|
Author
|
Topic: Gremlins Review
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted March 22, 2019 09:14 AM
My understanding is that Keith Wilton edited this one incognito for Derann.
Keith also wrote the review in Super 8 Film Review at the time, which commented that the "editor" had cleverly removed the extra story lines and concentrated solely on the story of the Gremlins.
He was right of course, it was a very good and clever edit, and much deserving of a bit of self-congratulation!
Many Derann super 8 reductions from 35mm source material were printed open gate (Predator, anyone? with the unfortunate words video, etc. showing on the bottom of the Predator POV shots...) With Gremlins, one whole section of the 35mm print is "hard masked" to 1.85:1
So, a portion of the super 8 print is also hard masked. Keith pointed this out on his original review, explaining that this was nothing to do with the 8mm print, but inherent in the original print. As Jean-Marc points, the whole 35mm print would be masked to 1.85:1 in cinemas.
Run the super 8 with the picture masked to 1.85:1 throughout for an original cinematic experience.
Just why director Joe Dante wanted one whole reel hard masked was never totally clear, although the rumour is that this reel would show the operating mechanics of the Gremlins in open gate and therefore the risk of them showing if the print was racked incorrectly. If this is true, he certainly did us super 8 fans a favour.
Off topic, but related to the picture ratio; on the original VHS release, the picture was also masked to 1.85:1
As TVs were 4:3 back then, the image had black masks top and bottom. Warner Bros. Home Video ran a message at the beginning to explain that this was the choice of the director, and not a fault.
How times change.
I bought my print mono back in the day, but subsequently had Derann re-record it into stereo at the cost of £6.00 per part, so £12.00 in total! ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Happy days. Still have it and it's a cracker.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted April 03, 2019 02:41 PM
I seem to recall that in the very early stages of this title being announced, Film for the Collector stated that it would be a 600ft release. So thank goodness we got the 2 x 600ft edit.
Perhaps the condensed version was something to do with the master material being a 35mm print. Also, a lot to do with the market at the time, which made this mini-feature so much more affordable.
I have to say, as much as I love Gremlins, I watched the Blu-ray recently and I still really like this 50 minute version!
Bit of off topic trivia, but here in the UK in 1980's, distributors were paranoid about video pirates (rightly so as it happens) and would etch a print ID number into one frame of the emulsion of a big release print. That way, they could trace a video pirate to a specific print. I always remember the Delorean in Back to the Future skidding to a halt in our local cinema as the print ID flashed up on the wheel hub (OK, I may have seen it more than once in one week...)
There is a print ID on the 35mm used for the super 8 of Gremlins, which can be seen if you look carefully...
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
