Is “Giant” overlooked BD-wise? (1 Viewer)

[Allansfirebird]

Just because a story has been bandied around over the years doesn't make it true. Fox obtained control of the Todd-AO corporation in 1958 after Mike Todd's death (as related in John Belton's authoritative book "Widescreen Movies", Harvard University Press, 1992). Having made Can-Can in Todd-AO, it defies logic that Cleopatra would be made in lesser format.

And just because Todd-AO was obtained by Fox after Todd's death doesn't necessarily mean that Cleopatra was always guaranteed to be made in the process. Fox made no movies in the process from 1960 to 1963, so I'm not seeing a burning desire of Fox's part to use the process. For now, I'm going by the extant story, and not more supposition, until I can find a complete copy of Taylor's contract for the movie.

 

[Bob Cashill]

New book out on the film: Giant: Elizabeth Taylor, Rock Hudson, James Dean, Edna Ferber, and the Making of a Legendary American Film https://www.amazon.com/dp/1250061903/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_2-E3AbFBFD3G0

 

[Worth]

According to this image, that $1,000,000 figure was an urban legend...

And it's still the case. Most actors are paid a fraction of the multi-million dollar paydays that get widely publicized.

 

[Les Mangram]

And just because Todd-AO was obtained by Fox after Todd's death doesn't necessarily mean that Cleopatra was always guaranteed to be made in the process. Fox made no movies in the process from 1960 to 1963, so I'm not seeing a burning desire of Fox's part to use the process. For now, I'm going by the extant story, and not more supposition, until I can find a complete copy of Taylor's contract for the movie.

Cleopatra was made between 1960 and 1963!

 

[RolandL]

Just because a story has been bandied around over the years doesn't make it true. Fox obtained control of the Todd-AO corporation in 1958 after Mike Todd's death (as related in John Belton's authoritative book "Widescreen Movies", Harvard University Press, 1992). Having made Can-Can in Todd-AO, it defies logic that Cleopatra would be made in lesser format.

Shooting started in CinemaScope, changed to 3-panel Cinerama and finally to Todd-AO.

 

[Les Mangram]

Shooting started in CinemaScope, changed to 3-panel Cinerama and finally to Todd-AO.

Since when has Wikipedia been an authoritative source?
For what it's worth, I believe that Cleopatra was originally conceived in the late fifties as a relatively cheap CinemaScope production to be filmed on the Fox backlot and starring Fox contract artist Joan Collins. Then Fox acquired Todd-AO, saw the massive success of Ben-Hur and upscaled the whole project. I do not believe that anything was shot in CinemaScope and as for three panel Cinerama, I am pretty sure that MGM had an exclusive deal with Cinerama for the use of the process in narrative films, hence How the West Was Won and The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm.

 

[Race Bannon]

I was able to watch my copy this past weekend (for the first time, first time seeing the film). I enjoyed it quite a bit. I'm now working my way through the extras.

 

[Robin9]

. . . I believe that Cleopatra was originally conceived in the late fifties as a relatively cheap CinemaScope production to be filmed on the Fox backlot and starring Fox contract artist Joan Collins. Then Fox acquired Todd-AO, saw the massive success of Ben-Hur and upscaled the whole project.

Fox did indeed tentatively plan a cheap and cheerful remake of Cleopatra as well as similarly cheap remakes of several other films. Then they were approached by Walter Wanger who wanted to remake Cleopatra as a big budget prestige film with Elizabeth Taylor and who was, I believe, unaware that Fox already had plans for a quick, low-budget movie. Fox were soon convinced that Wanger's idea was more sensible. It has long been accepted that the decision to use Todd-AO was due to Elizabeth Taylor's involvement.

 

[Les Mangram]

Fox did indeed tentatively plan a cheap and cheerful remake of Cleopatra as well as similarly cheap remakes of several other films. Then they were approached by Walter Wanger who wanted to remake Cleopatra as a big budget prestige film with Elizabeth Taylor and who was, I believe, unaware that Fox already had plans for a quick, low-budget movie. Fox were soon convinced that Wanger's idea was more sensible. It has long been accepted that the decision to use Todd-AO was due to Elizabeth Taylor's involvement.

The whole "Elizabeth Taylor insisted on Todd-AO" thing was started by people who had the mistaken belief that Taylor still had a financial interest in the Todd-AO Corporation, inherited from Mike Todd. This was not the case, Fox acquired the Todd AO Corporation after Todd's death in 1958. What possible reason would Taylor have had for insisting that the film be in Todd-AO (rather than Super Panavision or Technirama or any other process), and what possible reason would Fox have had for not making such a prestige production in a process that they owned? Over the years people have put two an two together and made five, the two and two being the mistaken belief that Taylor had an interest in Todd AO and her well known disdain for being photographed in CinemaScope.

 

[Allansfirebird]

From James Robert Parish's "Fiasco: A History of Hollywood's Iconic Flops":

In the seesawing negotiations, Taylor finally agreed to do Cleopatra for a fee of $750,000; $4,500 in weekly living expenses for her, Fisher, and their entourage; 10% of the box-office gross; and $50,000 a week if the picture went over its planned sixteen-week schedule. She demanded directorial approval and that the film be shot abroad (for tax purposes). Other requirements and perks stipulated by Taylor included deluxe living accommodations during the shoot and a $150,000 salary for Eddie Fisher to handle unspecified duties as her assistant. Elizabeth also insisted that the epic be lensed in the Todd-AO wide-screen process. (This had an adverse effect on the studio, as it required Fox to make hefty licensing payments to the company founded by Elizabeth’s late husband, Mike Todd. Moreover, using this filming process necessitated extra-careful attention to the lighting of the sound-stage sets, which was both time-consuming and expensive.)

 

[Robin9]

The whole "Elizabeth Taylor insisted on Todd-AO" thing was started by people who had the mistaken belief that Taylor still had a financial interest in the Todd-AO Corporation, inherited from Mike Todd. This was not the case, Fox acquired the Todd AO Corporation after Todd's death in 1958. What possible reason would Taylor have had for insisting that the film be in Todd-AO (rather than Super Panavision or Technirama or any other process), and what possible reason would Fox have had for not making such a prestige production in a process that they owned? Over the years people have put two an two together and made five, the two and two being the mistaken belief that Taylor had an interest in Todd AO and her well known disdain for being photographed in CinemaScope.

It seems you have provided the answer to your own question. If Elizabeth Taylor balked at the idea of being photographed in Cinemascope, why would she not ask for Todd-AO? She had at least a sentimental attachment to the process. She had never had any connection to either Super Panavision or Technirama.

 

[Les Mangram]

From James Robert Parish's "Fiasco: A History of Hollywood's Iconic Flops":

This is exactly what I mean by people mistakenly thinking that Taylor still had an interest in Todd AO. Fox owned Todd AO, there would be no question of hefty licensing payments! I repeat, Fox had already made Can-Can in Todd AO, so this is all nonsense, but if it were true why did Taylor not insist on any of her other films being made in Todd AO?

 

[Les Mangram]

It seems you have provided the answer to your own question. If Elizabeth Taylor balked at the idea of being photographed in Cinemascope, why would she not ask for Todd-AO? She had at least a sentimental attachment to the process. She had never had any connection to either Super Panavision or Technirama.

Sentimental attachment? Cleopatra was the one and only film that Taylor made in Todd-AO. Why didn't she insist on Raintree County being made in Todd-AO, or any other film that she ever made?

 

[Allansfirebird]

Sentimental attachment? Cleopatra was the one and only film that Taylor made in Todd-AO. Why didn't she insist on Raintree County being made in Todd-AO, or any other film that she ever made?

Several reasons:
A) Taylor was a contract player with MGM, and did not have the kind of superstar clout she would later have by the time she finally completed her contract with the studio with BUtterfield 8.
B) MGM Camera 65 was, as the name implies, MGM's proprietary filming format, so naturally they would wish to use that, rather than go through the extra expense of licensing another format.
C) MGM was not doing very well financially at the time Raintree County was made, which would definitely preclude expensive demands made by Taylor. If she didn't like it, there was nothing she could do as she was still under contract to the studio.
D) Taylor later made no films with Fox after completing her MGM contract or finishing Cleopatra during the period Fox continued making movies in Todd-AO, apart from The Only Game in Town. If you look at the list of movies made in the process, they're all Fox productions - no other studio leased out the filming process, choosing to use Super Panavision or Technirama.

This is exactly what I mean by people mistakenly thinking that Taylor still had an interest in Todd AO. Fox owned Todd AO, there would be no question of hefty licensing payments! I repeat, Fox had already made Can-Can in Todd AO, so this is all nonsense, but if it were true why did Taylor not insist on any of her other films being made in Todd AO?

You have yet to provide any evidence backing up your claim, yet you handwave my cited sources away by saying they're mistaken. I don't know what to tell you at this point. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Robin9]

Sentimental attachment? Cleopatra was the one and only film that Taylor made in Todd-AO. Why didn't she insist on Raintree County being made in Todd-AO, or any other film that she ever made?

Because she didn't need to! Raintree County was shot by Robert Surtees in Camera 65 and most certainly not using lenses from Bausch & Lomb. She wasn't able to anyway. Raintree County was an MGM movie and at that stage Elizabeth Taylor was still an MGM contract actress.

 

[ahollis]

In 1958 Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation invested in Todd-AO through acquisition of four percent of preferred stock from Magna Theater. Magna, partially owned by Michael Todd, then owned 63 percent of Todd-AO, while AOC held the balance. Fox also acquired the rights to film at least one picture a year in Todd-AO over the seven and one-half years. Fox filmed all the post 1958 Todd-AO films except for The Alamo (United Artists) and Airport (Universal). Since Todd also died in 1958, I would assume that Taylor inherited his shares of Magna Theatre, but by the time Fox produced Cleopatra they owned a stake in the process, so I’m gonna go with side that Taylor did not insist that Todd-AO be used. Fox already had the rights for one picture a year and Taylor did not receive any monies from it.

 

[Rob_Ray]

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Even if Miss Taylor no longer had an interest in Todd-AO, she probably insisted on it simply because it was Fox's proprietary large format alternative to CinemaScope, which she detested.

 

[Worth]

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Even if Miss Taylor had no longer had an interest in Todd-AO, she probably insisted on it simply because it was Fox's proprietary large format alternative to CinemaScope, which she detested.

Can't really blame her. Cinemascope was ugly as hell. It wasn't until Panavision came around that a decent looking anamorphic image was possible.

 

[Matt Hough]

Fox filmed all the post 1958 Todd-AO films except for The Alamo (United Artists) and Airport (Universal).

Wasn't Porgy and Bess filmed in Todd-AO?

 

[Andrew Budgell]

Sentimental attachment? Cleopatra was the one and only film that Taylor made in Todd-AO. Why didn't she insist on Raintree County being made in Todd-AO, or any other film that she ever made?

To answer the first part of your question, Elizabeth wasn't even get seriously involved with Mike Todd until filming of Raintree County was underway. They got to know one another largely by telephone while she was on location making that film.