I think they need to chill out and respect that not everyone likes the same films.
I'd like to say what I think that blurb from Criterion says of the mentality behind it, but then I'd sound like a snob.
Is that really a concern? I was under the impression most posts made by most members here were specifically written with the intention of sounding as snobby as possible.
I'd like to say what I think that blurb from Criterion says of the mentality behind it, but then I'd sound like a snob.
Is that really a concern? I was under the impression most posts made by most members here were specifically written with the intention of sounding as snobby as possible.
Thanks for sharing that, Jim. I've been to Criterion's site a number of times, occasionally lurked in the forums, etc., but never had come across these Criterion Closet videos before, though I now see there's a slew of them, including ones with Richard Ayoade and Guillermo del Toro. Sweet!
Thanks for sharing that, Jim. I've been to Criterion's site a number of times, occasionally lurked in the forums, etc., but never had come across these Criterion Closet videos before, though I now see there's a slew of them, including ones with Richard Ayoade and Guillermo del Toro. Sweet!
You're welcome. Seems like Garrel's remark in the closet about Bergman's "Persona" has amused many. Garrel's a good actor--and he's also a huge Woody Allen fan.
I don't think anyone here has ever mentioned the Criterion Closet videos before now. I've seen a few over the past couple(?) years and I think it's a delightful little feature; their enthusiasm gives me a sliver of optimism about film.
Thanks for sharing that, Jim. I've been to Criterion's site a number of times, occasionally lurked in the forums, etc., but never had come across these Criterion Closet videos before, though I now see there's a slew of them, including ones with Richard Ayoade and Guillermo del Toro. Sweet!
Have you seen the Criterion Top Ten lists made by big shot celebrities (where's Lukas Kendall on that page?):
So, RR... Is BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS really your favorite movie? I'm very curious how and why? Not kidding, really want to know. A very unusual favorite film.
Yes, it is my favorite movie. I remember seeing at a the student-run theater at the University of Maryland sometime in the mid-eighties. My jaw dropped into my lap, almost literally. I went to see every remaining screening during it's brief run; so probably a half-dozen times.
What I love about the movie is that it throws pretty much everything but the kitchen sink into the plot of the film, and it's obvious from the opening scenes that Ebert and Meyer are telegraphing to the viewer than nothing they're about to see is to be taken seriously. Nothing. This is entirely intentional, an seems to be the signpost up ahead that you're now entering Roger and Russ' version of "The Twilight Zone". The move never takes itself seriously (when on character tries to kill himself, you get a sound effect of an airplane crashing, and when another character gets decapitated, it's done to the strain of the 20th Century Fox fanfare, which was absent from the beginning of the movie).
It also moves from genre to genre in a way that is, I believe, purposefully jarring to the audience. There's all kinds of over-the-top comedy, a drug picture, a soap opera, a blaxploitation section (which gives the audience an African-American "meet-cute", which I don't think has ever been done in a major movie up until that time), romance (both straight and lesbian), some really subtle breaking of the fourth wall, and, like I said before, a tone that makes it impossibly difficult to take seriously.
Russ Meyer often called his movies "put-ons". This was a term that seems antiquated these days, but to him meant that nothing--not one damned thing!--in his movies was to be taken as anything but a jest. I read an interview with him that said that he saw his movies as the logical (or was it illogical?) extension of "Laugh-In" or sixties culture generally. (Frank Zappa skewered the sixties constantly in his music of that era, and in much the same way, which is perhaps why I love Zappa so much, too.)
And yes, I'm aware of the homophobia and transphobia in the movie. In any other movie, it'd piss me off. But that's Meyer's genius at work here. In the incredibly unrealistic, lunatic world that "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls" exists in, he dares you to suspend disbelief. In fact, he challenges you with it in every scene of the movie. Heck, even the songs and Stu Philip's score are in on the gigantic joke this movie is.
I'm actually interested in watchig it again to see if I can agree with you. I don't think I've seen more than five minutes of it since watching it around twenty years ago.
Hopefully it'll pop up on some streaming service, as I'm NOT buying it on Blu-ray.
Thanks for sharing that, Jim. I've been to Criterion's site a number of times, occasionally lurked in the forums, etc., but never had come across these Criterion Closet videos before, though I now see there's a slew of them, including ones with Richard Ayoade and Guillermo del Toro. Sweet!
Have you seen the Criterion Top Ten lists made by big shot celebrities (where's Lukas Kendall on that page?):
