Exposure of a Philistine - The Coppolla Factor
I hate to be the bearer of bad news and would never go out of my way to smear someones reputation, but this is disgusting. If you consider yourself a cinephile, then read about what Francis is doing to Abel Gance's "Napoleon".
Here's a link to the full discussion and story, told by someone who knows what he's talking about:
http://www.criterionforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1414
Part of the most important post:
"Recently, Coppola’s lawyers sent a heap of threatening papers to the BFI. That the 2004 screenings DID go ahead in spite of Coppola’s threats was an encouraging sign, but any hope of further screenings or a DVD emerging has now been set back indefinitely.
Also, as the final paragraph of the latest edition of Brownlow’s book on the restoration said, a fragment of film has turned up in Denmark that may be the last existing piece of NAPOLEON that will be found. I was lucky enough to be shown this brief piece of 35mm film: it is an incredibly beautiful conclusion to an early scene. This new fragment means that a slight alteration of the existing print is necessary, along with an alteration to Davis’ score. However, whether this will be able to seen is another matter entirely. Coppola and co. are suppressing this masterpiece in a continued display of unbelievable selfishness and philistinism.
Francis Ford Coppola had been so impressed with NAPOLEON when he saw it at Telluride that he decided to fund a restoration and get his father to compose music to accompany the film. Meanwhile, Thames Television sponsored Carl Davis to write a score for the UK version of the same restoration. The new restoration was screened with Davis’ score in London in 1980. This same version was then given to Coppola and his Zoetrope Studio. In October 1981, audiences at Radio City saw the film with Carmine Coppola’s score. However, the US version of the film was not the same as the UK version. Coppola not only removed sections of the film to decrease the run-time, but also showed the film at 24 frames-per-second, instead of the correct 20 fps. Yet, despite these fundamental changes, Coppola still announced his version was “the restoration”.
Not only was the fps incorrect and the film cut down, but the tinting done by Robert Harris and Zoetrope further adds to the detriment of the Coppola version. Brownlow had kept a precisely detailed record of the original tinting patterns from the original prints he had examined. Fully aware of this, Harris and co. went ahead with their own tinting (another example of their inadequate preparation for their version). The tinting in the Coppola version alternates between unnatural, synthetic-looking colours, a washed out blue, a hideous red-pink, and violent reds and oranges. It is often over-saturated and nearly always ugly.
Other than the final triptych blue-white-red, the 1980s UK version was not tinted. The latest restoration, however, is tinted and toned using original dye-bath methods (thanks to the work of Joao Oliveira). The results are spectacular – rich, authentic colours, beautiful saturation…
"They claimed their cut version was ‘the restoration’. They decided not to take advantage of the 1983 discoveries, and the version they still distribute, to my embarrassment, has all the crudities and all the mistakes of my first effort. It must be the only case in which a restoration was heavily cut and then claimed as more of a restoration than the restoration itself.” (Brownlow, Napoleon – Abel Gance’s classic film, London: Photoplay Productions, 2004, p. 239.)
"Coppola et al.’s schemes are currently to simply stall the Brownlow/BFI version from being seen/heard/put on dvd. However, he HAS made the demand for the new footage to be given to him and Zoetrope. This demand accompanied Zoetrope’s proposal to expand Carmine Coppola’s score to fit the extended 330+ minute version. Given that Coppola’s current version and thus his current amount of music amounts to only 225 minutes, this leaves him over 100 minutes short of music. The composer of his music is also deceased. The degree of absurdity in demanding footage from people one is trying to sue simply for having that footage and wanting to show it is remarkable."
Please, please, please take some time to read the rest of La Clé du Ciel's post. This is inexcusable, modern day iconoclasm and should not be tolerated.
Also, bear in mind that I've taken samples of the thread and that to have a total grip on the story and how audacious it really is, you'll have to read the whole account.