M.Powell

Hello all,

i am hoping that Small Back Room will receive a deluxe new edition as it deserves. Had any other British director made this, it would have been considered a highpoint of Britfilm i'd say, but Powell and Pressburger had done so much already... How about quota quickies? I'm would be very interested to hear that the non-quota 'Fire Raisers' is getting a release too. And 'Herzog Blaubarts Burg'. With appreciation of Powell and Pressburger continuing apace as it has for 25 years, i'd have though this one could be released somewhere. Am I missing something, have these last two already had releases? Criterion on SBR please!

Steve Crook

There are always hopes that some of these will get released in new editions.

I know just what you mean about The Small Back Room. The trouble is that P&P set the bar so high with some of their masterpieces that people do tend to ignore their "lesser works" which as you say, if made by anyone else would be considered their best film.

SBR has been released on DVD, by Studio Canal / Warner Home Video. Most retailers are probably out of stock by now. There are a few offered on Amazon.co.uk marketplace but they are quite expensive at £48 - £83.

SBR is available on video from Nostalgia Family Video and they also offer The Night of the Party, One of Our Aircraft is Missing, The Phantom Light and The Silver Fleet (produced by P&P) as well as The Challenge, Sons of the Sea (Atlantic Ferry), Adventure in Blackmail (Breach of Promise) and One Rainy Afternoon all of which were written by Emeric Pressburger and are well worth watching.

A couple of Powell's early quota films were shown on TCM (US) recently and so it might be possible to get those as well. Those were Something Always Happens (1934) and Crown v. Stevens (1936). We are always lobbying various people to get more of the films released. Maybe a set of Powell's early films, maybe some of their later work.

Herzog Blaubarts Burg (Bluebeard's Castle) has been restored and shown at a few festivals, as has Luna de miel (Honeymoon). I'm still trying to persuade the people concerned to release those publicly. Honeymoon was only known in its cut down version which was shown on TV here once. The trouble is that the cuts were nearly all to the dance numbers and leave it as little more than a travelogue as they travel around Spain. But the restored version shows that it was actually a very reasonable film, despite what he says in the autobiography. It includes an incredible bit of flamenco dancing which deserves to be seen more widely. As with all the other dance films like The Tales of Hoffmann and Oh... Rosalinda!!, Herzog Blaubarts Burg and Luna de miel never manage to hit the heights attained with The Red Shoes. But again, that bar was just set so high it's impossible to match. They are however well worth seeing and not just by admirers of Powell (& Pressburger).

Steve

P.S. The latest Criterion Newsletter drops a heavy hint in the bottom right hand corner by having a picture of a genie's lamp and the question "Do you have sandals in size 86?"
Yes, they're working on The Thief of Bagdad (1940)

Steve Crook

PaPAS

M.Powell

Thief of Bagdad is all very well, deserves the special treatment but then again Powell would have never allowed certain actors to talk so much if he'd been more than one of many directors. Everyone who bought Criterion 'I Know Where I'm Going', 'Blimp', 'Canterbury Tale', 'Black Narcissus' would buy 'Small Back Room' given the Criterion treatment. Come on Criterion!

Dave Rattigan

Well, I've finally been getting into P&P. If anyone recalls my earlier posts (might have been as far back as last year), I was really having difficulty appreciating them. However, having recently watched A Matter of Life and Death, A Canterbury Tale and Ill Met by Moonlight, I am definitely starting to see their greatness. I think A Canterbury Tale has been my favourite so far.

Just a shame the R2 DVD releases have been relatively poor transfers, or at least the ones I've seen from Carlton. If I had an R1 player, I would definitely invest in the Criterion edition of A Canterbury Tale.

Steve Crook

Well worth it, because them you can see ME!
(in a feature on Criterion's DVD of ACT)

It's actually worth it because then you can see some good films.

There are a lot that are available on R2 but having a "region free" player literally opens up the world to you and you will be able to see films from all the other regions around the world. As well as north America (R1) there are also some good films that were made in Australia (R4) and south east Asia (R3)

Steve

Aaryk Noctivagus

I hate virtually everything Carlton... they're an abysmal DVD firm who have some great movies available and treat them in a shoddy way... I've never forgiven them for their shameful treatment of 'Capricorn One'. Grrrrrrrr!

John Hodson

The Criterion Collection Blog has more details. Lee Kline writes:
...The main reason I most recently went to London was for The Thief of Bagdad. This has been a really involved title for a lot of us. The film has been out on DVD before, so Karen, Maria, Heather, and myself spent a long time comparing existing versions to see what we could improve. Thief is in glorious Technicolor and was one of the first films to use multiple special effects, such as blue screen. It’s beloved by filmmakers like Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, and George Lucas, just to name a few. As a matter of fact, Karen is working on some great extras for the DVD, including a commentary with Scorsese and Coppola, and a piece on the special effects with Craig Baron (Matte World Digital), Dennis Muren (Industrial Light & Magic), and legendary filmmaker Ray Harryhausen...

filmjournal.net/john

TimR

Yes, that would be true for me. They really do a fine job.

TimR

It's like a door opening. Interesting - I have not had a comparable experience with another director/writer team.

I have gone from somewhat impressed to a full-fledged follower (I am trying to avoid the word "fan" ) in a few months.

Steve Crook

They must have been listening to you
Thelma Schoonmaker introduced a screening of Bluebeard's Castle and The Tales of Hoffmann at the LA County Museum this week and in the Q&A she apparently said that the next P&P film that Criterion plan to work on is The Small Back Room, possibly followed by Oh... Rosalinda!!

Bluebeard's Castle might well finish up as an "extra" on one of those.

Steve

Steve Crook

If you don't like the word "fan", there is always aficionado

But of course a lover of The Archers could also be a toxophilite

Steve

TimR

I like toxopholite. It is certain that no one else that I know could possibly know what it means.

I am thinking about buyingTales of Hoffman and Ill Met by Moonlight (if it is available) on Criterion, but I am not very clear on what Tales of Hoffman is. Is it a film version of the operetta?

I know that Ill Met By Moonlight will be worth watching, because of P&P and the war theme, but musicals are not really my type of film. Nevertheless, I am curious as to how they will handle the material.

I watched The Red Shoes on Criterion last week. I admire that film and respect it as an impressive accomplishment, but it leaves me cold. The note of suppressed (and not so suppressed) hysteria in the film doesn't make sense to me, and I find the ending ludicrous - although I know that film has a devoted following.

But having said that, the DVD - with all its features - is outstanding; I cannot think of a better one. Also, the rich, dazzling color alone makes The Red Shoes worth watching.

So that has made me curious about Tales of Hoffman.

Steve Crook

Don't be too certain, admirers of The Archers tend to be a clever bunch. There are 500 or so in the email group and they often surprise me.

Ill Met by Moonlight, like The Battle of the River Plate is based on real events and they were both such amazing real events with the plucky British overcoming huge odds to win through, that they found there wasn't a lot they could add to the story. They are both very well made films and by anyone else they would be wonderful films, but I don't think that they really show The Archers at their best. But they're both well worth watching.

The Tales of Hoffmann isn't just a film of a staged opera. It is a truly filmic experience where they can do things that wouldn't be possible on stage. But it is opera so if you're not a fan of ballet and opera then it might not suit you.

One ballet writer by the name of Monk Gibbon decided that The Archers had invented a new art form in The Red Shoes and The Tales of Hoffmann. Although some ballet and opera purists don't like them just because they aren't stage productions. The films allow the camera to move around the performers and let the audience see them in ways that they couldn't be seen on stage. The films let them work on a much bigger "stage" than a real stage would allow them. And at times, the camera can even show what the performers are thinking like in the ballet of The Red Shoes when "the girl" floats off into her dream world and sees all the monsters.

As for The Tales of Hoffmann, it is based quite closely on the Offenbach opera although they could play around with the structure of it quite a bit. They had quite a few ballet dancers available so there is more ballet in it than is usual in the opera.

It's essentially the story of Hoffmann who is recounting the tales of the loves of his live as he started as a callow youth and then grew into maturity. Whenever he finds someone to love, someone always seems to be there to steal her away or corrupt her in his eyes.

It's as sumptuous as The Red Shoes as regards the colour and design. It was filmed by Chris Challis who learned his craft under the master, Jack Cardiff. And it's designed by Hein Heckroth who designed The Red Shoes but they really let him have his head with this one.

The main performers are many of the stars of The Red Shoes, Moira Shearer, Robert Helpmann, Léonide Massine and Ludmilla Tchérina. They are joined by Frederick Ashton (Royal Ballet) and opera stars Robert Rounseville (playing Hoffmann) and Anne Ayars.

Rounseville and Ayars sing their own parts. The others that sing are dubbed by real singers to leave the performers on screen free to dance.

Remember as well that this was made in 1950/51 which was still fairly early in the days of colour film. They used Technicolor and the Technicolor camera was quite a big beast. It was even more unwieldy with the soundproofing "blimp" over the top of it. It was about the size of a small car!

But for this film they decided to do it all to a pre-recorded soundtrack and it was made on an old silent stage where they could make as much noise as they liked. This meant they could leave the soundproofing cover off the camera and so it was much more mobile.

But you might want to skip the third act. That really is full-on, pure opera with up to four people all singing different things at the same time. Without subtitles it'd be impossible to know what they're on about.

Steve

Steve Crook

PaPAS

John Hodson

Steve, educate me please; am I right in thinking that the musical numbers for 'The Elusive Pimpernel' were shot and subsequently excised, and if so, does the footage still exist?

filmjournal.net/john

Steve Crook

As far as I know, (which is quite far )
The idea to do it as a musical was dropped quite early on and no musical scenes were ever filmed. It was dropped at the insistence of Alexander Korda who really just wanted a colour update of his 1934 version with Leslie Howard.

But there are a few scenes in it where I can imagine them bursting into song. Particularly in the steam baths where Niven is reciting his Pimpernel poem, and even more so when the revolutionaries break into the Chateau and then ride out on the big wine barrel

Where would you have put the songs?

Steve