Twilight Time Discussion Thread

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by DavidRoylance

I just checked a moment ago and cannot find any TT titles on the screenarchives website. Please could someone confirm that is the case, or reassure me that it is me at fault?

It's your fault.

Go to the SAE home page. On the set of "Browse" buttons on the left, click "Company Labels". On the Company Labels page, scroll down to and click "Twilight Time".

[DavidRoylance]

Thank you.

Originally Posted by jayembee

It's your fault.

Go to the SAE home page. On the set of "Browse" buttons on the left, click "Company Labels". On the Company Labels page, scroll down to and click "Twilight Time".

[nitin]

Holy hell, Violent Saturday is surely one of the unsung great films of all time?

Its Sirk meets Siegel approach probably makes it difficult to classify (and I am guessing advertise) but this is extremely high quality filmmaking IMHO even if that approach is probably not going to be for everyone’s taste.

The first thing that makes you sit up and notice is the expert use of the frame, Fleischer and his cinematographer put on a real show throughout with their blocking and movement. Then, the script has beautifully layered character work and the hard boiled noirish dialogue is lapped up by all of the cast (my favourite performances were Virginia Leith and Lee Marvin).

There are also just all of these idiosyncratic little touches peppered over the course of the film that just add to the pleasure, a great example being the scene where one of the bank robbers gives some candy to a kid who did not realise the danger he was in and had charged the bank robbers.

I saw it off Eureka’s UK blu but the TT disc is from the same stunning Fox restoration that is thankfully not too blue like a lot of Fox’s colour restorations in recent years. The colour and detail are just beautiful and really bring home the great camerawork I mention above. The 4.0 audio track was also fantastic.

[Aclea]

I always think of it as staging a heist in Peyton Place, but with added pissed off Amish. It's a terrific movie from the eternally undervalued Richard Fleischer.

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by Aclea

It's a terrific movie from the eternally undervalued Richard Fleischer.

Absolutely. Ever since I started collecting more Fox films I’ve enjoyed Fleischer’s work especially with “The Boston Strangler” and “Compulsion” in addition to “Violent Saturday”.

[Aclea]

Originally Posted by Dailyan

Absolutely. Ever since I started collecting more Fox films I’ve enjoyed Fleischer’s work especially with “The Boston Strangler” and “Compulsion”.

He originally studied to be a psychiatrist, and that really comes out in those two and films like 10 Rillington Place, though it wasn't always appreciated by his actors - when he tried to discuss her character's reasons for her kleptomania in Violent Saturday, Sylvia Sidney impatiently told him "Just tell me when to cry." (Which became the title of his memoir.)

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by Aclea

I always think of it as staging a heist in Peyton Place, but with added pissed off Amish. It's a terrific movie from the eternally undervalued Richard Fleischer.

Don’t you think there always seems to be a weird kind of inherent bias against directors who consistently made superb films in a variety of genres over a long career? As recently as the early 2000’s, John Huston still wasn’t getting respect and admiration befitting his great artistry.

I think the Internet and the availability of titles on physical media has really helped to boost critical favor for directors like Fleischer, but I still feel he and other similar filmmakers are not taken seriously by the old time critic’s establishment. Time for some new blood there.

[SeanJoyce]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

Don’t you think there always seems to be a weird kind of inherent bias against directors who consistently made superb films in a variety of genres over a long career? As recently as the early 2000’s, John Huston still wasn’t getting respect and admiration befitting his great artistry.

I think the Internet and the availability of titles on physical media has really helped to boost critical favor for directors like Fleischer, but I still feel he and other similar filmmakers are not taken seriously by the old time critic’s establishment. Time for some new blood there.

It's because so many people are up their own ass about the "auteur" BS (when most of them couldn't even tell you what that word means.)

Give me the likes of Wellman, Curtiz and Fleischer over just about anybody else...

[koberulz]

Is the Australian release the same transfer as the TT and Eureka versions? The extras are pretty much identical to the TT IIRC.

[SeanJoyce]

Originally Posted by koberulz

Is the Australian release the same transfer as the TT and Eureka versions? The extras are pretty much identical to the TT IIRC.

What extras?

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by koberulz

Is the Australian release the same transfer as the TT and Eureka versions? The extras are pretty much identical to the TT IIRC.

The Australian disc is the exact same disc as Eureka’s (same disc art and everything).

[nitin]

Originally Posted by Aclea

I always think of it as staging a heist in Peyton Place, but with added pissed off Amish. It's a terrific movie from the eternally undervalued Richard Fleischer.

I think I’ve undervalued him too so far despite enjoying Armored Car Robbery and especially The Narrow Margin. This was a whole another level though. And good to hear I have more quality Fleischer to look forward too!

[Cremildo]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

Don’t you think there always seems to be a weird kind of inherent bias against directors who consistently made superb films in a variety of genres over a long career? As recently as the early 2000’s, John Huston still wasn’t getting respect and admiration befitting his great artistry.

Same with Fred Zinnemann and William Wyler, two of my favorite golden oldies (especially the former, about whom I've read some particularly condescending stuff in other places). Sometimes, in cinephile circles, they're faintly praised for their "craftsmanship" and ability to tackle "multiple genres" - as if that was all their movies had to them, and as if being versatile and master craftsmen weren't an admirable trait.

[Aclea]

I'll repaste and expand a little on what I wrote last time the subject of Fleischer's mystifying lack of a reputation despite having so many great films on his resume came up:

The diversity is probably one of the main reasons: the auteur theorists tended to look down on people who didn't primarily stick to one style or genre (ie Hitchcock the thriller guy, Ford the western guy, Chaplin the comedy guy, etc) and who didn't have a specific set of themes or hangups running through their work. The very diversity of Fleischer's filmography, ranging as it does from thrillers to science fiction via musicals and historical reconstructions and film noir to psychological dramas, has given him a kind of critical anonymity, with each film being treated on its individual merits rather than being taken as part of a body of work. The lack of any obvious auteurist thread running through his films for critics to grasp hold of and the fact that, unlike directors like Howard Hawks or John Ford, he has never had a critical champion for his work has only helped keep him undeservedly in the shadows. He's often either dismissed as a mere 'craftsman' (an insult I always find more of a compliment) or a studio contract company man (even though he was always an independent after getting out of his RKO contract despite a long run of big budget pictures at Fox).

His tenure as a directorial stand-in on troubled productions such as The Jazz Singer or The Last Run has also given him an undeserved tag as a journeyman-for-hire, little helped by outright stinkers like Ashanti, Red Sonja and Million Dollar Mystery that littered the tail-end of his career. To an extent his problem with critics is that he lived too long (which I'm delighted to say gave me the chance to interview him in 1994 when he was promoting his memoirs) and worked too long even after he wasn't able to command the best projects or screenplays because he liked working (though conversely even at his peak there's a 'lost' period of five years between Barabbas and Fantastic Voyage where he didn't make a film because projects like Night Runners of Bengal and Sacco and Vanzetti fell through and he got caught up in the legal fallout).

But if critical establishment has yet to catch on that Fleischer is one of the great post-war American directors, audiences have been in on the secret for decades: even if they don't really know who he is, they remember a lot more of his films than most directors can boast. Perhaps the lack of recognition is a family trait. His father was Max Fleischer, one of the giants of early animation, but one who is rarely given the credit or recognition he deserves.

[lilboyblu]

Originally Posted by cfx

The writer of that doesn't seem very informed:

Other than those few times they did rereleases from long ago, when has TT ever renewed a license? It's contrary to their entire business model of titles being limited to 3000 copies. The reason to buy and not wait is the limited nature of their releases, not contract lengths and (lack of) renewals.

You’re reading this too literally. What they’re saying is Fox titles will probably not have their licensing renewed to anybody and will be swallowed in the Disney vault. It’s happening already, Disney quietly putting Fox classics in the vault.

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by SeanJoyce

It's because so many people are up their own ass about the "auteur" BS (when most of them couldn't even tell you what that word means.)

Give me the likes of Wellman, Curtiz and Fleischer over just about anybody else...

I became a professional film critic at the age of 18 in 1976 and worked with some of the old guard. Many acted like privileged bullies and I discovered most were incredible snobs. Being the age I was I often retreated from them and hid my love of such things as James Bond movies and directors like Frank Tashlin. I was often made to feel inferior and after some years I decided I was not cut out to be a critic. It wasn't just because of the more established few surrounding me and snubbing me, it was also because I found it to be very tough work and not something I had much talent in doing. I wound up screenwriting and story editing instead, with success, but that's a whole other story.

Suffice to say, however, that the glorious exposure to all kinds of film and filmmakers since those dark days where only a few had access to them and would attempt to mold budding cinephiles to their single perspective, has been the best thing to happen to film appreciation over the years. I often get more inspiration from forums like this than I did from all those cranky critics of old.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by plateoshrimp

Interesting article. I still hope for the best for Twilight Time but the tone of this piece doesn't inspire optimism.

I didn't see anything very insightful in that article, I was hoping for an actual interview with Brian Jamieson to shed a bit more light on the situation, but it's just a couple of quotes that we've already seen before.

As for Twilight Time, I think if they do continue to exist they really do have to re-think their business model. I really can't see it being sustainable in its present form. As a two-man operation, the idea of paying up front for the licences may have worked but with the fact that people weren't buying a lot at $29.95, and then with all those sales undercutting that even further, how can they stay viable?

I don't really know what a quick and easy solution would be, but I certainly hope that they don't completely go under. They've put out some great releases that are some of the most valued in my collection.

[cropduster]

Originally Posted by octobercountry

Nobody knows until a definite announcement is made, but at this point I think nearly everyone believes that Twilight Time is dead in the water and we're just waiting for a clearance sale.

Well, I'm trying to stay optimistic about the whole situation. If TT needs to step back for a bit and revise their business model to continue to stay in business and keep releasing blu-rays, I am all for that. I am also aware that at times, to keep the things that you love alive(whatever they may be), it requires giving money to those things, so I'll be purchasing as many TT releases as I can afford while TT is on hiatus to help keep the label alive. It would be a tragic irony if declining physical media sales wasn't the reason TT ended, but rather the passing of Nick Redman, Julie Kirgo not being involved with the company anymore, the Disney/Fox merger, and other behind the scenes factors the general public isn't privy to.

Originally Posted by AgentOrange

Yeah, at least would be nice to keep them going as an outlet for the more obscure Sony/Columbia releases. There's plenty that they COULD still do, and I'm not sure what other blu-ray label would pick them up.

I was thinking the same thing too. TT could still continue releasing plenty of Sony titles that Sony themselves and other labels have no interest in releasing, as well as continue releasing films from Universal, the MGM titles no other labels have an interest in releasing(despite the lesser quality masters), and the sporadic foreign releases. Maybe Paramount could be an option in the future if they are finally opening their doors to licensing more of their films that have already had a dvd release. If we're lucky, hopefully this Disney/Fox moratorium isn't permanent and certain Fox titles could be licensed for release once again sometime in the near future.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

I became a professional film critic at the age of 18 in 1976 and worked with some of the old guard. Many acted like privileged bullies and I discovered most were incredible snobs. Being the age I was I often retreated from them and hid my love of such things as James Bond movies and directors like Frank Tashlin. I was often made to feel inferior and after some years I decided I was not cut out to be a critic. It wasn't just because of the more established few surrounding me and snubbing me, it was also because I found it to be very tough work and not something I had much talent in doing. I wound up screenwriting and story editing instead, with success, but that's a whole other story.

Suffice to say, however, that the glorious exposure to all kinds of film and filmmakers since those dark days where only a few had access to them and would attempt to mold budding cinephiles to their single perspective, has been the best thing to happen to film appreciation over the years. I often get more inspiration from forums like this than I did from all those cranky critics of old.

This is one reason why I am not cut out to be a professional film critic. The sheer joy of losing one’s self in a movie is not always held in high regard. It probably would not sit well in certain circles that I try to devote the same attention to The Fast and the Furious sequels as I do to an Ingmar Bergman film.

[bonehica]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

This is one reason why I am not cut out to be a professional film critic. The sheer joy of losing one’s self in a movie is not always held in high regard. It probably would not sit well in certain circles that I try to devote the same attention to The Fast and the Furious sequels as I do to an Ingmar Bergman film.

This!!