You Shouldn't Have Been That Sentimental: Film Restoration Ethics in Hitchcock's Vertigo

Q2 Arts and Humanities Journal of Information Ethics Pub Date : 2010-04-01 DOI:10.3172/JIE.19.1.57
S. Kilcoyne
{"title":"You Shouldn't Have Been That Sentimental: Film Restoration Ethics in Hitchcock's Vertigo","authors":"S. Kilcoyne","doi":"10.3172/JIE.19.1.57","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The intricacies of motion picture restoration tend to mystify the greater public. Indeed, it is not uncommon for individuals to register outright surprise that there remains any point to preserving motion picture film, as we move inexorably toward some vague digital utopia. Already we have come to covet our moving images on a small disk, a tangible commercial good to own and consume on a relatively small screen, at our convenience, in the company of our choice. We also appreciate these products for their ability to add layers to the film experience, to supplement our understanding and enjoyment with materials such as alternative endings, international versions, audio commentary tracks, and exclusive interviews. Many promise to be the definitive edition of a given film, returning the original artistic vision of the director who may have been victimized by censors, studios, or producers, with inferior or incomplete results masquerading as the final version for years. Arguments over what is the authentic version tend to play themselves out in this scenario. In other instances, the film was released as planned, but decades of travel, projection, or inadequate storage have decimated footage, leaving modern audiences to interpret a mangled text.Film restoration and preservation can encompass all of these issues and many others. It must also be noted that movies allegedly \"restored\" for DVD release may not have undergone any physical restoration or preservation of the original film elements, but were instead scanned onto a hard drive and digitally corrected. This is not simple or cheap, but it is outside the scope of this paper, which will focus exclusively on film restoration as a process ultimately acted out upon celluloid through either analog or digital techniques (Koeber, 2003).1 Practice is complex, and so is the language. Before discussing the issues we will visit the problem of terminology, so that we have a proper mapping of the terrain when considering the ethical challenges of practice, which will be the subsequent undertaking. Finally we will explore one of the more physically and ethically difficult examples in film history: the James C. Katz and Robert A. Harris 1996 restoration of Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo.Although we are principally concerned with restoration, preservation is a good concept to begin with, since the process of restoring a film often results in de facto preservation. Karen F. Gracy observes that \"in the film archives community, the meaning of preservation is mutable and elusive\" (Gracy, 2007, p. 141). Literature on the subject would indicate that she is absolutely correct, since definitions become difficult to fix when the agendas of various constituencies within the preservation community tend to overlap or compete with one another. Still, there are core practices which can be considered as preservation, and the definition supplied by the National Film Preservation Foundation (NFPF) encompasses a range of meanings while still remaining focused: \"the full continuum of activities necessary to protect the film and share the content with the public. Film preservation now embraces the concepts of film handling, duplication, storage, and access\" (NFPF, 2004, pp. 3-4). In this sense, preservation involves storing the film properly and inspecting it regularly, but also taking the necessary steps to ensure that it is duplicated onto new, preferably polyester, film stock. If there is enough money available to the preserving institution, it is excellent practice to produce an additional film negative, so that the \"preservation negative\" remains untouched in the event that further prints of the film become necessary.The NFPF also provides an excellent definition of restoration as something that \"goes beyond the physical copying of the surviving original materials and attempts to reconstruct a specific version of the film. Ideally this involves comparing all known surviving source materials, piecing together footage from these disparate sources into the order suggested by production records and exhibition history, and in some cases, enhancing image and sound to compensate for past damage\" (NFPF, 2004, pp. …","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"57-73"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Information Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.19.1.57","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The intricacies of motion picture restoration tend to mystify the greater public. Indeed, it is not uncommon for individuals to register outright surprise that there remains any point to preserving motion picture film, as we move inexorably toward some vague digital utopia. Already we have come to covet our moving images on a small disk, a tangible commercial good to own and consume on a relatively small screen, at our convenience, in the company of our choice. We also appreciate these products for their ability to add layers to the film experience, to supplement our understanding and enjoyment with materials such as alternative endings, international versions, audio commentary tracks, and exclusive interviews. Many promise to be the definitive edition of a given film, returning the original artistic vision of the director who may have been victimized by censors, studios, or producers, with inferior or incomplete results masquerading as the final version for years. Arguments over what is the authentic version tend to play themselves out in this scenario. In other instances, the film was released as planned, but decades of travel, projection, or inadequate storage have decimated footage, leaving modern audiences to interpret a mangled text.Film restoration and preservation can encompass all of these issues and many others. It must also be noted that movies allegedly "restored" for DVD release may not have undergone any physical restoration or preservation of the original film elements, but were instead scanned onto a hard drive and digitally corrected. This is not simple or cheap, but it is outside the scope of this paper, which will focus exclusively on film restoration as a process ultimately acted out upon celluloid through either analog or digital techniques (Koeber, 2003).1 Practice is complex, and so is the language. Before discussing the issues we will visit the problem of terminology, so that we have a proper mapping of the terrain when considering the ethical challenges of practice, which will be the subsequent undertaking. Finally we will explore one of the more physically and ethically difficult examples in film history: the James C. Katz and Robert A. Harris 1996 restoration of Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo.Although we are principally concerned with restoration, preservation is a good concept to begin with, since the process of restoring a film often results in de facto preservation. Karen F. Gracy observes that "in the film archives community, the meaning of preservation is mutable and elusive" (Gracy, 2007, p. 141). Literature on the subject would indicate that she is absolutely correct, since definitions become difficult to fix when the agendas of various constituencies within the preservation community tend to overlap or compete with one another. Still, there are core practices which can be considered as preservation, and the definition supplied by the National Film Preservation Foundation (NFPF) encompasses a range of meanings while still remaining focused: "the full continuum of activities necessary to protect the film and share the content with the public. Film preservation now embraces the concepts of film handling, duplication, storage, and access" (NFPF, 2004, pp. 3-4). In this sense, preservation involves storing the film properly and inspecting it regularly, but also taking the necessary steps to ensure that it is duplicated onto new, preferably polyester, film stock. If there is enough money available to the preserving institution, it is excellent practice to produce an additional film negative, so that the "preservation negative" remains untouched in the event that further prints of the film become necessary.The NFPF also provides an excellent definition of restoration as something that "goes beyond the physical copying of the surviving original materials and attempts to reconstruct a specific version of the film. Ideally this involves comparing all known surviving source materials, piecing together footage from these disparate sources into the order suggested by production records and exhibition history, and in some cases, enhancing image and sound to compensate for past damage" (NFPF, 2004, pp. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
你不应该那么多愁善感:希区柯克《迷魂记》中的电影修复伦理
电影修复的复杂性往往使广大公众感到困惑。事实上,当我们无情地走向某个模糊的数字乌托邦时,人们对保留电影胶片仍然有任何意义感到惊讶,这并不罕见。我们已经开始觊觎小磁盘上的动态图像,在我们方便的时候,在我们选择的陪伴下,在一个相对较小的屏幕上拥有和消费一种有形的商业商品。我们也很欣赏这些产品,因为它们为电影体验增添了层次,通过不同的结局、国际版本、音频评论和独家采访等材料补充了我们的理解和享受。许多承诺是给定电影的最终版本,回归导演最初的艺术愿景,这些导演可能受到审查机构、工作室或制片人的伤害,多年来以劣质或不完整的结果伪装成最终版本。在这种情况下,关于什么是真实版本的争论往往会上演。在其他情况下,电影按计划上映,但几十年的旅行、放映或存储不足导致镜头大量减少,让现代观众只能解读扭曲的文本。电影修复和保存可以涵盖所有这些问题和许多其他问题。还必须指出的是,所谓的“修复”为DVD发行的电影可能没有经过任何物理修复或原始电影元素的保存,而是扫描到硬盘上并进行数字校正。这既不简单也不便宜,但它超出了本文的范围,本文将专门关注电影修复作为通过模拟或数字技术最终在赛璐珞上发挥作用的过程(Koeber, 2003)练习是复杂的,语言也是。在讨论这些问题之前,我们将先讨论术语的问题,以便在考虑实践的道德挑战时,我们有一个适当的地形映射,这将是后续的工作。最后,我们将探讨电影史上一个在身体上和道德上都比较困难的例子:詹姆斯·c·卡茨和罗伯特·a·哈里斯1996年对阿尔弗雷德·希区柯克的《迷魂记》的修复。虽然我们主要关注的是修复,但保存是一个很好的概念,因为修复电影的过程通常会导致事实上的保存。Karen F. gracey观察到“在电影档案界,保存的意义是可变的和难以捉摸的”(gracey, 2007, p. 141)。关于这个主题的文献表明,她是绝对正确的,因为当保护社区内不同选区的议程往往重叠或相互竞争时,定义就很难确定。尽管如此,仍有一些核心实践可以被视为保存,国家电影保存基金会(NFPF)提供的定义包含了一系列含义,但仍然保持重点:“保护电影和与公众分享内容所必需的完整连续活动。”电影保存现在包含了电影处理、复制、存储和访问的概念”(NFPF, 2004, pp. 3-4)。从这个意义上说,保存包括妥善储存胶片和定期检查,但也采取必要的步骤,以确保它被复制到新的,最好是聚酯胶片上。如果保存机构有足够的资金,最好的做法是制作一张额外的底片,这样,在需要进一步冲洗胶卷时,“保存底片”就不会受到影响。NFPF还对修复给出了一个很好的定义,即“超越对幸存的原始材料的物理复制,并试图重建电影的特定版本”。理想情况下,这包括比较所有已知的幸存的原始材料,将这些不同来源的素材拼凑成制作记录和展览历史所建议的顺序,在某些情况下,增强图像和声音以补偿过去的损害”(NFPF, 2004, pp. ...)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Information Ethics
Journal of Information Ethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diversity Matters: Economic Inequality and Policymaking During a Pandemic A Survival Guide to the Misinformation Age: Scientific Habits of Mind Intellectual Privacy: Rethinking Civil Liberties in the Digital Age Hate Crimes in Cyberspace We Believe the Children: A Moral Panic in the 1980s
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1