Author Archives: Julian Antos

Pause of the Clock – 20 Years Later


Until relatively recently, 16mm and super 16 were the mediums of choice for anyone who wanted to make a feature film with limited resources. With the glut of independent features shot quickly and digitally over the past five years, it’s hard not to get excited about recent features like LISTEN UP PHILIP, HAPPY CHRISTMAS, and GOD HELP THE GIRL being shot on 16mm on relatively small budgets even though, to the best of our knowledge, these films were exhibited only on DCP.

The few film schools that still offer classes in 16mm production tend to warn their students that it takes a patient person to work with the medium. Unless you’re in California or New York, it takes several business days for your film to be processed and printed, and if you’re lucky enough to work with optical printers, that crossfade you can drop in in Final Cut Pro in a few seconds can take a few hours to set up and execute.

It takes a patient person to work with film, but it takes an even more patient medium to work with Rob Christopher, who shot his feature film PAUSE OF THE CLOCK on 16mm in 1995. Since then, the negative, workprint, and soundtrack have been traveling with him from one apartment to the next, eagerly awaiting their final cut. We talked with Rob about what it’s like trying to finish a film he started twenty years ago, now that you can watch and make motion pictures on your iPad.

NWCFS: When you first started to revisit PAUSE OF THE CLOCK, what kind of shape were the film elements in? Did you have everything fairly well-organized or were you dealing with piles upon piles of uncataloged film?

Rob Christopher: I was very, very fortunate. I not only had all the reels of my rough cut in one place, but (more importantly) all the camera negatives too. The negatives were still in their plastic bags and boxes, the ones that came straight from the lab. So when it came time to scan the negatives, there wasn’t the need to do any heavy duty cleaning or restoration [other than some fairly standard dustbusting]. When all the scans were done I did my logging all over again, marking scenes and shots and takes and all that. But I would have done that anyway, since it had simply been so long since we shot everything. And I’m making a different film than I was back then.

However it wasn’t all sunshine and roses. I never could find a final, complete version of the script. And I discovered that, probably since the production spanned about 15 months, the way we had ended up numbering the scenes didn’t make any sense. But most alarming of all, some of the sound was missing! Just gone. An entire reel of Nagra tape of on location sound had vanished, probably left behind at one of the apartments I’ve lived in since 1997. I thank my lucky stars that I’d held on to my rough cut all those years, because I was able to rescue the most important parts of that missing sound from one of the mag reels. After my sound designer Matt Trifilo has his way with it, you won’t even be able to tell.

NWCFS: What labs did you use to process your original camera negative and what film stocks did you shoot on?

RC: I’d say that 95% of it was done by Du Art. My cinematographer Tchavdar had finagled a pretty good deal with them, so we were shipping everything to New York for processing and dailies. I think we used Astro here in town for a few of the MOS rolls. We pretty much shot on every type of film that was around. Good thing I still have the camera reports. It’s a melange of Kodak, Fuji and Agfa. Looks like a lot of Kodak 7287, 7293, 7298. Tchavdar and I were both kind of love in Fuji at the time. A Christopher Doyle/Wong Kar-wai thing. So we used some 8660, 8621. But for every filmstock we chose on purpose, there was one we used because it was a short end of something from a previous shoot that was either very cheap or free.

NWCFS: Independent film distribution has changed dramatically in the past 20 years, can you talk a little bit about what your goals for the film were when you shot it vs. what your expectations are now?

RC: At the time it was like, okay, rough cut on 16mm, fine cut on 16mm, conform the negative, make an optical track, then answer print and release print. And do telecine and then make a whole lot of VHS copies to send out to festivals along with your press kit. It was always about trying to get it shown at festivals.

And the interesting thing is, the steps in the process may have changed, and the tools, but it’s still all about getting into festivals. Actually getting any so-called theatrical distribution nowadays, it’s like chasing a mirage. Maybe it happens, but it’s not wise to bank on it. So playing at festivals *is* your distribution. It clarifies things in some ways. I do believe that PAUSE OF THE CLOCK will work best when it’s up on a big screen in a darkened theater, with people sitting together and watching it. So that’s what I’m aiming for. This is not an iPad movie. I’m making the very best film I can, and then doing everything I can to put it out there, and then que sera sera.

NWCFS: The dialog about independent film now is that you can make great feature films for very little money thanks to affordable digital cameras, but there’s such a rich history of great independent films being shot on 16mm for peanuts (MALA NOCHE, PERMANENT VACATION, SLACKER … to name a few). How were you able to fund production of the film pre-video and pre-Kickstarter? Can you talk a little bit about the budget for your shoot?

RC: I got this great book, Feature Filmmaking at Used-Car Prices, by Rick Schmidt. From my parents. So that really got me fired up, and when I decided I was going to do this thing, they were the first people I asked for money. And then grandparents, aunts and uncles. A lot of Christmas and birthday checks went into the movie. I was like, “Don’t get me presents, send me a check.” I asked everybody. I hit up some of my teachers from junior high and high school, and got some money that way. The youth pastors from my old church back in Colorado, and a guy I knew from the church I was going to here in Chicago. It involved a lot of long-distance phone calls and letter writing. My lead actor, Dylan, who was also my roommate, floated me a loan for like a year. And then, at a crucial moment towards the end of shooting, I was awarded an Albert P. Weisman Award from Columbia College. That allowed us to finish. In the end, the total production budget was less than $10,000.

NWCFS: I read that Rick Schmidt book, too. There’s a lot in it that’s still relevant. What really got me was the somewhat terrible but also gutsy advice about putting as much as you can on credit cards. I like the all or nothing approach. There was also the idea that you could offer “shares” of your movie’s profit in exchange for labor. Do you have any outstanding IOUs or was everything pretty much no-strings-attached?

RC: Most of the money was no strings attached, but a handful of people actually became investors. So if and when the film recoups its costs they’ll get repayments with interest. After more than 20 years that’ll be a nice surprise!

NWCFS: What got in the way of completing the film in the ’90s?

RC: When the last shot was in the can in May of 1996, I was completely exhausted. Creatively I ready to start editing, but I just could not face restarting the whole fundraising merry-go-round. I had no idea where more money would come from, no clue. And after the shooting was over, the whole team dispersed. I did get about 2/3 of the way through a rough cut. But the momentum was gone.

And then, before I knew it, it was Graduation Day. And time to, you know, make a living. On top of that, all that free and easy access to equipment that I’d had in college was taken away. Also, it was around this time I realized that writing was much, much cheaper and more gratifying. I started focusing more on that. So the movie just fell by the wayside and I moved on. It’s not like anyone was really breathing down my neck, pushing me to finish.


NWCFS: Had you made any short films before ​PAUSE OF THE CLOCK, ​or was this your first project as a director?

RC: I had made movies on video (and I mean, VHS) all through junior high and high school. My school district had this offline VHS editing system that I learned to use inside and out. When I was 14 I made this sci-fi opus called DESPERATION, about 90 minutes long. Very TWILIGHT ZONE. Then there was It’s All Too Much, a compilation of comedy sketches and music videos. And later, into my freshman year at college, I made two 45-minute pieces, Ambient Storytelling 1 and 2. Collections of people telling stories to the camera, intercut with evocative landscape footage. Brian Eno on the soundtrack. They got screened in a few places. When I finally able to get my hands on 16mm equipment, “real movie” equipment, I was infected by delusions of grandeur. Why make a short when you can make a feature?

NWCFS: Were there any filmmakers working on 16mm in Chicago (or in general) that were particularly influential or inspiring? Was there anyone making films at the time that made you feel it was possible to do it yourself?

RC: Like I said, Rick Schmidt’s book was really inspiring. I had had this great teacher my freshman year at the Art Institute, Cezar Powlowski, who got a lot of us excited about making movies. Later, when I transferred to Columbia, my faculty advisor was really supportive. Dan Andries. And though his films couldn’t have been more different than what we were aiming for, I loved all of Tom Palazzolo’s stuff. So, so Chicago. In the larger world, most of my influences at the time were older movies. Godard and Cassavetes. But Soderbergh was certainly on my mind, especially KING OF THE HILL. I often thought about what David Lynch went through to make ERASERHEAD.

NWCFS: One of the stretch goals for your Kickstarter fundraiser is making a 16mm projection print. Why is that important to you? What’s the workflow like?

RC: Firstly, that’s how we conceived the film. Namely, as a film. A reel of celluloid projected onto a screen. I know that PAUSE OF THE CLOCK will look its best when seen that way; and doesn’t every filmmaker strive for the best possible viewing experience? Not that it’s always achievable. The cold, hard truth is that most people are going to see this movie digitally.

I thought long and hard about my workflow before (very, very reluctantly) deciding to go that route. Had I access to about $10,000 more, I definitely would have conformed the original negative, THEN done color correction, THEN done a scan for digital/DCP & answer print & release print. But alas, I must do things the cheaper way for now. Though it’s not my preference, it’s not all bad either. The camera negatives were scanned at about 2.5K, and once all the final color correction is done digitally I’ll be doing a film out from that to 16mm. Looking on the bright side, that wonderful 16mm look has been preserved in the scan and I certainly won’t be doing any smoothing tricks to try to erase the grain. It’s gonna look like dynamite.

But, to get back to your question, the second and possibly more important reason for creating a 16mm print is for preservation. I really don’t think that today’s “born digital” filmmakers are truly cognizant of what’s going to happen to their movies in the future. Those ones and zeros can be dangerously fickle; and then, where’s your movie? A DCP is not archival. An Adobe Premiere Pro project is certainly not archival. Regular file migration seems like a stop-gap solution at best. A good film print is really still the best way to ensure that the movie’s still viewable, long term. I am very fortunate that my original elements are on film too, so God forbid something happens I can go back to those. If we had made PAUSE OF THE CLOCK on some crappy, early digital system and 20 years later I’d decided to pick things up again and finish it? Wouldn’t have happened.

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on Pause of the Clock – 20 Years Later

ORWO at the End of the World

Depending on who you talk to, motion picture film is either dead, floundering, or very much alive.

In the past year, Kodak has announced the discontinuation of several 16mm stocks. Deluxe and Technicolor have closed their main film production labs and auctioned off all their equipment. (We got a couple splicers, other forward-thinking institutions purchased what they could, and much was scrapped). Seeing a first-run movie in 35mm is now such a rarity that we drove all the way to Madison to see the Liam Neeson thriller Non-Stop on film. (Chicago’s last remaining 35mm-only second-run house, The Brew & View, announced its own digital conversion two weeks ago.)

At the same time Christopher Nolan, Quentin Tarantino, and others convinced major studios to place enough minimum orders with Kodak to keep film-on-film production a possibility for at least a few more years. Nolan’s Interstellar will open two days early on 35mm, 70mm, and 70mm IMAX, and the Weinstein Company announced that Tarantino’s The Hateful Eight would see the widest 70mm release in 20 years (presumably referencing Ron Howard’s Far and Away). On the other side of the world, Film Ferrania (a new company resurrecting equipment from the old Ferrania film factory) in Italy launched a  $250,000 Kickstarter campaign (so far wildly successful) to reopen their film production facilities and start producing color reversal film–both 35mm and medium format still camera film, as well as Super8 and 16mm motion picture film.

Earlier this fall we spoke to George Campbell of ORWO North America, the North American sales division of ORWO FilmoTec GmbH. For the past three years ORWO North America has been making black and white motion picture and sound recording film available in 16mm and 35mm to archives, amateurs, and filmmakers. At a time when the future of motion picture film is at best uncertain, ORWO presents a welcome light at the end of the tunnel, and is one of the many groups working to change in dialogue from the wimpy “film is not dead yet” to “film is alive.”

ARMS AND THE MAN, shooting on location in Rural Pennsylvania, will be the first feature shot entirely on ORWO filmstock in the US.

ARMS AND THE MAN, shooting on location in Rural Pennsylvania, will be the first feature shot entirely on ORWO filmstock in the US.

JULIAN ANTOS: So what can you tell me about how ORWO North America came about?

GEORGE CAMPBELL: ORWO’s been around in their modern facility [in Wolfen, Germany] since the late 1990s. The legendary ORWO Film company [originally] closed when the Wall came down in Berlin in ’91 because they couldn’t compete with all the other film companies. Eventually they reopened in the late ’90s as ORWO FilmoTec GmbH.

[A few years ago] I had connections with the Library of Congress and Kodak was failing, so I started working very closely with Ken Weissman at LOC. That’s what started us off in the US: Kodak couldn’t guarantee film for LOC, and ORWO was an immediate replacement of equal cost. I connected the dots to LOC and from there we set up the consumer side. The marketplace has been shifting and we’re still trying to understand it. It’s a growing process because the industry is such a mess …

ORWO North America has only been around for a few years, why start selling film at a time when so much of the industry is abandoning it? Is the business successful?

We launched ORWO North America on 11/11/11, and there have been at least ten large labs that have collapsed since then. We had to figure out who we could work with and who would be innovative enough to help grow our industry. ORWO has grown tremendously in the past few years. We’ve been working with a lot of labs and government agencies internationally because of the exposure we’ve had in the US. Integration into different partnerships in the US has grown the global and German sectors, so that‘s what’s going on now …

[Film] has become a passion of mine because of the understanding of what it has brought to society and what historical importance it has. I work in a couple different industries and film has changed my life. Working with Ken at the Library of Congress, I learned about the “end of the world theory.” It’s what I’ve based Owro on: digital storage devices have a short life span. You have to transfer data every five years and this all costs money, and hard drives need to be maintained and turned on and someone has to do all this stuff…. Whether it’s sound film, or motion picture film or photos or whatever else needs to be stored–[film can be] stashed away for 500-1000 years without ever being touched…

So what the Library of Congress will do is take the “end of the world theory,” and put everything on film and keep it in their vaults hundreds of feet below the earth. It will sit there in a temperature-controlled cage, and whatever happens to the earth, the aliens or whoever finds us will be able to take this film and hold it up to the light or put it in a machine or whatever and find out what our culture is all about. And you can’t really do that with any of the digital products out there.

I like the idea of preparing film for the next alien invasion. Is the consumer side of ORWO pretty substantial or do you mostly sell to archives? Are there a lot of artists and filmmakers working with your film?

The consumer side is what’s next. Right now we’re working with some smaller groups like Mono No Aware. Steve Cossman [of Mono No Aware] is here in Brooklyn, and he’s a huge proponent. He’s been very helpful, he uses a lot of ORWO film. He’s a great guy, he works extremely hard, he’s extremely diplomatic, and he’s very good for the industry. He’s probably very good for me because I’m not very diplomatic.

[Cossman] and his whole crew are extremely professional … What he has done is incredible because he brings people, introduces them to film, and treats the professionals and the beginners exactly the same. [He] brings them all into a community and gives the all the opportunity in the world and teaches everybody. He’s a true professor of the film industry.

There’s a lot more coming in this fall. My manufacturing partners are working with me on developing the consumer side so it’ll be a lot more robust. People are learning about us a little more and using us. I think this is becoming a really solid boutique industry that will be growing. There’s opportunity, and small cinemas and theaters around the country. I feel horrible that all of these 35mm projectors were tossed. Where are they all?

Oh, we got some of those…


So, Kodak has recently announced that they’re discontinuing some 16mm black and white stocks, including duplicating stocks which are really important for preservation, and 16mm black leader which is important for cutting A/B rolls. Is ORWO going to be able to fill that gap?


So, yeah, we have 16mm and 35mm duplicating film. I’m working with groups that have used it in the past. Figuring out the estimated amount of film that’s going to be purchased is really important, [then] I can start developing and investing in what we need to cut down and what we need to bring to the States.

Are you able to produce film in relatively small batches?

Yeah, it depends. We have the capabilities of slitting and perfing 35 down to super 8, and we can produce fairly small batches.

Sometimes people will see things are out of stock and sort of go, “Oh well,” and give up. Our small orders get sold out relatively quickly and tend to fluctuate wildly. It’s important for people to work with me to secure film.

One complaint I hear a lot in general is that film is expensive. “You can’t get it locally anymore, you have to send it out of state to get processed unless you live in LA,” etc.

You know what, it’s not that expensive. If you’re going to do a high quality piece, then do film. And if you’re not, then go do videotape or whatever. If that’s what you want, that’s great, but, hey, you’re going to find complainers in every industry. I’ve realized this working in digital advertising, plastic deposits, and green technologies, all kinds of different industries. I find complainers and whiners in every single one of them, but there are also brilliant people and brilliant artists. And I’ve met incredible artists that work with film all the time and they do great stuff. These are the guys I love to work with and I do work with. And they’re earnest and they work hard and they’re very supportive of what I’m doing. They work with me and they’re helpful.

I’m by no means a professional cinematographer or a technical film engineer. At the end of the day, I’m a salesperson that has a passion for film. It almost took someone like me to understand the value of the industry so that someone who’s been in it for 30 or 100 years or whatever won’t ruin it.

Ruin it?

A lot of these guys that are involved in the film industry, they’re kind of retiring. There’s not a lot of young blood there. They’re not going to let some young guy in unless there was some kind of apprenticeship, but they’re probably deathly afraid. You can’t run a business in fear! It’s a classic mistake, and one of the reasons why film has gone down so quickly: fear and poor management. Sure, it’s going to cut down because of all the new technologies, but you can’t cut it out. So many people just jumped ship, or gave up, or blamed it on the Man. Or blame it on people like me!

If someone wants to work in this industry, we have to work together, you know. People ask me for free film all the time, and I don’t have short ends, and the Germans don’t have short ends. My manufacturing partners are very efficient. There’s not a lot of leftovers, and that’s part of what enables us to continue on and grow. We work with very specific black and white film, we don’t plan on growing into color, we don’t plan on developing any more specific film grades, unless there’s a market for it. And by that I don’t mean one guy calling me or e-mailing me, telling me how much he needs a 400 foot can of film, you know.

Kodak makes a beautiful color film and it looks like Hollywood will float them at least for a little while and the archival color stuff, too. We’ll see what happens, but they’ll probably own the market on the color side. The black and white might be diminishing here and there, but it’s only because they have to. All these big labs are shutting down. Deluxe’s Burbank facility shut down a couple months ago…

There’s not a lot of money to be made here. Luckily I have alternative sources of income, so I can kind of bounce them back and forth from each other. I work six different jobs.

Sounds familiar! Are you the only employee of ORWO North America?

I’m the only employee, and I have six jobs! But hey, this fall we’ll be investing some more money so we can keep this thing up and running and we see the value in the market. It’s a crazy industry but it’s exciting! We’re growing and we may be the last ones standing. Who knows? My manufacturing partners are great guys. My partners in Wolfen, Germany are completely sweet.

I work with some of the most incredible creative artists. And film as a medium is beautiful. When it’s processed properly there’s a deeper level of grey contrast that you can work with … there’s so much different opportunity you can utilize film for and it’s not that expensive.

It takes a pro. It takes testing. It takes a creative person to go there and do the work. We’re developing the company to be a sustaining force and stand the test of time in the US and globally. You have to be creative in the development and sales of your film as much as you have to be creative with the processing and shooting of your film. If you don’t have the money, you have to conserve and be efficient. That’s exactly what we’re trying to do.

Posted in Blog | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on ORWO at the End of the World

Sylvia Sidney: A Lovely Crook for Reforming

Thanks to Neil Cooper for sharing this clipping with us.

Miracle Man_Sidney_Morris

Miracle Man

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on Sylvia Sidney: A Lovely Crook for Reforming

CITY STREETS in the Chicago Daily News

City Streets opened at the Chicago Theater almost exactly 82 years ago. Here’s the original review from the Chicago Daily News (thanks to Neil Cooper for giving us the article). Check out the mini-reviews for other films on the right!

City Streets - Chicago Daily News

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on CITY STREETS in the Chicago Daily News

Saving Vintage Animation One 400-Foot Reel at a Time:
An Interview with Tommy Stathes

Photo courtesy Lazara Stathes

Several of the shorts in our Wladyslaw Starewicz program (Screening Sunday 11/2 at 7pm at Cinema Borealis) are coming from film collector and animation historian Tommy Stathes. We exchanged a few questions with Tommy by e-mail about some of his ongoing projects and his role in keeping film alive.

For more information, visit Cartoons on Film & the Bray Animation Project

JA: What came first, your interest in film collecting or your interest in animation? How did you first get involved with both?

TS: I was definitely deeply interested in animation as a very young child, well before the moment when I understood that I could collect anything. Growing up in the early 90s, I was seeing most classic animation by way of VHS tapes given to me as gifts by older family members, and less occasionally, on television. As for why I gravitated toward animation so much at such a young age, I’ll never know, although it’s generally accepted that most infants, toddlers and older children simply love cartoons. My fascination and urge to see more and more and eventually learn about their history was the unusual aspect. Continue reading

Posted in Blog | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Saving Vintage Animation One 400-Foot Reel at a Time:
An Interview with Tommy Stathes

In Which Walter Huston’s Vacation is Ruined, and Joan Crawford Never Had Much of a Vacation to Begin With (1932)

A recent service call at the Portage led us to the service manuals for the early 1930s Western Electric Soundheads currently installed in the cinema, which included the list price, no less than $34,000. This is in 1934 dollars, and given that the only way film could be run at the time (and the only way a respectable repertory house runs film now) was on a two projector changeover system, the cost of the sound heads alone was at the time just under $70,000. This didn’t include the cost of installing the machinery. The manual reminds the exhibitor that though the cost might seem a bit high, Western Electric was offering the best sound reproduction possible. (They were right, of course, the design on those sound heads is very similar to those used in theaters today, about eighty years later as we look at the end of 35mm distribution as an industry standard, and the ones installed at the Portage are still running flawlessly.)

Exhibitors running expensive sound systems in 1932 – and regardless of what system they were using it never would have been cheap – were no doubt quite frustrated with Rain. Most exhibitors, critics, and audiences were at least unimpressed with the film, Variety called it a mistake, and Joan Crawford hated her performance, but the most impressive thing about Rain is the sound of Lewis Milestone recklessly destroying the sound mix with an onslaught of engineered thunderstorms. The dialog is never unintelligible (it helps that everyone is yelling at each other) but every scream and every murmur is abrasive and often downright frightening. Continue reading

Posted in Blog | Tagged , | 1 Comment

On The Bill This Wednesday: “The Young In Heart”

Some brief notes about what we’re showing April 6th at the Portage.

It seems irresponsible not to introduce a film like At the Dog Show, but then again, maybe it’s the recklessness of showing it in the first place that makes it so worthwhile. Redistributed by National Telefilm Associates (it was an RCA film originally) and produced by by Fairbanks and Carlisle (we’ll assume a relation to Douglas Fairbanks here, but can’t promise anything) it’s nearly impossible to tell what the film’s target audience might have been. Presumably it was shown fairly casually in cinemas when it was released theatrically in 1942, but its appearances on television (for children at odd hours of a Saturday morning, unassuming housewives in the afternoon, the whole family before The Dick Van Dyke Show, mom and dad late at night just before bed … all situations would be equally startling occasions to see dogs with rotoscoped talking mouths) must have been quite baffling. Television was doing something right. The animation was done by George Webster Crenshaw, who was responsible for the 1962-1995 single panel comic strip Belvedare, and worked as an animator for Disney (specifically on Fantasia and Pinocchio) and recalls the strangest of George Pal’s Puppetoons.

***At the Dog Show comes to us courtesy of our friends at the Chicago Film Archives ***

The Incredible Stranger (Jacques Tourneur, 1942)
The Incredible Stranger represents a body of work by Jacques Tourneur still relatively unearthed. This 1942 one-reller, made for MGM shortly before Tourneur directed Cat People for Val Lewton at RKO, is the second to last of a series of twenty-one short subjects the director made between 1936 and 1944. If they’re all this good then there’s a major section of the great Tourneur’s filmography we’ve been missing out on (though it should be noted that this short and a couple others have made brief, rare appearances on Turner Classic Movies), and if they’re half as good as The Incredible Stranger, they should still be pulled out of their respective vaults as soon as possible. We’re doing what we can, this original 16mm print comes from our own collection and was struck in 1942. Patrick Friel of Cine-File puts it best in his capsule review of the short (which was cited as “crucial viewing” on their site this week), but suffice it to say that the similarities between the short and the rest of Tourneur’s work are staggering, it’s the most emotionally resonant eleven minute film any of us have seen in a while.

THE YOUNG IN HEART (Richard Wallace, 1938)
The Young In Heart is neither rare nor terribly obscure, but for some reason this heavyhearted lightweight of a screwball comedy has slipped through the greasy fingers of auteurists and genre-files. Nevertheless Variety, Leonard Maltin, and even the grumpy Leslie Halliwell thought it was just about perfect. It’s incredibly tender, a case study of a family of con artists who get working class jobs in order to impress an elderly woman who’s possessions and real estate they’d like to inherit. This family, made up of Janet Gaynor, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., Roland Young, and Billie Burke, may be a group of clueless ne’er-do-wells, but they’re also so socially inept that they’re almost sweethearted. One of the most touching exchanges in the film occurs between Fairbanks and Gaynor on a milk cart, in which he asks her if she ever heard of anyone marrying for love … they’re both perplexed. It’s a film about a rotten bunch of stray dogs, basically, but even they turn out alright (there was an alternate ending, however, explained here in the Variety review).

Posted in Blog | Tagged | Comments Off on On The Bill This Wednesday: “The Young In Heart”

“Railroaded!” Distilled

We think Railroaded! is a very good film by a great director (Anthony Mann, who would claim the cinematic West like nobody else in the 1950s, elevating James Stewart to Shakespearean proportions in films like Winchester ’73 while maintaining the stark photography and relentless pulp of the noirs he made in the late 1940s) – but before it was saved by the auteur theory it was – and still is – at heart a Poverty Row flick, a cheap movie made by a broke studio looking to make a profit.

Which doesn’t diminish the film.

Perhaps the most impressive quality of B pictures was their formal and commercial malleability, present both in the infamously cheap way they were produced (as the old saying goes, in a B movie the sets shake when an actor slams a door), and in the ways they were exhibited – and re-exhibited, and re-re-exhibited. These qualities, originally products of commercial necessity, are what make these films worth watching now. Continue reading

Posted in Blog | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Re: I Shot Jesse James

Made for Lippert Pictures, a low rent production company specializing in B-Westerns and crime films for their even lower rent theater chain stretching across America’s Bible Belt, Sam Fuller’s first picture as a director carries all the darkness and doubt of films like McCabe and Mrs. Miller, Anthony Mann’s grubby string of 1950s Western Noirs, or Heaven’s Gate with Park Row and Pre-Code poetics (yeah, we know, 1948 ain’t pre-code by any stretch, but watching this next to I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang, Fuller’s 1948 feature sure feels like it). And if I Shot Jesse James can be considered the first revisionist western – an argument that makes more and more sense when one considers what a dramatic shift in sentiment it is to something like John Ford’s My Darling Clementine – than the Cine-Fist (as Godard would come to call Fuller) catapulted the genre out of its (perhaps) misdirected southern demographic like nothing else in the history of B-pictures. Continue reading

Posted in Blog | Tagged | Comments Off on Re: I Shot Jesse James