laureatedvd.com

[Dominic McHugh]

Dear Ken

Let me recommend www.fredastaire.net to all. I discovered it today, and it's a great site fully dedicated to Fred's life and work. It also has a big plug for your new edition of 'Holiday Inn' at the moment! INdeed, it seems to be very pro-Laureate and your work.

According to this site, a French company called Editions Montparnasse has released nine of the early RKO Astaire films with some amusing translations of the titles, eg Vernon and Irene Castle becoming 'La grande farandole' and Carefree being titled 'Amanda' after the main character, of course. In fact 8 of the RKO Astaire/Rogers films are available (minus Roberta, as usual, a film I have never seen; why is it so hidden in the UK?) plus 'Damsels in Distress. I'm intrigued! Again having translation problems, all I can make out is that there are French and original English soundtracks, with 'extracts from the films of Fred Astaire'. They are all Region 2, unfortunately for American fans (but good for Europeans!).

As for that peculiar German 'Top Hat', also called 'Ich tanz mich in Dein Herz hinein', I don't think it uses the voices of Fred and Ginger, but who knows? I think the speaking voices are dubbed but the singing of the stars retained. There is also an English soundtrack. Amusingly, the German fans who have written in all say that they wish there was a 'pure' original print rather than the 'doctored' German version! Which makes me think a) is the film available for the laureate treatment and b) if you released it worldwide it would be popular in more than just the English-speaking countries. It seems that the Germans appreciate the film as a great work of art which should be presented in as much purity as a Monet painting, an interesting cultural illustration which one can't argue with!

Sorry to keep cluttering your website with my chunnerings, but I hope this is of interest to someone out there!

Thanks for your response about the White Christmas query - I read it instantly and enjoyed it.

Thanks

Dominic

[jack clowes]

I suspect that the reason this film disappeared
was that MGM did a remake in 1952 called Lovely
to Look At and probably the 1935 original was
withdrawn. This almost certainly happened when
in 1951 MGM remade Showboat and the 1936 version
was not seen for many years. It's strange that
both remakes starred Howard Keel and Kathryn
Grayson and, in my opinion despite the lavish
MGM productions, were inferior to the originals.
anyway, no doubt Ken will have the facts

[Dominic McHugh]

Yes indeed, the MGM remakes were poor versions of classic originals. Thanks for your response - I couldn't agree with you more. I have seen the remakes but not the originals, and I would love to see the Paul Robeson version of Showboat in a good clean print. With the 'Lovely to Look At' in particular, it is hard to sit through what is quite a boring film considering the predecessor and the wonderful score (hence my rather pathetic title - sorry!). I look forward to hearing Ken's views on all four films - the two versions each of Roberta and Showboat. We like to keep you busy Ken! (It is appreciated!)

Robeson fans might be interested to visit an exhibition which is on in London at the moment, at the Theatre Museum in Covent Garden. I went today and really enjoyed it. Archive material from film companies and the RSC are coupled with interesting items such as the singer's enormous costume for Shakespeare's 'Othello', which made one realise the size of the man!

Best wishes

Dominic

[Ken Barnes]

My thanks to Jack Clowes and Dominic McHugh for raising the subject of remakes of classic films.

In the 1950s, MGM relied heavily on remaking former classics. Apart from the glossy 1952 re-hash of "Roberta"
( as "Lovely To Look At" ) and "Show Boat," they also did "The Prisoner of Zenda" (1952 (using the same shooting script as the 1936 version) " The Merry Widow"(1952 - for the third time after the 1925 and 1934 versions). All of which were inferior to their predecessors. The only remake that improved on the excellent 1925 version was "Ben-Hur"
(1959). But then this was directed by William Wyler - a good director can sometimes make a difference.

In the case of "Roberta," MGM bought the 1934 version from RKO and promptly buried it. They did the same with "Show Boat" - buying up the 1936 version from Universal so that the 1951 technicolor re-make would have a clear field.

In January of this year, I had the pleasure of chatting with George Sydney - director of the 1951 version - and he told me that while he was pleased with the results ( and the box office returns ), he had originally wanted to do the full story ( as in the 1936 version )in which the leading characters ( Magnolia and Gaylord ) grow old before they are finally re-united. But MGM wanted everyone to remain eternally young and attractive - so the story was truncated. Mr. Sydney died three months after our meeting.
A fine director in his day, he also directed MGM's sparkling 1952 re-make of "Scaramouche" - which actually improved on the 1923 original.

In my own library, I do have NTSC laserdisc versions of
both the 1934 "Roberta" and the 1936 "Show Boat" and they are, as you say, superior to the remakes. The latter,particularly, because of the presence of Paul Robeson and Helen Morgan ( the original "Judy La Verne") in the cast. Irene Dunne, I felt, was a little too old to play Magnolia as a teenager but she's fine in the later scenes. Allan Jones is perfect throughout as Gaylord Ravenal. In the late 1970s (when I was working with his son, Jack Jones), I spoke to Allan about the 1951 remake. He thought that Howard Keel, Kathryn Grayson and Ava Gardner were very good but he felt the production was too flashy and looked like more a college musical than a true reflection of the old South.

In conclusion, I must say I agree with Dominic and Jack.
As a general rule, I'm not into re-makes. Now, I hear that more re-makes are on the way. Those classic Ealing comedies "Kind Hearts and Coronets" and "The Ladykillers" are due to be given the "modern" treatment. Why bother when the originals are so perfect? To prove my point, I would heartily recommend the currently available DVD boxed set of Ealing Comedy Classics. This is a real treasure.

Thanks for getting in touch.

Best
Ken

[Dominic McHugh]

Yes indeed. Remakes are often awful, including the recently disappointing Thomas Crown Affair with Pierce Brosnan and Rene Russo, both of whom lacked the subtlety of the original duo. Even worse, perhaps, are the big-screen spin-offs from 1960s cult soaps, eg Charlie's Angels and The Avengers, both of which I sat through cringing. I can't bear the thought of someone remaking the Ealing Comedies - why try to improve on perfection?

By the way, is it the case that the earlier Roberta is seldom seen because of MGM owning the later version, or is there another reason? I infered the former from Ken's last response but was unsure.

Best regards

Dominic

[jack clowes]

I do have the Ealing Comedy box set and agree
with Ken about the quality of these films but
I wish they had made fuller use of the DVD
potential and included some informative and
entertaining commentaries - perhaps they could
have approached the master in this field - Mr
Barnes himself. I have both the Criterion and
Laureate versions of Charade and although the
former has the services of both the Director -
Stanley Donen and Screenwriter - Peter Stone to
provide the commentary I think it is inferior
to Ken's commentary. Although they are able to
provide a few anecdotes about the making of the
film they seem to spend most of the time having
a chat and having a few differences of opinion
about various events and facts. By comparison
Ken's commentary is meticulously researched -
as one has come to expect - and is extremely
entertaining and informative. My final point is
to Dominic - the Directors of the remakes you
refer to cannot be attempting to improve upon
perfection - if they were they would surely
make a much bigger effort!

[Dominic McHugh]

I couldn't agree more about the lack of features on the Ealing comedies set. The same goes for the Agatha Christie set, which is by the same company. In the latter case, the sound and picture quality leaves much to be desired as well, especially in 'Murder on the Orient Express.'

As for commentaries, these annoy me on many films. Think of 'Victor/Victoria', in which Blake Edwards and Julie Andrews make no helpful remarks whatsoever - they just complement one another on their talents all the time - especially Andrews to Edwards. The Delia Ephron films, eg 'When Harry Met Sally', 'You've Got Mail' and 'Sleepless in Seattle', are also excrutiating, due to the monotonous sound of that otherwise fine director's voice... The 'My Fair Lady' one is perhaps the worst; the 'restoration' team seem to think that the lay person wants to know every minute technical detail about how the restoration was done and what equipment was used. The only good thing about this edition is the inclusion of Audrey Hepburn's vocals for two songs.

Which brings me back to Ken's commentaries. He seems to realise that they are there to lead the viewer through the film, pointing out things which might not otherwise be noticed. It also makes one a more attentive and analytical viewer of other films. For example, I was watching 'Funny Face' last night, which, like 'Charade', is a Stanley Donen film. I suddenly saw similarities between the techniques in the wonderful opening shots of Kay Thompson striding through the doors of Quality Magazine in 'Funny Face', and the opening of the drawer containing Charles' body in 'Charde'. And I would never have appreciated the latter to the extent I now do without Mr Barnes. It made me wish that you had done a commentary on 'Funny Face.' Ah well. We all dream.

Keep in touch about any exciting news! Good luck with developments!

Dominic

[jack clowes]

In my view one should not buy a DVD just because
it has a commentary - if you like a film, then
your enjoyment can often be increased by having
a commentary - which is why I disagree with you
about the NORA Ephron films and My Fair Lady.
Some very good films have commentaries which,
although not brilliant, are worthwhile e.g.
North by Northwest and Steel Magnolias etc. on
the other hand there are some extremely good
films which also have excellent commentaries -
Shakespeare in Love (2 commentaries), Remains
of the Day, The Godfather Trilogy and Field of
Dreams spring to mind. But for me one of the
very best is Mike Leigh's commentary on his
wonderful TOPSY TURVY and one of the worst is
the Ben Elton (and Hugh Laurie) commentary on
the supremely self-indulgent and woeful MAYBE
BABY.

[Dominic McHugh]

Sorry - I must have expressed myself badly. Yesterday was a very long day...

However, I don't recall saying that I buy DVDs just for the commentaries - in fact, I was agreeing that commentaries can enhance favourite films. BUT I still think that considering the anecdotes that must be out there about My Fair Lady, they could have done a better job. In fact, the restoration team should have been on one track, and Marni Nixon and Gene Allen on another. I still find the comments of the restorers unhelpful; in fact, they often point out places where you can see the dullness of colour due to restoration, which spoils rather than enhances viewing.

And yes, I know it's Nora not Delia that's common to the films I mentioned. Delia does, however, work with her sister on the commentary of 'You've Got Mail', and I find that their discussion is particularly self-indulgent and over-sisterly. They behave as if their relationship is the subject of the film.

All I was trying to say, in a very long-winded way, was that not all film commentaries are of the quality of the Laureate ones, which definitely enhance viewing.

Don't take it to heart too much! I was only agreeing with you on the whole.

Dom

[jack clowes]

Now you've misunderstood me. I wasn't referring
to you when I mentioned buyng a DVD just because
it has a commentary - if anything I was getting
at myself (Maybe Baby was bought on the strength
of the Cast and the Commentary) and I was trying
to point out to anyone who reads these that they
should be certain that they like a film before
buying the DVD - I can speak from experience.
None of my comments were directed at you - I was
merely passing on to anyone who reads these, my
own experiences and opinions. Finally to put all
my prattling to rest I would just like to say
that in a previous message I referred to using
the full potential of DVD and would like to add
that an almost perfect example of this is the
new Two-Disc Special Edition of SINGIN' IN THE
RAIN (REGION 1) - perhaps they have seen what
Ken did with Royal Wedding and realised they had
a lot to learn. Anyway, once again let me stress
my comments are not directed at you but to
anyone who reads the Message Board.

[Jim Patterson]

Audio commentaries, when they are well done, are a worthwhile addition to any DVD. But I have yet to hear a director's commentary that sustains interest throughout.
Ridley Scott (Gladiator) and Tim Burton (Sleepy Hollow) may be successful directors - but they have such boring voices and take too long to get to the point.

I agree with both Jack Clowes and Dominic McHugh that Laureate's Ken Barnes is one of the few people to master the difficult art of the audio commentary. I'm looking forward to "The Man With The Golden Arm" and, particularly, to "Holiday Inn."

J.P.

[jack clowes]

I think the key elements of a good commentary
are research and preparation. Too often, the
Director or Actor (or both) sit down to watch
the movie (often for the first time in years)
and say whatever comes into their heads which
may be neither informative or interesting and
often have little to do with what we are looking
at. The worst examples of this are often when
there is more than one person and the result
is sycophantic and self-congratulatory (as in
the case quoted by Dominic plus Maybe Baby) and
is not at all entertaining. Anyway I urge you
to check out the 2-disc Special Edition of
SINGIN' IN THE RAIN not so much for the Audio
Commentary (which is OK) but for the many other
extras which are excellent.

[Dominic McHugh]

I've taken your advice and ordered Singin' in the Rain. I must agree that the original release had a deplorable lack of special features considering the wealth of material which must be available for such a classic film.
'Hello Dolly' and 'Calamity Jane' fall under the same category - there must be loads to say about the negative relationship between Streisand and Matthau in the former!

I also dearly wish that someone would restore the 'Shall I Tell You What I Think of You' sequence from The King and I. I have the audio track on a CD but can't seem to find the film clip anywhere. Can anyone help?

As a final wish to send into the universe, I wonder why there's no DVD release of Kiss Me, Kate? Not to mention Easter Parade and the delightful High Society (what a cast that film has!). Thankfully, the directors of these three films are unlikely to be available for comment(aries) - but Ken's here...!

Dominic

[Tony Gage]

This discussion on commentaries is becoming very interesting. While I agree with Jim Patterson that most director's commentaries are boring ( check out Robert Zemeckis on the DVD of "What Lies Beneath" ) I would recommend the late John Frankenheimer's efforts on "The Manchurian Candidate," " The Train" and "Ronin." This man was not only a fine director ( when he had the right script) but also an incisive observer of how films should be made.

I think Frankenheimer's commentaries should be required listening for other directors who fancy themselves as
qualified commentators.

T.G

[Dominic McHugh]

I couldn't agree with you more about the commentary on 'The Train' - here the director demonstrates, as you have said, exactly how a director's commentary can make the viewer reconsider the action onscreen. And what a film that is! No matter how many times I watch it, it never fails to blow my mind with moral, cultural, historical and philosophical ideas. But what's great is that it's also highly entertaining, and unlike most war-based scripts, the thematic content is the servant of a strong drama which is worthy of any stage, let alone the screen; the story transcends the Zeitgeist without ignoring or rebuking it.

As for commentaries in general, here's another to consider: White Christmas. I don't know how they let Rosemary Clooney loose on the film alone, considering the randomness and wildness of her comments. It would be inaccurate to put it down to age, because I've just seen Dame Judi Dench and Dame Maggie Smith on the stage in London - and they are still as fabulous as ever!

Dom