MovieChat Forums > The Anniversary (1968) Discussion > Audio-Commentary on DVD

Audio-Commentary on DVD

posted 16 years ago by Harold_Robbins
2 replies | jump to latest

I'm a big fan of Audio-Commentaries on DVDs, especially if they're done well.

I have to express some disappointment with the Audio-Commentary on THE ANNIVERSARY, which I'm about half-way through. Nothing annoys me more than when the participants aren't prepared - while I'm all in favor of informality and flexibility, I also like when the parties concerned know what they're talking about (such as the delightful James Ivory/Ismael Merchant/Emma Thompson commentary on REMAINS OF THE DAY).

The A-C on THE ANNIVERSARY is by the film's writer/producer, Jimmy Sangster, its director, Roy Ward Baker, and the DVD's producer for Anchor Bay, Perry Martin. They're a congenial bunch, and Martin keeps the questions coming about the filming and working with Bette Davis (about whom Sangster is actually very uncomplimentary at first - the term "battle-axe" is empoloyed, although after that he's actually full of praise for her), but at one point when a question comes up about happened in a previous scene while they were talking, all three men admit that they haven't seen the film in years!!!

In discussing Bette Davis's love of England, Baker mentions her famous attempt to break her Warner Bros. contract which went to court there in 1936 - he mentions that she won the case and that the victory helped break the studio contract system - I suppose allowances have to be made for Baker being about 90 when the Commentary was recorded, but he obviously has Davis's case (which, as we know, she lost) confused with Olivia de Havilland's victorious one in the mid-1940s.

Do the restraints of time and budget not permit studios to check a few facts before an Audio-Commentary goes public?

By the way - the DVD transfer looks great. However, the DVD doesn't include English subtitles. Since most dialog is subdued during Audio Commentaries, I often find watching with the English subtitles very helpful, unless I've watched the film so recently that I don't need to be reminded of what's going on. In the case of THE ANNIVERSARY I last watched it 2-1/2 years ago, and so decided not to re-watch it first without the commentary - the movie only runs 95 minutes, so it probably would have been a good idea to do so.

"Stone-cold sober I find myself absolutely fascinating!"---Katharine Hepburn

[–] BillyFisher 14 years ago

Sadly, yes, it probably is a sign of time and budget restraints. I don't think commentaries are particularly cost-effective on films of comparably minor interest. This is certainly the case with most of the lesser-known Hammer films (although the presence of Bette Davis widens the audience of this film somewhat). I imagine it's a case of shipping in the commentators for, say, two or three hours, and shipping them straight out again when recording is done.

With some of these films, I think we just have to be grateful there's any commentary at all.

I've not heard the Anniversary commentary, but I've heard some very scatterbrained commentaries on other movies. In the commentary for Dr Terror's House of Horrors, for example, director Freddie Francis apparently can't remember a thing about the film, and it's full of him forgetting details, getting confused and having to be corrected by the moderator.

- - - - - - - -
www.rattiganwrites.blogspot.com
www.dictionaryofhammer.com

[–] greenbudgie 8 years ago

It's embarrassing when you listen to a DVD commentary like that of Freddie Francis on DTHOH. I have heard commentaries where a director has deliberately gainsaid a lot of what the know-it-all moderator has asked them, just to be contrary.