rorkesdriftvc.com Forum Index


rorkesdriftvc.com
Discussions related to the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879
Reply to topic
Sheldon - Why Always Zulu But Not Zulu Dawn ?
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
Sheldon

I meant to ask this ages ago, but can't remember how I phrased my question, or where I was 'taking it'.

I'll try now. Please bear with me.

I know Zulu was/is an epic, but I'm sort of losing track how many versions have/will be released.

I've also lost track of how it has been updated, please excuse my lack of knowledge in this area, but we have - original, remastered, HD, Blu-Ray, and god knows how many other formats have/may be used to perfect Zulu, which I didn't think always needed perfecting, being the masterpiece that it is termed. When does it end ?

I know you carry the banner of leaving films alone, in the way they were made, but you don't, in my view, criticise all the modifications done to, and possibly future modifications, of Zulu.

If I may compare Zulu Dawn, which has been greatly criticised by many, to a run-down barn, then, with a bit of care and attention (and money) is renovated and restored into an outstanding barn-conversion, instead of left on the scrapheap, to be demolished or neglected.

How will people ever see any potential of other films, if they are not given such an opportunity, to be what they should have been ?

I hope this question makes sense.

Coll
Sheldon Hall


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 377
Reply with quote
Hi Coll,

I THINK I know what you're asking! The reason why "Zulu" has been issued so often in so many different formats is simple - it sells. As a popular title, it can be (and has been) repackaged in numerous ways so that punters will upgrade, eg, from fullscreen VHS to widescreen, from VHS to DVD, from standard DVD to two-disc Sp Ed, from SE DVD to Blu-ray, etc, etc. (I don't think there'a Blu-ray in planning yet, but it's only a matter of time!) Having said that, none of these repackagings has substantially altered the film itself, i.e., there has been no "Director's Cut" because the film as we have it is already the Director's Cut. Successive home video editions have simply tried to improve picture and sound quality by remastering the original material.

As for "Zulu Dawn", the reverse applies: it lost money on original theatrical release so is very much a "niche" title. The copyright has changed hands several times and has never belonged to a major studio, nor have any of the various rights holders had access to the original negative, so there has never been a completely satisfactory version on home video (one in the correct 2.35:1 aspect ratio with Dolby Stereo sound). Until the various rights are sorted out and the neg recovered and restored, I don't think we'll see a decent version anytime soon - and again, its lack of B.O. success is hardly an incentive for one of the majors to acquire it. Still, you never know!

Hope this answers your question!
Sheldon
View user's profileSend private message
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
Sheldon

Thanks for your reply.

Even updating it, but not altering the film itself, does that not mean still changing it, to suit ?

Do you know if sales equal or surpass the previous amount, each time a newer version is released, or perhaps people will get fed up with the same film, epic or not, being sold again and again as an upgrade, when I think, in general, many may be content with the copy they have at present ?

Perhaps Zulu Dawn was the wrong comparison to use, but I just feel all films should be given the opportunity of upgrading, in some way or other, as is it not the duty of the film industry to try and protect all, and not just a select few.

I know it probably comes down to individual studios and money, but how can we have film history, if some films are left, when others speed ahead ?

Do you not find, that maybe people don't recall older films, chiefly because of this reason, that they aren't kept up to pace with upgrades, so are missed out on ?

I don't know how many films have missed out, but possibly you may be able to name several, that seem to get left behind.

As I say, I don't know where I expected this topic to go, but it does appear to bother me somewhat, so felt I had to ask.

Coll
Sheldon Hall


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 377
Reply with quote
I'm afraid the answers to all these not-quite-rhetorical questions comes down to the same thing: money. The film and industry is a business, and companies don't spend any more than can expect to get back, plus an anticipated profit. So the most popular films tend to get frequently remastered, repackaged, etc, and the more obscure ones may not make it onto DVD at all.

Here are a few that have never been released on DVD to my knowledge, even in the US, but which I'd like to see uncut and in widescreen: "The Roots of Heaven" (1958), "The Big Fisherman" (1959), "John Paul Jones" (1959), "Porgy and Bess" (1959), "Pepe" (1960), "Freud: The Secret Passion" (1962), "The Victors" (1963), "Isadora" (1968), "Alfred the Great" (1969), "Goodbye, Mr Chips" (1969), "Antony and Cleopatra" (1972), "Lost Horizon" (1973). Not heard of some of these? My point exactly! Most of them flopped when they came out, some have been shown on TV in cut versions, but others have disappeared without trace. Rights issues may be involved in some cases, but most have probably just been forgotten about.
View user's profileSend private message
leightarrant


Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 131
Location: East Sussex
Reply with quote
Sheldon - Good bye Mr Chips 1969. Is that the Pet Clarke version? May I add to your list of long lost movies that struggle to show up onto ours shores in one format or another....
Frankenstein the true story 1972 (Sarrazin) - The Raging Moon (McDowell) - The Honeymoon Machine(McQueen) - The Lost Continent (Porter) - One Eyed Jacks (Brando proper restored vers)
Figures in a landscape (Shaw) - Robbery (Baker) - Villian(Mcshane) - Victim (Bogarde) - Gold (Moore, proper restored vers) Straight Time (Hoffman) to name but a few...some of these are gems....
View user's profileSend private message
Sheldon Hall


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 377
Reply with quote
Leigh, your mention of "Gold" reminds me that "Shout at the Devil" (also starring Rog, adapted from a Wilbur Smith novel and filmed in South Africa) has never been released on DVD in its full-length version. It should run 146 mins (140 at 25-fps PAL speed) but most video and TV versions run under two hours. And yes, the 1969 "Chips" stars Pet Clark and Peter O'Toole. I have it on a US laserdisc (remember them?), but there's no sign as yet of a DVD release. It's terrific, despite its poor reputation.
View user's profileSend private message
leightarrant


Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 131
Location: East Sussex
Reply with quote
Sheldon - I do remember the Pet Clarke version of CHIPS...great film, very different if you get my gist. Saw it on TV many many moons ago. Shout at The Devil I do have on DVD but haven't watched it...I also have a very poor copy of GOLD....shame as these two films are Moore at his best, especially GOLD, directed by the great Peter Hunt, also the music by Bernstein is fabulous. Meanwhile I'll await the Blu ray version of ZULU to come out which i guarantee will be before any of these lost gems listed.
View user's profileSend private message
Edward


Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Posts: 32
Location: Glendora, California
Reply with quote
Reworking any film � even one that was a box office disaster is a very touchy subject. It really all boils down to protecting the artistic integrity of what the director of the film originally intended.

Quite often films get butchered by the studio hacks who think they know better than the films director. Luckily for us the advent of VSH and now DVD have given us what is know known as the �Directors Cut� of many of these films. Sometimes these are marketed as restored version. Which in effect they are. This trend is one of the greatest benefits of the mass marketing of films for home viewing.

The difficulty arises when the director of the film is dead, as in the case of Zulu Dawn. That film�s director Douglas Hickox passed way in 1988. Even so restored version of films have come out recently long after the passing of that same film�s director. Samuel Fuller�s The Big Red One and Sam Peckinpah�s Major Dundee. These restorations � or reconstruction in the case of The Big Red One � where all possible because the director�s shooting scripts - and the cut of lost footage - were still in existence. Without such a document any such effort would be impossible.

In the case of Zulu Dawn the director is dead but both producers James Faulkner and Nate Kohn are still living so it would seem logical that if a restoration or reconstruction of the film was to occur either one or both of them would have to take the lead in the project. I have no clue if the director�s working script still exists.

Another important point to keep in mind is weather or nor the directors version of the film would have been really any better than the final released version. Sometimes a mediocre film is just that. The possibility of greatness was there but what actually came out of the production process was not � and never can be.

Personally I don�t think that there is any room for improvement of the film Zulu. Historical accuracy aside it is an outstanding film by any measure. Sure there are all sorts of little things that could have been done differently but changing them at this point would not make for a markedly better version of the film as it was shot.

Zulu Dawn as it was released could be improved upon either through a restoration or even a new version of the events of January 1879 being shot.

Also as to the rights to a film. These change with the wind at times. Here in the U.S. several really bad versions of Zulu were released on DVD not long ago. I ended up with two of these as gifts until the MGM version was released not long ago. Prior to the U.S. MGM release I had written to the Criterion Collection to see if I could get them to re-release their version of Zulu on DVD. That version was pretty much exactly what film goers in 1964 got to see on the big screen. So if anyone actually has the released the ulitimate version of Zulu it is the Criterion Collection.

Here is a tidbit regarding the rights to Zulu � at least as the U.S. is concerned:

In the U.S., Zulu officially lapsed into the public domain, meaning there have been several issues of the film on home video/LaserDisc/DVD in North America - most notably an LD release by the Criterion Collection which retains the original stereophonic soundtrack and taken from a 70mm print. An official DVD release (with a mono soundtrack as the original stereo tracks were not available) was later issued by Embassy's successor-in-interest, StudioCanal (with Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer handling video distribution). StudioCanal (the current owner of the Embassy theatrical library) had acquired control of the film in 2000 after its copyright was restored. Outside the U.S., the film has always been owned by Paramount Pictures.

_________________
"Why Worry? Be a coward and be happy."
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
Coll
Guest

Reply with quote
I've always said there was a lot of potential with Zulu Dawn, but felt it was filmed with the first or second draft of the script, instead of keeping on with it, and bettering the screenplay, through a few more drafts.

Obviously, there was more than the script at fault, being the financial aspect, amongst other things.

However, I consider that it should have began further into the Isandlwana story, perhaps beginning with the night of the 21st, or even still, the morning of the 22nd, after Chelmsford had left.

Therefore, much like Zulu, possibly with the same sort of information supplied at the start, which was the letter read by the excellent Richard Burton, to tell the story up to that point.

There is no real build-up in the first third of Zulu Dawn, which is a lot of wasted time, when audiences may lose interest quickly.

A good place to start, would be just before Col. D. arrived, when the circumstances were starting to change, introducing a sense of unease through some of the defenders, vedettes and officers alike, but the Zulu army remaining unseen to us, until, like the real event, they are located by the mounted men.

I'm a fan of Zulu Dawn, and this posting probably reads the same as many others I wrote before, but I couldn't stay quiet.

Coll
Sheldon Hall


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 377
Reply with quote
Edward (and Coll),

I have almost as many reservations about so-called "Director's Cuts", including the director-approved kind, as I do about studio-mangled versions. Many films need to be protected from their own directors, who are often tempted to fix unbroken films by fiddling about with them after the fact. Conspicuous offenders include Spielberg (replacing guns with mobile phones and drinks bottles in "ET"), Coppola (adding bits to "Apocalypse Now" that he was right to leave on the cutting room floor in the first place), Ridley Scott (altering the colour palette of "Alien"), Bogdanovich (changing dialogue to make a character more sympathetic) and especially Lucas (mucking up just about everything he's ever done with new digital effects). Some of these changes may have been motivated by creative second thoughts; others were frankly commercially minded, wringing another drop of revenue from old product.

As for posthumous DCs, several filmmakers have been the unfortunate victims of other people's second-guessing (always dangerous even if notes and scripts do exist to guide latecomers). Orson Welles has probably been worst affected, notably with "Touch of Evil" and "Othello". In the case of the former, Henry Mancini's tremendous music score was removed for its alleged DC - do composers not have creative rights too? Many films have had their sound effects tracks remixed or even re-recorded to add a Dolby 5.1 mix for home video - sound designers' rights, anyone?

Several alternate cuts of various Sam Peckinpah films have hit the market, none approved by the man himself and none corresponding to his "original intentions", which can only be a matter for speculation. I'm glad to have these versions as alternatives but they shouldn't be mistaken for definitive documents. The restored "Major Dundee", for example, was only a slightly longer version of the studio cut which Peckinpah always hated (the elements no longer exist to restore his own version). Fortunately, the studio concerned was honest enough not to pretend that the longer cut was a DC of any kind.

In the case of "Zulu Dawn", the problem is that most if not all of the "missing scenes" from the release version were never shot to begin with. As I have detailed elsewhere, the company ran out of money during production and was forced to cut the script as they went along, shooting only what they really needed (and sometimes not even that). So I very much doubt that there's any significant material left over to construct a longer version (other than alternate takes of scenes already in the film, which are not "extra material" as such).

The danger is to assume that longer is always better - sometimes material is cut for a good reason (it wasn't very good in the first place or didn't help the film). Sometimes these cuts are made by the director, sometimes by others who may, on occasion, know better than the director (I can think of many films which would have benefited from a second opinion on the final edit when the director has been too self-indulgent to listen to reason). And the profusion of alternate versions makes the job of a film historian very difficult - it's useful to know which was the one seen by original audiences, critics and industry peers, and to have access to it for the sake of the historical record!
View user's profileSend private message
Sheldon Hall


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 377
Reply with quote
Forgot to mention, re. "Zulu": I doubt that the Criterion edition was taken from a 70mm print (I will check my copy of the LD to be sure), but I'd be interested to know if the company claimed this was the case. The US rights have now passed to Paramount which, unlike MGM, has the stereo tracks (heard on the Region 2 editions). Par hasn't as yet issued a Region 1 version, but it might be persuaded to let Criterion do one, as with other Par films recently (e.g., "The Naked Prey", "if...."). I'd be interested to see the scenes cut from the final version (director-approved!), but God forbid that someone puts them back in...
View user's profileSend private message
Lost Zulu Dawn Material
Edward


Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Posts: 32
Location: Glendora, California
Reply with quote
In regards to �lost� scenes from Zulu Dawn. Several years ago while I was rummaging through several antique and collectable shops in the old downtown section of Pomona, California I came across a box filled with a large stack of original 35MM still contact prints from Zulu Dawn. These were the production stills photographer�s proofs and contained amongst other things really great character studies of all the major cast members, shots taken during shooting as well as other taken during lulls in the shooting.

In addition there were several sleeves of 2 � inch color transparencies of the same material.

In the same box were two full sized undeveloped 35MM film canisters production marked �ZULU DAWN� along with quite a few other notes. I remember Audio Track #�s were included. Unfortunately someone else had opened both canisters � hence me knowing that both had been undeveloped.

Naturally I bought all the stills and transparencies but left the film cans � both of which were giving off a pretty strong odor. I asked the shop owner if he could put me in contact with the person who had sold the stuff to him. He told me that the guy who sold it to him was a walk in and not a regular source. I left my business card but never heard back.

I ended up selling the other items on eBay to a prominent member of the Anglo-Zulu War community who I believe just resold some of the same material in eBay recently.

I have no idea what was on those two reels of film nor do I have any idea how materials directly connected to the production of that film ended up in Pomona. California.

_________________
"Why Worry? Be a coward and be happy."
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
leightarrant


Joined: 21 Feb 2006
Posts: 131
Location: East Sussex
Reply with quote
That's interesting stuff Sheldon - Directors cuts often seem to be the best thing that one can buy - but rightly so, its not always for the best., which leads me to my next question - of all the releases cinema and otherwise, can one really appreciate a 'Directors Cut'.... Laurence of Arabia perhaps.
Can anyone name at least a good movie where the Directors Cut has proved positive, and made the overall film much better. I myself can't think of one. Does The extended ALAMO (Wayne version) count I wonder.
There's not many.....
View user's profileSend private message
shearer


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 15
Location: Hartlepool
Reply with quote
The Alamo is much better when seen in the roadshow format, I only have it on video though,I think there would be a market for the dvd version.I think lawrence and spartacus are good in the extended form,the big redone is better too, however more often than not the original cinema releases work best.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mail
Sheldon Hall


Joined: 01 Sep 2005
Posts: 377
Reply with quote
Shearer,
In the cases of both THE ALAMO and SPARTACUS, the longer cuts WERE the versions first seen in theatres - albeit not for very long. Both restore material that was cut during their initial theatrical runs or for subsequent reissues. So too does the DC of LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, though David Lean also did a belated "fine cut" (deleting about 8 mins of footage - nothing major, mostly just the beginnings and ends of shots) for its 1989 restoration and re-release. The restored LOW is arguably a case of a director fiddling with his work, but the 20 mins cuts made to its roadshow version in early 1963 were also his work (a detail he subsequently denied or evaded)!
View user's profileSend private message
Sheldon - Why Always Zulu But Not Zulu Dawn ?
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT  
Page 1 of 3  

  
  
 Reply to topic