Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Little Women in 35mm

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Little Women in 35mm (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Little Women in 35mm

Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler

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

posted 12-26-2019 10:37 PM

quote: Frank Angel
Oh, and not for nuthin, but do these producers REALLY believe there is an audience out there that is pining for yet ANOTHER version of this title...four versions; really?

I don't know whether there's an audience pining for "Little Women" at all, although this seems to be getting good reviews, but as to whether audiences need another version, it's because audiences, especially younger audiences, are very reluctant to see anything "old" AND because there are quite few revival theaters these days.

If theaters brought back the 1994 version with Susan Sarandon, Winona Ryder and Kirsten Dunst, would anyone go see it? I don't think so. Thus, another version.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

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

posted 12-27-2019 01:51 PM

A movie production studio's "brain-storming" session today appears to be little more than looking 15-20 years in the past for something ripe to be re-made. It's even better when the original novel is old enough to fall into the public domain, which is the case for Little Women. Maybe they'll make a sequel of it. Nothing is off limits. It has been 30 years since Ghostbusters 2 was released but we're getting a sequel of that next summer.

quote: Scott Norwood
Shooting on 3-perf doesn't necessitate a DI. It is possible to cut the camera negative (even if the film is edited electronically; the Avid will happily make a cut list for a movie shot on 3-perf) and make a 4-perf negative optically. There are some negative-cutting issues with 3-perf involving visible splices, but that is not a big deal if the thing is going to be optically printed, anyway.

Whether or not they did this is a different question, of course.

I think the real issue is so many movie and TV productions have become heavily dependent on digital backlot techniques. It's surprising how much green screens are used on studio sets and on location. Whether the original live action footage is shot on film or captured electronically it's going to be pushed into the digital domain for compositing with lots of artificial CG elements and then color graded.

IMHO, once the footage has gone digital there's no reason to output it back to a film print other than to serve as an analog, archival backup. A film-out isn't going to improve the image quality any. And it's really not going to do it if the damned image is pillar or window-boxed on the print!

quote: Tyler Purcell
4 perf is wasteful in this day where nearly everyone shoots spherical and requires a 16x9 (1.75:1) aspect ratio version at minimal. 2 perf is common, but again it's process to photochemical finish blows, like 3 perf does.

There's still a lot of anamorphic shooting taking place, just for the oval bokeh look and flares. Some TV series have been shot with anamorphic lenses and even letter-boxed in 'scope ratio to look more like a movie. Most of those 'scope-looking shows are not shot on film. Then there's the ridiculous stuff like using UP70 lenses on an Arri Alexa 65 and claiming Filmed in Ultra Panvision 70 in the end credits.

I'm used to seeing 2:1 compression ratio anamorphic lenses being used on 4/35mm. But does anyone do that with 3-perf?

| IP: Logged

Shawn M. Martin
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 175
From: Arlington, VA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 12-30-2019 11:21 AM

quote: Bobby Henderson
I'm used to seeing 2:1 compression ratio anamorphic lenses being used on 4/35mm. But does anyone do that with 3-perf?

The movie "Luce", which came out a few months ago, did this. The ratio was 3.5:1 when unsqueezed, and it was cropped on the sides to 2.39.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

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.