|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: What development has had the greatest impact on the movie business?
|
Mitchell Dvoskin
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1869
From: West Milford, NJ, USA
Registered: Jan 2001
|
posted 01-28-2010 12:00 PM
- 1. Talkies. While sound movies were inevitable with the advance of technology, introducing it in 1927 put movies at the forefront of entertainment for decades.
¤ - 2. Xenon Bulbs. While we can argue forever about platters, big reels, automated changeovers, multiplexes, etc, but without xenon none of this would be possible. They transformed the entire exhibition industry.
¤ - 3. Home Video. I include in this DVD's, Internet Downloads, HD, etc. For the first time, the public could watch whatever movie they wanted whenever they wanted, both by owning and renting. As a result of the home video revolution, theatrical exhibition eventually ceased to be at the cutting edge of picture and sound presentation, but relegated to catch up. It also allowed anyone with a desire and a moderate amount of money to set up a home theater to rival the commercial operations.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 01-28-2010 12:56 PM
Platter or not, I do wish that every multiplex would have two projectors for the largest screen and, ideally, changever capability on a mid-size and small screen as well. It would provide redundancy (assuming that the platter could feed either machine) and would save significant labor costs for screenings and rentals. With two changeover screens, it would even be possible to do a manual version of Brad's delayed interlock if needed.
I'm really surprised that the two-machines-with-platter combination is not more popular, since is by far the most flexible arrangement.
Back to the original topic:
I'm amazed that no one else voted for television. This is what marked the shift from out-of-home entertainment (for which there would normally be an admission charge) to in-home entertainment (which is free, after the initial purchase of a set). It spawned 70mm, Cinerama, Cinemascope, VistaVision, multichannel sound, and a general improvement in theatrical exhibition quality. It also provided the basis for movies on videotape and DVD.
On a more positive note, I would also include the continual improvement in sound quality for theatrical presentations. The "average" cinema in 2010 will provide demonstrably better sound quality than the "average" cinema in 1985, which would be demonstrably better than the "average" cinema in 1970. Sure, we don't have large releases in 6-track mag in 2010, and I am fairly sure that the very best systems in the past would surpass what is typically installed now, but incremental improvements in sound quality have helped cinemas to distinguish themselves from the average home viewing environment, with tinny TV speakers or, at most, bookshelf stereo speakers.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God
Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 01-28-2010 02:22 PM
quote:
2. Xenon Bulbs. While we can argue forever about platters, big reels, automated changeovers, multiplexes, etc, but without xenon none of this would be possible. They transformed the entire exhibition industry.
¤
It also wouldn't have been possible without the introduction of Safety film, which also enabled the use of film in many places other than cinemas; mainly for education and training purposes.
Safety film goes back a long time, at least to 1912, but reasonably tough triacetate stock was introduced not long before the start of the 3-D boom of the early '50s, which is fortunate, because most cinemas ran those films on 6k reels on just two machines; only a handful ran them on 2k reels on four machines.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin McCaffery
Film God
Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 01-28-2010 04:53 PM
Though I dread to disagree with Steve, the question is what had an impact, not what could have been done. The platter, was the cheap easy way to multiplex, so it is what had the impact, not the self rewinding projector.
And for the record, I think it was, overall, a negative impact. Even though platters can be done right, I'm convinced the majority of them are not.
| 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
![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic