Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by StephenDH, Jul 6, 2014.
It might be from the same source but encodes can be different, one could be superior to the other.
Can't begin to tell ya how cool it is to see these again. Saw it during the initial run and have always known this as Andy Warhol's FRANKENSTEIN. I've never gotten used to the FLESH FOR FRANKENSTEIN moniker. (I noticed the Criterion laserdisc is on Ebay )
"Andy Warhol's Frankenstein" is the US title. God knows why as he'd absolutely nothing to do with it.
He's listed as one of the four producers.
Antonio Margheriti is listed as co-director but he wasn't. He was also prosecuted for some financial chicanery as a result.
There's probably a movie to be made about what went on behind the cameras.
Do you have any links to some "behind the scenes" stories about this film?
Only my personal recollection and what's on IMDb I'm afraid.
I'm sorry to say it but stereoscopically, this film is a mess.
Colonel Robert V. Bernier was a 3-D expert with 30+ years of experience when he was hired as Technical Advisor on the film. He built the Space-Vision Trioptiscope lens and knew what you could and could not do with it.
Morrissey ignored his expertise and the results speak for themselves. The film is loaded with shots like this which are very hard on the eyes and cannot be fixed.
FfF was the title of the R-rated cut (with or without Warhol wanting his name on it)--
That was the cut I saw on Instant Netflix, and thought, "What, what? Doesn't look so bad..."
Then, from descriptions of the movie, the abrupt editing, and camera shots that stayed carefully away from gore or nude bodies, realized I was seeing a LOT left on the cutting room floor.
Warhol was involved with the project right from the start. When I spoke with Paul Morrissey, he got agitated when I referred to film as ANDY WARHOL'S FRANKENSTEIN. He wanted it known as FLESH FOR FRANKENSTEIN.
It began filming in March 1973.
I should add that when I suggested to Morrissey that we would try to fix the alignment issues, he snapped - "There's nothing wrong with the way I shot it!"
That's very surprising to hear. Although I only saw it once in 3D 40 years ago, I didn't recall seeing anything like what is depicted in the animated .gif.
Perhaps it was there, but I just didn't notice, or care. I guess I was so in awe of seeing an "X" rated 3D movie at the time, that technical glitches must have went right over my head (or maybe it was the spear with guts dangling on the tip that went over my head!)
I had no problems with Frankenstein in 3D either.
Occasionally there are well done shots, when Morrissey actually listened to Bernier.
But they are the exception and not the rule.
For years I had rosy memories of TREASURE OF THE FOUR CROWNS. I was twenty when it was released. Then I tried to watch it in 3-D about five years ago and had to stop. The 3-D was painful!
Here's the full 35mm frame so you can see for yourself.
So is there any hope at all of FFF being restored, at least as it was when first released?
I wish I knew, Reed. My discussion with Morrissey was not successful. He was willing to pay for an HD scan but wanted the 3-D alignment work done for free.
I wished him luck.
No one should expect that work such as this should be performed gratis.
I hope that something can be worked out.
I agree 100%. I was cordial and made him laugh when I replied that I have this bad habit: I like to eat once in a while.
I just got the impression that he's very old-school and wants an expert to work gratis just for the experience and privilege.
Well, maybe if it was 1981 and I was 20 years old!
Maybe he got agitated because AW probably didn't have anything to do with it apart from the use of his name.
His attitude would be understandable if he were David Lean or Stanley Kubrick . . . . but he isn't.