MovieChat Forums > The Black Cat (1934) Discussion > 65 minute length?

65 minute length?

posted 15 years ago by rory-100
13 replies | jump to latest

The version I have is 59 minutes but IMDB says it's 65. Does anyone know which is right and if the longer version is available anywhere?

[–] iainhammer 14 years ago

Just to confuse things further, my Universal VHS tape says 66 mins. Haven't checked runtime on the DVD version in Universal's Lugosi Collection.

[–] Jaws67 14 years ago

I have the Lugosi Collection DVD, I just saw the film (great) and it's 65 minutes and 23 seconds to be exact.

This is a worthwhile purchase because so far I've only seen this film and Murders in the Rue Morgue and they're both among the finest of Universal Horror IMHO.

[–] rory-100 14 years ago

Great, now I've gotta find that 65 minute version. This thing is too good (and too short) to be missing 7 minutes of it!

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaryLouStalin 14 years ago

My cheapo version says 63 minutes, although the running time was slightly longer. It's a IK edition.

[–] as537 14 years ago

According to John Carradine,the movie originally ran up to 90 minutes in lenghth.The entire subplot of him being the insideman who sets the explosives got cut out,along with the more direct references to devil worship.The censors eviscerated the movie before it could even be released.David Manners was also known to complain about this happening. it's amazing the movie even woorks as well as it does.

[–] perfectpawn 13 years ago

I'm hesistant to believe this. The book "Cinema of Adventure, Romance, and Terror," by George E. Turner -- a 1989 book comprised of articles from the magazine American Cinematographer -- contains a section on "The Black Cat." Turner interviewed Ulmer's widow about these supposed "lost scenes" from "The Black Cat." Long story short: they're all hogwash. The film as it exists is the film that was shot.

[–] clore_2 12 years ago

Keep in mind that this is the same John Carradine who told interviewer Ted Newsom that he was never in a movie titled Voodoo Man. He also claimed that he turned down the role of the monster in Frankenstein and that Karloff always regretted that he accepted the role.

Karloff never said any such thing and in fact, went out of his way to say that he owed it all to the monster.

It ain't easy being green, or anything else, other than to be me

[–] megArnold 13 years ago

PAL speedup only cuts 4% off the running time, so, if the original is over 65 minutes long, the PAL version should have almost 63 minutes running time.

[–] Jumping_Elephant 12 years ago

Why is the internet archive version only 59 minutes?

*My lists: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur7367234/lists

[–] bobquack 11 years ago

Don't believe that crap about Ulmer's widow denying there were any cuts. Many other sources corroborate that the movie in its original form was too graphic, sadistic violent and perverse for those times. Universal execs were shocked when they saw the original film and ordered drastic cuts. Many scenes were reshot, having been rewritten, causing the film to be choppy and not making much sense. Because some of the scenes remained as they were and others reshot, the original meanings were mixed with the toned-down storyline. A good source I recommend is The Immortal Count by Arthur Lennig. He was a young fan of Lugosi's and knew a lot of inside details. Ulmer's widow was probably still sore at him for the affair he had with one of the crew. She is either lying or doesn't know what she's talking about.

[–] shazgwinn 10 years ago

The Lugosi doc on the Dracula Bluray mentions The Black Cat being changed and cut because of censorship reasons. The historians have no doubt their were substantial changes and cuts made to tone it down. Even in it's present form I find it a bit disturbing for such an early movie, way underrated.

[–] heelmaster2000 7 years ago

I was surprised by how much was done in such a short amount of time.