Let's Drink to Scholarship - Criterion's THE COMPLETE MR. ARKADIN

[rita]

very strong evidence...


http://www.criterionforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1125

[TheMcGuffin]

On that thread, Stefan annoucned, back in Feb, that his longer cut of Mr. Arkadin would be screen at Lorcano. Did this ever happen? I don't recall it being mentioned, thought the thread above is a tad outdated as we have subtle signals that Stefan's cut will be included in the Criterion set.

[Eve]

The longer cut of Mr. Arkadin was screened at Locarno - Jeff Wilson reported on it at the beginning of the "Locarno Wrap-Up" thread.

[Roger Ryan]

The "very strong evidence" is correct as far as I know...although I don't know why the one poster on the criterion forum persumes the release will happen in 2005; usually production is completed (including commentaries) several months before release. An early 2006 release sounds about right.

[TheMcGuffin]

Eve,

Thanks for correcting my oversight. I re-read Jeff's post about it. Thanks

[Harvey Chartrand]

Here is a very good article on how film writer/scholar Tim Lucas' extensive research on the different versions of MR. ARKADIN may have been overlooked in Criterion's THE COMPLETE MR. ARKADIN.

This is today's entry at Video Watchblog – http://www.videowatchdog.blogspot.com/

[Jeff Wilson]

I have often found interesting things in Video Watchdog, but recent issues, in addition to his blog, seem filled with "Look what I've done, aren't I wonderful?" comments. He may well be right that he is owed some kind of recognition, but Jesus, can he not do it in a less self-serving manner?

[Harvey Chartrand]

Tim Lucas is some kind of genius. He's spent 10 years working on a book about Mario Bava that oughtta put all other Bava books to shame. They say it might be published by 2010. And Lucas' "Book of Renfield" novel has just been optioned for the movies.

Now check out http://www.esotericrabbit.com/blog/?p=354

Matt Clayfield describes the quasi-mystical experience he had seeing CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT for the first time: "Every now and then you have an experience at the cinema that defies description, renders you shell-shocked, and makes other films - even very good ones - seem trifling and insignificant by comparison. Last night, I had one such experience, the film question being Orson Welles's remarkable Chimes at Midnight."

[Ste]

I have often found interesting things in Video Watchdog, but recent issues, in addition to his blog, seem filled with "Look what I've done, aren't I wonderful?" comments. He may well be right that he is owed some kind of recognition, but Jesus, can he not do it in a less self-serving manner?

My thoughts exactly!

As a writer myself, I have to say you just don't do this sort of thing. At best it makes one look bitter. At worst it is unprofessional. Review the disc, by all means point out any inaccuracies in the research, even refer to your own past work if you must, but don't make it the focal point of your piece. It is, as Jeff rightly states, self-serving. And, to be perfectly frank, who gives a shit?

There's too much preciousness on the Internet these days. I recently came across a UK censorship site bemoaning the fact that a similar website was poaching information from them. (The irony of this appeared to be completely lost on them.) I'm sorry, people, but this sort of archival research falls beyond the bounds of intellectual property. You don't own this sort of information. It is what it is. Once it's out there, it's free for anyone to use and abuse as they wish.

Some kind of genius, indeed!

[tonyw]

I'm in two minds about this. Yes, I can appreciate the angst at being overlooked when one has done some preliminary important research ignored by the critical establishment that can lead to a bitter response which does nobody any good. But, on the other hand, VIDEO WATCHDOG is an indispensable publication that has been going for many years that meticulously analyzes the difference between many versions of the same film that can put traditional scholarship to shame.

The problem affecting VIDEO WATCHDOG is its marginalization by the academic establishment who usually close ranks when outsiders come up with innovative research and just ignore them. I've fought for years to keep VIDEO WATCHDOG in our University Library to the amazement of a British colleague whose university library would look down its nose at this valuable publication.

Also, as we all know on this site, important work is going on by members which often puts academia to shame. But official DVD labels like Criterion and others go for the "eminent" authorities and ignore more innovatove outsiders. Personally, I think that Tim Lucas might have been a better choice than Naremore for ARKADIN. But corporations do not make these decisions.

Finally, on a personal note, I've been marginalized by one "definitive" book on a subject I and a collaborator wrote. During an interview, the authority whose work appeared a few years later stated to my former collaborator, "You were right about this" and "You were right about that." However, these recognitions never appeared in the second edition of this "definitive" book. At times, I've been irritated but have now moved on to other things, most notably my participation on this site and my pleasure in learning from others who are more knowledgeable than I am. Sometimes, bitterness at being ignored often colors what one writes, especially if one is existing outside the mainstream like Tim Lucas (and his many colleagues) but doing important work. I'm sure many people on this site might feel the same way if their work did not get the recognition it deserved.

[Ste]

It's not like he's discovered the author of Beowulf or something, though, is it?

Much as I love Welles, and while 20th Century pop culture has its place within the overall academic spectrum, let's keep things in perspective, shall we? He runs a small magazine devoted to what most people would consider to be fairly arcane movie trivia. Period. How seriously his readership takes him, people will have to decide for themselves. How seriously Mr. Lucas takes himself only he can say. (Didn't Welles have something to say about the nature of "experts" in F for Fake?)

If you are going to make a subject like film trivia your passion in life, then you really only have three options:

1. Sit in your ivory tower and keep your "valuable" information to yourself until you die. Not very productive for anyone this option.

2. Contribute to (or better still start) a small, specialist publication or website where you can share the information with other like-minded enthusiasts. You're not going to get rich this way, or particularly famous for that matter, but you will have the pleasure of seeing your name in print, and you may even be considered a "big fish in a small pond". Hello Tim Lucas!

3. Sit on the information until such time as you can publish it to great literary acclaim. This option obviously involves the most work, both in terms of research and writing ability. If you've done your job well, you might be rewarded with a media studies position at some minor college or other.

I can quite understand why university libraries might not see Video Watchdog as something worthwhile subscribing to, given their budgetary constraints.

All in all, I think Mr. Lucas has achieved exactly the right level of recognition.

[Harvey Chartrand]

Tim Lucas has provided excellent audio commentaries on several DVD releases: THE WHIP AND THE BODY, BLOOD AND BLACK LACE, BLACK SUNDAY, DANGER: DIABOLIK, etc. Audio commentary is an art form in itself, very demanding...
Lucas' essays and notes also appear on other DVD releases, such as VIDEODROME, THE CHRISTOPHER LEE COLLECTION, etc...

[Jeff Wilson]

I wouldn't be harsh on him, as he has done plenty of good work within his field, certainly worthy of recognition. My main comment related to what I perceived as a recent trend toward playing up himself, which might only be my own perception. As a former subscriber, I find Video Watchdog less and less useful these days, its main appeal to me being the lengthier pieces, rather than the short DVD reviews, which are always long out of date compared to what I can find on the Web. Plus, over time I found that I just didn't care about much of what they cover; I am not interested in the latest Jess Franco titty flick, to mention one fave there, or the various other Euro horror they specialize in. If you're into their main areaa of interest, it's a must have magazine, but I'll stick to reading it at Borders.

[Ste]

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realise he's an "artist". That changes things completely. Please accept my apologies.

[Jeff Wilson]

There is no need to rip the guy, so let's keep it civil, please.