Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

TCM Broadcasting Short Version of "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World"


Mario500
 Share

Recommended Posts

Turner Classic Movies has broadcast the 159-minute version of "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" twice since September instead of the 186-minute version they had broadcast in the past. Does anyone know why they switched to broadcasting the shorter version?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=Mario500 wrote:}{quote}Turner Classic Movies has broadcast the 159-minute version of "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" twice since September instead of the 186-minute version they had broadcast in the past.

We know...you've posted about this six times in the past month, sometimes even repeating your exact same comment more than once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original "road show" version was actually 192 minutes in length with the exception of overture music and intermission music. The version released on LaserDisc was 186 minutes in length, including overture music, intermission music, and closing music.

 

As for my previous posts about this short version of the movie (I mistakenly referred to it as the 162-minute version in those previous posts), I posted only three other times about the movie. Two of those posts were under topics about the October programming schedule for TCM.

 

 

Edited by: Mario500 on Oct 30, 2012 12:56 PM (corrected post count)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I'm well aware of that...I happen to own the laserdisc, and the 183 min running time is as close as it will get without a proper restoration. It's still LONGER than the general release shorter version.

 

Looking at your posts history, you've actually posted (including the first post of this thread you started) 4 times. The "shorts" thread comment included a long paragraph about Mad World.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SonOfUniversalHorror wrote:

We know...you've posted about this six times in the past month, sometimes even repeating your exact same comment more than once.

 

SonOfUniversalHorror...are you the moderator of these boards? No? You're not? THEN SHUT UP and quit jumping on people when they start threads that you don't think are worthy of these boards. That's not your job, and looking back at YOUR posting history, this is a nasty habit you've developed -- criticizing other members for starting threads that you don't like.

 

If you don't like a thread, move on until you find one you do like. For someone with such a fun user name (I also love the classic Universal horror films), you sometimes act like a meanie.

 

You have posted in this thread at least THREE TIMES already and still don't answer the OP's question!! OP, if it makes any difference --- I would also like to know why TCM has stopped broadcasting the attempted restoration from 1991 and switched back to the general release version from 1964.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see NO such evidence in my posting history that I've done anything that you insinuate.

 

My point was that posting the same question/subject multiple times won't make the answer or solution magically appear.

 

So what if I haven't answered the OP's question yet....in one of my replies I gave relevant info regarding the different versions of the movie. What difference does it make whether I answered the question or not? You haven't done so either...for that matter, neither has anyone else.

> {quote:title=Wayne wrote:}{quote}That's not your job, and looking back at YOUR posting history, this is a nasty habit you've developed -- criticizing other members for starting threads that you don't like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=SonOfUniversalHorror wrote:}{quote}

>

> Looking at your posts history, you've actually posted (including the first post of this thread you started) 4 times. The "shorts" thread comment included a long paragraph about Mad World.

>

Pardon me for not counting my comment from earlier today about the movie under the "shorts" topic you referenced. That earlier post has been corrected.

 

As for why I posted the same message twice before about the movie, I did so to make sure someone reads the message since it was related to the relevent topics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wayne: SonOfUniversalHorror...are you the moderator of these boards? No? You're not? THEN SHUT UP and quit jumping on people...

 

LOL! I think Junior's corrections of spelling and grammar and just about everything else are rather amusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's probably just an arbitrary decision. Remember - the longer version that TCM shows is NOT the official road show. It is a hybrid cobbled together with alternate and outtakes and there is a lot of controversy over how valid this version is. I, frankly, prefer the short version. Too much of what was inserted for the "restoration" was negligible content that merely extended scenes for no real reason. One scene, where Pike talks about his landlady, is very disturbing as it adds MOTIVE to his actions. Pike works much better as a totally surreal character.

 

The only scene that this picture NEEDS is the scene with Tracy and Keaton where they set up their rendezvous. And that's still missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I agree with Ray Faiola that the shorter IAMMMMW is actually snappier than the longer version. For example, in the short version, one scene ends with Sid Caesar's character insulting Ethel Merman's character and getting beat on the head with her purse. Ending on a sight gag, (albeit a timeworn one), the scene is funny. In the longer version, the scene continues with an anticlimactic discussion between Caesar and Merman about WHY she hit him, and the fun drains away.

 

 

And as far as Buster Keaton goes, his scene is so short, that I often have to convince skeptical friends that he's even IN the movie!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}Why in the world was this shot in Cinerama? It's not like its some epic............(I know it was the flat version)... Epic length maybe........

It was not shot in Cinerama (a three camera process), but was filmed in Super Panavision 70mm and exhibited/advertised as "Cinerama". It was not, actually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...