Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 70mm Hello Dolly Print Destoyed?

This is topic 70mm Hello Dolly Print Destoyed? 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=007377

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 08-05-2005, 11:43 AM:

Posted Yesterday...

quote: rec.arts.movies.tech

If you were planning to catch "Hello Dolly" in 70mm at the Castro's 70mm Festival you can forget it. Sign on box office says print damage makes it unplayable so "Vertigo" (in 70mm) will return to take it's place.

Anyone know what happened to the print?

Posted by Dan Lyons (Member # 1454) on 08-05-2005, 11:56 AM:

Perhaps they messed it up during the inspection screening... I've heard that the Castro tends to put cinch marks on the heads and tails of everything they play more than a few times.
If the head projectionist from that theatre is on this board, time to step up and defend yourself. [Wink]

I did a review of this film last year, it had some minor marks, but was still very watchable and very nice.70mm festival Coincidentally, that thread also adresses damage to a print of "Lawrence of Arabia" which was never explained. [Eek!]

Did Fox only make ONE PRINT of this title???

[ 08-05-2005, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: Dan Lyons ]

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 08-05-2005, 12:24 PM:

Well their screening date was August 11th., it could have been the last theatre.

Castro Theatre

Posted by Don Furr (Member # 1469) on 08-05-2005, 03:43 PM:

That really sucks [fu]

As Marty said in GREASE...."double do-do"....... [evil]

Don

Posted by Jeff Joseph (Member # 511) on 08-05-2005, 08:12 PM:

I think...not positive...that we're discussing 2 different prints here. There is a faded beat up print of "Dolly" (70mm) and somehow that's the print the Castro was going to wind up with. The new print is still in good shape.

Again, I'm pretty sure this is the case.

Jeff

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-05-2005, 08:46 PM:

Jeff, Just remember that neither of those "Dolly" prints will fit your Grindamecanicas!

Mark

Posted by Jeff Joseph (Member # 511) on 08-06-2005, 12:22 AM:

OK, I checked this. The new Fox print is still in fine shape. The Castro was indeed getting the old print, not the new one.

Fox only made one new print of each title in 70mm; it's amazing that they even did these. They are darned expensive and they'll likely never make their money back on these as it is.

Jeff

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 08-06-2005, 01:50 AM:

Well, that's fine and good... BUT!!!!! I'd still like to know who the asswhipe was that damaged the print!

Assholes!

Posted by Dan Lyons (Member # 1454) on 08-06-2005, 02:50 AM:

So does that mean that FOX finds the Castro theatre staff incompetant by refusing the let them play the new print? If that is the case, why is anybody renting their 70mm to that venue?

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 08-06-2005, 03:04 AM:

maybe someone else booked it for the same date and got the good one? i've seen a couple of the 70mm's at the castro so far. 2001 was a little thrashed, especially the head of r1. maybe it was the same print that played there a few years ago, in which case it's seen some abuse in the interim. tonight was apocalypse now. the original release print was about half faded, scratchy, and splicy.

i have no reason to believe they're responsible for this damage. yes, it's my belief that cinching happens at reel ends there. next time i run into the projectionist i know who works there i'll try and remember to ask him about that.

i'm planning to see dragonslayer, tommy, and edward scissorhands next week.

by the way, the reason that vertigo will "return" is that on it's original playdate, there was no sound for the second half of the movie (bad dts disc) so they ran 2001 instead that night. they added (i think) 6 replacement screenings of it. hopefully with a good disc.

carl

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 08-06-2005, 03:13 AM:

Is that in Dolly Digital?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-06-2005, 07:51 AM:

Kodak still makes lots of 70mm VISION Color Print Film. Most is used for 15-perf 70mm prints. The price per foot is still only about twice that of 35mm print film.

The lab costs are higher mostly because the prints are made on slower printers and processing machines, and usually require an extra pass to print the DTS sound negative. Mag striping is rare because of the environmental restictions on the solvent vapors, requiring significant capital expenditure on solvent recovery equipment.

You also need to add in the extra cost of making a 65mm duplicate negative for release printing, which can be prorated over the number of prints made.

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-06-2005, 08:09 AM:

Jeff,

When you're talking about the new print, are you referring to the restored version printed in 2002 that was shown at the Egyptian or is there a newer one?

Joe

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-06-2005, 09:21 AM:

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 08-06-2005, 09:35 AM:

Dan said "So does that mean that FOX finds the Castro theatre staff incompetant by refusing the let them play the new print? If that is the case, why is anybody renting their 70mm to that venue?"
you seem to dislike the castro I understand that the new 70mm print is currently outside of north america at present

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 08-06-2005, 09:51 AM:

Any venue still trying to run 70mm should be commended. If they're having trouble doing it maybe they'd welcome some constructive suggestions on how to do it better.

Just a crazy thought. [Big Grin]

Posted by Phillip Grace (Member # 2262) on 08-06-2005, 10:04 AM:

I'll second that.

Posted by Jeff Joseph (Member # 511) on 08-06-2005, 10:40 AM:

1. Yes, the "good" print is the one that ran at the Egyptian a couple of years ago.

2. No knowledge of why the Castro couldn't book the new print; I suspect that it was simply unavailable, and not a function of the Castro doing anything wrong.

3. Phil: The print that was "damaged" is over 30 years old and run to death (and faded).

Jeff

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-06-2005, 12:41 PM:

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 08-06-2005, 01:45 PM:

Jeff: Thanks for the info and correction to my assumption.

Posted by Joseph L. Kleiman (Member # 3097) on 08-06-2005, 02:17 PM:

Jeff,

Thanks for the answer.

Mark,

You're haunting me dude!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-06-2005, 02:49 PM:

Posted by Tao Yue (Member # 836) on 08-06-2005, 03:32 PM:

Michael Schaffer asked earlier about Vertigo:

quote: Michael Schaffer

Is that in Dolly Digital?

The question is irrelevant to 70mm, where currently the audio on the print can be either (but not both) DTS or magstriped analog. The 35mm prints do not have SR-D either. In 1996 it was not common to find multiple digital formats.

A 70mm film really ought to come with two sets of DTS discs, for precisely this eventuality. (Remember when DTS recommended two sets of DTS players for 70mm?)

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 08-06-2005, 03:51 PM:

According to Tom Hauerslev's "In 70mm" site, the new 70mm print of HELLO DOLLY will be playing at the Dutch Filmmuseum Cinerama on August 20.

Upcoming 70mm Engagements Worldwide

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 08-06-2005, 04:02 PM:

quote: Tao Yue
The question is irrelevant to 70mm, where currently the audio on the print can be either (but not both) DTS or magstriped analog. The 35mm prints do not have SR-D either. In 1996 it was not common to find multiple digital formats.

Thanks for explaining that, but my question wasn't really about the sound format. It was a failed attempt at a third-rate pun.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-06-2005, 06:01 PM:

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 08-06-2005, 06:36 PM:

I am beginning to wonder if mark has a thing for Joe since he keeps posting his picture [Big Grin]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-06-2005, 07:16 PM:

Well, Each of Joes pictures do make a statement all by themselves that really don't need to be accompanied by any words. Beware.... I have the entire "Joe" picture collection.....

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 08-06-2005, 08:42 PM:

Here's my statement

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-06-2005, 09:33 PM:

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 08-08-2005, 01:48 PM:

What's the cost of printing a new 70mm DTS print like that?

How about a magnetic print?

What does "destoyed" mean?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-08-2005, 10:06 PM:

Hummmm..... probably around 30K for a new print these days..... Magnetic would be about the same perhaps a little more expensive...has to be done out of the country so the EPA doesn't get wind. Destroyed! All you guys must be simok'in that I-70 stuff. 30 years and how many runs did this print get? It had to be beat red and getting pretty fragile anyway unless it was stored under exceedingly good conditions say as in Jeff's freezer.

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 08-09-2005, 03:08 AM:

the ~25 year old prints that i've seen at the castro (apocalypse now and tonight, dragonslayer) have been rather on the red side, not to mention scratchy and splicy. really selling the format short. again, not blaming the theater for this. that's just the state of the prints.

carl

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-09-2005, 05:47 AM:

quote: Carl Martin
...the ~25 year old prints that i've seen at the castro (apocalypse now and tonight, dragonslayer) have been rather on the red side...

If those 70mm prints are from the original release, they predate Kodak's introduction of more fade resistant print films in 1982.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 08-09-2005, 06:22 AM:

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-09-2005, 06:34 AM:

It must have been late 1982 for the low-fade prints...Somwhere I have a reel of Star Trek II that was on the Kodak fast-fade stock and it was released in the summer of 1982.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-09-2005, 09:04 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
It must have been late 1982 for the low-fade prints...Somwhere I have a reel of Star Trek II that was on the Kodak fast-fade stock and it was released in the summer of 1982.

That wouldn't surprise me. The smaller production volumes of 70mm usually mean it takes a bit longer to "clear the pipeline" of older product when an improved one is introduced.

Posted by Bruce McGee (Member # 131) on 08-09-2005, 10:20 AM:

Not trying to be a jerk here, but, A 70mm 30 year old print? I cant believe that TCF thinks so little of this film, which is better than I thought it would be, to only have one good print available. They waste enough money on new films.

Back in the early 1980's I saw an original roadshow print of Sound Of Music in 70mm at the now-defunct Columbia Theatre in Atlanta. It was red red, but the 70mm experience made it worth it to me. Overall, the print was in decent condition, and I was warned when I bought my ticket, that this print was very old. The big surprise was a new LPP final reel of the film. The whole audience gasped when this reel popped on the screen.

SOM saved TCF after Cleopatra bombed. One would think that TCF would be more aware of their heritage, wouldn't one? Or, am I just living in a Pollyanna dream?

Dont get me totally wrong. I'm glad there is a restored anything print of Hello Dolly. It played here in Asheville when it came out in 35, and was gone in 2-3 weeks. I never got to see it in a theatre. I avoided it on TV until I got to see it letterboxed on my giant 27" set. It's a real oddity, and I often wonder if there was any control happening while this was in production.

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 08-09-2005, 12:18 PM:

I think the fact that Fox made even one new 70mm print of Hello Dolly for circulation is pretty amazing. They have made new 70mm prints (albeit for their prep for new video transfers, but still)available for theatres. Fox is at the forefront of this endeavor, with recent years seeing new prints struck and shown such as PATTON, HELLO DOLLY, THOSE MAGNIFICENT MEN IN THEIR FLYING MACHINES, THE AGONY AND THE ECSTACY, and DOCTOR DOLITTLE. (SOM has a new 70mm print as well, but I believe FOX is being far more restrictive in its use).

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-09-2005, 07:22 PM:

quote: Paul Linfesty
(SOM has a new 70mm print as well, but I believe FOX is being far more restrictive in its use).

Yea, It makes me so sad that they won't let it out of town.....

Posted by Bruce McGee (Member # 131) on 08-10-2005, 10:57 AM:

Ya know, ol' Joe has the range of emotions from A to B. Joe, you need to be on the stage.

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 08-10-2005, 11:47 AM:

Yeah, the next one leavin' town. [Big Grin]