@William said:

And what is worse, film schools are churning out goofball directors whose sole purpose in existence is to prove how HOT they are by using 1) Maximum number of cuts in smallest possible amount of time and 2) Maximum number of cinematic techniques in the equivalent space. 

As a film student at Florida State University, nearly 15  years ago, the emphasis then was on writing and story manipulation.  Only the technical geeks were concerned with developing the newest and coolest camera techniques and they had a hard time with writing anyway.  The younger professors worshipped Quinten Tarantino.  Actually, worshipped is an understatement, these professors would pay a lot of money to just watch Quinten sip tea if they could.  The older professors acknowledged Quinten's contributions to the art but pretty much regarded him as a flash in the pan.  They emphasized the more established directors like Hitchcock, Kubrick, and Scorsese.  It was generally believed at the time that the quickest way to the Director's chair was through writing.  I guess in the end, however, the geeks won out and writing has taken a backseat to camera pizzazz.  Speaking of education, I wonder if any of those young professors back then knew that Tarantino was a high school drop out.  Not that there's anything wrong with that I'm just saying...

Classes in CGI were also encouraged.  At first I was reluctant but I'm actually glad I took those classes because I probably wouldn't be as computer savvy as I am today if I hadn't.  

Writing used to be the hardest part of making a movie.  For instance, writing Apocalypse Now, along with making the film, nearly drove Coppola to the funny farm.  A famous French director, it may have even been Truffaut, said "it takes two years to write a movie, two months to film a movie, two weeks to edit a movie, two days to re-shoot re-edit and touch up a movie, two hours to watch the movie and just two minutes for the audience to forget it."    

 Well, that was Truffaut in a rather negative mood.  His films, such as Jules and Jim, are certainly remembered longer than that!

The one other thing on this original topic I had was in Mysterious Island, Herrmann's extremely  sizeable score for that film.  Someone stated that if Debussy was the composer of nature in a beautiful state, Herrrmann was the composer of nature in a terrifying state.  This score is definitely that mood,  and another example of how the music is far better than the film (like in the Brian de Palma potboiler "Obession" - a lame film but one of the greatest film scores ever written).  In this score he had a huge brass and wind section, 8 horns, four tubas, massive woodwind ensemble, etc.  But the most interesting section is a bizarre piece he did for the Giant Bird sequence, in which a ridiculous-looking prehistoric bird menaces people.  In this scene he actually orchestrated an organ fugue by a baroque composer, J.L. Krebs (whose name meant "crab" which also is another giant beast seen in the film) but he did it with a wild combo of brass/winds and percussion that never existed in Krebs time. Another example of the pure, unadulaterated experimentation that Herrmann was always doing in the oddest places.

The Trial is a very interesting film and Anthony Perkins was perfectly cast as he was in Psycho. And also in a western as a nervy sheriff that I forget the name of. Very edgy actor. Yes - I put that giant bird scene up a while ago on a fucking asshole website I forget the name of and no one understood what was going on at all.

Some of the music Herrmann wrote just for throwaway scenes are ridiculous in their complexity but more importantly their effect. When you watch a concert performance of a Herrmann score, it's just as impressive if not more so.

That performance of the Death Hunt cue from On Dangerous Ground is certainly a spectacular showpiece, using the the triplet horn figures as a macabre reference to hunting.  Similar to North by Northwest's spectacular main title.  

Quite difficult horn parts to play I would imagine. I see in the good old USA at the Golden Bollocks Awards - they gave the award for scoring to the film about facebook. Hahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaa............

 At that same page for the On Dangerous Ground cue there is now the Scene d'amor Vertigo cue played by L.A. Philharmonic that is a fantastic performance.  Tremendous strings!  Essa Pekonnen put out a great compilation of Herrmann a while back that incidentally included the unused music from Torn Curtain with full orchestration of twelve flutes, nine trombones, 8 horns, massive percussion.  

Yes I've listened to that performance many times and it's brilliantly played.

kleinholgi mentioning Speilbergs Duel...

I love that film! Plus it was shot on Super 8mm !  Super cool... [H]

But a whole feature film of tension made out of, what is essentially, a cast of just two.

Fab.

@knievel said:

a whole feature film of tension made out of, what is essentially, a cast of just two.

Not strictly true, as we never seen the truck driver, so kind of a solo performance !

Duell is a nice example for what´s needed to make an interesting movie :

1. Good story

2. Good actors

Everything beyond that is optionally.

That doesn´t mean, there would be no need for special effects. Terminator or Matrix brought fantastic, new ,mindblowing effects to the cinema, perfectly supporting the action and the actors.

But still, the main task is to tell a nice story. So many movies today just focus on the latest technology, but miss out on the plot.

Take Avatar. O.K. 3d was nice, but the story - I can´t even remember.

Sigourney Weaver and some blue puppets running around...nothing to be worth talking about in 10 years.

Compare that with Sigourney in Alien I or II and get ready to freak out.

"We are on the express elevator to hell - going down"

Duel was not in Super 8.  It was an ABC TV movie so it would be shot in 35mm.  But I agree it is good because it was so minimalist, completely unlike his later films.  

Yes, I was also wondering, for 8mm the quality appears to be too good.

According to Wikipedia the original version was filmed on 16mm for TV. For the cinema they reshot a few scenes and copied the material to 35mm standard.

@knievel said:

a whole feature film of tension made out of, what is essentially, a cast of just two.

Not strictly true, as we never seen the truck driver, so kind of a solo performance !

They spent weeks scouring southern California looking for just the right truck.  Speilberg wanted a truck that not only looked intimidating and ominous but had a personality all it's own, or his own.  Aside from a beefy arm protruding out of the cab every once in a while you never see the driver.  In other words the truck was a character.  In a way, Kneivel is correct the truck was casted as a character.  

I don't believe anything on wikipedia which is an amateurish bullshit replacement for what SHOULD be a professional peer-reviewed encyclopedia,  but yes, you're right I noticed elsewhere it was shot on 16mm, which was extremely unusual for a network movie at that time.  It's funny how I truly feel without trying to be obnoxious that it is the only Spielberg movie I like.  With all the gobs of money and infinite resources and production values thrown at those films he has made since, I still like that gritty little thing much more than any of his later ones.

Speaking of 8mm, there was no professional film stock at the time, just reversal Kodachrome, Ektachrome and black and white reversal.  (though Kodachrome was a beautiful film stock unfortunately no longer made.)  Also, no really professional cameras.   Nowadays they make some color negative film for super 8 but it is so expensive and the quality is so much lower than 16mm due to the smaller size why would you use it?  I do like super8 though, especially black and white.  I guess this is major OT but I love talking about small film gauges.  Do you know that 9.5 mm is still made?  Now that would be super cool to use. 

Yes - I think I stand corrected. It was almost def shot on 16mm.

I think I'm so used to watching Duel on 8mm through my Elmo projector I got it into my head somehow that is was shot on Super8!

You view it over 2 reels! So me and my wee audience get an 'ice cream break' when we have Super 8 film nights!

Why can't they have ice cream breaks nowadays??!  I know it completely spoils the film, but hey, when I was little I used to look forward to the ice cream break soooooo much!  [pi][~][:D]

Did Dennis Hopper initially want to release a 12 hour version of Easy Rider though??!! With just hours of driving shots with cool music played over the top??! hehehe

You'd need lots of ice cream for that! 

(And lots of [ahem!] 'special cigarettes')

"Why can't they have ice cream breaks nowadays??! "

The break was the best part of Titanic [:D]

In some older films they still offer the traditional interruption even on DVD, e.g. Metropolis or 2001.

"it is the only Spielberg movie I like"

O.K., Schindlers Liste IMO should also be mentioned, because it is so anti Jurassic Parc and features a good plot, sensational actors and extremely atmospheric photography as well as an unbelievable soundtrack.

Even Jurassic Parc could have been such an interesting movie, because the book and the story is very nice. The SFX alone had been worth watching it, wouldn´t it be, that they insisted on these typical Hollywood family compatible actor half-comedy style.

Just throw out the children and everyone else asking for ketchup & Coke. Cast better actors and for christ´s sake no dogs to be saved.

At the same time fire the fat Burger eating programmer. What´s the use of such characters ?

Some marketing experts might have their reasons for going that way.

@knievel said:

I think I'm so used to watching Duel on 8mm through my Elmo projector I got it into my head somehow that is was shot on Super8!

You have a super 8 print of Duel?  

@knievel said:

I think I'm so used to watching Duel on 8mm through my Elmo projector I got it into my head somehow that is was shot on Super8!

You have a super 8 print of Duel?  

Yep!

Well... my friends copy really. We had stacks of Super 8mm movies at the time which we used to put on Super 8mm movie nights.

We even used to have a few 8mm reels of 'Pearl and Dean' UK movie adverts that we used to show before the films, just to create that nostalgic feeling of when we were kids going to the 'flicks'!!  [flicks = British term for movies!]

Did you used to get similar old cinema adverts like this in the U.S ??

Actually just thinking about it - I used to love the adverts just as much as the ice cream breaks!! hehehe and people nowadays actually go to watch the film ! How weird!  [;)]

WOW! I'M REALLY OFF TOPIC NOW!! I've ruined what was a good thread and am now just talking about ice cream and adverts!!  Ha! [:#]

Anyhoo William - perhaps try some Super 8mm forums if you need Super 8mm prints of fetures: http://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=2

knievel

well that is interesting knievel. I remember the super8 prints of a long time ago - shortened versions of features that you could buy.  "Blackhawk Films" was a company that sold them.  I didn't realize that people were still using them so that is very cool.  Screening a film on your own projector is way different than watching a video.   btw I have a whole cabinet of super 8 equipment I would never get rid of, including a silent projector originally bought for home movies from a department store, but built like a tank better than pro equipment of today with a housing made of black STEEL.  They truly do not make them like that anymore!   It still works like a charm thirty-five years later.