Of the four versions of A Star is Born, there is no question the original version of 1937, nominated for 8 Oscars, including Best Picture, stands out more proudly than its three successors. Fredric March and Janet Gaynor gave the performances of their careers up to this point, making this first version all the more memorable. Also, all four versions were shot in Technicolor. Thank you for uploading the original A Star is Born.
Absolutely not. It's visually uninteresting, has an at best serviceable first act, and criminally underdeveloped characters. The 1954 version outclasses it in every way.
Actually, the original version had 7 nominations, 1 win & 1 honorary that doesn't count. The most recent version has the most nominations (8) & 1 win. I don't think it's fair to compare them. They were made in very different eras and each appealed to different audiences. I personally like them all.
Good news, everyone! Warner Archive will officially release this film with an EXCLUSIVE NEW 4K RESTORATION FROM THE ORIGINAL NITRATE TECHNICOLOR NEGATIVES! It will be released in March!
Although the 1954 version is a real powerhouse and feels like Greek tragedy this original has it's charm. Janet Gaynor does well in the role of a lifetime. Hollywood's great spoof on Hollywood itself translates into a story and time that makes me sad and nostalgic. This is a special motion picture experience.
It is so nice to see the original walk of fame at 10:20 with Jean Harlow, Harold Lloyd and Shirley Temple. Never seen pictures of it before and it is always said that the walk of fame was established in the 50s. No source mention it.
I've never seen the original and I loved it. Many good lessons in it and her Grandmother was so wise and loved her so much and in the end it really did all work out.
I love this version. It is the most original. The others, all change from being an actress to being a singer. I understand why they changed it for Judy Garland. They wanted to use her well-known talent, singing. This is the best.
The saddest part about this movie is the version that was uncut in 1952. They cut it up so that it made no sense. Some day some lucky person,maybe a family of Jack Warner will come across the movie before they botched it up ! How proud Judy Garlands family will be,she worked so hard and they pulled it to pieces,the studio heads wanted a shorter picture !! Those fools in New York claimed it was to long. Lorna Luft (Judy’s daughter) tried so hard to find it. Someday it may happen. This version however is terrific…!
Even though the film is in the public domain, Warner bros. has the original 35 mm master elements of the film, hope they restore it and release it one day. Would be by far a better restoration than the kino Lorber version.
WB's Warner Archive Collection is indeed releasing a new restoration from the original camera negative. Official release date is March 29, but early reviews confirm your suspicion (and mine) that this restoration runs rings around Kino's.
Any movie with Natalie Kalmus in the credits, she is in charge. Nobody says action until she approves the lights. Gone with the wind, and wizard of oz, etc. She baked 'em alive under those lights.
During the production of A Star Is Born (United Artists 1937), Hal Kern, Selznick’s favorite editor, drove through the front gates of the lot and noticed how visually striking the Mansion was: There were some beautiful white billowy clouds behind the building, the lawns were a bright green, and the building itself was very imposing. So, I thought we should photograph this and use it until we got a permanent trademark. So I got Duke [Howard] Greene, the Technicolor cameraman, and we took the camera out just a little after noon, and photographed the sign close up and then swung down for a long shot of the building, and just as we did a flock of birds flew over the main building and some guy came out the front door, but we used it anyway, because of the birds.”
The actress who played Aunt Maddie at the beginning of the movie....she was also Auntie Emily (Auntie M) in The Wizard of Oz, I'm sure of it! I like the granny! She had spunk.
The rights to the 1937 version were later acquired by Warner Bros. by 1954, as they released a remake that year. WB also remade the film in 1976 and 2018. Even though it was a film in the WB library released prior to 1950, it was not included in the package of films WB sold to Associated Artists Productions (a.a.p.) in 1956, a syndicator that ironically merged with the film's original distributor, United Artists, in 1958.
Now currently owned and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures (Turner Entertainment only Co-distributed this 1937 original version), since WB remade this film many times in 1954, 1976, & 2018 (co-produced, co-financed and Co-distributed by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (since United Artists, MGM's current sister company who also produced and released this original 1937 film and the same company who brought Gone With the Wind, two years after A Star is Born was released way back in 1937)), thus, this original film still remains in public domain, because WB didn't renew copyright registration, in which the 35mm film elements is still remains with Warner Bros.
I hate to say it is what I’m going to say but if you’re able to have the perspective of a modern audience then this movie would be absolutely derided within the first 15 minutes.
Our idea of what cowboys are is a lie shaped by Hollywood. The real cowboys were just laborers. Usually Mexicans or blacks. That's why a lot of western words are Spanish. Rodeo, tornado, mesa etc. They didn't make much money. Regular folks probably thought of them like we think of homeless people, even in the 1930s.
@@wiscounter Thanks for your reply. I am reading on the history channel website that the cowboys were also Native Americans, and settlers from the East Coast and Europe as the West was settled. Nevertheless, all were hired hands.
Due to various snafus, the 1937 version's copyright wasn't renewed in 1965 as was then required by law (since repealed but not retroactively), so it entered the public domain. Warner Bros., however, successfully maintained the copyright on the underlying story it had purchased to make the 1954 film; that in turn led to WB's 1976 & 2018 remakes.
What a masterpiece!! Even if it’s 83 years old now, it’s simply excellent. No wonder it’s been remade so many times!!
Of the four versions of A Star is Born, there is no question the original version of 1937, nominated for 8 Oscars, including Best Picture, stands out more proudly than its three successors. Fredric March and Janet Gaynor gave the performances of their careers up to this point, making this first version all the more memorable. Also, all four versions were shot in Technicolor. Thank you for uploading the original A Star is Born.
Absolutely not. It's visually uninteresting, has an at best serviceable first act, and criminally underdeveloped characters. The 1954 version outclasses it in every way.
Agree 100 percent that this is the best version
Id have to disagree and say that the 1954 version is the best hands down
Actually, the original version had 7 nominations, 1 win & 1 honorary that doesn't count. The most recent version has the most nominations (8) & 1 win. I don't think it's fair to compare them. They were made in very different eras and each appealed to different audiences. I personally like them all.
@Celluloidwatcher You're talking nonsense. There were FIVE versions, of which this was the second.
Of the four versions this is the best even with the limited technology of the time.
Good news, everyone! Warner Archive will officially release this film with an EXCLUSIVE NEW 4K RESTORATION FROM THE ORIGINAL NITRATE TECHNICOLOR NEGATIVES! It will be released in March!
This movie used to make Humphrey Bogart cry when he watched it. He identified with the Norman Maine character.
Although the 1954 version is a real powerhouse and feels like Greek tragedy this original has it's charm. Janet Gaynor does well in the role of a lifetime. Hollywood's great spoof on Hollywood itself translates into a story and time that makes me sad and nostalgic. This is a special motion picture experience.
This film is a true masterclass ever the most emotional tragedy film
It is so nice to see the original walk of fame at 10:20 with Jean Harlow, Harold Lloyd and Shirley Temple. Never seen pictures of it before and it is always said that the walk of fame was established in the 50s. No source mention it.
I've never seen the original and I loved it. Many good lessons in it and her Grandmother was so wise and loved her so much and in the end it really did all work out.
Her grandma was amazing.
Granny is awesome af in this film everybody had no faith in ester chasing going after her dreams but granny inspired her too GO 🤩🤩😍😍
I absolutely Love this first version of my favorite storyline! Thank you for uploading ❤
Love the art deco furniture, interiors, appliances etc! Very classy and looks modern too! Later styles look way “older” if you know what i mean.
I love this version. It is the most original. The others, all change from being an actress to being a singer. I understand why they changed it for Judy Garland. They wanted to use her well-known talent, singing. This is the best.
Well said 👏👏👏
@@judyalcatraz918 Thank you.
The original and by far the best version of this film.
One of my comfort films :)
Mine’s “The Bat Whispers”.
The saddest part about this movie is the version that was uncut in 1952. They cut it up so that it made no sense. Some day some lucky person,maybe a family of Jack Warner will come across the movie before they botched it up !
How proud Judy Garlands family will be,she worked so hard and they pulled it to pieces,the studio heads wanted a shorter picture !! Those fools in New York claimed it was to long. Lorna Luft (Judy’s daughter) tried so hard to find it. Someday it may happen. This version however is terrific…!
I will add this to the record when you are called listen 👂 it only comes once a lifetime. ⭐️
Real actors 🎥 movies ⭐⭐
Even though the film is in the public domain, Warner bros. has the original 35 mm master elements of the film, hope they restore it and release it one day. Would be by far a better restoration than the kino Lorber version.
WB's Warner Archive Collection is indeed releasing a new restoration from the original camera negative. Official release date is March 29, but early reviews confirm your suspicion (and mine) that this restoration runs rings around Kino's.
Thank you for this
One of the greatest movie noir ever seen
Not noir at all...
Any movie with Natalie Kalmus in the credits, she is in charge. Nobody says action until she approves the lights. Gone with the wind, and wizard of oz, etc. She baked 'em alive under those lights.
Can't believe I'm watching a 86 year old movie
During the production of A Star Is Born (United Artists 1937), Hal Kern, Selznick’s favorite editor, drove through the front gates of the lot and noticed how visually striking the Mansion was: There were some beautiful white billowy clouds behind the building, the lawns were a bright green, and the building itself was very imposing. So, I thought we should photograph this and use it until we got a permanent trademark. So I got Duke [Howard] Greene, the Technicolor cameraman, and we took the camera out just a little after noon, and photographed the sign close up and then swung down for a long shot of the building, and just as we did a flock of birds flew over the main building and some guy came out the front door, but we used it anyway, because of the birds.”
Very cool information! Thank you 😁
The actress who played Aunt Maddie at the beginning of the movie....she was also Auntie Emily (Auntie M) in The Wizard of Oz, I'm sure of it! I like the granny! She had spunk.
The scene starting at 4:33 was shown in "Creepshow" (1982) during the "Lonesome Death of Jordy Verrill" segment.
The rights to the 1937 version were later acquired by Warner Bros. by 1954, as they released a remake that year. WB also remade the film in 1976 and 2018.
Even though it was a film in the WB library released prior to 1950, it was not included in the package of films WB sold to Associated Artists Productions (a.a.p.) in 1956, a syndicator that ironically merged with the film's original distributor, United Artists, in 1958.
The actual original version of this was "What Price Hollywood?" from 1932.
I’d like to see that one too! Thank you for the information ❤
The best movie and romantic 💕
Now currently owned and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures (Turner Entertainment only Co-distributed this 1937 original version), since WB remade this film many times in 1954, 1976, & 2018 (co-produced, co-financed and Co-distributed by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (since United Artists, MGM's current sister company who also produced and released this original 1937 film and the same company who brought Gone With the Wind, two years after A Star is Born was released way back in 1937)), thus, this original film still remains in public domain, because WB didn't renew copyright registration, in which the 35mm film elements is still remains with Warner Bros.
Masterpiece!
My first ⭐ 🎥🍿 the original
I have this version on vhs!
“A lot prettier than you are” 😂
I particularly liked the early scenes at Grauman's.
I hate to say it is what I’m going to say but if you’re able to have the perspective of a modern audience then this movie would be absolutely derided within the first 15 minutes.
And if you were able to suspend your disbelief and attempt to view the film in its own context, you wouldn't make your inane commentary known.
The ipad at 1:43:43 was a great surprise.
Wonderful movie
So This Is Real Aashiqui2😂
Oh now I got it. Bollywood movie Aashiqi 2 is adapted from this. 😀
I thought so too😲😄
I liked the Judy Garland movie better because Judy was a great singer, with a powerful voice. The lady in this movie does nothing but talk.
Janet Gaynor is the first actress to have won the academy for best actress, and for 3 movies. The 1957 version was a musical remake of this one.
What paper size is that screenplay at the beginning. It looks bigger than US letter size.
Is there mention of North Dakota in this film?
Yes.
This is the only version of this film I have seen . I'm not sure I care to watch another version .
You're cheating yourself if you don't watch at least the Judy Garland version. She *was* Norman Maine.
@@CripplingDuality You mean Vicki Lester, aka Mrs. Norman Maine. James Mason was Norman Maine in the 1954 version.
Judy Garland version with James Mason is wonderful.
A star is born 1990 angelica bella
Jordy Verrill at 5:42: "No... no, no, no, no, no, no, no, NO!! NOOO!!!" 😆
Good nice beautiful
Bollywood remade this as Aashiqui 2
Why wouldn't they rent to cowboys @ 11:05
Our idea of what cowboys are is a lie shaped by Hollywood. The real cowboys were just laborers. Usually Mexicans or blacks. That's why a lot of western words are Spanish. Rodeo, tornado, mesa etc. They didn't make much money. Regular folks probably thought of them like we think of homeless people, even in the 1930s.
@@wiscounter Thanks for your reply. I am reading on the history channel website that the cowboys were also Native Americans, and settlers from the East Coast and Europe as the West was settled. Nevertheless, all were hired hands.
is this legal
yea because its passed copyright date free to use now
Due to various snafus, the 1937 version's copyright wasn't renewed in 1965 as was then required by law (since repealed but not retroactively), so it entered the public domain. Warner Bros., however, successfully maintained the copyright on the underlying story it had purchased to make the 1954 film; that in turn led to WB's 1976 & 2018 remakes.
1:01:52 will never not be funny for me
Well it's is one of those feminist film where the girl takes proud in taking her husbsnd name
Spanish subtitles, please...
Creepshow sent me.
Jordy Verrill at 5:42: "No... no, no, no, no, no, no, no, NO!! NOOO!!!"
@@christiandenault7606 Exactly!
ook