'2001' intermission ; does this bother anyone but me?
#26
DVD Talk Hero
Remember that the original cut of the film was 20 minutes longer. That's 160 minutes + the 10 min overture/intermission/exit music and you're nearing 3 hours. My guess is that Kubrick had intended the intermission for the original cut but that it was left intact for the revised version. Here's some interesting tidbits about this:
http://www.in70mm.com/news/2004/2001/release.htm
Perhaps most interesting is that following several film critics bemoaning the slow pace of the film and excessive running time, Kubrick — perhaps reluctantly — cut about 20 minutes from the film (and added some location ID titles). Variety’s film review noted MGM’s initial print order for “2001” being just over 100, prompting some to wonder: if all of those (expensive) prints had been struck from a two and one-half-hour-plus negative prior to the revisions, did the studio order new replacement prints from the re-cut negative, or was each print that had already been struck physically re-cut by a projectionist or studio representative to conform to the new, shorter negative?
A contemporary audience may think that making changes to a film is a recent phenomenon. It was common in previous decades (just not as widely publicized), and, in the case of roadshows, it was not uncommon for films to be shortened during their transition from reserved seat run to general release. Some roadshow releases, however, including the classics “Lawrence Of Arabia” (1962) and “Doctor Zhivago” (1965), were shortened during the initial hard ticket, reserved seat release. What makes the changes interesting in the case of “2001” is that it appears, at least initially, that the film was not re-printed. Rather, the changes were made directly on each already-struck print.
One may wonder how many days and in which cities audiences saw the original cut before being replaced with the shorter version. Given the production timeline and the distribution sequence, it appears that the initial three cities in which the film was publicly screened — Washington D.C., New York, and Los Angeles — began showing the original-length version. The book “The Making Of 2001” cites the shortened cut appearing for the first time on 6 April 1968. Variety, however, reported in a 17 April article that the original three cities, plus Boston, started their runs with the long version. If Boston indeed initiated their engagement with the long version, it is conceivable that the other few engagements that began on the same day as Boston (10 April; see engagement list) also showed the long cut to a paying audience before being replaced with the revised edition. (A film review published in the Harvard Crimson included a reference to the Boston Cinerama Theatre’s print having been physically altered, referring to it as a “splice-ridden rough-cut”.)
Some might ponder how the press would have reacted to the film had they been shown the tightened, revised edition. During this age of director’s cuts and deleted scenes — special features popular on the DVD format — “2001: A Space Odyssey” continues to be seen today only in its shorter 149-minute edition. (The running time is 139 minutes plus about ten minutes of roadshow components: overture, intermission, exit music.)
A contemporary audience may think that making changes to a film is a recent phenomenon. It was common in previous decades (just not as widely publicized), and, in the case of roadshows, it was not uncommon for films to be shortened during their transition from reserved seat run to general release. Some roadshow releases, however, including the classics “Lawrence Of Arabia” (1962) and “Doctor Zhivago” (1965), were shortened during the initial hard ticket, reserved seat release. What makes the changes interesting in the case of “2001” is that it appears, at least initially, that the film was not re-printed. Rather, the changes were made directly on each already-struck print.
One may wonder how many days and in which cities audiences saw the original cut before being replaced with the shorter version. Given the production timeline and the distribution sequence, it appears that the initial three cities in which the film was publicly screened — Washington D.C., New York, and Los Angeles — began showing the original-length version. The book “The Making Of 2001” cites the shortened cut appearing for the first time on 6 April 1968. Variety, however, reported in a 17 April article that the original three cities, plus Boston, started their runs with the long version. If Boston indeed initiated their engagement with the long version, it is conceivable that the other few engagements that began on the same day as Boston (10 April; see engagement list) also showed the long cut to a paying audience before being replaced with the revised edition. (A film review published in the Harvard Crimson included a reference to the Boston Cinerama Theatre’s print having been physically altered, referring to it as a “splice-ridden rough-cut”.)
Some might ponder how the press would have reacted to the film had they been shown the tightened, revised edition. During this age of director’s cuts and deleted scenes — special features popular on the DVD format — “2001: A Space Odyssey” continues to be seen today only in its shorter 149-minute edition. (The running time is 139 minutes plus about ten minutes of roadshow components: overture, intermission, exit music.)
Last edited by eXcentris; 06-04-06 at 05:04 PM.
#27
Emeritus Reviewer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TheKing
Paint Your Wagon is a single sided, one disc film, and has an intermission.
Originally Posted by William Fuld
Add Heaven's Gate to the list.
Originally Posted by The Valeyard
That last DVD edition of West Side Story (The Limited Edition) had an intermission.
#28
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vichy America
Posts: 13,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hondo also has an intermission, and that's not even 80 minutes. (I believe all 3D movies required an intermission since both projectors were in use simulateously, but Hondo is the only disc I've seen that includes it.)
And 2001 didn't have an intermission on VHS (unless you count the "star gate" sequence).
And 2001 didn't have an intermission on VHS (unless you count the "star gate" sequence).
#30
DVD Talk Limited Edition
So what is shown during the intermission? Music played or is it just a blank screen? If it is only a couple of minutes as stated above, it isn't the length that it was in the theaters so it it isn't the true intermission anyways so they should only have it in there for 10 seconds. Personally, if the intermission does nothing for the story, might as well cut it out since it nothing more than a glorified extra-long camera angle/scene change that adds nothing.
#31
DVD Talk Special Edition
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by resinrats
So what is shown during the intermission? Music played or is it just a blank screen?
While it plays I usually have the mental image of Montgometry Burns in a green field singing "let's all go to the lobby, let's all go to the lobby, let's all go to the lobby, and get ourselves a treat!" Which, like, TOTALLY ruins the mood of the film for me. I really should try and stop doing that.
ETA: I just checked the DVD; it runs from 87:17 to 90:00. (2:43)
Last edited by wergo; 06-05-06 at 01:12 AM.
#32
Banned by request
The old release of Patton (I don't know about the current Fox Cinema Classics release) is on one disc and contains an intermission, if I remember correctly.
I've seen 2001 on cable, on home video, on DVD, on 35mm, and on 70mm, and the film definitely flows better with the intermission. Going right from HAL overseeing the conversation to the next segment is jarring, especially considering the next space sequence is in and of itself jarring in its sound design.
In its current version, the film may not feel long enough lengthwise to justify an intermission, but considering the content of each portion, I think it makes perfect sense.
I've seen 2001 on cable, on home video, on DVD, on 35mm, and on 70mm, and the film definitely flows better with the intermission. Going right from HAL overseeing the conversation to the next segment is jarring, especially considering the next space sequence is in and of itself jarring in its sound design.
In its current version, the film may not feel long enough lengthwise to justify an intermission, but considering the content of each portion, I think it makes perfect sense.
#33
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
It could be possible that, as has been mentioned, the intermission was meant to accommodate a longer version of the film.
On a separate note, does anyone know if the 20 excised minutes from 2001 still survive?
On a separate note, does anyone know if the 20 excised minutes from 2001 still survive?
#34
Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London, U.K.
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intermissions on DVDs give a misleading impression of how an intermission took place in theaters. As the Intermission title card appeared on the screen the curtains would close. The house lights then come up and there was about a 10 minute break. A bell would usually ring in the foyer to indicate that the second part of the film was about to start. The Intermission music (more correctly this music should be referred to as the Entr'Acte music, as it sometimes is) would then begin; the house lights would gradually dim and as the music ends the house lights would go out completely and the curtains would then open. Most of the audience were largely unaware of the music because they were talking and eating until the house lights darkened. The Intermission/Entr'Acte music soundtrack was an integral part of the film print although there was no image on the film and of course nothing was projected on the screen.
Last edited by vanmunchen; 06-05-06 at 05:15 AM.
#35
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: On the penis chair
Posts: 5,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm too young to experience movie with intermission in theatre.
Back to the original topics, I don't mind the intermission. As someone stated before, some people need a break after sometime, and prepare themselves for whats coming next.
Back to the original topics, I don't mind the intermission. As someone stated before, some people need a break after sometime, and prepare themselves for whats coming next.
#36
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Living Dead
On a separate note, does anyone know if the 20 excised minutes from 2001 still survive?
#37
Cool New Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Western Massachusetts
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by David Cornelius
This is also, I believe, the only movie on home video to have an intermission yet still fit onto one disc. Most others slpit the films over two discs, right at the intermission - so we don't notice the length. (There are a few clumsy 2-disc releases that ignore this rule, but that's another story...)
On a single disc, however (and before it, the VHS that ran the same way), a ten-minute break would be overkill. Films usually only produce a minute or so of music - the rest of the break is provided by the theater just not running anything - so having nine minutes of a blank screen would be a waste of space. The pause button works.
And GuamGuy's right - Kubrick was most likely consulted. And if it's good enough for Kubrick...
On a single disc, however (and before it, the VHS that ran the same way), a ten-minute break would be overkill. Films usually only produce a minute or so of music - the rest of the break is provided by the theater just not running anything - so having nine minutes of a blank screen would be a waste of space. The pause button works.
And GuamGuy's right - Kubrick was most likely consulted. And if it's good enough for Kubrick...
We should also remember that except for the word "intermission" that would be on the screen for a few seconds after the end of a films first act, seeing the words "overture" and "entr'acte" plastered on the screen is something that happens only for home video. Years ago when movies were first being made available for home video in their original road show versions, some people thought there was something wrong with the VHS tape because there would be just black screen and music for the first few minutes before the opening credits came up. This is why today on DVD we have title cards on screen for the whole length of the overture and entr'acte for the big road show films of the past.
#38
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Josh Z
As the story goes, Kubrick had a giant bonfire and burned all of the deleted footage because he didn't want anyone to see it again.
#39
Banned
Originally Posted by David Cornelius
This is also, I believe, the only movie on home video to have an intermission yet still fit onto one disc. Most others slpit the films over two discs, right at the intermission - so we don't notice the length. (There are a few clumsy 2-disc releases that ignore this rule, but that's another story...)
On a single disc, however (and before it, the VHS that ran the same way), a ten-minute break would be overkill. Films usually only produce a minute or so of music - the rest of the break is provided by the theater just not running anything - so having nine minutes of a blank screen would be a waste of space. The pause button works.
And GuamGuy's right - Kubrick was most likely consulted. And if it's good enough for Kubrick...
On a single disc, however (and before it, the VHS that ran the same way), a ten-minute break would be overkill. Films usually only produce a minute or so of music - the rest of the break is provided by the theater just not running anything - so having nine minutes of a blank screen would be a waste of space. The pause button works.
And GuamGuy's right - Kubrick was most likely consulted. And if it's good enough for Kubrick...
Here's a single disc release of Lawrence of Arabia:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...v=glance&s=dvd
#41
DVD Talk Special Edition
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But that's the larger question I'm asking; IS THIS how Kubrick intended it? Was it originally included for organic artistic reasons or for commercial reasons? Is including it keeping the film faithful to its original conception or simply continuing an intrusion demanded by the (now obsolete) rules of the marketplace?
To me, this doesn't seem much different from producers of TV shows who know in advance that they'll be required on initial broadcasts to include commercials and add a "previously on" tag for potential viewers who might not have seen or may have forgotten earlier episodes, but that doesn't mean I (or the producers/writers/directors) want either on a whole TV season DVD set.
Two and a half minutes does NOT replicate the original theatrical presentation, and all DVD players have a "pause" function.
To me, this doesn't seem much different from producers of TV shows who know in advance that they'll be required on initial broadcasts to include commercials and add a "previously on" tag for potential viewers who might not have seen or may have forgotten earlier episodes, but that doesn't mean I (or the producers/writers/directors) want either on a whole TV season DVD set.
Two and a half minutes does NOT replicate the original theatrical presentation, and all DVD players have a "pause" function.
#42
Emeritus Reviewer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by grundle
Here's a single disc release of Lawrence of Arabia:
As for overtures/entr'actes... Would you prefer a blank screen, a single title card, or (as has been used before) photo montages to play out while the music runs?
A side story: a (now defunct) theater in town that ran only classic films used to run an intermission during every movie, whether or not they had one. They would just find a serviceable spot during reel changes and slap on a break. While it was great to stretch one's legs and see the old "Let's all go to the lobby" bit every week, it was also a bit of a pain - during A Night At the Opera, for example, the reel change came right in the middle of a key scene, which was clumsily split in two by the theater.
#43
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Originally Posted by wergo
But that's the larger question I'm asking; IS THIS how Kubrick intended it?
Originally Posted by wergo
Was it originally included for organic artistic reasons or for commercial reasons?
Originally Posted by wergo
Is including it keeping the film faithful to its original conception or simply continuing an intrusion demanded by the (now obsolete) rules of the marketplace?
Not saying it couldn't be done, just that it hasn't. Might make for an interesting viewing experience.
Depending on circumstances (at a theater vs. at the home), one may feel an intermission is absolutely necessary and I wouldn't argue against that. Both times I saw Jackson's Kong in a theater, I had to hit the men's room during the film, which is something I never have to do. Based on my experience at the theater, Kong could have used an intermission.
#44
Senior Member
On the DVD of The Godfather, Part II, the film is split over two discs at the point where, according to Coppola on his commentary, there was originally supposed to be an intermission.
Apparently the plans were scrapped for one just before wide release. Does anyone recall an intermission for GFII, perchance?
Apparently the plans were scrapped for one just before wide release. Does anyone recall an intermission for GFII, perchance?
#45
Banned by request
Considering that Kubrick did not include an intermission in Barry Lyndon, which is longer than 2001, I would say that the choice of putting in an intermission was his, and if he didn't weigh in on the idea of an intermission for the DVD, then we should just respect his decision for it to be there in the first place.
#46
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Exit 10, NJ
Posts: 2,751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GeorgeP
On the DVD of The Godfather, Part II, the film is split over two discs at the point where, according to Coppola on his commentary, there was originally supposed to be an intermission.
Apparently the plans were scrapped for one just before wide release. Does anyone recall an intermission for GFII, perchance?
Apparently the plans were scrapped for one just before wide release. Does anyone recall an intermission for GFII, perchance?
#47
Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: London, U.K.
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Suprmallet
Considering that Kubrick did not include an intermission in Barry Lyndon, which is longer than 2001, I would say that the choice of putting in an intermission was his, and if he didn't weigh in on the idea of an intermission for the DVD, then we should just respect his decision for it to be there in the first place.
#48
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by vanmunchen
It's only right that Warner Bros should retain this on the DVD to replicate the theatrical presenation.
#49
Banned by request
Originally Posted by vanmunchen
Kubrick had nothing to do with the decision of having an intermission in 2001. The film was a roadshow Cinerama presentation and it would have been unheard of for a roadshow presentation not to have an intermission. It's only right that Warner Bros should retain this on the DVD to replicate the theatrical presenation. Barry Lyndon was not a roadshow presentation ( they had finished by that time) so there was no requirement by the distributor or theaters for an intermission.
#50
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the intermission served a purpose at the CINEMA-for people to get up, stretch, pee, buy snacks, something that could take 10 mins or more in a crowded theater-all that can be done at home in a jif and a pause on the remote.
Kubrick probably never imagined his film would show on TV, or home viewing, and thus, I would not be against doing away with it for home video. It seems more an intrusive anachronistic relic of a bygone era. IF done at side breaks, i could understand it.
Kubrick probably never imagined his film would show on TV, or home viewing, and thus, I would not be against doing away with it for home video. It seems more an intrusive anachronistic relic of a bygone era. IF done at side breaks, i could understand it.