Back on the 16mm's for a while now, starting off tonight with the very funny Without a Clue. This one didn't do well at the box office, but I think its great fun.

For screenshots please see here,

Without a Clue. 1988 LPP Theatrical Print

You mention the film didn't do too well at the box office Tom, do you enjoy the film more because its on cine? You may have gone to the cinema to see a film that you didn't think much of but owning it now makes it more enjoyable, the reason I ask is my wife has stated this to me on a few occasions and she's 100 percent correct, I've owned and still owned some shockers but because it's on cine I've enjoyed them, films that she knows I wouldn't see at the cinema I've owned, I can't deny it as its true ha ha!! There must be these things in most collectors surely? Mark

I would say yes to that for many titles, but this is one I first saw on the telly and it did make me laugh. As always with film though, it is much much better when projected on the big screen especially when the print is this good, deep colours , sharp image and very good sound via the old stereo amp. The screen shots do not show the superb colours you see on screen.
One shocker of a film I did buy in my days of buying everything i didn't really want is the 2 x 400ft Xanadu, I saw in the pics and it was just an embarrassment to sit through, the 2 x 400. Its fine for half an hour as much of the ELO music is in there, I struck lucky with mine because it is a rare low fade copy but the quality is still grainy and generally nothing special.

I do sit through many of my Brothers films with him which I wouldn't give a second glance to if they were not real films for the projectors.

I think also when you get a film that has all the right factors of colour and condition these can add to the enjoyment of a film, you mention Xanadu, I have this but the only reason I bought it was Gene Kelly ,the films dire but he for me makes the film, yes the music's good too, mines low fade, a faded print wouldn't be as nice on the eye's either. As in the review of this film, Michael Caine is a plus point, if you like the star it helps with a box office disappointment, the probability with this film is more like an old fashioned story instead of guns and bullets etc, I'm not knocking it as it's a good cast with plus points of a nice print, it's just interesting on the films we watch and enjoy because of the format, Mark

I agree with that, I sit through a lot of films my Brother owns which I wouldn't look at twice normally, Beau Geste, Red River are two such examples, there's nothing wrong with either film, Red River is a classic, but it isn't for me, however, watching them on 16mm at home I do actually enjoy them. I wouldn't watch either on TV.

Without a clue certainly isn't a classic but the two stars as well as Nigel Davenport, Paul Freeman and Jeffrey Jones make it work so well and even more so on film. I did first see this on the TV and thought it was good fun, it does annoy me when critics slam a film the way they did with this one as it is only their view, people should (and do) make their own minds up clearly, the critics who viewed it at the time wernt into slap stick, we are.