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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » 70mm Dolby Format 42 & 43 Compatibility Question (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: 70mm Dolby Format 42 & 43 Compatibility Question Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 08-20-2011 11:58 AM                     Regarding the sound, it's still not clear if the presentation was faulty or if the movie just has a crappy audio mix. Anyway, in addition to the audio issues addressed, I'd like to mention that I found the picture portion of this presentation problematic. In this case, though, it was the lab's fault, not the theater's. Highlander was a spherically-shot film (1.85:1), but the lab foolishly over-enlarged the image during the blow-up by filling the full width of the 70mm frame, thereby cropping a portion of the top and bottom of the image and making the image unnecessarily grainy and soft. The print itself was in mint condition, appearing to have been run only a handful of times. So, overall, this was a disappointing presentation. I already dislike the movie, and this poor presentation didn't help. I had thought that seeing a 70mm presentation might give me a new appreciation for the movie. Nope. If anyone's curious, the screening was in celebration of the film's 25th anniversary, and, as far as I know, was the first time it had been (commercially) screened in 70mm in the United States. This was the longer, original cut of the film, not the shortened version released by Fox. A Q&A with director Russell Mulcahy and producer Peter Davis followed the screening. This 70mm print of Highlander is, in my opinion, a poor example of what can be achieved with 70mm, and I'm afraid now that this print has surfaced that other organizations will want to book it.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 08-20-2011 01:54 PM                     ...and to add .. How many of us remember when Metro took "Gone with the Wind" and did a 70mm release of this film and did the same as with this "Highlander" release: made it full frame, thus did a lot of cropping from the original image .. and that was from a 1.37:1 frame image.  |  IP: Logged Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 08-20-2011 05:11 PM                     The framing on that 70mm blow-up of Gone With The Wind wasn't unique. That blow-up technique was common with spherically-shot productions during the 1960s and 1970s. I had thought, though, that by the 1980s, with a few exceptions, that technique had been phased out in favor of pillarboxing the sides (which is why I was surprised by the image on Highlander, a mid-80s release).  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 08-20-2011 05:51 PM                     ..like "E.T." and "Arachnophobia" - both blown up to 70mm releases and pillarboxed within the frame to keep the ratio intact.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-20-2011 06:48 PM                     However, WARGAMES was a 1.85 movie blown up to full-frame 2.2 70mm in 1983.  |  IP: Logged Lionel Fouillen Expert Film Handler Posts: 230 From: Belgium Registered: Nov 2002 posted 08-20-2011 06:55 PM                     Terminator 2 (1991) is another example. Shot in Super35, blown-up to 2.20 in 70.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 08-20-2011 07:25 PM                     Terminator 2 isn't a good example though, as it was shot with the intention of cropping all the way down to 2.4:1.  |  IP: Logged Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 08-20-2011 11:55 PM                     quote: Steve Guttag WARGAMES was a 1.85 movie blown up to full-frame 2.2 70mm in 1983. WarGames was one of the titles I had in mind when I wrote, "...by the 1980s, with a few exceptions, that technique had been phased out in favor of pillarboxing the sides..." Another is Rocky III (1982).  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 08-21-2011 12:05 AM                     Did "True Lies" make the 70mm releases when this was also shot in Super35?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 08-21-2011 12:08 AM                     Yes, but there were only a couple of 70mm prints. (They were mag.)  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-21-2011 12:11 AM                     Yes, True Lies had 70mm prints. However, this deviation thread has NOTHING to do with Super-35 to 70mm...The discussion is only about a 1.85 movies being blown (cropped) to 2.2 for 70mm. While all Scope moves are also cropped for 70mm (except THE UNTOUCHABLES)...the side cropping from 2.39 to 2.20 is considered minor as little action is at the extreme sides...however headroom is severely compromised when a 1.85 composure is blown to 2.2.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 08-21-2011 12:52 AM                     ..why "GWTW" looked horrible and crowded on the big screen in 70mm...with the massive head/scene cropping..  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 08-21-2011 05:59 AM                        GWTW was so bad they had to mevhsnicsally reframe it condstantly at the studio level. Louis  |  IP: Logged Bob Bregazzi Film Handler Posts: 17 From: Hampshie, England Registered: Jan 2010 posted 08-21-2011 12:14 PM                     I remember seeing GWTW in 70mm in 1968. The cinema I saw it at was a large 2500 single screen. Due to the overhang of the balcony the picture was cropped by almost a hole, making more or less a 2.35 ratio. You can imagine what it looked like.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.