Page 1 of 1

Nitrateville General Jackassery: Film Speeds

Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:36 pm
by Richard M Roberts
Hey, at least there was a new twist of delusional stupidity over there as I gave it a quick perusal today, apparently they now liken running silent films at the correct 24 fps to the goose-stepping latent Nazism of the Weimar Republic Germans:

http://nitrateville.com/viewtopic.php?f ... 60#p163278

What jack-offs.


RICHARD M ROBERTS

Re: Nitrateville General Jackassery: Film Speeds

Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 10:16 am
by Rob Farr
Just as there are people who cannot perceive 3-D movies and others who for whom strobe lighting risks triggering epilepsy, I am convinced that there are people who simply cannot watch undercranked motion without experiencing time/space disorientation. It doesn't matter if we painstakingly explain historical precedent. They can watch Ben Model's undercranking studies till the cows come home. They simply cannot watch undercranking without feeling as if the world they know and love has lost its temporal bearings.

At least those people who cannot abide 3-D happily watch the 2-D versions and people who cannot risk strobe lighting generally avoid discos. But the anti-undercranking crowd persists in arguing that undercranking should not exist in a rational world and must be not be tolerated in theatrical or home video. There's a simple solution: Don't watch anything made before 1930. And avoid Benny Hill at all costs.

Re: Nitrateville General Jackassery: Film Speeds

Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2015 11:44 am
by Richard M Roberts
Rob Farr wrote:Just as there are people who cannot perceive 3-D movies and others who for whom strobe lighting risks triggering epilepsy, I am convinced that there are people who simply cannot watch undercranked motion without experiencing time/space disorientation. It doesn't matter if we painstakingly explain historical precedent. They can watch Ben Model's undercranking studies till the cows come home. They simply cannot watch undercranking without feeling as if the world they know and love has lost its temporal bearings.

At least those people who cannot abide 3-D happily watch the 2-D versions and people who cannot risk strobe lighting generally avoid discos. But the anti-undercranking crowd persists in arguing that undercranking should not exist in a rational world and must be not be tolerated in theatrical or home video. There's a simple solution: Don't watch anything made before 1930. And avoid Benny Hill at all costs.




In short, there are people too stupid to be able to deal with these films as they are meant to be seen, and need them slower so they can take in the pretty pictures and make sense of it all.

They seem to populate Nitratevile, along with equally brain-dead denizens who are convinced that Silent Films had posted definite running times.


RICHARD M ROBERTS

Re: Nitrateville General Jackassery: Film Speeds

Posted: Thu Dec 24, 2015 7:39 pm
by William Ferry
Having seen plenty of silent films over the last fifty years, I confess I don't have any strong feelings one way or the other over projection speeds, with the exception of step-printing (if I'm using the correct term). Watching a Chaplin "two-reeler" that runs 26 minutes (and seems to be moving a bit faster than real life) only evokes this reaction from me: "Oh, I guess a two-reeler ISN'T limited to 20 minutes. How about that."

Generally, I don't get into arguments with people - having had enough of that with the old AMS newsgroup (and especially the Chaplin newsgroup). But I really think Real_McCoy needs to double up on his Prozac.

Re: Nitrateville General Jackassery: Film Speeds

Posted: Fri Dec 25, 2015 9:33 am
by Louie Despres
oh hell, not THIS again!

Re: Nitrateville General Jackassery: Film Speeds

Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:41 pm
by Bill Sprague
Yes, this is a very old subject. In my opinion those Video Yesteryear silent films were the worst when it came to projection speed. They had two reelers at 35 minutes

Re: Nitrateville General Jackassery: Film Speeds

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 1:55 pm
by Joe Migliore
Bill Sprague wrote:
In my opinion those Video Yesteryear silent films were the worst when it came to projection speed. They had two reelers at 35 minutes



...and Rosa Rio at the Hammond Organ!

Re: Nitrateville General Jackassery: Film Speeds

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:19 pm
by Bill Sprague
In Video Yesteryears' case , the musical scores were the best part of the film. If only they adjusted the projection speed

Re: Nitrateville General Jackassery: Film Speeds

Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 7:53 pm
by Richard M Roberts
Bill Sprague wrote:In Video Yesteryears' case , the musical scores were the best part of the film. If only they adjusted the projection speed



Yeah, Rosa Rio was a fine accompanist when the films were running at the correct faster speeds that gave her a chance to have real pacing. Video Yesteryear was definitely the worst, but far from the only ones with historically-incorrect ideas about "natural speed" in silent films.

RICHARD M ROBERTS