Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

Post news stories and home video release announcements here.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

traccy

  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:24 pm

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 1:35 am

I agree with the last comment. On the whole these look fantastic, but at times look a bit toooo bleached out. Nevertheless a great effort. With reference to the Beginnings of the Tramp documentary, can anyone help and identify where the sequence of Charlie (is it him?) bouncing on the trampoline comes from? I can't place it at all.
Offline
User avatar

jjbluecaps

  • Posts: 82
  • Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:42 pm

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 8:12 am

traccy wrote:I agree with the last comment. On the whole these look fantastic, but at times look a bit toooo bleached out. Nevertheless a great effort. With reference to the Beginnings of the Tramp documentary, can anyone help and identify where the sequence of Charlie (is it him?) bouncing on the trampoline comes from? I can't place it at all.


That's not Chaplin, they used some film of a Charlie imitator, as the woman imitating him, in the same documentary.
This little scene also appears in the City Lights' Chaplin Today.
Offline

DShepFilm

  • Posts: 583
  • Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:40 am

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 9:13 am

The footage of Chaplin imitator Minerva Courtney is clearly identified as such. The footage of CC on the trampoline comes from Association Chaplin (the Chaplin family).

David Shepard
Offline

DShepFilm

  • Posts: 583
  • Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:40 am

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 9:15 am

Dear All Darc,

The original nitrate print of THE RINK had severe emulsion fading (hypoing). The problem is in the source, the scan is more or less a miraculous recovery.

David Shepard
Offline

traccy

  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:24 pm

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 2:28 pm

So it is him! David is this an outtake? If so where from?
Offline
User avatar

jjbluecaps

  • Posts: 82
  • Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:42 pm

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 3:11 pm

DShepFilm wrote:The footage of Chaplin imitator Minerva Courtney is clearly identified as such. The footage of CC on the trampoline comes from Association Chaplin (the Chaplin family).

David Shepard


But David, I looked at this footage lots of times, in slow motion, zoomed, analyzed the movements and, really, he/she doesn't look like CC.
My guess is that's an imitator.
Offline

traccy

  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:24 pm

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 3:36 pm

I was surprised as well because it never looked like CC to me either. Besides where does it fit - an outtake from the Champion (?)
Offline

DShepFilm

  • Posts: 583
  • Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 2:40 am

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 4:18 pm

My guess is that he was just enjoying himself at the Hollywood Athletic Club where he lived for a while.

DS
Offline

Sammy Jones

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:24 pm
  • Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 5:37 pm

I noticed the odd gap in The Adventurer, too. I wonder if there was no full aperture source for that snippet.
Offline
User avatar

jjbluecaps

  • Posts: 82
  • Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:42 pm

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 6:51 pm

traccy wrote:I was surprised as well because it never looked like CC to me either. Besides where does it fit - an outtake from the Champion (?)


That's right! To me, certainly is not Chaplin.
Offline
User avatar

Rick Lanham

  • Posts: 1789
  • Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:16 pm
  • Location: Gainesville, FL

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostWed Aug 27, 2014 7:17 pm

Just in case anyone wondered. The "card" on the back of the package does come off. It has the list of films/times on the other side. It covers a nice illustration on the steelbook, and another list of the films. The card is held on with double-sided tape. I was able to remove the stickum from the now-exposed tape, but haven't yet removed the tape entirely.

Rick
Offline
User avatar

martin arias

  • Posts: 174
  • Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:42 am
  • Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 6:23 am

the trampoline guy doesn't look like Chaplin at all to me either!

The gap on "The Adventurer" should have been filled, even with lesser quality material. If the material was fit to be included 10 years ago, I cannot understand omitting it here. It's much worst the jump than a little difference in quality.

Also the separation of reels on BEHIND THE SCREEN included a fast fade on black on previous issues, and here we get a jump with Eric popping from one action to the other. A short fade would have been better, I think. But this is a detail, anyway.

The decision not to improve THE IMMIGRANT adding the missing scenes and supressing thus the various pop-ups still seems to me the weakest point on this box, all the praises to it already sung.
Last edited by martin arias on Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

missdupont

  • Posts: 2249
  • Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:48 pm
  • Location: California

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 8:55 am

you know, we all have photos where we don't supposedly look like ourselves. Also, there are many photos from the beginnings of people's stage careers or lives that look nothing like how they looked when they were in the movies, but it's them, because our looks change, they don't stay the same.
Offline
User avatar

martin arias

  • Posts: 174
  • Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:42 am
  • Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 9:22 am

Yes. I know, and the inverted sequence on "Behind the Screen" was probably Rollie Totheroh's mistake (even if the sequence was ok on all previous releases), and the extra shots on negative B of "The Immigrant" mentioned on the original Mutual reviews were never on negative A even if it's jumpy and calls for all of these missing scenes), and the jump in the middle of "The Adventurer" makes the film even better, and the same can be said about the uneven coordination of music and image.

Really, you don't have to try to justify everything in order not to appear to be denigrating all of the goods. I already stated hundreds of times how much I respect and admire Dave Shepard's work, as well as that of his French colleagues. But it doesn't mean we, freaky fans as we are, losing our times discussing small things here, cannot accept that sometimes, unvoluntarily, mistakes are made, or time or money (as I suspect was the issue with THE IMMIGRANT's non full restoration) dictate the way to proceed.

The trampoline guy doesn't look like Chaplin, doesn't move like him. I trust Shepard saying that he took this from Roy Export, but they had plenty of material filmed in the studio for various reasons. This could easily have been some Chaplin friend dressed as the tramp performing a stunt just for fun. I believe my eyes.
Offline
User avatar

jjbluecaps

  • Posts: 82
  • Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:42 pm

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 10:06 am

martin arias wrote:Yes. I know, and the inverted sequence on "Behind the Screen" was probably Rollie Totheroh's mistake (even if the sequence was ok on all previous releases), and the extra shots on negative B of "The Immigrant" mentioned on the original Mutual reviews were never on negative A even if it's jumpy and calls for all of these missing scenes), and the jump in the middle of "The Adventurer" makes the film even better, and the same can be said about the uneven coordination of music and image.

Really, you don't have to try to justify everything in order not to appear to be denigrating all of the goods. I already stated hundreds of times how much I respect and admire Dave Shepard's work, as well as that of his French colleagues. But it doesn't mean we, freaky fans as we are, losing our times discussing small things here, cannot accept that sometimes, unvoluntarily, mistakes are made, or time or money (as I suspect was the issue with THE IMMIGRANT's non full restoration) dictate the way to proceed.

The trampoline guy doesn't look like Chaplin, doesn't move like him. I trust Shepard saying that he took this from Roy Export, but they had plenty of material filmed in the studio for various reasons. This could easily have been some Chaplin friend dressed as the tramp performing a stunt just for fun. I believe my eyes.


I totally agree.
Offline

wich2

  • Posts: 1268
  • Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:11 am

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 10:53 am

>I believe my eyes.<

With respect, as countless jury trials have proven over the centuries, that's not always an infallible test.

-Craig
Offline
User avatar

martin arias

  • Posts: 174
  • Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:42 am
  • Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 10:59 am

with all due respect, why not considering an answer on the rest of the post, and not just in the punch line? I think many people here is more concerned in scoring a nice punch line than in really discussing film matters

but conceded, beautiful punch line

and now, for something completely different...
Offline
User avatar

LouieD

  • Posts: 1519
  • Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:57 pm

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 1:45 pm

So is THE IMMIGRANT complete on this set or what?
Offline
User avatar

martin arias

  • Posts: 174
  • Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:42 am
  • Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 2:28 pm

It is not. It has exactly the same footage as all previous official reissues on VHS and DVD. A complete version can be watched here. It was shown by the BBC, probably based on the foraign B negative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1RW1mSzzLE" target="_blank" target="_blank

It's easy to notice all of the missing pieces and jumps and pop ups, as well as strange editing, occuring on the usual prints (why would Charlie, for instance, sit next to Albert Austin to count his newly acquired money if he is disturbed by his presence? The answer is on the missing footage. Charlie sits first. Then comes Albert). The version on the new set, of course, has brilliant image quality. But it's incomplete, nevertheless.
Offline

Sammy Jones

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:24 pm
  • Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 4:29 pm

Thanks for the link! I've been reading about this missing footage for years, but have never seen it 'til now! Any idea if this version comes from the A or B negative?
Offline
User avatar

martin arias

  • Posts: 174
  • Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:42 am
  • Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 5:05 pm

According to Mr. Shepard, no original version of negative A is known to survive. All versions he had of negative A were edited the way we have always seen the short. So he decided in this only case to ignore all of the additional material on negative B, which you can easily appreciate, in order to use just all that survives from negative A, with the assumption (which I consider wrong) that Chaplin edited a foreign version with all these longer scenes and better editing, and then a domestic negative with careless editing, multiple scenes ending abruptly (like Charlie going out of the dining room) and characters popping up here and there. While all of the missing scenes are mentioned on the original Mutual copyright documents with the synopsis, someone on this forum reasoned that maybe the copyright documents were made watching the "longer" B negative. Not only this seems far fetched. It would also be the only case in all 12 Mutual shorts in which there are such big differences in content between both negatives!
It is true that sometimes alternate takes were used on both negatives, as is the case with the mannequin scene on "The Floorwalker" (two different versions exist, so it's logical to choose just one; maybe the original camera B shot was damaged in some way), and the sequence of Charlie walking through the road at the beginning of "The Vagabond" (again two different versions exist). But the main intention as seen in all of the shorts, was to present the same picture in the United States and abroad, and present prints as identical as possible. Also, the quality of the cuts in "The Immigrant" clearly matches those made in all of the other shorts through the decades just to make them shorter and sell them in other formats (transition shots, gags which do not affect the main story, shots involving characters other than Charlie, etc). These are the shots which were reinserted to all of the other 11 shorts but not to "The Immigrant". And a notice at the beginning of each of the other 11 shorts on the Blu-Ray clearly states that on every other case negative B was used to add damaged or missing shots from negative A. So why the aforementioned assumption was made with THE IMMIGRANT truly escapes me.
Last edited by martin arias on Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

martin arias

  • Posts: 174
  • Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:42 am
  • Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 5:27 pm

Also the fact that the print on You Tube was used by the BBC (and what I posted is a Japanese broadcast copy in low quality of the original BBC material), suggest that the missing material exist in acceptable quality, probably at the BFI.

This reminds me of Doug Sulpy (who also spoke here about the missing material) being upset about the inclusion of a defective print of "Recreation" on the Keystone set, and many on this forum answering him that he was seeing the half empy part of the glass...., and that he should simply make silence. Now it happens that his own better print of "Recreation" has been used on the Mack Sennett set, and we can all enjoy the short in better quality. So the main idea here is to watch in the future a complete high-quality restoration of "The Immigrant", not to bother anyone. And not offering that is, in my opinion, the worst weakness of the set. With so many Mutual restorations on the market, this should have been done on this present set.
But I understand there was a kind of a run here, with the French releasing the Arte set before Flicker Alley could put his on the market, and also another similar set appearing in Spain. So there was probably a hurry and some things were left for good. Like the bad sinchronization of music and films, which could have been easily corrected. I suppose they wanted to put this on the market as soon as possible and there was no time to touch THE IMMIGRANT, or to correct the obvious gap in THE ADVENTURER. All other reasons, considering the availability of the missing scenes, seem excuses to me. With all due respect.
Last edited by martin arias on Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

wich2

  • Posts: 1268
  • Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:11 am

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 5:42 pm

>with all due respect, why not considering an answer on the rest of the post, and not just in the punch line? I think many people here is more concerned in scoring a nice punch line than in really discussing film matters<

Not me, Martin. And when I say, "with respect," I mean it.

I read all of your post, but only chose to take issue with one point. Because as others have said, individuals look different at different times, from different angles, and when photographed differently.

So, my point was that one eyewitness opinion is not always enough for conclusive proof, either here or in trials.

Best,
-Craig
Offline
User avatar

Lonesome Luke

  • Posts: 89
  • Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 7:12 pm
  • Location: Montreal

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostThu Aug 28, 2014 8:02 pm

martin arias wrote:According to Mr. Shepard, no original version of negative A is known to survive. All versions he had of negative A were edited the way we have always seen the short. So he decided in this only case to ignore all of the additional material on negative B, which you can easily appreciate, in order to use just all that survives from negative A, with the assumption (which I consider wrong) that Chaplin edited a foreign version with all these longer scenes and better editing, and then a domestic negative with careless editing, multiple scenes ending abruptly (like Charlie going out of the dining room) and characters popping up here and there. While all of the missing scenes are mentioned on the original Mutual copyright documents with the synopsis, someone on this forum reasoned that maybe the copyright documents were made watching the "longer" B negative. Not only this seems far fetched. It would also be the only case in all 12 Mutual shorts in which there are such big differences in content between both negatives!
It is true that sometimes alternate takes were used on both negatives, as is the case with the mannequin scene on "The Floorwalker" (two different versions exist, so it's logical to choose just one; maybe the original camera B shot was damaged in some way), and the sequence of Charlie walking through the road at the beginning of "The Vagabond" (again two different versions exist). But the main intention as seen in all of the shorts, was to present the same picture in the United States and abroad, and present prints as identical as possible. Also, the quality of the cuts in "The Immigrant" clearly matches those made in all of the other shorts through the decades just to make them shorter and sell them in other formats (transition shots, gags which do not affect the main story, shots involving characters other than Charlie, etc). These are the shots which were reinserted to all of the other 11 shorts but not tto "The Immigrant". And a notice at the beginning of each of the other 11 shorts on the Blu-Ray clearly states that on every other case negative B was used to add damages or missing shots from negative A. So why the aforementioned assumption was made with THE IMMIGRANT truly escapes me.


I've been wanting to say something on this for awhile but kept putting it off. I agree with martin arias and those who think the extra footage from negative B should have been added to THE IMMIGRANT.
Offline
User avatar

LouieD

  • Posts: 1519
  • Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:57 pm

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostFri Aug 29, 2014 4:15 am

So is there extra footage missing on THE IMMIGRANT?
Offline
User avatar

martin arias

  • Posts: 174
  • Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:42 am
  • Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostFri Aug 29, 2014 4:52 am

And for those who on a previous post wondered that if the missing scenes were added THE IMMIGRANT would have been a three-reeler, you just have to check the total times for all 12 shorts on the reverse of the sheet that covers the metal Blu-Ray box: the way it is shown here, THE IMMIGRANT has the SHORTEST TOTAL TIME of all 12 Mutual prints offered!!! That means that with the maybe 2 or 3 missing minutes added (it is hard to calculate because there are plenty of short sequences here and there), it would have lasted just the same as all other 11 shorts.
Offline
User avatar

Mike Gebert

Site Admin

  • Posts: 5465
  • Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:23 pm
  • Location: Chicago

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostFri Aug 29, 2014 8:01 am

I cannot imagine there is much wondering left on this topic by now...

Image
“Sentimentality is when it doesn't come off—when it does, you get a true expression of life's sorrows.” —Alain-Fournier
Offline
User avatar

Harlett O'Dowd

  • Posts: 2042
  • Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 8:57 am

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostFri Aug 29, 2014 8:06 am

Mike Gebert wrote:I cannot imagine there is much wondering left on this topic by now...

Image


ymmv, but I think it's a pretty navel.
Offline
User avatar

LouieD

  • Posts: 1519
  • Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:57 pm

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostFri Aug 29, 2014 5:46 pm

So was THE IMMIGRANT a two-reeler or three-reeler??

Image
Offline

Pasquale Ventura

  • Posts: 60
  • Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2014 11:01 am

Re: Flicker Alley Chaplin Mutuals

PostFri Aug 29, 2014 6:58 pm

Had to have been a one reeler 'cuz Atlas Home Movies sold only one reel on 8mm.
PreviousNext

Return to Silent News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 6 guests