posted 06-29-2017 11:50 AM                       

quote: Monte L Fullmer

---

Go 1.85 and you're using the entire screen and people feel that they're getting their entertainment monies worth instead of that "cropped image" when presenting wide screen features.

---

posted 06-29-2017 02:29 PM                    

quote: Steve Kraus

---

I have one right now which is curiously labeled F-C. Apparently that means 1.37
within 1.85 but with rounded corners, at least that's what I've got on screen.

---

posted 06-29-2017 04:09 PM                    

quote:

---

I should think they should be focusing on doing the one thing that home theater *can't* do, which is widescreen projection!

---

posted 07-05-2017 10:32 PM                    

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

Most of them would probably just say "I didn't notice that, I just noticed how my ears were bleeding."

---

Only if they were at one of the two or three theaters left in the country that still plays movies at their proper volume.

At most these days it's hard to hear the dialog over the popcorn crunching and rusting snack wrappers.

posted 07-06-2017 04:13 PM                    

quote: Mark Campbell

---

Back to Brainstorm: I never saw it in the theater but I imagine for 35mm it was projected in scope with the "real life" 1.85 scenes pillar boxed in the scope image. Thus the dream world expanding to the sides making the image larger.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

I'll echo that response. About the only time I hear noticeably loud volume in movie theaters these days is when I pay extra to watch the movie in an IMAX-branded auditorium or some other kind of premium theater. If I watch the movie in a normal priced theater I can pretty much expect to hear the movie played at TV speakers volume -front stage speakers only, with the surround speakers and sub-bass enclosures damned near silent.

---

My last IMAX experience was actually less loud than it should've been. So, I paid premium for less.

But I think part of the reason why so many locations turned their volume down, is most likely also due to customer complaints.

Also, I blame it partially on modern movies, which seem to have fallen into the same trap that so much commercial musical releases have fallen into: The loudness war.

Many of those modern action releases are just unbearably loud all the time, when you play them at reference. Most likely also to compensate for theaters turning their volume down and to still leave an impression. In the process, they're killing dynamic range.

The trend isn't as bad as with commercial music, where everybody tries to compress the hell out of it, to be as loud as possible on the radio, but it is most definitely there.

Try to go through the latest Transformers crapola at reference or the latest Pirates movie for example. It's an almost constant full-frontal attack on your eardrums, you're almost longing for scenes where stuff isn't flying and exploding all around you.

Some stuff needs to be quiet and delicate, dialog should be at a normal level which doesn't equal at people shouting all the time and explosions need to be REAL LOUD. The extreme dynamic range of modern digital sound systems is something great if done right. Unfortunately, we're all to often abusing it for the wrong, selfish purposes.

So, I guess both film makers and the exhibition industry are to blame.

posted 07-06-2017 08:47 PM                    

quote: Mark Campbell

---

Back to Brainstorm: I never saw it in the theater but I imagine for 35mm it was projected in scope with the "real life" 1.85 scenes pillar boxed in the scope image. Thus the dream world expanding to the sides making the image larger.

I watched it a few years back either on DVD or Laserdisc. For that transfer way it was done was reversed from theatrical. On the TV their 1.85 image was letterboxes on TV screen as usual and the scope/65mm image was letterboxed even further. So a common width screen experience making the dream world "smaller" and reversing the intentions of the filmmakers.

Anyone seen a transfer done "properly" like the theatrical version?

---

quote:

---

Promoted as a Super Panavision 70 production, in actuality only a portion of the film was shot in large format. The objective “real world” sequences in “Brainstorm” were filmed in spherical 35mm and have a 1.66:1 aspect ratio; the subjective “brainstorm” sequences were originated in 65mm and are in 2.20:1. Presentations have varied over the years in how the aspect ratio changes have been handled. The 70mm and 35mm scope release prints have the 1.66:1 footage pillarboxed within the wide frame. The pan-and-scan video edition has a 1.33:1 ratio and reveals no ratio change between the real world and the brainstorm sequences. The first letterbox edition (the 1991 laserdisc) featured a transfer of the film that mirrored the original theatrical presentation. A remastered letterbox edition (the 1998 laserdisc and subsequent DVD releases) retains the proper aspect ratios but betrays the intended effect by letterboxing the brainstorm segments within the real world segments.

---