I think it fits in well. I’m glad someone released it, too, otherwise I never would have seen it. Definitely one of the funniest Criterion releases.
Sure, it’s odd, but I like it that way. I think it’s inclusion had to do with the cast, the indie sensibility of the series and the fact that it was an early Criterion release, way before most of us were collecting the discs and thinking of the CC in terms of a “canon.” It’s good to have entries like this in the series to keep the boundaries open, unpredictable and somewhat unenforceable even. Though I doubt that Criterion would be likely to release the disc at this time. I’d really like to know more about their review and selection process and particularly how it has developed over the years. My hunch is that they went through phases where they were either less selective or less able to afford the rights to release some films than they are now (though conversely, they also were able to release films in the past that they wouldn’t have a shot at today, e.g. Silence of the Lambs.)
I agree with you Pomoxian, but I do find it peculiar that Criterion has made a name for itself by impeccably explaining and contextualizing the films they release without really explaining how they themselves operate and make their selections. I read that they have a blog, but there hasn’t been any Criterion overview-esque press. They never explicitly provide reasoning for their selections, but this air of mystery has undoubtedly increased their brand appeal and the significance of their “canon,” as you described it. Not that they have to defend themselves, but sometimes I think about those Michael Bay movies possessing those cherished spine numbers and I wonder.
i have to agree with David. I was hesitant to watch a movie involving fishing, and would not have picked it up if it did not have the Criterion seal of approval, but I found the wit and absurdist conversation to fit right in with Criterion sensibilities.
I agree with everything Max said, right down to the Michael Bay comment!
Fishing With John was a most pleasant surprise.
I just wanted to chime in that Criterion performed a great public service by releasing this, as I had no idea it even existed beforehand. The segments with Jarmusch, Waits, and especially Dafoe are extraordinarily funny and perfect absurdist short films. Fishing with John also introduced me to Lurie’s music, which means I have them to thank for The Legendary Marvin Pontiac. I love that record.
Haha, tell me about it what in God’s name were they thinking with the Michael Bay films?
Willem Dafoe would make a marvelous fishing buddy- I loved the story of the roadkill deer. Matt Dillon on the other hand… what was his deal? It was hard enough for him to even respond to John. Overall, having loved Tom Waits in Down By Law and also as a musician, his real personality wasn’t as appealing. Really a fantastic little series.
This is such a great show, nearly bought the Criterion release the other day.
Can’t wait to sit down and watch this! I’m a huge John Lurie fan.
“There is a dance… a special dance!”
One of my favorite television shows of all time, and the ending of the Dafoe episode is exactly what I look for in humor.
I thought Matt Dillon and Tom Waits seemed exactly like I would expect them to. I’d be happy to go fishing with either, mainly because they’re both amusing. Hopper is a little intimidating. Defoe is really funny. Jarmusch seems alright. Hopper is the only one who scares me.
no
Just popped in Tom Waits’ new live album. Wish I could have attended a show from his last tour. =(
“the fishermen wake up exited to be alive. they hope for good weather and good lock. both fishermen are covered with sores and boners” my wife and i frequently quote that and get blank stares.
Max
Does anyone else find the inclusion of this TV show a bit odd?