623 Lonesome

[mikeohhh]

Lonesome



The early Hollywood gem Lonesome is the creation of a little-known but audacious and one-of-a-kind auteur, Paul Fejos (a filmmaker/explorer/anthropologist/doctor!), who bridged the gap between the silent and sound eras. Fejos pulled out all the stops for this lovely New York City symphony set in antic Coney Island during the Fourth of July weekend—employing color tinting, superimposition effects, experimental editing, and a roving camera (plus three dialogue scenes, added because of the craze for talkies). For years, Lonesome has been a rare treat for festival and cinematheque audiences; it’s only now coming to home video. Rarer still are the two other Fejos films included in this release: The Last Performance (featuring a new score by Donald Sosin) and a reconstruction of the previously incomplete sound version of Broadway, in its time the most expensive film ever produced at Universal.

Disc Features

- New digital restoration, featuring uncompressed monaural soundtrack on the Blu-ray edition
- Audio commentary featuring film historian Richard Koszarski
- The Last Performance, director Paul Fejos’s 1929 silent starring Conrad Veidt, with a new score by Donald Sosin
- Reconstructed sound version of Broadway, Fejos’s 1929 musical
- Fejos Memorial, a 1963 visual essay produced by Paul Falkenberg in collaboration with Fejos’s wife, Lita Binns Fejos, featuring Paul Fejos narrating the story of his life and career
- Audio excerpts about Broadway from an interview with cinematographer Hal Mohr
- PLUS: A booklet featuring essays by critic Phillip Lopate and film historian Graham Petrie and an excerpt about Lonesome from Fejos’s autobiography

[jesus the mexican boi]

I've never seen this film, but it's up there as one of my holy grails. Recently however, I discovered that it may not be as difficult to see in the not-too-distant future as I'd assumed. The Alloy Orchestra has revived their score for this film (which they hadn't performed in over a decade) at this year's Telluride Film Festival. According to their website, the only other performance of this film scheduled this year is at The Cornell Theater on Nov. 10-11.

That's kinda far for me to travel to see a movie (I live in the DC area) so I'm wondering: what are the DVD possibilities? This seems like a no-brainer for Kino (it's a Universal title so IN THEORY Criterion could get the rights but let's not upset the forthcoming list, which is overwhelmed as is), but I dunno. Folks who were at Telluride this year (portnoy I'm looking at you), got any hints? Was it at least a new print? Ten years is a long time to retire from distribution a film that hasn't ever had a proper release on home video in America (or anywhere? hey, that's a topic we can bring up in this thread!).

This, too, has intrigued me for many years. I never expected to see it, rare as it is, but I'm keeping a vigil on my hope chest.

Criterion? Kino? Bueller?

[Mysterypez]

Was it at least a new print? Ten years is a long time to retire from distribution a film that hasn't ever had a proper release on home video in America (or anywhere? hey, that's a topic we can bring up in this thread!).

I can answer this question because I work at the archive that supplied the print. Your answer is yes, this was a new print. (here comes the but) BUT this film is in need of some pretty intensive (read expansive) restoration.

The outstanding problem with LONSOME is the audio. Music and effects accompany the film. There are dialogue sequences that are barely audible. All of this needs to be fixed. The film was right at the edge of Silent/Sound change over. Those dialogue scenes were not shot/directed by Fejos. Pretty obvious as the film comes to a dead stop during these moments. The studio tacked them. In the past I know a number of venues used to turn down the soundtrack and provide their own musical accompaniment. It was simple enough to turn the volume up when the dialogue scenes came on.

Secondarily there are color sequences in the third reel. Faithfully reproducing those isn't cheap.

Thirdly, the negative we have is a bit of jumble. We have a picture negative; we have a second negative that is just made up of English intertitles (the original material was in French). These two elements are A/B printed. Then we have a third negative with the color sections. This means we have to cut in the color elements. Suffice to say we should have one complete picture negative not three chunks.

So all of this adds up to a big problem. We provided Telluride with a new print for this year's festival as a favor. The old print was beat to hell. The old print had a good long life. Until about 2 years ago that print went out 2-3 times a year......pretty good actually . We retired that print because it really had seen better days, and we had every intention of pursuing a complete restoration... one that we thought would premiere at Telluride. But as these things go the money fell through. We were stuck holding the bill on this new print. Believe me we could have just shown the old print and saved our selves a bundle. The cost for the Telluride print approaches five figures. As a general rule film archives do not have money lying around to make what amounts to a one off print for a festival. Granted this new print will probably see some screening dates, but it is hard for me to see the print as anything but an expensive compromise. The print we screened at Telluride looks good.... better than good actually..... BUT it could and should look better.

Full cost of the restoration will be in the $50,000-$75,000. I am hopeful that we can get this done in the next year or two. But this time last year I would have thought it was a slam-dunk with the granting agency we approached. We presented five films in that package, they picked three and LONESOME was not one of them. We were all stunned because it is not like the granting agency didn't know the importance of this film. They just went a different way.

I cannot speak about releasing this out on DVD. I would love to see it out there, but restoring it has to be the priority.

[portnoy]

Not really much added to that - I will say on the Telluride end that the film holds a special place at the festival. It was the random screening of a print of Lonesome by James Card 34 years ago that gave James Card, Tom Luddy, and Bill and Stella Pence the idea to start the festival the next year, so it seemed a fitting film for this year, since the Pences announced their retirement from the festival.

That said, it was so popular, they had to do a repeat screening of the film near the end of the festival - usually Alloy doesn't do an encore at the festival (they didn't do an encore even after last year's extremely popular screening of Chang, to my chagrin).

(Not that this thread is a good place for discussing it, but the loss of the Pences from the world of festival programming is surely a loss to film in general - over the past 33 years, Bill and Stella have been two of the most adventurous and interesting film programmers in the world, championing both important new filmmakers and helping to rediscover forgotten classics. Both as a friend and as a former employee's of Bill's (at a theater he still runs in New Hampshire), their presence with the festival will surely be missed.)

[denti alligator]

According to their website, the only other performance of this film scheduled this year is at The Cornell Theater on Nov. 10-11.

Holy Shit! Cornell University in Ithaca, New York??
That's where I live! The Alloy Orchestra has been here a lot, but I had no idea this was on the schedule for the Cornell Cinema. What a treat!

[Mysterypez]

The new 'Telluride' print will be screening at Cornell.

[zedz]

Fascinating (and depressing) information. I must have seen Lonesome (twice) just before the Alloy Orchestra retired it. It's a great, great film, and the Alloy Orchestra score is good too, so don't miss it Denti - or anybody else in the vicinity of a screening.

The dialogue bits are indeed clunky and redundant. MysteryPez, do you know if Fejos actually completed a silent version of the film which was then "sounded-up", or was the changeover effected in the midst of production?

[denti alligator]

I must have transgressed against the movie gods, because even though I've hardly ever NEEDED to leave town for the past 5 1/2 years, on exactlly November 10-11 I NEED to be in Chicago. Fuck!

[portnoy]

mysterypez - is this new lonesome print still officially an Eastman House print or is it a Box 5 thing? Ever since they announced the formation of Box 5, I've been curious as to what films (besides Phantom and sundry Valentino vehicles) are going to be official Box 5 releases.

[Mysterypez]

Funnily enough I just asked a colleague about the sound elements of this film. His response was he didn't know who directed them, but he bet his last name was Laemmle.

He did a little digging and found a NY Times article from August 1928 that indicates that Fejos had planned to include some kind of effects track. This article makes it appear as though the film has not even been made. However, a LA Times article from June 24th of that year reviews a sneak preview that had just taken place in the area. The review is of the silent version. Clearly the NY times article is a bit PR fluff to ready audiences for the eventual premiere in New York. In any case neither article mentions dialogue sequences. However, when the film premiered in Oct. of 1928 the film did have the dialogue scenes.

What is clear is that Fejos' next two films THE LAST PERFORMANCE and BROADWAY both had talking sequences…… and unlike LONESOME there are no stories/rumors that Fejos didn't direct them. Unfortunately for BROADWAY the final musical number has been lost. So comparing the three titles for stylistic clues is just not possible. We could always ask Barbara Kent. She is still alive. She will be 100 this year.

I don't know of anything doing with “Box 5â€

[portnoy]

[quote="Mysterypez"]I don't know of anything doing with “Box 5â€

[Mysterypez]

Oh Box 5 is just the group Ken Winokur set up for Alloy Orchestra to have their own cache of prints - I know they've got Phantom of the Opera (which I believe they actually printed from a positive from you guys) and a bunch of Valentino stuff, but it's a bit nebulous as to what the 'dozens of other films' they claim to have are.

Ahhhhhh gotcha. You can tell I don't work the contracts around here.

[Felix]

Just saw the French version of this and loved it despite a pretty crap picture. The copy I have does have an excellent score, put together by some e-tailer I suspect and it fits the film perfectly.

It does not have the colour tinting and there is no dialogue (the introduction suggests this is how it was released in France). The film is perfectly understandable without it, though it is puzzling to see the fairly long stretches when nothing appears to be happening, because they are busy saying it rather than doing it. It is a good example of what was lost with sound ("Film should be about more than pictures of people talking," Hitchcock, probably misquoted.) I should say sound, as in talkies, rather than sound per se, that was a very different matter.

I am sure I am just an old softie but the ending was so wonderful and life affirming it had me in tears.

More than a little of The Crowd and Sunrise about it, but the film it most reminded me of, as they kept looking for and failing to find each other, was a far later film, Lovers Of The Arctic Circle.

IMDB reports a restored version in 1999 which makes one wonder whether this one will see the light of day or not. We really need it out in a good print but for anyone tempted by the less than stellar ones going around I would say it is worth it at the right price (E-bay, not Facets, prices).

[Mysterypez]

Glad to see this old chestnut of a topic bubble up to the top.

Happy to write that we have secured funding for a complete restoration of the film. Soundtrack will be digital remastered. Titles will be remade. Image should be improved dramatically. Wish we had more money to do some digital clean up on the image. Still the total cost will be north of $60,000. Hopefully we will be done by next summer or early fall.

[denti alligator]

Glad to see this old chestnut of a topic bubble up to the top.

Happy to write that we have secured funding for a complete restoration of the film. Soundtrack will be digital remastered. Titles will be remade. Image should be improved dramatically. Wish we had more money to do some digital clean up on the image. Still the total cost will be north of $60,000. Hopefully we will be done by next summer or early fall.

Can we expect a Kino release thereafter?

[Mysterypez]

Currently, there are no plans for a DVD release. As Lonesome is still under copyright we have very little say in the matter of a DVD release.

[mikeohhh]

Wow, why did I not bump this thread when I actually did see this, spring 2007 at the National Gallery of Art in Washington, DC. What an incredible film! Every bit the equal to Sunrise, the photography is magnificent and the editing has an exhilarating Vertov-like quality. Because the silent film just flies by with pixie-dust romanticism, the sound sequences seem that much more clunky. This being the first silent/talkie hybrid I'd ever seen, I was amazed at how much WORSE those scenes were than even the parodies from Singin' in the Rain! One might even be tempted to think of the talkie scenes as some sort of intentional sabotage or self-aware parody, as though Fejos is saying "Are we really doing this?" Apparently this was Universal's first sound picture, the microphones on loan from Paramount or Warners for a week or so.

But what was most amazing about Lonesome was that the entire audience LOVED it!! It was a Sunday afternoon at a busy DC museum packed with tourists on an absolutely beautiful spring day and this was a free movie, so let's get one thing out of the way: this was NOT a crowd of strictly died-in-the-wool cineastes. Lots of families with young children taking in the film as part of their visit to the museum, couples on dates who I doubt would come back later that week for the Czech Modernism series (full disclosure: neither did I), and of course, our favorite fellow filmgoers, well-intentioned but ill-informed retirees. But yeah, everyone was totally into it! I mean, yes, people laughed at the clunky talkie parts and the make-cute ending but I laughed at those parts too. People were taking this 80 year old film at face value and couldn't get enough! And neither could I. Make with the DVD, folks!!

[myrnaloyisdope]

Ok, so I just watched this film a couple days ago and was floored. I'm just curious to learn a bit more about the sound sequences.

My copy is a shitty bootleg from a torrent, and doesn't have any talking sequences, but does have some sound added in, notably an alarm clock, the carnival ambiance, and an actual recording of "I'll be loving you always" being sung. The music used on my copy abruptly cuts out at some points, mainly when a scene changes.

So who can tell what's up with my copy?

[HerrSchreck]

I know the torrent you're talking about-- I've seen you there on the site-- I can pretty much guarantee you that that .avi version has sound effects added, that are not native to the original Movietone version. And yes the movie is of course a knockout.

...and it has Barabara Kent, who is cute as a button. I first fell for her charms in the incredibly bad Chinatown After Dark.

[Saturnome]

Anyone knows about The Last Moment, the director's other 1928 film? One of the most intriguing lost film I've read about. Given the greatness of Lonesome, it saddens me even more.

[zedz]

Ok, so I just watched this film a couple days ago and was floored. I'm just curious to learn a bit more about the sound sequences.

My experience with the film was seeing it (twice) accompanied by the Alloy Orchestra, but they preserved the talking sequence and were meticulous in following the obvious cues for sound effects, such as syncing up the various renditions of 'Always'. As I recall, there's only one talkie sequence, with the couple on the crowded beach, and it's by far the weakest scene in the film: static and stilted. It looks like it was filmed at a different time, perhaps even by different people, and had no particular importance in furthering the story. It looked like a classic example of a talkie scene being added after the film was finished just to capitalise on the craze. If the copy you've seen doesn't have that sequence, you haven't missed much. (But it sounds like you might have missed a lot in other respects!)

[Mysterypez]

As I recall, there's only one talkie sequence, with the couple on the crowded beach, and it's by far the weakest scene in the film: static and stilted. It looks like it was filmed at a different time, perhaps even by different people, and had no particular importance in furthering the story. It looked like a classic example of a talkie scene being added after the film was finished just to capitalise on the craze. If the copy you've seen doesn't have that sequence, you haven't missed much. (But it sounds like you might have missed a lot in other respects!)

There are three talking sequences. Two on the beach within a couple minutes of each. The second sequence is tinted. A third near the end, after the roller coaster. Jim has been 'arrested' and is standing before a Police Sargent trying to explain why he was rushing to Mary's side. Altogether there is only about 3 and half minutes of dialogue. Fejos had nothing to do with these sequences.