What's new

"A Star Is Born" Garland in 6k resolution (1 Viewer)

I think they are important in setting up Judy's character. It shows that she wasn't just going to sit around waiting for Norman to make her a star. She did what she could to get by. The scene at her apartment building loses something without the visuals because you can't see some of the humor.
 

Joe Caps

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2000
Messages
2,169
stan has outdone himself. Private emails for his eyes only and other OFF THE RECORD conversations he publishes (along with w ton of bad english, bad spelling and you name it - was this even proofread?) No wonder I was and am upset with him.


And Stan, reread the Haver book you love somuch. Ron Haver did NOT find the uncut three hour soundtrack. An editor at warners, Dave stoemaier did. And it was a mono optical track.
 

Eric Peterson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Messages
2,959
Real Name
Eric Peterson
Yeah! I don't really agree with Stan's methods, but if it get the job done.


The idea that anybody could sit on a film of this magnitude for any reason gives a whole new definition to petty.
 

Chuck Pennington

Screenwriter
Joined
May 11, 2001
Messages
1,048
The problem is these methods sometimes make things much worse. It's actually akin to bullying. I have it on good authority that Warner was in talks with the collector, and, once thejudyroom.com article went up and various comments were posted on HTF, that those talks abruptly ended.


Let's not forget this material was dumped, discarded and disrespected by Warner at one time, so I can understand why a collector, who was able to rescue it from complete loss, would then be hesitant to entrust it to the same company that, at one time, was hell bent on its destruction. We also don't know the details on what prior events occurred between the two parties in the past to complicate such a negotiation.


It's easy for any of us to say, "Hey, turn it over!" But isn't that the same thing that was told to the theaters about returning the trims after they cut the film to conform to Warner's instructions?


I'm reminded of that old saying that goes something like, "You catch more flies with honey than...," well, you get my drift.


I find it odd how some people feel this urgent need to be THE ONE to right the wrongs, to be the instigator, to raise their voice to espouse their feelings and cause to rise above anyone else's. In a way it comes off as selfish to me, one person doing what they can to put their own name and stamp on the legend. Now, I'm a fan of Don Quixote and the ideal of fighting the good fight when everyone else believes the cause to be hopeless. I also think it's important to stand up and blow the whistle when we see injustice and deception, regardless of what anyone else might think. However, publishing the name of a private citizen and rallying the troops based on nothing but third-hand information that is sketchy at best brings to mind the scene near the end of Disney's BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, when the villagers band together to storm the beast's castle, rushing to the conclusion that he will make off with their children in the night and terrorize them all, not even taking into consideration that the beast actually has a good and moral soul.


I'll all for tilting at windmills, but there has to actually be a windmill first. Believing that there MIGHT be one just isn't enough. And aren't people supposed to be presumed innocent until proved otherwise?


What happened to the idea of trying to engage someone into coming forward, to join the club, to be welcomed and congratulated for sharing what would have been lost if not for their foresight? Seems to me that would be a far better way to get results than resort to what teeters on harassment. Does anyone remember how we got some of our best intelligence information from the people we captured during WW2? It wasn't from water boarding - it was from playing cards and befriending them.
 

Rob W

Screenwriter
Joined
May 23, 1999
Messages
1,233
Real Name
Robert
Stan, one 'truth' is you could have seen the TCM premiere of 'A Star Is Born' for $599, which is what I paid for a pass in "The Essentials" category. This gave me access to the opening and closing night galas plus as many of the films as I could catch during the 3 1/2 day festival. ( I managed 16 .) What makes you think you could only see the film with the top-level pass?
 

Adam_S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2001
Messages
6,316
Real Name
Adam_S
Originally Posted by Chuck Pennington

The problem is these methods sometimes make things much worse. It's actually akin to bullying. I have it on good authority that Warner was in talks with the collector, and, once thejudyroom.com article went up and various comments were posted on HTF, that those talks abruptly ended.

I'm going to agree, sounds like the efforts of Stan Heck and the Judy Room have ensured that the complete version will never be seen by anyone other than the collector that has the prints. Thanks, guys for ruining it for the rest of the world with your coverage and bullying. discretion would have accomplished something, trumpeting and blaring loudly did little but put a complete end to things.


and that Stan blog was nearly unreadable. random carriage returns, inability to spell. failure of basic grammer, meandering 'story'. Ugh. it's like a very bad joke. Or prank. Unfortunately, this isn't a prank like the Four Devils prank on Criterion Forum, it's all too real.
 

Robin9

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
7,649
Real Name
Robin
Originally Posted by Adam_S
and that Stan blog was nearly unreadable. random carriage returns, inability to spell. failure of basic grammer, meandering 'story'.

I have to agree. I gave up half-way.
 

Richard M S

Screenwriter
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
1,050
While I would love to see the longer version of the film someday, there really is not that much still missing.


What really intrigues me is the idea that the footage deleted from SINGING IN THE RAIN, KISMET, BRIGADOON and (especially) THE PIRATE still is out there somehow. IMO that is what they should focus on recovering for future DVD release.
 

Mark Zimmer

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
4,318
Originally Posted by Adam_S




I'm going to agree, sounds like the efforts of Stan Heck and the Judy Room have ensured that the complete version will never be seen by anyone other than the collector that has the prints. Thanks, guys for ruining it for the rest of the world with your coverage and bullying. discretion would have accomplished something, trumpeting and blaring loudly did little but put a complete end to things.


and that Stan blog was nearly unreadable. random carriage returns, inability to spell. failure of basic grammer, meandering 'story'. Ugh. it's like a very bad joke. Or prank. Unfortunately, this isn't a prank like the Four Devils prank on Criterion Forum, it's all too real.


Indeed. Nice job.
 

allanfisch

Agent
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
48
Real Name
Allan
The film is hurt by the missing dialogue scenes. I was more impressed by that than by the missing songs back in 1983 because it filled out the story and the holes.And now with the stills, it screams out for the footage to be restored, And there is still the question of the parts( a few) that are still cut from the restored version. the original RT was 181 minutes, the restoration is about 176. There is that beautiful music cue for when Esther says good bye to the band on continues through her waiting for Norman to call and his being taken off to location...Would be nice to see that sequence complete(probably five or so minutes?).,
 

Robin9

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
7,649
Real Name
Robin
Bumping this old thread.

Having just read through the entire thread, I find the patience and restraint of Joe Caps and Jack Theakston admirable. I note that Stanton Heck is often designated as "guest" but I don't remember that being the case when he posted originally. Anyway, a very interesting thread, well worth re-visiting.
 
Last edited:

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,274
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
Thanks, but I'm well aware of this thread. I will simply say what I said before in the earlier thread - the fact that one person is withholding this material is doing great harm to our collective cinematic history. The assumption that I haven't read it and need to be educated strikes me as being unnecessarily rude.
 

marknyc

Agent
Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
48
Real Name
Mark Smith
I would be happy to be a part of any group that wants to confront Michael Arick and:

1. Demand that he tell us if he actually has a complete print.
2. Demand that he share it if he does.

Anyone care to join me?
 

Robin9

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
7,649
Real Name
Robin
Thanks, but I'm well aware of this thread. I will simply say what I said before in the earlier thread - the fact that one person is withholding this material is doing great harm to our collective cinematic history. The assumption that I haven't read it and need to be educated strikes me as being unnecessarily rude.

As you are so sensitive, I have removed the part you dislike, including the smiley you seem not have noticed. I did assume you hadn't read this thread. Why? Because your post in the other thread does not take into consideration anything in this thread.
 

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
67,604
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
As you are so sensitive, I have removed the part you dislike, including the smiley you seem not have noticed. I did assume you hadn't read this thread. Why? Because your post in the other thread does not take into consideration anything in this thread.
Let's stop with the personal comments towards another poster as it will only elicit the same type of response from that person towards you.
 

Mikey1969

Second Unit
Joined
Oct 13, 2012
Messages
343
Location
Kitchener, Ontario
Real Name
M. Fox
I'm just glad we have the film as it is now. Obviously it's not Cukor's version, but it's a reasonable representation of it, and it really is a great film. Warner really hacked it up back in the day, trying to shorten in, and removing much of the character and heart of it as well. I'm sure the footage will turn up some day, but given the pushy "demands" here and elsewhere for it, as well as the legal issues involved with transactions like this, I'm not surprised that we haven't seen it surface yet.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,770
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top