MovieChat Forums > The Cocoanuts (1929) Discussion > why are the prints so bad?

why are the prints so bad?

posted 17 years ago by wilsons926
11 replies | jump to latest

i like how this film has a old look to it, but some parts look like they were dragged around on asphalt. if this film was considered to be lost for years, there could not of have been too much handling of the film being done, so how can it look so bad? does film really decay that much just from sitting around?and how come noone has even tried to resored it? it is probaly in the exact condtition it was found in. you would think they would fix some of it up, but it is all terrible. i don't want them to make it look perfect. the white lines and dots add character to it. but like the jail scene, or when they first sing "when my dream comes true" just look horrible.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wilsons926 17 years ago

true. i have never heard of Devil Passkey bfore. what happened to it? anyway, my mother now has home movies from the 70's that my grandfather took of her family when she was little, that are on 8mm film. they have been in a garage for 20 years with the heat and mositure. she had just completely forgot about them. my stepgranfather just found them last year. a few of them are just terrible looking, while other reels are the clearest picture you'll ever see. but the ones that are decomposed look unfocused and dirty and have wierd spots. i know there is a difference between 35 year old, 8mm, home movies and a 70 somthing year old, 35mm film, but cocoanuts looks more like it is scratched up and handled the wrong way, then just decay alone. maybe before it was lost that reel(or the several reels we got the version we have today from)were handled badly. how come noone fixed it up? i see there are more complaints on here that the dvds look just as bad. why would they just throw it onto the dvds without trying to fix it up some? other movies from the 20's and even the 10's look great. other marx brother movies look great. why was this one just thrown together after being unavailble for so many years?

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wilsons926 17 years ago

i rember reading about that too. but almost all of their films are missing somthing. maybe one day we will get to watch the whole thing. that would be cool. for some reason, i have always wanted to see the cocoanuts in color. they do a pretty good job today, when it comes to colorization. i just wouldn't want the colorized version to become the main version

[–] Shaolin_Apu 17 years ago

Looks like the loss is irreversible. There are only excerpts remaining from many old Laurel & Hardy films.

The Apple Scruffs Corps, 05
This is a song from the show the 'muscleman'.

[–] whitelion43 17 years ago

the reason is that the old films were made of cellulose nitrate so they didn't last as it would decay. here is a link describing it http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/94/9410/film2.html

thats alright,my dog found the chainsaw

[–] MagAmbersons 16 years ago

Having watched it last night, I got the impression that the film was pieced together using three different prints: a fairly clean 35mm print with some scratches, a slightly less clean 35mm print and a poor 16mm print that was probably run repeatedly on some local TV station. I'm just happy the whole film exists.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nycruise-1 13 years ago

The reason may be that the original film negative has been lost.

So dupes have been made from prints - even 16mm since blown up to 35mm.

Maybe somewhere in Alaska or Finland, in a deep freeze somewhere, a pristine negative or even print is lying there, waiting to be found.

"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"

[–] stanleybix-1 11 years ago

Frame by frame restoration is quite a chore, and very expensive. Maybe one day we'll see a completely restored version!!

[–] franzkabuki 8 years ago

"Maybe somewhere in Alaska or Finland".

Maybe on Mars. Where were the Marx bros from, anyway?

"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan