A Robert Harris Bits Extra - Lawrence of Arabia: Superbit (1 Viewer)

[Sven Lorenz]

I'm not a film scholar - but I think you're overinterpreting the pee-break.
I'm sure that if he had been offered the chance, David Lean would have been happy to show the movie without intermission.

 

[frank manrique]

Yep...and to tell the truth, not even a 12 foot wide screen can match the majestic vistas of 70mm theatrical presentations either but, hey...such a sizable image still manage to pack quite a visceral punch!...

-THTS

 

[Robert Harris]

I was waiting to see if someone would correctly discuss Intermissions and Mr. Toell has done so.

While not a necessity, many roadshow length productions are scripted with a specific break point. Others have two or more possibilities, but generally carefully honed and designed during production.

In many, many cases, the intermission is a point at which a story changes mood or direction, while also allowing the audience a few minutes to actually think about and discuss what has just occurred.

The LoA intermission is extremely important, but there are many more without which a film makes less sense.

When 2001 ran at the Ziegfeld a couple of years ago in 70mm, I advised my son to stay away as the theatre had removed the intermission footage which supplies a specific coda to the story and presentation.

2001 with and without its intermission point is a different viewing experience.

Methinks that DVD viewers may be getting spoiled. This intermediate software holding system, as it now stands between laser disc and a higher capacity or higher capacity HiDef disc is merely that.

A holding system.

As I've stated earlier Lawrence weighs in at over 700 pounds, costs almost thirty thousand dollars and necessitates twelve changeovers from reel to reel every eighteen minutes or so.

The functionality of any long film on DVD is illusory.

RAH

 

[Stephen PI]

Mr. Toell wrote:
An intermission can indeed be a storytelling device. It can create a break in the narrative at a specific moment in order to signify something, much like the breaking of a novel into parts or chapters can do the same for that medium.

I also entirely agree. A prime example is "El-Cid", which I saw somewhere years ago exhibited without the intermission and his age leap was jarring.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

I'm sure that if he had been offered the chance, David Lean would have been happy to show the movie without intermission.

What do you base that on?

Where did you get your information?

I would have to guess that you know little about David Lean. If David Lean didn't want Lawrence of Arabia to have an intermission, it wouldn't.

Also, if the intermission was for nothing more than a "pee break", wouldn't they simply put it in the middle of the movie? It isn't.

 

[Sven Lorenz]

You're right - I know almost nothing about David Lean.
Just like you.
And I never said that he wasn't the one who decided when the break would be - I only said that the decision whether to have one at all wasn't his.
To think that any director (with the possible exception of David Lynch) would say: "Okay, at that point of the movie I want people to really think about what they've seen - so I'll insert a ten minute black screen with music." is silly IMHO.
It's far more likely that he said to the producers: "Well, if you got to have your damn pee-break then that's the least annoying point to put it."
But if you're happy with overinterpreting a technical necessity into a great storytelling device then be happy with it.
Twenty years from now people will probably start inserting small pauses into the places where the layer-change on the "old" DVDs were - to maintain the artistic integrity, of course.

 

[Damin J Toell]

To think that any director (with the possible exception of David Lynch) would say: "Okay, at that point of the movie I want people to really think about what they've seen - so I'll insert a ten minute black screen with music." is silly IMHO.

Perhaps if you knew more than "almost nothing" about David Lean and his films, you mightn't think it so silly.

DJ

 

[Robert Harris]

The intermission in Lawrence was designed to be where it was, both from a storytelling point of view as well as additional points, such as costume design.

Those who look carefully at the film will note that Lawrence's white robes after the intermission, although presumably all cut from the same cloth, are in fact not.

As Lawrence's mental condition becomes more frail, his robes have been produced from thinner, less elegant and thereby less regal material.

Everything was done with specificity and by design.

While I'm certain that there have been films which had an intermission break added as a necessary afterthought, Lawrence was not one of them.

RAH

 

[DavidJ]

I own the current double disc set and have never seen the movie. I was waiting to view it in a theater when it was making the rounds recently, but it came no where close to me. I guess I will give up and watch my two disc set. I have a friend who owns the current two disc set and will probably buy the Superbit. Even if I love the movie as much I as I am told and expect I will, I may hold off until it comes out on some type of HD format.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

2001 is my favorite film, and I caught it (twice) at the Ziegfeld without an intermission, and again several months later at the Coolidge in Boston (twice), this time with the intermission. Since I've seen the film so many times (I discovered during one of these shows that I actually know every line of dialogue by heart), the intermission didn't matter as much to me as it might have to others. But at both venues, I saw the film with different groups of people who had never seen it before, and I think the people that saw it with an intermission had a better viewing experience. They had time to think about everything that had happened ahead of time, to discuss the arc of the story and take note of the different segments. Breaking at the point where we see that Hal is reading the astronauts lips adds so much more tension to that scene, and to the first scene after the intermission. And, of course, having the entr'acte music is of invaluable importance, as that is the music that narrates the ending 'star gate' sequence.

Just as it's bad to break up films with interruptions where none previously existed (I don't include DVD or LD flip breaks in this; I do include commercial breaks on television), it's equally bad, if not worse, to remove intended breaks by the filmmakers that help set and maintain pacing.

 

[rich_d]

Sven, I agree with many of your points. Not the one about the four hour non-stop movie though.

The key point to me is the impetus for the intermission.

The impetus for the intermission is the length of the film. Lean, or any smart director of a long film would ask himself some questions:

Do I want to risk losing the audiences attention from my film as they are thinking about their "comfort" level or wondering when to dash out to the bathrooms?

Do I want them to miss some of my film?

If the answer came back no and no then plan an intermission. By plan, I have no doubt that Lean sequenced it when he wanted and intelligently planned it out - but you're right, the impetus was a bio-break.

I don't remember seeing any info as to where the intermission will be coming and on what "superbit" disc. But it is logical that people use disc changes for getting drinks and bio-breaks now just as they did when the intermission occured on first release of Lawrence. So, if it does not come on a disc change - yes, more people will fast-forward past it than they would have. Is it a big deal? I think not. Those that care about the intermission can wait for the intermission.

However, this contemplative nature of an intermission discussed in this thread seems overblown to me. It's as contemplative as going to the bathroom, getting snacks and checking out any cute girls can be for some or silent thinking about the film for others. Each to his own. Then and now.

 

[Dome Vongvises]

It's a astounding piece of Cinema. It will never date, never wane and when ever people get tired of the modern 'big' movies, they can always go back to this and see how it's done.

As long as people like me can still love it, we're in no immediate danger. It's the young un's two the three generations from now that worry me.

Sven, I'm going to give you some good advice:

Quit while you've still got the chance.

 

[Sven Lorenz]

Sven, I'm going to give you some good advice: Quit while you've still got the chance.

Yeah, I'm not going to argue anymore.
Five years of studying Literature has shown me that over-interpretation is something you just cannot fight.
However there's a story that one of the few professors who don't take themselves too serious once told me - it fits this situation really well:
The first edition of a novel (he told me the title, but I've forgotten it) was published with a flaw - because of the mistake a printer made, one page in the middle of the book was left completely empty. They realized the mistake too late and since no page was missing they decided to sell the book with the blank page.
Soon after publication the first reviews and articles about the book were published and many of the reviewers and scholars talked about the great impact that blank page had on them. They talked and talked about what a great allegory it was - how great it represented the nihilistic mood and the emptiness the novel projected. They praised the author for the bold choice of using such a stylistic device.

 

[Lew Crippen]

An intermission is not a storytelling device - it's something that in a movie theater has to be done to allow people to watch a four hour movie.

Intermissions as a part of storytelling have been around for 2.500 years or so. The inclusion and omission of them is a subject of some debate—even when the productions are first mounted. For example, Madama Butterfly was originally in three acts with a standard two intermissions. Puccini wrote music to bridge the last acts, so that the audience is not allowed the distraction of an intermission as they await (along with Cio Cio San) the coming of the dawn and of Pinkerton. This unlike the forced break between the first two acts. Both conscious decisions by the creative artists.

Hundreds of other examples could be cited. It is just not quite as common in films as in staged performances. But it is not unknown and is used for many of the same reasons.

 

[Patrick McCart]

Intermissions ARE vital to the narrative flow AND are often placed well before the actual filming.

The current TV prints (even LBX) of Around the World in Eighty Days lack the overture, intermission, and exit music. However, the lack of an intermission destroys of part of the film. (I think only the P&S LD and VHS keep it, but with a crappy video-generated screen)

The original version had the steamer going to San Francisco from Japan. The last shot before intermission had a close up of it and it faded out. After the intermission, we fade in to the steamer again (I even think this had unbroken music). Thanks to the intermission, we went across the Pacific Ocean in a few minutes and with two fade-to-blacks.

Ah! But the revisionists who think the movie flows better without one screw it up. We go across the ocean much more quickly thanks to a jump cut. The music shifts to a different piece all of the sudden, and the visual shifts ahead, too.

The potty break factor is probably considered, but even more important is keeping the attention of the audience. By having an intermission planned, the story has a soft break and the audience is ready for more once part two begins.

 

[Dennis Nicholls]

I was thinking about intermissions when considering The Agony and The Ecstasy. In the first half of the film, an uninspired Michaelangelo is trying to dodge the painting assignment, until he hides out in the mountains and has a vision supported by clouds....then the intermission followed by his selling the new scheme to the Pope. The intermission really gives you time to digest the cheesy vision of "artistic inspiration".

In the case of Lawrence, the first half of the film is primarily the story of the establishment of his legend, and the second half is when he starts to believe in that legend.....

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

In the case of Lawrence, the first half of the film is primarily the story of the establishment of his legend, and the second half is when he starts to believe in that legend.....

I would say "surrender to" or "be consumed by" rather than "believe in", but I agree that the intermission point in Lawrence seems every bit as purposeful as RAH indicated it was.

Regards,

 

[Nick Laslett]

As the opportunity has presented it's self due to this thread. I would like to recommend Adrian Turner's book "The Making of David Lean's Lawrence of Arabia" ISBN 1 85028 2110, published in 1994 by Dragon's World in the UK.

This is a very well written account of the making of Lawrence of Arabia, by Adrian Turner a respected film critic in the UK. Robert A. Harris assisted in the production of the book supplying film stills, etc.

I note in the screenplay I have in my possession for LOA, it says on page 142 "End of Part One", "Intermission".

On page II-1 it says "Part 2".

As you can see the film was written in 2 acts just like a play. The Intermission was planned from the start and presumably has nothing to do with toilet breaks!

 

[Stephen PI]

Mr. Toell wrote:
An intermission can indeed be a storytelling device. It can create a break in the narrative at a specific moment in order to signify something, much like the breaking of a novel into parts or chapters can do the same for that medium.
I replied:
I also entirely agree. A prime example is "El-Cid", which I saw somewhere years ago exhibited without the intermission and his age leap was jarring.

I read on another forum that a recently released region 2 Japanese version, with english 4.0 audio, of "El-Cid" has had the intermission removed.

 

[Dennis Gallagher]

No one's addressed the issue that Intermissions (in
conjunction with Overtures and Entr'acte music played to a
semi-darkened theater and closed curtains [Curtains? What are they?])were very much a part of the "Roadshow" experience very prevalent in the 60's, but going back to films like "Gone With the Wind". (I remember seeing GWTW for the first time as a kid and thinking what a kick the
Intermission point was, with the camera pulling back and the music swelling to a very definite break point.) Keeping the Intermission on the DVD, as well as the Overture and Entr'acte music, are nostalgic reminders of the pre on-screen commercials' days when
theatrical presentation really meant something.

FWIW, I was more bothered by Columbia's insertion of an
FBI warning (don't remember that in the theater!) before both the Overture and Entr'acte than any perceived problem with image quality of the original disc (though I will pick up the Superbit because "Lawrence" is one of my favorite films).

On the subject of Intermissions - what was the last commercial film to play with one? ("Gods and Generals?" "Gettysburg"?) It seems like we never get them anymore - even for epics like "Titanic". Maybe
studios think the audiences at the gigaplexes will get lost
in the hallways between the acts.

Dennis
(who's seen "Lawrence" twice in 70mm. The 1989 reissue at the Ziegfeld was one of my top five movie-going experiences! Thank you, Mr. Harris!)