Idea & Info: Cinerama 70mm '2001' preservation. Is it possible? — Page 6

Spaced and PDB, why don't you pair-up and do a preservation?   ;-)

Spaced, yes, I've browsed the underview site many times, however the underview site doesn't mention the 'just what do you think you're doing, dave' edit/trim and it's so cool if true.

Also, the trims were found, now only if the Kubrick estate and WB would see the value in actually reinserting them, re-releasing theatrically (on IMAX), and then on a new blu-ray. Sorry to get off-topic.

Spaced Ranger said:

...

A Taste Of Blue Food In Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY
http://www.underview.com/bhpalltrims.html

... 

Oh, yes, YES! Thanks for that reminder!

The liquid-in-the-straw is one of things that one would never see in Standard Definition (or barely). We'd need the High-Definition (HD-DVD, HDTV broadcast, Blu-ray), the 70mm film, or a reading of The Making Of Kubrick's 2001 to know about that.

• stop liquid food in straw from draining back down

Which reminded me of another one ..

• change floating tray "swinging on strings" to zero-g motion

A fan of the film just posted this old pamphlet that was given to viewers on reddit.com/r/movies. Supposedly there were no credits shown at the movie so you had to read the pamphlet.

http://imgur.com/a/FX2SL

@ Turisu

Checking that scene on an early DVD (Warner 1999, just in case the 2007 Blu-ray fixed something) did not show damage, anywhere in the frame, throughout the scene. Three other scenes of ship/Earth communications also show nothing.

The only thing that may even come close is during the BBC interview scene. There is an thin and slight brightness at the extreme left edge of image, across multiple shots -- like optical-printer bleed. It is more noticeable against the bluish shots of the hibernation containers. If that's it, I wouldn't characterize it as "damage", but definitely something to be addressed if it still shows in the Blu-ray.

.

@ kaosjm

I've never read of any "missing credits" on any showings of 2001:ASO (and that would be a pretty big thing, too). There were full-production program booklets like the very worn one you linked, which listed production credits, but that's normal practice. Here's some better looking photos ..

eBay: *RARE* 2001 A Space Odyssey. Promotional Movie Premier/Souvenir Book from 1968
http://www.ebay.com/itm/RARE-2001-A-Space-Odyssey-Promotional-Movie-Premier-Souvenir-Book-from-1968-/261752286450

There was a full-production Survival In A Vacuum pamphlet (apparently included with the program booklet), which also listed production credits (again, nothing extraordinary there) ..

[pictures from eBay: orig 1968 Stanley Kubrick 2001 A SPACE ODYSSEY movie Preview PROGRAM + TICKET
http://www.ebay.com/itm/orig-1968-Stanley-Kubrick-2001-A-SPACE-ODYSSEY-movie-Preview-PROGRAM-TICKET-/151592410275 ]

Thanks for clearing that up I was a bit confused!

The missing credits sounds like how Apocalypse Now was presented when it was premiered.

@ skoal

Preservations are pretty simple ... just get those unique, out-of-print publications off their mostly inaccessible media (laserdisc, obsolete/old videotape), which is done anyway for restorations (or, as in my case, a rectification -- although that word doesn't really sing ... I must find a better label).

Anyway, I was thinking about your mention of the "Just what do you think you're doing, Dave?" edit/trim and was certain I heard that in the movie. Sure enough, I checked and it's still in there. At 1h:49m:31s, as Bowman angrily walks through the pod bay to disconnect HAL, HAL breaks the silence with those words ..

.

@ PDB

Was the Apocalypse Now 1st showing a nationwide premiere or a main-theater sneak-peek (many films do that for final touch-up)? 2001:ASO not only was a premiere, but a simultaneous opening to the big Cinerama theaters across the country. When Kubrick made his famous final trims in/from New York, instructions were sent to those other theaters of where and what to cut for showings thereafter ... for the finalized film (credits untouched).

Being both serious and silly, does this forum have spoiler tags because I'm afraid to enter this thread.

Spaced, not sure if you're a fan of 2001: ASO as I am and in the same ways, however, please re-read that article. It's not that the line was trimmed, but moved and it changes the context somewhat-to-significantly depending on your interpretation(s).

If you're referring to SilverWook's Announcement: New plot spoiler policy *please read* thread, note that applies to "With new Star Wars films coming out, the issue of spoilers has become relevant again." [emphasis mine]
I think 2001:ASO is safely out of that category. 

.

Previously, it looked like you were citing the Underview article as not acknowledging a cut that you had found -- "the underview site doesn't mention the 'just what do you think you're doing, dave' edit/trim". I didn't know you were thinking of the LiveJournal article, which is the remembrance it's author without other corroboration -- "... as far as I can tell with the powers of Google, has never been described anywhere. By anybody." 

Of course, people who closely worked with Kubrick, like Special Effects Supervisor Doug Trumbull, would know. Too bad, when he was ramping up a presentation, the plug was pulled  on that whole thing.

No, I mean, for some, seeing flaws in films pointed out can ruin a film, so a spoiler tag could be useful.

I think the fact that the "just what do you think you're doing dave "trim isn't mentioned anywhere else makes this trim pretty interesting. Overall, the livejournal analysis is fairly detailed and while detail isn't an indicator of validity, it does mean he put some effort into it, which makes me think he's being genuine (even if mistaken). Because of this, I would like to know more about this specific trim and I mentioned it because perhaps someone else might know more, but I doubt it.

Spaced Ranger said:

If you're referring to SilverWook's Announcement: New plot spoiler policy *please read* thread, note that applies to "With new Star Wars films coming out, the issue of spoilers has become relevant again." [emphasis mine]
I think 2001:ASO is safely out of that category. 

.

Previously, it looked like you were citing the Underview article as not acknowledging a cut that you had found -- "the underview site doesn't mention the 'just what do you think you're doing, dave' edit/trim". I didn't know you were thinking of the LiveJournal article, which is the remembrance it's author without other corroboration -- "... as far as I can tell with the powers of Google, has never been described anywhere. By anybody." 

Of course, people who closely worked with Kubrick, like Special Effects SupervisorDoug Trumbull, would know. Too bad, when he was ramping up a presentation, the plug was pulled on that whole thing.

Spaced Ranger said:

 

@ kaosjm

I've never read of any "missing credits" on any showings of 2001:ASO (and that would be a pretty big thing, too). There were full-production program booklets like the very worn one you linked, which listed production credits, but that's normal practice. Here's some better looking photos ...

"When 2001 premiered in Cinerama, there were no titles or credits. We were given this program to ponder. (it survived college)"

That is the title of the thread from reddit.com/r/movies. If that is true was it maybe on some showings? If one were to do a true representation of the Cinerama print would the credits be removed? Sorry just wanting understand this version of the film as I hadn't even heard of it until reading about it here.

Spaced Ranger said:

.

@ PDB

Was the Apocalypse Now 1st showing a nationwide premiere or a main-theater sneak-peek (many films do that for final touch-up)? 2001:ASO not only was a premiere, but a simultaneous opening to the big Cinerama theaters across the country. When Kubrick made his famous final trims in/from New York, instructions were sent to those other theaters of where and what to cut for showings thereafter ... for the finalized film (credits untouched).

 Sorry I should of been more specific, its was AN's 70mm sneak peak that had no credit and the original fire ending. The had and the credits printed for people to read. kaosjm posting reminded me of that.

Back to 2001. I will work on it eventually but it will be a while. I have too many projects to finish at the moment and too little time. I have what I believe is all the materials I need (BD, MGM 5.1, CC video and PCM 2.0). If anyone want to tackle it before me, be my guest. 

@ Turisu

Yes, something like that would surely be rectified (in HD, all frame/picture edges should be clean & sharp). Now all I would need is the time to actually do it.  :)

.

@ kaosjm

Thanks for that link info. That, like the LiveJournal article-link (on page 5), is always interesting. It would help if others could/would corroborated it. After all, there is no shortage of witnesses to Luke threw the grappling hook twice in the 1977, first theatrical run of Star Wars.

.

For those interested, while searching around for posting/reply information, I came across an insightful, in-depth analysis of 2001:ASO that's worth a skim-through at the very least ..

Underground Research Initiative blog - 2001: A Space Odyssey - Discerning Themes through Score and Imagery
http://undergroundresearchinitiative.blogspot.com/2013/07/2001-space-odyssey-evoking-theme-by.html

.

@ PDB

Kudos! It's awesome that you're doing this (as time permits), especially from such an important source heretofor buried & forgotten! 

[This thought came to me over at the THX 1138 thread and I've copied the back-and-forth here for any further exploration] ..

.

poita said:

In reality though when watching a movie, no one will see it ... But I can't help it, knowing it is there is enough to irk me.

And it's worse if you've actually seen it once. Like first the time I watched the newly acquired 2001: A Space Odyssey in high def. The TV wasn't wasn't properly set up (I was playing with it) and I saw this ..

.. instead of this ..

What!? I had seen "behind the curtain" and saw ... the title board? From Stanley Kubrick? Genius? Perfectionist? And I just saw a sloppy overlay? Ever since, I can't watch 2001 without subconsciously scrutinizing every little corner to spot more poorly-joined seams. 

.

SilverWook said:

There are issues with the HD master of 2001. You're not supposed to be seeing the seams in the front projection screen used for The Dawn of Man sequence. They were never visible in 70mm, and they sure as heck shouldn't be now.

 .

...  I think their monitors weren't calibrated and they pushed the film beyond reasonable limits. I just grabbed the DVD (Warner 1999) and it shows the title board more plain (just like with the above downloaded HD image, when I paint-program pushed it to duplicate my maladjusted TV) ..

I wonder if this would show on the laserdisc, too (the Kubrick approved, Criterion Collection one PDB is using at the 2001 thread)?

@ PDB - If you have a chance, would you post the above shot from your laserdisc? It's just after the title appears but before Discovery enters frame left. Thanks!

.

Chess anyone? Hope you like it ... 'cause Stanley Kubrick was playing chess through his films (and he was no patzer).
                  
    New York Review blog 2010/04/05 - Playing Chess With Kubrick

Which brings us to the microcosmic chess match in 2001. The Chess webpage 2001: A Chess Space Odyssey is a semi-interactive chess game of Roesch vs Schlage (Hamburg, 1910) ... I mean ... Poole vs HAL9000 (space, 2001+) ..

My previous 2001 webpage-recommendation's author surmised that HAL made a mistake in it's chess game, deliberately, to test Poole. This new recommendation is an in-depth critique of 2001 tempered by Kubrick's other films and thematic patterns notable in his works.

This article has teeth, lots of pages, and lots of pictures (I love it!). So put on a pot of coffee, pour yourselves a first cup, and, as Dr. Morbius might phrase it, prepare your minds for a new scale of values on Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey ..

Analysis of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey
http://www.idyllopuspress.com/idyllopus/film/2001_toc.htm
"Are you one of the league who find Kubrick's cinema fascinating and wonderful but are also confused by seeming peculiarities? Are you certain those often under-the-radar-over-the-head weirdnesses must mean something? Or maybe you're just curious? Well, I am the person who "discovered" the open door opposite Room 237 (and a lot more besides) so if you're looking for Kubrick high strangeness then you've come to the right place. But if I delve into the high strangeness, the oddities are simply a component part of analyzing the themes and ideas that Kubrick carries from film to film."

Hey Spaced Ranger. I'm out of town so it will be awhile before I can get that pic to you

That'd be great! Whenever you get a chance. Thanks again!

Here you go:

Awesome, thanks!

Well, roughly doing my maladjusted TV simulation on this laserdisc frame (as on the HD & DVD, above) ..

.. it confirms my reflection and SilverWook's mention -- that's the way of doing things on film. That plus Kubrick's production team using multiple exposures of self-matted elements to produce 1st generation special effects on the original negative. Little wonder it reveals itself when pushed out-of-bounds. Actually, that's a good thing for a retification. It makes finding misalignments a task as easy as bumping up the gamma. (I love computers!)

As an aside, I tried Taschen-izing this shot (see Page 4). Before, it had no stars (not really, but it looked that way). After, ..

.. the stars show normally. This confirms to me the laserdisc needs that brightness / contrast boost to be accurate.

Spaced Ranger said:

BTW, http://s21.postimg.org/7r80easzb/ld_comp_2.jpg is not coming through for me. ... Postimg.com appears to be a little flaky.

 @ PDB

I've tracked down that problem with Postimg.com. Some time back I had blocked something in the Windows "hosts" file and it took out the entire "s21." address, and anything attached to it. (Oops, my bad.) So ... never mind.
Please forgive me, oh great Postimg picture-server in the cloud ...

Since I'm not anywhere near as technically adept as some of you here, may I ask, is the out-of-print MGM non-anamorphic DVD worth having .... even though I've purchased a copy of the Criterion CAV set and am awaiting it's arrival? 

Definitely skim this thread from the beginning (if you haven't been following it). Lots of good info scattered throughout. However, for the short-form, I'd recommend ..

.. the Criterion laserdisc for the Kubrick-supervised transfer ..
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Cinerama-70mm-2001-preservation-Is-it-possible/post/632583/#TopicPost632583 (Page 1 this thread)
.. with this releases caveat (ouch!) ..
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Cinerama-70mm-2001-preservation-Is-it-possible/post/746946/#TopicPost746946 (Page 4 this thread)

.. the MGM DVD (which is supposed to come with a booklet) for it's awesome widescreen (letterbox) motion menus ..
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Cinerama-70mm-2001-preservation-Is-it-possible/post/643160/#TopicPost643160 (Page 3 this thread) (note the referenced DVDBeaver's 2001 comparative-releases review with lots of eye-opening pictures)

.. and the Blu-ray for it's general clean-up & superior resolution.