|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: New Kodak Theater
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 03-25-2002 10:50 AM
The Kodak Theatre is a multi-use facility designed by prominent architect David Rockwell to host major musical productions, concerts, comedy, dance, and variety shows.
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-110801holly.story
Kodak Theatre Details Here's a link to some info on the sound system:
http://www.qscaudio.com/news/kodak.htm ------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene
Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 03-25-2002 02:34 PM
OK!! NOW YOU HAVE GONE AND DONE IT!!!Now I have to defend Monsters Inc! I admit that the really stupid fake bloopers are old and dumb, but at least its at the end! You can leave! With shrek, you have to keep watching the really old and very unfunny jokes as told by two of the unfunniest people of all time. Eddie murphy was funny in 1980, and Mike Myers was great in 1990, but only for a few moments. It could be just me, but when a joke is told more than twice, I go looking for different, and when it is rehashed, I start to get a bit of nausea in my belly. Sure some of the potshots at disney were cute, but it all started to get just a little predictable after a while. John Lithgow was the ONLY good thing about that film, as he was the ONLY real actor in that film. I don't recall any of the other three EVER having any real acting in thier careers, just a lot of very silly slapstick style comedy. John fell into comedy as of recent, which is why he can pull off a role such as this. Serious actors always come off funnier in comedies anyway, because they know how to play the straight man to the joke. NIETHER of the three entries in that category deserved it anyway. It is a HORRIBLE category, why dont we just merge the golden globes with the oscars while we are at it??? Really, I am a happy camper. Dave
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 03-25-2002 02:57 PM
Aaron said: "Anyone else catch the way cool shot of the Simplex E-7 with 6000' reels up in the balcony running the opening montage of the ceremony? WAY cool".I agree that it was  , but that vintage projector, lamp and lens were not the ones actually being used --- likewise, I suspect the costumed "projectionist" was an actor. ------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene
Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 03-28-2002 03:05 AM
Remember that this year was the lowest in SHARE, not necesarrily in audience. There are more people than ever watching TV, so when you add people to the frey, and they dont watch your show, your share goes down.The audience level was about one million households less than last year, but still killed in the ratings regardless. I agree, that whoopi just was not on her game. I think that they would have done better giving ol Dave a shot again. His popularity skyrocketed after his heart attack and 9/11. My thought is that perhaps maybe having the remaining members of Monty Python host the next oscars. They would bring an all time ratings sweep and bring the house down. Dave
| 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
ACK! 
Nice touch.
Printer-friendly view of this topic