It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad Restoration discussion thread (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

Alright folks, here's the way that it works.

We are still doing due diligence, going through final elements, and working with budgets, labs and digital facilities to try to bring the budget down to a comfortable level.

Once we've exhausted our current search for elements, which if allowed, could go on forever, all the numbers go to MGM, at which point all departments involved, ie. cable and satellite tv, home video, theatrical, foreign -- go over the numbers -- and based upon what they feel the film can do during a certain period of time -- either give the project a go ahead or not -- or come back with an alternative.

While knowing that a potentially large market exists for a new DVD release is certainly helpful, the numbers also must work.

It was not within current plannning to make any sort of announcement on this at the time but the WSJ desired to do their story, and we are still a bit premature. Therefore, I would suggest that everyone sit back and relax for a while and let the business end takes its natural course. MGM has superb management, is fully aware of the asset value of the various titles within its library...

and neither they nor I have the information yet on which decisions may be made.

There, in a large nutshell is the current story.

On the other side of the coin rests The Alamo, for which we are attempting to find financial support within the Texas community. And that budget is being re-evaluated at this time in an attempt to go a slightly different digital route (the only way that the film can be saved) and reduce the numbers.

RAH

 

[David Illingworth II]

Mr. Harris,

I read the article that Jeff Wells wrote for reel.com about the Alamo restoration project a few weeks ago, and I can't believe there is no support among the many rich Texans. I was hoping that you can continue to update the Forum here on how that project is going, if you do get financing or need alternative methods.

What do you mean about a digital restoration? Are you talking about the kind of thing that was done for the DVDs of NorthxNorthwest and Dr. Zhivago?

 

[David Lambert]

Another questions for you, too: Everyone here is well aware of the situation MGM is in with contemplating a sale of their studio or perhaps the library or such. They have stated that they are floating the idea out there, but unless there is a buyer with a deal that makes sense it will be "business as usual".

What, if any, impact does this siutation have on a long-term project as a restoration of IAMMMMW or The Alamo? Is there, *in your opinion*, any lesser chance of getting approval because of the atmosphere of the question "what if someone buys MGM?", or do you think it really IS something that's ignored in the course of such a decision?

 

[Nicholas Vargo]

I hope that MGM does decide to restore "It's A Mad Mad Mad Mad World". Maybe if we all continue to buy the current DVD version of the film (which I own myself and have watched numerous times). maybe MGM will go ahead with the full-blown restoration. I wish that tax payer dollars could go to Film Preservation. I might be only 16, but I already know it's important to restore films. I feel every film (including a bad one) deserves a restoration. "Mad World" is one of those films you wished that MGM had actually restored when all of the 70MM footage first turned up to be used for video. It's just a crime that "Mad World" hasn't been restored yet and I hope Robert Harris finds the rest of the footage from the "Roadshow" version of the film. By the way, the first night I discovered this article, I printed it out just so I could read it again and again. It was a great report, Ron, and you should be very proud of it. Good Luck, Mr. Harris, on finding the rest of the deleted footage from the "Roadshow" before the whole film disappears from our sights. I'm thinking about being a film preservationist when I grow up because I have been influenced by the great work Robert Harris has done, especially on "Lawrence of Arabia". If he restores "It's A Mad Mad Mad Mad World" and if the public gets to see it, I will greatly consider Film Preservation as a career when I grow up.

 

[Robert Harris]

I'll try to answer a few queries in a single message.

Everything at MGM seems to be business as usual, which means that a great many dollars continue to go into their asset protection program.

By "digital restoration" I do not mean N x NW or Snow White.

The extant footage of the long versions of both Mad World ande Alamo are so faded, leaning toward, in the midst of, or in full vinegar syndrome that the only way to restore anything near an original color balance is via digital scanning at a minimum of 4k, followed by image manipulation and then output (record out) to 4k, the cost of which is many dollars per FRAME.

We are currently experiementing with the concepts of recording out to either 35/8 perf - Technirama format or possibly 35/4 perf full aperture, which you'll recognize as super 35.

Because of the grain structure inherent in the 6248 stock of 1960 and the 5251 stock of 1963, we are hopeful that an output to 4 perf, especially when from 70mm print, will suffice for quality. The element can then be optically returned to its native 65mm format. This a result of the extremely high resolving power of modern Eastman stocks.

In any case, the most important element is to get the corrected frames back to film in some format.

Lastly a note for Nicholas...

Get into a great college with a wide-ranging education, and if your desire is still to get into film restoration, spend some time in grad programs at UCLA, NYU (new fall 2002, in concert with The George Eastman House / Jeffrey Selznick program in film restoration). Whatever you decide to do, try to make your life's work something that you can look back on with pride and be passionate about.

RAH

 

[Rain]

Wow.

I have to admit, I've never been all that interested in this film, but reading through this thread has brought tears to my eyes.

I'm always shocked when I hear what has been allowed to happen to so many miles of film footage over the years, either in the way of letting it rot away or, in some cases, simply disposing of it altogether.

It's encouraging to know that we have people like Robert Harris on the case and that the members of this forum are so willing to do whatever they can to help preserve a piece of film history. Once again, you've all made me proud to be here.

I'm going to make a point of picking up a copy of the existing DVD next week, for the very reasons that were mentioned previously.

Even if this isn't the film I'd most like to see restored, as Nicholas pointed out, every film deserves a restoration. And with each one that is successful (which unfortunately always boils down to money), there is hope for one more film receiving such consideration in the future. Plus, this movie seems to mean quite a lot to many people I have much respect for.

Ron, thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Robert, thanks for contributing your expertise here. Even more importantly, thanks for doing what you do.

Nicholas, welcome. And may I say that was the best first post I've ever read on HTF.

 

[Tom Blizzard]

:star: :star: :star: :star:
Ron,
In 1992 I bought the "New Restored Version!" of "It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" on laserdisc. The "restoration" was done by Rennie Johnson and Paul Scrabo. They did a good job of putting together a better copy of the film with some missing parts. Only now, however, do I realize (with your help) that there was more to be done.
I had no idea that there was anyone else who enjoyed the movie as much as I have over the years. Glad you enjoy it too. I appreciate, so much, your report about the movie listed at the top of the site. Believe me, it will become a part of my library.
I remember seeing "Mad World" in true Cinerama at the Tennessee theater in downtown Nashville, TN back in the 60s. There is no telling what will come of this effort. Maybe even a new re-release. I'm looking forward the the three disc, special edition DVD that Mr. Harris mentioned.
What do you think??
Regards, Tom Blizzard

 

[Peter Kline]

Hi Tom,
Not to make it a big deal (ok I will) but IAMMMMW was never in "true" Cinerama, just a poor imitation of the process.
Go here for all you'll ever need to know about Cinerama:
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingcr1.htm

 

[Tom Blizzard]

Thanks Peter.........
Golly, maybe I'm getting it mixed up with "How The West Was Won". Saw 'em both at the same theater.......... Regards, Tom B.
P.S. Of course, now I "get the picture" Super Panavision. I just read your ealier post. (Thanks)

 

[ReggieW]

The very best of luck with this important restoration Mr. Harris. Myself, and many others are willing to do whatever it takes to express our support and gratitude. Btw, I purchased a new large format book on the life of David Lean written by his widow Sandra (who surprisingly has an audio commentary on the Zhivago DVD). She spoke of the affection and awe you had for David, and had a few kind words for you. I certainly hope this restoration turns out to be every bit as outstanding as your work on Lawrence and Vertigo. Speaking of Lawrence, whenever Sony/Columbia decides to revisit this film, I sincerely hope they seek your expertise next time around. Thanks for all your hard work and dedication.
All the best!
Reg

 

[Joseph Goodman]

How in the world is anyone going to be able to get such brittle footage through an optical printer or scanner without destroying it? Wouldn't all the warping and buckling make getting good focus in the printer/scanner difficult? It's been done before, but I'd still like to hear some details on how the fragility of the surviving elements will be dealt with...

 

[Robert Harris]

Re: Mr. Goodman's query about brittle footage...

There is no way of reproducing this material. The roll of film which Ron photographed is approximately 1,200 feet of 70mm material (a bit over ten minutes) which is suitable only for the production of extremely brittle guitar picks.

About 50% of the remaining trims are heading quickly in this direction. Another 25 are not far behind.

RAH

 

[MatthewA]

So then how is the restoration going to be possible?

 

[Robert Harris]

As any footage goes bad, it can no longer be used as a part of the restoration. As the last bits go, there will no longer be any ability to save the roadshow version.
For background the the "SmileboX" process, which I would suggest as a second disc to a special Mad World DVD set...
go here:
http://www.cineramaadventure.com/smilebox.htm
And I suggest a proper tour of the site, as the documentary is superbly crafted.
RAH

 

[MatthewA]

So I guess there will be no restoration after all? :frowning:

 

[Jonathan Perregaux]

Does this curved aspect still fit within the confines of the 16 x 9 aspect ratio (for those of us who beg for anamorphic presentations on DVD)? It sure looks pretty close.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

Does this curved aspect still fit within the confines of the 16 x 9 aspect ratio (for those of us who beg for anamorphic presentations on DVD)? It sure looks pretty close.

It looks close enough that I'm sure they could windowbox their smile box even if it did not.
Regards,

 

[Darren Gross]

Here's something a bit confusing:

If most of the material used for the expanded laserdisc was from a workprint and wasn't included in the longer roadshow prints, then why was it in a 'rectified' format (ie: with the edges compressed for exhibition on curved screens)?

Wouldn't theatrical prints- therefore publicly exhibited roadshow prints only be printed in this way?

The workprint wouldn't be printed in such a way, would it and the UltraPanavision 70 would have a squeeze over the entire image, not just the sides...

 

[Peter Kline]

I don't see what the advantages would be to "Smilebox" IAMMMMW. The film was shot in Ultra Panavision 70 and meant to be seen on a flat or slightly curved screen. There is no inherent distortion in the film as appears with real 3 camera Cinerama formatted for a flat television screen. The center panel looks convex to the eye in when viewing real Cinerama (HTWWW) flat. The "Smilebox" eliminates this distortion by simulating a deeply curved screen on a monitor as the audience would see in a theatre. The laserdisc release contained some rectified segments that were meant for "Cinerama" projection. Those snippets, mostly extensions of excisting scenes, had the squeeze added on the right and left. Those special rectified (the whole film) prints were only used in the handful of Cinerama theatres. Most presentations were in either standard 70mm or 35mm.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

Peter,
I think that's why it is being proposed as an interesting supplemental presentation in addition to the proper standard letterbox presentation.
Regards,