This is topic Tarantino to shoot ant release next movie in 70mm in 2015 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=011711
Posted by John Rizzo (Member # 1289) on 09-03-2014, 03:57 PM:
This is quite interesting, Does everyone still have their 70mm Projectors?
Story Here
Posted by Mark Campbell (Member # 4411) on 09-03-2014, 04:02 PM:
The Cinerama here in Seattle will surely get it in 70mm. They are currently upgrading the theater again (thank you Paul Allen!) and I can't imagine they would have gotten rid of their 70mm capability what with their yearly 70mm fest and all.
Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 09-03-2014, 04:14 PM:
You need 70mm to shoot ants?
Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 09-03-2014, 04:52 PM:
I use a fly swat, but sure, 70mm looks like the perfect caliber for Tarantino.
- Carsten
Posted by John Rizzo (Member # 1289) on 09-03-2014, 06:14 PM:
I see link is not working:
trying again
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/quentin-tarantinos-the-hateful-eight-confirmed-for-fall-2015-will-have-widest-70mm-release-in-20-years-20140903
Posted by Connor Wilson (Member # 6088) on 09-04-2014, 03:13 PM:
This isn't large format discussion since this is about 5-perforation 70mm, not 8-perf, 10-perf or 15-perf.
Mod please move this to Film Handler's Forum.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-04-2014, 09:16 PM:
I suppose the time has come we need to remove all current IMAX threads from the large format forum since Digi-LieMAX is in no way large format.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-04-2014, 10:34 PM:
Agreed. Digital video IMAX as well as all of the other acronym laden video theaters (RPX, ETX/Prime, Big D, XD, UltraScreen, etc.) are NOT AT ALL Large Format. It's the same fuckin' 2K or 4K resolution projector (no better than 35mm resolution) blown up on a bigger screen. It is NOT truly large format. It's just a bigger screen with a somewhat louder sound system.
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-04-2014, 10:34 PM:
^^^BURN!
But anyways, great to hear. Hopefully it'll be my first-ever 70mmm experience.
Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 09-04-2014, 10:37 PM:
The Honolulu Star Advertiser printed an article about Quentin Tarantino 's film THE HATEFUL EIGHT in 70mm not on the entertainment page in the last section but on page two in the front section along with other major world and local news. That was very unusual indeed.
I am very curious if any theatre in Honolulu will ever play this movie in 70mm because no theatres in the city or the state is equipped for it anymore. At one time, we had a total of ten theatres that were capable of 70mm projection. If any theatre in Honolulu would play it in that format, it would most likely be a Consolidated theatre if they still had the equipment in storage and would go to the trouble of setting it up for only one movie,
-Claude
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-04-2014, 11:01 PM:
Any word on what lab is going to do the film processing and printing? IIRC, FotoKem did the prints of The Master, but their website no longer mentions large format film release printing as one of the services they offer. Deluxe closed down their Hollywood lab earlier this year. To my knowledge, only Gulliver Arane in France are now offering a full 65/70 wet lab service, and so I guess that Tarantino's new movie will be seriously good news for them.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-05-2014, 12:00 AM:
Here's the way I see it with 70mm, and film in general. It's a lot like the resurgence of vinyl LPs with music sales/distribution. Our local Hastings store has a bunch of music on vinyl. Apparently there's enough customers out there to justify selling it. And that's even with the dubious advantages vinyl has over modern digital recording technology.
There is no dispute over how much better 5-perf 65mm originated material can look versus the very best digital video camera systems currently available to mankind. 70mm is just plain better. Period.
Obviously I understand it's a hell of a lot more difficult working with film versus digital video. But 70mm is a grown up, real hardcore, real man kind of movie making process. 70mm ain't for pussies. If you're really a filmmaker and want to live up to the FILM part of that term (which is largely BULLSHIT in most other cases of what we're calling "films" now), making a movie in true 70mm format is the end all be all of it. QT is throwing down the gauntlet on being a real man and real filmmaker in that most non-pussy sense of the term. He's going to make a movie in 70mm. The wimps can videotape all they want with their Arri Alexa and Red cameras.
So, just like the resurgence of vinyl in music sales, 70mm can be a real sales point for theaters wanting to sell FILM!!! to the general public, at least those parts of the public who give a damn about film.
Best case scenario: if Quentin Tarantino's push for 70mm with The Hateful Eight does well, the movie theater industry could have at least a couple hundred screens in North America and another few hundred across the globe able to show movies on film in classic 5-perf 70mm (and maybe 35mm too). All without the silly IMAX branding attached to it.
My hope is if The Hateful Eight succeeds commercially, it might leave behind a sort of high end boutique level infrastructure of 70mm capable venues that dozens of other real film productions can use to their advantage.
We all understand the challenges that stand in front of this movie release. There's lab difficulties in handling 65mm negatives and 70mm prints. Obviously a LOT of training is needed in getting projectionists up to speed in handling 70mm prints so they're not turned into shreds or at least scratched all to hell. Datasat needs to do something to get a bunch of DTS 70mm time code readers ready. Or some other folks need to figure out how to get 5/70mm prints paired up with state of the art sound formats like Dolby Atmos (they can do this; I ain't buying any friggin' excuses, QT shouldn't either).
The movie industry needs to do what it can to keep film alive for the sake of archiving its own product. Digital media SUCKS out loud in terms of long term archiving. Film is where it's at. 70mm is the pinnacle of film.
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-05-2014, 12:37 AM:
*Wipes tear from eye*
That would be most excellent.
Curious, what is the smallest practical screen size for 5/70?
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-05-2014, 01:03 AM:
quote: Bobby Henderson
Datasat needs to do something to get a bunch of DTS 70mm time code readers ready.
The issue is more fundamental than that: someone needs to start making, or providing solid commercial support for 70mm projectors in commercial revenue earning service again.
We just bought one of the four final shutter assemblies that Kinoton Made for the DP70/AAII. Kinoton is now out of the film projector business. In fact, as far as I know, everyone is now out of the film projector business. Is there any model of 35/70 machine for which the full range of spares and support is still offered by the manufacturer or its approved agent? The people who are keeping these machines running today are already down to stockpiling parts, Ebay and putting want ads on sites such as this one.
That's OK if you're a rep house like ours, which plays 70mm half a dozen times a year and has five geeks on the staff with the knowledge, inclination and patience to persevere with it. But if the format is to make a serious, sustained comeback in the first run market, that means that there'll have to be installations which can run a print four times a day, being operated by someone who does not have advanced service and repair skills and with the same or better level of reliability as the DCP shows that are now the industry standard.
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 09-05-2014, 01:31 AM:
I've got a complete "JJ" SN # 313, if that would help ... ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-05-2014, 05:57 AM:
Leo is dead on...long-term, the problem will be keeping such a niche market going. The cost of 70mm parts were always vastly more expensive than 35mm due to far fewer quantities associated with 70mm.
Its great if you can show 70mm...but what if you damage that intermittent sprocket? Will that shut you down forever? Can you hold your head high and book a 70mm run knowing that you are just one failure away (of most anything) from not being able to recover?
I know on our installations in recent years for venues that were to run film indefinitely, they were backed up pretty substantially with spares just for this purpose. The more "special" the part, the more likely that there is spare of it on site. This, however required a substantial investment by the theatre to prepare for that day.
As for labs, I'm 99% sure Fotokem still handles 70mm. We have a customer that moved their negative there and still gets prints from them after the lab in California shut down (I thought it was Technicolor).
Unlike with vinyl, film is just way too small a market to have a sustainable niche. A couple 100 world wide systems is just too small to support. And of those 200 or so operating systems, you are going to have a mix of probably 4-5 brands/models...further diluting the potential for a person to manufacture a part to recover their costs.
As for DTS/Datasat. They will still repair 70mm readers and at the likely level of 70mm releases, that shouldn't need to happen very often at all! What are we talking about? Maybe, on a good year, with a good title, 2 months of use? That reader should last almost indefinitely. We have one site that "consumes" 70mm reader life but it runs 70mm 7-days a week. And they only need approximately 1 LED/year or perhaps a bit less. Furthermore, one isn't dependent on Datasat for the LED though the rest of the reader does wear too. That said, it isn't the trickiest of machining to duplicate. Love it or hate it, DTS kept their reader design pretty simple. I suspect that all of the readers that ever need to be made for 70mm have already been made. It may just be a matter of pair those that are running the format with existing readers that have not managed to be thrown away. If there was a market, I'd suspect that Datasat would make them but I think there is simply no market at this time.
And lets not kid ourselves...this will only be a niche that will become increasingly less received. Film is not coming back.
That said, I hope 70mm has as long a run as possible. 5/70 remains my most favorite format.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-05-2014, 08:52 AM:
Who is making 15/70 Imax prints now? The same operation should have no trouble with 5/70, since the printing and processing steps are the same.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-05-2014, 09:02 AM:
quote: Steve Guttag
And lets not kid ourselves...this will only be a niche that will become increasingly less received. Film is not coming back.
That said, I hope 70mm has as long a run as possible. 5/70 remains my most favorite format.
Completely in agreement with Steve here. 5/70 is the best film format that has ever existed. I know I'm ready on my end with equipment (and the proper experience) to setup and run multiple sites for Quentin's movie next year. ![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 09-05-2014, 10:39 AM:
quote: Steve Guttag
Will that shut you down forever? Can you hold your head high and book a 70mm run knowing that you are just one failure away (of most anything) from not being able to recover?
I am sure somewhere on the face of the earth there will be a part somewhere. Courier can ship it over night if needed.
Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 09-05-2014, 11:01 AM:
1) I would make an effort to see The Hateful Eight in 70MM.
2) I would also like to watch Quentin Tarantino shooting at ants.
BANG! Die you little six-legged fuckers! DIE!
BANG! BANG! BANG!
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-05-2014, 01:56 PM:
quote:
BANG! Die you little six-legged fuckers! DIE!
BANG! BANG! BANG!
It even was funny before I managed to read the entire title of this topic ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Getting back to the possibility of a 70mm revival...
The problem probably isn't just parts, it's also the lack of knowledge of the format. If you switched your whole operation to digital and got rid of all your projectionist in the process, are you going to hire one back just for a few limited shows?
Maybe someone like Christopher Nolan could ditch 15/70 IMAX and start embracing 5/70? Because 15/70 IMAX is going nowhere in the future, as awesome as that format is, it has so many issues that it will never will go anywhere close to mainstream. Besides that, I don't think it's the best format for feature films anyway. But 5/70 has been a proven format for feature films over the years. Getting someone like Nolan "aboard", would at least get one extra big name committed to this format.
I know it's probably wishful thinking, but a few great names in the industry could really make a dent and revive 5/70 as a premium format. This format still has much more resolution than any digital technology now available. Also, there are still sufficient directors out there, that embrace film as the only medium to shoot on.
Maybe DATASAT or some other company could also work out a way to modernize the sound for this format. Why couldn't you redesign the timecode reader to feed into your standard DCI Server and deliver uncompressed sound as a digital package, maybe even a DCP, synced to the movie for example? It would require some software updates on that server obviously, but if a 486 processor could do it back in the 80s, a modern cinema server should be able to handle it nowadays.
It's probably hard to get a critical mass rolling, but that's true for "new technology" too. So, maybe the key is, to not brand this as a revival, but as something totally new and shiny? Who cares if it's being done with decades old equipment?
But yeah, I'll stop dreaming now...
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-05-2014, 02:25 PM:
One thing I just thought of...
Now that digital is the new norm, 35mm has kind of 'gotten out of the way' if you will.
Directors, if they are going to choose film, really might as well choose 70mm if they're insisting on film at all at this point.
Perhaps a big focus on 5/70 by everyone could really modernize it and give it just enough backing to make it feasible.
Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-05-2014, 04:11 PM:
They are talking a wider release than Far & away so at least 200 prints. I will be glad if they actually strike 50 prints though. 50 is a more reasonable number to get re-installed and running again. 200 is out of the question.
As for enough qualified projectionists I'd be tapping the ex-IMAX operators that also had 70mm experience. There were quite of few of them at one time. They are also careful film handlers for the most part.
Mark
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-05-2014, 06:35 PM:
quote: Marcel Birgelen
It would require some software updates on that server obviously, but if a 486 processor could do it back in the 80s, a modern cinema server should be able to handle it nowadays.
I have to correct a stupid typo here, it was obviously in the 90s and not in the 80s.
quote: Buck Wilson
Now that digital is the new norm, 35mm has kind of 'gotten out of the way' if you will.
I would also say that 4K, if done right, actually is an improvement to 35mm in general... Yeah, I said it, shoot me . Although it is very hard to compare both, in terms of resolution, I would say that 4K comes pretty close. It has also the added benefit of better image stability and isn't prone to film damage after repeated runs. Also, the non-compressed digital sound is a step forward. There certainly are still issues that need to be fixed, like the black levels.
So, if we really want to improve and present a premium format that exceeds 4K, something many people will get at home in the coming years, there should be some room for a super-premium better-than-4K format, or not?
And why couldn't this format be film? Yeah, we're still facing a whole bunch of issues, but on the other hand, there's currently no out-of-the-box equipment that can shoot in e.g. 8K, there is no out of the box projection system that can do it either...
Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 09-05-2014, 07:07 PM:
quote: Marcel Birgelen
I would also say that 4K, if done right, actually is an improvement to 35mm in general...
I saw JAWS in 4k on Memorial day at the Alamo Drafthouse in Littleton, CO. The presentation was pretty good, except for darker images. They were very muddy. I don't remember 35mm looking that bad, when done right. But other than that, it was sharp, steady, and bright. (The screen wasn't all that huge though...
quote:
Yeah, I said it, shoot me [Wink]
Smile, you son of a bitch!
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-05-2014, 07:42 PM:
Surely that should be "Don't fuck with me, you fucking little six-legged fuckers!", followed by him ripping the six legs off with tweezers one by one, while Duane Eddy twangs through the surrounds?
Posted by Kilian Henin (Member # 8098) on 09-08-2014, 11:54 AM:
DCP is too bright - even the blacks look bright for some reason. I miss the days when theatres were actually dark during a movie. And the colours don't look right either.
Personally I don't think digital will ever catch up to the quality of film projection - irregardless of whether it is 35 or 65 (or even 16mm). Yet we're stuck watching second-rate digital video just to save the studios money. I'm glad some directors are fighting back, even though it's a losing battle.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-08-2014, 02:41 PM:
quote: Kilian Henin
DCP is too bright - even the blacks look bright for some reason. I miss the days when theatres were actually dark during a movie. And the colours don't look right either.
It's not really a matter of digital projection being too bright. It's the contrast, or lack thereof. Digital projection can't get the black levels as deep as film projection, particularly larger format projection like 5/70mm and 15/70mm.
Laser-based projection is supposed to improve contrast and black levels, but I kind of want to see for myself.
The bit depth in the video data files is another problem. It needs to be deeper in all levels of production (in the camera, in post production and in exhibition) -like 16-bits per color channel. That would allow for better reproduction of color and allow for greater levels of manipulation in color grading work. Obviously, this is easier said than done. Storage requirements are already demanding for 4K material at "normal" color depths. Upping the bit depth 50% or 100% geometrically increases processing and storage requirements.
Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 09-08-2014, 03:08 PM:
quote: Kilian Henin
DCP is too bright - even the blacks look bright for some reason. I miss the days when theatres were actually dark during a movie. And the colours don't look right either.
While you are kind of right, and I do agree with you that film looks better, I must say I don't think it really makes a difference right about now. The majority of people don't miss 35mm or even care to be honest.
I want to also add that I have seen poor 35mm, DCP, and 15/70 presentations. I don't recall seeing many bad 5/70 presentations.
For what its worth, single projection DCP is fine for screen up to about 30 feet from what I have seen. Anything larger than that and you really need two projectors. Nothing is as bad as Cineplex's AVX, the image is too dim from those single projectors, lack of masking and coupled with the distracting Atmos overhead/surrounds played back and levels that are way too loud and you have one really shitty experience ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-08-2014, 03:35 PM:
The weak black levels are really my only complaint about digital cinema, when you come right down to it. I hate the way dark scenes look washed out.
Well...that and those crappy NEC white power switches. Two complaints.
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-08-2014, 04:10 PM:
NEC probably has the worst contrast of the DLPs too. Though they are certainly better than anyone's series 1 projectors.
Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 09-08-2014, 04:48 PM:
quote: Buck Wilson
Curious, what is the smallest practical screen size for 5/70?
Well,I can do that in my Flat Living Room with a 6ft wide 70mm picture, may be it's time to dust off the DP70
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-08-2014, 06:50 PM:
HAhaha awesome.
Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 09-09-2014, 07:01 AM:
There is no such thing as the smallest screen for 70mm. It will always look better. It could be said that there is a largest screen for 35mm since at some point, you can't get enough light through the 35mm aperture or image starts to look bad due to magnification. The smallest screen we have that can/could run 70mm was on the order of 18 feet or so (wide).
Posted by Tom McGarrity (Member # 7320) on 09-09-2014, 01:20 PM:
Three 70MM Christie Epics waiting here for a Chinook to fly them to the USA.
Posted by Christopher Woollard (Member # 2455) on 09-09-2014, 02:40 PM:
The Odeon Leicester Square now has its one remaining 35/70mm Victoria8 reinstalled and operational again. They were running some 70mm tests the other week when myself & Nigel Wolland visited. Hopefully it will remain at its current projection port as it does not get in the way of the digital projectors, which are mounted on the rail system. DTS is also there so hopefully they may get a print when the film is released. Of course our National Film Theatre has an excellent pair of Kinoton FP75E-S's but they do not tend to run commercial first releases. They could run it on changeovers even.
Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-09-2014, 05:23 PM:
Thank you, Steve!
Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 09-12-2014, 04:02 AM:
If this all comes true I'll be busy I have 4 sites with operational 70mm kit, only one of them actually screens 70 with any regularity though.
Would be nice to have one's lesser used skillset in demand again, if only for a short while.
Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 09-25-2014, 02:59 AM:
Any truth to the rumor that Nolan is running out INTERSTELLAR on 5/7O in addition to the 15/7O IMAX prints?
Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 09-25-2014, 12:20 PM:
quote: John Wilson
Any truth to the rumor that Nolan is running out INTERSTELLAR on 5/7O in addition to the 15/7O IMAX prints?
It highly doubtful that Interstellar will get a 5/70 release.
IMAX will have the exclusive for the 70mm presentations. Both Paramount and IMAX will get the message out as to who is running 15/70 and IMAX will fit the bill for any multiplex 15/70 equipment adjustments just like they did when they ran TDKR.
Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 09-25-2014, 12:28 PM:
quote: John Wilson
Any truth to the rumor that Nolan is running out INTERSTELLAR on 5/7O in addition to the 15/7O IMAX prints?
Yes, there will be at least a few 5/70 Datasat prints.
Posted by Connor Wilson (Member # 6088) on 09-25-2014, 08:40 PM:
Where did you hear about the 5/70mm Interstellar prints, Daniel?
Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 09-25-2014, 08:45 PM:
quote: Connor Wilson
Where did you hear about the 70mm Interstellar prints, Daniel?
I'm not sure where he got the info, but Brad indicated in another thread that he would have locations running Interstellar in 5 perf 70mm.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-25-2014, 09:06 PM:
Daniel knows people at Datasat.
One thing I'm wondering: is there any sort of thing similar to THX' old Theater Alignment Program?
Paramount has distributed print surveys to theaters asking about any operational film equipment. In the case of theaters possibly playing 5-perf 70mm I think something more than a questionnaire is needed.
There's a long list of things that need to be checked, particularly for any theater that hasn't run 70mm in quite some time. I'm sure there is perhaps at least a dozen or maybe more locations in the United States fully capable and qualified to show 5/70mm film prints. Some people do have what it takes to set up temporary or new non-temporary 70mm installations. Paramount can't turn just anyone loose with a 5/70mm print if they're not fully prepared for it.
Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 09-26-2014, 11:55 AM:
quote: Connor Wilson
Where did you hear about the 5/70mm Interstellar prints, Daniel?
I run the sound-for-film division at Datasat - we're in the thick of making the discs, trying to drum up 70mm timecode reader heads, and all the rest.
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-26-2014, 12:05 PM:
quote: Daniel Schulz
I run the sound-for-film division at Datasat - we're in the thick of making the discs, trying to drum up 70mm timecode reader heads, and all the rest.
Besides the oddball director that pushes forward a 70mm release for a major feature, the market for 70mm DTS timecode readers must be somewhat limited nowadays.
Do you guys even have the facilities to build new readers or are you just working with refurbished stuff you get back from the field?
Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 09-26-2014, 12:56 PM:
quote: Marcel Birgelen
Besides the oddball director that pushes forward a 70mm release for a major feature, the market for 70mm DTS timecode readers must be somewhat limited nowadays.
Do you guys even have the facilities to build new readers or are you just working with refurbished stuff you get back from the field?
The market was completely dormant until two years ago, when P.T. Anderson pushed out The Master in 70mm with Datasat Digital Sound. With Christopher Nolan and Quentin Tarantino now pushing the format, we're getting requests for more readers than we have on hand, so we are assessing the viability of building more. It's not as easy as it sounds - digging up fab drawings from 15 years (and one corporate sale and 3 office moves) ago, sourcing replacements for obsolete parts, etc. But we love 70mm and want to see it supported, so we're working with the studios to help make it happen.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-26-2014, 01:16 PM:
The time code readers are just one part of the equation with the 5-perf 70mm format. Some old 70mm capable film projectors will have to be brought back into service since no one is making any new 70mm projectors.
I'm hoping Interstellar will be a huge hit and that the 5-perf 70mm shows will attract a lot of customers. If that happens the combination of it and Quentin Tarantino's 70mm project could encourage other filmmakers to utilize the format and actually bring it back to some degree -and perhaps create enough demand for companies like Datasat and Kinoton to build new parts and products to support 5-perf 70mm exhibition. They'll do it if they can make money with the effort.
Although I prefer movies to be shot on film, I think the new Arri Alexa 65 camera could provide a possible outlet for 5-perf 70mm print production. The camera has a 6.5K native resolution and has an image frame similar to that of a 5-perf 65mm negative. A 70mm film print is currently the only exhibition format that will put all of that 6.5K detail on the screen. D-cinema projectors max out at 4K.
Posted by Mark Campbell (Member # 4411) on 09-26-2014, 01:48 PM:
I really hope this small ripple of 70mm origination and/or presentation with the drive from filmmakers like Nolan, Tarantino and Anderson becomes a wave and an artistic push back on boring same-old digital CG crap being shoved at us on souped up imax-ish screens. Nothing CG is more impressive than in-camera spectacle and realism captured on large format film. Anyone who has seen Lawrence of Arabia or Baraka presented properly in 70mm will agree.
I just hope there are enough theaters that will support the format. Not every city has a theater as dedicated to presentation as our Cinerama here in Seattle, but who knows what could happen...
Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-26-2014, 01:54 PM:
quote: Daniel Schulz
The market was completely dormant until two years ago, when P.T. Anderson pushed out The Master in 70mm with Datasat Digital Sound. With Christopher Nolan and Quentin Tarantino now pushing the format, we're getting requests for more readers than we have on hand, so we are assessing the viability of building more. It's not as easy as it sounds - digging up fab drawings from 15 years (and one corporate sale and 3 office moves) ago, sourcing replacements for obsolete parts, etc. But we love 70mm and want to see it supported, so we're working with the studios to help make it happen.
Yeah, I can imagine the logistical and engineering problems at hand. I hope those things don't end up being so expensive nobody can afford them .
If this 70mm "revival" keeps up for a while, any chance we might see some uncompressed surround sound based on e.g. DTS-HD Master Audio or maybe just uncompressed PCM teamed up to 70mm?
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-26-2014, 03:25 PM:
quote: Mark Campbell
I really hope this small ripple of 70mm origination and/or presentation with the drive from filmmakers like Nolan, Tarantino and Anderson becomes a wave and an artistic push back on boring same-old digital CG crap being shoved at us on souped up imax-ish screens. Nothing CG is more impressive than in-camera spectacle and realism captured on large format film. Anyone who has seen Lawrence of Arabia or Baraka presented properly in 70mm will agree.
Film use will come back only so much in production and post production. Almost every feature movie is run through a digital intermediate regardless whether it was shot on film or video. Nolan is one of the very few exceptions who choose the old school color timing route.
Visual effects are almost exclusively all-digital now. Few effects studios have any capability to produce classic optical based visuals. CGI has brought about some huge improvements. It's far more precise, easier/faster in some respects and can be seamlessly composited into a digital intermediate without any differences in color, contrast or sharpness.
The real problem is bad CGI. That comes from other factors like way too short production schedules and budget constraints. Being a CGI artist for movie productions doesn't carry the glamour it once had, not to mention the pay either. Other industries like gaming and defense technology are grabbing more of the best talent.
The film manufacturing industry needs to survive to at least some degree in order to prevent the loss of many digital-based movies by way of film-based archiving. That's only a niche product; it's going to take at least some movies being shot on film and shown on film to make companies like Kodak and FotoKem more viable.
Posted by Steve Matz (Member # 1890) on 09-30-2014, 08:27 PM:
quote: Steve Guttag
There is no such thing as the smallest screen for 70mm. It will always look better. It could be said that there is a largest screen for 35mm since at some point, you can't get enough light through the 35mm aperture or image starts to look bad due to magnification. The smallest screen we have that can/could run 70mm was on the order of 18 feet or so (wide).
I believe this to be true about too large a screen in 35mm. When the Drive-in's here rebuilt their Screens after Cinemascope arrived in 53. This One particular DI(Motor-Vu) must have added 50 ft to this screen.it was certainly larger than the other's in town. The Projection Booth I would estimate was probably 200+ yds from the Screen. This is the DI I mentioned in other posts that traded out it's Brenkert Projectors for Motio AAA's and were using Mighty 90 lamps.
I always thought films at this DI compared to the others seemed dimmer in contrast&resolution,etc. certainly wasn't an exceptional image quality to me. I know the projectionist was qualified but maybe they went overboard in Screen size trying to capitalize on a Scope Audience...
BTW: Does this Theater still have any Film Projection Equipment...
Posted by Kilian Henin (Member # 8098) on 10-01-2014, 11:30 AM:
Here's a list of all of the 35mm, 70mm(!), and 15/70 showings for Interstellar.
https://interstellar.withgoogle.com/ways-to-see
Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 10-01-2014, 12:03 PM:
Bought my tickets for November 4 in Indianapolis! 15/70 for me.
AJG
Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 10-01-2014, 12:32 PM:
quote: Kilian Henin
Here's a list of all of the 35mm, 70mm(!), and 15/70 showings for Interstellar.
https://interstellar.withgoogle.com/ways-to-see
Deserves its own thread, imo.
Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 10-01-2014, 12:38 PM:
A crisp $100 bill to any theater owner who shows this in front of a 35mm print.
Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-01-2014, 12:45 PM:
I hope they're able to add more 5/70mm shows to what currently isn't a very long list.
I'll definitely drive to the Dallas area to see Interstellar in 70mm at either one of the Studio Movie Grill locations. I don't know which location is better though (Dallas or Arlington).
It's kind of fitting for Interstellar to have one of its 70mm shows in New York City booked at the Ziegfeld.
I'm a little surprised there's not more 15/70mm IMAX shows. Did Cinemark pull the 15/70mm hardware at its IMAX theaters? I halfway expected its Tulsa location to get a 15/70mm print. Same goes for the one in Colorado Springs. Neither will be playing Interstellar in real IMAX. I guess if I want to see the movie in IMAX I'd have to see it in Denver, Branson or Austin.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-01-2014, 01:28 PM:
Geoff, that list isn't completely accurate for the 70MM shows. I started a clean thread on it though here.
Posted by Connor Wilson (Member # 6088) on 10-01-2014, 02:28 PM:
5/70 at Ziggy? Looks like I'm in, but I'm a bit concerned because the last 5/70 Datasat print @ Zig, The Master, the surrounds were not in use.
I hope the folks at Ziggy do a complete and thorough A-chain and B-chain for Interstellar.
quote: Mark Ogden
A crisp $100 bill to any theater owner who shows this in front of a 35mm print.
Although it's super unlikely, I'll be giving $200 to any theater owner who plays THIS* in front of a 5/70mm print.
*Not wholly accurate, but you get the idea.
Posted by Michael Kurtzke (Member # 7512) on 10-01-2014, 05:39 PM:
quote: Mark Ogden
A crisp $100 bill to any theater owner who shows this in front of a 35mm print.
Don't Worry! We will!!!
Posted by Connor Wilson (Member # 6088) on 10-01-2014, 05:47 PM:
You sure? Does Alamo Ashburn have a 35mm projector? DCP doesn't count.
Unless you're talking about Angelika Mosiac, which has 35mm capability.
I think the FP trailer should be from 35mm, too, not through digital.
Now getting back on topic, I saw a teaser trailer for The Hateful Eight last night before GotG. It looked like cheap After Effects, no footage of the movie. The trailer was windowboxed in scope and advertised 70mm.
Posted by Michael Kurtzke (Member # 7512) on 10-01-2014, 06:39 PM:
The Ashburn Alamo will be installing 35mm projectors next week!
We also have a 35mm version of the FP Snipe. Along with "Prevues of Comming Attractions" if there are any enclosed trailers with the print!
As for the HATEFUL EIGHT trailer, that's what the stuido provided. I only put it on GOTG because I Love 70mm!
I just checked out the Trailer on Theatre 8, and you're right! It is windowboxed. Does anyone else have this issue with the HATEFUL EIGHT Trailer?
Windoboxing:
Test Pattern:
Posted by Connor Wilson (Member # 6088) on 10-01-2014, 06:56 PM:
That's cool you're "upgrading" to 35mm next week. ![[beer]](graemlins/beer.gif)
Don't forget to stack up on some film cleaners and Film-Guard.
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2