The Man With The Golden Arm (1 Viewer)

[David Von Pein]

Speaking of Sinatra films and ratios.......
I noticed that 1954's Suddenly seems to be transferred to DVD in Academy 1.37:1 (exactly). There are teeny-weeny black bars at the top & bottom of the frame.
At least there are on this edition (LaserLight Video), which is one of approx. 299 editions floating around of this very good suspenser.......

Any other releases of the movie have the black bars on them?

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

David, there is an anamorphic 1.78:1 edition available in Britain, which is region ZERO and has some nice extras: http://www.play.com/play247.asp?page...R2&title=96595
Very good transfer, as I recall - I haven't looked at it in a while, but I do recall that the last reel is either a multi-dupe or 16mm, as the quality degrades, but other than that I recall being pleased.. Good extras, too. I'll dig it out tonight. Corker of a movie. Great companion piece to the Bogart gem, The Desperate Hours.
Gordy

 

[David Von Pein]

Thanks Gord.

Corker of a movie. Great companion piece to the Bogart gem, The Desperate Hours.

Yesirree! I love James Gleason as the retired, crusty ol' ex-Secret Service man in "Suddenly".
As I understand it, Mr. Sinatra made an effort to destroy ALL known prints of the picture after the JFK assassination (nine years after the film was released). Based on the multitude of outfits that have slapped their names on this title and all the available copies, obviously Frank was unsuccessful in his quest.
But my copy (above pic) is definitely not as wide as 1.78. It's just barely wider than regular Full Frame 1.33:1, which I thought was odd, because I don't recall ever seeing a DVD transferred to exactly the 1.37:1 AR. All Academy Ratio films are seen as FF 1.33. Any exceptions to the 1.37 appears as 1.33 rule?
(Or are these FF films in reality 1.37, but *appear* to be 1.33 due to overscan?)

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

Glad you're a fan, David!
1.37:1 'letterbox' on a 4:3/1.33:1 screen gives slivers of black bars that are barely noticeable.
It is common practice to transfer 1.37:1 to 1.33:1 on a telecine. I don't think that there are any other opticals than 1.33:1 or 1.20:1 (2.40:1 when unsqueezed) scope as far as 35mm is concerned. Back in the bad old days, 1.37:1 Academy films used to be cropped as badly as 2.35:1 scope films. Zoomed-in by as much as 15%. And that's before your old wooden TV overscanned the broadcast by a further... 5-10 percent! :frowning:
All is well in Heaven now, though.
Gordy

 

[David Von Pein]

OK, Gordy...thank you.
Just got out the trusty tape measure ..... My "Suddenly" DVD is presented in the unusual "Widescreen" (barely ) aspect ratio of exactly 1.46:1.
Most curious indeed. Someone actually bothered to mat this print at 1.46:1?? Seems odd.

 

[Jeff_HR]

Manchurian remake coming up with Denzel (in Sinatra role) and Meryl Streep (mommy role).
The horror... the horror...Why?

Why indeed! As much as I like Denzel Washington as an actor I will not watch or buy this remake. No one can come close to Frankenheimer's version.

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

No one can come close to Frankenheimer's version.

Amen! Frankenheimer was a great filmmaker, says I. I was so bummed when he passed away. I love French Connection II. So outrageous. Gene Hackman, as Popeye Doyle, in Marseilles! I got the Seconds DVD a few weeeks ago, man that movie is just... beyond outrageous. What balls to put Rock Hudson in a movie like that and get Jimmy Wong Howe to shoot it! ALL of Frankenheimer's films are like that - wild, but conrolled, deftly made and a lot of fun.
Yeah, making a new version of The Manchurian Candidate is arrogant beyond belief. The 1962 film nailed the story pefectly and it is forever etched it people's minds as a stone classic. What next for the Hollywood recycling machine - Dr. Stranglelove?
But I love modern movies - as long as they are stories I have never heard before. Gimme somethin' new, otherwise get outta my office, kid!
Gordy

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

My "Suddenly" DVD is presented in the unusual "Widescreen" (barely ) aspect ratio of exactly 1.46:1.

That's pretty close to the IMAX ratio of 1.44:1!
Just sounds like half-assed matting. Some TV staions in Britain present films in the region of 1.50 and 1.55:1. Weird choice. But TV station get everything wrong, if you ask me!
Gordy

 

[Jeff_HR]

Frankenheimer was a great filmmaker, says I. I was so bummed when he passed away

So was I Gordon. I really love to listen to his commentaries. They enthrall me. Too bad there will be no more.

Let me know your thoughts on the "The Man With The Golden Arm" DVD you have coming after you watch it. I'm considering a purchase from BW.

 

[David Von Pein]

Just sounds like half-assed matting.

Why is there even a need to mat a 1.37 AR film? Seems to be a needless effort.

 

[TedD]

I can only remember ONE flat film made after 1954 that came with specific instructions for Projection A.R. and that was Giant, at 1.66:1.

It's true that a lot of low budget stuff was filmed using a 1.33:1 full frame, but very little, if any, was composed for 1.33:1 projection, for the simple reason that very few theaters were equpped to show 1.33:1 after the CinemaScope conversions in late 1953 and early 1954.

The cost of two pairs of prime lenses was considered very high, and the screen height was generally different after the conversion which made the original 1.33:1 lens pair unusable.

In all my years in a projection booth, I can't remember seeing more than 3 or 4 examples of 1.85:1 producing excessive cropping, (with the exception of films produced outside of the U.S.).

Just my $.02.

Ted

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

Oh, get that British DVD of Golden Arm if it's available too you, Jeff! It's a superb edition. Great interview with the truly great Elmer Bernstein. Ken Barnes' commentary is enlightening and interesting. The transfer is clean, sharp and has good detail. Go for it!
Great stuff.
Gordy

 

[Bill Burns]

Ratios -- if this is helpful:
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...ris081202.html
Sinatra -- I'd love to see a studio-produced DVD of both Suddenly (a film I understand Sinatra himself suppressed after the JFK assassination) and The Man With the Golden Arm. Criterion involvement would be more than acceptable if controlling parties would like to license their best elements.

 

[oscar_merkx]

wow just read the entire thread, thanks Gordy for pointing out some really good old classics, and will be purchasing some of them in the near future..
In complete agreement about French Connection II as Gene Hackman was superb

 

[Bill Burns]

Ah, I missed the fact that the Sanctuary Golden Arm is NTSC. I'd read of this "it's UK, but it's Region 0 and NTSC" phenomenon regarding a UK edition of Meet John Doe, but didn't realize Golden Arm was another such release. Excellent. Is the UK Suddenly you linked earlier also NTSC, Gordon (the site says it's Region 2, but that could easily be a misprint)?
ADDITIONAL UPDATE: Sorry Dave, I shouldn't have posted without reading the first page a bit more carefully -- I see you already mentioned the JFK tie-in regarding Suddenly.
STILL FURTHER UPDATE: As odd AR credits go, the back of the Anastasia box (Fox's 1997 animated version) credits an MAR version with something like 1.48:1. Bizarre. There's also a 'Scope transfer on the disc, happily, though it's 4x3 letterboxed (non-16x9), so I've never bothered looking at the MAR transfer.
Gordon -- one question: as the silent/full aperture is a larger negative area than the Academy aperture (as per my earlier link), was it Academy or was it FA films that were typically zoomed in the early days of telecine? I tried to get into this a bit earlier, but wound up deleting it all and just leaving the AR link -- it's too involved and I'm a bit pressed for time at the moment. But if early telecine optics were 1.33:1, would you have to optically reduce the larger FA negative (even though it's 1.33:1) to fit within it? The ratios can make it all seem a bit screwy, but if the optics are set for the smaller negative area Academy Aperture or something even smaller (1.33:1 from Academy's 1.37:1), in returning to a silent aperture film, would it be cropped all the way down to Academy's 1.37:1 and then further cropped to 1.33:1? Optically reducing it would seem the only means of capturing the entire image with the old telecine optics if those optics couldn't even manage the full Academy frame.
At any rate, I gotta dash -- but I thought I'd throw some of this out there for a bit of discussion/chewing the fat. Great thread.

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

But if early telecine optics were 1.33:1, would you have to optically reduce the larger FA negative (even though it's 1.33:1) to fit within it?

Your right on the money there, Bill! A full aperture 1.33:1 silent movie would have been optically reduced and cropped - and be beat-up, unstable and in general, unwatchable. Today, more care is taken with silent films, as the DVDs of Metropolis and the new Phantom Of The Opera attest.
Cheers, Bill!
Gordy

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

Cheers, Oscar!
I knew there must've been someone else who loves French Connection 2! One one the great 'fish-out-of-water' movies ever made. Hackman in the bar with the Absinthe-drinking bartender, eating eggs and trying to pick up those French girls! Ha! Great stuff. Great ending, too. I like endings like that.
Gordy

 

[oscar_merkx]

not a problem at all. How about the opening scene then with all that fish

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

I hate the smell of fish. Just as well the film wasn't in Smell-O-Rama!
Hackman was on Actors Studio the other day, but I missed it. Damn. Eureka is out this week on region 1 - get it, that's all I can say. Great performance from Hackman.
Gordy