Skip Navigation

Frame by Frame

Posts Tagged ‘Film Preservation’

Treasure Trove of Silent American Movies Found in Amsterdam

Sunday, March 30th, 2014

A group of extremely rare American silent films has been found at the EYE Museum in Amsterdam.

As Susan King reports in The Los Angeles Times, “Long-missing comedy shorts such as 1927’s Mickey’s Circus, featuring a 6-year-old Mickey Rooney in his first starring role, 1917’s Neptune’s Naughty Daughter; 1925’s Fifty Million Years Ago, an animated introduction to the theory of evolution; and a 1924 industrial short, The Last Word in Chickens, are among the American silent films recently found at the EYE Filmmusem in Amsterdam. EYE and the San Francisco-based National Film Preservation Foundation have partnered to repatriate and preserve these films — the majority either don’t exist in the U.S. or only in inferior prints.

The announcement was to be made Sunday in Amsterdam at EYE Museum with a public screening of the first film saved from the project Koko’s Queen [see image above], a 1926  Out of the Inkwell cartoon, which had been available in the U.S. only in substandard video copies. Annette Melville, director of the National Film Preservation Foundation, said EYE came to them after learning of NFPF’s partnership four years ago with the New Zealand Film Archive, which repatriated nitrate prints of nearly 200 silent U.S. films, including a missing 1927 John Ford comedy, Upstream. The following year, the NFPF and the New Zealand archive also identified the 30-minute portion of the 1923 British film The White Shadow, which is considered to be the earliest feature film in which Alfred Hitchcock had a credit.

‘We had so much on our plate,’ said Melville. ‘We took responsibility for funding the preservation of a good number of the 176 films. We didn’t want to bite off more than we could chew. There are a lot of resources involved in bringing the films back and preserving them. Most of this work is funded through grants.’ With support from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the NFPF last year sent researcher Leslie Lewis to Amsterdam, where she spent two months examining more than 200,000 feet of highly combustible 35mm nitrate film. A veritable Sherlock Holmes of celluloid, Lewis also was one of two nitrate experts dispatched to identify the films in the New Zealand Archive.”

You can read the entire story by clicking here, or on the image above.

“Persistence of Vision: Reading the Language of Cinema”

Thursday, April 4th, 2013

Martin Scorsese recently delivered the 2013 Jefferson Lecture in the Humanities entitled “Persistence of Vision: Reading the Language of Cinema” at the Kennedy Center in Washington.

As reported in Dawn.com, Scorsese urged his listeners to preserve our shared cinematic heritage before it disappears, a sentiment which I am in absolute agreement with. As Scorsese noted, “I believe we need to stress visual literacy in schools. Young people need to understand that not all images are out there to be consumed like, you know, fast food and then forgotten. We need to educate them to understand the difference between moving images that engage their humanity and their intelligence, and moving images that are just selling them something.”

As Dawn.com’s anonymous correspondent added, “to fully comprehend the language of moving images, it is essential to ‘preserve everything’ from blockbusters to home movies by way of films that may not look like works of art on first showing, [Scorsese] said. To prove his point, Scorsese screened a clip from Vertigo – hailed today as a work of genius, but at the time of its release in 1958 regarded as just another in a string of crowd-pleasing Alfred Hitchcock psycho thrillers.

‘[Vertigo] came very very close to being lost to us,’ he said, adding that over time, viewers can identify and appreciate elements in a film that might not be evident upon its initial release. ‘Just as we learned to take pride in our poets and writers, and in jazz and blues, we need to take pride in our cinema, a great American art form. It’s a big responsibility, and we need to say to ourselves that the time has come to look beyond weekend box office numbers and start caring for films as if they were the oldest book in the Library of Congress,’ [Scorsese] said.”

You can the entire article by clicking here, or on the image above.

To Save and Project: The 10th MoMA International Festival of Film Preservation

Monday, October 8th, 2012

To Save and Project is a celebration of preserved masterworks and rediscoveries of world cinema.

The Museum of Modern Art’s 10th annual series of To Save and Project, under the direction of Joshua Siegel, Associate Curator, Department of Film, continues to amaze and delight with some 75 films rescued from imminent destruction, projected for the most part in their original film format, as opposed to digital versions.

As Dave Kehr notes in The New York Times, the the 10th incarnation of To Save and Project comprises “about 75 films from 15 countries, a vast assortment of work in practically every conceivable format, from Hollywood features to home movies. And yet, as hefty as the program may be, it represents a small fraction of the films rescued each year from physical deterioration or commercial neglect by the world’s archives, museums and those studios enlightened enough to take responsibility for, and pride in, the films on which their business was built.

Paradoxically, even as preservation work proliferates, opportunities to see the films in question continue to dwindle, as studios cut back on their ‘deep library’ releases to home video, black-and-white movies vanish from television, and even museums and revival houses turn more and more to the digital presentation of films through hard-drive digital cinema packages (or D.C.P.’s, to use the industry acronym), which are rapidly replacing celluloid film prints.

For the moment, at least, MoMA is holding the line: all but a handful of the screenings in Save and Project are being presented the old-fashioned way: on film. ‘I’m not entirely convinced that digital technology is sophisticated enough to compare with the quality of celluloid on a big screen,’ said Joshua Siegel, an associate curator in the museum’s department of film and the organizer of this year’s festival. ‘There will be a time when we won’t be able to discern a difference, but for the time being I believe in showing these films in the original.’

Mr. Siegel’s purist approach is best represented by the two racy Hollywood features, made before the industry’s self-censorship regulations began to be strictly enforced, that open the festival on Thursday: John Francis Dillon’s 1932 Call Her Savage, with Clara Bow, and Raoul Walsh’s 1932 Wild Girl, a western romance with Joan Bennett. Both are new 35-millimeter prints struck from original nitrate materials donated to MoMA decades ago by 20th Century Fox.”

This is an incredibly rare opportunity to see some remarkable films in the original format; I remember running a 16mm print of Call Her Savage in my film history class years ago, and being really impressed by it. The chance to see these films in the full splendor of 35mm shouldn’t be passed up, so if you live in the New York City area, and have even the slightest interest in cinema, this series should go to the very top of your “must see” list — it’s a once in a lifetime chance to see these films.

The series runs from October 11–November 12, 2012 — don’t miss it.

Moving Image Archive News

Tuesday, February 28th, 2012

Jan-Christopher Horak at the UCLA Archives.

Arguably, the most important task facing film historians today is the preservation of the images themselves. At the Moving Image Archive News website, there are a group of interviews with some of the country’s foremost archivists on the challenges they face on a daily basis.

As their website notes, they recently conducted these interviews with some of the top professionals on “moving image archiving, preservation, and restoration about what they do in their jobs, how they got involved in the field, and the like. Over the next few weeks, you can see what they said, here on the site.If you know anyone who might be interested in working in the field, these clips should be informative and hopefully inspiring. Or, perhaps you already work in the field and are interested in finding out about other people in your line of work. So, here goes. Today, to get things rolling, here are three people with varied roles in the moving image world.”

Click here to go this essential website, right now.

Digital Storage vs. Film Storage – Which is Cheaper? Which is More Stable?

Friday, January 27th, 2012

You can read Michael Cieply’s thought provoking article by clicking here.

As reported by Michael Cieply in The New York Times a while back, films that are “born digitally” — that are digitally produced, edited, distributed and projected — are never really fixed in any solid state medium. They’re just pixels and electrons that have to be moved from one platform to the next.

As Cieply wrote in 2007, “Time was, a movie studio could pack up a picture and all of its assorted bloopers, alternate takes and other odds and ends as soon as the production staff was done with them, and ship them off to the salt mine. Literally.

Having figured out that really big money comes from reselling old films — on broadcast television, then cable, videocassettes, DVDs, and so on — companies like Warner Brothers and Paramount Pictures for decades have been tucking their 35-millimeter film masters and associated source material into archives, some of which are housed in a Kansas salt mine, or in limestone mines in Kansas and Pennsylvania.

It was a file-and-forget system that didn’t cost much, and made up for the self-destructive sins of an industry that discarded its earliest works or allowed films on old flammable stock to degrade. (Indeed, only half of the feature films shot before 1950 survive.)

But then came digital. And suddenly the film industry is wrestling again with the possibility that its most precious assets, the pictures, aren’t as durable as they used to be.

The problem became public, but just barely, last month, when the science and technology council of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences released the results of a yearlong study of digital archiving in the movie business. Titled The Digital Dilemma, the council’s report [offered this] startling bottom line: To store a digital master record of a movie costs about $12,514 a year, versus the $1,059 it costs to keep a conventional film master.

Much worse, to keep the enormous swarm of data produced when a picture is ‘born digital’ — that is, produced using all-electronic processes, rather than relying wholly or partially on film — pushes the cost of preservation to $208,569 a year, vastly higher than the $486 it costs to toss the equivalent camera negatives, audio recordings, on-set photographs and annotated scripts of an all-film production into the cold-storage vault.”

That was in 2007. Now, in 2012, just five years later, everything is digital. But the problem remains the same. There are more movies being made than ever, but they’re not being shot on film — they’re digital. How are you going to archive them? What do you do when a digital platform is phased out, as DVDs now seem to be heading for their final spin?

The most practical solution might well be to simply make a fine grain photographic negative of all the film’s original materials and bury in it in vaults — cheap, easy, and reliable. Some preservationists suggest that film buried deep in cold storage vaults can last for hundreds of years without a problem.

Can you say the same for a digital production?

Top 75 Lost British Films

Thursday, November 3rd, 2011

From the lost film Sleep is Lovely, 1968

While film may seem eternal, in fact it’s highly ephemeral, as this list of 75 lost British films compiled by the British Film Institute clearly indicates. Some of the films on the BFI list are from the 1970s, and one would think that films of such relatively recent vintage would be readily available, but no — they’re lost, negatives and all prints. In most cases, only stills and press materials survive. They may eventually turn up in a vault somewhere, or in someone’s attic or bedroom closet, but for the moment, these films are only memories — moving images that once had life, but now exist no more.

This list, in itself, is one of the best arguments one can make for the essential nature of film preservation. Without proper archival care, all films will cease to exist eventually. Our job is to keep them with us, as part of our shared cultural heritage. The films on this list are all British productions, but such a list could easily be expanded to include films around the world — films that are now just memories. Once they’re gone, they’re gone forever, and you can’t bring them back — so we must act now.

About the Author

Wheeler Winston Dixon

Wheeler Winston Dixon, Ryan Professor of Film Studies at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, is an internationally recognized scholar and writer of film history, theory and criticism. He is the author of numerous books and more than 70 articles on film and appears regularly in national media outlets discussing film and culture trends. Frame by Frame is a collection of his thoughts on a number of those topics. To contact Prof. Dixon for an interview, reach him at 402.472.6064 or wdixon1@unl.edu.

RSS Frame By Frame Videos

  • War Movies
    UNL Film Studies professor Wheeler Winston Dixon at one of the earliestand most enduring film genres, the war movie. […]
  • Frame By Frame - Hollywood Composers
    UNL Film Studies professor Wheeler Winston Dixon highlights the most prolific Hollywood film composers. […]

In The National News

National media outlets featured and cited Wheeler Winston Dixon on a number of topics in the past month. Find out more on the website http://newsroom.unl.edu/inthenews/