Why armageddon criterion

Explosions during the end were done the old fashion way: explosions were filmed outside in a back alley using different chemicals to get different colours. This footage was then fit into the film. This section has five chapters that can be watched individually or all at once. The section dedicated to Hoyt Yeatman looks at the Paris sequence. A lot of work went into this one as well and this minute segment breaks it down nicely.

After an animatic is created they then started building the scene in sections. They first recorded the explosion on a much smaller scale, which involved a lot of explosives and we get to see this footage from different angles. Slowed down and coming towards the camera this alone looks rather impressive. Another bit was filmed where gargoyles are destroyed in the foreground. Then using the computer those two sequences are put together along with photos of Paris, and CGI buildings that will crumble.

The effects in Armageddon have held up rather well and I think it has to do with this mix of old technologies and new technologies. The effects in this film put a lot of newer films to shame and watching them actually pull of the effects was far more fun than watching a computer effect go through the transitions. The final portion is devoted to Pat McClung, and is a simple interview. Running minutes, McClung talks about working with Bay, how it was decided whether older special effects should be used in sequences, or whether newer visual effects should be used.

He also talks about how far special effects have come and how the film could not have been done years ago. This is another excellent part dealing with the special effects.

In all I found this section completely worth my time. It was fun watching these sequences be created. Production Design presents a 6-minute interview with Michael White. He discusses the large scope of the film, getting into the general design of the asteroid, the space station, the costumes, and creating the sets for NASA.

Marketing presents a collection of trailers including the theatrical trailer, the teaser, the Superbowl spot, and also a collection of second spots and second spots.

Something that may have been interesting are international trailers, or even poster art. But nothing here. With this one, though, you get an interview with members of the band. Not terribly interesting and the song is still terrible. And finally we get your typical Criterion insert, this time with an essay by Jeanine Basinger, who does defend the film as a work of art and talks about Bay.

It makes for an amusing read. In the end this release is only a step up from most DVDs of this type. And while I can recommend it to fans of the film, it would still probably be best to hold off until the inevitable Blu-Ray release, mainly for the non-anamorphic issue.

Again, given her bona fides, Basinger percent knows more about film than I ever will. By no means is Basinger entirely wrong here. In terms of pure visuals, camera movement and spectacle, Bay is absolutely a visionary. His films relentlessly push forward — again, those 50 minutes on the asteroid are completely action-packed, even if some of that action is repetitive — and absolutely no one can stage or sustain mass destruction on film like Michael Bay.

Also, Armageddon is by no means the only action flick in the Criterion Collection. Armageddon and The Rock differ from these films in many, many striking ways. In this sense, I guess, Armageddon is genuinely an important movie — one that holds an important place in cinema history — and one that deserves its place in the Criterion Collection. Also, thanks for the Shearer obit; I didn't know she'd died. It wouldn't have met anything to me before I started watching these movies.

Re: Armageddon and filmmaker's intentions—I've been thinking about that a lot lately because of a comment Jeff made about Blood for Dracula. Do you think it matters whether the filmmakers meant for Armageddon to accomplish any particular goal? Or in general, what importance is the author's intention when watching a movie?

I'm tempted to say it doesn't matter at all; your comment leads me to believe you see it differently. I don't think Armageddon is a good test case for this because it's not that successful to put it mildly.

But in general, do you think a filmmaker with bad intentions can luck into making a great movie? Beyond camp value? Fair enough—I actually think the Criterion Collection could benefit from a few more good bad flicks; I agree that by most standards Armageddon is a bad bad flick. Matthew, just discovered your blog and all I've got to say is good luck and great job so far.

Are you renting or buying these movies, by the way? One thing I wanted to add to this is the possible reason behind Criterion choosing such films as Armageddon and The Rock to be a part of their collection. I believe it has to do with these films actually bringing in profit. So I think these two movies are a part of the Collection to "keep the collection alive", so to speak.

Without it, Criterion would have not have a profit that could sustain their work. But then again, this isn't a confirmed fact, although I remember reading about it somewhere. It does make sense though. Anyhow, good luck and keep reviewing! Anonymous, Thanks! Glad you're enjoying it. That probably pays for a lot of Tarkovsky A great review, I have watched this film several times against my better judgment , and believe it plays better if you think of it as a sly comedy rather than a serious piece.

Also, thanks for finally clearing up why that chain gun exists. That has always bothered me. Andrew, Thanks for the kind words. Re: a sly comedy: that's how I see Starship Troopers , but I think Armageddon is pretty much in earnest. Glad I could help sort out the chain gun. Now we've just gotta figure out who thought "space dementia" was a good idea Oh, I didn't mean that Armageddon was intended to be a comedy, just that I felt less pain upon further viewings of it when I started to think of it that way I think the technical term for this is The Independence Day Effect.

I am still waiting for the Armageddon Real Time edition, a DVD that will allow you to play all of the slow motion scenes at normal speed. That way I could watch the whole movie in about 25 minutes. Andrew, I eagerly await the Real Time edition. Anthony, Why not what about top gun? Top Gun seems to be a better example of the kind of history and aesthetics that would encourage its inclusion. Right, I see. Well, for one thing, Criterion can't get the rights to any film they want.

They'd done a laserdisc of Armageddon , which would have made the rights somewhat easier. Also, though, I think that Top Gun is a different kind of movie not to say that it shouldn't be represented in the Criterion Collection. I remember the nineties as featuring at least one giant disaster film every summer after Independence Day : had at least three Godzilla , Deep Impact , and Armageddon.

And who could forget Dante's Peak or Twister , or Volcano? On a slightly related note, I read a good disaster movie script the other day, for Pompeii , which will be Roman Polanski's next film.

I don't think anyone owns US distribution rights yet, but they will. Looking forward to it. I'm glad I found your blog! You write beautifully and it's been very informative. Thanks for complementing my views of this film with a different perspective. Some mention of the Aerosmith theme song would have been nice. It remains one of the cheesiest works of emotional movie music ever made. Up to that point, Fincher was flying high with Se7en and The Game, which were both released on laserdisc in full CC versions.

Bay was like a little kid, and had to try and outdo Fincher. Both Bay and Fincher came from Propaganda Films way back then and that's where their hatred for each other stemmed.

Nowadays, I don't think it's a big deal, but then again, Curious Case of Benjamin Button has a Criterion Collection blu ray and Bay has his Transformers, so I guess they both win in the end. Armageddon was one of the worst, most incoherent movies I have ever seen. I remember it giving me a monstrous headache when I walked out of the theater. Is this an example of what Hollywood thinks "mid America" enjoys? It's a bit insulting how Hollywood looks down on mid-America. Before I moved, I had stereotypes of the ignorant, ten-gallon hat wearin', tobacco spittin', gun totin' redneck running around in my head.

I was pleasantly surprised to find out that the people here aren't a whole lot different from any other city or town. Actually, I found Hollywood to be filled with too many self-centered primadonnas who care more about style than substance. Ken, Unfortunately, given the box office returns for Armageddon and other Michael Bay movies, I would say it is an example of what mid-America and coastal America, and the rest of the world enjoys, or at least is willing to pay for, whether you or I enjoy it or not.

I grew up in Knoxville, then moved to New England and the west coast, so I experienced those stereotypes from the other direction. The Stealth Bomber wasn't the only way that "Armageddon" revealed something highly classified. I hate to be a cocktease about it, but further explanation would get me in trouble.

I will say that if I'd shown what Bruckheimer showed, my ass would be wished away to the cornfield For the life of me I don't know why, but I'm actually going to be super-pedantic and defend Michael Bay against one accusation of dumb-assery: there's no problem firing bullets in space. A cartridge contains a bullet sitting on top of an explosive which is detonated by hitting the firing cap at the bottom.

The explosion is contained by the casing and blows the bullet out of the top at a suitably high velocity. The absence of an atmosphere or gravity actually means that bullets work better in space, losing no velocity to aerodynamic drag and maintaining a straight course.

Okay, I'm done, and I'm certainly not going to defend Bay from any other accusations of dumb-assery: I always come away from one of his movies that this is someone who knows what movies look like but has no comprehension of why. Anonymous, You're right! I was thinking, mistakenly, that gunpowder would need atmospheric oxygen to ignite.

I should have done my homework. On the plus side, this means it's going to be much easier to build that lunar assault vehicle I've been working on. I very much enjoyed the analysis here. This is an excellent piece that I will definitely be recommending to others.

I did have one comment, however It's been awhile since I've seen this, but isn't the animal cracker scene between Grace and AJ the first time we see him driving the BMW? I had always assumed that this was his "since I'm never coming back" purchase, akin to the other guys getting tattoos and going to the strip club. I didn't think that he drove it when he was a "normal citizen.

In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter at all, but it was the one point in this article that confused me. Beth, Glad you enjoyed the article. My point was not that he couldn't afford the BMW, but that a two-seater German roadster didn't fit his personality. I would have imagined his car, whether it was a "never coming back" purchase or his "normal citizen" car, to be a truck or a vintage muscle car, American-made.

Thank you so much. Thank you thank you thank you. I'm 5 years late to this wonderful little piece, but you have no idea how many times I've tried and failed to explain my fascination with the movie Armageddon to people. I'd written it off for years until I saw it shortly after being introduced to The Americans during my freshman year of college.

I watched the movie more closely then, and then I watched it again, and again, because I couldn't believe all that I'd missed. I found myself becoming strangely attached to it, and only then did I put away my snobbishness and allow myself to love it simply as a piece of entertainment and for its over-the-top, manipulative brilliance.

You've beautifully articulated literally everything I was unable to express to people, and in a way that can be taken seriously. I know I sound like a crazy person, but I have never met anyone who either agreed with me or was willing to give me the benefit of the doubt and try watching the movie again just once.

Anyway, now I have a link to share so that I don't have to sound like an idiot for appreciating such an apparently ridiculous film. Now on to Armageddon. I appreciate the dichotomy of art vs. I saw Armageddon during its theatrical release in the summer of the release date of July 1st being as good an example as any of the manipulation on display throughout the film itself. Frankly, I enjoyed it. And then I never gave it another thought. Which is as it should be.

More precisely, I never gave it another thought until now. I concluded, as you, that Armageddon belongs in the Criterion collection, if for no other reason, for its unprecedented access to NASA facilities during its filming. But because it is included in the Criterion collection, I have watched it through four more times twice without commentaries, twice with and watched a second disc full of special features.

In my comment on Tokyo Drifter I asked if the Criterion label distorts our perception of films merely by adding them to its collection. In the case of Armageddon , it may not ultimately distort our opinion of the film, but its inclusion has certainly generated a whole lot more critical thought than Armageddon was ever meant to withstand. And it was successful on both counts.

John B. Just finished with The Rock , eh? Almost like we're in sync for the first time. Deleted my comment? In the case of Armageddon, it may not ultimately distort our opinion of the film, but its inclusion has certainly generated a whole lot more critical thought than Armageddon was ever meant to withstand.

Posted by John B. Virusman was the name of a Danish company founded in by Robin Drinkall. The company consisted of a cartoon character similar to Spiderman who was going to save the world from destruction. Hi Matthew, I have just! Which is why you'll definitely be tired of hearing what I am going to say. Which is: your blog is great. I have found it increasingly rare to find writing of this quality and thoroughness - especially on the internet, which is probably my own fault, being somewhat technophobic.

Plus, I now have my own Criterion list - albeit one requiring less time and dedication than yours - to work my way through, which is exciting!