DVD commentaries: Most informative and most entertaining?

At one point of the commentary by Laura Dern during "Citizen Ruth" (the vigil in the field outside the farmhouse),
Dern & her co-host remark about the presence of something in the crowd. For some reason they refuse to identify it, as if it's just too nasty to be spoken of. "There it is" is all they say. I can't see anything obvious. Anyone have a clue?

 

Tina Fey's commentary for MEAN GIRLS was pretty good. Of course, it's funny, breezy movie and she's good company. (There was another commentator, but I don't recall who that was.) The big takeaway was that at one point, the roles of Lindsey Lohan and Rachel McAdams were reversed.

Yes, I realize knowing enough about that movie to comment about its commentary makes me immediately suspicious . . .

 

The Simpsons box-set's have GREAT commentaries.

 

The Simpsons and Futurama commentaries are very funny and entertaining to listen to, but they're pretty short on hard information. In the case of The Simpsons, that's at least partially because the show is still running and it's hard for them to talk about anything difficult or any bad blood that may exist. In separate interviews James L. Brooks will talk quite freely about how Matt Groening and Sam Simon hated one another, but there's not a peep about it on the DVDs, not least because Simon himself -- who basically ran the show for the first 2-3 years -- wouldn't participate. There's also the whole "A Star Is Burns" fiasco, wherein Groening took his name off the episode because he disagreed with doing a Critic crossover, and that isn't so much as mentioned anywhere on the disc. I understand there are politics involved, but it's still disappointing for anyone with a serious interest in the show -- especially when Groening in particular tends to repeat the same things over and over and over again throughout the discs.

 

The Simpsons are still an ongoing concern, which is why the special features aren't particularly informative in inside dirt. You'll have to get that from an entity outside of officially released Simpsons' product.

 

And no commentary from John Schwartzwelder on the DVDs.

 

It also has director Mark Waters and producer Lorne Michaels. I was less enamored of the commentary:

"The track has potential but rarely lives up to it. Waters dominates, and Fey talks quite a bit, but Michaels chimes in much less frequently. The commentary covers cut sequences and other unused segments, alterations and bits adapted from the book, locations, and a lot of various notes from the set. The latter category fills most of the track; it lacks a great deal of concise data and usually tells us more about trivia. This makes it fairly breezy but it doesn’t let us know much that sticks. Honestly, I find it hard to remember anything substantial about the film’s creation. The lackluster quality of the material presented combined with a lot of happy talk and praise turns this into a moderately entertaining but less than informative commentary. "

 

Groening says little during the commentaries, IMO - not just little of use, but little period. I kinda get the impression he doesn't have a ton of direct involvement in the show anymore, though I could be wrong.

I think the "Futurama" tracks are much better than those for "Simpsons". The latter tend to be too much watching the show and laughing, which David X. Cohen makes sure the "Futurama" discussions stay on target and are informative.

They're also just more FUN, usually because Billy West and John Di Maggio make them amusing...

 

They mention several times that he simply refuses to participate in the commentaries, for some unknown reason. It's unfortunate, since he wrote some of the best lines and gags that have ever appeared on the show.

 

I highly doubt that Spielburg wanted Lean to keep quiet. That's not what he says.

 

Why can't they simply have an actor, producer, director of photography....someone on a commentary track? Something like "Schindler's List" just seems incomplete without one.

 

All I can say is the story I remember, and in that version, Spielberg indicated that he wanted to watch the movie without Lean chatting.

Spielberg tells multiple versions of the same story. For instance, there are variations on the one about how he got Cary Guffey to act in the kitchen scene from "CE3K"...

 

I too very much enjoyed Roger Ebert's commentary in Citizen Kane. I'm not even a huge fan of the movie, but his comments really make the DVD a great viewing experience, and learning experience.

Some of the commentaries on the Seinfeld DVD are great fun, while others are really dull. Most of the good ones feature Larry David and the cast; in most of the disappointing ones the producers and writers are doing the talking. The latter often tell old anecdotes about school mates and roommates that just are not funny or interesting. It's ironic that these guys wrote such great episodes, but came up with such dull material when it was their turn to step up to the mic.

But for bad commentaries, the Breaking Bad DVD's get my vote for "worst". 90% of the comments were incredibly insipid and uninteresting to me. Most of them seem to have been recorded in a "round table" environment, where all the actors, writers, and directors basically ramble on and on with dull small talk and stories about wrap parties and behind the scenes trivia, without ever really taking a deeper look at the stories or the episodes themselves. Making matters worse, the audio is mixed very poorly.

The audio mix can really make or break a commentary track. You need to be able to hear crucial lines of dialog so you can follow the original story and the commentary at the same time. I'm sure this is not easy but in many commentary tracks, the mixer pulls the original track levels WAY down when comments are spoken, which is distracting and makes it hard to relate the comments to the original story line. In the better commentary tracks, the narrator and the mixer make more of an effort to insert comments in quieter sections between important scenes, and that really makes a world of difference.

 

I just found mine!

Upon realizing that the Criterion LaserDisc of HIGH NOON's commentary track was by the same Howard Suber, I remembered that I had once rented the CAV LaserDisc of THE GRADUATE, and being impressed with the commentary, dubbed a copy of the movie with the commentary track running.

Last week, I finally dubbed my Criterion LaserDisc of HIGH NOON to DVD-R with the Suber commentary running, and at this very moment am dubbing the old VHS tape of THE GRADUATE with Suber's commentary to my DVD recorder's hard drive. When it's done, I'll write that back out the DVD-R for preservation. This guy is truly a genius when it comes to film-making and understanding its nuances.

It's too bad that most of the general populace can't benefit from these commentaries any more.

Harry

 

One of the only commentaries that sticks in my mind is "The Limey," where screenwriter Lem Dobbs complains to director Steven Soderbergh throughout about all the changes Soderbergh made to the script. Knowing Soderbergh the whole thing could be a put-on... but it's hard to tell for sure.

 

Had no idea this existed-including the fact that the movie was available at all. Not as big a fan as I thought, I guess.

 

He does the same thing for "33 1/3 Revolutions Per Monkee" - and makes the special MUCH more entertaining in the process, often complaining he's bored or that the special was a bad idea. (On the other hand, Brian Auger's commentary is the total opposite, and it's interesting to hear from someone who genuinely enjoys the special.)

 

The Ultimate Editions remedy this a bit with their new commentaries - Roger Moore does a fun one for LALD, even quoting lines (like "Take this honky outside and waste him!") that he particularly enjoys.

I agree with many posters, This Is Spinal Tap set a new standard for commentaries. ("He's dead.") I also enjoy Rocky Horror's commentary, if not just for the chance to hear Richard and Pat display their usual chemistry.

On that note, the commentary on "Shock Treatment" is enjoyable as well - while I DO feel slightly ass-kissy saying that knowing that I know one of the individuals doing it (both commenters are fans of the film rather than the actors), it's very informative.

 

Also, did I ever mention in this thread a commentary I LOATHE? "Grease."

Pat Birch seems very misinformed, and says a lot of things that simply aren't true - the most glaring being the claim that in the stage version, Johnny Casino's song was called "Born To Hand-Job"! It wasn't....

 

Has anyone heard John Waters' commentary for "Mommie Dearest"?

 

Yup, and I didn't think it was especially interesting. It's better in theory than in reality:

http://www.dvdmg.com/mommiedearest.shtml

 

Yeah, I listened to all the Moore tracks.... he's pretty low-key throughout, but I enjoyed them more than the commentaries on the older editions. (Moore's general dislike of A View to a Kill was a bit of a buzzkill, though... )

 

I heard it too. I bought the DVD because somebody recommended it and was pretty disappointed. It seems like a match made in Heaven, a campy movie and John Waters talking about it, but not so much.

I too don't understand Spielberg's aversion to commentary. I like getting insight into how a movie was made and have already seen the movie before I turn on the track. I like the commentary to 28 Days Later. It's a good look into making a low budget movie.

I think the worst I've heard was the commentary to Guy Ritchie's Swept Away. Guy and the screen writer or somebody smoking cigarettes and drinking. That combination worked for 28 Days Later, but not this movie.

Chad

 

Hmm... I didn't like the movie, but I thought it was a good commentary:

http://www.dvdmg.com/sweptaway.shtml

 

Most of the Tim Lucas commentaries for the Mario Bava films.
Also the ones on the Monster Kid Home Movies disc.