NitrateVille.com

On another thread there was discussion of the 1931 re-issue of "Ben Hur" in a sound print - with the orchestra playing on the sound track instead of in person at the cinema.

I have noticed that quite a number of silent pictures were given "the treatment" in the '30's - the studios of course hopeful that they could milk even more dollars out of an old product.

As audiences took to talkies in a wild stampede, I wonder whether these re-issues did good box office? Someone may have some figures and let us know?

Similar thing like colourisation?

In another thread the resoundation of Napoleon was discussed as well.

Only the result was never as if they were really talking? I want to know this too.


I wonder if they could do it better today. Instead of just a score, also adding a narrator and a few voices here and there, sort of like a guided tour through a silent movie, a mix between score and in-character commentary. It wouldn't be authentic, but it might be a new way to enjoy an old movie.

As has also been discussed elsewhere, the 1930s reissues of Chaplin's 12 two-reelers for Mutual were quite successful (ran 1932-34), with new soundtracks and sound effects. And of course, Chaplin's 1942-reissue of THE GOLD RUSH, with added narration and soundtrack, was also a big hit.

Another reported big hit was the 1938-reissue of Valentino's THE SHEIK; however, the film is reported to have frequently caused unintentional laughter from the audience.

I learnt in another thread here that some Harold Lloyd silent shorts were also reissued in the 30s, and would like to know more about this, if anyone has some info.

Also worth to add, perhaps, is that the transition from silent to sound films was not nearly as "meteoric" most places outside of the US; where I come from, Norway, they still made silent films until -33 or so, and older silents were revived frequently (as in many other European countries).

Spiny Norman wrote:Similar thing like colourisation?

In another thread the resoundation of Napoleon was discussed as well.

Only the result was never as if they were really talking? I want to know this too.


I wonder if they could do it better today. Instead of just a score, also adding a narrator and a few voices here and there, sort of like a guided tour through a silent movie, a mix between score and in-character commentary. It wouldn't be authentic, but it might be a new way to enjoy an old movie.

I don't think the mechanical additional of the orchestral accompaniment was doing anything "harmful" - it was merely replacing the orchestra or what have you that would have been in the pit. If anything the soundtrack orchestra might have been better musically than the local fleapit's endeavours.

It's interesting you bring up the point of narration. It was not uncommon to find a man especially hired for this purpose in cinemas in Japan and some European countries (Germany I think had them). They would explain to the audience whatever it was that was going on. Luckily this added distraction did not eventuate in Australia.

Smari1989 wrote:As has also been discussed elsewhere, the 1930s reissues of Chaplin's 12 two-reelers for Mutual were quite successful (ran 1932-34), with new soundtracks and sound effects. And of course, Chaplin's 1942-reissue of THE GOLD RUSH, with added narration and soundtrack, was also a big hit.

Another reported big hit was the 1938-reissue of Valentino's THE SHEIK; however, the film is reported to have frequently caused unintentional laughter from the audience.

I learnt in another thread here that some Harold Lloyd silent shorts were also reissued in the 30s, and would like to know more about this, if anyone has some info.

Also worth to add, perhaps, is that the transition from silent to sound films was not nearly as "meteoric" most places outside of the US; where I come from, Norway, they still made silent films until -33 or so, and older silents were revived frequently (as in many other European countries).

Silent comedies as far as I can recall were always being played - at least the two-reelers. When I was knee-high to a grasshopper, the newsreel cinemas had morphed into "hour shows" - and there was usually a Charlie Chaplin on the programme or a Laurel and Hardy.

I think that full length silent dramas would have been pretty rare. I was 19 before I got to see one.

William M. Drew's book, "The Last Silent Picture Show," covers all these reissues and discusses their reception in the movie marketplace. It is the only study, as far as I know that covers the continuing release and interest silent film through the first twenty years of the sound film era in the U. S. A really valuable piece of film scholarship.

Donald Binks wrote:Luckily this added distraction did not eventuate in Australia.

What if it's done right?

Spiny Norman wrote:

Donald Binks wrote:Luckily this added distraction did not eventuate in Australia.

What if it's done right?

It's all up to individual taste of course, but I prefer to watch silent pictures with just a musical accompaniment - with perhaps sound effects. I find the singing that is on some sound additions distracting and an added narration would prove even more irksome. (The 1942 re-issue of "The Gold Rush" is one good example). Having said that, my basic introduction to silent pictures was the early 1960's TV series "Silents Please", which featured cut-downs of films with a narration. That, at that time, was better than nothing!

There was kind of a clearance sale of silents in the early years of talkies. Big hits like Birth of a Nation, Ben-Hur, The Big Parade, etc. all got new soundtracks for reissue in 1930-1, often also being trimmed down in the process. These versions were still in distribution in the 70s and 80s on the film society market, since they were usually the only versions of these films that had music tracks.

Within a couple of years after sound came in, though, silents were very old hat and very out of fashion. I think part of what changed this was that the culture changed so rapidly; the only thing you can compare it to is how even early 60s movies seemed positively ancient by the late 60s/early 70s.

Chaplin comedies hung on as something any small neighborhood house could revive and please the audience with; you see ads for smaller theaters where a 20-year-old Chaplin short gets billing over the new movie ostensibly leading the program.

In the late 30s, though, the first theaters showing silents for fans started to appear, and a handful of famous titles were reissued to great success, such as Valentino's The Sheik and William S. Hart's Tumbleweeds (source of the prologue he filmed then). That led Chaplin to consider how to adapt his films for a modern audience, and resulted in the 1942 Gold Rush reissue, with narration, which was a big hit, grossing over a million dollars.

The boom sort of fizzled out then, but it did sort of establish the idea that silent movies were still worth reviving, and after the war you had the film society movement spreading across the U.S., with silents distributed by the Museum of Modern Art and others, and through the next few decades releases of both entire older films and compilation films such as the comedy ones put together by Robert Youngson.

I'm curious about the sound reissue of PHANTOM OF THE OPERA in 1929. Have any of you seen it, and how was it received at the time? If you have seen it, what do you think?

CJBx7 wrote:I'm curious about the sound reissue of PHANTOM OF THE OPERA in 1929. Have any of you seen it, and how was it received at the time? If you have seen it, what do you think?

One reel was found and is apparently included on the latest DVD set as an oddity?

Here's another one...


Frivolous Wives was the reissue title of Valentino's The Married Virgin (1918). This program is from very early in the sound era (February 1929), but every other film showing at the Lyric in Rochester is a sound (or part-talkie) film.

I seem to recall having VHS's (Hollywwod Select Video, maybe?) years ago of the early talkie scored rereleases of TOL'ABLE DAVID and SON OF THE SHEIK.

Such usually were well scored; the problem was the 24fps speed.

And of course, Fairbanks Jr. did a decent Music/SFX/Narration redo of his dad's IRON MASK in the '50s.

-Craig

Spiny Norman wrote:

Donald Binks wrote:Luckily this added distraction did not eventuate in Australia.

What if it's done right?

To describe the Japanese tradition of the Benshi as merely a guy explaining what's going on is to miss the point of this unique art. If you should ever have the opportunity of seeing one, I highly recommend it. I attended a benshi-accompanied showing of The Water Magician (1933) few years back, and my report is at viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8474&p=50462&hilit=benshi#p50462.

I've done some research on the Valentino reissues of 1937-38, and they were extraordinarily successful by the standards of their time - too much so to think that their appeal was merely of a 'Fractured Flickers' sort. In Australia, there were even duelling revivals of The Sheik and Son of the Sheik playing at rival cinemas at one point. Their success also seem to have sparked a wider reissue trend that took in earlier sound films, such as It Happened One Night.

With all the focus on 1939, we tend to forget that the industry was really in the doldrums in 1938, and this revival trend was seem by the industry as its apotheosis: what, people are really more eager to watch some piece of junk from fifteen years ago than the stuff we're making today? Yikes ...

Spiny Norman wrote:

CJBx7 wrote:I'm curious about the sound reissue of PHANTOM OF THE OPERA in 1929. Have any of you seen it, and how was it received at the time? If you have seen it, what do you think?

One reel was found and is apparently included on the latest DVD set as an oddity?

Which latest DVD do you mean?
From everything I've read the best footage derives from a silent print of the 1930 international version which was edited from the 1929 sound version- it I'm wrong on details it is because the versions are confusing. Suffice it to say I don't think any footage of the dialogue sequences survives although the discs DO survive - we can hear Kerry & Philbin's inane dialogue even if we can't see them.

I've done some research on the Valentino reissues of 1937-38, and they were extraordinarily successful by the standards of their time - too much so to think that their appeal was merely of a 'Fractured Flickers' sort. In Australia, there were even duelling revivals of The Sheik and Son of the Sheik playing at rival cinemas at one point. Their success also seem to have sparked a wider reissue trend that took in earlier sound films, such as It Happened One Night.

Right, you also had the Frankenstein-Dracula reissues (which John McElwee talked about here) and subsequently King Kong's 1938 reissue. I think there were two things going on that people were hungry for. One is I think movies got kind of dull and safe in the latter half of the decade. Horror movies in particular were explicitly barred from showing the kind of thing they used to, but most genres were sort of tamed in the decade, gangsters became G-Men, stars were less sexy (what guy ever got hot for Luise Rainer or Sonja Henie), and so on.

I also think that the visuals of silents made a comeback then because people were tired of looking at the flat, overlit modernity of late 30s movies. German Expressionism, after being deader than a doornail for a few years, crept back into movies all over the place— horror movie reissues were popular, then French "poetic realism" movies, then noirs and Citizen Kane. I think on a lot of levels what was good about silents came back then, just as, say, punk brought back the virtues of the two-minute single after a decade of prog-rock and folk-rock. Joey Ramone, Frankenstein, what's the difference?

>what guy ever got hot for Sonja Henie<

Well, they say Tyrone Power, Joe Louis, two of her skating partners, and three hubbys!

To describe the Japanese tradition of the Benshi as merely a guy explaining what's going on is to miss the point of this unique art. If you should ever have the opportunity of seeing one, I highly recommend it. I attended a benshi-accompanied showing of The Water Magician (1933) few years back, and my report is at viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8474&p=50462&hilit=benshi#p50462.

I daresay it would be a novel experience to do the once - however someone babbling on in Japanese would do me no good as I am not proficient in the language.

Donald Binks wrote:

To describe the Japanese tradition of the Benshi as merely a guy explaining what's going on is to miss the point of this unique art. If you should ever have the opportunity of seeing one, I highly recommend it. I attended a benshi-accompanied showing of The Water Magician (1933) few years back, and my report is at viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8474&p=50462&hilit=benshi#p50462.

I daresay it would be a novel experience to do the once - however someone babbling on in Japanese would do me no good as I am not proficient in the language.

From the Satiric novel "The Honorable Picnic" (Thomas Raucat, 1924) here are some observations on moviegoing with a Benshi They are supposed to be the
opinions of an 18 year old working-class girl.

I like the movies very much. I like the theater too, but I prefer the movies
because they are an imitation of the foreigners. The tickets cost more and
it is more distinguished.

The show was very beautiful and the narrator had such a distinguished voice!
(A footnote explains the custom of using a Benshi). First we heard one
episode of an American serial film. When this began the blonde young lady
was hanging by her hair from an airplane and the wicked gentleman who was
the passenger was trying to stab out her eyes with his fountain pen. All the
women were shuddering. But just in time along came her fiance, a newspaper
reporter, to the rescue, sitting horseback on his tame eagle, which bit off
the wings of the airplane. Then followed a dizzy fall... I could have
learned the following week how they escaped.
That is all I remember and it is thanks to the explaination of the
honorable-narrator. All these people hurried around in such a frantic flurry
that my eyes blurred. All through the picture I was trying in vain to
understand and completely bewildered.

Next there was a perfectly grand Japanese film (I'm omitting the lengthy
description. The villain wears European clothes to make him easy to spot.
The picture stars Miss Kurishima Sumiko, footnoted as a Japanese movie star)
The story did not end until finally all the gentlemen and ladies ...had died
of chagrin, or had been drowned, or had been locked up in prison or in the
honorable-brothel. It lasted three hours.

In the ordinary routine of existance nothing ever happens that really grips
your heart; if you want to be profoundly moved you must go to the movie.

Here is a bit of Kurishima Sumiko:

Donald Binks wrote:

To describe the Japanese tradition of the Benshi as merely a guy explaining what's going on is to miss the point of this unique art. If you should ever have the opportunity of seeing one, I highly recommend it. I attended a benshi-accompanied showing of The Water Magician (1933) few years back, and my report is at viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8474&p=50462&hilit=benshi#p50462.

I daresay it would be a novel experience to do the once - however someone babbling on in Japanese would do me no good as I am not proficient in the language.

You'd be surprised, they are very expressive even if you don't know the language. My first viewing of Broken Blossoms was a live performance with a benshi and it was a great experience--i can still hear her voice when i watch the film. It's not just a dry recitation of the intertitles but more like a performance of all the parts in various voices plus a commentary. Actually, when you don't know the language it's almost like a good musical score.

greta

Well, they say Tyrone Power, Joe Louis, two of her skating partners, and three hubbys!

In real life she may have been hot stuff, but on screen she's up there with June Allyson among the least alluring stars ever.

Well, all those silents that were reissued with added soundtracks. The image was cropped to allow for a soundtrack stripe on the print. There was no optical reduction of the image, just plain cropping. Therefore if only a sound reissue print or composit negative survives the image is cropped and doesn't show the full format visible during the silent era.

Phototone wrote:Well, all those silents that were reissued with added soundtracks. The image was cropped to allow for a soundtrack stripe on the print. There was no optical reduction of the image, just plain cropping. Therefore if only a sound reissue print or composit negative survives the image is cropped and doesn't show the full format visible during the silent era.

Pardon me if I'm asking a very naive question now -- but while I've heard that silent re-issues in the early sound era had to have a "cropped" image to allow for a soundtrack, I'm not sure if I've seen any actual examples. To what degree was cropping necessary? Would be grateful to see examples.

Just imagine a 5th of the picture lopped off on the left side. If it's a long title, sometimes some of that is lost.

Smari1989 wrote:
Another reported big hit was the 1938-reissue of Valentino's THE SHEIK; however, the film is reported to have frequently caused unintentional laughter from the audience.

Oh? Why did it frequently cause unintentional laughter?

David Alp wrote:

Smari1989 wrote:
Another reported big hit was the 1938-reissue of Valentino's THE SHEIK; however, the film is reported to have frequently caused unintentional laughter from the audience.

Oh? Why did it frequently cause unintentional laughter?

Of course, no one today can say for sure to what degree this claim of unintentional laughter is exaggerated / downplayed, but THE SHEIK most likely seemed very dated to late-1930s audiences; one may compare it with how we in 2014 look back upon Internet technology of the mid-90s.

The film may possibly have appeared even more dated in the 30s than it does to us today, in a way, as the film is now so old that we can study it with more distance, and accept the fact that it was made at a very different time.

I guess Valentino films were bound to attract a lot of interest when shown because he was such a huge icon and newsworthy. The male Monroe? I remember there were always regular news articles about him in the 60's, 70's and even the through to the 80's most usually around the anniversary of his death. Everyone knew about him though I don't ever recall any of his films being shown at the time. If they were, it was not on TV.

Changsham wrote:I guess Valentino films were bound to attract a lot of interest when shown because he was such a huge icon and newsworthy. The male Monroe? I remember there were always regular news articles about him in the 60's, 70's and even the through to the 80's most usually around the anniversary of his death. Everyone knew about him though I don't ever recall any of his films being shown at the time. If they were, it was not on TV.

Channel 0-10 in Oz screened "The Son of the Sheik" in I think 1969. I know my father stayed up with me to watch it as it came on about 10.00pm. He knew I was interested "in all that old rubbish", and was intrigued that I could sit through it. He said that all men used to laugh at Rhubarb Vaselino even when his pictures first came out. Women loved them of course. To return the favour I stayed up with my father a couple of nights later to watch the Cricket - which bored me senseless.

Hey, The Sheik seemed dated by the time of The Son of the Sheik, which is clearly poking fun at the earlier film from time to time, including in Valentino's performance which is very savvy about where to exaggerate things just enough for a knowing laugh.