New version of "Mad World" out this week? (1 Viewer)

[Ronald Epstein]

Really, we can talk about this until we are
blue in the face. Obviously MGM isn't going
to budge and pony up the dough to restore this
film.

If this film belonged to Fox or Warner Home
Video, you can bet that those studio would have
done the necessary restoration.

Every studio holds a few "Holy Grail" films
that remain the pride and joy of that studio.
In most cases, the studios recognize the value
of these films and do whatever is necessary to
save them, often ponying up big money for full
restoration.

We can all list titles that Fox, Warner and
Columbia have painfully restored for DVD release.

Is Mad Mad Mad Mad World a "Holy Grail"
film for MGM? You bet it is! This film features
the largest assortment of comics from Hollywood's
golden age. It may not be the funniest film ever
made, but it is without question the greatest
comedy ever assembled.

What film at MGM holds even higher status? How
about West Side Story. Well, folks, MGM
didn't pony up any money to restore that film.
The recently released Special Edition boxed set
is the same transfer. If what I hear is correct,
West Side Story is also a film in danger
of being lost forever because nobody wants to pay
for a restoration.

I'm not pointing the finger at all the folks
at MGM Home Video. From what I hear, many of
them want the films restored. Decisions tend
to go higher up than that, and obviously all of
them are based on financial reasons.

Still, we are faced with losing Mad World
and West Side Story forever if the studio
doesn't recognize the value of the artwork it
has in its vault.

 

[Robert Harris]

What appears to be a "dim" imaage on the Dome screen is not.

The image has a lack of contrast, and therefore focus, due to major problems of cross-illumination, which wash out the image.

This makes the image appear murky. I'm told that they cranked the lamps up to 16fl for Mad World.

RAH

 

[george kaplan]

It's truly depressing that this film is never going to get the treatment it deserves. :frowning:

 

[Jeff Krispow]

Greetings, folks!

I was at the Dome benefit screening myself this past Thursday, and this new 70mm presentation was by far the best version I have seen to date. However, I must agree that it was not perfect, and it did have room for improvement.

With regard to the presentation at the Dome, sorry Bruce — the light output wasn't dim. The Dome is well-able to throw a proper light source at their screen. The problem was with the print itself.

As Bob said, the color timing is off, plus there's that contrast issue with the print source. On its own, with nothing else to compare it to, it looked pretty darn good. But if you are truely AWARE of what the actual colors are supposed to be, then you could easily see that color timing was off.

A rather simplified way to get an idea of what the color timing is likely going to be for a print of IAMMMMW is to take a look at the opening title card for the film — it should be a rather vivid olive-greenish sort of color, which is how it's presented on the 1991 LD reconstruction. In comparison, this new 70mm print was a pale greenish color. The green was somewhat close, but again, just too pale. Other colors were better than most prints I've seen, but again just too pale.

In comparison to the recent 2001 DVD edition (vomit!), the 70mm Dome print is definitely superior in every manner. I personally think that most of the internet reviewers who looked at this DVD were completely blind when they gave it terrific ratings, saying things like "this is the best the film has ever looked," and that it had "fantastic, natural colors." Hogwash! Those reviewers obviously don't have a clue as to what this film is supposed to look like, not to mention that the colors on this DVD so far off, they fall into a totally different part of the color spectrum. Rather than a vivid olive-greenish, or even a pale green, the opening title card on the DVD is RED. The image is rather sharp, which seems to give the illusion that this is a great transfer, but it's not since the colors are waaaaaay off. (If you think the DVD looks fantastic, get your eyes examined.) Just as an FYI, the DVD edition came from an original 1970 35mm reduction print. No restoration, no timing, no nuthin' was done to it.

I was at the screening with a very good, old friend of mine, who's name some of you might recognize: Joshua Berman. Josh is the one who rescued ~20m of the 30m of long-missing roadshow footage from a warehouse about to be destroyed (along with all its contents!). We'd been really good friends since we were rather little tots, but had unfortunately lost touch about a decade ago due to, well, the crap that life throws at people. We've apparently both been trying to find each other for ages, but were unsuccessful. I had seriously hoped he would be at this screening — with all the work he's done on IAMMMMW, and his love for the film, how could he not be there? But I simply couldn't find him. Then, during Intermission, someone who was sitting behind me had gotten up to talk to someone, and was leaning on the back of my seat (and my head), and when I asked him to move, we just stared at each other for about 10 seconds and then these huge grins spread across our faces. Yup, we'd been sitting right next to each other (okay, in front of and behind, same diff.) and didn't even notice it. 'Twas a very enjoyable reunion!

Along with Josh was Jim Kroeper — Jim is an associate of Robert Harris, and was the one who finally located the long-missing "Road Calls" intermission audio back in 2001.

(Fan Side Note: For the 1991 LD reconstruction, Josh really wanted to see the "Road Calls" sequence inserted into the film, but it was long since lost. Josh attempted to get MGM to fund a re-recording using Stan Freberg — who really wanted to do it — but MGM wouldn't go for it. It took a decade, but thankfully Jim located the entire missing sequence. At Thursday's screening, Freberg was unaware that the audio sequence had finally been located, and was overjoyed when Josh told him that it had been located… and was going to play at the screening!)

Josh, Jim and I spoke at length after the screening regarding the film, the print, the "state of restoration," and all sort of other personal things that would bore most of you silly. Josh and Jim are probably some of the best "experts" on how this film looks (and should look) aside from Robert Harris. Both agreed that it was a great experience to see it properly projected in 70mm, and that the print was nice. Just nice… not fantastic. They said the biggest problem was definitely that the color timing was off, and that other prints they've seen were definitely better in that respect (especially a 35mm IB print Jim said he viewed). They also said the same things I mentioned above about the color comparison — the 1991 LD reconstruction, while obviously not perfect, had "much truer colors". Josh did state that this new 70mm print was thankfully superior to the dreadful mess that was exhibited last year at the Egyptian Theatre's 39th Anniversary Grand Re-Opening screening.

The other issue was that MGM gave the Cinerama Dome a flat 70mm print, which, when projected, distorted the image at the ends. Because the screen at the Dome has such a large curvature, a rectified print would have been far more appropriate, and would have removed the distortion. ("Rectification" is an optical process that removes the anamorphic squeeze from a film print. This is replaced with a gradient squeeze that enables an anamorphic film print to be propjected properly against the the highly-curved sides of a Cinerama screen. A gradient squeeze is applied to the image, starting at the center of the frame, which is completely unsqueezed — however, the squeeze gradually increases towards the left and right edges of the frame. If you've ever seen a widescreen movie where a person person suddenly gets very skinny as they move towards the edge of the frame, and returns to normal in the middle of the frame, you're watching a rectified print. If you have the 2001 IAMMMMW DVD, the 59m of extra footage is shown in this process.)

I also asked Josh and Jim what the current state of restoration was, and that I'd heard that the original elements were disintegrating (as Ron keeps claiming) — it was my understanding that the film was in dire need of restoration NOW or else! I was told that wasn't exactly correct — most of the film is fine, and that it was only some elements that were problematic. The biggest problem is apparently with the 20+ minutes of "lost" Roadshow footage that Josh had. When he turned it over to MGM for use on the laserdisc, it was supposed to be cleaned to remove dirt, scratches, etc., but that was it. Instead, MGM chemically-treated ALL his footage as part of some rejuvenation process, which had disastrous long-term effects. All of that footage is now extremely brittle, has shrunken, faded and is rapidly decomposing. MGM apparently denied that the film was treated in any way, and blamed it on the film stock, previous storage conditions, etc. — except that the footage Josh retains is still in the same shape it was 12 years ago and shows no signs of decomposition. So no, it's not the "entire film" that's decomposing as Ron makes it sound like — however, it IS some of the Roadshow footage for which there currently exists only a single copy (or take). Hopefully something can be done about this before it's too late.

However, if there are other issues regarding other parts of the film that are deteriorating, I was not made aware of them at this time. Perhaps Mr. Harris can provide some additional details on this and give us a "restoration state-of-affairs" from his standpoint?

Well, that's about it — I hope this additional insight proved useful. As for myself, this was one terrific screening all around, and I'm even happier that I was finally reunited with one of my best friends.

Two quick final items:

Bruce Kimmel — Bruce, anything yet up with your restored version of "The Creature Wasn't Nice?" When I wrote you on your own forum about a year ago, you hinted that something was in the works, but that was the last we heard. Any comments here, or I should I go "formally" pester you at your other location?

Robert Harris: Earlier this year, you asked me to contact you if/when I was ever able to relocate Josh — well, I guess you could say I was successful. Aside from the screening, we've only been able to chat for a couple hours on the phone. However, we're planning a proper get-together in the near future, once he finishes up a current production job, so we can catch up on things. Anyway, as soon as I have more info, I'll contact you directly, let you know what's up, and send along his current contact information. Until then…

Regards to all!

 

[BruceKimmel]

Thanks, Jeff, at least your information makes the kind of sense I understand. It is not pedantic. All my post was meant to say was that I didn't understand what "restoration" was necessary if a print the quality of what is on display at the Dome could be pulled from the 70 elements. I understand what you're saying about the color timing but that is a whole separate issue and has nothing to do with "restoration". So, since Mr. Harris remained mute on the subject, what really needs "restoring" is the deleted bits from the roadshow version.

Now, since you know more about this than I (I did see the film six or seven times at the Dome on its original release, but I am now senile) but when I watch those deleted bits on the DVD (which I agree is not so hot) I have to wonder - it is said they come from a workprint. Has it been ascertained that all this footage was actually IN the roadshow version? I mean, does the Variety review of the time give the running time as 180 or whatever? Because some of those bits look rough, look like they're unfinished and it is hard to tell if they made the final film or not. It's one thing for someone to say, "Oh, yes, I remember every one of those bits" but as we all know, memory plays tricks on all of us (i.e. the "to be continued" non-existant card at the end of BTTF). Just curious.

As to The Creature, what we're talking about doing is putting the recut version (the only one "officially" released AND my original cut (which is quite different) on one DVD. We would do a hi-def transfer of the recut, but sadly my version only exists on three-quarter inch tape and would have to be taken from that.

In other rather fascinating news - when we did the DVD transfer of Nudie Musical, we had to go from several prints, some Fuji, some Eastman, with the telecine colorist/operator at Todd-Ao doing a rather spectacular job of putting the color right. The reason for so doing was that both the camera neg and the CRI had gone missing. Well, I recently located and purchased the CRI which is in primo condition, along with five perfect color Fuji prints. To say I'm in heaven is an understatement.

 

[Robert Harris]

The 70mm footage used in the laserdisc of Mad World was from several sources, some of which was never in the premiere cut of the film.

For those of you who have not seen Mr. Kimmel's First Nudie Musical, the DVD is a wonderfully campy treat and is recommended.

RAH

 

[James_Garner]

Has it been ascertained that all this footage was actually IN the roadshow version?

I wonder about that too, especially after remembering the sequence where Spencer Tracy gets out of the cab followed by everyone else, followed by William Demarest calling for an APB for Tracy, followed by a shot (In the reconstucted version) of Tracy exiting the cab AGAIN. That was very jarring to me when i saw it in '91.

Also, since the intermission exists again, is there ANY way we mere mortals could listen or read the transcript to it sometime soon? I've always wanted to experience this piece of film history after reading about it im 1987.

 

[Jo_C]

This is totally ridiculous...at least on the part of MGM's current management.

I am a big, big fan of "Mad World", and I do wish we would get at least some kind of reconstruction and restoration before time really kills our "world", sort of speak.

By the way, I think TCM is planning an airing of the LD reconstruction of "Mad World" within the next couple of months, so I'd set my VCRs or DVRs if I were you, just to compare it with the current DVD.

With this week's news, it just gets more confusing. Questions, then...what was the state of the existing negative from which the 70MM print screened this past week, and why did the screened print look so good?

And can a digital restoration of at least the deleted segments be done so as to output it later to 70MM film?

Who should we believe, anyway? Well, I certainly can't get "mad" at Mr. Harris on the merit of the wonderful job he has done so far on restoring the Hitchcock films (how happy his only child Patricia is).

One thing is for sure...one day, when all the film elements are deteriorated and "Mad World" becomes beyond restoring at all, MGM will finally wake up and realize the big mistake it has made in not resurrecting its UA library.

Oh, that reminds me, what about "The Alamo"? That, of course, is another story.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Jeff,

Excellent post!

So happy to hear that you and Joshua Berman
finally had the opportunity to meet again after
all these years.

 

[Mark Cappelletty]

I've been watching my copy of the LD box set and I guess DVD has spoiled me, as the LD shimmers like the sun's reflection on sand in the middle of the desert.

The deleted scenes are a bit rougher in both color and condition, but instead of huge blocks of deleted material, I am surprised to see little bits added here and there. Almost all of the deleted scenes are valuable and help the viewer understand what's going on (particularly with Sid Caesar nearly being sucked out of the old WWI-era plane). With "reconstruction" being used as such a marketing tool anymore by the studios, it seems daft for MGM not to see this as a money-making opportunity.

I think a lot of people -- not just those on this board -- would leap at a fully-restored SE of this film (with the supplemental features of the LD box set) in a heartbeat.

 

[Jeff D Han]

Yeah, Mark, I would definitely double dip on a proper
release with all of the deleted scenes put back into
the movie. Unfortunately I got rid of my 1991 laserdisc
with the extended version when I heard that the DVD was
being released in 2001. The deleted and extended scenes
are necessary to some segments of the movie. I thought
that the original 2001 release on DVD looked nice, but
I didn't do a direct comparison to the laserdisc for
color.

 

[Peter Kline]

As I understand it, Stanley Kramer was not exactly thrilled with the laser disc release. He didn't like the scenes that were extended. In comedy, sometimes shorter is better. Those particular scenes, it seemed to me, went well beyond the punch line. Editing is a good thing believe it or not.

 

[george kaplan]

I have never heard that Kramer didn't like the ld cut. As far as I know, he originally wanted the whole thing in real time (5+ hours), and had to cut it for the obvious reasons. I strongly suspect that if he were still alive and could magically create the director's cut, it would be very long indeed. Which makes me think that he, like myself and lots of other fans, would prefer the longer ld cut, to the shorter dvd cut.

What is your source for his unhappiness. And was it really that he would have been happier with the dvd cut, or that he bemoaned the ld cut against what it could have been (i.e., even longer).

 

[BruceKimmel]

Since my post of late last night has strangely gone missing (Mr. Epstein?), I'll say it again:

a) Thank you for the nice words, RAH.

b) Why is no one else able to answer the question I keep posing: What was the original running time as listed in the Variety review of the time. What I saw on Thursday ran approximately 165 minutes with overture, intermission and exit music. There seems to be total confusion on the key point: Was the LD footage ever used in the roadshow version of this film or was it found in a workprint and just added in for the LD - if the latter is the case, I don't know that Mr. Kramer's unhappiness would be so hard to understand. Mrs. Kramer said that what we were seeing on Thursday was the film as Mr. Kramer wanted it seen. So, can someone please shed some real factual light on this.

Hopefully, this post will not strangely disappear.

 

[Robert Harris]

While I don't have my notes with me at present, I believe the Premiere cut of the film ran 192 minutes.

RAH

 

[george kaplan]

I think the ld is 182 minutes and the dvd only 154.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Bruce,
I don't appreciate the accusatory tone in your last post and you should ask yourself why on earth would Ron Epstein or any of the other administrators delete your post about the running time for this film? Chances are your post was lost in cyberspace when you submitted it which has happened to me on several occassions.




Crawdaddy

 

[Parker Clack]

Bruce:

If a thread you post goes missing just give me an email and I will look into it.

Parker

 

[Jeff Krispow]

Bruce,

First off, thanks for the response about "Creature"… even though your "real" version is on 3/4", I'd take that ANY day over the "Naked Space" recut. Still, a DVD with both editions on it would make for an interesting comparison. I'm also VERY happy for you that you were finally able to locate the CRI to "Nudie Musical" — I remember how upset you were that this had vanished into the ether (plus FIVE Fuji prints?!?). Congrats! (So, now that you have a perfect color "Nudie Musical," will us peons be able to benefit from your findings with a new transfer someday (hint - nudge - hint)? I'm also glad that my description/explanation of the Dome screening helped you out… always glad to be of service.

Getting back on track with IAMMMMW, my notes show that the original 70mm Roadshow Premiere engagement runs 175:22 for the actual film segments. However, if you add in all the other "parts" — the Overture (2:23), Intermission lead-in (0:18), "Radio Calls" (6:11), Entr'Acte (3:40) and Exit Music (2:13) the total length of the IAMMMMW Roadshow experience ran exactly 190:07. [This paragraph has been corrected thanks to exact film length information provided by Robert Harris further down in this thread. Many, many thanks, Robert!!!]

For the 70mm General Engagement (i.e. non-roadshow showings), the film was cut down to 162m. This version still retained the Overture, Intermission lead-in, Entr'Acte and Exit music, but not the "Radio Calls" segments. Therefore, this version ran just about 171m in total.

The subsequent 35mm General Release version used a 35mm reduction print (which left ~10% of the 70mm image missing from the sides). This version was cut down further to 154m. It contained no Overture, Intermission lead-in, Entr'Acte or Exit… just the film proper and nothing else. This was the standard version shown on television over the years (panned & scanned) , and what appeared on early home video releases. This was also the cut shown during the 1970 theatrical reissue of the film.

On the packaging, the 1991 Laserdisc Reconstruction is listed as running 188m, but that's absolutely not correct (that timing includes two trailers on the LD after the film). It actually times out to exactly 181:18 — which includes the actual film (172:43), Overture (2:25), Intermission lead-in (0:18), Entr'Acte (3:40) and Exit (2:13) music.

Here's what the LD states about the transfer: "In the summer of 1990, MGM received a call from Mr. Paul Scrabo, an editor with NBC in New York, who referred us to Mr. Joshua Berman, who had rescued approximately 20 of the 30 minutes of missing footage from a warehouse slated for demolition. To begin the restoration process, the 70mm trims were sort, catalogued, assembled onto 5 large reels and sent out for rejuvenation.* The best copy of each trim was then mastered to digital videotape. At the same time, a magnetic copy of the 6-track stereo audio was recorded and remixed into the 2-track Dolby Surround format. This proved to be the most difficult task in the entire restoration process and resulted in tedious hours of filling ambience holes and matching lost pieces of dialogue."

[* As I stated in my earlier post, this "rejuvenation process" chemically treated this footage in such a way that it's decomposing and will soon be permanently unuseable. Good going, Turner!]

However, this LD "reconstruction" is definitely not an entirely accurate representation of the original Roadshow version. What Josh found contained numerous trims, multiple takes, alternate takes, etc. My understanding is that much of the footage WAS in the Roadshow version, but that some segments were most definitely NOT. Still, several of these "unintended" segments were basically thrown into it by MGM personnel who wanted these pieces in anyway.

Also, the LD had other problems, that included small bits of connective footage that was still missing. In order to get as much of Josh's footage into the film (especially the parts that shouldn't be in there), MGM used cutaways — taking scenes from other places, and closeups of people — and used this footage to cut the LD version all together in an attempt to make this LD version "work." The end result was that some of the LD "Roadshow" footage was actually either alternate takes or outtakes, and some pieces were added back into the film in the wrong places. Still, this was the closest we've been to the original Roadshow version in 30 years, and definitely improves the film and also makes for fascinating viewing (at least as far as I'm concerned).

If I remember correctly, there were at least two scenes in the LD cut not in the original Roadshow version. The first was a several second shot of Arnold Stang up in the rafters in the gas station sequence, waiting to hit Jonathan Winters on the head (and missing and smashing a ceiling light instead). The other is an insert between Winters and Dorothy Provine, where Winters explains the true reason he wants the money (to give to his elderly landlady, who has taken care of him for many years) — I actually really like this segment, because it shows that Winters' character is the only one going after the money for purely unselfish reasons.

Lastly, these "trims" were all in a 70mm rectified format, great, right? Unfortunately, MGM transferred the remainder of the existing footage from a 35mm reduction source. Therefore, the 70mm trims didn't match up exactly to the 35mm footage because of the change/difference in image orientation between the 70mm and 35mm — either there would be some strange "jumps" in the footage when the trims were inserts, or the studio did some minor panning of the 70mm material to get it to match up to the framing of the 35mm. I guess it would have been too much to ask for the studio to transfer everything from the 70mm source.

(Side Note: At the time the LD transfer was being done in 1990-1991, there really wasn't a direct way of transferring 70mm to video. A special telecine unit needed to be custom built, but the cost was somewhat prohibitive. Luckily, transfer facility had another project come in the required transferring of 70mm materials, and they had a far greater budget that the IAMMMMW laserdisc — sorry, but I forgot the name of this other project. Therefore, the transfer facility needed to built such a unit anyway, and subsidized the cost between MGM and the other studio. Of course, now, 12 years later, this type of unit is somewhat commonplace.)

And lastly, just for completeness, the Cinerama Dome 40th Anniversary Screening was a new print of the 70mm General Engagement (i.e. non-roadshow) version, which runs 162m. It contains the Overture, Intermission lead-in, Entr'Acte and Exit music, and also adds back in the "Radio Calls" segments. The total showtime is 178m.

As for last year's 39th Anniversary Grand Re-Opening screening at the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood, my understanding is that it was a 35mm version of the 162m version… but since I wasn't there, I can't quite confirm that.

As the recent DVD edition run 160:35 in total. It is missing the Overture, but contains the intermission lead-in, Entr'Acte and Exit music.

And here's where it gets a bit interesting. For at least the past 20 years, it's been "said" that ~30m of footage was cut from the 70mm Roadshow version to create the 70mm General Engagement version. This was reiterated on the laserdisc set, and we had no reasons to doubt that it was correct. But let's do the math based upon the latest information — 190m (original Roadshow) minus 178m (Cinerama Dome 70mm) = 12m. That means that 12m-13m of footage was actually cut, not "~30" (and this is ALL footage, not music, since all the music is intact on the Dome print).


[C]* * * * *[/C]

Also, I have a small bit of info regarding the DVD editions that many will find interesting. We had all hoped that the 2001 DVD would feature a true restored version, but that was not to be. Instead, it was the shorter 161m cut. The only sign of the missing footage was in a 59m section entitled "extra footage." It turns out that those trims should never have even been on the DVD.

Let's just say that someone planned out things rather wisely… Contractually, MGM was only allowed to use this missing footage for, or as part of, an extended or reconstructed version of the film. The footage could be used as an extra supplement, but only if the film itself was the "long" version. This was done with the hopes that the cut version would fade from public eye, to be replaced with a proper restoration (or at least the LD reconstruction version).

Therefore, even though this was a great supplement for fans (I bought the DVD solely for this extra), MGM made a mistake by including it. A mistake that they seem to be attempting to rectify, since the recent DVD reissue no longer contains this footage. Therefore, it is highly doubtful that any future DVDs will feature this footage, unless it has been properly restored to the film via Robert Harris' efforts (or appears as a supplement in whatever DVD set arise from that restoration).

One the one hand, I really can't condone owing these DVDs as they stand — partially because it's the cut version (when it should have at least been the LD cut), but also because of the godawful horrible color timing! But on the other hand, I also feel that these trims, outtakes and alternate takes are valuable extras to fans of the film — as a historical document, curiosity, or whatever. Because of that, I'm going to bite my tongue (*ouch!*) and recommended you pick up the original 2001 DVD travesty soley for the "extra footage." If you have even the slightest interest in this, act now before it is permanently replaced by the bare 2003 edition. There's no guarantee that you'll ever see these 70mm trims collected in such a manner again…

(My apologies in advance for recommending this as I have, Ron. I know how much you despise the DVD, and I feel exactly the same. But this extra footage is just too valuable to ignore, considering the circumstances — not to mention the very uncertain restoration prospects.)

[C]* * * * *[/C]

And that's about the best I can do about the various versions and
everything else you were curious about, Bruce. Hope it proves useful!

Also, Bruce, since you didn't really make it clear, do you actually have this LD copy in your vast collection? If not, maybe we should trade screenings some day — perhaps IAMMMMW LD against your cut of "Creature"…

Robert, do you by any chance recall what the exact length of the "Radio Calls" segment is? I was told it was somewhere around 6:30, but I would love to have an exact timing for my notes, if possible.

Ron, thanks for the kind words. Seriously, you have no idea how glad I was to find Josh actually there… he was one of my two best friends when were growing up, and we've known each other nearly forever, it seems. We hung out together, went to school together, worked on projects together, my mom knew his mom, yadda yadda yadda. But I almost gave up trying to figure out where he disappeared to — I figured sooner or later we'd HAVE to run into one another at some screening or event out here, but that never happened. But when I bought a ticket for the Benefit screening several weeks ago, it was for two reasons: 1) this is one of my favorite movies, so there was no way I was going to miss this screening; and 2) I also knew it was my best chance to find Josh. I knew he had to be there, that he'd never miss this screening so long as he was alive — but there was that actual process of trying to find someone in that crowd. In the end, we not only found Josh (who was sitting directly behind me), but also a couple additional "lost" friends (who coincidentally were sitting in the seats directly in FRONT of us). Again, this was a terrific screening for a variety of amazing reasons!

The Dome always seems like a great place to run into friends, especially those long lost ones. I'm curious to see whom I might run into at the upcoming "Lord of the Rings" Trilogy screening at the Cinerama Dome on December 16th! Luckily, I was still able to buy a ticket for it before the IAMMMMW screening, even though it was "sold out" for nearly a week. (How? Because if I'm going to attempt to survive this 12-hour screening… *ugh* — I'm definitely going to have to use my wheelchair, and the Dome still had all their wheelchair spaces unsold. Fine by me, since my wheelchair is far more comfortable than their seats any day. Not a bad deal for gimpy me!) Oh, and if any HTF folks are going to that special Trilogy screening, let me know — if would be great to be able to place some faces to the forum posters!

And lastly, those of you in another part of the country will soon be able to see this 40th Anniversary version of IAMMMMW, so if you missed it, don't fret. It will next be appearing at The Paramount Theatre in Austin, Texas on October 25, 26, 27, 28 & 30 (there is no showing on Oct. 29th due to another engagement). It's the same 70mm print with DTS sound. Click here for the schedule.

I can only pray that the "higher beings" with the pursestrings at MGM notice the fantastic business IAMMMMW is doing on its 40th Anniversary and the sold-out shows, and gives Robert Harris all the support and funding he needs for a proper restoration. Let us all cross our fingers…

'Nuff said!

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Since my post of late last night has strangely gone missing (Mr. Epstein?),

I am very sorry that this extremely intelligent
and interesting discussion is having to be
plagued with addressing an inquiry like this,
but here it goes....

Do you honestly think I have nothing better
to do than to delete your post about the film's
running time?

Now, getting back to this thread....

Jeff, tremendous reading. So happy that you
have made it over here and given us so much
of your thoughts on this film.

From the very beginning, Mr. Harris has made
it clear that should the restoration fall into
his hands, he wasn't going to do an exact copy
of what was included on the laserdisc release.

In other words, he would only use the excised
footage that was intended to be used (as you
explained in your above post). Though I was
a bit unhappy that Mr. Harris wasn't going
to include all the "unintended" trims, who could
blame him for not wanting to put the film back
in the way that Stanley Kramer originally
intended.

I was always under the assumption that the
entire film was about to be lost. I actually
went to Mr. Harris' office and saw the condition
of the film elements. I did an article on my
visit and when I get back home (I am still at
my day job) I'll find the link and post it here.
There are pictures of destroyed film stock that
I am sure won't look unfamiliar to you. I am
somewaht relieved that MOST of the film is still
in good shape -- but really -- it's the extra
footage we want saved and those are the pieces
of film that are about to be lost forever.

It just surprised me that with all the attention
we have given to this film on this forum (and we
know the folks at MGM are reading this thread),
that no-one at that studio has recognized the
importance of this issue (and the demand for a
roadshow release) and offered financial assistance
in putting a restoration effort underway.