York critical preview. The studio enigmatically claimed they de­ layed the release out of reverence for President Reagan, who had
just been shot by John Hinckley! GLEN OR GLENDA? did finally reach the screen in a belated, barely advertised, commercially weak May 1 opening at the Quad Cinemas downtown, where (one can easily follow their thinking) the film ultimately belonged. Getting back to the present...
The foreboding undertones of the recent corporate maneuvers to squelch the independent video circuit were lightened somewhat by the sudden appearance of the film (35mm prints struck from a version of GLEN OR GLENDA? entitled I LED TWO LIVES) in theatres hoping to capitalize on ED WOOD’S publicity. A proper reappraisal of the film and a de­ luxe video release, one hoped, would be the next logical step. Nope. No sooner had the film
been booked in numerous cities than Paramount’s legal depart­ ment informed its theatrical arm that, although they owned copy­ right on the film, their distribu­ tion rights had lapsed after ten years (in 1991) and that no fur­ ther bookings could be taken (re­ sulting in the cancellation of a pair of smaller dates in Atlanta and Tampa). It turns out the property’s earnings were so slim during the past decade that Para­ mount had opted not to renew the contract. (Jpon this revelation, it
seemed likely that the film was destined to vanish into legal oblivion, regardless of the at­ tention Ed Wood was earning from his illegitimate $ 18-mil- lion namesake. But just when all hope of a
proper presentation of GLEN OR GLENDA? seemed lost, out comes independent producer/ distributor Wade Williams, who has pursued and obtained
formal distribution rights to such Wood films as PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE, JAIL BAIT and NIGHT OF THE GHOULS. Will­ iams announced that he has signed a contract withGLEN OR GLENDA? s original producer, George Weiss, for full distribu­ tion rights and is negotiating with several companies for a video release (the definitive ver­ sion, he claims, mastered from original camera negatives). Until the deluxe GLEN OR
GLENDA? hits the shelves, how­ ever, watchdogs will have to bay at a blank screen... although it should be noted that a pack of Gotham entrepreneurs have been spotted filling the void with an impromptu sidewalk stand outside the Village East Cinema, covertly hocking double feature videocassettes of PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE and GLEN OR GLENDA? to patrons exiting the Burton film. The “never-say-die” spirit of
Ed Wood lives on, after all. —Bret Wood
Mayhem See American Movie Classics con­
tinues to present a number of their monthly offerings in the letterbox format, including an increasing number of films un­ available in that format on tape or disc. Foremost among the recent
titles were Frank Tashlin’s THE GIRL CAN’T HELP IT (1955), Cornel Wilde’s THE NAKED PREY ( 1966), and John Franken- heimer’s terrifying SECONDS (1965), which has never been released on video in any form. Of these three titles, THE NAKED PREY fared best, looking far crisper and more colorful than the Paramount Home Video release, and also containing ap­ proximately two additional min­ utes of violence and nudity.
Unfortunately, THE GIRL CAN’T HELP IT (which pokes fun at its Cinemascope framing, thus mak­ ing the widescreen format essen­ tial) was not shown in stereo, as it was originally presented on Key Video in the mid-’80s. SECONDS looked terrific, but for some rea­ son, AMC failed to differentiate between its pan&scan and letter- boxed presentations in their TV GÜIDE listings. (We missed it, too.) As much as we admire and
appreciate AMC’s enlightened policy of showing letterboxed transfers, we continue to notice them presenting some newer titles in edited-for-TV versions, without acknowledgement. For example, Peter Bogdanovich’s PAPER MOON (1973) was re­ cently shown with all of Tatum O’Neal’s Oscar-winning profan­ ity redubbed. (Try to make sense of Ryan O’Neal’s shocked expres­ sion when Tatum asks for the keys to the “outhouse” !) Like­ wise, Peter Yates’ modern noir THE FRIENDS OF EDDIE COYLE (1973) unreeled with passages of comparatively innocuous dia­ logue (“Quit fartin’ around...”) cut out. Therefore, if a movie was made after 1968, AMC is not the place to see (or tape) it. It’s excusable when a com­
mercial cable network—Bravo, for example—edits their films for adult language and sexual con­ tent, because their program­ ming is supplied free to most viewers and they are required to attract the largest audience pos­ sible for their paid advertisers. While AMC is a free cable ser­ vice, it is not a commercial net­ work. Furthermore, AMC is fond of portraying itself as a torch- bearer for Hollywood history and film preservation, which makes their unacknowledged reliance on bastardized TV prints all the more hypocritical. Last October, AMC’s “Sec­ ond Annual Salute to Film
5
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84