Original prints of THE CIRCUS

Matt Barry · External Since: Jun 22, 2006 Posts: 260

Are there any "original" prints of "The Circus" available for screening? As
far as I know, all current prints carry the Chaplin re-issue titles (I know
that David Shepard's restoration eliminates the new title song but retains
parts of the 1969 credit sequence for its main titles).

Did Chaplin have an "original" 1928 print in his vaults when he set about on
his 1969 re-release? It seems that he must have, in order to have something
to work with. It seems that at that late date that the "original" print
would have gone back into his vault and been preserved along with the
re-release version.

--
Matt Barry
www.myspace.com/mattbarry84
View my films at:
www.youtube.com/comedyfilm
Read my essays and articles at:
http://filmreel.blogspot.com

Richard Carnahan · External Since: Jun 01, 2007 Posts: 54

On Jul 16, 3:40 pm, "Matt Barry" <bar... RemoveThis @bellatlantic.net> wrote:
> Are there any "original" prints of "The Circus" available for screening? As
> far as I know, all current prints carry the Chaplin re-issue titles (I know
> that David Shepard's restoration eliminates the new title song but retains
> parts of the 1969 credit sequence for its main titles).
>
> Did Chaplin have an "original" 1928 print in his vaults when he set about on
> his 1969 re-release? It seems that he must have, in order to have something
> to work with. It seems that at that late date that the "original" print
> would have gone back into his vault and been preserved along with the
> re-release version.
>
> --
> Matt Barrywww.myspace.com/mattbarry84
> View my films at:www.youtube.com/comedyfilm
> Read my essays and articles at:http://filmreel.blogspot.com

Can't tell you what's in Chaplin's vault but there >is< a restored
silent version of THE CIRCUS that has played in Los Angeles (with a
live orchestra) at least a couple of times in recent years. And
there are >some< prints of the 1928 version in the hands of
collectors. THE CIRCUS was the first Chaplin I ever saw--a 16mm
collector's print shown in a cluttered recording studio on Santa
Monica Blvd.--back in 1961.

Matt Barry · External Since: Jun 22, 2006 Posts: 260

I saw a poster for a screening of "The Circus" in Switzerland in 2002 which
advertised that it would be performed with a live music score. I didn't have
time to attend the screening, but I always wondered if this would have
included Chaplin's original 1928 musical cues (the one that includes "Blue
Skies" over the end titles) arranged by Gillian Anderson.

--
Matt Barry
www.myspace.com/mattbarry84
View my films at:
www.youtube.com/comedyfilm
Read my essays and articles at:
http://filmreel.blogspot.com
"Richard Carnahan" <rfcsac627n RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184772970.095936.311010@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 16, 3:40 pm, "Matt Barry" <bar... RemoveThis @bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>> Are there any "original" prints of "The Circus" available for screening?
>> As
>> far as I know, all current prints carry the Chaplin re-issue titles (I
>> know
>> that David Shepard's restoration eliminates the new title song but
>> retains
>> parts of the 1969 credit sequence for its main titles).
>>
>> Did Chaplin have an "original" 1928 print in his vaults when he set about
>> on
>> his 1969 re-release? It seems that he must have, in order to have
>> something
>> to work with. It seems that at that late date that the "original" print
>> would have gone back into his vault and been preserved along with the
>> re-release version.
>>
>> --
>> Matt Barrywww.myspace.com/mattbarry84
>> View my films at:www.youtube.com/comedyfilm
>> Read my essays and articles at:http://filmreel.blogspot.com
>
> Can't tell you what's in Chaplin's vault but there >is< a restored
> silent version of THE CIRCUS that has played in Los Angeles (with a
> live orchestra) at least a couple of times in recent years. And
> there are >some< prints of the 1928 version in the hands of
> collectors. THE CIRCUS was the first Chaplin I ever saw--a 16mm
> collector's print shown in a cluttered recording studio on Santa
> Monica Blvd.--back in 1961.
>

Candace · External Since: Jul 03, 2007 Posts: 10

The version of The Circus which played at UCLA in 2005 did not have
the musical cues and it was played with a live orchestra. The print
was absolutely glorious.

David Totheroh · External Since: Jun 03, 2007 Posts: 44

On Jul 20, 11:48 am, "Matt Barry" <bar....DeleteThis@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
> "Candace" <ulys....DeleteThis@mscomm.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1184943032.968269.153790@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > The version of The Circus which played at UCLA in 2005 did not have
> > the musical cues and it was played with a live orchestra. The print
> > was absolutely glorious.
>
> I am envious of anyone who has the chance to see it on a big screen with an
> audience. It has to be, without exaggeration, one of the most consistently
> funny movies I've ever seen. Every silent comedy I've seen with an audience
> *really* comes to life, such as Harold Lloyd's "Speedy", which I always
> found somewhat flat on DVD, but on the big screen, it gets continual laughs
> throughout.
>
> I'll always regret not being able to stick around to catch that screening of
> "The Circus" in Switzerland several years ago. I've never had a chance to
> see it on a big screen since then.
> --
> Matt Barrywww.myspace.com/mattbarry84
> View my films at:www.youtube.com/comedyfilm
> Read my essays and articles at:http://filmreel.blogspot.com

If the screening that Candace is talking about was the one with the LA
Chamber Orchestra performing, it was with Chaplin's 'new' 1970 score
reorchestrated by Tim Brock, not the one Gillian Anderson reassembled
from the notes of the 1927 collaboration between CC and Arthur Kay.

I saw a 'preview' presentation of Anderson conducting the CC/Kay score
on the Chaplin sound stage (with a 10-12 piece combo) in 1993 and
again in 1994 with the San Diego Philharmonic (45-50 piece) Orchestra.
I thought that score was very effective, but I disagree(d) with
Anderson's conclusion of a projection speed of somewhat less than
24fps (around 22fps as I recall) that she based on music cue tempos.

Candace · External Since: Jul 03, 2007 Posts: 10

The three times I've seen a Chaplin film with a live orchestra have
been some of the highlights of my life. I saw City Lights in San
Francisco late last year, saw The Circus in 2005 in LA and saw The
Gold Rush that same year.

The revelation for me was that the audience reaction made the film
incomparably greater. The laughter was constant, the appreciation and
love from the audience just enveloped you. When others around you are
laughing hysterically, it just makes the film all the more hilarious
and enjoyable. You just get swept up in the enthusiasm from everyone
around you.

For instance, after Charlie's trapeze scene in the Circus, the
audience just stood up spontaneously and cheered for at least 2
minutes. It just sent shivers down the spine. They were cheering in
appreciation for the man's sheer brilliance. What a moment!

And at the conclusion of City Lights in San Francisco, you could hear
the audience collectively sobbing, even though you know most have seen
the film many times previously.

The only "bad" part about seeing a Chaplin film with a live orchestra
is that watching the same film on DVD in your own home just pales in
comparison. Charlie had said that in order to appreciate his films,
you have to watch them with a live audience. I fully appreciate this
after seeing these films not only with people, but with own score
played live. For a Chaplin fan, this is the absolute zenith.

I'm sure everyone has seen this, but in case anyone doesn't have info
on upcoming live orchestral screenings, here's a list:

http://www.charliechaplin.com/live_performances?lang=en

Matt Barry · External Since: Jun 22, 2006 Posts: 260

"Candace" <ulysses DeleteThis @mscomm.com> wrote in message
news:1184943032.968269.153790@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> The version of The Circus which played at UCLA in 2005 did not have
> the musical cues and it was played with a live orchestra. The print
> was absolutely glorious.
>

I am envious of anyone who has the chance to see it on a big screen with an
audience. It has to be, without exaggeration, one of the most consistently
funny movies I've ever seen. Every silent comedy I've seen with an audience
*really* comes to life, such as Harold Lloyd's "Speedy", which I always
found somewhat flat on DVD, but on the big screen, it gets continual laughs
throughout.

I'll always regret not being able to stick around to catch that screening of
"The Circus" in Switzerland several years ago. I've never had a chance to
see it on a big screen since then.
--
Matt Barry
www.myspace.com/mattbarry84
View my films at:
www.youtube.com/comedyfilm
Read my essays and articles at:
http://filmreel.blogspot.com

Richard Carnahan · External Since: Jun 01, 2007 Posts: 54

On Jul 20, 12:25 pm, David Totheroh <dtothe....DeleteThis@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jul 20, 11:48 am, "Matt Barry" <bar....DeleteThis@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Candace" <ulys....DeleteThis@mscomm.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:1184943032.968269.153790@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > The version of The Circus which played at UCLA in 2005 did not have
> > > the musical cues and it was played with a live orchestra. The print
> > > was absolutely glorious.
>
> > I am envious of anyone who has the chance to see it on a big screen with an
> > audience. It has to be, without exaggeration, one of the most consistently
> > funny movies I've ever seen. Every silent comedy I've seen with an audience
> > *really* comes to life, such as Harold Lloyd's "Speedy", which I always
> > found somewhat flat on DVD, but on the big screen, it gets continual laughs
> > throughout.
>
> > I'll always regret not being able to stick around to catch that screening of
> > "The Circus" in Switzerland several years ago. I've never had a chance to
> > see it on a big screen since then.
> > --
> > Matt Barrywww.myspace.com/mattbarry84
> > View my films at:www.youtube.com/comedyfilm
> > Read my essays and articles at:http://filmreel.blogspot.com
>
> If the screening that Candace is talking about was the one with the LA
> Chamber Orchestra performing, it was with Chaplin's 'new' 1970 score
> reorchestrated by Tim Brock, not the one Gillian Anderson reassembled
> from the notes of the 1927 collaboration between CC and Arthur Kay.
>
> I saw a 'preview' presentation of Anderson conducting the CC/Kay score
> on the Chaplin sound stage (with a 10-12 piece combo) in 1993 and
> again in 1994 with the San Diego Philharmonic (45-50 piece) Orchestra.
> I thought that score was very effective, but I disagree(d) with
> Anderson's conclusion of a projection speed of somewhat less than
> 24fps (around 22fps as I recall) that she based on music cue tempos.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

THE CIRCUS also screened in 2002 at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater in LA,
which is where I last saw it. Geraldine Chaplin attended the
screening. Here is an article about it:

A 75th anniversary screening of 'The Circus' will feature an orchestra
playing
the original score by the comic legend.

By Susan King, Times Staff Writer

Though the classic 1928 Charlie Chaplin comedy, "The Circus,"
screening Friday
at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater in Beverly Hills, is filled with
wonderful sight
gags and pathos, the film's production was a three-ring circus of
delays,
strife and angst.

"It is so surrounded in misfortune," says the Little Tramp's
daughter,
Geraldine Chaplin. Her father started the film in 1925 right after the
release
of "The Gold Rush" but didn't complete it until 1927. Production was
interrupted for nearly a year because of "horrendous divorce"
proceedings with
his wife, Lita Grey.

"It was an awful divorce," Chaplin says. "He had to stop the
production because
she would have taken everything. Then his mother died during the film,
and then
all the first weeks of the film where he shot all the tightrope stuff
-- the
rushes came back and they were all scratched and he had to reshoot
everything."

Then the sets burned down. "Fire destroyed everything," she says.
"Then the
firemen came and then they destroyed everything that wasn't destroyed
by the
fire. Then the American income tax people came and he owed over a
million in
taxes."

Chaplin says that the divorce aged her father so much that his face
changed
radically from the time the film started to when production ended.
Reshoots of
close-ups scheduled for the end of production had to be canceled
because of his
appearance.

"He had to dye his hair because his hair went white," she explains.

Despite all the problems surrounding the filming, his daughter reports
that he
loved the film. "We used to show it a lot" at home.

As part of the film's 75th anniversary celebration, the Academy of
Motion
Picture Arts and Sciences has restored "The Circus," and the screening
Friday
marks the premiere of the new print. It also marks the first time in
Los
Angeles that the score Chaplin wrote for "The Circus" in 1967 will be
played
live. The Robert Israel Orchestra, a 25-piece ensemble, will provide
the
musical accompaniment with strings, wind, brass and percussion.

In "The Circus," Chaplin's Little Tramp joins the big top and falls in
love
with a beautiful performer (Merna Kennedy). Chaplin received a special
Oscar
for his "versatility and genius" at the first Academy Awards for
writing,
directing and starring in the film.

When "The Circus" was released in 1928, there was a compilation score
that went
out to theaters in large towns.

"He worked with a man named Arthur Kay to compile and arrange a score
from
source materials, music from the day," Israel says. "This apparently
is what
went out with the picture to some theaters. In the 1920s, because a
film had a
score on paper it didn't ensure it was played at the theater. You
could go to a
small town and your pianist probably couldn't read music very well and
just
simply improvised. Only the large theaters would probably have the
score."

With 1931's "City Lights," Chaplin began writing the scores for his
films. One
of the reasons "The Circus" doesn't have the fame of "City Lights,"
"Modern
Times," "The Great Dictator," "Limelight" and "The Gold Rush," which
he
reissued in the early 1940s with music and narration, was because it
didn't
have a score. So in 1967 at the age of 78, he wrote a score, and in
1969 he
re-released the film.

Israel says that Chaplin's scores have a "complete uniqueness" that
are
influenced by Beethoven, Mozart and Bach, as well as his roots in
English music
halls.

"Chaplin may not have been the composer in a traditional sense in that
he was
musically illiterate," Israel says. "But that of course did not stop
him from
being able to communicate with musicians what he wanted and how he
wanted it
and to ultimately realize it.

"Of course you will have arguments from academians saying he wasn't a
real,
true composer. I am one of the few who still take a stance
academically and say
that is hogwash simply because if you look at his entire output
starting with
'City Lights' -- one of the great film scores of all time -- his
identity as a
composer is imbued in every one of his scores. There is no mistake
when you
hear music by Chaplin."

Israel says that the score for "The Circus" is one of the best from
his late
creative period.

"It's a wonderful score," he says. "He has very pretty melodies."

Geraldine Chaplin has warm memories of her father composing the score
on the
piano at the family home in Switzerland.

"Those tunes, they were so beautiful," she says. "He even sings at
the
beginning this love song: 'Swing little girl, swing high to the sky.'
" .

*

"The Circus" screens Friday at 8 p.m. at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater,
8949
Wilshire Blvd., Beverly Hills. Admission is $5; $3 for academy
members. For
more information call (310) 247-3600.

Copyright 2002 Los Angeles Times

Feuillade · External Since: Jun 04, 2007 Posts: 18

On Jul 20, 6:37 pm, Candace <ulys....TakeThisOut@mscomm.com> wrote:
> The three times I've seen a Chaplin film with a live orchestra have
> been some of the highlights of my life. I saw City Lights in San
> Francisco late last year, saw The Circus in 2005 in LA and saw The
> Gold Rush that same year.
>
> The revelation for me was that the audience reaction made the film
> incomparably greater. The laughter was constant, the appreciation and
> love from the audience just enveloped you. When others around you are
> laughing hysterically, it just makes the film all the more hilarious
> and enjoyable. You just get swept up in the enthusiasm from everyone
> around you.
>
> For instance, after Charlie's trapeze scene in the Circus, the
> audience just stood up spontaneously and cheered for at least 2
> minutes. It just sent shivers down the spine. They were cheering in
> appreciation for the man's sheer brilliance. What a moment!
>
> And at the conclusion of City Lights in San Francisco, you could hear
> the audience collectively sobbing, even though you know most have seen
> the film many times previously.
>
> The only "bad" part about seeing a Chaplin film with a live orchestra
> is that watching the same film on DVD in your own home just pales in
> comparison. Charlie had said that in order to appreciate his films,
> you have to watch them with a live audience. I fully appreciate this
> after seeing these films not only with people, but with own score
> played live. For a Chaplin fan, this is the absolute zenith.
>
> I'm sure everyone has seen this, but in case anyone doesn't have info
> on upcoming live orchestral screenings, here's a list:
>
> http://www.charliechaplin.com/live_performances?lang=en

Sorry to rain on your parade, Candace, but I prefer to hear the score
that Chaplin wrote on the actual film. While I don't have a problem
with so-called "live" screenings of "The Gold Rush" or even "The
Circus," to show "City Lights" or "Modern Times" with a live orchestra
is a very very bad idea.

To put it mildly.

Tom Moran

Candace · External Since: Jul 03, 2007 Posts: 10

Tom,
I agree with you about The Gold Rush, I prefer the 1925 version over
the '42 version, though some scenes in the 1942 version are visually
superior. But it's still wonderful to see the movie with a live
audience and an orchestra.

Why do you think showing City Lights and Modern Times with a live
orchestra is a very bad idea? Please explain, I'm interested in the
contrary viewpoint. I can't think of any negatives.

I've not seen Modern Times live, I'm not sure how they would have the
orchestra in combo in Charlie's Titine gibberish song.

Feuillade · External Since: Jun 04, 2007 Posts: 18

On Jul 22, 11:27 am, Candace <ulys....RemoveThis@mscomm.com> wrote:
> Tom,
> I agree with you about The Gold Rush, I prefer the 1925 version over
> the '42 version, though some scenes in the 1942 version are visually
> superior. But it's still wonderful to see the movie with a live
> audience and an orchestra.
>
> Why do you think showing City Lights and Modern Times with a live
> orchestra is a very bad idea? Please explain, I'm interested in the
> contrary viewpoint. I can't think of any negatives.
>
> I've not seen Modern Times live, I'm not sure how they would have the
> orchestra in combo in Charlie's Titine gibberish song.

>

This was gone into ad infinitum at one point on this newsgroup, so it
would be easy to find those old posts.

But just to get you up to speed... Smile

The Gold Rush and The Circus are silent films. Both had music tracks
added on to them years later -- decades later, in fact. So showing
them with a live accompaniment does not bother me. In fact, if I had
the chance to see The Circus with its original music (the way Gillian
Anderson conducted it), I would probably go.

But City Lights and Modern Times are a different matter. They are
both sound films, and their music track -- not just the score, but the
track itself -- is an integral part of the film. To show the film
without it is, in my opinion, just as bad as showing it colorized.

As I said, there was much give and take on this subject roughly a
decade ago, which I doubt anyone is willing to rehash (and even if
they were I doubt I'd take them up on it). But that's my position on
the issue, in a nutshell.

Tom Moran

David Totheroh · External Since: Jun 03, 2007 Posts: 44

On Jul 22, 4:08 pm, Feuillade <Feuill....DeleteThis@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jul 22, 11:27 am, Candace <ulys....DeleteThis@mscomm.com> wrote:
>
> > Tom,
> > I agree with you about The Gold Rush, I prefer the 1925 version over
> > the '42 version, though some scenes in the 1942 version are visually
> > superior. But it's still wonderful to see the movie with a live
> > audience and an orchestra.
>
> > Why do you think showing City Lights and Modern Times with a live
> > orchestra is a very bad idea? Please explain, I'm interested in the
> > contrary viewpoint. I can't think of any negatives.
>
> > I've not seen Modern Times live, I'm not sure how they would have the
> > orchestra in combo in Charlie's Titine gibberish song.
>
> This was gone into ad infinitum at one point on this newsgroup, so it
> would be easy to find those old posts.
>
> But just to get you up to speed... Smile

>
> The Gold Rush and The Circus are silent films. Both had music tracks
> added on to them years later -- decades later, in fact. So showing
> them with a live accompaniment does not bother me. In fact, if I had
> the chance to see The Circus with its original music (the way Gillian
> Anderson conducted it), I would probably go.
>
> But City Lights and Modern Times are a different matter. They are
> both sound films, and their music track -- not just the score, but the
> track itself -- is an integral part of the film. To show the film
> without it is, in my opinion, just as bad as showing it colorized.
>
> As I said, there was much give and take on this subject roughly a
> decade ago, which I doubt anyone is willing to rehash (and even if
> they were I doubt I'd take them up on it). But that's my position on
> the issue, in a nutshell.

I see no need to rehash this whole thing again either. But I do have a
few questions that might offer a somewhat different perspective on the
issue. What if a fully silent original release print without an
integrated soundtrack, which was intended to be shown with sound on
disk, turned up? Would it be legitimate to screen such a copy with a
live accompaniment if the disks didn't exist? What if the disks
existed but were not available? Would it be legit to screen it with a
live performance of the same score that was recorded on those disks?
With a different score?

Is there a different standard for other (Vitaphone) films in the same
state?

What if it can be shown that the existing soundtrack is substandard,
in terms of fidelity, to the sound on disk version. Is it appropriate
to limit a viewer's experience to the lesser quality accompaniment?

George Shelps · External Since: Jul 09, 2003 Posts: 1839

Tom Moran wrote:

>Candace wrote:

>>Why do you think showing City Lights
>>and Modern Times with a live orchestra
>>is a very bad idea? Please explain, I'm
>>interested in the contrary viewpoint. I
>>can't think of any negatives.

>But City Lights and Modern Times are a
>different matter. They are both sound
>films, and their music track -- not just the
>score, but the track itself -- is an integral
>part of the film. To show the film without
>it is, in my opinion, just as bad as
>showing it colorized.

The soundtracks of both CITY LIGHTS
and MODERN TIMES are not so
"integral" as to give the films a different
meaning if the music is presented
live. Addtionally, they are recorded in the low fidellity optical sound
of the 30s which
is replaced by the sonic splendor of
live instruments.

Consequently, a live performance might
enhance the visuals to a degree that more
than counterbalances the omission of the
original optical track.

(The only legitimate concern of the "purists" woud be the continued
availability of the original soundtrack)

Feuillade · External Since: Jun 04, 2007 Posts: 18

On Jul 22, 10:33 pm, David Totheroh <dtothe... RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote:
> On Jul 22, 4:08 pm, Feuillade <Feuill... RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 22, 11:27 am, Candace <ulys... RemoveThis @mscomm.com> wrote:
>
> > > Tom,
> > > I agree with you about The Gold Rush, I prefer the 1925 version over
> > > the '42 version, though some scenes in the 1942 version are visually
> > > superior. But it's still wonderful to see the movie with a live
> > > audience and an orchestra.
>
> > > Why do you think showing City Lights and Modern Times with a live
> > > orchestra is a very bad idea? Please explain, I'm interested in the
> > > contrary viewpoint. I can't think of any negatives.
>
> > > I've not seen Modern Times live, I'm not sure how they would have the
> > > orchestra in combo in Charlie's Titine gibberish song.
>
> > This was gone into ad infinitum at one point on this newsgroup, so it
> > would be easy to find those old posts.
>
> > But just to get you up to speed... Smile

>
> > The Gold Rush and The Circus are silent films. Both had music tracks
> > added on to them years later -- decades later, in fact. So showing
> > them with a live accompaniment does not bother me. In fact, if I had
> > the chance to see The Circus with its original music (the way Gillian
> > Anderson conducted it), I would probably go.
>
> > But City Lights and Modern Times are a different matter. They are
> > both sound films, and their music track -- not just the score, but the
> > track itself -- is an integral part of the film. To show the film
> > without it is, in my opinion, just as bad as showing it colorized.
>
> > As I said, there was much give and take on this subject roughly a
> > decade ago, which I doubt anyone is willing to rehash (and even if
> > they were I doubt I'd take them up on it). But that's my position on
> > the issue, in a nutshell.
>
> I see no need to rehash this whole thing again either.
>
I'm so glad we agree on this point at least. I don't have the energy
to go over the whole thing in detail. The old posts say what they say
and they're accessible to anyone who cares to look them up.
>
>
> But I do have a few questions that might offer a somewhat
> different perspective on the issue.
>
Some very rhetorical, hypothetical questions.
>
> What if a fully silent original release print without an integrated
> soundtrack, which was intended to be shown with sound on
> disk, turned up? Would it be legitimate to screen such a copy with a
> live accompaniment if the disks didn't exist? What if the disks
> existed but were not available? Would it be legit to screen it with a
> live performance of the same score that was recorded on those disks?
> With a different score?
>
Well, none of this really applies to the "City Lights" situation.

But in theory...

If a silent film with sound-on-disc existed minus the disc, I would
not want the fiml to sit in a vauilt for want of the discs. But that
would be a very special circumstance and I would not want it to be
considered the norm.

And it doesn't apply to the "City Lights" example, where the original
track very much *does* exist.

>
> Is there a different standard for other (Vitaphone) films in the same
> state?
>
> What if it can be shown that the existing soundtrack is substandard,
> in terms of fidelity, to the sound on disk version. Is it appropriate
> to limit a viewer's experience to the lesser quality accompaniment?
>
This theory is being tested, I believe, with "The Jazz Singer," where
a recently discovered sound-on-disc copy is being used for an upcoming
DVD issue.

Replacing one version of the track with a better sounding version of
the same track is acceptable. Replacing the track with a new track
(or a live performance) is, in my opinion, not acceptable.

Tom Moran

robfarr53 · External Since: Jun 04, 2007 Posts: 2

Seeing and hearing Gillian Anderson conduct the Arthur Kay/Chaplin
compilation at Wolf Trap Park in Virginia circa 1992 was one of the
most memorable filmgoing experiences in my life, right up there with
Napoleon's premiere in Telluride with Abel Gance in attendence. The
music for the tightrope scene just worked perfectly and there wasn't a
dry eye in the house as Chaplin shuffled away from the camera at the
end to the tune of Blue Skies.

Rob Farr
www.slapsticon.org

On Jul 20, 3:25 pm, David Totheroh <dtothe... DeleteThis @aol.com> wrote:

> If the screening that Candace is talking about was the one with the LA
> Chamber Orchestra performing, it was with Chaplin's 'new' 1970 score
> reorchestrated by Tim Brock, not the one Gillian Anderson reassembled
> from the notes of the 1927 collaboration between CC and Arthur Kay.
>
> I saw a 'preview' presentation of Anderson conducting the CC/Kay score
> on the Chaplin sound stage (with a 10-12 piece combo) in 1993 and
> again in 1994 with the San Diego Philharmonic (45-50 piece) Orchestra.
> I thought that score was very effective, but I disagree(d) with
> Anderson's conclusion of a projection speed of somewhat less than
> 24fps (around 22fps as I recall) that she based on music cue tempos.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

David Totheroh · External Since: Jun 03, 2007 Posts: 44

On Jul 23, 12:22 am, Feuillade <Feuill... RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote:
> On Jul 22, 10:33 pm, David Totheroh <dtothe... RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 22, 4:08 pm, Feuillade <Feuill... RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 22, 11:27 am, Candace <ulys... RemoveThis @mscomm.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Tom,
> > > > I agree with you about The Gold Rush, I prefer the 1925 version over
> > > > the '42 version, though some scenes in the 1942 version are visually
> > > > superior. But it's still wonderful to see the movie with a live
> > > > audience and an orchestra.
>
> > > > Why do you think showing City Lights and Modern Times with a live
> > > > orchestra is a very bad idea? Please explain, I'm interested in the
> > > > contrary viewpoint. I can't think of any negatives.
>
> > > > I've not seen Modern Times live, I'm not sure how they would have the
> > > > orchestra in combo in Charlie's Titine gibberish song.
>
> > > This was gone into ad infinitum at one point on this newsgroup, so it
> > > would be easy to find those old posts.
>
> > > But just to get you up to speed... Smile

>
> > > The Gold Rush and The Circus are silent films. Both had music tracks
> > > added on to them years later -- decades later, in fact. So showing
> > > them with a live accompaniment does not bother me. In fact, if I had
> > > the chance to see The Circus with its original music (the way Gillian
> > > Anderson conducted it), I would probably go.
>
> > > But City Lights and Modern Times are a different matter. They are
> > > both sound films, and their music track -- not just the score, but the
> > > track itself -- is an integral part of the film. To show the film
> > > without it is, in my opinion, just as bad as showing it colorized.
>
> > > As I said, there was much give and take on this subject roughly a
> > > decade ago, which I doubt anyone is willing to rehash (and even if
> > > they were I doubt I'd take them up on it). But that's my position on
> > > the issue, in a nutshell.
>
> > I see no need to rehash this whole thing again either.
>
> I'm so glad we agree on this point at least. I don't have the energy
> to go over the whole thing in detail. The old posts say what they say
> and they're accessible to anyone who cares to look them up.
>
> > But I do have a few questions that might offer a somewhat
> > different perspective on the issue.
>
> Some very rhetorical, hypothetical questions.

Not so rhetorical or hypothetical as you seem to assume.

>
> > What if a fully silent original release print without an integrated
> > soundtrack, which was intended to be shown with sound on
> > disk, turned up? Would it be legitimate to screen such a copy with a
> > live accompaniment if the disks didn't exist? What if the disks
> > existed but were not available? Would it be legit to screen it with a
> > live performance of the same score that was recorded on those disks?
> > With a different score?
>
> Well, none of this really applies to the "City Lights" situation.

Ah, but it does...

>
> But in theory...
>
> If a silent film with sound-on-disc existed minus the disc, I would
> not want the fiml to sit in a vauilt for want of the discs. But that
> would be a very special circumstance and I would not want it to be
> considered the norm.

You may not want to consider it the norm, but from what I understand,
it's not at all unique, or even very special, as far as Vitaphone
films are concerned. More disks have turned up over time, but orphans
still exist.

>
> And it doesn't apply to the "City Lights" example, where the original
> track very much *does* exist.

But *which* original track? It has recently come to my attention that
a set of disks *does* exists for City Lights. However the owner, who
has contacted me directly, is unwilling to play them for fear of
damaging them. He has heard that there is a laser process that could
'read' them, but has no access to that resourse. (So much for
"rhetorical" and "hypothetical.")

>
>
>
> > Is there a different standard for other (Vitaphone) films in the same
> > state?
>
> > What if it can be shown that the existing soundtrack is substandard,
> > in terms of fidelity, to the sound on disk version. Is it appropriate
> > to limit a viewer's experience to the lesser quality accompaniment?
>
> This theory is being tested, I believe, with "The Jazz Singer," where
> a recently discovered sound-on-disc copy is being used for an upcoming
> DVD issue.
>
> Replacing one version of the track with a better sounding version of
> the same track is acceptable. Replacing the track with a new track
> (or a live performance) is, in my opinion, not acceptable.

How do you know it's 'just' a better sounding version of "the same
track" with "The Jazz Singer"? What if there are other differences?

OK, I admit *this* part is hypothetical since no one I know of's heard
the CL disks yet, but... Can you be sure that the disk and optical
track came from the same master? What if they were recorded from
different audio takes? Why would a present day rerecording of the same
score, with the intent of being as close as humanly possible to the
original optical track except for improved fidelity, be unacceptable;
while an only somewhat better quality (relatively speaking,
fidelitywise) disk version, that may or may not be the same, would be
an acceptable replacement for the optical?

constance.kuriyama · External Since: Jun 01, 2007 Posts: 17

On Jul 20, 5:37 pm, Candace <ulys... DeleteThis @mscomm.com> wrote:
> The three times I've seen a Chaplin film with a live orchestra have
> been some of the highlights of my life. I saw City Lights in San
> Francisco late last year, saw The Circus in 2005 in LA and saw The
> Gold Rush that same year.
>
> The revelation for me was that the audience reaction made the film
> incomparably greater. The laughter was constant, the appreciation and
> love from the audience just enveloped you. When others around you are
> laughing hysterically, it just makes the film all the more hilarious
> and enjoyable. You just get swept up in the enthusiasm from everyone
> around you.
>
> For instance, after Charlie's trapeze scene in the Circus, the
> audience just stood up spontaneously and cheered for at least 2
> minutes. It just sent shivers down the spine. They were cheering in
> appreciation for the man's sheer brilliance. What a moment!
>
> And at the conclusion of City Lights in San Francisco, you could hear
> the audience collectively sobbing, even though you know most have seen
> the film many times previously.
>
> The only "bad" part about seeing a Chaplin film with a live orchestra
> is that watching the same film on DVD in your own home just pales in
> comparison. Charlie had said that in order to appreciate his films,
> you have to watch them with a live audience. I fully appreciate this
> after seeing these films not only with people, but with own score
> played live. For a Chaplin fan, this is the absolute zenith.
>
> I'm sure everyone has seen this, but in case anyone doesn't have info
> on upcoming live orchestral screenings, here's a list:
>
> http://www.charliechaplin.com/live_performances?lang=en

In my experience, any screening of a Chaplin film with a live audience
is
an event that should not be missed. Even if it's DVD projection on a
big screen, that's better than watching it at home on TV. If it's a
pristine 35mm
print with the original track, that's even better. As for the live
performances,
they're very special events. Having an orchestra actually performing
adds to
the excitement and exposes people to the films who otherwise might not
be interested in watching them.

Any experience we have of these films now will be different from the
experience
of most original audiences. Most people who saw _The Gold Rush_ in
1925 did
not see it with a full orchestra. Most of them did not see a pristine
print. None of
them saw it on a CRT or plasma or LCD screen. We are now seeing these
films
as they were never seen before, but I don't think that makes any
difference in
the essential meaning of the films.

i like the idea of being able to see these films in more that one way,
as log as
the essence of the filmi is preserved.

Connie K.

Candace · External Since: Jul 03, 2007 Posts: 10

I'm sorry I wasn't around 10 years ago on this group and was unaware
that this subject has been beaten to death in the past.

I agree with George on this one. The live music enhances the film to a
tremendous degree. I understand the reservations some may have about
The Gold Rush, in particular and I share those feelings. But come on,
does anyone really want to see The Kid with some canned organ music
instead of Charlie's later score? The music makes the film all the
greater! I would resent it if some Bozo from Tin Pan Alley wrote the
music for the Kid or The Adventurer, but CC himself wrote it.

I see nothing negative with City Lights since the orchestra is playing
the exact score as is presented in the original movie, right down to
the kazoo "voice" effects. I can't believe some purist would prefer to
sit through City Lights without the live orchestra, since they're
simply playing the exact music from the soundtrack, only a million
times better.

Feuillade · External Since: Jun 04, 2007 Posts: 18

On Jul 26, 6:01 pm, Candace <ulys....TakeThisOut@mscomm.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry I wasn't around 10 years ago on this group and was unaware
> that this subject has been beaten to death in the past.
>
That's okay. Al the posts are there. It's not hard for anyone to
catch up, if they really wanted to.
>
> I agree with George on this one. The live music enhances the film to a
> tremendous degree. I understand the reservations some may have about
> The Gold Rush, in particular and I share those feelings. But come on,
> does anyone really want to see The Kid with some canned organ music
> instead of Charlie's later score? The music makes the film all the
> greater! I would resent it if some Bozo from Tin Pan Alley wrote the
> music for the Kid or The Adventurer, but CC himself wrote it.
>
> I see nothing negative with City Lights since the orchestra is playing
> the exact score as is presented in the original movie, right down to
> the kazoo "voice" effects. I can't believe some purist would prefer to
> sit through City Lights without the live orchestra, since they're
> simply playing the exact music from the soundtrack, only a million
> times better.
>
How about watching it colorized? That would be the original film,
only in color.

Would that make it "a million times better"?

Tom Moran

David Totheroh · External Since: Jun 03, 2007 Posts: 44

On Jul 27, 1:56 pm, Feuillade <Feuill... DeleteThis @aol.com> wrote:
> On Jul 26, 6:01 pm, Candace <ulys... DeleteThis @mscomm.com> wrote:> I'm sorry I wasn't around 10 years ago on this group and was unaware
> > that this subject has been beaten to death in the past.
>
> That's okay. Al the posts are there. It's not hard for anyone to
> catch up, if they really wanted to.
>
>
>
> > I agree with George on this one. The live music enhances the film to a
> > tremendous degree. I understand the reservations some may have about
> > The Gold Rush, in particular and I share those feelings. But come on,
> > does anyone really want to see The Kid with some canned organ music
> > instead of Charlie's later score? The music makes the film all the
> > greater! I would resent it if some Bozo from Tin Pan Alley wrote the
> > music for the Kid or The Adventurer, but CC himself wrote it.
>
> > I see nothing negative with City Lights since the orchestra is playing
> > the exact score as is presented in the original movie, right down to
> > the kazoo "voice" effects. I can't believe some purist would prefer to
> > sit through City Lights without the live orchestra, since they're
> > simply playing the exact music from the soundtrack, only a million
> > times better.
>
> How about watching it colorized? That would be the original film,
> only in color.
>
> Would that make it "a million times better"?

If the 'colorizers' worked to match the pallette Chaplin (and crew)
intended to present as closely as those who perform the original score
do, then maybe not a million times better, but better nonetheless.

Do you think it is inappropriate for film restoration efforts to
utilize contrast or grey scale adjustment technologies in their B&W
work? Is it inappropriate to mechanically adjust/enhance optical
tracks in sound film restorations?