Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Campaign for 'Raiders Of The Lost Ark' to be re-issued...

This is topic Campaign for 'Raiders Of The Lost Ark' to be re-issued... in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001786

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-01-2001, 03:05 AM:

'Raiders Of The Lost Ark' has its 20th anniversary this year.

Go to www.indy20.com and click on the 'yes' button to try and get Paramount and Mr. Spielberg interested in a re-issue.

There's also a trailer for its 20th anniversary. The trailer's a fake (but very good) made by the same guy who made the Star Wars Episode 2 trailer on theforce.net but what the hey...it's something.

If they can re-issue The Exorcist and make money, surely Indy can make it back to the big screen, eh?

Couldn't hurt...

...trust me.

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 01-01-2001, 07:27 AM:

Yes! I can't see how this could possibly fail.

A 70MM blow-up and/or IB Tech prints wouldn't hurt, either! A fully remastered soundtrack in DTS is a must too, of course...

Do it!

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 01-01-2001, 10:14 AM:

It's hard to know how re-releases will do nowadays. People can watch a film at home, and with a good DVD/television/stereo system, have a pretty "high-quality" presentation (admittedly not as good as film, though.)

Seeing a film (especially a film like "Raiders") in a theater will always be cool, but will it earn enough to pay for a re-release?

Here is an example where if the theaters could offer something "different" (like "Raiders" in 70mm) the public would come back to the theater.

It's sort of strange how the public welcomed (by spending their money) improvements in other areas of quality, (CD's over LP records; DVD's over video tape) yet the studios feel the public won't pay for 70mm.

I think any theater running 70mm should be able to charge, say, $1 more, and that money should go directly to the theater to offset the cost of 70mm maintaince. I feel most people will spend the extra money when they realize what they are getting in return.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-01-2001, 12:52 PM:

There should be no higher maintance cost for 70mm since the head wear issue is not there with modern DTS 70 prints and even the teccon heads showed minimum wear

Posted by Brett Rankin (Member # 31) on 01-01-2001, 03:52 PM:

I don't see how a Raiders rerelease could fail, either. I mean, come on, even "Grease" did well a few years ago (not to offend those who like the film...). I saw Raiders at the Egyptian in Hollywood a few months ago and it sold out hours before showtime. You can't say it isn't a popular film- I would consider it almost an equal of Star Wars, and look at what kind of money that brought in.

And it would be an excellent promotion for the much rumored part 4...

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 01-01-2001, 06:46 PM:

My big fear is that because I don't have a premire house in a big city with 70mm, if I were to book Raiders or 2001 that we would get poor performance. But just because I fear it doesn't mean I won't do it. If I can get Raiders or 2001 then I will give it a go.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 01-01-2001, 07:59 PM:

Yes, I was forgetting about DTS 70mm for the moment (I've only run mag 70mm.)

But, that $1 extra would go towards paying a real operator, also.

I think that nationally, "Grease" did not do very well. Also, it was advertised as being "restored," yet it looked like shit. Now the studios will mis-use the term "restored." They will confuse a "Lawrence of Arabia" type job with "Grease" and will not go see it.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 01-01-2001, 08:32 PM:

How long do 70mm mag heads last, anyway? Mag heads in tape recorders can last thousands of hours, and I find it hard to believe that mag-striped film would wear down the heads substantially faster than magnetic tape (after all, tape is more likely to withstand high tension than film).

I do know that the Colonial Williamsburg Visitors' Center runs their tourist film (about 34 minutes, mag-striped 70mm) 19 times a day in twin theatres on JJs and they get about 2500 runs (or more) per print before the mag stripes start to lose the high frequencies and I believe that their heads last longer than that. I'm pretty sure that they're using the Teccon heads rather than the Ampex heads...

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-01-2001, 08:58 PM:

Scott:

Teccon heads can be good for up to 20 million feet. Tracks 1 and 6 often start to loose head contact first.

Steve

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-01-2001, 11:18 PM:

I hope you are all going there to vote.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 01-02-2001, 01:41 AM:

I think it will do well on the second time around if you the double feature thing with another Indiana Jones movie.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 01-02-2001, 09:05 AM:

We were only able to get 3 "runs" out of a Teccon mag head before it died. (The Teccon head "sounded" much better than the Ampex we were buying.) By "run" I mean a 3 month (or so) length. Steve is right; usually the outside tracks wear more than the center.

To keep the entire width of film even on the heads (to read the tracks correctly) there's a lot of pressure on the film as it passes over the heads; much more than a regular tape-recorder.

This was better than the Ampex's, which only lasted 1 or 2 runs at best.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-03-2001, 07:14 AM:

I agree with John Walsh --- the reason the mag heads used for film wear faster than those used with audio and video tape is the increased tension required to maintain good contact between the magnetic strip and the head with the much thicker film stock. Polyester film base is 0.0047 inches (120 micrometres) thick, whereas most magnetic tape is well under 0.001 inch (25 micrometres) thick.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 01-03-2001, 02:32 PM:

I usually find the teccon heads last about 2 years in most of local theatres when 70 was the norm in them (almost all year)
dirty prints seemed to cause more wear problems than anything

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 01-03-2001, 02:49 PM:

With efficient film cleaners now available to theatres, dirty prints should be a thing of the past, eh? Seriously, using a film cleaner helps improve quality in many ways.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 02-05-2001, 12:45 AM:

Oops! Must have accidently bumped this up to the top again.

www.indy20.com

------------------
"It's not the years, honey...it's the mileage". Indiana Jones

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 02-05-2001, 08:49 PM:

John, since I missed it the first time...

Actually tracks 3 and 4 wear the most (C and RC) but it is tracks 1 and 6 that loose contact first...as the middle of the film bows up to the head, the edges start to loose contact...also edgewave plays some affect on the outside tracks.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

Posted by David Miller (Member # 412) on 02-08-2001, 08:24 PM:

Speaking of "Raiders" and Indian Jones for that matter. A special thanks to Gordon for the helpful information on the 70mm prints of the Trilogy that were being kept in Canada by Paramount. A few phone calls and a week long run of each of them materialized here at the Cinerama in Seattle. Perfect timing for the anniversary.

So from February 16th thru March 9th the Indiana Jones Trilogy will be running in 70mm at the Cinerama in Seattle. March 9th is reserved for two full runs in order of the trilogy.

We have the prints and other than the fact that "Raider" is fading, everything else is perfect. "Temple" and "Crusade" look like they are brand new and they sound perfect. It should be a great run and anyone from Film-Tech in the area is always welcome to stop by.

Thanks again Gordon.

------------------
David Miller
millerdk@plu.edu
Projectionist, Seattle Cinerama

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 02-08-2001, 11:43 PM:

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 02-09-2001, 06:42 AM:

David Miller said: "We have the prints and other than the fact that "Raider" is fading, everything else is perfect. "Temple" and "Crusade" look like they are brand new and they sound perfect."

Your print of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" was likely printed prior to 1982, before Kodak introduced EASTMAN Color Print film having greatly improved image stability. "Temple of Doom" and "Last Crusade" are on the improved films, so I'm not at all surprised they look like new.
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/about/chrono3.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/about/chrono4.shtml

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 02-09-2001, 05:14 PM:

I just hope those prints come back to toronto afterwards and not get junked

Posted by David Miller (Member # 412) on 02-10-2001, 01:01 AM:

John: You are quite right about the printing of "Raiders" vs. "Temple" and "Crusade." Our technicians who were in this past week to make sure everything for 70mm was set said the same thing about 70mm stuff prior to 1982.

Gordon: After a long conversation with the guy at the Paramount film office we both agreed that what has been happening to most 70mm prints is sick. I am bringing in another fulltime projectionist that I trust and we will be running the entire run of the Trilogy. This should safe guard the prints from getting trashed. Then they are being FedExed back to Canada. Since the guy at the Paramount Film office was pretty freaked out about letting all three films out of his sight at once and for so long.

------------------
David Miller
millerdk@plu.edu
Projectionist, Seattle Cinerama

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 07-07-2001, 12:23 PM:

Re-release Raiders of the Lost Ark? Why not! Tomb Raider is burning out fast and nothing else Paramount has coming up looks appealing.

Of course Paramount has to do it properly with a fully restored picture, missing footage (if any) and SRD/SDDS/DTS. That's how The Exorcist became a hit all over again in "The Version You've Never Seen".

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 07-07-2001, 01:01 PM:

No we don't want it in DTS/SRD/SDDS we only want 70mm prints

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 07-07-2001, 01:11 PM:

Gordon: 70mm for the Ziegfeld and Loews Astor Plaza in NYC -- yes. 70mm for general release -- out of the question. That's why I mentioned SRD/SDDS/DTS.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-07-2001, 05:29 PM:

I'm with Gordon. Make 'em drive to see it in 70mm!