A Few Words About While we wait for A few words about...™ Lawrence of Arabia -- in 4k/UHD Blu-ray (2 Viewers)

[Robert Harris]

I was one of those people. I was working at Elstree Studios and I knew the guys that worked in the film library. One day I walked into the vault and there in front of me were stacks of brown 35mm 1000' cardboard boxes of film of "Lawrence". Also 70mm cans of film. I was mystified as to how the material got there, only to find out later that when Shepperton cleared their vaults in the early seventies, all the Lawrence material, was sent to two places, one, Elstree Studios, the other I was never able to find out.
As I worked in the cutting rooms, I knew how to look after film and, in my spare time, I went through all the 35mm film to familiarize myself with all the deleted footage and made notes. I replaced everything back into the boxes exactly as I had found them and returned them to the vault. This was around 1975/77.
Later in the US, I volunteered to go to the Selznick studio to visit Jon Davison and to view his first reel of his 35mm IB print of 'Lawrence', hoping that by some miracle the goggle shot might be in the print. Anne Coates, who I knew fairly well, exclaimed, "But how do you know?!", not realizing that I had a chance, years before, to go through all the footage.
Of course, as I suspected, the goggle shot was not in the reel as 35mm IB prints of 'Lawrence' were not made until sometime after the cuts were made.

Stephen,
Always a pleasure to see you post. If memory serves, certain assets were annotated as EMI.
As to the 35s, matrices had been prepared of the 222, and a mono track negative for foreign editorial had been produced. When the first set of cuts were made in Jan '63, the cost of the matrices was used as partial trade offset with Technicolor, as many of the early 70mm prints had been defectively processed, and were turning green. Literally. The problem was exacerbated by the fact that the prints had been inspected, mag striped, sounded by I believe RCA, and then inspected again before shipment.
As there was no quality means of making a dupe in that era, all 70mm prints came via optical printing, auto-select from the OCNs,which in the end created problems faced by both our team, as well as Mr. Crisp's, as the original was run somewhere over 120 times, in addition to wear and tear from the production of every head and tail section, as needed for replacing damaged footage.
Printed dry, the negative was shown to be the extraordinary mess that it was. Our only ability to create quality prints for the restoration was first via wet gate, and finally by 5243 dupes, which allowed brilliant results.
Without a liquid 8k scanner, Mr. Crisp was faced with every one of these problems. Head on, and in full daylight. There was no way to hide anything.
RAH

 

[Allansfirebird]

After spending much too long lurking, I've finally decided to join this forum after reading the wealth of knowledge from RAH and other members here.
I'm waiting with baited breath to hear more on the story of Lawrence's restoration.
On a side note, I had a question for LoA experts. I've got the behind the scenes book on the film written by L. Robert Morris & Lawrence Raskin from 1991 or so. I've been trying (with no avail) to find an affordable copy of Adrian Turner's 1994 book on the film. I'm aware of the unfortunate status of the original plates of AT's book. Are there any substantial differences in content between the two tomes, or are they fairly similar?

 

[Robert Harris]

After spending much too long lurking, I've finally decided to join this forum after reading the wealth of knowledge from RAH and other members here.
I'm waiting with baited breath to hear more on the story of Lawrence's restoration.
On a side note, I had a question for LoA experts. I've got the behind the scenes book on the film written by L. Robert Morris & Lawrence Raskin from 1991 or so. I've been trying (with no avail) to find an affordable copy of Adrian Turner's 1994 book on the film. I'm aware of the unfortunate status of the original plates of AT's book. Are there any substantial differences in content between the two tomes, or are they fairly similar?

Totally different tomes. And plates do not survive for either. There was some discussion of the Raskin / Morris book going digital -- something I'd love to see. Both books are very wothwhile. The R / M was authorized by DL.
At least that one can still be had for a reasonable price, especially as it also had a paper release. Everyone with an interest in the film should possess a copy.
While we're discussing books, two more.
David Lean by Stephen Silverman -- more on that one coming...
And another -- a very serious bio on DL, that should also be essential reading by someone named Brownlow.
And welcome to HTF, Sean.
RAH

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Sean,

So glad you finally joined us.

Welcome aboard. I think this will be your new home.

(We have already billed you for the mortgage payments)

 

[Allansfirebird]

Thank you very much, Robert and Ronald for the welcome. I'll try to stay ahead on the payments, don't want my account to be foreclosed on, do I?
I was glad that I managed to find the R/M LoA book on ebay last year. Combining the info from that, and Kevin Brownlow's epic DL biography, it's helped to paint quite a detailed look at the film. It would be great to see both behind the scenes books in digital versions. I wonder if anyone has ever tried to scan an extant copy of AT's book to make a digital backup?
In the meantime, I'm going to try an interlibrary loan to borrow a copy.
Oh, and Robert - during the restoration process, were any of the trims taken out of the final 222 min print to shave it down to 217 minutes saved? In fact, were any of the scenes that were cut before the Royal premiere in Dec '62 found? Might we see any of those in a "deleted scenes" section on the upcoming blu-ray?

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Allansfirebird /t/308191/while-we-wait-for-a-few-words-about-lawrence-of-arabia-in-blu-ray/1650#post_3948914
Oh, and Robert - during the restoration process, were any of the trims taken out of the final 222 min print to shave it down to 217 minutes saved? In fact, were any of the scenes that were cut before the Royal premiere in Dec '62 found? Might we see any of those in a "deleted scenes" section on the upcoming blu-ray?

All picture elements survive, with the exception of the sep master trims. We had reconstructed the film back to its 222 form, less two shots -- one which was irrelevant to put back in, and one other, which was part of a dissolve. That was the single shot that DL had noted early on, that wasn't necessary.

RAH

 

[Brianruns10]

I'd LOVE to see some kind of featurette comparing the various versions of the film, and the whole restoration process, akin to what was done on the recent Metropolis release, or what Criterion did for "The Rules of the Game."

 

[Stephen PI]

I was one of those people. I was working at Elstree Studios and I knew the guys that worked in the film library. One day I walked into the vault and there in front of me were stacks of brown 35mm 1000' cardboard boxes of film of "Lawrence". Also 70mm cans of film. I was mystified as to how the material got there, only to find out later that when Shepperton cleared their vaults in the early seventies, all the Lawrence material, was sent to two places, one, Elstree Studios, the other I was never able to find out.
As I worked in the cutting rooms, I knew how to look after film and, in my spare time, I went through all the 35mm film to familiarize myself with all the deleted footage and made notes. I replaced everything back into the boxes exactly as I had found them and returned them to the vault. This was around 1975/77.
Later in the US, I volunteered to go to the Selznick studio to visit Jon Davison and to view his first reel of his 35mm IB print of 'Lawrence', hoping that by some miracle the goggle shot might be in the print. Anne Coates, who I knew fairly well, exclaimed, "But how do you know?!", not realizing that I had a chance, years before, to go through all the footage.
Of course, as I suspected, the goggle shot was not in the reel as 35mm IB prints of 'Lawrence' were not made until sometime after the cuts were made.

I first became aware that the film had been edited down from some twenty minutes in the February issue of "Films and Filming", from 222 to 202 minutes.
I had previously followed the progress of the film and recall that I had told my class in my geography or history lesson at school, back in 1961, that a film was being made, every time the subject of T.E.Lawrence came up.
Unfortunately, I was unable to go on my own, to the Odeon, Leicester Square, to see the film in it's original glory until April 20th 1963 at the Metropole Theater, Victoria in it's shortened 202 minute version. My eyes were transfixed to the 70mm screen for the entire 3 hours and 22 minutes. I remember the experience vividly. I sat in the center of the front row of the circle. I saw it several time afterwards. I persuaded my Mother to see it and was thrilled by it and she returned to see it again with my Father.
I was a confirmed David Lean fan and hoped one day, if it ever happened to see the 20 minutes of footage that I had regretfully missed at the Odeon.
I was lucky to meet Peter O'Toole when he did a play in London called "Ride a Cocked Horse" at the Piccadilly Theater. This was around August,1965. My Mother and I went to see it. Before the performance, we waited by the stage door and soon along came Mr. O'Toole! We chatted for several minutes and I pulled out a birhday card in white envelope and stuffed it into the inside pocket of his sports jacket! He exclaimed, "Is that my birthday card? Thank you!"
I met O'Toole again at MGM on the set of "Goodbye, Mr. Chips". I spoke to him briefly outside the huge assembly hall set. He then disappeared onto the set, on cue, and shortly afterwards heard the enormous sound of cheering schoolboys!
Later in 1970 I was finally able to meet my hero David Lean, when I was working at Pinewood Studios on "Ryan's Daughter". During this time, I brought in some LP's of his films and gave them to editor Norman Savage for David to sign. David, by this time, knew me by site as we had met during dialog recording sessions on the film. One day, I was walking through Pinewood's executive dining room and sitting right there on his own was David. He smiled at me and said "I haven't forgotten!", referring to my LP's he was going to sign. I was speechless, but responded as if to say "That's perfectly okay".
During this time the film was re-issued in 1970/71 at the Dominion theater in it's 202 minute version and David and I were discussing the print and it's color in the men's bathroom, no less!! He also mentioned that he didn't care for the poster artwork. He always preferred the original artwork, until, in David's own word's, "Characters started coming out of his ears", and I agreed. It was also at this time David had to go over to Shepperton Studios to oversee a further cutting of "Lawrence," for the US only.

 

[Allansfirebird]

Was the irrelevant shot the bit where Anthony Quayle attempts to fire the flare gun & it doesn't work (I believe this was the attack prior to Auda leaving for the winter)? Or was that one of the trims?
Were there any significant scenes that were cut before the original '62 premier, or was pretty much everything shot in that version?
I apologize if I'm being a bit overly specific in my questions. Lawrence has become my favorite film in the last few years, and I'm ever curious to details of the production.

 

[Stephen PI]

Stephen,
Always a pleasure to see you post. If memory serves, certain assets were annotated as EMI.

Hello Robert, thank you for your response. Actually, Elstree Studios is, or was, EMI. The studio which was called ABPC (Associated British Picture Corporation, Elstree studios) in it's hey day, went through several name changes in the seventies.

 

[ShellOilJunior]

Does anyone know where to purchase a copy of Robert Bolt and Michael Wilson's screenplay? I see there are many PDF copies on the net but they look to be merely transcribed offerings. Amazon has a listing or two but those very well could be printed PDF's bound together with brads for all i know.
Many thanks in advance.

 

[Robert Harris]

A chat with the general...

With the eight hour time difference between London and L.A., I waited until a reasonable hour, and once again, fortified, made the call.

As I recall, after pleasantries, DL's first question was very much in to the point.

"What are you doing to my film?"

My immediate fear was of being "archivist non grata" on day one of the relationship. If there was even to be one.

I explained the concept of the reconstruction, and the problems we were facing, and was initially met by silence.

This was a call I never wanted to make to begin with.

Finally came a response.

"I'm heading back to London next week, stopping in New York on Tuesday, to see Kate. If you'll send a car, I'll come up and spend the day with you, and we can go over details."

Far better than the proverbial stick in the eye.

The list in my head began.

Clean the cutting room. No staff in jeans. All notes typed and ready for discussion.

Before ending the call, I had one more thought. I asked if he would mind if I had a friend come up with him. A writer.

"You want to make me ride with a journalist?"

Apparently, he was kidding, and the ride up ended up with his approving Stephen Silverman doing a book about his work. Not bad.

Tuesday arrived. Troops were at the ready -- cutting room and KEM spotless, along with a comfortable chair for him at the bench.

It was a very cold February day -- ice on the ground in Mamarnoneck -- when the car pulled up.

Introductions, pleasantries, and then...

"Anne told me you've found the goggles."

Yes.

"Do you have a work picture?"

We're cutting one.

"A continuity."

No.

"Anne can give you notes. So how will you do it?"

An inkling that he might be agreeable.

Do we have your permission?

"Of course, I've not wanted to look at the film since the rats got at it. I'm thrilled."

We viewed work picture, took a look at the hundreds of cans of 65mm trims and outs. Discussed the inventory of what we'd found, and headed out to lunch.

We went to a very nice seafood place, near the Long Island Sound in Mamaroneck. Sitting at the next table were two women, who had apparently seen Dr. Zhivago
the evening before on network TV. Little did they know.

Things had remained rather formal, which was probably my doing. I began to notice that every time I called DL "Sir David" he would cringe a bit. As we got back to the office, there was obvious ice around our parking area, and I had an eighty year-old treasure in my care. I suggested that Joanne Lawson come around, open his door, and help him into the office.

He turned and glared.

"You're afraid, aren't you?"

Sorry?

"You're afraid."

I don't...

"Headlines. Famed British director breaks ass in Mamaroneck."

And then he smiled. He was trying to get me to relax.

"I'm a filmmaker. You're a filmmaker, and you're trying to save my film. Drop the Sir. It's David."

When we got back inside and got more comfortable he asked the big question.

"How much sound are we missing?"

Interesting, that it was now "we." Very good.

Somewhere around fifteen minutes.

"Dialogue?"

Probably around ten.

"How did you plan to handle it?"

I was hoping to get some actors who sounded like...

"Why do that?"

Excuse me?

"We'll bring them all back. They'll be happy to do it. Peter, Omar, Tony, Alec... Are we missing any of Arthur Kennedy? I'm not sure where he's
living now. Of course, we can't get Jack Hawkins, and Anthony Quayle's not well."

And so it began...

 

[Brianruns10]

Were there any significant scenes that were cut before the original '62 premier, or was pretty much everything shot in that version?

I'm no expert, and Robert is the man to answer your question, but until he is able, I can help a little bit, based on what I've read about the recutting of LoA
If I remember correctly, with the exception of the extended Allenby Balcony scene (which Lean cut because he felt it didn't work), the trims account for the excess runtime are all "ins and outs," the beginnings and ends of scenes that didn't really add much, and were trimmed for flow. One example that comes to mind is the map room scene where Lawrence goes "to see the general." Right before the scene cuts, you'll notice one of the corporals reaching for the message delivered to Lawrence. In the original version, this scene goes on, with the corporal essentially restating what Lawrence has already said, by exclaiming (paraphrased) "He has gone to see the general" It's a scene that adds nothing really, and why Lean was inclined to trim it.
Realize that Lawrence of Arabia was something of a miracle of editing, in that it was cut together very, very quickly to make the December premiere. IIRC it was around 3 months (please someone correct me if I'm wrong).
Working under that kind of time, you don't have as much opportunity to finely tune things, and when the restoration came about, Lean and editor Anne Coates looked at it as a chance to make a definitive version, with all the little revisions they would've liked to have made.
So in that regard, I think calling current incarnation of Lawrence of Arabia a "restoration" to be something of a misnomer. Yes, cut scenes were restored, but it is NOT the entire 222 minute Premiere version. In my opinion, it really should be called a "director's cut (and indeed, the restored version was advertised in the UK in 1989 as the "Director's Cut.). It is more refined and fine polished.
That being said, I would be thrilled to see the cut bits in some way shape or form...the could be mute for all I care, I'd just be thrilled to see those bits. It would really be a nice insight into Lean's editorial process.

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Allansfirebird /t/308191/while-we-wait-for-a-few-words-about-lawrence-of-arabia-in-blu-ray/1650#post_3948923
Was the irrelevant shot the bit where Anthony Quayle attempts to fire the flare gun & it doesn't work (I believe this was the attack prior to Auda leaving for the winter)? Or was that one of the trims?
Were there any significant scenes that were cut before the original '62 premier, or was pretty much everything shot in that version?
I apologize if I'm being a bit overly specific in my questions. Lawrence has become my favorite film in the last few years, and I'm ever curious to details of the production.

There were several scenes that didn't make it into the December '62 cut. One that comes to mind is Turkish officers going over maps, and discussing where El Aurens has hit their railways.

There was also one other piece that we did not replace, and that was a prologue that ran during the last fifteen seconds or so of the Overture. It was a crawl, and read as follows:

In 1916 Britain and France were allied against the
Germans in a struggle which is known as World War 1.

Turkey, which for centuries dominated the middle east,
aligned itself on the side of Germany. It became vital
to the British strategy that the Arab tribes living under
Turkish rule be united. An obscure lieutenant with the
British forces in Egypt was destined to become the
spark that kindled the Arab revolt in the desert.

His name was T. E. Lawrence


RAH

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Brianruns10 /t/308191/while-we-wait-for-a-few-words-about-lawrence-of-arabia-in-blu-ray/1650#post_3948932
I'm no expert, and Robert is the man to answer your question, but until he is able, I can help a little bit, based on what I've read about the recutting of LoA
If I remember correctly, with the exception of the extended Allenby Balcony scene (which Lean cut because he felt it didn't work), the trims account for the excess runtime are all "ins and outs," the beginnings and ends of scenes that didn't really add much, and were trimmed for flow. One example that comes to mind is the map room scene where Lawrence goes "to see the general." Right before the scene cuts, you'll notice one of the corporals reaching for the message delivered to Lawrence. In the original version, this scene goes on, with the corporal essentially restating what Lawrence has already said, by exclaiming (paraphrased) "He has gone to see the general" It's a scene that adds nothing really, and why Lean was inclined to trim it.
Realize that Lawrence of Arabia was something of a miracle of editing, in that it was cut together very, very quickly to make the December premiere. IIRC it was around 3 months (please someone correct me if I'm wrong).
Working under that kind of time, you don't have as much opportunity to finely tune things, and when the restoration came about, Lean and editor Anne Coates looked at it as a chance to make a definitive version, with all the little revisions they would've liked to have made.
So in that regard, I think calling current incarnation of Lawrence of Arabia a "restoration" to be something of a misnomer. Yes, cut scenes were restored, but it is NOT the entire 222 minute Premiere version. In my opinion, it really should be called a "director's cut (and indeed, the restored version was advertised in the UK in 1989 as the "Director's Cut.). It is more refined and fine polished.
That being said, I would be thrilled to see the cut bits in some way shape or form...the could be mute for all I care, I'd just be thrilled to see those bits. It would really be a nice insight into Lean's editorial process.

We formally named the cut "The Director's Cut" in 1988. Not certain, but that may be the first time the term was used outside of the industry, and for marketing purposes.

RAH

 

[Allansfirebird]

I can see why the scenes with the Turkish army were cut. They would've interrupted the narrative flow. The movie, for the most part, is told from Lawrence's point of view. Also, the only times we really have any connection with the Turks is during the Derra sequence and the Tafas massacre. To suddenly have a scene with the Turks only would've seemed strange. Also, I think the tent briefing scene ("Pound them, Charley. Pound them!") serves some of that purpose as well.
Looking over the version of the script I have, I can't find that scene with the Turkish officers. But, I've noticed there's some scenes that are in the final film that aren't in my copy, so it might not be a final script.
Does anyone know if Robert Bolt ever wrote his version of a scene that was supposed to take place at Petra? There's a brief mention in Brownlow's book that Bolt conceived of Lawrence walking (or riding a camel) down the siq with a killed animal over his shoulders & handing it to an Arab once he got to the end of it. If someone has one of Michael Wilson's drafts, did he write a version of this?

 

[Brianruns10]

We formally named the cut "The Director's Cut" in 1988.  Not certain, but that may be the first time the term was used outside of the industry, and for marketing purposes.
RAH

That could very well be. I've also heard the term "Director's Cut" attributed to the Criterion Collection and their initial run of laserdiscs, as well as the Z-Channel, which was famous for airing the director's cuts of such films as "Once Upon a Time in America," "Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid" and "Heaven's Gate"

 

[Allansfirebird]

Could it be said that it is a Director's Cut of the Restored film?

 

[Robert Harris]

Was the irrelevant shot the bit where Anthony Quayle attempts to fire the flare gun & it doesn't work (I believe this was the attack prior to Auda leaving for the winter)? Or was that one of the trims?
Were there any significant scenes that were cut before the original '62 premier, or was pretty much everything shot in that version?
I apologize if I'm being a bit overly specific in my questions. Lawrence has become my favorite film in the last few years, and I'm ever curious to details of the production.

The shot of Mr. Quayle opening the hatch of the armored vehicle was a simple head trim.
The other shot that wasn't cut back was a sunset after L falls onto Ali's mat after rescuing Gasim. In the 222 the continuity was L collapses onto mat, burning of uniform, cut to sun setting, dissolve to later in scene.
RAH

 

[Adam_S]

Working under that kind of time, you don't have as much opportunity to finely tune things, and when the restoration came about, Lean and editor Anne Coates looked at it as a chance to make a definitive version, with all the little revisions they would've liked to have made.

They were so crunched never actually screened the entire film all together, just one half or the other. per Anne Coates, at the academy a few years ago in an editing seminar, "No one had four hours to watch the whole thing down." The first time anyone saw the complete film was the premiere.