As I watched the Branagh version of Love’s Labour’s Lost last night (a five on a scale of 1 to 10), I realized that in their efforts to make it a “forties-ish” movie they put all the credits at the beginning.
My question is, what was the first movie to decide that all of the credits should be at the end, or at least a vast majority? Movies up until the fifties just ended with “THE END”, because everything was credited up front. Who changed this and why?
jarbaby
Previously discussed in this thread. No hard-and-fast answer to the question, but the discussion indicates why it would be so difficult to pin down a single film as “the first.”
I noticed one thing that wasn’t discussed in that prior thread, and that was Orson Welles’ 1958 Touch of Evil. In one of the more disgusting examples of Bowdlerization on film, studio executives ripped the ambient soundtrack from the landmark “long take” opening sequence, dropped Henry Mancini’s credit score over top of it, and ran the goddamned credits over the shot.
Welles had specifically asked that the film start without any credits at all. Instead, the credits and the Mancini score were to be placed at the end. The new restored version of the film, which I just got on DVD, fixes that awful slight to Welles, as well as numerous other inconsistencies specifically noted in a 58-page memorandum by Welles prior to the film’s release.
Now, the question is, did the suits ruin one of the best film sequences ever made because they were sociopathic idiots, or because they had to according to some film guild regulations?
I apologize for the re-ask, Cervaise. I did a search and didn’t find this one! Very informative.
Can I still be your love slave? I know you barely know me, but good god, that telemarketer rant made me all sweaty with angry raging, lust.
And…I like movies!
jarbaby
Did you get to see it when it was re-released on the big screen? They did it only in limited markets, so not everybody got the chance. 'Twas a must-see, though. The opening shot, especially with the re-designed soundtrack (supervised, IIRC, by legendary editor Walter Murch), was very effective. And the later scene, where the Welles character strangles that guy while Janet Leigh sleeps, was far scarier and more chaotic on the big screen than the TV, with the fish-eye lens and the in-and-out close-ups.
By the way, there’s also an hour-long documentary called “Reconstructing Evil” that was shown on premium movie channel Encore along with the film. Kinda surprised they didn’t add it to the DVD.
My WAG: They didn’t get it. What Welles was doing was fairly atypical, and I figure the suits were afraid the audience would think the movie was being shown out of order. Hey, if you were a Regular Joe moviegoer in 1958, and you saw a movie that doesn’t start with credits but that has a long, complicated tracking shot through a city following a car being driven by people you haven’t yet been introduced to, you may very well have gotten up, walked out to the lobby, and told the manager that they’ve started in the middle, and to “fix” it. And when the manager says “That’s the way it’s supposed to be,” you may have harrumphed and left.
Take a number. 
Just to clarify, I didn’t ask that last question.
Yep, I sure did see it on the “big” screen, at the Cineplex Odeon in Dupont Circle. The CineOd is most notable for the structural column that sits almost in the focal point of the theatre. The screen is about ten feet wide.
But on the other hand, you’re only sitting fifteen feet away, so the effect is still good. And God save me for dissing that place. After the Biograph shut down, it’s about the last place in DC a carless film fan can go to see good indie film. I’ll take the princess, warts and all.