3 ms·

> I want to sell it to a serious producer who either restores it or keeps it locked away, or restores it and shows it to people for studying purposes. How is s

> I want to sell it to a serious producer who either restores it or keeps it locked away, or restores it and shows it to people for studying purposes. How is someone who "keeps it locked away" even an option if he believes it "must be seen"? This seems like the perfect candidate for going on archive.org, if the goal is for it to be preserved and for people to see it. I also find it odd that he's been screening it for friends since the 80s, yet has only shown it to 24 people.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
observationist 1y ago
Maybe he's talking about the physical medium, and not the movie - a copy of the movie should be distributed, for sure, but the film (and the vhs tape) should be kept locked away, it's a piece of history.
- reddalo 1y ago
  Call me a dreamer, but he should just make a good capture of the VHS and upload it to the Internet Archive.
  - rapidaneurism 1y ago
    But how can he sell that to 'worthy collector' ?
- al_borland 1y ago
  All original copies of all films should be properly archived. I agree with that. The fact that so many have been "lost" is why I don't think we should put our faith in these companies to be the archivists for these works.
gwbas1c 1y ago
Probably shows it to a small group of people, like 3-6, every 7-8 years.
abootstrapper 1y ago
If he stole it, how does he have the right to sell it?
- dylan604 1y ago
  he wouldn't. but eventually, it'll become part of the public domain. at that point, he could release his "work output" and own the copyright on that. that new work could be sold. i worked with someone that did this very thing of restoring copies of old films and released them on DVD
  - bawolff 1y ago
    In the us, unpublished works created before 1978 are copyrighted until 70 years after the death of the author (Sweeden might be different though). So you might be waiting a long time. > he could release his "work output" and own the copyright on that Probably not in the united States, but other countries (i know UK at the very least) this would be true. The united states requires "creative decisions" to grant copyright. Work output by itself doesn't count. You could still distribute it, you just couldn't copyright it.
    - dylan604 1y ago
      Just putting the film up on a telecine and transferring it requires creative decisions, so I'm not really sure what you're on about. You're commenting like you know what you're talking about, but you clearly are not familiar with the process. This is something I've absolutely worked on projects to do this very thing. When scanning a film print/negative, there are many decisions to be made that would make yours different than the originals. How far do you zoom in/out on each frame. Does it need pan&scan. Was it shot 4:3, but now you're transferring it to 16:9?? The color decisions will also be unique. Was it B&W, the same applies to the grade. Were there film scratches, dirt, etc that you've now removed/restored? Every single one of these decisions is a creative decisions.
      - bawolff 1y ago
IncreasePosts 1y ago
The film is interesting due to its rarity, but most likely it's not a very good film. So the only people that you might screen into are people who are interested in film history or especially interested in Jerry Lewis
dylan604 1y ago
You can find old film reels from random places. I used to work at a film post house where people would bring us film they purchased without really knowing what it was. One person scored several features from an old broadcaster from when they would actually broadcast straight from the telecine. Some of these might be in the public domain now, but most were not. A lot of them reeked of vinegar and beyond saving.
happytoexplain 1y ago
What is the minimum number of people you would expect any arbitrary person to screen a film for?? If he started with a handful and met a new one every couple years, that's "odd" to you? Why do you even have an internal concept of what that number should be?
- al_borland 1y ago
  If the movie was really good (as implied by saying they people need to see it), I’d expect the initial batch to tell some friends, and then those people to tell some friends. Some organic growth at least in his local area where people are pushing him for more showing to show friends. I don’t know what I was expected, but it was higher than 25 over 45 years.
  - Xss3 1y ago
    Organic growth? For inviting people into his home to watch a movie he obviously kept a secret?
antithesizer 1y ago
At 25 people this guy probably has the largest social circle of anyone in Sweden.
TazeTSchnitzel 1y ago
> I also find it odd that he's been screening it for friends since the 80s, yet has only shown it to 24 people. He was terrified of the consequences of too many people finding out about the theft; a lot of those views were quite recent.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

observationist 1y ago

Maybe he's talking about the physical medium, and not the movie - a copy of the movie should be distributed, for sure, but the film (and the vhs tape) should be kept locked away, it's a piece of history.

reddalo 1y ago
Call me a dreamer, but he should just make a good capture of the VHS and upload it to the Internet Archive.
- rapidaneurism 1y ago
  But how can he sell that to 'worthy collector' ?
al_borland 1y ago
All original copies of all films should be properly archived. I agree with that. The fact that so many have been "lost" is why I don't think we should put our faith in these companies to be the archivists for these works.

gwbas1c 1y ago

Probably shows it to a small group of people, like 3-6, every 7-8 years.

abootstrapper 1y ago

If he stole it, how does he have the right to sell it?

dylan604 1y ago
he wouldn't. but eventually, it'll become part of the public domain. at that point, he could release his "work output" and own the copyright on that. that new work could be sold. i worked with someone that did this very thing of restoring copies of old films and released them on DVD
- bawolff 1y ago
  In the us, unpublished works created before 1978 are copyrighted until 70 years after the death of the author (Sweeden might be different though). So you might be waiting a long time. > he could release his "work output" and own the copyright on that Probably not in the united States, but other countries (i know UK at the very least) this would be true. The united states requires "creative decisions" to grant copyright. Work output by itself doesn't count. You could still distribute it, you just couldn't copyright it.
  - dylan604 1y ago
    Just putting the film up on a telecine and transferring it requires creative decisions, so I'm not really sure what you're on about. You're commenting like you know what you're talking about, but you clearly are not familiar with the process. This is something I've absolutely worked on projects to do this very thing. When scanning a film print/negative, there are many decisions to be made that would make yours different than the originals. How far do you zoom in/out on each frame. Does it need pan&scan. Was it shot 4:3, but now you're transferring it to 16:9?? The color decisions will also be unique. Was it B&W, the same applies to the grade. Were there film scratches, dirt, etc that you've now removed/restored? Every single one of these decisions is a creative decisions.
    - bawolff 1y ago

IncreasePosts 1y ago

The film is interesting due to its rarity, but most likely it's not a very good film. So the only people that you might screen into are people who are interested in film history or especially interested in Jerry Lewis

dylan604 1y ago

You can find old film reels from random places. I used to work at a film post house where people would bring us film they purchased without really knowing what it was. One person scored several features from an old broadcaster from when they would actually broadcast straight from the telecine. Some of these might be in the public domain now, but most were not. A lot of them reeked of vinegar and beyond saving.

happytoexplain 1y ago

What is the minimum number of people you would expect any arbitrary person to screen a film for?? If he started with a handful and met a new one every couple years, that's "odd" to you? Why do you even have an internal concept of what that number should be?

al_borland 1y ago
If the movie was really good (as implied by saying they people need to see it), I’d expect the initial batch to tell some friends, and then those people to tell some friends. Some organic growth at least in his local area where people are pushing him for more showing to show friends. I don’t know what I was expected, but it was higher than 25 over 45 years.
- Xss3 1y ago
  Organic growth? For inviting people into his home to watch a movie he obviously kept a secret?

antithesizer 1y ago

At 25 people this guy probably has the largest social circle of anyone in Sweden.

TazeTSchnitzel 1y ago

> I also find it odd that he's been screening it for friends since the 80s, yet has only shown it to 24 people. He was terrified of the consequences of too many people finding out about the theft; a lot of those views were quite recent.