PDA

View Full Version : Lost Footage From Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey' found!


Pages : [1] 2

Hard Panner
12-17-2010, 10:58 AM
http://www.thewrap.com/deal-central/column-post/wb-uncovers-lost-footage-kubricks-2001-space-odyssey-23309



WB Uncovers Lost Footage From Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'

By Jeff Sneider
Published: December 16, 2010 @ 4:05 pm

Warner Bros. has evidently found 17 minutes of lost footage from Stanley Kubrick's sci-fi classic "2001: A Space Odyssey" in a Kansas salt-mine vault, according to Forgotten Silver (via Slash Film and The Film Stage).

Douglas Trumbull (the film's special photographic effects supervisor) revealed the exciting news at a recent screening of "2001" in Toronto. Trumbull said he wasn't sure what the studio plans to do with the footage, which was found in pristine, "perfectly preserved" condition and is considered an important piece of movie history.

According to its IMDB page, "2001's" original running time was 160 minutes when it debuted in 1968. Kubrick subsequently removed 19 minutes, and it's presumed that this was the footage that was discovered in Kansas.

Kubrick reportedly cut the footage from "2001" because he felt it created pacing issues. The footage includes some additional footage of the "Dawn of Man" sequence, a scene in which Dave Bowman (Keir Dullea) searched for a replacement antenna part in storage, a scene where HAL severs radio communication between the "Discovery" and Frank Poole's (Gary Lockwood) pod, as well as shots of Poole's space walk before he is killed.

Trumbull and David Larson have spent years working on the documentary "2001: Beyond the Infinite -- The Making of a Masterpiece," which the studio has reportedly decided against moving forward with due to rights issues and other financial concerns.

Trumbull's presentation featured never-before-seen images that will be included in his and Larson's upcoming behind-the-scenes photo book, though it's unclear if those images were from the found footage or not.

benjaminhuf
12-17-2010, 11:23 AM
interesting stuff!

kevywevy
12-17-2010, 11:26 AM
Wow. I wouldn't be surprised though if Kubrick had some kind of "nobody touches my work, ever" clause, given the control freak he was.

Bryan
12-17-2010, 11:28 AM
Cool. Maybe next they'll miraculously find all of the models that he is said to have destroyed.

Solaris
12-17-2010, 11:31 AM
I want the pie fight sequence from Strangelove!

mdm08033
12-17-2010, 01:13 PM
Related but off topic, what about the test footage of the mechanical boy in AI Artificial Inteliigence. Allegedly Mr. Kobrick was working on this for years.

Cheers, Michael

Drew
12-17-2010, 01:18 PM
I guess I'm pretty ignorant about this stuff, but how does 14 minutes of lost
footage from one of the greatest movies ever made wind up in a Kansas salt
mine vault?

Raylinds
12-17-2010, 01:58 PM
I guess I'm pretty ignorant about this stuff, but how does 14 minutes of lost
footage from one of the greatest movies ever made wind up in a Kansas salt
mine vault?

I was wondering the same thing.

daglesj
12-17-2010, 01:58 PM
I thought this was old news and these clips were long known to exist.

I'm sure I saw the kids painting scene in a documentary a few years ago.

Black Elk
12-17-2010, 02:20 PM
I guess I'm pretty ignorant about this stuff, but how does 14 minutes of lost
footage from one of the greatest movies ever made wind up in a Kansas salt
mine vault?

Because the film studio likely has a contract with a company like Iron Mountain:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Mountain_Incorporated

SoundAdvice
12-17-2010, 02:22 PM
Wow. I wouldn't be surprised though if Kubrick had some kind of "nobody touches my work, ever" clause, given the control freak he was.

Even if true, Wifey can overule that with one signature.

nojmplease
12-17-2010, 03:14 PM
My favorite quote:

"Kubrick reportedly cut the footage from "2001" because he felt it created pacing issues."

Of all films for Kubrick to concern himself with pacing issues...

thegage
12-17-2010, 06:49 PM
My favorite quote:

"Kubrick reportedly cut the footage from "2001" because he felt it created pacing issues."

Of all films for Kubrick to concern himself with pacing issues...
One person's "boring" is another's "carefully orchestrated masterpiece."

John K.

F_C_FRANKLIN
12-17-2010, 06:53 PM
One person's "boring" is another's "carefully orchestrated masterpiece."

John K.

Amen!

darkmatter
12-17-2010, 07:06 PM
I would love to see the footage :)

Vidiot
12-17-2010, 07:25 PM
Because the film studio likely has a contract with a company like Iron Mountain...
Naaaa, they're in the underground salt mines (http://www.undergroundvaults.com/) beneath Hutchinson, Kansas. That's where most of the big-studio negatives are stored.

I was sad to see that the studio can't work out the financial arrangements to at least allow a documentary on 2001 that would show pieces of the scenes. I'm wondering who is it that wants all the money... Kubrick's estate? MGM? Somebody else?

Black Elk
12-17-2010, 07:50 PM
Naaaa, they're in the underground salt mines (http://www.undergroundvaults.com/) beneath Hutchinson, Kansas. That's where most of the big-studio negatives are stored.

Which is another company of the same ilk as Iron Mountain:

http://www.ironmountain.com/

which similarly has underground storage for film and audio assets. The point I was trying to make is that it should come as no surprise that this footage was found where it was, since studios send their assets out for storage.

Claviusb
12-17-2010, 09:20 PM
http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2010/12/17_minutes.php

Also note the first comment after the story...

His Masters Vice
12-17-2010, 09:33 PM
Naaaa, they're in the underground salt mines (http://www.undergroundvaults.com/) beneath Hutchinson, Kansas. That's where most of the big-studio negatives are stored.

I was sad to see that the studio can't work out the financial arrangements to at least allow a documentary on 2001 that would show pieces of the scenes. I'm wondering who is it that wants all the money... Kubrick's estate? MGM? Somebody else?

Warner Bros owns the rights to 2001. MGM sold off their share many years ago. Of course, I suppose that the situation for unreleased footage could be more complicated...

I was told, completely off the record mind you, by Trumbull that Warner Bros won't allow the documentary to be released because (in his opinion) they want to assemble a new Super Deluxe version of 2001. He also thinks that there is probably some other 2001 footage "out there". I've seen some of Trumbull's documentary - it's a pity it won't be released; although perhaps WB might see fit to include it as an extra on some future release of 2001.

Taurus
12-17-2010, 10:30 PM
Excuse my ignorance, but could someone define "pacing" in a movie context? Thanks! :wave:

Veech
12-17-2010, 11:52 PM
Excuse my ignorance, but could someone define "pacing" in a movie context? Thanks! :wave:

I'm no expert but pacing is all about maintaining viewer interest. If the pace is considered too slow, the viewer may get bored and cease to be entertained or engaged in the experience. Once that happens, the viewer becomes disconnected and the film fails in it's fundamental purpose.

MLutthans
12-17-2010, 11:57 PM
One person's "boring" is another's "carefully orchestrated masterpiece."

John K.

Here's my take on this, and I wish I had a really simple explanation.

When I've tried to watch 2001 on TV, I've been bored to tears, regardless of TV size. I've seen the movie 5 or 6 times on genuine Cinerama screens (as originally intended) in 70mm and once on a flat screen in 70mm, and have been utterly transfixed each time, especially on a curved screen. The bigger the better.

Matt

daglesj
12-18-2010, 03:02 AM
If Kubrick didnt want the scenes in then they are NOT essential and dont need to be edited back in.

Now if a studio cuts out scenes just to get an extra screening in a day then you know you'll need them back in so the film will actually make sense.

I remember watching the deleted scenes from Deep Blue Sea (yes not a great film) and the deleted scenes actually would have elevated the film from confused and trashy to slightly less confused and trashy.

Robert Campion
12-18-2010, 03:28 AM
So, the scenes have been there all along but Kubrick's contract is what prevents them from being seen? It doesn't surprise me. I'd like to see them, but, yeah, keep them out of the film. On another site, someone mentioned a prologue with talking heads on the subject of science. This belongs to a different set of cuts, made before the premiere. Also the "bush-baby" scene. Dunno if we'll see those.

Also, I want to see the Hospital epilogue from 'The Shining'!!!!

EddieVanHalen
12-18-2010, 04:40 AM
One person's "boring" is another's "carefully orchestrated masterpiece."

John K.

Well said, I 100% agree with that.