Great Directors Made Small #4

Hal Ashby and his big brother.

Nick Dawson’s recent bio, Hal Ashby, Life of a Hollywood Rebel seems pretty good — it tells the story of the troubled editor-turned-director in what seems a fairly even-handed way, sympathetic to Ashby but also admitting his weaknesses and moments of cruelty.

However, I was slightly alarmed by a passage dealing with Ashby’s work as a junior editor for William Wyler on THE BIG COUNTRY (I know, it’s a strange meeting of talents, but Wyler was actually a big personal influence on Ashby)…

“When the film previewed in San Francisco, he was one of the few not brought along by Wyler, but he nevertheless paid his own way to attend the screening. Wyler was so impressed that Ashby was there that he had his expenses reimbursed. Everybody settled down to watch the film, and all was going well until, about an hour or so into the film, one of the reels went out of sync. It took a group of nervous editors almost ten minutes to rethread the negative and sort out the problem, by which time, as Ashby recalled, “a lot of people had come out to the popcorn stand to get candy and popcorn and so forth. And when they started the picture back up again, there was Willy running around in the lobby saying to people, ‘The picture’s started again, the picture’s started again,’ forcing them back into the theater! There was no question about it: he wasn’t polite, he was just grabbing them and throwing them back in! It was hysterical.”

It’s a nice anecdote, but what strikes me about Dawson’s telling of it is the blithe technical ignorance he displays. What would the negative be doing in the projection room? Does he have any idea what you would see if you projected a negative? You would see a negative! And you really wouldn’t want to risk your negative under such conditions, even if for some crazy idea you fancied previewing the film with all the colours reversed.

This kind of thing in film bios rather irks me, and puts me off because how, if you don’t understand the difference between a neg and a print, are you going to be able to talk about Ashby’s actual work as an editor, or even as a director? It certainly seems like a moderate amount of grounding in film language would help.

Incidentally, I used to wonder how a film could go out of sync when the sound was printed right on the print, in that optical film stripe ~

The answer lies in the loop. First, it’s important to understand that the sound is already out of sync — due to the impossibility of reading sound from a frame of film passing in front of the projector beam (I assume there’s just no room, plus the heat of the lamp might be deleterious to a sound head), the sound is printed several frames off, so that one frame is passing over the sound head to have the soundtrack read, while the corresponding frame of picture is passing through the gate and being blasted with light.

Meanwhile, there is the loop, literally a loose loop of film between the sound drum and the gate, a little quantity of excess that’s designed to stop the film tearing if it momentarily snags anywhere along the way. The trouble is, if the film does snag, the loop can shrink or disappear, which has the effect of moving the sound out of sync. The frame being projected would now be up to half a second closer to the frame whose soundtrack is being read. That’s enough to be very noticeable whenever a a character onscreen talks or slams a car door. (Dawson is quite correct in his use of the world “rethreaded” for the solution to this problem.)

This stuff might or might not strike you as interesting, but none of it is inherently hard to grasp, and anybody writing a book about an editor’s life might want to make a point of understanding some of it…

Advertisement

15 Responses to “Great Directors Made Small #4”

  1. Very readable biography of a fascinating talent. Didn’t notice the neg error, which galls me. I liked how his research helped discover the original cut of ‘Lookin’ to Get Out’, even if the film is pretty much unwatchable either way… and the Ashby/Jewison bromance was touching, to say the least.

  2. Yes, there’s some very good work there. Lookin’ to Get Out is certainly flawed and kind of hard to take, but I found it interesting and ALMOST good in places. I think the big mistake was trying to force it to be funny.

  3. Nowadays a trend in film studies pay careful attention to detailed analysis of production processes, so certainly blunders like this won’t be taken to kindly.

    Tag Gallagher’s and Chris Fujiwara’s books in particular take to this, although they aren’t exactly mainstream.

    That anecdote is quite poignant, poor Willy Wyler, trying to get the audience in the mood for a preview(although chucking them in isn’t going to create any favorable atmosphere for them to ruminate on their thoughts of the film).

  4. I knew about that problem when I was in elementary school. We had 16mm projectors and I was one of the few kids who was capable of running it because I understood what the loops were for, and I noticed the lamp for the sound drum (it sometimes burned out, which would end our film if we didn’t have a replacement on hand) was a number of sprockets away from the image in the gate. The better projectors we had, had a semi-automatic way of resizing the loops, though we never had those expensive self-feeding projectors. Remembering those loops helped a lot when I learned to thread a 16mm cine camera.

  5. What does the book have to say about Ashby maudit masterpeice Second-Hand Hearts?

    Ashby is the director everybody forgets about when the blather that the 70′s was “THE Greatest.” He wasn’t an autuer like Coppola, Spielberg or Marty. And while many of his films were very successful they were made for adults, not children or the “child-like” as was the case with Lucas.

    I’ve seen both cuts of Lookin’ to Get Out. Very little difference between them. It’s rather nice but nowhere near as special as The Landlord, Shampoo, The Last Detail or Being There

  6. Lookin’ to Get Out does, however, boast the motion picture debut of the current Queen of The World:

  7. I think Ashby’s modest rep is growing and he can no longer really be considered neglected. Whether Peter Biskind is due credit for that I’m not sure, but Harold and Maude, The Last Detail and Being There are all pretty strong cult items. The Landlord could certainly stand being better known, as could Road to Glory.

    Weirdly, Bob Fosse and Peter Bogdanovich are now more neglected than Ashby, it seems to me.

  8. I agree with you about Bogdanovich, but as Fosse dominates the world of musical choreography he’s scarcely forgotten.

    Incidentally I read an interview recently in which Jacques Rivette declared his admiration for Bogdanovich’s At Long Last Love

  9. Yes, the sound can’t be read in the same location as the film gate, but not necessarily because of the light. As the film passes through the gate it’s being advanced in chattering increments and held still long enough for the the shutter to open and close. The audio track needs to be running smoothly to get a constant speed over the sound head (magnetic or optical or whatever) so it has to be at least one sprocketed drive roller away from the gate.

    I always thought it interesting that the projector’s pull-down mechanism, as in a camera, is the same basic mechanical setup found in a sewing machine, and a machine gun.

    Rat-tat-tat.

  10. Don’t shoot!

    Thanks for the extra information, that makes better sense.

    Hmm, maybe that’s why Help! is dedicated to Emmanuel Singer, inventor of the sewing machine? It seems like a complete non-sequitur gag, but maybe it’s a private joke with hidden meaning.

    I long to see Second-Hand Hearts — the new book gives it short shrift but that sequence looks fascinating.

    Just got a passable copy of At Long Last Love, so I must revisit it and see if an injustice has been done. I remember thinking it was mildly pleasing but didn’t quite work, but it seemed far from being the catastrophe described by the awful likes of Michael Medved.

  11. Michael Medved is John the Baptist to Glenn Beck’s Anti-Christ.

    Somehow I’m not surprised te Ashby book gives Second-Hand Hearts short shrift. It has been a long ongoing project of mine to recuse that great film from the ashcan. The current meme would have it that Lookin’ to Get Out the great overlooked Ashby. As I’ve said it’s very nice, but nothing special

    Or to put another way I’ll take Robert Blake over Jon Voight any day.

    Especially now.

    I saw At Long Last Love when it opened at Radio City Music Hall.
    While it didn’t deserve the brickbats lobbed is way it still weighs a ton. It’s the plot characters and set-ups between the numbers that fail rather than the numbers themselves. And Cybill Sheperd is utterly devoid of charm.

  12. Christopher Says:

    ..I can’t think of a bad performance I’ve seen out of Robert Blake(comes with many years in the business),While several of his films might not be anything special,He always comes thru…I miss seeing him up there on the Large..and small screen..Madeline Kahn too :o(

  13. Maybe with Dennis Hopper ill somebody will cast Blake again. Would make a good project for QT to undertake — the rehabilitation of a great actor.

    The Ashby book suggests that Blake’s performance is the problem in Second-Hand Hearts, which I find hard to believe. Although a lack of chemistry between Blake and Harris would be possible, given their on-set tensions. But such hatreds often give rise to electrifying performances.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 105 other followers