|
|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
|
Author
|
Topic: End of proper wide screens = the end of moviegoing for me
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-08-2016 10:11 AM
quote: Jesse Skeen
Remembering all the complaints in the 80s and 90s about letterboxing on video (main reason why most movies on VHS were pan and scan, while laserdiscs were letterboxed as more educated people bought those) I'm surprised Joe Average doesn't at least ask these theaters to crop the movies to fit their screens (I don't know if projectors can be set to do that or not, though of course for me that would be even more of a deal-breaker.) I've noticed hi-def cable movie channels usually show cropped (or sometimes open-matte) versions of scope movies, I've even accidentally watched a couple on Netflix and could quickly tell they were cropped- not as badly as in the 4x3 days but still cropped nonetheless.
I still have a feeling the 'scope format is going to fall out of favor, if not stop being used by new movies completely. Right now it doesn't seem like such a thing is possible since nearly every new movie it seems is cropped down to 'scope aspect ratio. But I think the relentless trend of installing common width screens (sans masking) in new theater builds is setting the stage for the death of 'scope.
IMAX could once again be a culprit is driving this kind of change, just as it did for influencing the removal of masking and curtains from commercial theater screens. They've already had at least a couple or so "exclusive" features where standard theaters received a cropped, 'scope ratio version while the IMAX houses got the taller version that actually showed more imagery. The next Captain America and Avengers movies are going to use this approach. Supposedly some or most of the footage in these movies will be shot with IMAX' new digital cameras, modified Arri Alexa 65 cameras with vertical anamorphic lenses to stretch the image taller. They will be selling this taller image as a bonus in the theatrical market.
From the early 1980's thru mid 1990's most movie releases were flat. A lot of big event movies were released in flat format. Remember all those odd 70mm blow-up prints of movies in flat format? Of course this trend was heavily influenced by the VHS tape format and the then-booming home video industry.
The situation with home video is very different today. I'm not sure if movie studio executives have bothered to notice their biggest revenue source, physical movie disc sales, is in a state of rapid decline. Many thousands of video rental stores have closed, as have retail stores that specialize in selling videos, music, books and games. Even the Redbox kiosk business is now taking a beating lately. There has been overall sales growth in streaming VOD, but profit margins are far more slim there. And movies are not the top selling point with streaming services; TV series are the main point of interest there. Whether movie studios like it or not, the commercial theater market is going to be more vital to them in the future. They're going to be making less and less money on home video.
If the movie industry once again becomes more dependent on commercial theaters for revenue they might do more to once again tailor their content more for those theater screens. A lot of older theaters with common height, 'scope shaped screens have been demolished. There is industry pressure for theaters to incorporate recliners, in theater food service, bars, etc. That's all easier to incorporate into a brand new multiplex rather than retrofit into an old, existing theater.
In the end, the 'scope format is just becoming less and less relevant.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jesse Skeen
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1517
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 12-09-2016 02:22 AM
The seats at this place are actually pretty cool, that's one of the few positives I'd give it- but improper screens are still a deal-breaker. If people DO care more about the seating than presentation, then that gives this theater even less of an edge as those who like the recliners can buy similar ones for their living rooms, but there's only so large a screen one can fit there. I actually did like the size of the "XD" screen and would have gone back had it been the proper ratio, maybe even if it had been top-masked but the masking always stayed put for scope features so it might not be so easy to tell at first.
As for listing theaters that still do it right, as bad as the nearby UA Market Square is, their screens are all common-height with side masking, as they should be. Since they started running digital pre-show, the masking does go to 1.85 in between shows which I don't really approve of, though if that crap is coming from the same projector then at least from an automation standpoint it makes sense as the lens has to zoom the same time the masking opens. The dimensions of the smaller auditoriums there actually would better fit common-width screens though, as the scope picture would have been the same size had they done that. Sad that newer theaters have made this place look good in comparison (they NEVER did film right, and their digital presentation is still somewhat flawed, mainly being too dark when I've been there.)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 12-09-2016 10:59 AM
quote: Bobby Henderson
For those occasions where viewers choose to pay more to see a movie at a commercial theater, those viewers assume a theater is supposed to follow certain professional standards of practice even if the viewers don't know what those standards may be.
I think you're over-estimating people. Sure they want things to look right and sound right, but beyond that they really don't know what to look for. The main thing they want is to see the movie they came to see and be as comfortable as possible.
In my theater we have our screen masked for scope, but we have a pillarbox presentation for flat movies because it's simply not possible to put movable masking over the ends of the screen due to the way it was built in 1930. (There is no space for the mechanism, so I've been told.) We get about 15,000 to 20,000 people a year in here. In the past 40 years, wanna guess how many people have said "It's too bad you don't have masking on that screen"? That's right, zero.
That's not to say I wouldn't put masking there (and a curtain) if I could afford it or it was possible. I would love to do that. But we'll probably need to update the seats, sound, popcorn machine or projector again before we can do either of those.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|
Home
![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
)
Printer-friendly view of this topic