How The West Was Won... (1 Viewer)

[John Hodson]

Actually, having seen the film again - and while I wouldn't say it's the worst (let's just say, as a dyed in the wool Ford fan, it showed potential) - I'm not afraid to say, no, I don't think it's the best. On reflection, Jimmy Stewart's scenes are, IMHO, the finest, but THE best sequence of all has to be the buffalo stampede which just shows off not only the wonder of Cinerama but a truly thunderous soundtrack.

BTW, disregard my comments about the LD / DVD earlier; I'm told that although the DVD sleeve gives the running time as 2hrs 30mins, the running time including overture and exit music is actually 2hrs 44-ish which tallies with the LD.

 

[Robert Crawford]

John Ford is my favorite director, I grew up watching his films which was fuel to me loving film as I do today. However, that being said, I have to agree with others that his directed sequence in this film was the weakest of the three.




Crawdaddy

 

[DeeF]

I'm also a very big John Ford fan myself; I watch my DVD of The Searchers every few months, and also My Darling Clementine. I don't think his work on this movie is bad, but the other sequences are better, I think.

Although overall I wouldn't say that How The West Was Won is the greatest movie, it is really quite fascinating to see, for the Cinerama technique, the sweep of it, and the music.

I would love to see it in a Cinerama theater, recreating my experience seeing it as a 6-year old in Albuquerque.

 

[John Hodson]

No, it's not the best of westerns and its very nature makes it something of a dog's dinner - we just get going with Hathaway and Stewart, and then, just as we begin to care about these characters we've been introduced to, they disappear - puff - into history. Ford changes the mood completely, in a very Fordian manner, but his piece never really gets into its stride does it? Marshall's segment is saved by the stampede, and then the whole 'wild west' thing is tossed off in a few minutes with Hathaway's final segment.

I know it's 160-odd minutes, but it feels too damn short, as they rush headlong through decades of rich history, discarding characters with a whimsical line, introducing some - Massey's Lincoln - and allowing them not a word.

Still breathtaking however...

 

[Bill Huelbig]

About the water tower: I believe it came down during a rehearsal with the buffalo before the Cinerama cameras were ready, so the actual collapse of the tower is not seen in the film. There's a picture of it coming down (complete with stuntmen on top of it) in the souvenir program, however.

I will try to post this picture when I get home tonight.

 

[John Hodson]

Thanks for that Bill; that shot is the same as this one that I posted a link to earlier isn't it?

 

[Bill Huelbig]

That's the one, John. Thanks. I'm glad you enjoyed the show in Bradford, and I hope we get to see it in the US sometime soon.

 

[JPCinema]

I've seen "HTWWW" in restored Cinerama three tmes in the past few years. Twice at the Cinerama theater in Seattle and once at the Cinerama Dome in LA. Its a great experience!!! I hope it is played again soon!
I hope that there is a restored SE of it soon from Warners. It would be fantastic if it had one version in "Smilebox" as was done in the documentary "Cinerama Adventure". That effect really captures the sweep of the Cinerama screen.

 

[Doug Bull]

I just hope that any new release will come from the original Cinerama elements and not the poorly done(at the time)Cinemascope ones.

With today's technology I'm sure that Warners could come up with a stunning new transfer, complete with the original Cinerama Sound Mix.

The only query is, would it be cost effective for Warners?
I just hope and pray that George Feltenstein twists a few arms and gets the go ahead.

Along with The Searchers it is the best Hollywood Western ever made.

 

[Patrick McCart]

I really doubt they would use the CinemaScope conversion. It suffers from the panels not having even color and contrast, as well as it being one big optical.

However, Warner would be making video technology history by presenting How the West Was Won correctly.

 

[JPCinema]

A "How The West Was Won" SE would have been my one question at the WB chat last week, but I never had the opportunity.
I hope that someone might know if it is at least in preparation for a new DVD release.

 

[John Hodson]

I mentioned this in another thread (the complete item focuses on HP's work on King Kong), but the relevent stuff about HTWWW seemed to get buried, hence my post here. This is from 'Ain't it Cool News', but it originates from Hewlett-Packard - see the complete press release here:

http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/pr...5/050418a.html

"HP has also invented a new film restoration process for Cinerama films that eliminates the "seams" visible from the old three panel Cinerama process as well as corrects the distortions in perspective that were inherent in the change from Cinerama's curved screen to a flat one. Tests have already begun on the classic MGM 1962 film "How The West Was Won," now part of the vast Warner Bros. Studios library."

I'm delighted that work on restoring HTWWW seems to be underway but it's a question of how; do we, we home cinema fans, want to eradicate the Cinerama experience altogether?

 

[Bill Huelbig]

I sure hope that at the end of all this restoration work, they'll give us a choice: the new home video version, or the original 1962 Cinerama edition with the join lines intact. The filmmakers worked so hard to make a great film using the 3-camera technique, and they succeeded so spectacularly, that it would be a sad disservice to film history to completely wipe out all traces of 3-camera Cinerama.

 

[John Hodson]

Indeed. It would be akin to colorization IMHO.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Yes, I agree!





Crawdaddy

 

[Bill Huelbig]

Well, John and Crawdaddy, since we know the Warner Home Video people read the Forum, maybe we got our message through!

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Bill,

No doubt.

 

[oscar_merkx]

Great news then

 

[Dick]

Well, I can understand purists having a problem with the elimination of the join lines, but to compare that to colorization is a bit of a stretch. Colorization was/is a horrifying bastardization of a film intended to be black and white. It completely negates all the hard work put into it by the cinematographer, set designer, costume designer, etc. Removing join lines must begin with the premise that, had there been the technology to produce a 2.76:1 ratio with the same image size and resolution as was gained by using three cameras, using a single camera instead, that is how it would have been done. In other words, a modern software program that can somehow eliminate this obvious FLAW (and hopefully correct color inconsistancies and other distortions) would seem to me to be a tool that directors of the original films would wish they had had for re-issues of their movies, had they lived long enough, no?

 

[John Hodson]

Directors tried very hard to disguise join lines; they framed their shots in many cases to do so, and thus they become part of the creative process.

Cinerama boasted a distinctive curved screen and there was characteristic distortion at the edges; this is how these films were seen by audiences theatrically. To remove the lines altogether, to flatten the image and remove the distortion - and still call it Cinerama - is, I insist, as great a manipulation of the original presentation as colorization.

It's not a flaw IMHO, just as not having The Sea Hawk in colour - a shame though it is - is not a flaw.

It's just how it was.