| |
"STAR!" the new 70mm Print
|
Read more
at
in70mm.com
The 70mm Newsletter
|
Written
by: Rick Mitchell,
© 2008, Universe rights reserved. |
Date:
29.03.2008 |
On Friday, Sept. 5, 2008, the American Cinematheque ran Schawn Belston and
company's beautifully restored new 70mm print, by Fotokem, of Robert
Wise's "STAR!" (20th Century-Fox; 1968). I'd only seen the film once
before, 23 years ago, in a then new 35mm print at the Vagabond Theater,
not exactly the best place to experience any wide screen film. It's
really not a bad film, but an unfortunate victim of the time it was
released. And it's another example of how a knowledgeable creative team
can beautifully present an essentially "intimate" subject on the BIG
WIDE SCREEN.
Robert Wise liked deep focus cinematography, the most extreme example
being "THE CAPTIVE CITY" (United Artists; 1952), shot with a great deal of
difficulty entirely on location. This was a 1:37.1 film and also shot
with special lenses designed by Ralph Hoge for deep focus photography.
But anamorphic lenses and the shallower depth-of-field that results from
the necessity of shooting with longer focal length lenses on the larger
65mm negative made achieving deep focus in these formats difficult.
However, the cinematographers Bob worked with on his 65mm films, Daniel
L. Fapp, ASC on "WEST SIDE STORY", Ted McCord, ASC on "THE SOUND OF MUSIC",
and Ernest Laszlo on "STAR!", all succeeded admirably, particularly in
capturing, production designer on all three, Boris Leven's uniquely
vertical sets for the horizontal frame. With the additional aid of
legendary production illustrator Maurice Zuberano, on all three films
they achieved the Grandeur that not only Mike Todd but William Fox saw
in Wide Film.
"STAR!" takes a realistic but stylized view of old and New England in the
first third of the 20th Century. The conceit has Gertrude Lawrence in a
screening room in 1940 watching a documentary on her life and reflecting
on what really happened. The documentary is in black-and-white 1.37:1
mixing archival and recreated footage (with some surprising
anachronistic hand-held and zoom lens work!) while the "reality" is in
wide screen and color. Perhaps because this "reality" is Miss Lawrence's
memory, Leven often stretches it in ways that in at least one scene goes
way over the top, and this is not a scene on a stage! Donald Brooks did
the same in his costumes. And in this 70mm print, these scenes are
really eye-popping.
The film's stereo sound track is also interesting, reflecting how much
we've lost in today's overblown glorified mono except for the music. The
track is in DTS' special format and accurately reflects the original 5
track dub (Bob Wise didn't like surrounds, so I doubt there was anything
in that channel). It is not an effects heavy film, but dialog, both
production and loops (pre-ADR) and on-screen effects are positioned with
their on-screen sources and it all sounds very natural on the big wide
screen in a way that today's primarily centered dialog and effects
don't. Though granted the contemporary overuse of wide screen filling
closeups renders this discussion moot. (The mixers were Todd-AO legends
Murray Spivak and Douglas O. Williams, along with Fox veteran Bernard
Freericks.)
The rarely shown "STAR!", of course, is now best known as one of the four
films most often used to attack what was left of the "Old Hollywood"
studio thinking of the Sixties, the others being Fox's "DOCTOR DOOLITTLE"
(1967) and Paramount's "PAINT YOUR WAGON" (1969) and "DARLING LILI" (1970),
all big budget spectacular boxoffice failures. We are once again seeing
reevaluations of those events of 40 years ago, especially from the
alternative press, all of which are conceptually flawed because they
view them from the perspective of what was going on with moviegoing when
they were released, when the perspective needs to be from when they were
green-lit! Thus, to properly evaluate the wisdom of making "STAR!", we
need to look at the state of the industry in late Spring to mid summer
1966, when it was likely greenlit.
It's hard to believe at a time when "THE DARK KNIGHT" can take in half a
billion dollars internationally in two months of release that 40 years
ago the industry was banking on a release pattern which saw a usually
expensive film playing exclusively in one theater in maybe 75-100 cities
internationally for six months or more. But this had proven to be one of
the more successful attempts to counter the decline in the over 25
audience that began in 1947. The architect of this formula was Michael
Todd, who introduced it with
"This is inerama"
(1952) and made it a key to the development of his own 65-70mm process,
Todd-AO, making a visit to a special film the equivalent of a theatrical
event. This idea actually was not new; according to Arthur Knight in The
Liveliest Art, it was first introduced in Paris, France in 1908, came to
the United States in 1912 with the presentation of the french film "QUEEN
ELIZABETH", and became associated with long epic films with Griffith's
"THE BIRTH OF A NATION" (1914). The technique was successfully used in the
Twenties to reverse an audience decline at that time, notably with in
1925 with "BEN-HUR", "THE BIG PARADE", and even "THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA".
It's widespread use declined during and after the Depression, its most
notable use being for GONE WITH THE WIND (1939) and the few Fantasound
engagements of FANTASIA (1940). That was technically the first
association of roadshowing with technology, though some of the initial
sound engagements in 1926-28 could be considered roadshows, but it was
"This is Cinerama"
and
"Oklahoma!" (1955) that kicked off what's considered
the Roadshow Era, which lasted until 1970.
The earliest dramatic roadshows were either historical epics, often
adapted from famous books, or adaptations of fairly well known stage
musicals and because they were sold as "high class attractions" they
brought out the older middle class which no longer went to movies
regularly, even on general release in small towns after their road show
engagements. And because they could sell advance tickets as early as
three months before their opening, the studios could get back money on
them while they were still in post-production! (Tickets went on sale for
Otto Preminger's "EXODUS" (1960) the day it went into production, six
months before its scheduled release.)
|
More
in 70mm reading:
A Brief Interlude - "STAR!" in Liverpool
Internet link:
|
Publicity
picture from "STAR!", 1968. Promotion picture taken during the "STAR!"
roll out in 70mm by 20th Century Fox. Robert Weisgerber, 2018
Though there were as many unsuccessful roadshows as hits, the biggest
hits were successive record breakers: "THE TEN COMMANDMENTS" and
"Around
the World in 80 Days" (1956),
"South Pacific" (1958), BEN-HUR (1959). The period of December, 1959
to December, 1963 would see only one roadshow bomb, "CAN-CAN" (1960) and
though "The Alamo" (1960)
bombed in most of its roadshow engagements, it made it for it in general
release in the summer of 1961. All the others roadshown in the United
States did well, with December, 1962 to December, 1963 being considered
to roadshow peak with the following opening in or around the period:
"THE
LONGEST DAY", "Lawrence of Arabia",
"MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY", "How The West
Was Won", "Cleopatra",
and "IT'S A MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD WORLD". Their success led to every studio,
including American International, to announce plans for roadshows, and
of course, led to the biggest of them all, "THE SOUND OF MUSIC" (1965).
This led to a glut that ultimately killed roadshows and also some
attempts to vary the formula. MGM went to the most extreme in this
regard with the first contemporary dramatic roadshow "GRAND PRIX" (1966)
and the first futuristic one,
"2001: A Space Odyssey"
Other companies stuck with variations on the historical epics and
musicals, generally successfully, so in mid-1966, studio executives had
no reason to not consider gambling on these admittedly expensive films.
"STAR!" probably looked like such a viable gamble, a reteaming of the star
and director of "THE SOUND OF MUSIC", then on its way to being the most
successful film to date. Its biggest negative was that it was an
original musical about an actress who was not that well known outside
upper class intelligensia. Indeed, by that time, probably her best known
role in the stage version of The King And I had been way overshadowed by
better known film actress Deborah Kerr in the film version, which
happened to be re-released in 1966. But "STAR!"'s surprisingly light
approach to the material was perfect for the middle aged audience that
in recent years has kept Broadway revivals alive, and had the film been
Fox's Christmas release, it might have done better despite the negative
reviews and opposition from the higher profile "FUNNY GIRL".
However, no one could have forseen the radical audience demographic
change that occurred over the next two years encompassing "STAR!"'s
production. While a competent professional creative team, the kind that
can't get work these days, can take a project shot on film from prep to
release prints in about three months, it actually takes longer when you
factor in the writing the script and all the other b.s. that goes on in
pre and post production. It's usually nine months to a year for an
average film that doesn't require extensive visual effects work (though
both "THE RAINS OF RANCHIPUR" (Fox; 1955) and "JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE
EARTH" (Fox; 1959) reportedly went from the start of photography to
release in five months, despite the extensive traditional effects work
on both films!) and for the popular roadshow films of the Sixties, the
entire production process could take anywhere from a year and a half to
two years. And though MGM notoriously canceled an expensive would be
roadshow production of "MAN'S FATE" the weekend before it was to start
shooting in 1968, normally once the production spigot is opened, there's
usually no Roto-Rooter that can close it, especially on a film with the
kid of high profile of most intended roadshows.
Also, "DOCTOR DOOLITTLE"'s failure at Christmastime 1967 was really the
first inkling that there might be a problem with these films. "THOROUGHLY
MODERN MILLIE" had done very well in roadshow earlier that year and
"CAMELOT" had also opened well. And ironically, MGM was worried about
"2001"
because it wasn't getting the advance sales "GRAND PRIX" had enjoyed. In
the last month in particular, we have been reminded of the events of the
Spring and Summer of 1968 and they quite obviously affected the target
audience for "STAR!" Its failure would be another nail in the coffin of roadshowing, which was associated with Old Hollywood. Over the next two
years, such policies as reserved seats, advanced ticket sales, and
limited showings were abandoned, though there was a brief increase in
special engagements using 70mm prints blown up from both 35mm anamorphic
and spherical, accompanied by a decrease in original 65mm production.
(The last
Technirama film was also released in 1968.)
At a time when the studios are trying to force digital projection down
exhibitors throats and Barnuming the public into not noticing that
digital in the theater is not that much different than digital in the
home, they are typically ignoring technology that actually goes back 78
years which, when properly used, can deliver the kind of unique
entertainment experience worth going outside the home and paying for,
though not $35. And both the production and exhibition exist fairly
widely around the world, or in the latter case can easily and
economically be fixed up and installed for a fraction of the cost of a
digital projector. That a film like "STAR!", whose only spectacle is in
its musical numbers, can have the impact it does suggests the
possibilities being filtered out by the digital blinders on today's
production and exhibition executives. Not that they'd be impressed by
seeing "STAR!", but if it could inspire someone to do a good new film with
contemporary stocks (and without today's narrow minded excesses)...
|
|
|
|
Go: back
- top - back issues
- news index
Updated
28-07-24 |
|
|