Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Chicken Little (2005)

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews » Chicken Little (2005) (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Chicken Little (2005)

Amanda Jones
Film Handler

Posts: 92
From: Indianapolis, IN, USA
Registered: Aug 2005

posted 11-08-2005 07:46 PM

Yes the bulb stays on between shows. Our tech guy told us that the bulb has to be changed every 2 months and that shutting off the bulb between shows and then reigniting at the start of the next show it looses 3 hours of use, so he said to ignite it at the start of the first show and then shut it off at the end of the last show.

I finally saw it today at the new Rave Theater in Plainfeild Indiana. The movie itself was cute but a bit rushed and stuff that needed better explaination but since it was a kids movie I expected it to be just like that. Kids are not going to question the hurried plot. I thought the 3D was cool I have nothing to compare it too except for Adventures of Shark Boy and Lava Girl which of course Chicken Little is far superior. My experience with the theater was medicore at best. First I never carry a lot of cash with me and today I had NO CASH and the theater's credit card server was down luckily my brother had enough cash to cover me. Their lobby was small and I think their sign said lobby capacity was 59. With 18 screens you would think they would have a bigger lobby. At any given time on the weekend we can have anywhere from 1-200 people in our lobby and during our midnight showing of StarWars we had 1000 plus in the lobby at once. There was only 3 families in front of my brother and I and it took us 15 minutes to get through the concession line. There was 1 concession worker and a manager. The manager just stood there in a daze and the concessionist was really slow and I had to tell the manager to dump the kettle of popcorn before it started to burn, she rolled her eyes at me. The manager that tore our tickets just stood at the ticket post and didn't hop behind the concession stand to help out despite no one walking through the door in the 15 minutes we stood in line. I understand this is a new theater and that even the managers may be new to the theater business but the first thing we train our employees on is how to pop a simple batch of corn and crowd control and how not to let your lines get long.

We got in the theater just as the show was starting even though I already knew what previews were on the movie and have seen them before I still like to be in the theater before the previews start.

| IP: Logged

Wolff King Morrow
Master Film Handler

Posts: 490
From: Denton, TX, USA
Registered: Feb 2004

posted 11-08-2005 08:14 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
On the other hand I wonder how the 35mm prints hold up to their digital counterpart... The 35mm I watched looked excellent, was sharp as sa tack and I kept wondering to myself if the digitals looked near this good....

About the same quality from my own comparison, however, the digital version had some advantages I could tell right off. For one, no matter how steady your intermittent is, the digital version has no moving parts, so the image is so steady it looks like a friggen poster on a wall. The 2nd advantage is there never will be so much as one tiny scratch or spec of dust anywhere in the entire movie on the digital version. You can approach this with a lot of care on the 35mm, but you don't have to do a damn thing on the digital version for it to play EXACTLY the same way as many times as you play it. The 3rd advantage is no chance of damaging the movie with brain wraps, bad threading, or any other mistakes that happen with 35mm. All you do is press the "play" button and that's it.

The downside to digital is everything has to be "repaired" with a laptop and special software, which I of course did not get supplied with. The techs I've spoken with said you HAVE to have that software or you're up shit creek without a paddle when something goes wrong.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 11-08-2005 08:33 PM

quote:
For one, no matter how steady your intermittent is, the digital version has no moving parts,

Perhaps you have not studied the DLP technology...there are a bunch of mirrors moving about there....many mirrors in fact. The moving mirrors are one reason why DLPs don't often look as good as LCDs when showing static images...the DLP can't hold a static image...has to jiggle the mirrors to simulate varying intensities.

That said, I think we acknowledge that "jump and weave" are significantly improved on the digital side.

quote: Wolff King Morrow
The 2nd advantage is there never will be so much as one tiny scratch or spec of dust anywhere in the entire movie on the digital version.

Sorry to burst your bubble there too...watch digital projection long enough and you WILL be seeing pixelization and other digital artifacts start showing and randomly. You will also potentially experience a complete show failure by the most simplist of things going wrong. About the only thing that is backed up and is reasonably roubust is the dual drives.

quote: Wolff King Morrow
The 3rd advantage is no chance of damaging the movie with brain wraps, bad threading, or any other mistakes that happen with 35mm. All you do is press the "play" button and that's it.

Ah but now you have computer lockups and other software related crashes to contend with.

As someone that has been working with DLP and other video technology for several years now...I can tell you that all is not perfect in that world either.

As to the software...depending on your projector the software could cause more harm than good. It isn't like you are going tweek anything.

Digital definately has its merits...then again so does film.

| IP: Logged

Wolff King Morrow
Master Film Handler

Posts: 490
From: Denton, TX, USA
Registered: Feb 2004

posted 11-08-2005 09:02 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
Perhaps you have not studied the DLP technology...there are a bunch of mirrors moving about there....many mirrors in fact. The moving mirrors are one reason why DLPs don't often look as good as LCDs when showing static images...the DLP can't hold a static image...has to jiggle the mirrors to simulate varying intensities.

That said, I think we acknowledge that "jump and weave" are significantly improved on the digital side.

Yes perhaps I've not studied DLP technology, but perhaps you're going to extremes to gloss over the point of a giant motor being involved in phisically moving pictures into view on a 35mm projector. That's what I was getting at, which I'm sure you knew ahead of time what my point was.

quote: Steve Guttag
Sorry to burst your bubble there too...watch digital projection long enough and you WILL be seeing pixelization and other digital artifacts start showing and randomly. You will also potentially experience a complete show failure by the most simplist of things going wrong. About the only thing that is backed up and is reasonably roubust is the dual drives.

Well sorry you didn't burst my bubble because you're now talking about apples to oranges. I've yet to see any degradation in the picture and seriously doubt I will unless something actually fails in the equipment, which is a different subject.

quote: Steve Guttag
Ah but now you have computer lockups and other software related crashes to contend with.

As someone that has been working with DLP and other video technology for several years now...I can tell you that all is not perfect in that world either.

Hence, why I mentioned this very downside of digital. Your point was my point.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 11-09-2005 12:43 AM

quote: Wolff King Morrow
Well sorry you didn't burst my bubble because you're now talking about apples to oranges. I've yet to see any degradation in the picture and seriously doubt I will unless something actually fails in the equipment, which is a different subject.

Actually that is much more apples to apples. The digital artifacts that you WILL eventually see are random and are quite visible to even the untrained eye. Film's dirt tends to degrade based on improper care, but can be cleaned. With digital you never know what kind of show you are going to get. With film, unless the print is actually damaged, it is much more predictable
and able to present a superior, glitch free image. With digital, you are at the mercy of the entire imaging process and it just isn't 100% all of the time.

With digital you have a grided array of pixels projecting onto a grided array of perforations...net result will be a morie pattern to some degree (much worse with transmissive technology, but still there on DLP and other reflective technologies).

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-12-2005 07:56 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
With digital you have a grided array of pixels projecting onto a grided array of perforations...net result will be a morie pattern to some degree (much worse with transmissive technology, but still there on DLP and other reflective technologies).

Digital cinema would certinaly be a good companion to the curved compound screen as it's solid surface would minimize the moire effect. There will always be some moire effect because of the fixed position of the mirrored pixels though no matter what.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 11-14-2005 12:18 PM

quote: Amanda Jones
Yes the bulb stays on between shows. Our tech guy told us that the bulb has to be changed every 2 months and that shutting off the bulb between shows and then reigniting at the start of the next show it looses 3 hours of use, so he said to ignite it at the start of the first show and then shut it off at the end of the last show.

What makes this bulb different than a bulb in a 35mm projector?

| IP: Logged

Mark Lensenmayer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1605
From: Upper Arlington, OH
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 11-17-2005 01:33 PM

I saw Chicken Little at the Rave Polaris 18 on 11/16 at 7:00pm. Dolby Disney Texas Instruments Digital 3-D system installed in Theatre 1. The digital unit is centered on the screen, with the 35mm offset slightly to the right (from the booth perspective.)

The film was surprisingly entertaining. Certainly not a great or memorable picture, but it held my attention. The voice actors did a very good job, especially Joan Cusack. Animation was adequate, not nothing ground breaking. It was certainly better than the Dreamworks pictures I have seen, but not up to Pixar standards.

Quite frankly, I don't think 3-D added much to the entertainment value.

The digital projection was crisp and very clear. My initial seat was approximately 40' back from the ~35' screen. (The room seated 260.) A very slight hot spot was apparent during the trailers, but not especially noted during the 3-D feature.

The 3-D effect was very very good. The only 3-D I've seen better than this was full-screen IMAX 3-D. That image is much more convincing because it fills the entire field of view.

The room side lights were somewhat distracting. They were at a very low level, but they pulled my attention away from the screen.

Since there were only a few others in the theatre, I experimented with some other seats. Moving to the far right about 1/2 way back seemed to flatten the 3-D effect. I also moved to about 5 rows from the front again at the extreme right (this time past the edge of the screen) and the effect was flattened even more. Anyone sitting far off center will not see a very good 3-D image.

I then moved to the front row, which in this theatre is about 6'-7' below the screen. The image seems a bit dim from here, and the 3-D effects were also not very effective.

But, sitting in the center of the theatre gave a very impressive 3-D image.

Glasses were comfortable, but they broke midway as I was experimenting with them. They are not as comfortable as the newer Imax glasses. The Chicken Little glasses have a bit of a squeeze built in to keep them in place.

It certainly looked to me like the green glasses worn by Chicken Little were an afterthought and attached on later in the production. His wearing glasses didn't make much sense.

I'm looking forward to seeing other films in this process. As others have noted, the system trailers were very good.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-20-2005 08:02 PM

I thought that the film was pretty lame, but the 3D looked quite good. This is the first time that I've seen (I assume) 2K DLP at full resolution (as opposed to upconverted NTSC) and it looks really good. They finally got scrolling credits to look decent.

The DLP people should have picked a better demo film for the 3D system. As others have mentioned, this show didn't benefit much from it.

I do think that the system shows some promise for the future and hope that someone will make a 3D film that is actually good. I'd be curious to know how live-action 3D films look when projected via DLP.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 11-20-2005 08:15 PM

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 11-20-2005 08:22 PM

quote: Mark J. Marshall
What makes this bulb different than a bulb in a 35mm projector?

I can see 15k IMAX bulbs not being turned off between sets since those machines have water cooled mirrors and dowsers, but...having to change a bulb out every two months...huh? What size of bulb is in that console then that needs to be changed out every two months and left on all the time?

That'sa lot of moolah going through the roof for a two month bulb changeout all the time, especially if it doesn't needed to be changed that often!

quote: Steve Guttag
Perhaps you have not studied the DLP technology...there are a bunch of mirrors moving about there....many mirrors in fact. The moving mirrors are one reason why DLPs don't often look as good as LCDs when showing static images...the DLP can't hold a static image...has to jiggle the mirrors to simulate varying intensities.

True. millions of tiny mirrors swinging back and forth in a no-reflective state for "off", and a reflective state for "on". Steve, with this definition above of DLP's operation, what would be the more recommended machine for home use..DLP or LCD machines since of the gridwork display of the LCD version?

thx-Monte

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 11-20-2005 11:04 PM

I can't see the bulbs being over 3K since the projectors generally seem to go into medium sized < 350 seat audtioriums. So I would really like to understand the thought process behind leaving the bulbs on if anyone has any input.

| IP: Logged

Sam Graham
AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues.

Posts: 1431
From: Waukee, IA
Registered: Dec 2004

posted 11-30-2005 10:14 PM

CINEMA: Megaplex 17 at Jordan Commons, Sandy, UT
AUDITORIUM: 15
PRESENTATION: DLP Disney Digital 3-D Dolby Digital Cinema Say That Three Times Fast
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: None [Cool]

RATING: Two and one half stars (out of four)

Like the Cricket IMAX, they're doing "reserved seating" in this auditorium. We don't get an usher this time. The ticket taker says "Auditorium 15 is to your right. The bathrooms are back there. This is reserved seating, so please check your ticket for your seat. And here are your 3-D glasses. Would you like this free "Making of the Work and the Glory (American Zion)" DVD?"

There were no people running around exchanging seats this time, partly because there was very little audience. I overheard an employee the other day saying the kids had all moved on to "Polar Express" at the IMAX.

Warning issued with 3-D glasses: "Keep out of reach of children under 3." Well WHO DO THEY THINK THIS MOVIE IS TARGETED AT?!? It isn't smart enough for most kids older than, oh, six...

So the trailers start (after a warning to not put on the glasses yet) and the first thing I see in DLP is the trailer for "Cheaper by the Dozen 2", which starts out with simulated film scratches for effect. There's irony for ya.

The non-3-D trailers were kind of fuzzy, but the feature was sharp and clear. I was most impressed with the 3-D when things weren't moving quickly...otherwise the strobe effect noted previously was apparent. I don't plan to see "Polar Express" in IMAX 3-D for comparison because "Polar Express" sucks.

The sound was awesome.

I didn't think the movie was too bad, and I thought the ending was cute. "Ugly Duckling" looks a lot like MaggieMoo. I expect any sequel to be a Disney "straight to video" release.

| IP: Logged

Richard Fowler
Film God

Posts: 2392
From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA
Registered: Jun 2001

posted 12-01-2005 08:42 AM

I saw this at the Muvico in Davie Florida. The color space on the coming attraction trailers prior to the 3D almost looked like Kodachrome in color and contrast. The use of 3D was excellent and the complaints that most of the 3D was at the image frame and behind where a "matter of opinion"....3D was another element to move the story along...not the scene stealer. The cicular polarizers worked great on ghosting image issues; the only time of saw ghosting was when a high contrast circular image was shown, like a ring of white circles. This film is no Pixar but the 3D made it more fun.
I noticed on another post they complained about "texture" on the screen. The manufacture of silver screens is difficult with most surfaces sprayed with 4 to 7 coats of silver. Problems with spray heads, temperature + humidity in the factory and mounting of spray ( horizontal or vertical ) heads can be a factor.....there are one - two screen companies which use a "printed" surface but they also can have problems since screens are made from several rolls of material which may not match up. Screens are made of panels and welded or stitched to create the full surface. Silver screens have more problems where the seams will show in the image....this was the case at this cinema location as 3 to 4 non 3D looking lines appeared in bright scenes.

| 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.