8mm Forum: Hawk the Slayer, who put it out on Super 8?

This is topic Hawk the Slayer, who put it out on Super 8? in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=003615

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on April 09, 2008, 05:30 PM:

I'm assuming that some UK Super 8mm film supplier got it out on Super 8, as it is a UK film release in the first place, but that doesn't necessarily follow.

Any info chaps?

Posted by Mark Todd (Member # 96) on April 09, 2008, 05:35 PM:

Hi Osi Derann a 3 reeler and the full feature and believe you me the 3 reeler digest is enough. Saying that an OK print, usually in good condition for lack of viewing reasons, and usually on kodak LPP, I think they all were.
I`ve only had the 3 reeler and the first 20 mins is OK, but the last 10 are just naff, but the musical intro is catchey.
Best Mark.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on April 09, 2008, 07:22 PM:

Goodie, as I have the edited version.

You said three reeler? Does this mean a three reeler as in 3X400, or as in thirty minutes. This one I have coming is a 30 minute version, I believe, (well, it's on a 600ft reel.)

Posted by John Clancy (Member # 49) on April 10, 2008, 03:29 AM:

If I recall correctly... sometime around 1981/82 Derann put out an appeal to find out which title of several they listed collectors would prefer to see released. 'Hawk the Slayer' got the most votes.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on April 10, 2008, 10:19 AM:

This is a curious film. Now, I've never actually seen it, but it sounds like the mindless kind of stuff I'd enjoy.

It seems somewhat rare these days, as I don't think I've seen any copies on even the Derann used lists; at least not for a long time, (or since I can remember.)

Though, there must have been a number of prints, if it was the popular pick (for Derann)

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on April 11, 2008, 06:22 PM:

It's a release that caused some problems due to the derision the film received - I'm sure I recall Derek saying that it damaged Derann's ability to put out further ITC releases. I think the fundamental problem was that when the questionnaire went out, a lot of people (and I admit to being one of them) voted for it because we liked the idea of a colourful sword and sorcery type film appearing on 8. The trouble was that most of us hadn't actually seen it so had not fully realised that it was one of the worst films of this type. It certainly wasn't Derann's fault. I only watched the 600' a couple of times, although I still have the trailer, which is probaly the ideal version of the film!

It's a shame that the Disney deal did not result in the Disney/Paramount production 'Dragonslayer' coming out; a very good film that would have made an impressive scope feature.

Posted by Barry Attwood (Member # 100) on April 12, 2008, 03:04 AM:

I must come to the defence of this lovely cheesey little film, it was made on a shoestring (if you look carefully in some scenes you can see them), they cast the scene chewing Jack Palance as the baddie (his OTT performance is amazingingly bad, just what the role called for), and a host of British character actors to boot. The lead was that well known U.S. actor John Terry (now does anyone else know a film he has been in since) as the lead, and amazingly inventive special effects (they had to be on the budget for his film), but let's not forget the script, which seemed to be turned out by 2 left handed monkies. Now after my thoughts on this film you might think I really hated it, but it's the total reverse, as this is one of those films, where it's SO BAD it's really GOOD as you know that you're not watching the best film ever made (far from it), but it does exactly what it says on the tin, it entertains, perhaps not exactly as the producer and director intended, but it ambles along nicely, and who can forget the late Bernard Bresslaw as the 'Giant'.

Oh and by the way, I am a proud owner of a F/L 8mm print too!

Posted by John Clancy (Member # 49) on April 12, 2008, 05:46 AM:

NOW I REALLY WANT TO SEE THIS!!!

How about bringing your print along to the convention Barry??? I think we'll have a captive audience after your great review!!!

Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on April 12, 2008, 09:34 AM:

I was the previous owner of the copy that Mr. Osi will be receiving. (Shipped yesteday sir!)
I have to say the print quality is excellent. No fade, great colors, good sharpness too!
The film had me laughing even though it was supposed to be serious! Like a very cheesy pre-Lord of the Rings. Dwarves, giants, and of course.. Jack Palance.
It really is so bad that its kind of good. But...not good enough for me to keep. Or shall I say....not bad enough for me to keep!
I can't imagine having to sit through the feature. :0

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on April 12, 2008, 01:28 PM:

Mmmm, the delicious cheese factor!

... and, at 30 (or so) minutes, (as that is what I'm assuming the running time of this 600ft is, eh Rik?), if you watch this whole thing, and find that it's a waste of time, your not shaking your head and saying, "Egad! 90 minutes of my life blown all to heck!", no, you only blew 30 minutes, a great savings of blown time!

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2