8mm Forum: Worst Digest Ever

»	8mm Forum » 8mm Forum » Worst Digest Ever

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

Author

Topic: Worst Digest Ever

Barry Attwood
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1411
From: Enfield, U.K.
Registered: Aug 2003

posted March 16, 2004 04:27 AM

The "Best Ever Digest" category is very popular on the forum at the moment, but how about we swing it around a bit and list the worst digests ever, be it in shabby editing, nauseating narrator, running time, the list of faults could be endless. I'll kick the ball of on this subject, with the most dissapointing digest I ever bought 'category'. As a lot of people who know me (once seen, I'm afraid never forgotten), my favourite film of all time is the Spielberg classic "Close Encounters Of The 3rd Kind", and this film was the reason for my involvement in this glorious hobby, I knew of 8mm releases (my brother had an old Eumig Standard 8 Sound projector many years before), so on my 18th Birthday along came my 1st Sound projector, and short after a print of the 8mm version of "CEOTTK". This was being touted at the time that Spielberg approved or actually help cut the 8mm version, shame on him if it is true, as the 8mm version can only really be called a souvenier of the film, the editing (what there is of it) is haphazard at best, with key moments just dropped into the 8mm edition with little reference to storyline or coherency. The prints were not to bad quality wise, but as was the case in the late 70's the sound is a bit thin. Overall this is a major dissapointment, with the hard to find Cineavision Scope promo doing a better job in 5-6 minutes of outlining the story, than the 17 minutes running time of this release.

Now what's your favourite 'worse' release or releases (I know it's not proper English, but this is the 8mm fourum, I know you must have some.

| IP: Logged

Gary Crawford
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 979
From: Manassas, VA. USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted March 16, 2004 08:18 AM

I'm not sure about the worst digest...... The most disappointing one for me was Marketing's Raiders of the Lost Ark.... . Someone on the "best " thread listed that one as a favorite, but I was terribly disappointed in it..not so much for the content, but the print quality...at least on my copy,..was just horrid...murky...color balance off to the green side...focus not sharp. I ended up shelving it after I watched it the first time by myself..and never showed it again. It was too bad a print to show to an audience. Universal's 800 foot Incredible Shrinking Woman...was also a horrible print...with grain the size of beans...and the movie itself was not very good. It, too, sat on my shelf..in fact I don't think I ever watched reel two of it at all. Both films are still on the shelf . And on the subject of producing films with no sensitivity to the audience , the buyers or the film....I once bought in a group of many good films, a 150 foot Columbia cutdown of First Men in the Moon.... I can imagine the disappointment of the original buyer . The original feature was color/scope. This standard 8mm sound monstrosity was murky black and white AND PRINTED SQUEEZED FOR SCOPE. The editing was terrible..the sound tinny....but who in their right mind would have put out a black and white scope print( with nothing on the box or leader to indicate it was printed squeezed?) I guess they thought the poor suckers would never know the difference.

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted March 16, 2004 10:04 AM

Gary i do agree with you on that one, i bought raiders and the quality is nowhere as good as their usual standard, pity they didnt do the 3 x 400 like most of the other marketing films, it would have been one of the best 8mm mini features going, also why didnt marketing want to release anything in scope with so many great titles at their disposal? [Mad]

| IP: Logged

Sonny Young
Junior
Posts: 15
From: Astoria, NY, USA
Registered: Nov 2003

posted March 16, 2004 12:53 PM

Castle Films did some really good editing on the classic Universal horror films (eg, FRANKENSTEIN, INVISIBLE MAN). My biggest diappointment, however, was the 200' version of FRANKENSTEIN MEETS THE WOLFMAN. Those of you who collect these digests know what I'm talking about. The beginning of the digest is the wonderful graveyard scene and the ending is the great fight, but there is absolutely NO storyline connecting the two scenes. The Wolfman literally stumbles upon the monster, fully animated in a cozy, "fully equiped" ice cave. What a freakin' mess. This film even diasspointed me as a kid. The 400' version is even worst since it picks up in the middle of the action with no rhyme or reason (not even the graveyard scene).

There! I'm glad I got that off my chest!!

| IP: Logged

Mike Newell
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 826
From: United Kingdom
Registered: Jun 2003

posted March 16, 2004 02:39 PM

Hi Barry

Funny Close Encounters would have got my vote when I first bought it from Portland. I thought it was crap and was glad I could return it as there was a sound fault. They gave me Meteor in its place and I was happy.

However, I got a copy less than a year ago and thought it was good. I know it was an edited highlights but hell I always looked upon it as promo anyway. Now the second copy was a US print in a cardboard sleeve as opposed the super dobber plastic
jobbie I got the first time. There was also no extra commentary
which I seemed to remember. I dont know was there two versions.

Anyway my vote for worst digest would have to be a Mountain release. All their digests were butcher jobs. The one that sticks in my head was She wore a yellow ribbon. It concentrates on the last 20 minutes of the movie with no attempt to show the rest of the movie. Ironically, it does give you extra footage not given in the 4x400 version but you will never get the same
colour balance to match in both versions.

The worst one has come to me Tycoon 2x400. A crap John Wayne movie and guess what a completely crap digest which has a lot
of explosions and very little else.

I was no wiser after watching it and it was mind numbing boring.

Watched once sold the next day.

| IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003

posted March 16, 2004 03:28 PM

Mike, yes my vote for "worst edited" goes to Mountain Films also. A 400 footer of "The Day of the Triffids". Some would say serves me right for buying the movie in the first place, but I've always loved this hammy film ever since I was a kid.

The extract is just some lenghty scenes from the first half hour of the movie hacked together with no ending, just a classic Mountain Films screen-full of writing explaining that everything was alright in the end!!! I was twelve years old when I bought this and having saved-up for ever to get it, felt more than a bit let down. Annoyingly, as seems to be sod's law with rubbish edits, the print is lovely and sharp with great colour!

Gary, on the subject of prints, my copy of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is fine. Not the best and nowhere near the standards of today, being a bit washed out and low in contrast (but aren't all Marketing 400 footers like this!) but very sharp and good colour. I'm a bit of a "Raiders" fan and have 2 copies and have seen another few; all the same. I gather this was the last Marketing release and remember "manufacturing difficulties" delaying it at the time. Maybe yours is a duff copy from a dodgy, maybe "rushed" print run?

| IP: Logged

Barry Attwood
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1411
From: Enfield, U.K.
Registered: Aug 2003

posted March 16, 2004 04:01 PM

I'm afraid "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" suffered from virtually being the last 400ft digest ever put out by a major distributor, the first run prints were of excellent quality, and I have a sneaking suspicion that Marketing were very surprised by the number of orders for this title, and as was the case in those days, most probably made a 'B' neg & perhaps even a 'C' neg, which were farmed out to different labs. The one title that I know this was done too was the 3x400ft edition of "Superman", some of these are superb, and others are only average, I remember Derek Simmonds telling me that he knew of at least 3 labs knocking "Superman" out, thus the variation in quality.

| IP: Logged

James N. Savage 3
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1375
From: Washington, DC
Registered: Jul 2003

posted March 17, 2004 04:15 PM

Before I name my wost digest, let me comment on the Raiders 400 footer.

What I liked-

The digest is actually well structured and includes most of the key scenes that anyone would want. The sound was typical Marketing, which was very good. The scenes blended well, with nice fades and good sound editing. Great colorful glossy box!

What I didn't like-

The begining credit scene was very choppy (like the U-8's). The colors were drab and murky in many of the scenes. The big ending, when the ark is opened, just sort of pops up abruptly, and the viewer doesnt't get the full impact of whats happening. And then, it just ends ubruptly. No credits, No music, No epilog. My viewing audiences never seemed to like this digest either, so I guess I'll have to give it an overall C-.

Now, for my worst digest (I know I've mentioned this before)-
"Dressed To Kill" 400 footer.

This digest drags at the pace of a slow feature, giving way too much information for a 16 minute digest. Then, we see the famous elevator killing (a very nice "DePalma-style" scene). Then, the digest jumps to the very end, which is basically just an epilog involving a nightmare by the central character (Nancy Allen), then, its over.

Then, there's the quality. This film jumped and jittered so much when I got it brand new back in '83, I thought it was going to damage my projector. The picture is very grainy and the sound is very average.

I still have the elevator scene (makes a nice short for a horror show). Nice box though.

Nick.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

Printer-friendly view of this topic

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2