The Digital Bits' Call to Action for John Wayne's The Alamo

[bigbadwoppet]

Originally Posted by Flex Mentallo

I'll just start off saying The Alamo isn't a very good movie. I know The Duke has his fans but I think even those fans can agree there are much better movies of his worthy of a blu ray release.

With that out of the way let's talk MGM. They're broke and frankly have bigger fish to fry than restoring a bloated mess like The Alamo. MGM is nothing more than a catalog at this stage of the game and can barely release their own films on home video hence their licensing deals with Fox, Criterion, Twilight Time and anyone else willing to cut them a check. Truth is, MGM could make more money selling Twilight Time "They Call Me, Mr. Tibbs!" than they ever could restoring then releasing The Alamo on video.

And a Kickstarter campaign? That's just embarrassing. Best case scenario MGM gets a couple hundred thousand. I'm gonna go on a limb and say this is a several million dollar job and ain't nobody funding, much less co-funding, second tier John Wayne in this market. $7.88 in the Walmart dump bin is not going to cut it.

I know every movie has it's fan and my collection is filled with movies in no one's top 100. I'm just being real about it. If I'm wrong then great. Nothing wrong with more catalog on blu.

Yes, I find this whole thing about The Alamo and It's a Mad Mad world before it highly ridiculous.
There are hundreds of films more deserving of restoration than these. Is a film a classic solely because it was released as a roadshow back in its day? Billy Wilder's delicious The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes was originally envisaged as a roadshow but was never released as such. The material is now lost, the chance of restoring it to its original intent lost forever. 2001 premiered in a 15-minute-longer version which was then cut to the version currently available. This short version never had an intermission, overture, etc. The cut scenes have been found, they are in Warner's vaults, the film could be brought back to how it was first released (regardless the fact Kubrick recut it himself, the roadshow was his original director's cut). The Wicker Man will never be restored to its original long version because the deleted material only survives as telecine, etc.
These are among countless examples of films with artistic merit which should be given consideration but unfortunately no longer sell enough to justify the extra expenditure. At least they're still readily available for those who want to sample them. There are films which are lost in their entirety, period.
I think Harris has lost the big picture. He is obsessed with the technical aspect above the artistic. Some of his decisions have been highly questionable. He knows about what he knows. Unfortunately, he opens his mouth to talk about things he doesn't know as well. "Are there any good movies in need of restoration right now? No? How about restoring BAD movies? Isn't it a great idea?". I'm still shocked Criterion put IAMMMW out in a super-duper deluxe edition. A long (even in its short version), bad and, worst of all, unfunny comedy. The Alamo is the same thing, a fascist rant of a bad movie. The long version may be lost forever? I have news for you: every single film in the history of cinema except, probably Hitchcock's Rope, could have had an extended version had the filmmakers not destroyed the unused material after delivering final cut. Every year there are countless extended editions of lousy comedies and horror films put on the market which add nothing to anybody. Not all films are shortened because studio executives are evil (they are), many of them are cut because they're bad and what's the point of extending the suffering of poor unaware paying audiences?
An old, ugly chair is not an antique, just an old, ugly chair. If it's comfortable, do keep it. Don't expect a museum to pay you for the privilege of displaying it, though.

[Egbert Souse]

Originally Posted by s.jorgens1

he founded it to market himself and tax purposes only

because people who want to help and actually not use these foundations as ego trips, still do the work but do not publish it and A want thank you for it. Scorsese does it for tax purposes, publicity, and ego, not to actually help. do it anonymously if you are rally wanting to help

Who the hell cares? As long as the films are preserved, it will never matter why.

Besides, anyone who actually has read about Scorsese's enthusiasm for film would know he's been a serious film buff since before even getting into filmmaking. He was one of the first prominent directors to bring attention to modern film preservation as early as the late 1970s.


Anyways, there's no reason for any film to be at risk of being lost or in compromised states in 2014. The technology is better than ever and for lower costs.

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by bigbadwoppet

Yes, I find this whole thing about The Alamo and It's a Mad Mad world before it highly ridiculous.
There are hundreds of films more deserving of restoration than these. Is a film a classic solely because it was released as a roadshow back in its day? Billy Wilder's delicious The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes was originally envisaged as a roadshow but was never released as such. The material is now lost, the chance of restoring it to its original intent lost forever. 2001 premiered in a 15-minute-longer version which was then cut to the version currently available. This short version never had an intermission, overture, etc. The cut scenes have been found, they are in Warner's vaults, the film could be brought back to how it was first released (regardless the fact Kubrick recut it himself, the roadshow was his original director's cut). The Wicker Man will never be restored to its original long version because the deleted material only survives as telecine, etc.
These are among countless examples of films with artistic merit which should be given consideration but unfortunately no longer sell enough to justify the extra expenditure. At least they're still readily available for those who want to sample them. There are films which are lost in their entirety, period.
I think Harris has lost the big picture. He is obsessed with the technical aspect above the artistic. Some of his decisions have been highly questionable. He knows about what he knows. Unfortunately, he opens his mouth to talk about things he doesn't know as well. "Are there any good movies in need of restoration right now? No? How about restoring BAD movies? Isn't it a great idea?". I'm still shocked Criterion put IAMMMW out in a super-duper deluxe edition. A long (even in its short version), bad and, worst of all, unfunny comedy. The Alamo is the same thing, a fascist rant of a bad movie. The long version may be lost forever? I have news for you: every single film in the history of cinema except, probably Hitchcock's Rope, could have had an extended version had the filmmakers not destroyed the unused material after delivering final cut. Every year there are countless extended editions of lousy comedies and horror films put on the market which add nothing to anybody. Not all films are shortened because studio executives are evil (they are), many of them are cut because they're bad and what's the point of extending the suffering of poor unaware paying audiences?
An old, ugly chair is not an antique, just an old, ugly chair. If it's comfortable, do keep it. Don't expect a museum to pay you for the privilege of displaying it, though.

This is nothing more than five paragraphs of pure snobbery. So YOU don't like those particular films and YOU feel they are undeserving of restoration. Well, frankly, who cares what YOU think? The Alamo and IAMMMMW are both significant, Oscar winning films featuring the work of significant filmmaking professionals. Personally, I didn't really like the Alamo that much, and I don't like IAMMMMW enough to have bought the Criterion release, but I still do not begrudge the efforts to restore these or any other film if that's what someone wants to devote their time and money too.

[f451]

Originally Posted by DigitalBits --
Now… it’s widely understood that MGM is in a difficult position financially. And while The Alamo is important from a cinema history standpoint for any number of reasons, it’s not usually considered among the studio’s A-list classics. So I can understand completely that MGM may feel they just can’t afford to invest the money to do a proper restoration at this time. That’s a sad situation, but I get it – I am entirely sympathetic to that argument. It’s understandable. The problem is this: There have been efforts to fund this restoration with outside monies, at no cost to MGM. And there has been interest in doing so from outside parties. But MGM has chosen not to allow it, seemingly in an effort to save themselves the embarrassment that would result from essentially admitting that they can’t or don’t want to put up the money themselves.

Has any one or group attempted to outright acquire the film from MGM?

That would give them an honorable out. They could say it was a business transaction, or perhaps a charitable donation (say, for example, to the AFI), take a huge write-off on their books, and they came out ahead. It's a win/win scenario.

The studio divests itself of a film which they have no intent to market (and has become something of an albatross to them) and it garners positive press.

The new owner would then be free to proceed with the restoration and marketing of the video release through a third party, such as Criterion, which has a great track record in doing it right.

The customers could get what they want. Or mostly what they want.

Perhaps the parts that cannot be fully 100% restored could be (blasphemy) colorized to fit in with the rest of the film. Alternately, seamless branching could be used to the present both roadshow and general releases across a BD50 disc(s).

[mar3o]

Just read that article on the bits and it made me sick. These multi-billion dollar companies are willing to sue an average citizen into lifetime bankruptcy for "sharing" their precious films, even films half a century old or older, yet they will sit back and let these same precious films literally rot into oblivion when they decide it's not precious enough to actually save it from disappearing forever. Truly nauseating.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Can't afford != Doesn't care. MGM isn't in the position to spend millions on a proper restoration of this. They're trying to rebuild as a company, and that woul be a completely terrible business decision. They can't do everything just because it's the right thing to do. This is why a crowd funding project is likely the best way to go about this, at least to partially fund this.

Okay - so then explain why this was attempted and MGM refused. They had the chance to get financial help on this and they passed out of stubbornness. From the article:

"There have been efforts to fund this restoration with outside monies, at no cost to MGM. And there has been interest in doing so from outside parties. But MGM has chosen not to allow it, seemingly in an effort to save themselves the embarrassment that would result from essentially admitting that they can’t or don’t want to put up the money themselves."

[imsounoriginal]

Wasn't aware of Alamogate until I read the Digital Bits article now.

MGM has always been a black sheep when it comes to studios and home video, going back to the early days of DVD. Whether it was not including subtitles, to now not even restoring a film for asset preservation/distribution, MGM has always been behind the proverbial eight-ball. People lambast Universal as the worst studio for home video (often understandably so), but MGM isn't far behind.

I don't get why they wouldn't want to just sell or license the title out; they'd be making some badly needed money to help alleviate financial woes. Let them license out their entire library if they need to, it'll be in better hands anyway.

[Slim Jim]

Originally Posted by mar3o

Just read that article on the bits and it made me sick. These multi-billion dollar companies are willing to sue an average citizen into lifetime bankruptcy for "sharing" their precious films, even films half a century old or older, yet they will sit back and let these same precious films literally rot into oblivion when they decide it's not precious enough to actually save it from disappearing forever. Truly nauseating.

I don't understand why you think it's ok for people to steal from a company they own the movie so they can do with it what they want to. I bet if you owned rights to a movie and someone tried to make money off of it and your not getting any of it I bet you would sue to company's have the right to protect their property just like anyone else

[filmczy]

Glad I still have my laserdisc boxset of the director's cut!

It's the original 202 min "roadshow" release...

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by Slim Jim

I don't understand why you think it's ok for people to steal from a company they own the movie so they can do with it what they want to. I bet if you owned rights to a movie and someone tried to make money off of it and your not getting any of it I bet you would sue to company's have the right to protect their property just like anyone else

Wow, way to go adding words to my mouth. I won't even get into the fact that even the law recognizes that copyright infringement isn't the same as stealing. And I won't get into the fact that the copyright infringement charges that hit people with million dollar fines were never meant to be used against individual citizens by big corporations, but rather actual bootleg vendors who manufacture and sell for profit.

Instead, I'll just ask where in my post I voiced an opinion on whether it was okay or not? I simply stated the hypocrisy of a company suing an individual for infringing on their rights to their "precious" films while at the same time letting said "precious" films rot away in a vault.

I have several DVD shelves full of DVDs and blu-rays that I've been buying for over a decade. Thanks for putting words in my mouth though.

[UNCMT9]

Signed the petition.

[Oblivion138]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Wasn't aware of Alamogate until I read the Digital Bits article now.

MGM has always been a black sheep when it comes to studios and home video, going back to the early days of DVD. Whether it was not including subtitles, to now not even restoring a film for asset preservation/distribution, MGM has always been behind the proverbial eight-ball. People lambast Universal as the worst studio for home video (often understandably so), but MGM isn't far behind.

Barring issues like this one, however, MGM has come a lot further than Universal in recent years. And it isn't as if Universal isn't guilty of the same. The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) clearly requires a real restoration/preservation effort at this point, and it could be done for probably $600K or less...but they aren't willing to take the trouble.

[The_Big_Viking]

It would be interesting to hear how many people actually contacting MGM about this issue. I doubt it's enough to change their minds, but it'd still be interesting to know.

[klauswhereareyou]

Originally Posted by Oblivion138

Barring issues like this one, however, MGM has come a lot further than Universal in recent years. And it isn't as if Universal isn't guilty of the same. The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) clearly requires a real restoration/preservation effort at this point, and it could be done for probably $600K or less...but they aren't willing to take the trouble.

If the Hitchcock blu-rays are anything to go off of, there are at least 5 titles (Rope, The Man Who Knew Too Much, Marnie, Frenzy, and Family Plot) that need some serious work.

[Oblivion138]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

If the Hitchcock blu-rays are anything to go off of, there are at least 5 titles (Rope, The Man Who Knew Too Much, Marnie, Frenzy, and Family Plot) that need some serious work.

Those others could definitely use some TLC, but you can tell from the BD transfer of The Man Who Knew Too Much that the original elements are actually failing at this point. It legitimately needs to be restored and preserved soon, or it will be too late. I'd say the others simply need to be remastered from new scans, free of video noise and ugly filtering.

[ArnoldLayne56]

Originally Posted by The_Big_Viking

It would be interesting to hear how many people actually contacting MGM about this issue. I doubt it's enough to change their minds, but it'd still be interesting to know.

I hit their FB page- Posts to the page, and also comments of their posts, every week or so with SAVE THE ALAMO!!

[yellowcakeuf6]

MGM is supposedly working on a digital restoration of the shorter General Release version of The Alamo for a Blu-ray release. Should have been done and released by now, but who knows where it is. Nothing from MGM about it recently as far as I know, but I think the mentality regarding the negative reaction of allowing the original film elements to disintegrate, is to ignore it and hopefully it will go away. We should get a decent looking Blu-ray, and MGM said they were "restoring" some extra footage (digitally only, I assume) for inclusion on the BD, but there were some discrepencies about the amount of extra footage and if it would be incorporated into the film, or left as a supplement. The fact remains though, that the original elements will most likely be lost to future generations. Please prove me wrong MGM.

[ArnoldLayne56]

Originally Posted by yellowcakeuf6

MGM is supposedly working on a digital restoration of the shorter General Release version of The Alamo for a Blu-ray release. Should have been done and released by now, but who knows where it is. Nothing from MGM about it recently as far as I know, but I think the mentality regarding the negative reaction of allowing the original film elements to disintegrate, is to ignore it and hopefully it will go away. We should get a decent looking Blu-ray, and MGM said they were "restoring" some extra footage (digitally only, I assume) for inclusion on the BD, but there were some discrepencies about the amount of extra footage and if it would be incorporated into the film, or left as a supplement. The fact remains though, that the original elements will most likely be lost to future generations. Please prove me wrong MGM.

Thanks for your comment, but without some citation that a restoration is underway, it sounds like just more rumour, and probably incorrect. cheers

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by yellowcakeuf6

MGM is supposedly working on a digital restoration of the shorter General Release version of The Alamo for a Blu-ray release. Should have been done and released by now, but who knows where it is. Nothing from MGM about it recently as far as I know, but I think the mentality regarding the negative reaction of allowing the original film elements to disintegrate, is to ignore it and hopefully it will go away. We should get a decent looking Blu-ray, and MGM said they were "restoring" some extra footage (digitally only, I assume) for inclusion on the BD, but there were some discrepencies about the amount of extra footage and if it would be incorporated into the film, or left as a supplement. The fact remains though, that the original elements will most likely be lost to future generations. Please prove me wrong MGM.

This is the theatrical release correct?

[yellowcakeuf6]

Originally Posted by ArnoldLayne56

Thanks for your comment, but without some citation that a restoration is underway, it sounds like just more rumour, and probably incorrect. cheers

It was all in the press release from MGM last summer. So not incorrect.

Closest I could find to an actual press release, but it does have quotes from MGM.

http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/2...twilight-zone/