Comments on: Alfred Hitchcock Needs Our Help

By: Medusa

Medusa — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 16:22:12 +0000

The reason I have a bug in my ear about funds for film preservation is that I’ve sat in meetings where top film studio folks thought it was just dandy that, at the time, AMC was soliciting viewers for film preservation funds. Millionaires who make their living off film were tickled that AMC was asking regular folks to treat film preservation like a charity and contribute to the effort. There is SO much money in the industry, plenty to preserve anything, it’s just that nobody cares enough, obviously. It’s rotten. I hope that the BFI gets all the money it needs, but I’d hate to see other causes, not connected to a vibrant and obscenely profitable industry — like animal welfare or children’s health, for instance — get bypassed because the film industry doesn’t feel like tossing a little coin to the preservationists.

Can you imagine if they took just a small percentage of some blockbuster’s bloated marketing budget and doled it out to the good guys saving these films?

Rose,you’re right, I guess I am naive, but it makes me crazy! lol Oh well…I’ll calm down now!! :-)

By: Rose

Rose — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 15:29:15 +0000

Medusa, I think your reply is a bit naive. The British Film Institute has famously been cut and and cut for years and has just been the biggest victim of the UK government’s most recent arts cuts. I understand from friends that work there that they have very little funds for restoration. They have a sponsorship department that tries to raise more money and I’m sure that they will have already have approached all the studios. That said, I’m not sure why the studios would pay out. These films weren’t made by the big US studios, and they only look after their own. And even then, not particularly well. Look how few of their own back catalogues are available on DVD or to download? I don’t see why this should be considered any different than trying to save an important painting by a major artist. If you only see films as commercial products (rather than artworks that need our support) how can we hope that governments will see them in any other way. If the BFI is after £1 million to restore then Hitchcock silents, that works out at over £100k per title. I really don’t believe that anyone could even begin to recoup this amount through DVD sales. I just hope that people dig into their own pockets and help in some small way and don’t assume that it is someone else’s responsibility.

By: Mark Notarberardino

Mark Notarberardino — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 01:47:43 +0000

Hitch was my first true introduction to the cinema when I was in High school back in the late 70s. I can’t afford an 8,000 dollar donation but I can certainly come up with 40. It is the least I can do for him…and I will mention the BFI endeavor on my blog.

By: Heidi

Heidi — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:24:22 +0000

Betty, you are not dreaming-I saw it too! It has been a while since I last saw the movie, but I remember that scene. No clue why is isn’t shown now. What a good question!

By: wilbur twinhorse

wilbur twinhorse — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 02:00:33 +0000

Thanks Kimberly for the reply. I agree with Medusa that the Industry is lagging in this area. I keep trying to get through the book THE AMERICAN FILM INDUSTRY published by the University of Wisconsin Press, Ltd. 1976/85. In the early years after Edison messed with every fresh voice and throttled creativity with crippling lawsuits, basically Wall Street took over and it’s been the bottom line since then IMHO.

By: suzidoll

suzidoll — Sat, 10 Jul 2010 23:45:53 +0000

I saw a print of THE LODGER a couple of years ago as a special showing by the Silent Film Society of Chicago. It was in terrible shape and really detracted from the movie. I thought it was just this particular print. I didn’t realize the state of the original material. I am all for the restoration of past films, no matter how it gets done. I understand Medusa’s point about current Hollywood’s lack of interest in its own history, but that won’t change as long as the business grads and marketing jerks remain in charge of the big studios.

By: Kimberly Lindbergs

Kimberly Lindbergs — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 21:01:34 +0000

Wilbur – Your friend sounds like he has a fascinating job! Film restoration is demanding work but it seems very rewarding.

Medusa – I understand what you’re saying, but I don’t think BFI is asking anyone to “bail them out” of anything. They hope to get the attention of anyone and everyone. Everyday folks as well as Hollywood bigwigs. If a wealthy producer in Hollywood for example offered them $160k to help restore one of Hitchcock’s films I’m sure they’d gladly take it but most of the people making movies now and in the past have been in it for the money. It’s just a job to them. But I know there are plenty of wealthy and powerful folks involved with the film industry who give money, time and energy to nonprofit organizations that restore old films. We just don’t hear much about them but these organizations don’t run themselves. Martin Scorsese has done a lot to raise awareness in the US but he’s not alone. The Film Foundation’s board of directors includes names like Francis Ford Coppola, Clint Eastwood, Woody Allen, Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, Robert Redford and Peter Jackson just to name a few. Maybe one of them will hear about BFI’s campaign and get involved? It’s important to raise awareness of the situation as well as the general need to preserve our film heritage and I think that’s what BFI is doing.

Betty – I’m afraid I can’t help you. Maybe someone else can offer some advice?

Steve – They do! It’s an incredible organization and I’m glad they’re raising awareness about the important work they do.

By: Steve Langton

Steve Langton — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 07:53:31 +0000

More power to the BFI. They do sterling work in many areas, and this is a most worthy project. I’m sure they will raise the funds required.

By: Betty

Betty — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 05:01:05 +0000

Can anybody tell me why the key scene in An Affair to Remember, which explains how Cary Grant knew Deb. Kerr was in a wheelchair, has consistently been omitted. The scene appeared in the 1957 original version but hasn’t been included since. That scene showed Kerr in her wheelchair looking into the art shop window, seeing her portrait wearing Grant’s grandmother’s shawl. She enters the shop and tells the owner she would like to have painting but can’t afford it. Owner calls Grant and tells him there’s a woman in a wheelchair who wants painting. Grant tells owner to give it to her.
Leaving this scene out of the current version leaves the viewer to wonder how he knew to look for the painting and then be so upset when he finds it. Then he puts it all together, creating the tearjerker ending.

I called Paramount about this some time ago, but the person I spoke to probably wasn’t even born when the movie was made, and certainly couldn’t answer the question.

Anybody have an answer? I know I’m not hallucinating.Thanks so much for whatever can be found out.

By: Medusa

Medusa — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:06:59 +0000

I’m all for restoration, but I think it’s the film industry’s responsibility to do so as some payback for all the profits it has made over the years. Asking fans to pony up for this kind of effort, the cost of which would be a pittance on a big studio’s balance sheet, is the height of audaciousness and I think just plain bad taste, ungrateful and greedy in the extreme.

As much as Hollywood loves to complain about how much it *isn’t* making because of piracy or whatnot, they sure know how to turn a blind eye when it suits them. The industry and those reaping fortunes from cinema should be ashamed that they aren’t giving back a little to the art form that gave them everything.

I mean, the BFI is asking for so little…can you even imagine how little a million bucks means to Warner Bros., say? It’s just so sad that Hollywood has so little sense of its own history.

Asking regular people to bail out Hollywood is as ludicrous as the way we’ve bailed out the banks. “Give what you can” aimed at fans is pretty outrageous considering what a profitable industry Hollywood is, despite all their whining.

This issue has been one of my pet peeves for a LONG time and I sure don’t mean to freak out, but the pressure should be on film professionals and the studios. Maybe I’m all wrong about this, but it makes me nuts, obviously! lol

But of course the cause is a great one! I just watched a Hitchcock doc on one of the pay channels and was again struck by what a master he was and how much all of us who love film owe to him.

Thanks for riling me up, Kimberly! :-)