Newsgroups: bit.listserv.cinema-l
Date:         Mon, 23 Nov 1992 17:37:55 GMT
From:         Kerr Avon <lcc@WIN.ICL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Restored THE ABYSS coming out on LD!

>From: FAC_JCLARK <FAC_JCLARK@JMUVAX.bitnet
>
>Here is some probable explanation for why a revised ABYSS (or revised
>ALIENS or any other such film) won't be released on tape or the theatre.

Thanks for the reply, Jeff.  What you say about theatrical re-release
(basically, it is unlikely to be financially viable) makes perfect sense,
and I didn't mean to question that.

On the issue of video vs. laserdisk....

>Now, the tape issue.  On this matter, a bit more conjecture on my part, some
>personal opinion that may incite some flaming... but probably not far off the
>mark.  Especially since we're taking here Cameron as the example, about whom
>I know a few things related to his views on his films and home video.  Just
>recently, Cameron said in an interview that it would be wonderful to have THE
>ABYSS re-released theatrically, but the realities of the movie business leave
>such revised films as his a second-best option, usually--an ideal presentation
>in the home video format.  The format he's devoted to is laserdisc.  Because
>it's best able to handle interactivelly the added features to a film
>(commentary,
>production footage and stills, etc), and--probably most important--quality of
>the visual and audio presentation.

Hmmm... Let's take _Aliens_ as the example.  The special edition of _Aliens_
is the re-edited movie.  That's all.  Now, yes, laserdisk does give a better
visual and audio presentation (from what I've seen and read; I don't have
a laserdisk, few people do over here).  The other stuff (commentary,
production footage and stills, etc) is window dressing which makes great
use of the media, but that is all.

I find it rather hypocrytical of Cameron (assuming that he is indeed
"devoted" to laserdisk) that not only does he allow the _Aliens_ Special
Edition to be released on video in places where laserdisk has not yet
caught on, but, more importantly, that the version that is released in
the PAL format is a poor quality NTSC conversion, rather than a copy of a
PAL master.

If Cameron is so concerned about the quality of the final product, and given
that he is apparently considerate enough to understand that Euro-viewers are
less likely to have laserdisk technology ans so allows the film to be
released on video tape, shouldn't he strive to make sure that the film
is available in as high a quality edition as the medium allows?  Or am I
being unrealistic, and should I be happy that he (or Fox video) have thrown
us a scrap from the table at all?

I accept that most of the "window dressing" would not be suitable for the
video tape release, but surely the quality of sound and vision should be
as high as is possible, especially given Cameron's views which you present?

>A director such as Cameron (who recently,
>remember, got a studio contract to own his own negatives from now on) would
>probably not settle for anything less.

That's exactly what he did do, by releasing a tape of significantly poorer
quality than was technically possible.  It would have cost a bit more to
produce a PAL master (from what little I understand of this stuff), but
if one worries so much about the presentation of one's final product,
wouldn't one be prepared to face a slight cut in profits?

This raises the question of why the film was released in Europe on tape
at all?  Obviously, the answer is money.  One assumes that a quick buck
was the motivation, since it seems that consideration for the viewer was
clearly _not_ a concern (given the poor quality of the tape).

>The quality of VHS video just doesn't
>cut it, even on a smaller screen, especially when the filmmaker may've gone to
>the trouble to personally supervise a digital video transfer.
>And of course
>Cameron's gone beyond that with his transfers, working on compiling the addi-
>tional materials on the disc, even finishing production on scenes that have
>been added and using alternate takes of ones already in the film because
>they'll now cut better with what's being added.  There may of course be other
>reasons not related to a filmmaker's personal artistic concerns, such as
>marketing
>strategy to build the laser market (which isn't really mass yet, though it's
>a growing success) by withholding the new version from tape.

And let's not forget that they can flog the special edition for 5 times
as much as the original...

I hope that the laserdisk market continues growing, both here and in the
states, and I hope that one day I can own one.  At the moment, though,
the technology (in Europe) is rare, and very few people have access to
it.  In many ways, I think that Cameron should have stuck to his principles
and not released the film on tape at all, rather than foist a sub-standard
product on us.
                        Liam.
                        ====-
                                   *"Oh dear, what shape [chips] do
     KERR AVON    |   Work: ICL,   * you usually have?  Mickey Mouse
 aka Liam Cairney |Reading, England* shape? Smarties shape? Amphibious
  All e-mail to:- | Home: Glasgow, * landing craft shape?  Poke in
lcc@win.icl.co.uk |    Scotland    * the eye shape?"
                                   *            -- Basil Fawlty