Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull: May 22, 2008

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull: May 22, 2008 (Page 12)

This topic comprises 22 pages: 1 2 3 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 20 21 22

Author

Topic: Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull: May 22, 2008

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

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

posted 02-28-2008 03:13 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
Technically, Indiana Jones is George Lucas' baby.

Yep, and we see who won the "Shoot it digitally!" vs. "Shoot it on film!" debate between them.

This is freakin hilarious. Major Kudos to Mr. Spielberg!

[thumbsup]

| IP: Logged

Brian Guckian
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 594
From: Dublin, Ireland
Registered: Apr 2003

posted 02-28-2008 03:55 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
If the CGI and DI are rendered in the usual 2K quality level then this film only effort in distribution will be tinged with more than a bit of hypocrisy. A 35mm film print doesn't gain anything above 2K digital projection if the movie is output only in 2K resolution.

Is it confirmed they're doing a DI? They might not. After all, they were able to do CGI in The Last Crusade long before the advent of DI.

Mind you, I think 4K DI isn't half bad. I remember projecting Walk the Line and finding the DI was most unobtrusive.

If DI is used on The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull it is highly likely they'd use 4K.

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 02-28-2008 03:55 PM

Are they even doing a DI on this thing?

Lucas may own the rights, but it's definitely Spielberg's baby. This film-only thing is proof of that.

| IP: Logged

Dustin Mitchell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1865
From: Mondovi, WI, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 02-28-2008 05:11 PM

Prediction #1: it won't end up happening, just like how Gibson wanted to release Passion with no subtitles.

Prediction #2: if it happens it will be completely meaningless.

I'm no digi-phile. I know that film done right can perform just as well if not better than 2k digital. I have never seen a 70mm presentation but the opinion seems to be unanimous that it is superior to all current formats.

All that being said 2k DLP is the best presented format in current wide release. Look at what I said carefully, best PRESENTED format. Talk about caring projectionists and rejecting reels with even the slightest defect is all well and good but in the end the vast majority of the first run 35mm screens in the US are giving a very poor presentation, worse than digital if I may say so myself. Releaseing Indy 4 in 35mm only is going to change NOTHING about the current state of projection. You're still going to see tons of scratches on the prints, even before the first public screening (build up damage/prescreening damage). Many prints will still be cached with dirt and fingerprints. You're still going to have digital sound dropouts due to various reasons. Yes, none of these problems are caused by the fact the movie is being shown in 35mm, they're being caused by pis poor/ignorant 'projectionists'. What causes the problems doesn't change the fact that they're there however.

What makes this hair brained scheme even worse is the fact that most digital complexes do have dual systems. The ones that end up showing Indy and doing so in 35mm will have operators who haven't handled film on a regular basis in months. The chance for mistakes and equipment failure will be much higher in these locations.

In the end? A meaningless gesture that will change nothing. I daresay it may even help digital along a bit-if there is enough press attention on this I'm willing to bet audiences used to a digital presentation will be none to happy with the inevitable presentation problems. Management blaming the problems on the format ('that just happens with film', 'film gets like that') will just reinforce the customers opinions.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 02-28-2008 05:54 PM

Now it WOULD be cool if they could carry this a bit further and offer 5/70 prints to those that can play it. Personally, I'd like to see a 5/70 release with DCinema and see which has the bigger draw....particularlly on a film that was born on film and edited on film.

Steve

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-28-2008 06:26 PM

UPDATE: OK, I just talked on the phone to an Exhibitor Relations rep at Paramount and he hadn't heard a thing about this 35mm-only deal.

Also the joblo.com page now has an update saying that 35mm-only will happen as long as it won't cause too much financial impact and "unless Spielberg has a change of heart."

So I have gone back to being skeptical.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

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

posted 02-28-2008 06:42 PM

Note,

In truth, we are talking about 10% or so of the theatres that would be affected IF they were 100% digital with NO film capability. By forcing film, they are also probably forcing the movie to ONLY play in the largest houses in the 100% digital theatress too.

I wonder if this is going to be kinda like Pearl Jam when they released their new works on LP first and then CD.

As for those POed people...just WHO guaranteed them digital prints? None of this stuff is "DCI" compliant yet too. There are already those that spent money on the 1st gen stuff that have been told...sorry, no more so that money is blown. As for the current stuff...Disney has stated that if you don't keep up and continue to make things compliant, then you will be left behind too. What if some of the current equipment can't be made compliant...oh well?

Anyone that is buy DCinema now is certainly doing it on speculation and definately not entirely with their own money.

Steve

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

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

posted 02-28-2008 07:46 PM

quote: Brad Allen
Indy will not be available in digital.

I find that hard to believe. On the other hand, Taranterrible did it on "Grind House"! [Eek!]

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 02-28-2008 10:01 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
Now it WOULD be cool if they could carry this a bit further and offer 5/70 prints to those that can play it.

Oh man, if Spielberg did that I would be pulling some 35mm projectors out of service to install 70mm machines in a heartbeat!

| IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 02-28-2008 10:18 PM

quote:
On the other hand, Taranterrible did it on "Grind House"!

I could be wrong, but wasn't that because Weinstein hadn't started releasing movies digitally yet?

| IP: Logged

Dustin Mitchell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1865
From: Mondovi, WI, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 02-29-2008 12:50 AM

quote: Steve Guttag
By forcing film, they are also probably forcing the movie to ONLY play in the largest houses in the 100% digital theatress too.

This isn't true at least for my location. The dual format houses are mid size only. Don't ask me who made that call.

quote: Mike Blakesley
UPDATE: OK, I just talked on the phone to an Exhibitor Relations rep at Paramount and he hadn't heard a thing about this 35mm-only deal.

Apparantly our booker called today requesting info on our 35mm screens and gave out the '35mm only' plan as being the reason. They could have been going off this rumor, however. I'd say your info is more accurate coming from the horse's mouth and all.

| IP: Logged

Brian Guckian
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 594
From: Dublin, Ireland
Registered: Apr 2003

posted 02-29-2008 11:30 AM

quote: Dustin Mitchell
Releaseing Indy 4 in 35mm only is going to change NOTHING about the current state of projection

Not necessarily...such a move could be accompanied by a new film-based training and information initiative.

All the support and information is out there - trainers, manuals, publications, reference charts, etc. etc. This website could be involved too!

These days, nobody can legitimately say they "don't know" how to handle film properly.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-29-2008 01:30 PM

Further UPDATE on the no-digital question:

An e-mail I received from NATO today said that Paramount will be distributing Indy in both digital and film.

| IP: Logged

Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 900
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2002

posted 03-02-2008 07:36 PM

I don't understand how any theatre can be all-digital. As far as I can tell, only a small percentage of films have been released in digital and according to the lists I have (which admittedly might not be complete), they actually show a decrease to the number of digital films released. For 2006, I show about 65 films and for 2007, I have tracked about 50. For 2008, I only show 7 so far.

| IP: Logged

David Zylstra
Master Film Handler

Posts: 432
From: Novi, MI, USA
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 03-02-2008 07:51 PM

We have 3 locations (10, 18 and 18 screens) - all our screens are digital and about half are dual 35mm/digital. In the past year we have seen only 5-6 movies on 35mm only, and these 5-6 were all limited release titles - since our 10 screen is in a small market and doesn't usually get the limited releases it has pretty much been 100% digital for more than the past year. Of the current releases we are showing only "There Will be Blood" and "Bonneville" are 35mm (there might be 1 other but I can't think of the title offhand).

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 22 pages: 1 2 3 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 20 21 22

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.