Film & Shorts Discussions > Random Comedy Reviews
The Gold Rush (1925) - Charlie Chaplin
NoahYoung:
I watched about half of the mK2 disc of the 1925 version last night, and it looks better than I remembered. Some online searching says it was restored in 1993 by Brownlow and Gill, so the mK2 release was not the first one. They used as many shots as possible from the 1942 version, as long as it was the same take, I believe.
Many people trash the mK2 NTSC Chaplin discs because of the 4% PAL speedup, and the "ghosting" effects caused by the conversion of PAL to NTSC. For talkies, I admit this is an issue with voice pitch, but for the silents in these sets, I think it's nitpicking. I don't notice any "ghosting."
The Criterion blu-ray that came out awhile ago is supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread, for both the 1925 and the 1942 versions. I'm not saying it's not, because I haven't seen it, but I'll repeat my mantra about blu-ray not being a panacea, and to me it is more of a placebo. I didn't buy the Chaplin mK2 discs right when they came out -- perhaps a few years later. I get annoyed that media I bought less than 20 years ago is already considered obsolete! And these were touted as the end-all and be-all when it came to Chaplin video releases!
Cineteca di Bologna supposedly did the "restoration" for Criterion, but I could not find any evidence that they did more than re-scan the film elements restored by Brownlow and Gill in 1993. If all they did was re-scan, than Cineteca di Bologna is full of Bologna! (Sorry, couldn't resist.)
I'm a purist who prefers restoration/preservation on actual film. I don't like digital "clean-up" or any other trickery. Scan the film elements and release a disc, for crying out loud.
Now if you need to scan multiple prints and are averse to splicing pieces together physically -- then fine. Splice digitally, but that's all, other than making the image the same size across different print sources, or image stabilization. But please stay away from any other enhancements! These blu-ray producers tend to enjoy tinkering with their fancy schmancy digital tools!
NoahYoung:
Here's a short video that was included on the Criterion that talks about the 2 versions and the restoration. Again, it appears that the real restoration only happened in 1993, and that the Criterion version is probably just a rescan in HD, technology which didn't exist in 1993.
https://archive.org/details/presenting-the-gold-rush
Go to 9:22. This guy Jeffrey Vance lies and says the whole world only saw the 1942 version until 1993. Funny, since earlier in the video he talks about how Raymond Roahauer exhibited the 1925 version after 1942 and long before 1993! How do these inaccurancies and contradictions make it past anyone???
I saw the 1925 version long before 1993. I saw it on TV. I saw it on 8mm. And I saw it on budget VHS labels. It was both easier and cheaper to see the silent version for years, and harder and more expensive to see the sound version! I first heard about the 1942 version around 1976 when RBC films released it on Super 8 film! And it wasn't cheap! (I now have a copy!)
You can see the whole 1925 version of the film here:
https://archive.org/details/the_gold_rush_1925_720p/the_gold_rush_1925_1080p.mp4
A general comment about what you read or hear anywhere:
I know those statements made by Vance were innacurate because I saw the 1925 version many times before 1993. Now what about anything I read or hear on any subject, or current events, that I don't have prior knowledge about? How do I know that anything I hear or read about those kind of things are accurate? Think about it.
NoahYoung:
Check this out:
https://alt.movies.silent.narkive.com/sh9Qsi6J/gold-rush-on-tcm
Among other things, it says:
--- Quote ---Paul Killiam's 1970s restoration of the 1925 GOLD RUSH, with a William Perry
piano score, has played TCM multiple times, including the Sunday Silents
slot, and always in B/W.
--- End quote ---
So that's more evidence that this Jeffrey Vance character doesn't know what he's talking about!
Apparently, he worked as an archivist for the Chaplin estate, and was probably paid to stack the deck and not let on how easily available the 1925 version was after its copyright expired in the 50s and before 1993. That newsgroup discussion also mentions that Criterion themselves issued the Paul Killiam restoration of the 1925 on laserdisc!!!
(Edit: I can't find any evidence that Criterion issued THE GOLD RUSH in any form prior to the blu-ray.)
Does Criterion and Vance think we're all fools?!?!?!
See attached -- Republic laserdisc of Paul Killiam's 1925 version -- issued in 1992, copyrighted 1970. I believe that's before 1993. :o
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version