Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Blade Runner

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » Blade Runner (Page 2)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Author

Topic: Blade Runner

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 10-18-2005 10:24 PM

You're right: Ladd Company, not Orion. [uhoh]

I really am full of [bs]

sometimes.

What a waste it is to lose one's mind! I stand corrected. [beer]

| IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000

posted 10-18-2005 10:47 PM

Theatrical distribution was handled through Warner Bros.

| IP: Logged

Mathew Molloy
Master Film Handler

Posts: 357
From: The Santa Cruz Mountains
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 10-18-2005 11:50 PM

In Seattle I ran a 70mm print of Blade Runner for a week about five years ago and we were (accidentally?) sent one of the 'audience test prints'. Memory of this has grown slightly fuzzy but there's discussion of this and other test print versions on the internet. I do remember there was a mix of Vangelis and orchestral music and the eye gouging scene was a tad longer (as in the unrated version I have on Beta released many moons ago). There is some narration although not as much as in the original release and some of the narration was different than on the re-release. I prefer this version actually except for the end narration which went something like, "I sat there and watched him die...and then he died and he was dead." We just tried to book Blade Runner but Warners no longer has the rights.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

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

posted 10-19-2005 12:04 AM

quote:
“XANADU” that was with “Olivia Newton-John” and “Gene Kelly” that’s a film I haven’t heard about in years.

Yep, it was a stinker from Universal that summer of 1980 nationwide, but at the VILLA in SLC, it was garninshing sellout crowds and huge bankrolls.

Granted, story was thin in as well (a simple boy-girl love story) as the plot, but because of the SOUND quality that place produced off that print and the fanbase of Olivia Newton-John in that city, made this movie a hit in this city.

I've got the LP soundtrack and the VHS copy of this movie. In the early 80's, this movie was out on LD in stereo.

quote: David Stambaugh
Ladd Company, not Orion.

But Dave, don't kick yourself too hard there, LADD, and eventually Orion DID go through WarnerBros, being independent production companies.

Just that Orion, even though they started out doing their own productions and releases (being that they had 1984's "AMADEUS" all by themselves, then in 1990 through Warner released "DANCES with WOLVES" at their big front gun movies in the AMPAS awards), eventually got into some finanical trouble to where they had Warner do the releases and then Warner soaked them up completely.

-Monte

| IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000

posted 10-19-2005 12:33 AM

quote: Monte L Fullmer
Just that Orion, even though they started out doing their own productions and releases (being that they had 1984's "AMADEUS" all by themselves, then in 1990 through Warner released "DANCES with WOLVES" at their big front gun movies in the AMPAS awards), eventually got into some finanical trouble to where they had Warner do the releases and then Warner soaked them up completely.

Orion was soaked up by MGM and MGM was aquired by Sony. As I remember Orion released Dances With Wolves on it's own. Orion released on it's own First Blood in 1982.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

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

posted 10-19-2005 12:52 AM

Yea, got things crossed up a bit: Orion was in part with Warner Bros at the beginning, not at the end when "Leo, the Lion" soaked them up in 1997.

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001

posted 10-19-2005 01:14 AM

quote:
Theatrical distribution [of "Blade Runner"] was handled through Warner Bros.

This is true because WB did Ladd's distribution. However, Dave's comment pertained to the logo at the head of the film, which at the time of its initial release was the Ladd logo (with a tiny "distributed through Warner Bros." blurb near the bottom).

quote:
Yep, ["Xanadu"] was a stinker from Universal that summer of 1980 nationwide, but at the VILLA in SLC, it was garninshing sellout crowds and huge bankrolls...because of the SOUND quality that place produced off that print.

Monte,
Was it really optical? Couldn't it have been a 4-track mag print?

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

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

posted 10-19-2005 02:07 AM

quote: Michael Coate
Monte,
Was it really optical? Couldn't it have been a 4-track mag print?

Yessir, it was an optical print.

For I was up in that booth with the chief projectionist of that theatre when the film was being played.

"Look MA! no mag tracks on my print, yet I'm playing stereo!"

the Villa was a MANN theatre back then and I was with MANN as well as our town's chief projectionist.

I was, more or less, in the "circle of brothers" with the other MANN projectionists at that time and the head of technical department with MANN invited me down to SLC to witness the sound reproduction of the Dolby "A" optical at the Villa, which was a grand place in SLC to see 70mm presentations, due to that huge Cinerama screen that was installed there.

I took a spin down there shortly afterwards, went to the VILLA, went upstairs with the chief projectionist, who was also the local RCA sound tech, working for MANN (and an IA booth), and he showed me and explained to me all of the necessary stuff to make this Dolby print work and sound correctly.

Course, this was all new to me since none of our theatres in my hometown had such privileges of optical stereo playback. My theatre still had the Simplex magnetic setup, which time to time, I would still test out since I had some mag film to run though.

To have Dolby Stereo was like being a king of the castle back in those days.

Granted, this house had Century "JJ's" plopped in front of Ashcraft SuperCorelite lamphouses (Side Topic: the following summer, they ran "Raiders of the Lost ARK" in 70mm with this same booth setup. Here's a strip of that film that I got the following year when I saw "Raiders" later that year, that I sent to the webmaster on his page of the VILLA theatre in SLC, UTAH), but that TECH, who spent quite a few weeks at DOLBY school in SFO, learned as much as he can with DOLBY - is the reason that auditorium and film reproduction sounded so good.

The sound was so clean and bright, that I thought that it WAS a 4trk mag print being played.

thx-Monte

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 10-19-2005 06:43 AM

quote:
“Blade Runner”

| IP: Logged

Bill Gabel
Film God

Posts: 3873
From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 10-19-2005 07:36 AM

quote:
The first was limited run, hand numbered version on a company called "Off World Records".

The limited run was 2000 discs. (I forgot I had this disc. #1610 out of 2000)

"Xanadu" was a optical Dolby Stereo A release. Mann's Chinese opened it in one of the twin theatres. In those days for major release first run theatres. The studio would pay for a full Dolby sound call. [thumbsup]

Those were the days.

| IP: Logged

Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 10-19-2005 11:10 AM

I personally hate most narrated movies. It makes me feel as if the studio thinks I am too stupid to get it.

In fact, the original cut of the movie had no narration, nor the ending that it had. The studio felt that everyone would be too dumb to understand the picture, filmed the drive away into the sunset ending, and brought Harrison in to dub the narration of the film over.

I prefer the original cut, which was not the original theatrical cut. I enjoy both, but my favorite would have to be the re-cut version that Riddley Scott first shot.

Ciao

| IP: Logged

Andy Summers
Master Film Handler

Posts: 397
From: Bournemouth Dorset United kingdom
Registered: Jun 2005

posted 10-19-2005 01:23 PM

Do you think the Dolby type “A” encoding will still be on the DVD version, in spite that it’s been done digitally there are a few films where I’ve detected hiss, I’d like to have the Dolby cat 363 pictured hear http://www.sonicperfectionists.com/images/NoiseReduction450.jpg

This baby is dual, type “A” and “SR” but you already knew that.

Seen a few of these going around cheaply, like to have a few of them, this model came at around the late 1980’s there about, I think it was 1988?

Anyway if I see the chance and there going dirt cheep I’ll snap them up.

Just like to improve the sound slightly, I think my NICAM version of Blade Runner had slight hiss on it, with a few pops and crackles, I love that stuff.

Monte’

I saw that site scratched “Raiders of the Lost Ark” article before I joined the Film-Tech Forums, I spoke to a projectionist in my home town where he calms that Dolby Stereo mag prints sound better over Dolby SR-D Digital, due to the compression used.

Though the copies of the “Indiana Jones” trilogy on DVD have been sourced from the six-track masters, compression will still be a small issue, but we can live with that.

I think Laserdisc had less audio compression used; I’ve got that “Raiders” buzz I’ve got that buzz, just going top play a few chapters from it, arr that THX feeling

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

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

posted 10-19-2005 01:40 PM

quote:
I spoke to a projectionist in my home town where he claims that Dolby Stereo mag prints sound better over Dolby SR-D Digital, due to the compression used.

Course, this statement is an automatic no-brainer here. Analog sound is actually a more truer soundform being that digital is actually "squaring off" the analog waveform by "chopping" off the peaks of each waveform.

It doesn't matter how high your sampling frequency is or how high the bitrate is, you're still chopping off that waveform and losing a bit of the analog waveform.

You'll find arguments and discussions on this real quick on the topic between analog and digital sound.

One of the advantages with digital that is over analog reproduction is the limited dB range of the linear magnetic's saturation point, (S/N ratio of -65dB (on an average) to digital's -100+dB). This is why digital has more dynamic range than linear magnetic.

Plus, the mag releases are coming from the edited magnetic session masters, captured during the recording sessions and probably being duped in the "real time" 1.00/1.00 mode, which is the most purest form of duplication.

-Monte

| IP: Logged

Andy Summers
Master Film Handler

Posts: 397
From: Bournemouth Dorset United kingdom
Registered: Jun 2005

posted 10-19-2005 03:00 PM

Monte’

So if there was an A&B testing one say the “Final Approach” there where three version of this films soundtrack available when it came out 1992 Dolby SR CDS and 70mm /six-track Dolby Stereo with split-surrounds though I’ve never had the opportunity to do an A&B test of this film, I’m wondering if you have done a comparison test?

And giving the value levels of each of the analogue and digital formats S/N ratio being different, would you say there’s something distinguishable about it 70mm Dolby Stereo A or SR mag.

Damn “Raiders of the Lost Ark” has got one hellish six-track Dolby Stereo mix, playing right now; well actually the credits are rolling….

Hold on I’ve just turned it up to 0db can you hear it….LOL.

So you’ve been in the game few fair few years, and seeing lots of new techniques passing your way I take it, arr, rolling the credits again, I confess I do like this film, though I’ve never seen the 70mm Blow-up version only Indiana 2 and 3.though I have seen all in regular optical Dolby Stereo “A.”

Anyway is there a way around this cropping of analogue waveform, though the use of addition technologies or just have to simple sit back and enjoy what I have

Monte’ is there a technical paper on the differences between 70mm and Dolby SR-D.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

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

posted 10-20-2005 01:40 AM

quote: Andy Summers
Hold on I’ve just turned it up to 0db can you hear it….LOL.

Running it 100% WIDE open...are your ears bleeding by now [Big Grin]

(LOL)?

quote:
Anyway, is there a way around this cropping of analogue waveform though the use of addition technologies, or just have to simple sit back and enjoy what I have.

Just have to sit back and enjoy your LD's and DVD's with all of this. Once a analogue waveform have been cropped, there is no turning back.

Just like taking a .WAV file and crunching it down to an MP3, or MWA with the compression programs that are "lossy" programs - (progams that looses some data bits during the compression), and then "exploding" them back to .WAV's - just not the same.

Why I like LP's and open reel tapes - pure analogue soundsource.

quote: Andy Summers
I’m wondering if you have done a comparison test?

Actually, the comparison test that I've done personally with "Raiders" is of the one mentioned of my visit to the VILLA when the 70mm mag release was being played, and then in 1987, when I played the re-release of "Raiders" in Dolby "A" format using a CP-50 processor sending the output lines through QSA 200 amps with Electrovoice speakers behind the screen.

Even then, I could tell that the mag 70mm release that I witnessed back in that summer of 1981, walked all over the Dolby "A" release hands down with no question.

The VILLA was originally, as you know by reading that article in that villatheatre link, for the most purest form of sound there could possibly be, and that was with using the Cinerama process.

Then, when Cinerama faded away and the Century Cinerama machines were taken out and replaced with a pair of Century "JJ's", this theatre kept up with the high quality of sound as possible-being one of the most prestigious 70mm theatres here in the western part of the States during the 60's and mid 70's.

1000% quality was the absolute norm that had to be presented at this theatre at the time and at all times.

Sure, there were other 70mm houses in SLC, even one drive-in had 70mm (the Park-Vu DR. In with that huge, curved, perforated(to let the wind blow through) outdoor screen...), but none of these other theatres could really be on the same level as the VILLA.

The VILLA was the 70mm palace-no question about that. The next 70mm palace close by here in the mountain west, would have been the Cooper in Denver, which also was a Cinerama house as well.

This is also why, in my previous post about the movie "Xanadu", that this movie also sounded fantastic for being a Dolby "A" optical print - to keep up that sound quality that the VILLA was known for.

Thus, when I did that A/B test with my witnessing each performance, it really depended on the theatre's setup on which really sounded the best. And of course, the 70mm mag will always win - no matter what.

(Okey, I'm going to throw another side topic on this for you, Andy: I saw STAR WARS in 70mm, in 1977 and this presentation ALSO blew away the 35mm Dolby "A" releases hands down..once again, it depended on the theatre setup (which this 35mm house couldn't even touch a good Dolby setup and the CENTRE (being a PLITT theatre)in SLC, that was playing STAR WARS at this time. Only disadvantage with the CENTRE that it had a flat screen, not curved, but the sound was still good since they had CP-65 processors there for the 70mm release.

AND, another one: I saw "LOGAN's RUN", in 1976 at this same CENTRE, in 70mm, and then ran the 35mm later on, but these 35mm prints were just mono only. Thus, couldn't do the "A/B" on this release...)

quote: Andy Summers
is there a technical paper on the differences between 70mm and Dolby SR-D?

Now, as a teacher can also be a pupil since, granted, I've been in this film business for a good number of years, but unfortunately, didn't expand too well in the technical field being of my restrictions due to the area where theatre technology rather was at a standstill.

Thus, my level of ignorance is at a level of a need to be "filled" from other teachers that can also enlighten others as well as me on many topics of this nature.

I invite Steve Guttag, or Mark G. to enlighten and share what they know to us on this topic so that all of us can learn more between these technicial differences that you so mentioned above.

-thx Monte

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

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.