criterionforum.org

Is it illegal to be a philistine? Can't we sue the asshole for that?

I really would like it to be shown at Edinburgh as well. I love the city and the festival is the longest continually running one in the world. It'd be a pretty big platform for the film and there'd be more of a public outcry if they tried to sue them than the BFI.

Felix wrote: I really would like it to be shown at the Edinburgh Festival though and to get the big movers and shakers in the film world to apply some pressure on Coppola.

Alternatively, someone to sue for the claim that Coppola restored it.

Or just assassinate him --

I'm changing my profession to "Coppola killer" (mods!)

To be fair to Coppola, he and his old man do deserve on-screen credit of the 2006 restoration and perhaps even a share in the royalties. All that should really matter to Brownlow is that the masses have access to the longer version, which would then secure his place in the world of Cinema, if it isn't secure already. As it is, we have a monumental work of art restored to its original condition as closely as possible, yet it languishes. I can see why a man would feel aggrieved at someone else (a friend even) besting a previous joint achievement, but I can also see a bigger man applauding the herculian effort. As it is, Coppola unfortunately reveals himself as resentiment. Brownlow appears just as stubborn in not giving credit and/or royalties.

Gordon wrote:To be fair to Coppola, he and his old man do deserve on-screen credit of the 2006 restoration and perhaps even a share in the royalties. All that should really matter to Brownlow is that the masses have access to the longer version, which would then secure his place in the world of Cinema, if it isn't secure already. As it is, we have a monumental work of art restored to its original condition as closely as possible, yet it languishes. I can see why a man would feel aggrieved at someone else (a friend even) besting a previous joint achievement, but I can also see a bigger man applauding the herculian effort. As it is, Coppola unfortunately reveals himself as resentiment. Brownlow appears just as stubborn in not giving credit and/or royalties.

Hmm… Seeing as no one else has commented, I feel I ought to step in. The Coppolas do indeed deserve credit for promoting NAPOLEON throughout the US back in the 80s – Bob Harris managed to get the film widely advertised and seen and all credit to them. However, to say that they deserve credit for the 2004 restoration is going a bit far and calling Brownlow “just as stubbornâ€

Well then furchrissakes if we can get our BVD's into an off-yellow over mere windowboxing & start firing off petitions and emails galore to Criterion, and same to Kino/Milestone etc for not preconverting some of their non-NTSC silents, for god's sakes this demands some kind of blitz response.

Somebody please provide an email address beyond some bland [email protected] type address, or even better a phone number. Let's get in the hunt on this. Tell your friends. Let's flood them.

For real. We're pieces of shit if we don't speak our mind on this.

Amen.

It sounds like Gordon works (worked) for Zoetrope, perhaps he can supply us with a phone number or something.

I'm up for some email writing..if anyone know the address

These chaps deserve some flak..

Does it really seem that I am taking the side of Coppola, that old buffoon? I call him ressentiment, which is a far greater criticism than calling Brownlow "stubborn", which I will retract, as I was speaking from ignorance. To be honest, I can't see how Coppola can prevent the 2004 restoration from being screened. They should just show it and let Coppola do his worst - surely the case would be thrown out of court? He should just fuck off and film Tetro with his own money instead of blocking the release of a film that was made before he was born. And he should hope that one day, some twat doesn't block the restoration of The Godfather, as it sure as shit will need restoring within the coming decades.

So, in closing, though I feel that Coppola is a resentful buffoon, I still feel that he deserves at least a "thank you" in the credits. It could be the case that he is simply protecting his old man's work, which is understandable to all, surely. However, that previous 1981 version is available on DVD, so that takes care of that format, so why is a DVD of the 2004 version so bothersome to Coppola, eh? I'll tell you why: ressentiment. He's using his power to negate the efforts of a would-be enemy. And his daughter's films are shit, too.

I think it would be odd to officially say “thank youâ€

It's been reported elsewhere in this forum (and on other fora), but might as well report it here. Optimum has cancelled their R2 release of Napoleon 'due to rights issues'.

Very happy to publicise this at mastersofcinema.org

It would be worthwhile, I think, to get a page of facts together, which we can link to.

So I'll put my money where my mouth is.

If someone needs a (cough) writer to gather material into an appropriately infuritating but fair and true piece, LE CLE can feel free to PM me for an email address whereby we can try to construct some manner of effective and affecting press piece, which we can throw up someplace for link-ins or submissions, ie to Nick for starters.

Nick if we all end up destroyed and eating rat meat, we can flip a coin later on to see who catches the rats and who gathers the sticks to make the tiny fire spit & skewers.

peerpee wrote:Very happy to publicise this at mastersofcinema.org

It would be worthwhile, I think, to get a page of facts together, which we can link to.

Speaking of mastersofcinema.org apparently: "The Round Up (Miklos Jancso, 1965) Second Run R2 USA" was released in March

anyone know where I can get a copy

La Fin du Monde can be downloaded HERE.

The only known 35mm print is located in Prague.

A question (not related to Napoleon):

Has anyone seen Gance's La Tour de Nesle?

I've seen it. Even though it's part of Gance's much less impress late period, it's actually a very interesting film and well worth seeing. There is a first-rate, but subtitle-less, DVD of the film available in France, although most of the online retailers don't list it for some reason.

A very good melodrama with some bad acting at the start.

I just wanted to say, this and the Napoleon topic are what convinced me to read these forums.
Just a small thanks to you guys.

I have been silenced by events.

I have been avoiding posting for some time. However, in my current state of brain I feel I should at least try and say hullo once again.

ALLEGEDLY

…the unidentified British film institute safely have the UK rights to THE UNKNOWN FRENCH FILM.

But what do I know.

Oh, and J'ACCUSE proceeds well.

LA ROUE just proceeds.

[The preceding words bore no relation to any real names or persons or events, living or dead, and any similarity to names or persons or events, living or dead, is purely coincidental.]

Thanks for the "update"... good to see you checking in. I was wondering what happened to you and whether or not we'd be hearing from you again.

The BFI news is particularly saddening. If not for this then what?

If BFI has no money we should donate them some.

Seriously. I would happily give, say, £50 for the cause.

SoyCuba wrote:If BFI has no money we should donate them some.

In fact, they just recently received an award. I expect they'll get a nice cut of this £25 million pie. In the end it probably won't resolve much. It's a start though.

If only someone could have donated a spine to the BFI.

I fear there was a worrying aura about their attitude toward NAPOLEON, suggesting that because it was not a British film it was therefore not within their remit of responsibility or as worthy of preservation/further funding. The BFI are, of course, the innocent party here; but the whole legal crisis made them react in the most defeatist fashion and revealed a worrying display of lethargy. I'm sure the £25 million pie will help things, but it may get swallowed up very quickly just preserving films which have not been touched/restored at all yet and not fund further restorations of non-British films.

On the subject of LA TOUR DE NESLE (and the acting therein), I was rereading Truffaut's comments on Gance in Les films de ma vie only the other day. He mentions the film and Silvana Pampanini

“Go and see Pampanini in LA TOUR DE NESLE and then go see her in something else and if you don't see immediately that Gance was a genius then you and I do not have the same notion of cinema (mine, obviously, is the correct one).â€

La Clé du Ciel wrote:ALLEGEDLY

…the unidentified British film institute safely have the UK rights to THE UNKNOWN FRENCH FILM.

and ALLEGEDLY

…the unidentified British film institute are idiots and now have no money to do anything with THE UNKNOWN FRENCH FILM in any case.

No money to transfer the 2004 restoration to DVD? How so? The BFI publish new DVDs every few weeks.

It's not as simple as transferring an existing restoration to DVD. New material has been found since the 2004 restoration, so that needs to be added and a new print assembled etc. This means an extension of the Carl Davis score (of which there is no complete 2004-version recording in any case). Then there needs to be an orchestra and recordings made etc etc. There is also the issue of associated screening(s). Funding a new (and hopefully definitive) restoration of the film will cost a large amount of cash – these things really aren't easily put together and released.

Even aside from the necessities and difficulties of assembling the material for the DVD or cinema screenings, there is the effort and willpower needed on behalf of the relevant powers. Lethargy seems to be at the heart of BFI policy regarding NAPOLEON. As maddening as it seems, we will still have to wait.