8mm Forum: Does a "Texas Chainsaw" 2x600' exist?

This is topic Does a "Texas Chainsaw" 2x600' exist? 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=011907

Posted by Kurt Gardner (Member # 440) on November 25, 2017, 06:03 PM:

I won a 2x600' print of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" on eBay and am awaiting its arrival from Belgium (it's in English). Is it the Iver 4x400' mini feature crammed onto 600' reels or is it something else? I've never heard of one this length.

The seller said it was from Perry's, but they were only distributors, not manufacturers, weren't they?

From the screen shots, it looks like the Iver print, kind of faded, but that's what I like -- the grindhouse, drive-in vibe. And surely with two 600' reels, there's plenty of time for all the killings.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on November 26, 2017, 12:48 AM:

There are many of my UK 4*400' prints are spooled on 1 x 1200'. So I guess that this also the case of your TCM.

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on November 26, 2017, 08:50 AM:

Apart from the Iver versions, I've only heard of the Derann 400' version. Iver tended to be quite generous with the footage on their reels, so I wouldn't presume that two 400' reels could easily be crammed on to a 600', but I've never owned one of their 4 x 400' releases so I couldn't rule it out.

Posted by Tom Photiou (Member # 130) on November 26, 2017, 09:10 AM:

I have the Iver 4 x 400 and it wouldn't fit onto 2 x 600 as far as i could see, mine is on two full 800 ft spools.
I guess if its been re-edited and would tightly it would possibly squeeze onto two 600s but they would be over spilling [Wink]

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on November 26, 2017, 09:39 AM:

Kurt, in the sales section, Ian O'Reilly (from Perry's)says : "Just to put the record straight, we never released this print, it was released by IVER FILMS."

Posted by Kurt Gardner (Member # 440) on November 26, 2017, 10:42 AM:

Interesting. When I receive it and screen it, I'll issue a report!

Posted by Dominique De Bast (Member # 3798) on November 26, 2017, 03:27 PM:

If it is the copy advertised on this forum, it is described as faded.

Posted by Burton Sundquist (Member # 5813) on November 27, 2017, 12:46 AM:

Well done Kurt! You wanted this print, as did I, But I was thrown by the inaccurate description of the print origin. Chalk up another rookie mistake on my part. We all know the Iver prints have varying degrees of fade. And you're expecting that. To sum up what you really want to know is if this Iver print, originally a 4 X 400' release, could be mounted on 2 X 600' reels, It can be done as mentioned so I think you will receive a very good purchase. By the way, Grindhouse was the last film I was present for at a drive-in...

Posted by David Ollerearnshaw (Member # 3296) on November 27, 2017, 01:03 PM:

Looking though some old boxes I found the newsletters from Iver Films. They were dated almost forty years ago. At the time I never knew you could request them on acetate or polyester stock. And some of my sales invoices say polyester. I wonder if that has a bearing on fade issue?

Posted by Brian Fretwell (Member # 4302) on November 28, 2017, 02:53 AM:

I don't know about fade (some Marketing were SP polyester) but as some polyester was thinner it gives a better chance of a 4x400ft film fitting onto 2x600ft spools.

Posted by Kurt Gardner (Member # 440) on December 01, 2017, 06:53 PM:

This is an odd one. It has an "R" rating card and the Bryanston logo at the beginning. It also has John Laroquette's opening monologue, which the Iver 4x400 didn't have. The first reel and half of the second reel seem to include all the footage from the first part of the feature.

But once Kirk, Pam and Jerry are killed, it jumps into hyper speed, racing through the rest of the film. The scenes of Sally and Franklin are completely deleted, and the spooky walk through the woods calling for Jerry almost immediately cuts to Leatherface killing Franklin.

The scene of Sally running to the Old Man's gas station/barbecue is included, but the dinner/screaming/bloodshot eye scene is gone. We're not introduced to Grampa; he just pops up for the hammer scene. After she jumps out the window, the end is pretty much intact with the trucker. etc.

I can't tell who may have manufactured this, since the leaders were replaced.

Posted by Bill Phelps (Member # 1431) on December 01, 2017, 07:00 PM:

Are all these cuts/edits printed or splices? Just wondering if it was a home made edit by someone.

Posted by Kurt Gardner (Member # 440) on December 01, 2017, 07:02 PM:

Nope, no splices. It was done in the lab.

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on December 01, 2017, 11:56 PM:

Hi Kurt,

Is the color held up well? From a score 1-10 what are you going to give.

Cheers,

Posted by Kurt Gardner (Member # 440) on December 02, 2017, 07:05 PM:

I had the 4x400 Iver, and as I'd mentioned before, I really dig the grindhouse/drive-in look. This print's color matches the Iver. So going by actual color grading -- it'd be a 5 out of 10. For nostalgia viewing -- 8 out of 10. The blues are going, so it actually looks like two-strip Technicolor.

I was on the lookout for another because I'd lost the first 800' of my Iver print in a stupid projector malfunction. I was running it for some friends, and the takeup reel stopped moving at one point. Since the projection wasn't interrupted, we didn't notice it, but when the reel ended and I turned on the lights, I found the film in a pile of unforgivably tight knots on the floor.

God, I tried for weeks to untangle the print, twisting the film right and left, spreading it out all over my apartment, even trying to cut and resplice it at the bigger knots, but no go. I was heartbroken.

So I was delighted to receive this print and see that this edit was seemingly uncut for the first half of the film while whipping through the last half that I didn't need. Now I have an extremely full 800' reel for part one, matched up with my also full 800' of part two, which has all the later scenes that this edit deleted. And the colors match!

Posted by Brian Fretwell (Member # 4302) on December 04, 2017, 02:31 AM:

I believe some of that look was due to it originally being shot on 16mmand then blown up to 35mm for release as with El Mariachi which the director states the look is due to the blow up process of the time. Now they could scan and produce a print that would be much closer to 35mm originals, but of course they wouldn't - just send out a file to the cinema.

Posted by David Hardy (Member # 4628) on December 04, 2017, 03:50 AM:

I remember hiring a print of the Iver copy away back in the 1970s when it was brand spanking new and the colour even then was not very good and the print was rather grainy in parts.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2