Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 70mm Presentations in Louisville

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » 70mm Presentations in Louisville (Page 3)

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

Author

Topic: 70mm Presentations in Louisville

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 02-19-2018 04:05 PM

From The (Louisville) Courier-Journal; August 5th, 1956; Section 5, Page 2. The closure was for fifteen days.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 02-19-2018 05:54 PM

Are we to believe they showed the King and I in CinemaScope 55 from that ad? It was shot in that process but I don't know of any commercial runs with it as the presentation format. It can be a hot topic of debate.

| IP: Logged

James Westbrook
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1133
From: Lubbock, Texas, Usa
Registered: Mar 2006

posted 02-21-2018 02:44 PM

Back when I was researching my local theaters in the microfilm section of my local library I would encounter "stereophonic sound" ads for movies playing at one of the local drive-ins. It was in the directory sized ad art from the distributor. Whoever built the directory ads up at the theater's office probably just clipped it down to size and pasted it on the art board and handed it to their newspaper ad rep without examining the details.
The Brown theater ad is likely a similar situation where the ad art for The King and I had the Cinemascope 55 logos in it and the individual in the office who assembled the ads used that one. Maybe all the ad slicks had Cinemascope 55 on them.
I gave up the researching after some local blog posted my list of local theaters and I inadvertently omitted the State theater. Then I got into an argument about a non-existing drive-in. I decided it was not worth sitting in an uncomfortable chair in front of a microfilm viewer to pursue the hobby and gave up. I have enough data to know, when I encounter a movie like Bullitt, that I can look it up and find it opened first run at the Village theater. That, and $5 can get me a Route 44 Iced Tea at Sonic.

| IP: Logged

Rick Raskin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1100
From: Manassas Virginia
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 02-21-2018 05:23 PM

To my knowledge the Cinemascope 55 format was never projected commercially.

| IP: Logged

Travis Cape
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 122
From: St. Louis, MO, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 02-21-2018 05:47 PM

Louis has told me that story. I'll go with it, it's a good story. It confirms that many exhibitors are liars, which we all know is true. The truth also doesn't matter, exhibitors are still liars even if the Brown really had 70mm for Oklahoma.

I've already stumbled across advertisements from the 1970's proclaiming state of the art projection in a theater with Super Simplex's and mono and another in 2001 that had ORC consoles from the 1980's etc. Exhibitors lie, except for Mike.

| IP: Logged

Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 900
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2002

posted 02-21-2018 08:09 PM

quote: Rick Raskin
To my knowledge the Cinemascope 55 format was never projected commercially.

True. In 2004, Cineric was involved in the restoration of the two 55mm films. They made a presentation about the restoration process at a SMPTE meeting and the handout states the following:

"...The plan was to produce 55mm prints by reduction printing the 8 perf negative to a 6 perf print with room for six magnetic sound tracks, but because of technical and distribution problems the idea was scrapped. Instead, 35mm reduction negatives were made from the the 55mm originals, and both films were shown at the time of their release in standard 35mm CinemaScope. "The King and I" was re-issued in 1961 with two 70mm prints made directly from the 55mm negative. These prints, billed under the name Grandeur 70, with their 5 perf, 2.2:1 aspect ratio were actually reduction prints having less image area than the 55mm original negative."

| IP: Logged

Martin McCaffery
Film God

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

posted 02-21-2018 08:29 PM

quote: Travis Cape
Exhibitors lie, except for Mike.

If that really is his name [evil]

| IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 02-21-2018 11:20 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
That ad is scary. I may be thinking in 1980s verbage but it speaks of the process in which Oklahoma! was made. It makes no real mention of the PRESENTATION format other than the curved screen (something that CinemaScope would have too). If that was written in the 80s, I'd suspect funny business since there was no mention of the PRESENTATION format.

Might be scary, but "Produced in Todd-AO" was the verbage that was used throughout 1955-1970 to be used only with the exhibition of 70mm prints (deep curve screen optional after Around the World in 80 Days and all subsequent films being 24fps). Only the 70mm prints featured the "Produced in Todd-AO credit...only if the 70mm print was used were the newspaper ads, posters, etc to say Produced in Todd-AO, at least from the 60's on. (yes, I know some ads for Around the World and South Pacific just said "In Todd-AO). But the credits for the 35mm version didn't mention Todd-AO (and yes, I know some videos sourced from 35mm may very well have the Todd-AO label, but not in the original releases). THe exception seemed to be Thos Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines, which was "Photographed in Todd-AO" and which newspaper ads actually used the CinemaScope label for the 35mm prints. Apparently, \the distinction was that Magnificent Men was mixed with 4 tracks and then tricked up to 6 tracks, although Sound of Music carried the 'Produced" label even though it was also a 4 to 6 track conversion.

BTW, in Bakersfield, CA the normally second-run Tejon Theatre got the first-run booking of STAR!. They added in their own type at the top of the ad "In Todd-AO and Technicolor." Of course, STAR! prints were color by Deluxe, but anyway, the Tejon was only a 35mm house with their widest tabs set to 2 to 1. And yet it was advertised like this for the whole week. The Tejon had also gotten the first-run booking of that other Fox flop DOCTOR DOLITTLE. I actually saw that as a child. I guess because it was first-run, they decided to show the full width of the reduction print by projecting over the opened curtains and a ittle bit on the side wall!!!

| IP: Logged

Terry Monohan
Master Film Handler

Posts: 379
From: San Francisco CA USA
Registered: May 2014

posted 02-23-2018 01:58 PM

The old Blumenfield Roxie Theatre in Oakland CA ran ads that said 'Same As Roadshow' and they even had 70mm in the ad. Only had 35mm. Put in a cheap stereo system for Disney's Mary Poppins in 4 track mag stereo. Disney made them If they wanted to play It first run in Oakland CA. Did the Brown Theatre have a curved screen for 70mm? Thanks

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 03-01-2018 12:33 PM

quote: Sam D. Chavez
…but it is possible and similar things have happened. There was this thing called a film exchange back at that time. Every sizable city had one, usually located on "Film Row".

So, Theatre 70 opens a brand new very posh 70mm theatre in Oakland with great fanfare. There was not much 70 being released but there was 4 track Mag in common use.

So I'm working at a weed infested drive in, the "Oakland" if memory serves, located in Hayward area. Usually not a day and date kind of venue. So "Hurry Sundown" opens with great fanfare. We, without notice, get a glorious brand new 4 track Mag print which I can actually run, in Mag mono of course. Meanwhile, Theatre 70 gets a run of the mill 35mm mono optical print. So these things could and did happen back then.

Prints getting sent to the wrong theater seems an easy thing to occur when a film is in release with numerous prints circulating. But, unless I’m misunderstanding your comment, yours is an apples to oranges comparison to the Louisville/”Oklahoma!” situation since “Oklahoma!” was an exclusive roadshow booking (i.e. a specialized release) with hundreds of miles of clearance and commencing months before any 35mm prints circulated. It would've been impossible, in my estimation, for the Louisville theater to have been sent the wrong print or wrong advertising materials.

Anyway, Theatre 70 played “Hurry Sundown” as an East Bay exclusive, many weeks ahead of any area drive-in bookings.

quote: Sam D. Chavez
Does anyone know if ["Oklahoma!"] opened in 35mm and 70mm day and date?

quote: Paul Linfesty
I thought the 35mm prints of Oklahoma! didn't debut until the beginning of 1957.

As far as North America is concerned, "Oklahoma!" did not open day and date in both 70mm and 35mm. The best I can tell there were only 31 domestic 70mm bookings (all with a reserved-seat policy) that commenced between October 1955 and November 1956. The CinemaScope version (from a different distributor, a general-release policy, and different ad campaign) began in November 1956, with much of the country playing it during the early months of 1957.

| IP: Logged

Sam D. Chavez
Film God

Posts: 2153
From: Martinez, CA USA
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 03-02-2018 01:44 AM

I knew you'd be back.

quote: Michael Coate
Anyway, Theatre 70 played “Hurry Sundown” as an East Bay exclusive, many weeks ahead of any area drive-in bookings.

Lets see the docs or I'll go with my recollection. The only reason I recall it is because it was so absurd. I wonder if the east bay exclusive ad also said "presented in 4 track sound?

As to apples and oranges, of course, just making the point that inaccuracies happened all the time. For example a good deal of prints in collectors hands came from exchanges. They were to be destroyed but instead were sold so the record keeping was none too good.

I do admire your research but it's not infallible.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 03-02-2018 11:14 AM

quote: Steve Guttag
Are we to believe they showed the King and I in CinemaScope 55 from that ad? It was shot in that process but I don't know of any commercial runs with it as the presentation format. It can be a hot topic of debate.

That is a good subject for Michael to investigate. The projectors for sure did exist and at least one pair still do exist. I have pictures of that pair. Supposedly, The State Lake Theater ran it and the 35/55mm mag penthouses were still at Charlie Wolks place last time I was there.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 03-05-2018 05:25 PM

I was traveling over the weekand am just now getting back to this.

quote: Sam D. Chavez
Lets see the docs or I'll go with my recollection.

I'm not sure this is the sort of thing you'll find satisfactory/convincing, but here's the East Bay opening-day ad from the Oakland Tribune (March 22, 1967):

You'll have to take my word that "Hurry Sundown" played the area drive-ins several weeks later. I think it will be difficult (readability-wise) if I post the drive-in ads as they're all small and text-based and thus will be difficult to see the relevant text AND the datestamp AND the Theatre 70 ad all in same image. But if you're still not convinced, let me try to find something usable.

| IP: Logged

Sam D. Chavez
Film God

Posts: 2153
From: Martinez, CA USA
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 03-05-2018 11:58 PM

I saw that as well.

You don't take anyones word. Why should I take yours?

Did your mother never tell you not to believe everything you read in the newspaper? In todays vernacular the ad might be called "fake news" "Oakland" opened day and date which was a bit of a surprise; not because it was all that unusual, but that it was the humble Oakland DI. DI's played day and date all the time by the "60's. This was the land of Syufy who sued to get this condition. There were much better DI's it could have played day and date, but I just know about mine and that I got the mag print.

I did not care for your vague assurance that it opened "many" weeks later in drive In's. How do you know this? I don't think you bothered to check.

For once you will need to take my word for it because I was here. If you have better evidence, produce it.

It's always possible Theatre 70 only considered indoors when they claimed an exclusive. This looks like a theatre made ad not a co-op made by the branch manager so who's to say? They either knowingly or unknowingly made an incorrect statement. So, you rely on some random theatre manager with a pair of scissors who can make any ad he can afford? No one checked up on cinemas to make sure they did not make false claims. Only a competitor would have a reason to challenge it.

An over reliance on local cinema ads is a weakness in your research methodology.

I know what I know on this one and you have no better evidence so leave it and let's move on.

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 03-06-2018 01:18 AM

Sigh...

Your latest comment, Sam, exhibits precisely why I initially declined to reply to your “Hurry Sundown” challenge because I (correctly) predicted that you would simply double down and insist whatever I post is “fake news.”

Did you honestly believe I would not research beyond just that Theatre 70 ad??? Even though I will predict that you will continue to double down and insist fake news, here’s the text-based East Bay theater listings for March 22, 1967, the day on which “Hurry Sundown” opened at Theatre 70. (Theatre 70 is in top middle, while the Oakland Drive-In is in lower right.)

And even though I again predict you won’t believe it, the playdates for “Hurry Sundown” (based upon researching the advertising in the East Bay newspapers) were March 22nd-April 30th (1967). “Hurry Sundown” at the Oakland Drive-In was July 19th-August 1st (1967).

I’m not even going to address the mag issue since the differing playdates alone should call into question your memory of this incident.

| 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.