Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: NORTH BY NORTHWEST VistaVision?

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » NORTH BY NORTHWEST VistaVision? (Page 5)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Author

Topic: NORTH BY NORTHWEST VistaVision?

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 08-08-2002 06:53 PM

Anamorphic VistaVision does NOT refer to Technirama nor any other anamorphosis in the photography. It refers to a regular 4-perf release print using Scope sized frames but with only a 1.5 : 1 squeeze ratio for approx. 1.75 : 1 images. Projection was via a variable anamorph akin to a Panatar. This is a third type of print that was made from VistaVision negatives in addition to horizontal 8-perf or flat widescreen 4-perf. See the 2nd page of the VistaVision wing of Marty's Widescreen Museum.

| IP: Logged

Fred Georges
Master Film Handler

Posts: 257
From: Lombard, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2000

posted 08-08-2002 07:53 PM

Dear Peter, You aren't nuts. Paramount re-issued "The Ten Commandments" in 1989 in "SUPER VistaVision" which was mearly a super 35 type anamorphic blowup of the Vista Vision frame. They also struck 70mm prints that, unfortunatly, were sourced from this new 35mm Scope element rather then the VV negative. The one fun thing about these prints was the DeMille prologue. It was presented "windowboxed" at 1:37. As the Paramount logo appeared over Mt.Horub the screen opened up to Full Scope width to that great StereoPhonic Score.

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 08-08-2002 07:57 PM

Steve Kraus said: "It refers to a regular 4-perf release print using Scope sized frames but with only a 1.5 : 1 squeeze ratio for approx. 1.75 : 1 images."

Sounds like the 1.5X Anamorphic Print concept of IscoVision that Glenn Berggren demonstrated in 1982, and that I presented and demonstrated again at SMPTE recently. But even better quality, since it starts with the large VistaVision 8-perf negative.

1.5 times the light for the "flat" format, with just a change of lens and aperture plate. Would really help get better screen luminance on large screens.
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newsletters/pytlak/feb97P.shtml#p

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 08-08-2002 07:59 PM

I saw one of those 70mm prints of Ten Commandments, at the Cinerama Dome. It was badly cropped, and didn't really look very good. Then something went haywire right before the intermission, the film broke or something, image froze, and within a half second or so the print burned.

| IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 08-08-2002 08:31 PM

Did you have to pay extra for a treat like that?

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 08-08-2002 08:49 PM

I, too, saw THE TEN COMMANDMENTS while it played at the Cinerama Dome in 1990, and I agree it was a disappointing experience. Like the GONE WITH THE WIND re-release in the late-1960s and a few other 70mm repurposing efforts, this appeared to be a case of attempting to exploit the quality potential and marquee value of the 70mm format.

At least THE TEN COMMANDMENTS played at the Dome for *only* a single week which, fortunately, prevented more people from viewing the film in the less-than-desirable conditions it was presented in.

| IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-08-2002 08:59 PM

Michael Coate wrote:

quote:
At least THE TEN COMMANDMENTS played at the Dome for *only* a single week which, fortunately, prevented more people from viewing the film in the less-than-desirable conditions it was presented in.

Except for unlucky people like me who saw it in the 70mm move-over at the Bruin Theatre in Westwood and seemed to project a bit wider (scope width) than even the already badly cropped 70mm print. Ugly image, vastly inferior to the IB Technicolor print a saw as a high school student. And what WAS up with that intro? I'm sure that was originally shown in the same AR the feature was.

| IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-08-2002 09:08 PM

Claude wrote:

quote:
I cannot imagine having this image cropped during projection because it is fine the way it is.

Paramount's instructions to exhibitors was to project THE TEN COMMANDMENTS at 1.85.

| IP: Logged

Claude S. Ayakawa
Film God

Posts: 2738
From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 08-09-2002 12:26 AM

I could not understand why Paramount did not just use all of the negative area of the original VistaVision negative of "THE TEN COMMENDMENTS" when they made 70mm prints and project it as is instead of creating a pseudo wide screen film. It would have been much better than the limited 35mm horozontal VistaVision theatrical presentation during the film's premiere engagements I did not see the 70mm version but I did see newspaper advertisments in the Los Angeles Times for the film with the tag "Super VistaVision". I still remember paying big bucks for the 70mm Road Show engagement of "GONE WITH THE WIND" at Honolulu's Cinerama Theatre and walking out after forty five minutes and I am glad the 70mm version of "THE TEN COMMANDMENTS' did not play in Hawaii. Thank God!!!

-Claude

| IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-09-2002 12:48 AM

The horizontal (very limited) roadshow release of THE TEN COMMANDMENTS was projected at 1.85 to 1. All VistaVision horizontal projections were set up for this ratio. The full size of the VistaVision negative frame lost some height for the optical soundtrack. I think the full 1.5 IS on the standard reduced frame version that most theatres got, but the intended ratio was 1.85. Now Paramount had a scheme that let theatres crop that 1.5 image down to 1.66, 1.85, or at worst, 2 to 1. But this was more of a gimmick to seperate them from the "rigid" standards that Fox was imposing. Paramount wanted to be the exhibitor's FRIEND, and allow the theatres to set their own standard. But if you go to Marty Hart's WIDESCREEN MUSEUM site, he features full tech and publicity info on VistaVision, as well as a presentation booklet of TEN COMMANDMENTS stating that it was supposed to be shown at 1.85 (*which it was composed for, regardless of how much camera negative frame was exposed.

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 08-09-2002 11:26 AM

Steve asked: "Did you have to pay extra for a treat like that?"

Well, Ten Commandments is one of my all-time favorite movies, and I wasn't about to miss the chance to see it in 70mm. I couldn't get anyone to go with me, so I went by myself, drove 60 miles each way (El Toro to LA). Got to the theater, had to pay for parking, found out the next show was already sold out. I wasn't going to turn around and leave, so I bought a ticket for the following show, killed about 4 hours, finally got in, then was thoroughly disappointed at the image quality, and to top it off, the film broke. I left at that point -- didn't even wait for them to get it running again.

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 08-09-2002 02:46 PM

Paul Linfesty wrote:

quote:
Except for unlucky people like me who saw it in the 70mm move-over at the Bruin Theatre in Westwood

That's true, but at least the Bruin didn't have a deeply curved screen, a too-high (IMO) projection angle, or need to use a bowtie aperture plate, which all exacerbated the presentation deficiencies.

I'm sure the Bruin experience was disappointing like you mentioned, but I bet it was far worse at the Dome. If I recall correctly, it played at the Bruin for three weeks. Then, the print moved on to the San Francisco bay area....

| IP: Logged

Peter Kerchinsky
Master Film Handler

Posts: 326
From: Seattle, WA, USA
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 08-09-2002 03:35 PM

A little bit off the subject.....
I remember getting the trailer for The Ten Commandments on a "cartoon size" reel! I believe it ran about 7 minutes and was all DeMille. One of our projectionists called him "an old windbag" for taking so much time talking about the story.
The "old windbag" line was also in the film. recited by Cecil Hardwick while one of his priests was praying.

| IP: Logged

John Schulien
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 206
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-09-2002 04:06 PM

Peter,

Coincidently, there's an IB tech print of exactly that extended trailer being offered right now on efilmbid!
http://efilmbid.com/cgi-bin/auction.cgi?35&1029369993

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 08-10-2002 09:34 AM

I came upon this promo at least 15 years ago when we ran THE TEN COMMANDMENTS (the 11th commandment being, Thou shalt run something other than THE TEN COMMANDMENTS if you want box office receipts to clear the guarantee -- we really tanked with this booking).

I thought the DeMille trailer was an incredible find -- a 10 min IBTech promo for this classic film. Incredible, that is, until I brought it to the theatre and played it. 10 min of this old geezer babbling on and on about his movie, and NO CLIPS. What a disappointment. I planned to run it for the two weeks prior to the engagement, but after the first day, hearing the audiences moan and groan during its first screening, I pulled it -- my hard-earned $200 down the drain. You won't find a better example of why the marketing department should never let the director try to market the picture. And why collectors should always heed the First Rule of Print Acquisition: be thoroughly familiar with the content of any print you plan on acquiring, like make sure it isn't some old geezer babbling about his movie.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.