NitrateVille.com

Can anyone shed light on the version of 'The Black Pirate' that's come down to us? I've heard tales of how the film that movie-goers saw in 1926 was lost due to decomposition, and so some or most of the picture had to be reconstructed from outtakes.

Just wondering if anyone here knows the full story. Thanks!

Jeff Rapsis

The original version exists as a black and white dupe from a faded Technicolor print at MoMA. The color version was cooked up by Raymond Rohaeur from an alternate take negative prepared for Europe.

From David Pierce's website:

The Black Pirate is best remembered for the novel use of two color Technicolor, although the film was long available only in black and white. The color process enhances the visuals, but the film works equally well without it. The Killiam Shows edition, prepared in 1972, offers the black and white version with color tints and features an original piano score by William Perry. While all of the titles are original, the film's six main title cards have been reduced to two.

There are several different versions in distribution by The Rohauer Collection/Douris Corporation. Raymond Rohauer acquired a color negative restored by the British Film Institute. Rohauer prepared a "restored" version in 1972 in 35mm and 16mm with rewritten title cards, some re-editing and a score of stock orchestral music. The colors are not entirely accurate. The titles were rewritten and placed on a parchment-style background; some titles were dropped, picking up the pace of the film. The score of stock orchestral music is adequate.

In 1974, Rohauer released a version in 35mm with a heavy sepia tint that obscured most of the original color, although in some scenes the different color tones are evident. The print features the original opening credits, and most of the intertitles are original. For the last 20 minutes (or so) through the end, the intertitles have been replaced, and, apparently, additional titles inserted, slowing the pace of the climax.

The 1996 Kino International/Image Entertainment edition restores the film to its original release version. The video was transferred from the restored negative, and required substantial post-production work to accurately represent the original Technicolor hues. The soundtrack presents the original jaunty score by Mortimer Wilson, performed by a chamber orchestra conducted by Robert Israel.


http://www.cinemaweb.com/silentfilm/26bpirat.htm

The British Film Institute has restored the film twice. The (far superior) second restoration does not circulate.

The first restoration is the basis of the Rohauer version. Douglas F Jnr financed it with a large donation (which is how Raymond R then obtained access). It was built from unused takes which survived as original negative, but it was very close to the original version. Unfortunately, Rohauer couldn't keep his thumbs out of it, the worst damage being the yellow-background (rewritten) title cards, emphasizing the one color which the Technicolor process of that time simply couldn't achieve. Of course BFI has the un-altered version.

We have in the Blackhawk library a 35mm nitrate fine grain master of a b&w version. It is NOT a dupe of a color print. I suspect a b&w protection negative was produced simultaneously in case it proved impossible to follow through with a sufficient number of full color release prints. The prints Blackhawk sold in 16mm and 8mm derived from this nitrate FGM. On the other hand, MoMA's b&w circulating prints do seem to derive from a dupe of a color print.

When I prepared the video master which was used for the Image laserdisc and the Kino release, I used Rohauer's color neg which had been obtained from the BFI but inserted the original titles from the b&w FGM and dumped Raymond Rohauer's various "improvements." It took about 40 hours online to do digital color correction on this 90-minute film. Rudy Behlmer had a collection of apparently un-faded original 35mm frames which give a good idea of the original color (some are well reproduced in an article he wrote for "American Cinematographer" magazine). That's amazing, because the out-takes on the Kino version are reproduced from an original nitrate color print in which not even a hint of green remained, which is why I presented them only in b&w.

David Shepard

DShepFilm wrote: That's amazing, because the out-takes on the Kino version are reproduced from an original nitrate color print in which not even a hint of green remained, which is why I presented them only in b&w.

David Shepard

Why would the outtakes be in color? Wasn't that old Tech filmed with two strips, the color prints being made by glueing each color record together?

Darren, one would assume that Technicolor Company made a color work print of the selected takes so the production unit could see how things were going as the film progressed, and so the editor could assemble the film with color values among his considerations.

DS

Darren Nemeth wrote:Why would the outtakes be in color? Wasn't that old Tech filmed with two strips, the color prints being made by glueing each color record together?

You are only partially correct. Two-color (NOT two-strip) was shot with a single strip of film, which createdtwo simultaneous images on the negative, one right side up, the other upside down. Until the introduction of I.B. printing about 1928, the two-color negative was step-printed every other frame to creat one record, then backwards on a separate piece of print sock to create the other. The separate red and green positive records B&W records were then dyed, and cemented together to creat the release print.

DShepFilm wrote:The British Film Institute has restored the film twice. The (far superior) second restoration does not circulate.

The first restoration is the basis of the Rohauer version. Douglas F Jnr financed it with a large donation (which is how Raymond R then obtained access). It was built from unused takes which survived as original negative, but it was very close to the original version. Unfortunately, Rohauer couldn't keep his thumbs out of it, the worst damage being the yellow-background (rewritten) title cards, emphasizing the one color which the Technicolor process of that time simply couldn't achieve. Of course BFI has the un-altered version.

So, just to make sure I'm getting this straight, the second BFI restoration is in Technicolor and uses the original takes? And, is this second restoration from original negative materials as well?

The BFI materials are alternate takes, but are camera negative, hence the color. The two restorations were based off of these same materials.

The American Technicolor cut only exists as a black and white dupe (and apparently a black and white "B Roll" version).

Jack Theakston wrote:The BFI materials are alternate takes, but are camera negative, hence the color. The two restorations were based off of these same materials.

The American Technicolor cut only exists as a black and white dupe (and apparently a black and white "B Roll" version).

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

This is a great thread guys. I knew there was a much more recent restoration of THE BLACK PIRATE out there someplace. Why has this never surfaced? The current Kino DVD has a print going back quite some years, because I first saw the same version on Cinemax way back in 1987. What year was the newer BFI project done?

Gagman 66 wrote:

The current Kino DVD has a print going back quite some years, because I first saw the same version on Cinemax way back in 1987.

I doubt it, Gagman. ( You must have been dreaming of THE BIG PARADE). I did the work in 1995. Maybe you saw an unrepentant Rohauer or Killiam version of some sort.

David Shepard

Rohauer advertised the color version in 16mm as early as the early 80s, but I would never take the mere fact of a Rohauer catalog offering something as actually meaning that it existed.

Mike, David,

Well whatever the case might be, I can prove that the film did run on Cinemax back in 1987, and it was in Two-Color Technicolor. I still have the tape. An old Fugi High grade VHS T-120. I didn't see the film again until 1995 when AMC ran it a few times. as far as I am aware the picture has never been on TCM, at least not in this country. Is there a reason for this? I was hoping the newer restoration might surface sometime.

Anyway, When I bought the Kino DVD set, I didn't see much difference in the material as I recall if any. At least I didn't notice much at the time. Not putting down anyone's efforts here. So When was the first VHS, and or Laser-disc release from Kino/ Just curious? There must have been an earlier issue? Correct?

Gagman 66 wrote:So When was the first VHS, and or Laser-disc release from Kino/ Just curious? There must have been an earlier issue? Correct?

Well, my Kino laserdisc bears a 1996 copyright.

What sort of backgrounds are used for the title cards on your VHS copy, Gagman...?

If they are on a parchment background, It has to be the Rohauer version.

Gagman 66 wrote:Mike, David,

Well whatever the case might be, I can prove that the film did run on Cinemax back in 1987, and it was in Two-Color Technicolor. I still have the tape. An old Fugi High grade VHS T-120. I didn't see the film again until 1995 when AMC ran it a few times. as far as I am aware the picture has never been on TCM, at least not in this country. Is there a reason for this? I was hoping the newer restoration might surface sometime.

Anyway, When I bought the Kino DVD set, I didn't see much difference in the material as I recall if any. At least I didn't notice much at the time. Not putting down anyone's efforts here. So When was the first VHS, and or Laser-disc release from Kino/ Just curious? There must have been an earlier issue? Correct?

TCM no, but a sister channel from Argentina seen in all Latin American countries (Retro), did play the film.

Sadly, Turner cancelled that channel in order to give prominence to the lousy Latin American version of TCM, one of the most repugnant and unwatchable insults produced by the most incompetent jerks of the world.

I have the Black Pirate in Laserdisc and the other Fairbanks titles in the 2 box sets issued by Kino/Image at the time. I was only thinking this week that I don't believe I updated any of these to DVD versions but have other Fairbanks on DVD. My story some years back was that MOMA(not the best preserver of film and stuff in nitrate not preserved by them from the 1920s and belonging to Warners/FN was returned to them and supposedly junked. That said, the story went then that they believed that they could not preserve the original footage they had of Pirate and shipped it to the National Film Archives(NFA) as it was called then in Britain who had better refrigerated vaults for this kind of film. The major scratching would be due to two pieces of film glued together and being rather thick as a result and there was a lot of tearing and the heat from the illumination of the image needed at the time to display the image on the screen would take a toll.

The time might be right for such films being redone for re-release on Blu Ray if funds and sales predictions warrant such a project. I would would be a buyer. I already have a few silents in this format such as The General & Sunrise and more are promised from UK(later US) such as City Girl. Peter Lorre's 1931 'M' is due in that format also along with the recently found English language version.

We have been looking into possible Blu-Ray publication by Flicker Alley of a silent film with supplementary material which will run about 200 minutes all told. It's a title which will have wider appeal than, say, MISS MEND or one of our Abel Gance colossi, but not on the magnitude of, say, MODERN TIMES, METROPOLIS or THE GENERAL. So we're probably talking total sales combining DVD and B-R of no more than about 2000 units.

The additional cost to produce in B-R compared to DVD at this time is about $20,000. At a $40 retail, we would have to be prepared to sell most of our units at not much more than $20 wholesale. Obviously it would then take at least half of the sales income to make up the additional cost of the B-R, leaving little to divide among costs of production: the films weren't free by any means, even musicians have to eat, the expenses of HD telecine and digital cleanup, the standard DVD edition, and perhaps at the end some peanut butter and saltines for ourselves.

We might put on blindfolds and go ahead just to try it, but a few 'experiments'; like this and it's likely to be the end of us!

David Shepard

DShepFilm,


Instead of diving into tHe Blu-Ray field, I have some other suggestions. What about a release of HIS HOUR similar to BARDELYS THE MAGNIFICENT? Or maybe a Colleen Moore or early Marion Davies Collection? I'm still not clear on if Warner's controls the rights to HIS HOUR or not? Of course I understand the complications, since that title cards have not been converted to English.

I'm hoping it's CHICAGO!

Danny,

Yes CHICAGO would be fantastic! I have to admit! Great choice! I'd definitely buy that.





Phyllis Haver-"Pistol Packin'Roxie!"

DShepFilm wrote:We have been looking into possible Blu-Ray publication by Flicker Alley of a silent film with supplementary material which will run about 200 minutes all told. It's a title which will have wider appeal than, say, MISS MEND or one of our Abel Gance colossi, but not on the magnitude of, say, MODERN TIMES, METROPOLIS or THE GENERAL. So we're probably talking total sales combining DVD and B-R of no more than about 2000 units.

The additional cost to produce in B-R compared to DVD at this time is about $20,000. At a $40 retail, we would have to be prepared to sell most of our units at not much more than $20 wholesale. Obviously it would then take at least half of the sales income to make up the additional cost of the B-R, leaving little to divide among costs of production: the films weren't free by any means, even musicians have to eat, the expenses of HD telecine and digital cleanup, the standard DVD edition, and perhaps at the end some peanut butter and saltines for ourselves.

We might put on blindfolds and go ahead just to try it, but a few 'experiments'; like this and it's likely to be the end of us!

David Shepard

Whatever you do, Mr. Shepard and your esteemed cohorts at Flicker Alley, please please PLEASE don't go out of business. If that means no Blu-rays, that's fine with me. I'll happily gobble up standard-def DVDs of your silent restorations for as long as you keep putting them out.

There's hardly anything released on BluRay from before 1960. At least some home theater enthusiasts like older films, so there is some market for them. And at least right now there is not much competition for the cinephile's BluRay purchases except from Warner Home video.

Sure Chicago would be great, but because it's still copyrighted that would increase your expenses even more. I think a "Joe Franklin" title like Phantom of the Opera, The Lost World, Steamboat Bill, Jr, or Black Pirate, would probably be your best bet. A double set of The Mark of Zorro and Don Q, Son of Zorro would be my pick!

And of of course the $50,000 question (or more!) is if it will really sell.

I saw reference to this topic elsewhere**, and it was remarked that the film would be one that had never yet been released on a video format. That eliminates most of the "warhorses"; titles owned by major studios such as WB or Paramount are also unlikely, and I doubt that it's a non-Hollywood film.

CHICAGO has been making the rounds in its restored print, which would be suitable quality for Blu-Ray. It was also remarked somewhere awhile ago that it would eventually appear on DVD.

So....putting these clues together, I think it's a logical choice. Even if not, it's fun to speculate, but I think there's a good chance that it will indeed be CHICAGO.

**edit - just found the source for this - Barry Maxwell's latest "Coming Attractions" column at Digital Bits

PHANTOM OF THE OPERA will certainly sell-- no one I know has lost money on that film to date. Dunno about any other titles.

Well, please forgive me; I did not mean to be coy among film friends.

CHICAGO will be released (most probably) early summer. Mont Alto is doing the score -- I have heard a recording from a live performance, and it's superb. There will be two outstanding bonus films with it -- you can learn about them later on.

Through the courtesy of the DeMille Estate, we were able to master in HD directly from the (perfect) nitrate but we did not leave UCLA selling apples on the corner.

However, it is still quite up in the air whether or not we will follow through with a B-R release.

Image asked about re-doing some of the obvius warhorses in B-R but I gave them a breakdown of costs and didn't hear any more after that.

David Shepard

I'm in for Chicago for sure. On Blu would be a bonus, but either way it sounds great.

Can't wait for The Italian Straw Hat from Flicker Alley in April, too.

Thanks for the update, David. Naturally I'm thrilled to learn that it is indeed CHICAGO, and greatly anticipate its release, as well as the additional bonus goodies. I'd buy the Blu-Ray, but I certainly understand if the extra costs can't be justified.

I always annoyed my mother by figuring out the contents of my Christmas presents from a slight clue or two...

David, Everyone,

Woo-hoo! CHICAGO is the most surprising release of any Silent as far I am concerned since BARDELYS. Not counting Warner Archive stuff that is. Of course the Talmadge DVD's from Kino are pretty big too. This is quite an announcement I must say! I can't wait to see this picture.