DVD Review HTF Reviewers Pick: Their FAVORITE DVD Releases Of 2004 (1 Viewer)

[Ira Siegel]

What, no DAMN YANKEES, no GUNGA DIN, no SPIDEY-2? Arrrgghhh!

Great lists guys. Thanks. I'm now interested in a few more 2004 releases that I had not thought of before.

 

[Herb Kane]

Mark, you know that, how…?

I’ve typed this a dozen times over the last couple of months… remember, all of these films were Paramount productions. For the past 70 years, they have changed hands, been played ad infinitum and treated like all-around red headed step children. It’s the same reason The Lost Weekend looks the way it does and mark my words, will be the same reason Double Indemnity looks the way it does when it too, is eventually re-released. There’s no denying WB or Criterion’s ability – none. Trust me, I see enough of it. But to have expectations of the Paramount MB films looking like Now, Voyageur or The Bad and the Beautiful are not only physically unrealistic but financially unrealistic as well. Are they perfect…? No. But they’ve never looked better either.

As for Criterion, I agree, they had a great year and judging by what has already been announced for 2005, it looks as though they’ll easily surpass 2004. Two of my picks were Criterion titles and I guarantee if you go back and look at all the Criterion titles I reviewed for the forum, the number I recommended or highly recommended will vastly outnumber those I didn’t. In fact, only one 2004 CC release comes to mind as a failure and that’s A Woman Is A Woman.

 

[Rich Malloy]

Not necessary to review "Night" at all before watching "Dawn"... but you might want to! I'm in the minority on this (though a substantial minority, I'd wager), but I very slightly prefer "Night" to "Dawn".

My absolute favorite release of the year (and this surprised me, if only a little bit) is Criterion's "Fanny and Alexander". I still haven't finished enjoying all the features in this set (the commentary for the theatrical cut, for example!), but I'm blown away by the film, the transfer, and the extras. Truly astounding.

Along with the Cassavetes set, The Battle of Algiers, The Leopard, The Rules of the Game, Ikiru, Slacker, Videodrome, Tokyo Story, etc. etc.... I gotta say, Criterion is always near the top of the heap for me, but this year they've utterly blown away any pretenders to the throne. I don't see how they could possibly ever top this year's output.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

I agree. Great year for Criterion, and 2005 looks promising as well!

Going over everyone's lists really brings home the fact that this really was a great year for DVD releases.

 

[Mark_vdH]

No need to, as I've already read them. I'm sorry if you got the impression, but I didn't mean to imply at all that you've treated one or more studios better than others, as I fully realize these lists are nothing more than good old honest, personal taste.

Now we're at it, one review-related question: how are the Criterion movies you review picked out, as I've noticed you aren't reviewing them all? Does Criterion send you stuff they want you to review, or do you get to pick the ones you want?

 

[george kaplan]

Except for M, I haven't been as impressed with Criterion's releases this year as in the past, and with one exception, I think the lists presented by the reviewers in this thread are excellent.

 

[Herb Kane]

Mark... I try to review as many as possible, choosing those I believe will be of greater interest to the members here. Unfortunately, it gets hectic depending on what studios release and when they release them. If there is ever anything you want me to look at specifcally, just let me know - I'll do my best.

 

[Ernest Rister]

Post removed by author to make a new thread

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Tease!

 

[george kaplan]

Let's just say that Michael and I have different taste in film. I thought I only agreed with two of his choices, but then I realized that Spellbound wasn't the Hitchcock film, so I only agree with one of them. But that's just a difference in opinion.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Certain members have many differences in opinion.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

DAWN OF THE DEAD -- "the greatest horror epic, no question that it's one of the greatest horror films in general, or one of the greatest films, period?" BAH!

 

[Aaron Silverman]

All of my opinions are different.

 

[rich_d]

All,

Overall, there are some fine choices on most of the lists. However, I did have a problem with one list.

Michael Osadciw says his selections are a "top" list DVDs consisting of DVDs "I’ve reviewed on the forum, or that are associated with the studios I review for."

First, I sure hope that was a poor choice of words. I hope he meant he is reviewing DVDs for HTF and its members and not for the Studios.

Michael,

How in the world do you come up with a criteria that has Panic Room (SE) as the top DVD of 2004?

I probably like Panic Room more than most but in no way shape or form is it a terrific film. Doesn't the film count for more than anything else? I mean what is the point of a bunch of stellar film extras for a film that is not stellar to begin with? Isn't that just whipped cream on mediocre hot chocolate?

Why honor a DVD release that is (at least) triple-dipped? Why reward some studio with your top pick that didn't get it right the first time, let alone the second time?

Why reward a DVD release when your own comments indicate that the DVD's film presentation itself is not as good as prior DVD releases?

 

[Aaron Silverman]

I enjoyed Panic Room a lot, and I have no issues with someone thinking it's a "terrific" film. It might have made my list, too, if I had gotten around to watching all the extras.

The film is the most important thing for me, but when talking about the top DVD, the A/V quality and extras are taken into account. It's perfectly legitimate for a good movie with a ton of extras and good A/V quality to beat out a great film that's lacking in extras and/ or technical quality.

 

[Michael Osadciw]

Rich

My choice for my top 10 were based on all ingredients of a DVD: picture quality, sound quality, the film itself, as well as the extras. If I were to choose a top 10 ten of films based soley on the film itself this would be a different list and I'm sure there would be more people questioning my choices. My opinion of one film will be different from someone else's.

I side with you that Panic Room isn't a terrific film; but I did think it was a good film. Add the fact that the A/V quality was great and the extras discs were one of the best compilations I've ever seen. It led me to believe a lot of work and energy went into laying this disc out in terms of content. The care that went into this release to give to the fans of this film was top-notch. I bet not one Panic Room fan is disappointed!

I'll also tackle Star Wars here. By all means, the Star Wars films are not "great films" either. But again, the time and effort that has been put in to clean these films up resulted in a fantastic release. Extras on the other hand - were slim. We've seen far more difinitive versions (such as PR or LotR extended cuts with lots of extras). Thus I bumped it to number 2. In fact, if my decision was based only on the story of the film it would be further away from number one even though I am a Star Wars fan. I've just seen better films over the years.

I could go on and on about why I made the selections I did but I'm not. My list is based only on the films I've reviewed for you. I review films from FOX, Anchor Bay, and a few small and lesser known companies. I've tried to do both mainstream films as well as some not-so-well known films. If I wasn't broad in my selections and only stuck to the movies everyone knows and likes, how would a great complilation discs like "Shorts!" ever get recommended when it deserves to be? My hope is that someone with interest in any of the genres/titles I've reviewed will be intrigued and aquire these discs and enjoy them as much as I did.

I'm happy with my choices and remember we are doing this for the love and fun of movies and DVD.

-Mike-

 

[JonZ]

I dont get it.This is a list for best DVD releases. Whats the problem?

"I probably like Panic Room more than most but in no way shape or form is it a terrific film."

Even if the movie isnt the greatest,film quality is only one part of the rating. If its a 4 disc SE, with everything on it including the kitchen sink and makes a great DVD, then its worth consideration.

Its not a Top 10 Films of 2004 list.

 

[rich_d]

It's about the film, that's why.

It would be really interesting if the HTF reviewers each put out a number as to what the film matters to the total merit of the DVD. Such as the film itself contributes xx percent to the overall merit of a DVD. That's a number I'd love to see. Even better yet, the film contributes XX percent plus the audio/visual presentation of the film contributes XX percent plus the extras contribute XX percent = 100. That would be great.

But many DVD reviewers seem to avoid the issue of contribution just as they avoid the issue of value. How often has a DVD reviewer wrote that you'd be wiser buying three "bare-boned" DVDs versus the "piled higher and deeper" DVDs marketed to us?

That doesn't mean that special features can't be terrific and quite worthwhile. But if you believe that the special features are primary versus secondary to the DVD release than you're confused.

 

[JonZ]

No Im not.

Ive always said the film is what matters on DVD. Special Features usually dont really interest me.I hate interactive menus and could case less about 99% of the commentaries and for that matter most extras on most discs.

But thats not THE point here. THIS discussion is about more than the JUST the film. A DVD is made up of more than the film - it has special features, presentation, packaging and so on.


I think Hellboy is a ok movie. However the Dir Cut is a amazing DVD.Lets say theres a 2004 release of 2 film - HB Dir Cut and Roshomon.Would I place the Hellboy multiple disc Dir Cut over a barebones version of Roshomon. Well, probablly yes since the point of the discussion is the great DVDs released this year,not "the greatests films released on DVD".

(BTW, Ive often rated greater films with less extras higher than some of the more popular loaded SEs here at HTF. But there has to be a balance otherwise it just becomes a best films list not taking the whole package into consideration- Mike even picked a film he doesnt like as his top spot. Hes acknoledging the importance of the film but also the greatness of the "DVD release"-which included presentation, restoration, etc)

Its plain and simple right here:
"My choice for my top 10 were based on all ingredients of a DVD: picture quality, sound quality, the film itself, as well as the extras"


My favorite releases of the year werent even films.

 

[Scott Kimball]

Without standards of quantification, such numbers are meaningless. For me, the film is ALWAYS going to be 95% or more of the "merit" of a DVD, because that's what I buy discs for. In my collection of over 500 DVDs, there are only a dozen or so that have extras that really influenced my decision to buy. I appreciate the fact that others feel differently, and that's why I choose not to quantify reviews with any kind of a score (beyond "Highly Recommended, Recommended, no recommendation, or Not Recommended). As for A/V quality - that trumps content when the transfer is poor.

Reviewers write with built-in biases. When I see a film, I bring to it my own experiences... my own likes and dislikes... When I watch special features and commentaries, my impressions are similarly biased. It's human nature. Without knowing me, you can't possible know my biases. Boiling a disc down to a score only encourages readers to skip the narrative that explains my approach to a disc, rendering the number meaningless.

Even knowing my own biases, I don't know if I could quantify merit percentages, as you describe. Often times, it comes down to a gut recommendation - something unquantifiable. That's what this list was about for me: what discs did I view in 2004 that had that special, unquantifiable quality that made me want to tell people: See This Disc! Were they necessarily the best of 2004? No. But I hope that some lesser known titles received some attention on our lists. A simple "best of" list would automatically exclude a number of smaller gems.

-Scott