While I'm on, just a couple of topics, number one, how many collectors actually preferred the shorter 200' version to the
longer 400' of the same title? Such as the Ken Films releases.
While I'm on, just a couple of topics, number one, how many collectors actually preferred the shorter 200' version to the
longer 400' of the same title? Such as the Ken Films releases.
Thats a good question Hugh, some were better than the 400s,
The high plains drifter 200 footer packed a lot in and was very well done, (obviously i picked on the wrong title here, there was only this then the 2 x 400 footer, oops,) but that said, the 200 ft was a good one.
Have to say, i cant think of any of the Ken 400/200 releases where we had both. But, for universal, they did do some good 200s.
Posts: | 5.331 |
Points: | 10.583 |
Date registered | 08.14.2015 |
home: | Plymouth. UK |
ThankYou | 512 |
Hi Tom, yes I have the 200' and 2x400 of High Plains, plus the 16mm 'scope Agfa, one of my favourite Clint westerns. Yes Ken did
various titles in both lengths, Longest day , Patton, although one of the 200's was his speech. Sand Pebbles, even Alien, not to mention Star Wars etc.
I'd go for the 400' every time ... It manages to tell slighly more story. Gives more sense (usually anyway)
Posts: | 5.636 |
Points: | 12.837 |
Date registered | 08.02.2015 |
home: | Sarpsborg, Norway |
ThankYou | 332 |
Oh yes Vidar, apart from the guy that can watch "ALIEN", in bloody 'scope no less, oh yes he says, 400s will do for me,
like hell, when he can nail it full length, he mocks us peasants (pheasants), I get confused ) Only kidding my son.
Ha, ha ... Probably won't happen often that I can afford this. I give you 300 for The Thing ;-) Soon I can't say this, but hopefully I am able to start saving a bit. Would be nice to be able to buy Terminator if it pops up
Posts: | 5.636 |
Points: | 12.837 |
Date registered | 08.02.2015 |
home: | Sarpsborg, Norway |
ThankYou | 332 |
Vidar, I'm amazed you let Terminator slip away, ON 35MM, you couldn't get better, even with the little marks, it was 35mm!
I honestly thought you'd have nailed that one, a nice film. Now, where were we on the 400's vs 200s, you little devil you.
Auction was over before I knew my refinance went through. And I would love a 16mm as it was mono originally anyway
35mm is a huge spacehugger, that is why I need to sell some. Sadly. First film to go is A Moment to Kill, nice western with good colour. Feel sad to let it go. Ordered a DV (PUKE) D of it
Posts: | 5.636 |
Points: | 12.837 |
Date registered | 08.02.2015 |
home: | Sarpsborg, Norway |
ThankYou | 332 |
I believe, though never witnessed myself, that through a very good friend in this game I am blessed to have met, Jaws 200ft er was superb!.
I've always jokingly argued the toss with him by stating, surely it's no better than an extended trailer on that amount of footage!
He was having none of it! I have never seen it so I cannot form any opinion, but I trust my friends expertise judgement to the point where I am expecting others here that have, to cement his opinion.
Andrew, I still have my 200' spool, it is a great edit, in such a limited time, it covers the film. Indeed, on a large screen, that shark
coming out of nowhere, in silence, is startling.
I wouldn't doubt your or my friends word for a minute here Hugh!!
If you ever see one for sale Hugh, please think of me. I'd love to share his joy in watching this cut down one day.
No problem Andrew, indeed they were quite common at one time, rest assured if I see a print,I will nail, just for you. I've even given them away, when they were spliced onto other films from Perry's Films.
Rare now though Hugh, but thanks for the gesture my friend, most appreciated!
I used to own the 200' version of "Jaws" and it was one of the best edited 200 footer's ever.I wound up selling my copy and was surprised how much it went for. Generally the Castle / Universal-8 200' versions were better than the Ken Films efforts.They did have some good ones but that blasted narration! Still I've owned many over the years and still have a few in my collection. I actually preferred the 200' edit of "Tora!Tora!Tora!" over the 400' one. Mainly it was due to way too much narration in the 400' print. Disappointing for me since I'm a big fan of the film.
Hi Doug, I remember we had this discussion before, but aside from the narration, the 400' is a superb edit, especially the
raid. those planes and propellers being let loose over those airfields was superb. I have had it in my collection twice before,
but will gain it a third time for keeps.
Quite true Hugh and the extended footage of the raid is very good.I watched my 200' copy just last night and was sad to see that my print is fading (but not surprised.) One day I would love to find a copy of the full feature on 16 mm,but can only image the costs involved.
This brings up an interesting point: Has anyone ever successfully been able to remove the narration from any Ken or Columbia prints?
Posts: | 5.636 |
Points: | 12.837 |
Date registered | 08.02.2015 |
home: | Sarpsborg, Norway |
ThankYou | 332 |
With me Vidar it depends upon how heavy the narration is.I sold off my copy of "The Caine Mutiny" shortly after my first viewing due to the excessive narration. It would run over what the actors were saying to the point where you almost wished it was a subtitled,silent print! Columbia hands down was the worst culprit and sadly it ruined for me what could have been a very good digest.
Hmmm ! 200' or 400' version now I guess that depends on how tight the shorter 200' edited version is.
Also does it contain all or some of my favourite scenes.
For example I have owned the Castle Films 200' ABBOTT and COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN for many years now. I bought the U8 400' edit hoping the
"House Of Horrors" waxworks candle moving scene was included in that version. I found it was not and that what footage was added
did very little for me. So I sold the 400' version and stuck with the Castle Films 200 footer.