Those shots are excellent.But how great is it in the video that that last tree stump was still there!
Ronald Epstein said:You'll hear an announcement in less than a month.
Moe Dickstein said:So it is November just as we thought
Criterion only announces things on the 15th of each month, or the nearest monday or friday to the 15th.Ron said we will know in "less than a month" therefore that only leaves the August 15th announcements for November,David Weicker said:I know that we will hear about November's titles in less than a month. I also expect that at some time we will hear IAMMMMW being announced. Whether the two coincide, who knows. Given how tight-lipped Criterion is about the specifics of their releases, I don't think anyone one (outside of Criterion) knows for sure. Mr. Kimmel was told that the clue was indeed IAMMMMW, and that it was definitely coming. He didn't say he was told when it was coming. David
Outstanding video. Thorough investigative work and continually interesting. Made my day. Smiles at the end. Thanks for posting. Waiting for Criterion Blu-Ray. My Spanish Class at Ganesha High School, Pomona, attended opening Cinerama Dome presentation of "IAMMMMW". I believe it was the first month of release, but I'm not sure until I see restored Blu-Ray (???).Ronald Epstein said:Really enjoyed watching this video this morning...
Robert Harris said:The 162 as well as the 197 were both approved by the filmmakers. The cutting history of the film is almost as huge as.the film itself. Cuts and trims had been continuous over several months, as the film was previewed in multiple cities. The film slowly took shape between July and November of 1963.The final re-cut was extremely intensive and complex. Deletions, in many cases, were not simple trims. Entire sequences and scenes were moved from reel to reel, and virtually the entire film had to be re-mixed.My preference has always been the 197, even with a bit of fat attached. The 162 moves more quickly, and is a great film. But for those who experienced some of the deleted material, it can seem lacking.Also, when it comes to "liking" the film, it's important to understand that this is one of those films that was not meant to be viewed in any way other than on a huge, huge screen, and shared with a huge audience. Seen in 70mm, it's a totally different experience.RAH
Robert Harris said:The 162 as well as the 197 were both approved by the filmmakers. The cutting history of the film is almost as huge as.the film itself. Cuts and trims had been continuous over several months, as the film was previewed in multiple cities. The film slowly took shape between July and November of 1963.The final re-cut was extremely intensive and complex. Deletions, in many cases, were not simple trims. Entire sequences and scenes were moved from reel to reel, and virtually the entire film had to be re-mixed.My preference has always been the 197, even with a bit of fat attached. The 162 moves more quickly, and is a great film. But for those who experienced some of the deleted material, it can seem lacking.Also, when it comes to "liking" the film, it's important to understand that this is one of those films that was not meant to be viewed in any way other than on a huge, huge screen, and shared with a huge audience. Seen in 70mm, it's a totally different experience.RAH
We'll if Criterion has been working on this for a few years now, it's probably going to be the cloests to the originial 192 or 210. They may have all three versions, this could be Criterion's big release of the year jamed pack with all lengths and hours and hours of special features.rmw650 said:So just for clarification purposes, what version of this film is Criterion actually releasing, since there are so many versions out there, if it is scheduled to be released before the holidays...210, 192, 179, 168, 156, or any other length this film has been known to be released under? I'm hoping the extended version myself at 210
Why don't we go halvsies? Then we could convert it into a museum, and charge admission. We'd recoup the investment in no time.Charles Smith said:
But how would you split up the profit? Shares?Reed Grele said:Why don't we go halvsies? Then we could convert it into a museum, and charge admission. We'd recoup the investment in no time.