What's new

Around The World In 80 Days (1956) (1 Viewer)

Matt Hough

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
26,152
Location
Charlotte, NC
Real Name
Matt Hough
I remember reading about his comments after attending the Oscars together. He could hardly feel ecstasy about his win for Around the World because he kept claiming that Elizabeth should have won for Giant even though she hadn't even been nominated.
 

RolandL

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
6,623
Location
Florida
Real Name
Roland Lataille
RAINTREE COUNTY was filmed in 65mm and as such, it has never been presented properly properly (i.e. in 70mm)

The following are from various articles from the in70mm.com web site. I don't know how accurate they are.

"Shots of the Civil War sequence in How The West Was Won were taken from footage originally shot for "Raintree County", and split to three panels for Cinerama."

"In addition, Raintree County was raided for a shot of a stern-wheel riverboat at dusk (from Montgomery Clift and Elizabeth Taylor’s honeymoon) and another, briefer and more close up, which appears just before the intermission of How The West Was Won."

"(Technicolor also made select 35mm IB prints of "Raintreee County" and "Ben Hur" "letterboxed" to reproduce the 2.75:1 ratio within the 2.35:1 frame.)"



The following are from Widescreenmuseum.com

"Its release in 35mm is probably more the result of the studio being unwilling to spend the money for 70mm presentation than was the shortage of 70mm equipment. But since one significant motivation for the development of the process, like VistaVision, was to produce extremely high quality 35mm reduction prints, there may be some truth to claims that 70mm presentation had not been planned for the film. There is some documentation that indicates that there was substantial lobbying from exhibitors for MGM to use 35mm prints rather than force additional expenditures for new screens, sound, and projection equipment."

"Raintree County, was printed only in CinemaScope compatible 35mm with either optical sound or Magoptical sound, with a maximum aspect ratio of 2.35:1."

 

john a hunter

Screenwriter
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
1,462
Indeed there is and it is quite clear that the scenes mentioned above were from Raintree.

There is also some truth about the lack of theatres available with 70mm given the long runs of 80 Days.
It was only the second 70mm release.
I think there were only about 40-50 theatres equipped following the release of the first- Oklahoma.
 
Last edited:

Tom St Jones

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jul 14, 2013
Messages
863
Location
the Great Northeast
Real Name
Thomas
I realise this thread is for the '56 version of ATWI80D (not that this fact has kept it from digressing wildly at times, ofcourse), but was curious to know if anyone has heard any rumors of a Blu-ray release of the 1989 television miniseries version starring Pierce Brosnan? IMHO that one was also very well done. Unfortunately, the existing DVD's (from E1 Entertainmnt) pictr quality is so-so at best.
 
Last edited:

John Carver

Agent
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
30
Real Name
John
I believe that there is a shot from The Alamo that was used in HTWWW.
The Mexican Army amassing- right after the river raft sequence- I ran every Cinerama release in 3 strip - except for This Is Cinerama - a reduction print on 70mm. The Mexican Army is spherical Todd-AO footage-

Many sequences were filmed with UPV 70 - because of weight and size of the 3 strip camera.
Having run Raintree County in the original release- it was easy to recognize the reused footage- Some Civil War battle scenes were printed reversed L to R for Shenandoah.

Metro did not make 70mm prints because most theaters were running 80 Days and at that time- Todd-AO Corp had exclusive rights to market the equipment- and the Simplex machine shop conversions - were inferior and only designed to run 65mm positive prints- to this day the Simplex/Strong/wrong 70mm equipment will scrape the magnetic oxide from the print- a shoe and not a pad roller or in the Philips DP70 and AA-II gate tension bands and a pad roller kept the perfs on the intermittent sprocket by engaging 7 perfs on the sprocket.
 
Last edited:

John Carver

Agent
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
30
Real Name
John
I realise this thread is for the '56 version of ATWI80D (not that this fact has kept it from digressing wildly at times, ofcourse), but was curious to know if anyone has heard any rumors of a Blu-ray release of the 1989 television miniseries version starring Pierce Brosnan? IMHO that one was also very well done. Unfortunately, the existing DVD's (from E1 Entertainmnt) pictr quality is so-so at best.

Cheap-assed Warner refuses to spend the $ to restore the negative. They claim they can do this in-house.
They will not release on BR the present digital elements used for the DVD-

To further address cheap-ass Warner- when they re-released 80 Days in 1984 or 5 on 70mm - they used a 35mm negative to make a blow-up. Easy to see, because the change over cues were oval on the screen.
This real 70mm prints were 30 frames/second -

In 1956 - fine grain film stock was not around- the first blow-up using improved grain film was The Cardinal-
Kodak made the film stock and Technicolor did the printing.

The real hell of it: the separation masters are lost -
 

John Carver

Agent
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
30
Real Name
John
80days.jpg
This is a film that is in need of a ground-up restoration. There are element problems exacerbated by various other missing elements. As I recall, I believe the current video version is derived from the generic 24fps version. This can be checked by looking at instances of background footage (without actors). If things move slowly, it isn't the Todd-AO version.

RAH
Firstly, Mr. Harris my compliments for your work- Andy Pratt labs removed the lacquer on both sides of the 30fps negative - there was nothing mentioned about the 24fps negative. The negative could be printed, but the quality would be lacking. The separation masters are lost. Mike Todd had contact prints made for the 70mm roadshow runs, unlike optical prints today- he was serious about the quality of his prints.

The countdown 70mm leaders had: Michael Todd Company above the printed reel numbers-

I have a Cinestage print of 80 Days- 1.567 squeeze, mag audio only - I will loan this for 1 performance at a college cinema. This is close to 60 years old, sadly R10 has VS and is autocatalytic- and isolated from the print. One collector in Europe has a Cinestage print - stored at 17F. along with Oklahoma! and South Pacific - before Bloody Mary was recut as first musical number.

Some unknowing will comment that variable anamorphics are not light efficient - my comment: if you start out with enough light- it does not matter- they who believe this are unknowing of chromatic aberration inherent with the ground glass fixed decompression anamorphics..

BTW- the change overs are in different places on the 70 and 35 mm prints.

The above image is from the 80 Days Cinestage print - 2.21:1 a/r - Mike Todd wanted to preserve the 70mm a/r - at that time there was no SMPTE anamorphic standard.- I had the bottom of the screen loose because I had a curve- the reason for the left side- 20 wide by 9.75 high. Variable anamorphics and carbon arc.
 

John Carver

Agent
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
30
Real Name
John
D150.jpg
AAII70mm.jpg


The Philips Todd-AO projector. No equal to this day. This is 70mm magnetic film running on a Philips AA-II.
I run 2 in change over mode- and have a spare machine. The spherical projection lens is a ISCO T-Kiptagon, my favorite for 70mm because of edge to center focus and depth of field.

If a person has uncorrected stigmatism, the depth illusion is compromised.
Any projectionists take note of the under tensioning of the mag head- they key to a longer life of the 10 track head.

Top image is configured for using D-150 Super Curvulon projection lens- this lens allowed the use of longer f/l optics- the longer the f/l the greater the distance from the aperture plate -the greater the distance, the less any movement in the plate is noticed - the Philips machines did not have this problem - superior by design.
The Century JJ Cinerama used, where not as well designed.

The Peerless Magnarcs were made before WW-II - The DP70/AA-II design life is 80,000 hours ( at 30 fps w/ 70mm film) - Philips designer , Jan Kotte allowed for acetate film stock shrinkage in sprocket tooth pitch- I have never lost a loop or torn a perforation on these machines.

It is the $ of 80 Days that got Hollywood's attention and created the demand for 70mm product.

Feel free to address any questions to me- I am a retired IATSE projectionist / troubleshooter - and date back to Todd-AO # 30 of installs- what has become of exhibition today, is depressing.
.
 

RolandL

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
6,623
Location
Florida
Real Name
Roland Lataille
Thank you Mr. Carver for the 70mm info. You probably already know about it but, there is a great web site on 70mm - http://www.in70mm.com/. Also my father worked for American Optical (the AO in Todd-AO) in Southbridge, MA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMF

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,311
Real Name
Robert Harris
Cheap-assed Warner refuses to spend the $ to restore the negative. They claim they can do this in-house.
They will not release on BR the present digital elements used for the DVD-

To further address cheap-ass Warner- when they re-released 80 Days in 1984 or 5 on 70mm - they used a 35mm negative to make a blow-up. Easy to see, because the change over cues were oval on the screen.
This real 70mm prints were 30 frames/second -

In 1956 - fine grain film stock was not around- the first blow-up using improved grain film was The Cardinal-
Kodak made the film stock and Technicolor did the printing.

The real hell of it: the separation masters are lost -

Have you done an inventory of the original elements?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMF

John Carver

Agent
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
30
Real Name
John
Thank you Mr. Carver for the 70mm info. You probably already know about it but, there is a great web site on 70mm - http://www.in70mm.com/. Also my father worked for American Optical (the AO in Todd-AO) in Southbridge, MA.

I discovered Thomas site when it first appeared. I contribute info, but do not allow my name to be published.

The first generation bug-eye lens was designed with 7 ray tracings- and a lot of punch cards. An AO first.
Even though retired ( or trying) I provide tech support in 5 countries. I was provided internal intermittent movement parts - by Philips in the late 50s for emergency repairs only- Philips wanted the part back for failure analysis - today an intermittent sprocket has a list price of $ 1374.00 ( less 25% dealer)- and worse is a new intermittent movement- $ 14,000 list ( same discount) - Parts went through the roof when Kinoton took over the Philips cinema biz.--- the main failure on the intermittents was the phenolic (fiber) gear - a $ 300.00 part - a better choice is to have that gear fabricated from high temp Delrin- same cost.

American Optical did everything except build the projector heads- the Todd-AO bases were wired in the USA at Southbridge- same for printing Oklahoma! it was all in house. Projection was Philips, pre-amps Westrex , power amps Altec- let me put error to rest- The Westrex pre amp and switch was only configured to use Perspecta steering tomes on optical sound. No Perspecta was used or possible with the Litton Industries rack on 70mm magnetic-
 

John Carver

Agent
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
30
Real Name
John
Have you done an inventory of the original elements?

Again, my thanks for your restoration work. You made a believer of RWH - he used IB on his product, you introduced him to the DP70- serious post graduate film school.

My info comes from one of the techs at the lab who did the lacquer removal. I do not know what Warner has. I would guess the LOC has more elements. I am doubtful Warner will do anything further. From the DVD quality, you could better estimate the cost of restoration- Today 2500 feet of color print 70mm is
$ 723.00 - and at 30fps 25,431 feet of print film for 180 minutes. That is only raw stock.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,311
Real Name
Robert Harris
Again, my thanks for your restoration work. You made a believer of RWH - he used IB on his product, you introduced him to the DP70- serious post graduate film school.

My info comes from one of the techs at the lab who did the lacquer removal. I do not know what Warner has. I would guess the LOC has more elements. I am doubtful Warner will do anything further. From the DVD quality, you could better estimate the cost of restoration- Today 2500 feet of color print 70mm is
$ 723.00 - and at 30fps 25,431 feet of print film for 180 minutes. That is only raw stock.

So...

the tech at the lab had no masters?

Why would you doubt Warner's position toward saving the film?

They have a superb record of being extremely pro-active toward their library.
 

John Carver

Agent
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
30
Real Name
John
So...

the tech at the lab had no masters?

Why would you doubt Warner's position toward saving the film?

They have a superb record of being extremely pro-active toward their library.

The only element for lacquer removal was the edited negative, it had lacquer on both sides- brown and cracking-
The seps are lost -JJ saw them at the Cinestage basement- but where they are now is anyone's guess. Warner acquired rights in the late 60s as memory serves I ran this in 1967 as a 35mm magnetic print for 6 weeks at the Cinerama house. If they were serious about preserving this 5 Oscar winning film, do you think they would have started 40 years ago.?

With all respect, if they were serious, you would have been working on this after your LOA restoration.
I offered to pay for a 70mm mag print with a 60/40 split ( 60 for exhibitor and myself )- and they were not interested in making any 70mm prints.- At that time the print cost was just under $ 12K.

As the digital insanity has descended upon the art of cinema - a film print is of little importance to Warner.
They would spend less $ on more product than what the pencil pushers have determined the $ for 80 Days would cost. Consider the number of 70mm machines and what pretends to be a moving picture machine operator today. Simply platter monkeys with little knowledge--think UATC "projection attendants"- One venue in LA managed to destroy a print of The Master - opening day.
 

Robert Harris

Archivist
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
18,311
Real Name
Robert Harris
The only element for lacquer removal was the edited negative, it had lacquer on both sides- brown and cracking-
The seps are lost -JJ saw them at the Cinestage basement- but where they are now is anyone's guess. Warner acquired rights in the late 60s as memory serves I ran this in 1967 as a 35mm magnetic print for 6 weeks at the Cinerama house. If they were serious about preserving this 5 Oscar winning film, do you think they would have started 40 years ago.?

With all respect, if they were serious, you would have been working on this after your LOA restoration.
I offered to pay for a 70mm mag print with a 60/40 split ( 60 for exhibitor and myself )- and they were not interested in making any 70mm prints.- At that time the print cost was just under $ 12K.

As the digital insanity has descended upon the art of cinema - a film print is of little importance to Warner.
They would spend less $ on more product than what the pencil pushers have determined the $ for 80 Days would cost. Consider the number of 70mm machines and what pretends to be a moving picture machine operator today. Simply platter monkeys with little knowledge--think UATC "projection attendants"- One venue in LA managed to destroy a print of The Master - opening day.

There were few studio edicts toward preservation, not even thinking about restoration, possibly outside Roger Mayer's work at M-G-M / Turner.

There was virtually no one at the studio level in 1988, when Lawrence was reconstructed and restored, at which time the studios began to take things seriously.

Everything has to fit into budgetary parameters, so please make no presumption that the studio people either don't care, or don't get it.
 

John Carver

Agent
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
30
Real Name
John
I take it that despite the extremely high costs Warner will preserve it before it deteriorates too much to be saved?

The edited 30fps 65mm negative was at Andy Pratt Labs. There Kodak generated the process for safely removing the lacquer from the base and emulsion sides of the negative. The YCM separation masters are lost.

As Warner had rights since the mid 60s- and it is now 2017 - do you think enough time has transpired to conclude any restoration work is overdue ?

Yes Warner does take care of their product, They have neglected 80 Days- I can only hope the neg is stored at close to freezing- The revenue stream from BR disk will be a negative pay back..

In the meanwhile, I am content to have a 35mm Technicolor Dye Imbibition 35mm 4 channel magnetic (only) Cinestage print of 80 Days. Perspecta was used on the 35mm mag prints- there are 3 steering tones on T4 30, 34 and 40 Hz. For directing sound as it was mixed for the 6 channel prints.
 

deepscan

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
240
Real Name
JP
There were few studio edicts toward preservation, not even thinking about restoration, possibly outside Roger Mayer's work at M-G-M / Turner.

There was virtually no one at the studio level in 1988, when Lawrence was reconstructed and restored, at which time the studios began to take things seriously.

Everything has to fit into budgetary parameters, so please make no presumption that the studio people either don't care, or don't get it.

Well said, Mr. Harris.

Having seen the 1984 reissue edit, the VHS version, and the current DVD of the 24 fps version (which I have), I am sure WB is doing all they can with the film's assets since they acquired it from the late Liz Taylor.

But I will say this for the record...knowing what we learned about the current state of the elements of the original 30 fps Todd-AO version, if not for WB piecing back together the 24 fps version in the best quality possible, we probably would not be seeing this classic film today in any form. WB does have the best interests of this film in mind, and I am sure if another restoration is done for blu ray, HD, or whatever, it will be done right, from whatever best surviving elements there are.
 

deepscan

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
240
Real Name
JP
The edited 30fps 65mm negative was at Andy Pratt Labs. There Kodak generated the process for safely removing the lacquer from the base and emulsion sides of the negative. The YCM separation masters are lost.

As Warner had rights since the mid 60s- and it is now 2017 - do you think enough time has transpired to conclude any restoration work is overdue ?

Yes Warner does take care of their product, They have neglected 80 Days- I can only hope the neg is stored at close to freezing- The revenue stream from BR disk will be a negative pay back..

In the meanwhile, I am content to have a 35mm Technicolor Dye Imbibition 35mm 4 channel magnetic (only) Cinestage print of 80 Days. Perspecta was used on the 35mm mag prints- there are 3 steering tones on T4 30, 34 and 40 Hz. For directing sound as it was mixed for the 6 channel prints.

John,

To correct you, original distributor UA had the rights until 1976, when they reverted to Todd's widow, Elizabeth Taylor. WB then bought the film seven years later and renewed the copyright. It has been with WB ever since, and always will.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,734
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top