Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 70MM ad thread

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » 70MM ad thread (Page 13)

This topic comprises 38 pages: 1 2 3 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 36 37 38

Author

Topic: 70MM ad thread

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 03-09-2011 10:32 PM

quote: Tom Petrov
It really is too bad that Out of Africa was not filmed in 70mm

Nearly all the movies released with 70mm prints since 1970 were filmed on 35mm. Very few were shot on 65mm. Quite a few of the movies with 70mm blow-up prints in the 1980s were 1.85:1 or 1.66:1 in ratio.

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 03-09-2011 10:52 PM

Far and Away was filmed in 70MM

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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

posted 03-10-2011 12:10 AM

I remember "Raise the Titanic." It was such a bomb, I remember we got a booking sheet with it listed and I remember calling the booker and saying "You've got to be kidding." He wasn't thinking clearly that day I guess.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 03-10-2011 12:28 AM

quote: Tom Petrov
Far and Away was filmed in 70MM

65mm actually. So was Baraka, Tron, Kenneth Branagh's version of Hamlet and significant parts (but not all) of Brainstorm.

What other movies made after 1970 can you name that were filmed mostly or entirely in 5/65mm format? You can't name many more than what I listed above, certainly not standard theatrical releases.

Since 1970 around a couple hundred movies have been released with some 70mm prints in their inventory. The overwhelming majority of them were blow-ups from 35mm.

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 03-10-2011 12:53 AM

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 03-10-2011 01:06 AM

quote: Tom Petrov
It really is too bad that Out of Africa was not filmed in 70mm

Sort of related: About a decade ago I had the pleasure of interviewing Out of Africa director Sydney Pollack. In that conversation he expressed some regret that Out of Africa was not shot in scope like most of his prior films.

quote: Bobby Henderson
65mm actually. So was Baraka, Tron, Kenneth Branagh's version of Hamlet and significant parts (but not all) of Brainstorm.

Don't forget Little Buddha (1994), which featured some 65mm-originated footage.

And, FWIW, I can state with a fair degree of confidence that 65mm was given serious consideration for Empire of the Sun (1987), Dick Tracy (1990) and Malcolm X (1992), all ultimately shot in 35mm. Ironically, each had 70mm blow-up prints during their releases.

| IP: Logged

Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 03-10-2011 01:49 AM

quote: Tom Petrov
I wasn't going to respond to your post because you already know this-the cost alone to produce and distribute a 70MM print is worry enough. All of the other factors I mentioned go on top of this heavy cost.

The cost of one print - though considerable - is NOTHING compared to the fact that the movie was already produced, released and had a strong track record. Six years later, it was surely costing an equally considerable amount to have the product sitting in a vault earning nothing. A re-release made good business sense.

The trick with a re-release is finding a way to convince people to see something they've already seen. One way to do this is to present it in a different way -- "you've never seen it like this" -- and we've seen this strategy continue to the present era with films like "Star Wars Special Edition", "Apocalypse Now Redux", "E.T. 20th Anniversary" and "Apollo 13 in IMAX", to name a few.

Nothing in Hollywood is inexpensive. People in that business seem numb to the economic scale they're working with. It's really one of those "spend money to make money" situations. So I would be surprised to learn that Warner Bros. was fretting over the cost of that first 70mm print. Especially when you consider the movie in question was "The Exorcist."

The fact that they went to the trouble to re-release it indicates that they were already optimistic. If they were nervous about anything, it was more likely the advertising campaign which - at least in the 80s - could cost more than production.

...and whatever became of that re-release? Did it in fact go wider?

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

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

posted 03-10-2011 02:38 AM

quote: Bobby Henderson
65mm actually.

I was going to say this when I first read Tom's post because I remember it from that time, but then to double-check I looked up "Far and Away" on Wikipedia and it says 70mm. Which is right?

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 03-10-2011 08:51 AM

65mm camera negative film and 70mm print film have the same size image area inside the perforations. The only difference is the area outside the perfs. 70mm film has more material outside of the perfs to hold four tracks of a 6-track magnetic soundtrack.

I have wondered why film production people went to the trouble to make two different widths of film for the classic Todd-AO format. Why not just make it all 70mm in width? Is there substantial savings on weight in the camera with shaving off 5mm of width? Does shedding that extra 5mm made the film run through the camera more reliably?

One interesting thing: it might actually be possible for the 70mm version of DTS to work on 65mm film. That time code isn't nearly as wide as 4 tracks of magnetic sound. But I don't see anyone going to the trouble of re-working film projectors to do 5/65mm projection.

I would like to see 65mm/70mm production make a comeback at the very least in the film production end of things. It does make a difference in how well the movie looks on mediums from film projection down to Blu-ray. Baraka is proof of that.

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 03-10-2011 09:35 AM

| IP: Logged

Robert Harrison
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 239
From: Harwood Heights, Illinois, USA
Registered: Jun 2005

posted 03-10-2011 10:23 AM

This ad says nothing about 70MM, but what else could it be? After all, despite the claim that this 1973 re-issue is being presented with a new single projection system, wouldn't this have been the same thing that Cinerama devolved into during the 1960s?

Besides that, the Edens 2 DID have a curved screen (with movable masking not only on the sides, but on top as well, so 70MM presentations had a bigger picture than scope 35MM), but there were NO CURTAINS to open and open and open. It's possible that they at least used the masking to scale down the size of the screen as much as possible during the introduction and then open the masking up when Mr. Thomas says, "This is Cinerama!"

| IP: Logged

Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 03-10-2011 10:44 AM

quote: Manny Knowles
...and whatever became of that re-release? Did it in fact go wider?

Two days ago when I mentioned the Louisville run being a test, I also stated:

quote: Michael Coate
It had a "proper" re-release a couple months later

In other words, The Exorcist 1979 re-release played nationwide, mostly in 35mm, in the typical staggered distribution pattern of the era. It ended up opening in New York on April 11 and in Los Angeles on May 4.

At least six 70mm prints circulated during the re-release. Some historians/moviegoers have had conflicting memories of whether the 70mm prints preserved the film's original 1.85:1 aspect ratio, or if the image was cropped somewhat top and bottom to fill the full width of the 70mm frame.

| IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 03-10-2011 04:21 PM

quote: Michael Coate
About a decade ago I had the pleasure of interviewing Out of Africa director Sydney Pollack. In that conversation he expressed some regret that Out of Africa was not shot in scope like most of his prior films.

I remember opening the cans in April 1986 and finding out it was flat and couldn't believe it. Of all his movies...THIS one was flat??? I found out later on he had not filmed it in scope as he had long since grown tired of seeing his scope films butchered by pan and scan methods of the time.

Sad really...

Mr. Pollack speaks of this dilemma.

| IP: Logged

Rick Raskin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1100
From: Manassas Virginia
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 03-10-2011 05:08 PM

quote: Robert Harrison
This ad says nothing about 70MM, but what else could it be?

Absolutely 70mm. I remember it at the Uptown in DC.

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 03-10-2011 08:32 PM

quote: John Wilson
Sad really...

Mr. Pollack speaks of this dilemma.

Great video. Too bad the guy died. He seems like such a good guy.

But he is right about what he is talking about. But in defence of tv and VHS, at the time a lot of people would not see movies unless it was in Pan and Scan anyway - at least there is a message at the beginning saying that the movie was formatted to fit your screen.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 38 pages: 1 2 3 ... 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 36 37 38

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.