Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: HATEFUL EIGHT 70mm

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » HATEFUL EIGHT 70mm - all discussion (Page 22)

This topic comprises 44 pages: 1 2 3 ... 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ... 42 43 44

Author

Topic: HATEFUL EIGHT 70mm - all discussion

Sascha F. Roll
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 140
From: Berlin, Berlin / Germany
Registered: Sep 2015

posted 12-18-2015 03:39 AM

quote: Steve Guttag
On reels, yes...doubled up reels no. I have no problem shipping them out that way but don't approve running them that way. Care to lift 5-reels of 35mm over your head to aim for a 1/2" spindle 5 times a show? For what? To save a few changeovers? If you can make 4 good ones you can make 9 good ones. And, in the unlikely event of a mishap, you've only endangered 1 reel, not 2.

Interesting - a few minutes ago I've seen a picture of the Berlin 70mm-Print (playing at the Zoo-Palast) being assembled on the Kinoton ST270-Platter and it seems to be shipped on Cores...

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 12-18-2015 07:05 AM

I'm sure it is being handled in other countries differently. Remember too, in the US, all films were shipped on reels...MOST other countries always shipped on cores. Personally, I'd rather they ship on cores rather than in beat up cans/reels (in general, not specific to the Hateful 8).

| IP: Logged

Martin McCaffery
Film God

Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-18-2015 08:52 AM

quote:
They(Disney)threatened the Dome saying "you will not honor The Hateful Eight booking if you want Star Wars at all your other Pacific theaters!"

If Disney did indeed say that, and QT has any proof thereof, he could, and should, sue the ass off of Disney because such practice is illegal in this country.

| IP: Logged

Jonathan Goeldner
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1360
From: Washington, District of Columbia
Registered: Jun 2008

posted 12-18-2015 09:46 AM

what I don't get is that the Dome's projector was updated to a Christie laser system and Dolby 3D - did they do the upgrade prior to the knowledge that Disney was going to play hardball and do what they did?

| IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 12-18-2015 10:12 AM

quote: Aron Toplitsky
I’m curious about that 70MM list and which of those theaters can properly (like the Cinerama Dome) project an Ultra-Panavision 2.76:1 aspect ratio and not mask it down.

Since when? When they projected It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World in UP70 a few years ago, the screen was indeed masked down (top masking) with an added upward curved masking on the bottom. The screen CAN handle the full width of three projection Cinerama, but UP 70 is trickier coming from one projector because of the addition of screen stretch that occurs from deeply curved screens. In the old Cinerama days UP70 prints were NOT used to project UP70-filmed movies. In the film labs, the 1.25 squeeze was actually removed and a new progressive squeeze was added to the print. There was no squeeze in the center of the image, but the sides got more and more squeezed as you approached the edges of the frame. The theatre's lenses were designed to hold focus across the whole screen, but it was the actual geometry of the screen that removed (more or less) the squeeze in the "rectified" print. So a straight UP70 print at the dome is also going to get the spreading out effect towards the extreme sides, but without the corrected print is going to have to be masked down to get the full image on the screen, which will actually end up wider than 2.76 due to this screen stretch effect.

| IP: Logged

Robert Harris
Film Handler

Posts: 95
From: Bedford Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2003

posted 12-18-2015 10:32 AM

And one can add, on top of those problems, the lack of a strip screen. Cross-illumination, anyone?

RAH

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 12-18-2015 03:16 PM

I was not very impressed with a d-cinema version a deep curved theater screen. This was at the new Warren Theaters Broken Arrow Warren location outside Tulsa. The two "Grand Infinity" auditoriums have huge, deep curved screens and use a single 4K laser projector for each of the two screens.

The geometry was just too warped and wacky looking. The text on the green bands of previews was running in an obvious smile shape to the horizontal boundaries of the screen. On top of that the projected imagery didn't look very sharp and I think the contrast was affected a bit by light reflection -or cross illumination as Robert put it. Color and contrast quality didn't seem any better than typical d-cinema projectors.

| IP: Logged

David Buckley
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 525
From: Oxford, N. Canterbury, New Zealand
Registered: Aug 2004

posted 12-18-2015 03:43 PM

quote: Victor Liorentas
That is a big pile of and Disney is simply trying to QT by deliberately going after the one screen QT really cared about.

Oh Victor, you are so delightfully naive; Disney aren't out to fuck over QT, Disney are out to fuck over everyone, and to do this all of the time. QT isn't special, he's just another bit of collateral damage that got in the way of the mouse.

The truth is probably simpler though. When you are as big as Disney, and you just do what you think are sound commercial business practices, then smaller folk just get damaged all the time. As an example, Andy Hildebrand, inventor of Auto-tune, has decided he's not going to take on Apple for them violating his patents. Andy may be right, but Apple are big...

| IP: Logged

Daniel Schulz
Master Film Handler

Posts: 387
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Registered: Sep 2003

posted 12-18-2015 06:02 PM

It seems Hateful Eight may be kicking off a trend:

Warner Bros. Considering 70mm Release for "Batman v. Superman"

From the article:

quote:
THR reveals that Warner Bros. is mulling over releasing "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" in 70mm, as Zack Snyder shot parts of the movie in 65mm IMAX. The studio is also considering re-releasing catalog titles that were shot in the format, like David Lean's epic "Lawrence Of Arabia." Certainly for theaters, this could be a boon, as it will allow them to put a premium price on the ticket and to sell a new kind of cinematic experience. But again, it will be interesting to see how 70mm catches with audiences in the weeks ahead, and whether it's something that will resonate beyond being a unique selling point for "The Hateful Eight."

| IP: Logged

Mark Ogden
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 943
From: Little Falls, N.J.
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-18-2015 06:10 PM

How is Warner Bros. going to re-release Lawrence of Arabia? In the first place, it's a Sony/Columbia title. Also, I thought the original negative was no longer in good enough shape to strike prints from.

Sounds like a job for Robert Harris, at any rate.

| IP: Logged

Sean Weitzel
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 619
From: Vacaville, CA (1790 miles west of Rockwall)
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 12-18-2015 06:28 PM

Lawrence of Arabia was already restored by Robert Harris in 1989. There are beautiful prints out there.

Now if only we can go back to magnetic sound [Smile]

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 12-18-2015 08:18 PM

I don't know about anyone else, but I personally would be willing to pay a premium to see 65mm originated content on 70mm film prints. That's a big deal to me. It means a shit-ton more than mere HDTV resolution 3D bullshit blown up great big and premium charged when I can pretty much watch the very same digital shit at home for far less money.

quote: Sean Weitzel
Now if only we can go back to magnetic sound

Here's what they need to do with the 70mm film prints. Since DTS/Datasat seem to be punting the film-based tech over to FotoKem, why not take that time code and tie it into modern d-cinema sound systems?

From my point of view it is flat out doofus bullshit retarded to not allow a 70mm film print to be twinned with state of the art sound like Dolby Atmos. Technologically speaking this is entirely do-able. There is absolutely zero excuse against making something like that happen. So fucking make it happen Hollywood!

| IP: Logged

David J Hilsgen
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 192
From: SAUK RAPIDS,MN . USA
Registered: Aug 2004

posted 12-18-2015 08:23 PM

Warners all ready called us here, at willow creek in plymouth ,mn on batman vs superman, we said we would take the 70 print. also i got a call from I.A local 219 which i'm a member, that they are looking for projectionist for hateful 8 & the pay is $800.00 a day for 8 hour shift there is 2 shifts a day so total pay out is $1600.00 a day & $1600.00 a day per shift for holidays plus hotel mileage & $72.00 a day for meals. sounds, to good to be true or are they getting desperate.anybody else here about this.

| IP: Logged

Stephan Shelley
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 854
From: castro valley, CA, usa
Registered: Nov 2014

posted 12-18-2015 08:39 PM

Something like that in San Francisco as well.

Stephan

| IP: Logged

Jim Cassedy
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1661
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Dec 2006

posted 12-18-2015 09:15 PM

I don't like to post exact salary information.
Some of my employers have an NDA.
But the figures quoted are more or less correct.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 44 pages: 1 2 3 ... 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ... 42 43 44

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.