Attn. KINO and Flicker Alley: Need a film checker?

[Big Silent Fan]

It seems no matter how hard I try, I continue making typographical or other errors. I never see these glaring errors until I go back and read something I've already sent. Thankfully, here at Nitrateville, we can go back and edit after posting.

But what about all those small errors in the films we buy? I never miss any of these when I watch Silent films.

While my errors don't amount to much, more often than not, errors are contained in DVD releases from all the well known companies (like KINO for just one example). It's often just repeated scenes, or scenes that have been put together out of their proper sequence. It's too bad they were not caught and corrected before the DVDs are produced.

For example, watching Stroheim's "Blind Husbands" (only yesterday), I watched Gibson Gowland's character (Sepp), go outside to sit down alone. In the very next scene, we suddenly see him (with the group) looking at Stroheim and Doctor Armstrong. Clearly an error, since it's only a brief flash on the screen before Sepp is seen sitting outside alone again. Try as I have, I cannot see that as some sort of hidden message about what Sepp was thinking. I believe it was simply an error.

Confusion like this exists in "The Jazz Singer" where the train scene is repeated, in "Mare Nostrum" (seen several times on TCM), where a street scene is repeated, and even in the recent "Lalia" where the child is rescued from the plague infested town. While none of this ruined the viewing experience, it would be nice if the films could be watched without these flaws that should have been caught before going on sale. Perhaps these companies would do well to hire a silent film fan to preview their final copy before it's released.

It's always good to get someone else to check their work. I'm available. My wife wants me to get a job...maybe this is one for me.

[Arndt]

This sounds like a surefire recipe to make enemies and alienate people: "Sorry guys, you need to get back to the drawing board. This isn't quite right yet. Call off the big launch party in Vegas and roll up your sleeves."

[missdupont]

As I've often heard archivists say, to be accurate to the print, they leave flaws, warts, and all. They don't remove all the nitrate deterioration, the scratches, flashes, repeats, etc. If those flaws were in the original print, they're staying there.

[WaverBoy]

Mistakes such as repeated or misplaced shots can occur when restorations are done by conflating multiple print sources, which were most certainly not in the original theatrical prints. I believe this is to which the original poster referred.

[missdupont]

There often are repeat frames in early films since exhibitors could cut and show what they wanted, so yes, they would be in the original print that is being used for restoration.

[Gary]

Perhaps these companies would do well to hire a silent film fan to preview there final copy before it's released.

You mean "to preview THEIR final copy."

[Rodney]

I do keep an eye out at the scoring stage, and I have caught a few glitches here and there. I've caught misspellings in new intertitles, reel-end titles left in, bad nonlinear speeds, scene-order problems, scenes left in tinting order, and suggesting that new title cards should be left up long enough to read. However, I'm sure I don't notice things that would bother another viewer.

Then again, original misspellings should probably be left (some of those title writers couldn't write titles, but that's history). And there's not always evidence that shot-to-shot continuity was good in the original (D.W. Griffith is particularly careless this way). A scene of the burning of Atlanta jumps ahead to the middle of a slow pan shot of Sherman's march to the sea. I have no idea whose fault that was, maybe it was intentional. So I didn't bring it up. The continuity at the beginning of Last of the Mohicans was so odd that I did bring it up, and the producers agreed and changed it.

And if I were allowed more power to edit films, I'd probably do some damage. There's a cross cut in BEN HUR where the rhythm of the slave-galley drummer gets totally screwed up with two very close hits on either side of the cut, when the whole point of a slave-ship drummer is to give a steady tempo. Talk about distracting the audience! If that were my print, several priceless frames would end up on my floor just to get the drum tempo straight. Don't tempt me with that power.

[Big Silent Fan]

You mean "to preview THEIR final copy."

Thanks for pointing this out. I went back and fixed my error.

Making any finished product flawless is a difficult task. I'm only suggesting that a fresh look by someone who hasn't already watched something many times might be helpful, especially if the person was a silent film fan. Like my spelling error, when you know what somethings is supposed to look like or say, you can look right at the error and not see it.