By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

“I’m not sure anybody has ever seen DETOUR looking so good, and it’s still one of the most revered and beloved noir classics.”

Posted Wednesday, April 25th, 2018 - Comments Off on “I’m not sure anybody has ever seen DETOUR looking so good, and it’s still one of the most revered and beloved noir classics.”
Be Sociable, Share!
THE ACADEMY FILM ARCHIVE AND THE FILM FOUNDATION PRESENT
NEW 4K RESTORATION OF EDGAR G. ULMER’S DETOUR (1945)
RESTORATION TO PREMIERE AT TCM CLASSIC FILM FESTIVAL
JANUS FILMS TO RELEASE THEATRICALLY IN FALL 2018
New York, NY. (April 25, 2018) – The Academy Film Archive and The Film Foundation, in collaboration with Cinémathèque Royale de Belgique, The Museum of Modern Art, and Cinémathèque Française, with funding from the George Lucas Family Foundation, have completed a new 4K digital restoration of Edgar G. Ulmer’s DETOUR (1945) that will premiere Thursday, April 26at the TCM Classic Film Festival in Hollywood. It will be released theatrically by Janus Films in the fall.
Added to the National Film Registry in 1992, DETOUR is a quintessential example of distinctive filmmaking on a low-budget. Now the Academy Film Archive has carefully restored the film with sources from three different countries and an innovative use of 4K digital technology.
The film noir recounts events in the life of musician Al Roberts’ (Tom Neal) through an extended flashback. On his way to join his girlfriend Sue (Claudia Drake), in Los Angeles, he hitches a ride with con man Charles Haskell (Edmund MacDonald). When Haskell mysteriously dies, Al assumes his identity, believing he will be blamed for the death if he goes to the police. Al runs into a new set of troubles when he picks up a hitchhiker, Vera (Ann Savage), who discovers the truth and uses his lies against him.
“DETOUR, shot in 14 days by Edgar G. Ulmer for $100,000, is now an acknowledged milestone in American cinema. It’s a picture about bad luck, about being down and out, about thinking you’ve hit bottom and then realizing that it’s a longer way down than you thought. The style of the picture reflects the desperate situation of the characters,” said Martin Scorsese. “For many years, it was possible to see DETOUR only in copies mastered from extremely degraded 16mm prints. Which was okay, it seemed, because it was in keeping with the spirit of the picture. Then, in the late 90s, there was a photo-chemical restoration made from far better elements, though it was still a bit rough. With this new restoration, to be able to see so much detail in the frame, in the settings and in the faces of the actors, is truly startling, and it makes for a far richer and deeper experience. In fact, watching this new restoration of DETOURmight make you feel like you’re back there in 1945, seeing the picture on opening night.”
“We’ve been looking forward to restoring DETOUR for years,” said Michael Pogorzelski, Director of the Academy Film Archive and co-supervisor of the restoration. “It’s wonderful that The Film Foundation and four archives from around the world have collaborated to make this restoration as complete and perfect as possible.”
“I’m not sure anybody has ever seen DETOUR looking so good,” said Janus Films President Peter Becker, “and it’s still one of the most revered and beloved B-movie noir classics of all time. We’ve been hoping for years that this day would come and now thanks to The Film Foundation and the Academy Film Archive we can see Edgar Ulmer’s work clearly for the first time – and it’s a revelation.”
The restoration team began by examining potential sources, including: a 35mm dupe negative from The Museum of Modern Art, which was incomplete and riddled with jump cuts; a 35mm safety composite print from the Cinémathèque Française; and a 35mm nitrate print from the Cinémathèque Royale de Belgique. That print, thought to have been made from the original camera negative, was clearly the best element in terms of image clarity, contrast, and density, but had never been considered as a source for preservation because it contained burned-in French and Flemish subtitles.
This obstacle was overcome by scanning all of the print elements to 4K, then compositing frames from the MoMA print over the matching subtitled frames from the Belgian print. Where frames from the MoMA print were missing, and in shots that contained significant movement within the frame, the subtitles were removed by dedicated and talented digital artists using digital painting techniques.
Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in MCN Curated Headlines, Movie City News, Press Releases | Comments Off on “I’m not sure anybody has ever seen DETOUR looking so good, and it’s still one of the most revered and beloved noir classics.”

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon