8mm Forum: Marketing Films 3 reelers?

This is topic Marketing Films 3 reelers? 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=008354

Posted by Chad Shumaker (Member # 2384) on July 10, 2013, 06:32 PM:

Hello-

Just recently snagged a three reel version of Star Trek The Motion Picture. I had the 1 reel version for awhile and knew that a three reel existed.

This however, got me thinking- are there 3 reel versions of other Marketing releases? Like The Godfather 1 & 2 and Chinatown?

I don't see these in the catalogues I have but I wasn't sure...

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on July 10, 2013, 06:47 PM:

They sure were Chad, from 200', 400',3x400' & full feature of
all the titles you mentioned, and in various languages.

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on July 11, 2013, 03:11 AM:

The Marketing 1980/81 catalogue lists the following as 3-reelers in English:-
Barracuda
Chinatown
Babarella
The Longest Yard
The Ten Commandments
War Of The Worlds
Saturday Night Fever
Samson And Delilah
Rosemary's Baby
Grease
To Catch A Thief
Prophecy
Once Upon A Time In The West
When Worlds Collide
Godfather
Godfather II
True Grit
Marathon Man
The Warriors
Black Sunday
The catalogue does not mention a 3-reel version of "Star Trek - The Motion Picture", only the 12-minute special version # 1070. Perhaps the 3-reeler was issued at some other time,

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on July 11, 2013, 07:11 AM:

Not forgetting "Crack in the World", there was also the feature
of "Death Wish", which a very lucky Vidar owns, and many
other releases were done in the German language, including
"Death Wish".I found that the German releases tended to have
nicer print quality. and their packaging second to none.

Posted by Douglas Meltzer (Member # 28) on July 11, 2013, 10:55 AM:

The three reelers tend to hold their color better than the features.

Doug

Posted by Chad Shumaker (Member # 2384) on July 11, 2013, 11:27 PM:

Wow! More out there than I realized! Rosemary's Baby? Very cool. Thanks everyone!

Posted by Laksmi Breathwaite (Member # 2320) on July 12, 2013, 12:22 AM:

I would love to snagged a three reel version of Star Trek The Motion Picture. Hey any body out there want to sell??

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on July 12, 2013, 08:15 AM:

That's very true Doug, the print difference was quite noticeable
on the "Chinatown" feature and 3x400', the features having a
pink colour caste.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on July 12, 2013, 12:55 PM:

My long desired 3 reeler marketing films release is the "War of the Worlds" 3X400ft as I hear it's a great cutdown and from what I understand, most were printed on low fade and have perfect color today (please, if someone has a faded 3X400ft digest of this, let me know, as I wouldn't want to spread about mis-information).

and ... from what I read, Marketing films actually got ahold of a three strip technicolor print for they're editing which was surprising as well as awesome, because there were a LOT of crappy eastman prints made of this film and this digest actually looked much better than most 16MM features of this floating about, (as they were eastman prints!)

Those Technicolor prints of this title really stand out!

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on July 12, 2013, 04:28 PM:

quote:
, if someone has a faded 3X400ft digest of this, let me know, as I wouldn't want to spread about mis-information

Osi, here is my print and you can see there are prints that have just faded like usual:

http://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=005211

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on July 12, 2013, 05:36 PM:

Osi, I had the 3x400',it had beautiful colour, I traded it in when
I got the full feature on 8mm, and it still is great colour.

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on July 15, 2013, 08:45 AM:

I have fifteen reels of Marketing releases and the colour is very good on all of them.

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 15, 2013, 09:09 AM:

Guys, I don't want to be a pain in the **** here, but we ARE a film forum...

A REEL is a measurement of film length (running time), a SPOOL is a device to store film.

In super 8, as with 16mm, 35mm, etc. a REEL is a measurement of film length, usually 10 minutes, so about 200ft with super 8.

Correct me if I'm wrong???

Hence, the Marking films 3 x 400ft versions are actual 3 x 400ft spools, with various film length on them.

Since most run about 45 - 50 minutes, they are technically 6 REEL versions?

Sorry... [Wink]

Can't help myself, it is like reading bad grammer!!!!

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on July 15, 2013, 10:09 AM:

Rob

Of course you're right - spools v reels.
But it's usual to refer to the length of a film in reels, not spools. You can say "my film is on spools".

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 15, 2013, 11:17 AM:

I know Maurice, but is so wrong!

We are a film forum.............

It is like an apostrophe in the wrong place for me!

So a 4 x 400ft version is actually 8 REELS. Yes guys, 8!!!!

OK, I have OCD! [Smile]

Guys, a little education here, we are the representation for film!!!!

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on July 15, 2013, 12:03 PM:

But you are 100% correct Rob, when i found the full uncut feature of The Texas Chainsaw massacre it was advertised as a 9 reeler, one reel is 200ft, the 400ft cut downs are always refered to as two reelers, and so [Wink]

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 15, 2013, 03:22 PM:

Thank you Tom, let us at least talk in a language we all understand!

We are a FILM FORUM here!

Re-considered my post.

Can we all re-think "reels" and "spools", at least???

Posted by James N. Savage 3 (Member # 83) on July 16, 2013, 06:14 AM:

Never really understood the "double-numbering" of reels. Back when I started collecting, I was buying 400 foot digests here in the USA. Then, I found a copy of "Movie Maker" magazine from the U.K., and discovered all of the wonderful releases on super 8 from England. But then, I noticed that all of my digests were being advertised as "two reels"??? [Eek!]

It took me a while to figure out that a "two reel" digest is the same as a (single) 400 foot digest here in the U.S. [Wink]

Always thought it was strange though.

James.

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on July 16, 2013, 03:35 PM:

James, don't panic, we were all in the same boat once,films
sold in the times of dinosaurs like me, were sold hence; a 4x400
was sold as an 8 reel film. "The Lost World" was sold as 5 reels.on 3x400'
Another example "Babes in Toyland" would be sold as an 8 reel
on 4x400' spools,Therefore the 400' spool from Columbia or Ken,
is a 2 reel film, eg; a 200' is a reel. a 400' is a 2 reel, a 600' a 3 reel
etc.The Mistake is in the main title of this thread; IT SHOULD BE
SIX REELERS FROM MARKETING.
The Americans confuse reels with spools, and that is where the anomaly lies.

Posted by Ralf Hoff (Member # 36) on July 16, 2013, 05:07 PM:

quote:
they are technically 6 REEL versions

Mmmmhhh,

I was always confused with this definition of film length. Here in Germany we talk about the length in parts. So a marketing 3 x 400 ft version was a three parter, a 2 x 400 ft version a two parter and so on.

You can see this also in the old catalogue of marketing international´:

http://www.super-8-hobby.de/k-mfinter80.htm

All cut downs are three part editions.

UFA also speaks about 3 Teiler (= three parter)

See here in this catalogue:

http://www.super-8-hobby.de/k-ufa81.htm

The film the dirty dozen is new as three parter (neu als 3-Teiler).

What do you mean????

Ralf

Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on July 18, 2013, 03:02 PM:

I guess my original intent was to point out that the post suggests that a 3 reel version on super 8 is a film on 3 x 400ft "spools", but not something of 3 reels run time.

3 reels = run time = about 30 minutes.

I know super 8 was primarily domestic, so 3 x 400ft / 3 x Spool version / 3 Part version, etc...

But "3 reel version" to describe a run time of 45-mins, to me, isn't ok and if no one else cares then neither do I.

BTW...how many "reels" is a Blu-ray?? [Smile]

Its simples...a reel is a measurement of film, a spool is a thing you put it on...

1 reel = 10 minutes of film.

I'm confusing myself now!

I'm now going to lie down in a dark room... [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Ralf Hoff (Member # 36) on July 19, 2013, 01:05 AM:

quote:
I'm now going to lie down in a dark room...

Rob

you dont have to lie down in a dark room. Your statement was ok.

quote:
1 reel = 10 minutes of film.

This always confused me. I 35mm 1 reel = 17 minutes of film.

Ralf

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on July 19, 2013, 02:56 AM:

In the days of nitrate a reel of 35mm film was 1000' - 11 minutes. Only after safety film was introduced so were the restrictions relaxed of how much film could be in the projection box at any one time.

In my early days of film projection (1952) many safety films were still being printed in 1000' lengths. When "making-up" our films we joined two together to make a 2000' reel. These were then called "doubles". Our new BTH Supa (single unit projection assembly) projectors already had 2000' spool boxes.

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on July 19, 2013, 05:44 AM:

Rob, I agree, and it must be totally bewildering to any new converts, I generally now just term them as I do machined timber,
3x4s or 4x4s etc.

Posted by Mal Brake (Member # 14) on February 04, 2014, 09:00 AM:

Sorry to drag up an old thread, but I totally agree with Rob on this. It appears to be UK versus the rest on this terminology. [Smile]

How do members feel when they see 8mm or 16mm film referred to as 'tape'? That's another one to raise the blood pressure.
What does muddy the water is that old tape recorders where called reel-to-reel!! d'oh

Posted by David Ollerearnshaw (Member # 3296) on February 04, 2014, 03:13 PM:

I hate that "tape" misleading too.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2