"The Alamo"s Status? (3 Viewers)

[OliverK]

Also, incorrect. Warner is extremely proactive regarding their library.

While they hold a number of large format productions, only two, both with major problems, and neither of which could be in any way self-supporting, are in less than safe condition.

All others have viable camera negatives, as well as secondary supporting film elements.

I was under the impression that negatives for Brothers Grimm, Raintree County and Around The World in 80 Days would qualfify as being in less than safe condition and these are the movies that I meant as they would be at least as costly to restore as The Alamo.

Obviously these would not be self supporting so I take it more as a business decision and I wonder what would be different for The Alamo without external funding?

 

[Robert Harris]

I was under the impression that negatives for Brothers Grimm, Raintree County and Around The World in 80 Days would qualfify as being in less than safe condition and these are the movies that I meant as they would be at least as costly to restore as The Alamo.

Obviously these would not be self supporting so I take it more as a business decision and I wonder what would be different for The Alamo without external funding?

Referring to Raintree and 80

 

[PMF]

Referring to Raintree and 80

Maybe WAC could consolidate their monies and restore the first half of one large-format film and the second half of the other,
then re-release it with the re-purposed title of "Around the Raintree in 80 Counties".

 

[cinemiracle]

Sorry, that’s incorrect.

WB is not at fault re Grimm. The problem was a vault flood/leak.

Alamo is age of stock, combined with chemical damage, along with MGM not wishing to allow the film to be saved.

Very different.

I still blame whoever stored WWOTBG in a place that was subject to water damage .(a result of an earthquake perhaps?). Surely MGM had better facilities in which to store their negatives? After all,they partly owned the copyright and must share the blame for the negative's destruction.

 

[TonyD]

I still blame whoever stored WWOTBG in a place that was subject to water damage .(a result of an earthquake perhaps?). Surely MGM had better facilities in which to store their negatives? After all,they partly owned the copyright and must share the blame for the negative's destruction.

That’s nonsense and frankly a dumb thing to say.
You can’t blame people for a natural disaster that ruined something that is out of their control.

 

[OliverK]

While I would like to think that there is more to the story of Grimm sustaining water damage than just a natural disaster that nobody could do soemthing about it is not of any relevance to what happens with Grimm today.

Moving forward this will probably have to be a rather low key digital restoration to make any financial sense and the question is if and when Warner will allow others to access the elements as it does not look as if they have any plans to do it themselves for the time being.

 

[Robert Harris]

While I would like to think that there is more to the story of Grimm sustaining water damage than just a natural disaster that nobody could do soemthing about it is not of any relevance to what happens with Grimm today.

Moving forward this will probably have to be a rather low key digital restoration to make any financial sense and the question is if and when Warner will allow others to access the elements as it does not look as if they have any plans to do it themselves for the time being.

Why would WB wish to allow anyone access to original elements toward performing a “low key, aka less than perfect, inexpensive effort.

Unique original elements should only be accessed for full bore restorative efforts.

 

[RichMurphy]

Why would WB wish to allow anyone access to original elements toward performing a “low key, aka less than perfect, inexpensive effort.

Unique original elements should only be accessed for full bore restorative efforts.

I think that some of us with limited technical knowledge of such things are afraid that those unique original elements will continue to fade or decompose to the point that they will be totally unusable by the time that full bore restorative efforts become cost effective.

That, and the fact that some of us will be long gone by then.

 

[OliverK]

Why would WB wish to allow anyone access to original elements toward performing a “low key, aka less than perfect, inexpensive effort.

WB may wish to allow access to make it possible to watch Grimm in better than subpar DVD quality.

Not very probable that they would do that but it seems more probable to me than Warner paying for a full bore restoration or outside funding becoming available for such an expensive project.

Unique original elements should only be accessed for full bore restorative efforts.

I think that in an ideal world we would all like to see things done to perfection but if the option is to get nothing for another decade or a less expensive effort that would result in a decent Blu-ray then I would choose the latter.

And to be clear I do not hold it against Warner that they do not want to spend lavishly for Grimm which by now is probably mostly unknown to even serious moviegoers.

 

[OliverK]

I think that some of us with limited technical knowledge of such things are afraid that those unique original elements will continue to fade or decompose to the point that they will be totally unusable by the time that full bore restorative efforts become cost effective.

I cannot imagine that a full bore restoration will ever be cost-effective.

That, and the fact that some of us will be long gone by then.

This is the sad truth. Whatever audience this movie still has is slowly dying off.

 

[usrunnr]

HD on Dish network showed "The Alamo" last night. Does anyone know what, exactly, they broadcast?

 

[Randy Korstick]

HD on Dish network showed "The Alamo" last night. Does anyone know what, exactly, they broadcast?

Same old chopped up theatrical release not the roadshow.

 

[TonyD]

HD on Dish network showed "The Alamo" last night. Does anyone know what, exactly, they broadcast?

Is HD a channel?

 

[Angelo Colombus]

HDNET is a movie channel and they are currently showing films like The Alamo, Chisum, original Carrie & The Terminator, and The Bridge at Remagen that I just saw a few days ago.

 

[TonyD]

Ok so it’s HDNet. Which I can get. Never heard of a channel just called HD that’s why I asked.

 

[John Skoda]

HDNet showed THE TRIALS OF OSCAR WILDE recently, a British Technirama film I've never been able to see before and it looked beautiful.

 

[Interdimensional]

.

Why would WB wish to allow anyone access to original elements toward performing a “low key, aka less than perfect, inexpensive effort.

Unique original elements should only be accessed for full bore restorative efforts.

....what about scanning for archival purposes? In a situation where important elements are deteriorating, I would presume it would be best practice to make high quality scans regardless of whether a 'full bore restoration' has the immediate go ahead or financing in place.

When it comes to hypothetical costly restorations such as the titles under discussion, (and I presume it varies) but how much of the expense is typically involved in physically preparing and scanning the film elements, and how much is the subsequent digital restoration?

 

[Robert Harris]

.



....what about scanning for archival purposes? In a situation where important elements are deteriorating, I would presume it would be best practice to make high quality scans regardless of whether a 'full bore restoration' has the immediate go ahead or financing in place.

When it comes to hypothetical costly restorations such as the titles under discussion, (and I presume it varies) but how much of the expense is typically involved in physically preparing and scanning the film elements, and how much is the subsequent digital restoration?

What might one scan?

 

[Interdimensional]

What might one scan?

- you would know better than I. Ideally the large format original negative if necessary.

If it's the case that one can look at an important section of film and conclude that in a decade or so the footage will be too far gone, I would assume the responsible thing would be to get it scanned before it reaches that stage.

 

[Robert Harris]

- you would know better than I. Ideally the large format original negative if necessary.

If it's the case that one can look at an important section of film and conclude that in a decade or so the footage will be too far gone, I would assume the responsible thing would be to get it scanned before it reaches that stage.

We passed that stage 15-20 years ago. There are no half steps at this point. We’ve reached critical mass. Expensive, extensive, extremely difficult and time consuming. With an end result that will not hit perfection.

Unless one has unlimited funds and all the time in the world. Which would not be the case.