 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 24, 2018 - 4:40 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Graham Watt
(Member)
|
I would absolutely LOVE to see that! The film itself is a classic of course, but each time I see it the prologue, epilogue, and - particularly - that damned voiceover ("Then I ran and I ran", and you see him running and running) becomes more annoying. I can hardly watch it now it's so damaging.
We did have a thread here a while back about the merits or otherwise of the two "possible" versions. Who was it... PhiladelphiaSon (?) who said he'd seen the director's cut with Siegel himself there? I'll try to bump that old thread if I find it.
I must admit, I only scanned the longer article, but the first link says quite clearly that the version "about to play" has had the tacked-on beginning and ending removed AND the voiceover (?) Is it so easy to remove a dialogue track? The second link, which I still have to read in detail, seems to imply that somebody SHOULD try to remove the bookends and the voiceover, but I don't see where it says that it's actually been done. I'm probably wrong again. Will read it in more detail.
ADDED TWO MINUTES LATER - I see it was actually YOU, arthur, who saw the director's cut. And PhiladelphiaSon. A lot of material spread over a few threads. But I have to go back to work. Seeya later!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know what? As a kid, which is when I first saw this picture on Channel 9, I found the prologue and epilog to be part of the thrilling experience. And the ending, with some hope left to stop the aliens - but still unresolved - was chilling. The loud-assed score sold it, as did McCarthy's weary relief and hope.
I would really love to see the original cut, but I adore the version we've always had.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is the directors cut available? Is it merely without the hospital prolog/epilog? Seems like the voice-over narration would be different, assuming it was used originally.
No, as far as I know. It was only the director's personal print he would proudly exhibit when he was alive. Aside from the absence of the framing scenes, making everything happen as we see it instead of being "recollected", it has no narration whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
From what I've read, the D.C. still had narration. If it exists without narration and bookending, I'm quite surprised that Olive didnt include it on their recent signature blu-ray (the old bluray with special features). Would have been easy to program the disc to omit the bookends and use another audio track.
Arthur, when you ask if people want to see it - which is moot, of course we do! - is this the real D.C., or a fan-edited version?
It was the director's own personal print, the way he wanted it without studio interference. It has no framing scenes and no narration. It's an absolute masterpiece. I've been trying to reach Siegel's son to see if he knows anything about it. Any help would be immensely appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It was the director's own personal print, the way he wanted it without studio interference. It has no framing scenes and no narration. It's an absolute masterpiece. I've been trying to reach Siegel's son to see if he knows anything about it. Any help would be immensely appreciated.
I can't tell from your comments if you've actually seen the D.C. or are relaying someone else's comments. "It's an absolute masterpiece" suggests you have. If so, I imagine you've tried tracking down who arranged that private showing?
Sorry for the confusion. Yes, I saw this director's cut: Don Siegel presented it as described at the L.A. County Art Museum with Kevin McCarthy in attendance. It was Don's private print. Others have claimed to have seen it when Don traveled on occasion to various theatres across the U.S. I am trying to get in touch with Siegel's son to find out whether he knows about it. I am currently living in Australia so this is difficult.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was wondering about the tv prints I watched growing up..full frame or cropped.
Thanks!
I seem to recall seeing the d.c. on laser disc. Am I imagining this?
Also..the film is often referred to as. " cult" film, implying it was not a commercial success upon I initially. released.
I thought it was a big hit.
?
Thanks
Brm
|
|
|
|
|
|
GEE
I finally seek out the expertise of.Mr. Grant and....
Bupkis!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ray?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ray?
Harryhausen?
Charles?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ray?
Harryhausen?
Charles?
Faiola.
He should LIKE me. I bought the BYU LOST.HORIZON
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was wondering about the tv prints I watched growing up..full frame or cropped.
Thanks!
I seem to recall seeing the d.c. on laser disc. Am I imagining this?
Also..the film is often referred to as. " cult" film, implying it was not a commercial success upon I initially. released.
I thought it was a big hit.
?
Thanks
Brm
Sorry for the late reply. I just noticed this post's "resurrection". Television airings (I presume '60s, '70s and/or '80s) would have been flat as I recall seeing these TV presentations. Most viewers during those years would have never accepted images that did not fill their 1.33:1 television screens. Broadcasters in the U.S. would typically go to great lengths to display films this way no matter how they were filmed or intended to be presented (the latter being applicable to Don's "flat but masked" 1.85:1 version). The film was a commercial success upon its theatrical release but largely ignored by the critics at the time. Very few have seen Don's "Director's Cut" without the framing scenes and narration, so would have no basis of comparison with the known version. Every single version released on home video to date including the laser discs released by Republic Home Video and in 1986 by Criterion contain the regular theatrical release.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Siegel's print? Was it flat?? I have an original non-theatrical release print. It is full frame and without the SuperScope credit.
Siegel shot the picture full frame with 1:85 masking in mind. Then Allied decided to release it in SuperScope, which was an awful process where they practically cut the vertical size in half and then printed it anamorphic. To add insult to injury, when NTA inherited the film they apparently did not get or lost the camera negative so they had to make their tv prints from the SuperScope negative. Which means they took a frame that was cut in half and then CUT IT IN HALF! I have run my print side-by-side with an NTA print and it is astonishing to see what was lost on TV all those years.
At least now we have the SuperScope version on disc. But it would be nice if a 35mm of the full frame version could be found and masked as Siegel originally intended.
I am almost 100% positive Don's personal director's cut was flat and not presented "masked" but I am completely sure it was not the bastardised SuperScope print you are referring to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
