|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: 70MM ad thread
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"
Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 03-09-2011 12:43 AM
They were probably road-testing a hunch - that people would come out and see the movie again - and this was their way of proving it. So, yes, I'd agree it was about money - it usually is - but I doubt they were nervous about the technology. They were probably just seeking confirmation that the movie would still draw a crowd. If anything, they were so sold on the technology that they were RELYING on it to make the rerelease that much more attractive.
The fact that a print was made means that most of the (post-production) expense had already happened. It's actually NOT cost-effective to make just ONE print - with an all-new soundtrack.
New technology has historically been regarded as an incentive to try something in this business. Just look at how "old" technology gets the heave-ho. Black & White, 1.33AR, Silent, Shorts, Mono, Analog, Film...All gone, rare or on the way out.
(This is like saying, "in the mid-1990s, CGI was new and so nobody wanted to try it." Quite the opposite - Everyone wanted to use it. Traditional visual effects went away.)
Dolby might've been new but, from the moment it hit, there was never any question of whether the technology was any good or not. Nor was there ever a question about its marketing power - witness all the ads in this thread. And the fact that theatres had it would only serve as an incentive to supply product. How do you construe that as a disincentive?
I think #5 is *perhaps* your strongest point. But still not a great point - because it doesn't amount to "a sizable investment." After all, the movie was already made, and was a proven hit - commercially and critically. Remember - there wasn't a home-video market yet. So a theatrical rerelease of a proven hit wasn't abnormal.
Finally, from a marketing standpoint - the R rating would have been better for business than an X rating - in fact, the X rating was so bad for business that the name was eventually changed to NC-17.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 03-09-2011 09:04 PM
quote: Robert Harrison
Does anyone remember this flick from 1980?
Oh, yes! I saw this at the Cinerama Domem in Hollywood (in 70mm, but was preceded by a Pink Panther cartoon and preview for THE JAZZ SINGER, both shown in 35mm ). Afterwards, I saw The Blue Lagoon at the Mann Hollywood (not advertised, but shown in 35mm MAG stereo. Oddly, all they showed before it was a 30 second teaser for STIR CRAZY that was in SCOPE (no actual scenes)even though BLUE LAGOON was flat.
As far as OUT OF AFRICA was concerned, I saw that at the 10am showing at the Dome on Friday. Later that evening, I watched YOUNG SHERLOCK HOLMES in 70mm at the National.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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