|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: What movie had the widest release in 70mm?
|
Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 02-01-2002 07:22 PM
quote:
What I was talking about was that the Coate and Kallay article used to be available online to anyone, even to non-subscribers of Widescreen Review. The database of 70mm films was also onine and searchable. A couple of months ago, it disappeared. The URL was:
http://db.widescreenreview.com/theatrical/70mmartcl.htm It seems to be gone now. Does anyone know where it went? Did Widescreen Review decide they wanted to make it a pay-only thing?
There are several items of possible interest to 70mm enthusiasts on the Widescreen Review site, including the article and film lists mentioned in this thread. There is also a recently completed section on 70mm exhibition in the Los Angeles area with listings of all of the known engagements along with the theaters they ran in. Unfortunately, those items are now located on the subscriber side of the Web site (it wasn't my decision). They are located in a section known as the "Theatrical Ographies" (dumb name, I know -- also not my decision!). I'm not posting here to plug my work (the topic was already raised by others in the thread). Having said that, some of you might actually find the work worth paying for. If any subscribers are interested in any links to the sections, or have difficulty locating them, simply email me and I'll provide any requested information. An earlier version of the work is still available in the 2001 Special Edition print issue mentioned in an earlier post. Michael Coate
Co-Author/Compiler
"Presented In 70mm"
"70mm In L.A."
Widescreen Review Magazine
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 08-04-2002 01:23 PM
Bill Gabel wrote:We had double features of "Alien" & "Close Encounters", "Jazz Singer" & "Zoot Suit" in Sensurround Plus, "Sleeping Beauty" & "Black Hole", "Fame" & "Divine Madness". "Empire Strikes Back" and "Raiders of the Lost
Ark" each for a few weeks then doubled up. I've always been curious as to how exactly Sensurround Plus worked on Zoot Suit, and how it differed from Sensurround. Bill Gabel wrote: The best one I saw was
at The Pacific's Warner Beverly Hills. It was "Patton" in 70mm
and "The Longest Day" in 4 track Mag. Great Show ): There seemed to be very RARE instances when 70 was run with 35 (Tora!Tora!Tora! with Vanishing Point at the Egyptian comes to mind.) Were there any special union contracts needed for a split double feature like this? Did the lamphouses get a refocus between the shows? Or were there four projectors at the theatre set-up? I remember three at the Egyptian. BTW, the only 70mm double feature I ever saw was THE WIND AND THE LION and MAN OF LA MANCHA at the Royal in SF.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bill Gabel
Film God
Posts: 3873
From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 08-05-2002 12:24 PM
In a few of the major film palaces in Los Angeles, they had more
than two projectors. The Warner Beverly Hills had 4 projectors.
We had 2 Norelco DP70's and 2 Black Simplex XL's. They at one
time had a pair of VistaVision Century projectors. They also had
a pair of followspots too. This theatre ran carbon arc, it had no
platters. This theatre was one of the Best presentation houses in
Los Angeles, in it's day. As for special pay. If you where running
a Road Show House (which is two shows nightly and matinees on Wed,
Sat & Sun) in Los Angeles the contract was $50.00 per performation.
But during the 70's, those big film palaces in Beverly Hills
(Warner Beverly Hills, Fox Wilshire, Loew's Beverly) they would run
double bills of films. As the Road Show films became fewer and fewer
, the chains would book past Roadshow 70mm films. Some times it was
a 70mm and 35mm double, depending on the theatre. Because as part of
the contract the projectionist got alittle more to run 70mm, on a
regular city or screening run. Back in the mid 90's, I ran a Disney
double feature at Pacific's Crest theatre in Westwood. I ran "Beauty
and the Beast" in 70mm and "Aladdin" in 35mm SRD. They had the same
double at the El Capitan in Hollywood. But at the Crest we had a
Century JJ-3 and a Simplex XL projectors and two AW-3 platters. Yes
the Crest had two platters for a single screen theatre. The El Capitan
has two Century JJ-3's and one AW3 platter. At the Pacific's Hollywood
Pacific Tri-Plex theatre. If you were running 70mm downstairs. You
had to have a extra projectionist to run the twin upstairs. Most of the First Run Palaces in Los Angeles had three projectors. Two for
the feature and one for the trailers/short subjects.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 08-07-2013 11:30 AM
Not meaning to sound overly picky, but how are we defining 'widest release' - the number of prints made, number of theatres played, total number of revenue-earning screenings, etc.?
In terms of prints made, I'd take a wild guess that it would be a 1970s title - after 35mm mag had effectively died but before Dolby SVA became established, and so 70mm was the only way of getting multi-channel sound and thus essential for prestige, city centre venues. One of the early saturation-release blockbusters, e.g. Jaws or Star Wars, maybe?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 08-07-2013 05:27 PM
Interesting. It would probably be completely impossible to compile the figures, but if it were possible, it would be interesting to compare that to the top ten list of the total number of people who saw a given movie in 70mm. My impression is that the saturation release and multiplex era resulted in a vastly increased number of prints (both 35 and 70) to be made of mainstream titles, but for each one to be seen by a smaller total audience, thanks to the new distribution and marketing techniques of the '70s and '80s depending on a movie opening everywhere and at once (TV ads etc.).
I've spent quite a bit of time going through the British trade press from the '20s to the '50s. One of the two major publications, Today's Cinema, regularly published boiled down versions of the press releases from distributors, which included how many prints of a title were being struck or imported for the UK release. What sticks in my mind is how small those figures were - 30 to 50 was typical for a top-budget 'A' picture. Figures I remember are 25 for The Iron Horse (including 10 that were hand tinted and toned for prestige bookings, the rest b/w), 18 for Gone With the Wind and 45 for The Big Sleep. Yet those films were seen by tens of millions of people, because each print did a 2-3 year release cycle from the grand opening at, say, the Odeon Leicester Square until finally ending up at the Bijou, Chipping Sodbury, opening in a new theatre every Monday and Thursday throughout that time.
Fast forward to the late 1980s, and a typical 35mm release print of a blockbuster does 3-5 weeks at a multiplex and then goes straight to landfill. My first job was at a typical suburban high street cinema in 1990, and it was very rare that we wouldn't get a new print of everything.
So, bringing this back to topic, I wouldn't be surprised if the roadshow 70mm releases of the 1950s were seen by just as many if not more people than the 70mm prints of the 1980s saturation releases, because the likelihood is that each individual print saw revenue-earning service over a much greater time period.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
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
Printer-friendly view of this topic