- Joined
- Jun 20, 2004
- Messages
- 3,527
- Real Name
- Richard W
Just picked it up in the 5 for $50 sale and received it today. Haven't been able to preview the disc yet, but I saw it a few months back at Film Forum's Pre-Code series. The print came from elements preserved by the Library of Congress, which the DVD is also sourced from. I'd never pay $20 for any of these discs, but wait for a sale and they can be had for $10-$12 each. Right now, there is a 3 for $33 sale going on. Why not pick up SAFE IN HELL and 2 others today?Richard--W said:
This sounds similar to the print I saw, rough all around and missing some frames--and this was a print from the Library of Congress collection! I've seen many, many 35mm projections of Pre-Code titles over the years--a specialty of Film Forum, in particular--and SAFE IN HELL stood out as one that was in much poorer condition than most others I've viewed. Clearly, not much survives of this film and to expect more is unfortunately not realistic for a title of this vintage and historyChuck Pennington said:Well, I'm halfway through it and the transfer is very strange. I can see some colored analog artifacts along some lines in the image, and the video appears to be from an old master. The print is rather rough and dark and has many missing frames and jumps in the soundtrack. There is some strange ghosting of black dirt on the extreme left-hand side of the frame, and there is a strange diffused look to the image. The movie is very watchable, but the overall quality is a huge step down from what I expect from the Warner Archive program.
My sentiments too. Mine came in yesterday as well, and just got done watching it a bit ago. The master looks like something made in the 80's for low res broadcast- but the content is stimulating enough to overcome the weak presentation. I would hope this would get properly remastered at some point. I'll have to check out the Letter at some point. Is it superior to the Davis version or different in any significant way? Haven't seen a lot of chatter about it.ahollis said:Not the best of the WAC transfers, but sure is one hell of film.
Thanks, Conrad. That's what I've been trying to communicate. This DVD, from what I previewed, looks very similar to the Library of Congress print shown at Film Forum. We're lucky to have this film at all, particularly in a not-brutally-cut down-by-Joe Breen edition.Conrad_SSS said:It was my understanding that this was almost a lost film, no negative, etc. I recall reading something about this (I don't remember where) that the only surviving copy was the lone print at the Library of Congress, and everything we see comes from that, warts and all. I too, saw the Library's print at the Film Forum in NYC (or likely a copy made from it?), and in viewing the new DVD, it looks the same as what I recall seeing in the theater. It is an electrifying film, and given how many early sound films have completely vanished from the planet, I think we're just lucky it still exists. Given the circumstances, I was more than pleased with the DVD, and have already watched it twice. Mackaill is astounding in it....and I love that cover art, too.
Originally Posted by Paul_Scott
I'll have to check out the Letter at some point. Is it superior to the Davis version or different in any significant way? Haven't seen a lot of chatter about it.
I think I'll be picking up the Eagels' LETTER in the next 5 for $50 sale.ahollis said:The Letter also has a lot of film damage, including a short spot in the first reel where there is a missing part of the opening sound, but you don't miss any dialog for it was just the opening of the film. The acting of Jeanne Eagels is impeccable, especially when she on the stand in the courtroom. The main advantage of this version is that it was not censored as was the Bette Davis version. It is amazing to watch Jeanne Eagels and she was nominated for Best Actress for this role after her death. While it was a Paramount film, Warners acquired ownership of it when they purchased the remake rights for Davis. This makes a great pre-code double feature with Safe In Hell.
WarnerArchive Warner Archive @ @carroljohummer Yes. If that print - which is not in the greatest condition- was not at LoC, then this would be a lost film.
Those pre-code double features they had last year certainly had some gems among them that I was surprised by. Most of them are comedies or romantic comedies, but were more often than not a good buy. I take that back--they were all good buys. The Robert Montgomery set along with the upcoming pre-code double features have already preordered, so I guess I'm in the same boat here. Haven't gotten around to watching either of the films mentioned, but I'm definitely looking forward to it now.ahollis said:I so blown away with SAFE IN HELL as I was the 1929 THE LETTER that while I have always had a high regard for pre-code films these two have really peaked my interest again. I am hoping that the batch that WAC has for us this month will also have a diamond in the rough. Possibly one of the two other Dorothy Mackail titles (PARTY HUSBAND/THE OFFICE WIFE). Due to SAFE IN HELL I seem to have latched on to her and have only seen her in this one film but I think she was an outstanding actress.
She delivers a knock-out performance here, no question. Want to see more of her. You can catch her on DVD in NO MAN OF HER OWN, better known as the only onscreen pairing of Gable and Lombard. She's third-billed. This was after First National let her contract lapse. The Warner Archive tells me on Twitter that SAFE IN HELL is selling surprisingly well.ahollis said:I so blown away with SAFE IN HELL as I was the 1929 THE LETTER that while I have always had a high regard for pre-code films these two have really peaked my interest again. I am hoping that the batch that WAC has for us this month will also have a diamond in the rough. Possibly one of the two other Dorothy Mackail titles (PARTY HUSBAND/THE OFFICE WIFE). Due to SAFE IN HELL I seem to have latched on to her and have only seen her in this one film but I think she was an outstanding actress.
Had no idea about the PARTY HUSBAND / OFFICE WIFE release. I'd wager we have the sales of SAFE IN HELL to thank for that very promptly scheduled Mackaill release.Roger Rollins said:Have to agree with all the great things said about SAFE IN HELL. Mackaill is a revelation. I could say that this was my best DVD purchase yet this year, except there have been literally dozens of releases from WB's archive series that have warranted repeat viewing after arrival. I'll buy anything Mackaill is in at this point, and already put in my order for the new PARTY HUSBAND & OFFICE WIFE combo. I saw on WB's Facebook page that they may also release the 1930 film BRIGHT LIGHTS, which I've never seen, but it sounds quite interesting.