I know that there was a post about this in the blog, but I am so pissed off that this film is getting the recognition of a Criterion so soon, let alone at all.

In my opinion, the film was very good, but that it falls about 100 miles short of most of Fincher's other films. Although technically it's superb, the film itself seems like it would be nothing for a director like Fincher to tackle.

I have known Criterion DVDs to exist for two reasons: to highlight the best work or works of particular directors, or two restore inventive and revolutionary foreign and domestic films so that a new era can come to enjoy them.

Like I said before, the only category in which this film succeeded to be revolutionary would be for makeup. The film's structure, story, acting styles, and even many of its production values have been done before (and in better ways).

Sadly, I have lost quite a bit of respect for Criterion, not only for awarding this film above so many others, but also because the DVD is amongst the worst I have ever seen.

Thoughts?

I completely agree that it is undeserving, but it makes perfect sense why it is getting one. It revolutionized aging effects forever, I mean hell Armageddon has a Criterion for revolutionizing effects.

no wayyyyy does this deserve a criterion... this kind of pisses me off too.

C'mon, if Armageddon got one, I can't really complain. Plus, I liked Benjamin Button.

If they had waited maybe five years to give it a criterion than that might have worked, but the movie isn't even out on DVD yet and its getting a criterion over many other deserving films.

It's very odd.

I have a criterion for Jean Renoir's The Rules of the Game. It's awesome, you guys should see it.

Havent seen Rules of the Game but I did see Renoir's The Grand Illusion, I thought it was very good but people made it out to be amazing and I didn't think it was quite all that...