This is topic HATEFUL EIGHT 70mm - all discussion 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=011888

---

Posted by David E. Nedrow (Member # 4981) on 10-12-2015, 07:05 PM:
 
Please submit any confirmed venues you're aware of.

EDIT - Admin altered the title from "Confirmed HATEFUL EIGHT 70mm locations" since this has become a common thread for all discussion.

[ 12-04-2015, 12:37 AM: Message edited by: Brad Miller ]
 

---

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 10-15-2015, 12:14 PM:
 
Hateful Eight will play in 70mm at the Astor Theatre in Melbourne, Australia beginning January 14, 2016. Confirmed by theatre Facebook feed.
 

---

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 10-15-2015, 07:49 PM:
 
Well, hell...that would make for an prolonged car ride to see that, for me.
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 10-17-2015, 12:41 PM:
 
I caught another facebook posting that it will be showing in 70mm at the Imperial Bio in Copenhagen Denmark starting January 7th.


 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 10-17-2015, 01:42 PM:
 
James had better be an Amphicar. Hard to find gas stations on the pacific ocean.
 

---

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 10-17-2015, 11:23 PM:
 
Looks like digital presentation for me, then. Balls.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-18-2015, 01:42 PM:
 
I'm hoping Brad Miller and his crew get to run The Hateful Eight in 5/70mm like they did with three prints of Interstellar in the Dallas area last year. I'm hoping LOOK Cinemas gets a print. Of course some of this depends on how Star Wars gets booked.

quote: James Westbrook

---

Looks like digital presentation for me, then. Balls.

---

DFW is kind of a long haul from Lubbock (over 300 miles each way), but that would be better than nothing.
 

---

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 10-18-2015, 02:17 PM:
 
I get astounded by people driving from Midland Odessa to see certain Fathom events, or Amarillo to see Indian movies.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-18-2015, 02:19 PM:
 
Interesting that the only confirmed venues so far appear to be overseas ones that already play 5/70 regularly.
 

---

Posted by Fabian Schreyer (Member # 5120) on 10-18-2015, 09:16 PM:
 
The Schauburg cinema in Karlsruhe (Germany) announced the film to be shown starting January 28th.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-18-2015, 09:57 PM:
 
I believe LOOK Cinemas is already confirmed, but I need to absolutely verify that before you go to buy advance tickets. I had them already setup for Ultra Panavision with the 1.25x anamorphic, so it's a complete no-brainer for Weinstein at that site. Just ship the print and that's all is needed.

For those that have been to the revised auditorium at LOOK last year for Interstellar (or for a digital movie afterwards), the screen is something like 65 feet wide and is side masking. In scope (2.40:1) the very bottom edge of the image can just slightly have a head in the bottom of the image from the guy sitting in front of you even with the stadium seating due to the size of the screen. With Ultra Panavision 70mm (2.76:1) we will bring up the bottom masking just slightly to perfectly achieve the ratio. At that point the room shape is truly perfect for this movie.

I don't think any other theater in the area could provide a better presentation. Most screens are smaller, probably just about all of them won't update their masking for this film, and who knows how many will have those godawful silver screens thanks to 3D. The couple of screens that are just slightly larger don't have masking or the motorized masking has been disabled, so forget that nonsense.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-18-2015, 11:07 PM:
 
All I know is I'll be heading that way late December with my best girl, and probably wearing that 70mm t-shirt to boot. I'll gladly support any theater within reasonable distance that can show 70mm properly. I'll probably even make the 200 mile drive each way even if The Hateful Eight turns out to be a dialog-heavy turd.

 

---

Posted by Thomas Hauerslev (Member # 566) on 10-19-2015, 12:23 AM:
 
TH8 70MM shows will be on this list as soon as I get them: http://www.in70mm.com/now_showing/index.htm
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Jensen (Member # 5870) on 10-19-2015, 11:43 AM:
 

quote: Sean Weitzel

---

I caught another facebook posting that it will be showing in 70mm at the Imperial Bio in Copenhagen Denmark starting January 7th.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

All I know is I'll be heading that way late December with my best girl...

---

From what I've heard of this show, it doesn't sound like classic date night material.

"Sweetie, isn't it cute the way he stuck those spurs where the sun didn't shine?"

"Awww ... that torture scene ... so romantic!"
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-19-2015, 04:09 PM:
 
We've watched plenty of action movies together, including QT's last movie. That was pretty bloody. She'll cover her eyes if a scene is too rough.

 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-19-2015, 08:05 PM:
 
Confirmed for the Somerville Theatre in Somerville, MA.

Is there a full list of 70mm locations yet?
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 10-19-2015, 10:37 PM:
 
It is advertised as Super CinemaScope 70mm. I wonder if they got permission from Fox to use that brand name or paying them royalty?

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-20-2015, 07:55 AM:
 
Also, it appears, confirmed for the Coolidge Corner theatre in Brookline, MA.

Edit: I should add that both the Somerville and the Coolidge already have 70mm capability. Somerville would need UP70 lenses and the Coolidge would need lenses and DTS, but both of those venues would be easy to install. They both also have competent operators with 70mm experience.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-20-2015, 09:21 AM:
 

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa

---

It is advertised as Super CinemaScope 70mm. I wonder if they got permission from Fox to use that brand name or paying them royalty?

---

There's not only the issue of Fox owning the CinemaScope brand name. That familiar 70mm logo is also a registered trademark, although I don't know how owns it. Paramount Pictures? Dolby? It was mostly associated with Paramount movie advertising, but Fox used it very prominently in the campaign for Die Hard.

Current advertising for The Hateful Eight has that "glorious" Ultra Panavision 70 logo on it instead.
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 10-20-2015, 01:29 PM:
 
I do not know how many of you know this but at one time, Ultra Panavision 70 was marketed as Camera 65 by MGM when they shot the two movies in the process and released RAINTREE COUNTY in 1957 and BEN HUR in 1959. Because all commercial 70mm theatres were playing another large format film at the time, RAINTREE COUNTY was released only in 35mm. I do not know if it ever played in 70mm anywhere or prints were made.

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-20-2015, 06:22 PM:
 
This looks like one of those movies where all the old cowboy-movie lovers will show up and then be appalled at the Quentin-Tarantino-ness of the movie.
 

---

Posted by David E. Nedrow (Member # 4981) on 10-20-2015, 07:59 PM:
 
I'm hoping a "good" venue pops up here in the Midwest. But then, Dallas is only a 14 hour drive.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-21-2015, 07:24 AM:
 
Also confirmed: the Hollywood Theatre in Portland, OR. This is another pre-existing 70mm installation.

Attn: Bob and Harvey--post the 70mm locations list somewhere so that we don't have to keep doing this ourselves.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 10-21-2015, 10:35 AM:
 
Still some mix of "Ultra Panavision 70" and "Super CinemaScope" format monikers on the posters so far.

If I'm working by then, I may have to make the trek to the Look Cinemas in Dallas, TX to see this - it's only a 10-hour drive each way...


 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-21-2015, 01:54 PM:
 
Anyone that does make the trek to Dallas please let me know ahead of time and I'll try and setup a booth tour.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 10-21-2015, 06:04 PM:
 
I got a note from my boss about there being a delay in the release date. I think a lot of venues are having conflicts with Starwars. We have a 4 week lock in out biggest house. We could open Hateful Eight upstairs in 70mm but the film fans won't like that.
 

---

Posted by Thomas Hauerslev (Member # 566) on 10-21-2015, 10:43 PM:
 
@ Paul:

"Still some mix of "Ultra Panavision 70" and "Super CinemaScope" format monikers on the posters so far."

- that was the teaser poster from 2014. Are they still using that? The Collection of logos seems to be "thrown" together by someone who had no clue about what they were doing.
 

---

Posted by Jason Metcalfe (Member # 5739) on 10-23-2015, 11:07 PM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Edit: I should add that both the Somerville and the Coolidge already have 70mm capability. Somerville would need UP70 lenses and the Coolidge would need lenses and DTS, but both of those venues would be easy to install. They both also have competent operators with 70mm experience.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

This looks like one of those movies where all the old cowboy-movie lovers will show up and then be appalled at the Quentin-Tarantino-ness of the movie.

---

quote:

---

This movie will be interesting. With Inglorious Basterds, Tarantino showed that he can actually direct actors and make suspense scenes work without having to resort to splashing the tomato ketchup around, or f-word this and n-word that. From what I've heard of the script it's essentially a psychological drama, and so he may surprise us all and give us a movie that fans of 1940s and 50s westerns have no problem dealing with.

---

A Tarantino-directed Spaghetti Western about a bunch of bounty hunters with Samuel L. Jackson as one of the leading characters, a film poster featuring a horse-drawn carriage with a trail of euhm... red paint?

If this doesn't yield a new F- and N-word record, I for one will be thoroughly disappointed.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 10-24-2015, 02:06 PM:
 
For Thomas -

Yeah, that poster image was from a recent Facebook posting, so I guessed they're still using those format names and artwork. No theaters in New Mexico are equipped for 70mm so I'm pretty sure the posters here will not mention 70mm anything. I'm still trying to figure out a way to get to Dallas to see this flick at the Look Cinemas in whatever 70mm format they end up calling it!
 

---

Posted by David J Hilsgen (Member # 2614) on 10-27-2015, 10:45 PM:
 
Here is what is happening up here in the MPLS/ST.PAUL MN area, originally i thought we would be playing here at mullers willow creek, after all we played interstellar in 70 for 10 weeks with no problems & we are equipped with waterfall curtains& motorized top & side masking,also have dual dts readers & players makes for a good roadshow presentation and 2 great projectionist along with my self to run it.just need the up70 lens. we pressed our booker the past 2 week to get a confirmation on hateful 8 and we found out today, it is going to amc southdale which isn't equipped, it would be a new install, also no curtains and no adjustable top & bottom masking plus no body that knows how to run 70.my question is did weinstein's hook up with amc nationwide. also a tech buddy was contacted about putting 70 into mall of america they still have a cinemechanica there weinstein's also told our booker they plan to have only 1 print up here.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-28-2015, 07:30 AM:
 
I have heard within the past week that the AFI/Silver has been booked for the Hateful Eight in 70mm now. They have not published their December calendar yet.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 10-28-2015, 08:38 AM:
 
^ the AFI Silver always waits to the very last minute so the December European Union Film Festival details are finalized.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-31-2015, 02:24 PM:
 
LOOK Cinemas will NOT be playing Hateful Eight. They want to, but as expected Disney is not playing nice.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-31-2015, 02:37 PM:
 
I presume that means LOOK will be playing Star Wars: Ep VII on its Evolution screens?

If LOOK is unable to play The Hateful Eight that would leave Studio Movie Grill the only practical options in Dallas -by that I mean places where they could run 70mm without botching it.

Honestly, Tarantino needs to just debut his movie in just a couple New York and Los Angeles theaters for that Christmas release (and Oscar consideration) and then wait another 3 or 4 weeks for Star Wars to get the hell off a bunch of the best screens.

I'm really going to laugh pretty hard if this new Star Wars movie turns out to be a piece of shit.
 

---

Posted by Jason Metcalfe (Member # 5739) on 10-31-2015, 02:59 PM:
 
Sounds like Alamo Ritz in Austin is confirmed
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-31-2015, 03:31 PM:
 
Kind of makes you wonder of those theaters that DO get this, how many of them:

*Have masking
*Will install or adjust their masking for a 2.76:1 ratio

I could see lots of installs just cropping the image to whatever the theater's "scope" ratio happens to be (which is usually in between 2.2:1 to 2.4:1), thus totally defeating the purpose of Ultra Panavision Super 70mm.

Then again I can't imagine how shitty the presentation will be on these "PLF" screens with silver screens and no masking.

If Tarantino wants a proper roadshow presentation to show people how good film can look and to get people out of their homes (and away from watching movies on their tables and phones), the auditorium has to be equipped for it. I understand curtains are probably asking a bit too much for most of these locations, but I'll bet a shocking number of them will suffer the above presentation issues.

I agree with Bobby. It really would be best to open the thing in half a dozen locations for their Oscar nomination, then expand to more 70mm screens 2 weeks later (when Star Wars mania has passed) and make those count by doing it right.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 10-31-2015, 04:47 PM:
 
Add Grand Lake Oakland California. Because of Star Wars, Hateful Eight will open on screen 2 upstairs. It will be in UP 70mm. We have an AA Norelco and AW3 there.

While my boss has not given the official work. BLSI has contacted me about the equipment needed.

Am planning on masking the bottom of the screen to the correct ratio. Is a side masking setup but scope is all the way out. BLSI said they were not planning on doing masking but if I wanted to ask for it to do so and I did.
 

---

Posted by Julian Antos (Member # 5497) on 11-10-2015, 06:00 PM:
 
The Music Box Theatre in Chicago can now confirm THE HATEFUL EIGHT in 70mm. We will be installing a larger (and properly masked!) screen for the run, as well as putting in a new sound system.

Kerasotes Showplace Icon, AMC River East 21, AMC Barrington 30,and AMC Crestwood will also be screening the film in 70. I'd imagine the Showplace Icon presentation will be excellent, but no idea about the AMC locations. Will report back!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-10-2015, 08:45 PM:
 
See? Installing masking isn't that hard. Way to go Julian.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 11-11-2015, 08:45 PM:
 
NYT Article on the purchase and installation of the 70mm projectors for Hateful 8.
Says full list should be out this week.
NYT: Hateful 8
 

---

Posted by Eric Richard (Member # 8635) on 11-12-2015, 09:07 PM:
 
Great news! Hope we see the list Friday.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 11-13-2015, 09:42 PM:
 
Grand Lake in Oakland CA received the shipment containing a Schneider 1.25x attachment for Hateful Eight plus the 100mm prime lens and a few other odds and ends. Now for the masking.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 11-14-2015, 01:01 PM:
 
Shot in August 2014, the BL&S 70mm stockpile for Tarantino's little 70mm UP project:

https://www.facebook.com/94736998476/videos/10153379438368477/
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-14-2015, 02:47 PM:
 
Good thing there was a well-deserved "editing" credit on that.
 

---

Posted by Shawn M. Martin (Member # 6762) on 11-14-2015, 06:51 PM:
 
Just found out that the Regal Gallery Place 14 in D.C. is putting a 70mm projector into auditorium #14 for this. They'll show it for two weeks (Dec 25 - Jan 8).
 

---

Posted by Eric Richard (Member # 8635) on 11-14-2015, 07:44 PM:
 
Awesome video of the projectors! Was it something like 120 projectors they were able to put together?
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 11-14-2015, 10:03 PM:
 
Some images of the lens(es) that BL&S sent. Looks a lot like a digital one.




 

---

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-14-2015, 11:37 PM:
 

quote: Video Paul linked to

---

https://www.facebook.com/94736998476/videos/10153379438368477/

---

Same music as the original Imax 1570 Branding Trailer.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 11-16-2015, 01:15 PM:
 
Behold the return of the 70mm roadshow. This ought to make Joe really happy...


 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-17-2015, 10:19 AM:
 
Per this article, these are the confirmed bookings in the Detroit area:

AMC Forum 30
AMC Livonia 20
MJR Southgate
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 11-17-2015, 02:40 PM:
 
At one time Honolulu had as many as ten 70mm theatres with five of them in the Wakikiki area of the city. The city no longer have any now and I doubt any of our theatres will be set up to play HATEFUL 8 in 70mm because of a population of less than a million people on the island of Oahu which Honoluku is part of. Of.

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 11-19-2015, 10:51 AM:
 
so where's this master list from the Weinstein's regarding theater locations - wasn't that supposed to come out last Friday?
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-19-2015, 11:39 AM:
 
Give me a second to don my tin foil hat. There, that's better.

I'm pretty concerned about all these regular multiplex theaters (lots of AMC sites for instance) that plan to show The Hateful Eight in 70mm. There's a strong possibility some of the theaters or even a lot of them will ruin their prints within the first few shows. Given some of the "digital is better" bias running through the industry I kind of wonder if some theaters will have prints set up to be ruined on purpose in order to make digital look better. Any proper response should point to incompetence in the projectionist. Back in the good 'ol days theaters managed to show 70mm without a hitch.

BLS apparently has a couple hundred projectionists ready to roll with these showings. Some are experienced with handling 70mm and some in this group have come out of retirement. There's others with no experience who I assume BLS has trained and hopefully trained properly.

For the Dallas-Fort Worth showings, if the 70mm shows are not booked in theaters where Brad and his crew can do the booth work I'm going to be very nervous about the safety of those film prints. I mean it's pretty damned pathetic when AMC's top theater in Dallas (their Northpark 15 location) shredded a 35mm film print of Interstellar in the very first show.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 11-19-2015, 02:19 PM:
 
Besides the Grand Lake in Oakland CA, Kabuki San Francisco and AMC Mikado, Santa Clara. Several Cinemark theatres in the San Francisco Bay Area including Pleasant Hill, San Francisco Center, Mountain View, San Jose and Union City. They are all getting 70mm equipment packages from BL&S. Cienmark gets Cinemachanica V8s. The rest Century JJs. As far as I know projectionist are not included.

At the Grand Lake, the lens setup shown above did not work as with AA Norelco's the lens sits so far back the porthole cropped the sides of the image. Solution is to add the 1.25x adapter to our existing 70mm lens setup.We use a 4" lens barrel prime with a 4" magnicom in front. I was able to collapse the magnicom enough to get the right size image. Quite the Frankenstein lens. Must weigh close to 25 pounds.


 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-19-2015, 02:39 PM:
 
This is unrelated to this discussion, but what is the purpose of the two white rollers above the lens? I have never seen a Norelco with those before....
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 11-19-2015, 02:58 PM:
 
That is a prototype Dolby Edgecode reader. There is also a small black roller and led/reader there.
 

---

Posted by Michael Putlack (Member # 6523) on 11-20-2015, 12:22 AM:
 
I don't think anyone has posted this yet, but I just got word that the runtime of the DCP will be 2h 47m with NO intermission! I was kind of hoping they'd include one with the DCP too, but I guess not.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 11-20-2015, 12:49 AM:
 
Left out Century/Cinemark Daly City, CA
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-20-2015, 02:16 AM:
 
Most servers now have some means to create your own intermission though you'd be on your own for the intermission card and any music.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 11-20-2015, 09:58 AM:
 
Tarantino deliberately made the DCP a bit shorter by trimming the intermission out as well as shortening some of the "scenery porn" shots that the UP70 version lingers on, such lingering being considered pointless on smaller screens. The DCP is not intended to be the "roadshow" version - just like the old days.

Also, BL&S has stayed out of the issue of training 70mm projectionists - too many site specific variables to have to train for. BL&S will install these locations but operators will be the responsibility of each site.

I would love to be able to operate one of these roadshow sites - but there are no 570 sites anywhere in NM. Once the roadshow site list comes out, I hope to pick one that's fairly close and catch a screening there. Maybe Dallas???
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 11-20-2015, 10:33 AM:
 
15 minutes of 'scenery porn' is a lot
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 11-23-2015, 09:37 AM:
 
Apparently there was an advanced screening in 70mm last week in NYC, and the projector broke down.

New Story

quote: pagesix.com

---

Harvey Weinstein is taking a risk releasing Quentin Tarantino’s “The Hateful Eight” in the extinct, widescreen 70mm format.

While the industry has gone digital, the Weinstein Co. bought more than 100 antique 70mm projectors and restored them so it can show a special “roadshow version” of the film, with an overture and intermission, clocking in at over 3 hours.

But at one of the first screenings Thursday night at Village East Cinema, the projector broke.

Erik Lomis, president of distribution for Weinstein, told me the projector wasn’t one of the 100 he had restored. “It was the theater owner’s and a gear was stripped and then replaced in one hour.”

Producers Shannon McIntosh and Stacey Sher quickly threw together a Q&A with actors Kurt Russell and Walton Goggins to keep the audience occupied during repairs.

One audience member told me of the film, “It’s great. So I’m glad I stuck around.”

---

quote:

---

...more than 100 antique 70mm projectors

---

quote: Boston Globe

---

Between them, Cutler and Weinstein Co. have trained or recruited about 200 projectionists, enough for two shifts per theater. Many are veterans coming out of retirement.

---

So, does the MPAA rating of "R" (seen on the poster, for multiple "reasons") perhaps makes this the first 70mm roadshow movie in history with an "R" rating? Not a movie to take the kiddies to on Christmas day, apparently.

Meanwhile, no local screens have been announced in SoCal that I can find. The Cinerama Dome will open Force Awakens in 3D but their website only lists the Dome for 4 days. Surely Disney won't let them bump it in only a week for H8ful, but I'm pretty sure the Dome is the only screen in this part of the world actually made for 2.76:1.
 

---

Posted by Eric Carter (Member # 1392) on 11-24-2015, 02:32 PM:
 
I think the Dome still has the possibility of showing the HATEFUL EIGHT (one of the two no-brainer venues in the country that should show it, along with the Seattle Cinerama) because the Arclight has all of those black box houses behind the Dome. I think they are using four houses (including the Dome) for SW. Just move it over to a black box and open the 70mm roadshow in the Dome. The Seattle Cinerama is showing SW with their 6P laser projection and Dolby Atmos; they wanted to also play HATEFUL EIGHT at a later date, but that won't work for TWC's 70mm release plans (at this juncture).
 

---

Posted by Paul H. Rayton (Member # 1817) on 11-25-2015, 04:08 PM:
 
I think the Southern California screens are some of the most critical (and yet fiercely-fought over) territory for exposure of such a movie in the country. So, as of the moment, no one (that I know of) has yet seen anything "official" about who gets it. The battle of H8 with Star Wars for screen space out here could be the subject of the next epic movie!

Yes, the Dome would be "interesting", and they already have a Kinoton 35/70 installed; another one that could/would be fun would be the so-called Big Newport, in Newport Beach. Again, I have seen nothing to indicate that it will be one of "the chosen", so this is wishful thinking. But it was historically a nice place to see big screen epics, so might lend itself to such a movie. Possibly the powers that be are trying to keep the local 70mm "winners" quiet (for some reason), but soon enough word will leak out as projectors get put in.

Meanwhile:

I was speaking with Chapin Cutler (of Boston Light & Sound) last week, and he discussed a few of the details about this project. So, in no particular order, a few things that might be of interest:

► all 70mm prints (for platter houses) will be shipped out entirely assembled, none will be assembled in the venues. The prints are being built up by a selected crew working near Magic Mountain (Santa Clarita), CA.

► the prints will be in one single transport case, custom made for the show. A large, flat case, similar to those sometimes used to transport Imax 70mm prints, back in the day.

► even though the show will have an intermission, there will be only ONE ROLL of film. In other words, the intermission is built into the movie, with 12 minutes of black film (and DTS [Datasat] timecode printed in it) in the middle of the built-up platter print. There is no audio during the intermission, but there is a 45-second "entr'acte" music bit at the beginning of the second half of the show.

► the film print itself weighs about 220 pounds.

► with the shipping box, the total shipping weight is 350 pounds.

► the total running time is a little over 3 hours, including the intermission.

► BLSI tracked down about 120 projectors, including 20 from Cinemeccanica and some Simplex XL 70’s. About 90 of the machines are Century JJ’s.

► all the platters are Christie AW 3 R’s converted to 70 mm.

► the projectors being sent out are 70mm ONLY. Most 35mm-specific parts for allowing them to run that gage are removed and stored. This was to minimize the chances for accidentally flipping a roller (etc.) into a 35mm mode, or have a too large / too small loop hitting somewhere, as potential causes of scratching. All the systems will have an on board PTR film cleaner.

► Larry Shaw from BL&S had to commission about 125 different parts as they are no longer being made by the original suppliers.

► they had to commission a significant number of new primary lenses, taking an educated guess at the number of specific focal lengths which would be needed.

► they also had to have over 120 of the 1.25X anamorphic attachments built; some are based on the design of the anamorphic lens developed for d-cinema by ISCO, but are not identical. There is another design for longer throws and can be used in the reverse direction, i.e. as in the "reverse anamorphic" mode sometimes used by drive-ins with long throws.

► lamphouses are all from equipment sent into premature retirement when the digital juggernaut hit a few years ago. New reflectors were made for many of them.

► all the equipment that is shipped out to venues is on temporary install basis. The gear is scheduled to be taken out following the run. (This does not apply to venues which have pre-existing 70mm projection equipment, obviously!)

► FotoKem is producing the prints.

► BL&S is lining up projectionists to work through this run. They are contacting folks with film projection experience by approaching local Unions to see who might be available.

And no, Chapin did not give me even the slightest hint on which So. Calif. screens might get the show, if he even knows!
 

---

Posted by Mike Rivest (Member # 5500) on 11-25-2015, 04:21 PM:
 
Montreal locations confirmed.

In this article about the closing of the Ex Centris, the article says that Hateful 8 will play at Cinéma Banque Scotia and Quartier Latin (French Version)

http://montrealgazette.com/entertainment/cinema-excentris-closes-its-doors-for-now

And that has been the pattern ever since, Blanchet noted, pointing to Lenny Abrahamson’s Oscar-buzz kidnapping drama Room as another that got away; and Quentin Tarantino’s upcoming The Hateful Eight, due Christmas day, as the final straw.

“We said, ‘We have a 70mm projector and we’re ready to show it.’ We had several discussions with the distributor (Seville), but they ultimately said no. One copy is going to Quartier Latin, the other to Scotiabank. Two weeks later, we were to get the truncated version — well, guess what cinephiles are going to do? They’re not going to wait two weeks (to see it at Excentris).”
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 11-25-2015, 04:31 PM:
 
Interesting. One of the recent(-ish) news articles suggested that the 70mm theatre list would be forthcoming very soon, but it sounds as if we may have to wait a bit for that.

As for lenses, Somerville got a pair of the reverse anamorphic model. They are big and heavy and gorgeous.

The fixed-length intermission with blank film will be annoying. I can see why they did it that way to simplify things for platter houses, but the time really should be longer for a sold-out show at a large theatre and shorter for a lightly attended mid-week show at a multiplex. Let's hope that it at least comes at a reel break so that the reel-to-reel houses can have some flexibility if needed.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-25-2015, 05:12 PM:
 
Here is a link to a promo short that was released yesterday. The Panavision stuff is interesting and worth a watch, but be prepared for a good amount of sales pitch babbling about how awesome this is going to be. It's just ashamed nobody told the actors the little bits and pieces that make most of these installs disappointing like no masking, the picture not properly fitting the screen and the fact most of these prints will be trashed faster in a matter of days. Also these screenings will not even be on the biggest screen in most scenarios.

Sadly it looks like they also used clips from the movie before they had a chance to color correct, as the interview footage has better colors than the film clips. Snow is not green.

The clip of the movie:


An auto-correct for white via Photoshop (a quick and dirty example I spent literally 5 seconds on):


My favorite part is at about 2:10 "the movie is shot in 65mm and then projected in 70mm with an image twice the size of what you are used to".

Twice the size eh? Uh huh. Yeah, right. In 99% of the cases it will be smaller than a typical scope movie and in the newer complexes with common width screens, it will be the smallest the picture has ever been.

quote: Paul H. Rayton

---

All the systems will have an on board PTR film cleaner.

---

quote:

---

Harvey Weinstein to Release Fewer Indie Films
November 24, 2015 -- Variety (online)

By: Brent Lang, Senior Film and Media Reporter @BrentALang
& Ramin Setoodeh, Film Editor, New York @RaminSetoodeh

Harvey Weinstein relishes his status as the underdog mogul, championing maverick indies from “Pulp Fiction” to “The Artist.” But the larger-than-life impresario faces a daunting challenge that’s antithetical to the way he operates.

In response to the increasingly tough financial strains on the independent film business, Weinstein is shrinking his outsized ambitions, and slashing the bloated overhead at the company he runs with his brother Bob. He will cut back on the very thing that earned him cred in the creative community: the movies.

In a surprising move that comes as a big blow to the indie film business, TWC will distribute fewer movies and increase focus on its TV operations, Variety has learned.

The studio will cut the number of films it releases from 18 a year to between eight and 10, according to a knowledgeable source. Instead of loading up on new titles at film festivals like Sundance or Toronto, the company is going to make fewer bets. It will snap up more projects at the script stage, as it did with the Michael Keaton film “The Founder,” to allow for hands-on development, rather than acquiring finished pictures.

Moving forward, TWC plans to bulk up its television business, aiming the unit to fuel roughly half of the company’s earnings. Presently, 30% of TWC’s revenue comes from TV shows it produces, such as Netflix’s “Marco Polo” and VH1’s “Mob Wives.”

The company is seeking partners for its TV business, following the collapse last May of a $950 million deal to sell the division to British broadcaster ITV. Insiders say that three or four parties are circling, and that a stake could be sold by early next year.

As a result of the difficult economic market for small films — and such flops as “Burnt” and “No Escape” — TWC has slashed payroll. Last week, it laid off 50 people from the 225-person company. Board member and advertising giant WPP pushed aggressively for the cuts, according to sources.

Ups and Downs
TWC is already having a better year than last, even before “The Hateful Eight” release.

$283m 2015 B.O. through Nov. 22 for 12 films
$222m 2014 total B.O. for 19 films
$492m 2013 total B.O. for 21 films

“Our board has been on us to cut our overhead,” Weinstein told Variety. “And it’s a smart thing, but it hurts. Bob and I resisted the cuts for a few years because we still think of ourselves as a mom-and-pop organization. Maybe we need to grow up, but if this is the price of doing it, I hate growing up.”

Going forward, the multiplatform arm Radius-TWC will have its operations folded into the main studio with fewer employees. Radius founders Tom Quinn and Jason Janego left the company last summer to launch their own label, part of an executive exodus that includes marketing chief Stephen Bruno and TV head Meryl Poster.

Despite months of bad press, executives denied reports that the entire Weinstein company is being shopped around, with billionaire Ron Burkle as a potential buyer.

“Ron Burkle is an amazing business partner of ours, but there are no plans to sell him the Weinstein Co. at the present time,” said David Glasser, TWC chief operating officer.

Glasser vowed TWC would survive despite rumors of its financial doom. He also disputed ongoing speculation that the company is suffering cashflow concerns, and is not making money.

“We are an independent company — we’re not part of big conglomerate,” said Glasser. “We don’t have a TV station to fall back on. So it becomes: how to protect a company of this size so it can survive the cyclical nature of the business, and be profitable?”

Glasser, who in July said he would leave TWC, instead struck a new deal in September, and decided to stay. He was insistent with the Weinsteins about the need to tighten the company’s belt.

The board has been examining alternate scenarios for the company’s future. One option being weighed is to combine the television business with the company’s film library and on-demand operations and spin them off, possibly as a publicly traded entity. Also under discussion: merging the film studio with another media company. Some of these ideas are being debated by three new board members who have recently been brought on: hedge fund billionaire Paul Tudor Jones, investor Dirk Ziff and Cablevision CEO James Dolan.

Those who know Harvey Weinstein question if he can downsize. One source described an environment where he still uses private jets and round-the-clock town cars. But another insider said Weinstein cut his travel spending three years ago, at the board’s request, and pays personally for private plane trips.

Looking ahead at this year’s slate, the company has high hopes for “Carol,” which opened well in its first weekend of limited release.

Weinstein Co.’s hits & Misses
The year started off with Oscar gold, but a few big bets fell flat. Last weekend, “Carol” opened well in four theaters.

The Imitation Game
B.O.: $91 million
Benedict Cumberbatch pic kept Harvey’s Oscar nom streak alive this year.

The Woman in Gold
B.O.: $33 million
Helen Mirren’s appeal to older auds made this one of 2015’s biggest indies.

Burnt
B.O. $13 million (in release)
The Bradley Cooper chef comedy bombed after a wide opening.

Begin Again
B.O. $16 million
Harvey plopped down $7 million for this musical directed by John Carney

Insiders say TWC needs Quentin Tarantino’s $62 million Western “Hateful Eight” to be a massive holiday hit. Harvey Weinstein denied reports that he was fuming at the director’s controversial statements last month that equated police shootings with murder. In response, law enforcement groups said they would boycott the film.

“Bob and I are getting along better than ever with Quentin,” Weinstein said. “I think he’s been misunderstood and misinterpreted. I respect his right to speak out for what he believes in, while at the same time respecting the sacrifices made every day by the overwhelming majority of our police officers. The two are not mutually exclusive.”

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

The fixed-length intermission with blank film will be annoying. I can see why they did it that way to simplify things for platter houses, but the time really should be longer for a sold-out show at a large theatre and shorter for a lightly attended mid-week show at a multiplex. Let's hope that it at least comes at a reel break so that the reel-to-reel houses can have some flexibility if needed.

---

It does. The intermission reel is labeled as Reel 6C and falls between 6AB and 7AB.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-26-2015, 04:56 PM:
 
I know one guy that is going around doing port/electrical thing on contract. He seems to have a pretty long list of theatres to do it for too. My guess is that this part of the deal isn't that expensive and honestly, the theatre should probably pony up for that. That becomes the physical property of the theatre and if removed, would have to be patched too. When DCinema first hit the streets, theatres put in second ports and power too. I wonder if some of those sites are reusing those second ports.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-26-2015, 05:01 PM:
 
It would be interesting to see what kind of windows he is putting in, as I know at LOOK it took quite a long time to get the projector just perfectly nudged into an exact position because we were battling the size of the window (which was pretty big), the very short throw coupled with the very big screen, plus the angle of the projector and physical limitation of how close to the window it could be, back row of chairs, auxiliary lens mount height options and so forth. Literally 1/4 inch any direction and it was a no go.

I'm sure most of these installs will not be in the "PLFF" auditoriums, but some of them are bound to be in a similar type of situation to where patience and a little Mcguyver'ing will be needed.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 11-26-2015, 06:09 PM:
 

 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-26-2015, 06:36 PM:
 
Possibly a minor gripe, but 50 years ago when the roadshow was at it's peak, did people abbreviate the title of the movie in cell phone text-eze?

EDIT - I just saw the actual poster for this film and it was spelled with the text-eze abbreviation. What the heck? That's not bringing back the grandeur of the 70mm roadshow to me.
 

---

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 11-26-2015, 07:21 PM:
 
It's written like that on some of the posters.
 

---

Posted by Fredrik Sandstrom (Member # 8171) on 11-27-2015, 02:45 AM:
 

quote: Paul H. Rayton

---

all 70mm prints (for platter houses) will be shipped out entirely assembled, none will be assembled in the venues. The prints are being built up by a selected crew working near Magic Mountain (Santa Clarita), CA.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

The fixed-length intermission with blank film will be annoying. I can see why they did it that way to simplify things for platter houses, but the time really should be longer for a sold-out show at a large theatre and shorter for a lightly attended mid-week show at a multiplex. Let's hope that it at least comes at a reel break so that the reel-to-reel houses can have some flexibility if needed.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

I just saw the actual poster for this film and it was spelled with the text-eze abbreviation. What the heck? That's not bringing back the grandeur of the 70mm roadshow to me.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

I just saw the actual poster for this film and it was spelled with the text-eze abbreviation.

---

It's written that way in at least one trailer I've seen too. I don't like it. It makes the movie sound like a similar film to "Mean Girls" or something of that type.
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 12-01-2015, 04:03 PM:
 
Would it be correct to assume that these "pre-built" prints are only for the BLSI "package installs" and theaters with existing equipment getting a booking will receive the print on conventional shipping reels in cans?
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-01-2015, 04:15 PM:
 
Rumor has it that the reel-to-reel prints will be doubled-up, with two shipping reels' worth of film on each physical reel. This is probably a smart idea to reduce shipping costs and handling damage, but could get interesting if there are any carbon-arc houses that play this film.

No idea about the platter prints for existing installations.
 

---

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 12-02-2015, 05:34 AM:
 
I don't think they are at all concerned about arc setups let alone change over ones. Will the reels even have printed in cues? Oh when we played Baraka on 70mm a while back it came on three double upped reels.
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 12-02-2015, 08:02 AM:
 
I hate to ask what may seem like a stupid question to those of you who work(ed) with 70mm, but if the entire film is being shipped built up and ready to lift from the shipper directly onto the platter, with that amount of weight, how the hell do lift it?
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 12-02-2015, 09:26 AM:
 
At the Omnimax (~14000 feet of 15-perf for a 40-minute show) we used to tip the case up, then roll the complete reel from the case to the lowest deck of the Mark I reel unit. Then lean the reel against the reel unit, and drop in the teflon hub disc onto the center of the spindle, having first removed the house reel. Then it was simply a matter of half-lifting the loaded shipping reel onto the reel unit. I imagine it will be a similar process for this UP 70 print (~21000 feet of 5-perf for a 186-minute show) onto a platter.

The IMAX lift was a two-man job unless the booth had one of those print forklifts, which we didn't have (we didn't run enough IMAX festivals (or DMR prints) to justify the money for a forklift).

Let's have some before/after H8 dead weight lift contests for the world's remaining 70mm film projectionists!
 

---

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 12-02-2015, 06:17 PM:
 
If Hateful shows up on any local SoCal screens, it still hasn't been announced where. Since Brad mentioned a while ago that Disney didn't play nice with Look in Dallas, no doubt Paul Layton's Screen Wars is a reality. Meanwhile...

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

From what I've heard of the script it's essentially a psychological drama, and so he may surprise us all and give us a movie that fans of 1940s and 50s westerns have no problem dealing with.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

This looks like one of those movies where all the old cowboy-movie lovers will show up and then be appalled at the Quentin-Tarantino-ness of the movie.

---

quote: BoxOfficeMojo.com MPAA page

---

The Hateful Eight (Western) [Wein.12/25/15]: Rating: R. Reason: strong bloody violence, a scene of violent sexual content, language and some graphic nudity.

---

quote: myself

---

So, does the MPAA rating of "R" ...perhaps makes this the first 70mm roadshow movie in history with an "R" rating? Not a movie to take the kiddies to on Christmas day, apparently.

---

quote: HitFix

---

Quentin Tarantino would have popped a blood vessel if he'd seen what we saw

By Drew McWeeny @DrewatHitFix | Thursday, Dec 3, 2015 7:30 AM

There are few things I've been looking forward to more this year than the release of Quentin Tarantino's "The Hateful Eight."

Since the live-reading he did of the script here in Los Angeles, I've been excited to see how he would hone the ending of the piece and how he and his longtime collaborator Robert Richardson would make the whole thing look. Tarantino's films are events for me, and I think a big part of that is because there is so much of my DNA as a film fan that was formed the same way as it was for him.

Starting with the Comic-Con presentation for the film, though, something else has become important thanks to the emphasis that Tarantino has placed on the 70MM presentation of the movie. After all, he went out of his way to work with Panavision to shoot in a real Super Panavision format, and it is so important to the way Tarantino wants the movie seen that he designed an entire special roadshow experience for the 70MM prints of the film.

Just check out the featurette that the Weinstein Company sent out that we've embedded at the top of this story. They have been hyping this as a major part of the experience for months, and based on Tarantino's history, it's clear that he considers film enormously important. One of the reasons he continues to fund the New Beverly Theater in Los Angeles is so there is a revival house that screens actual 35MM prints. Admirable, to say the least.

Tonight was the second major press screening of "The Hateful Eight" in Los Angeles. On Tuesday night, they screened the film at the Linwood Dunn, which is a screening room at the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences building on Vine. Great room, and I've seen many films there in the last few years. Wednesday, it screened at both the Linwood Dunn and the Crest in Westwood, which is where I chose to see it. It's been a while since I've seen a film at the Crest, but it was chosen because it was one of very few venues in Los Angeles currently equipped to screen a real 70MM print of something.

We are at a very precarious moment for film, and one of the things that guys like Tarantino and PT Anderson and Christopher Nolan and JJ Abrams hope when they shoot film is that they're helping to keep this particular process alive. When Steven Spielberg shoots "Bridge of Spies on film, he makes a strong case for why film is still the best way to shoot. "Bridge Of Spies" is gorgeous period work. You notice, though, that he never seems to make a big deal out of it. He shoots on film because he's Steven Spielberg, and that's the way he wants it.

Meanwhile, if the studios had their way, they would simply switch over to a universal digital standard and never look back. When Nolan insists on 70MM prints of "Interstellar," that is not an easy or a cheap thing, and Warner Bros and Paramount did what he asked because of the relationship they have with him. It's important to him, so it becomes important to them. The same thing is true here. Harvey Weinstein doesn't give a shit if 70MM is possible or in use; Quentin Tarantino does.

And if Quentin Tarantino had been at the Crest on Wednesday night, he would have burned the place to the goddamn ground.

Part of loving film prints is accepting that they are imperfect things. When a film print is perfectly projected, it is magic in a way nothing else can be. It's a chemical thing. Light hits celluloid and something happens. One of the best experiences I've ever had in a theater happened at the old Alamo Drafthouse in Austin, the original downtown location. Tarantino brought his own 35MM IB Tech print of "Suspiria," and Tim League pushed the sound system to its breaking point. The colors that night were so rich it felt like you could step into the screen, and more than it ever has before, it felt like a real nightmare. I have spent my life either worshipping in the house of cinema, looking up at those images thrown up on that screen, and as soon as I was able, I got a job that put me in a theater. I started as an usher, but I quickly worked my way into the projection booth, and I went out of my way to learn everything I could about the process. Building a print, tearing one down, repairing film breaks… all of it was a pleasure for me because it was such a key part of the process. As the projectionist, my job was to make sure that people had the best possible presentation of the film, and I loved that. Even after I stopped working as a projectionist, I've always been fascinated by the various ways people have pushed the boundaries of film projection. When "How The West Was Won" played the Cinerama Dome in full Cinerama, I managed to set up a tour of the booth and a demonstration of the process close-up. It was amazing, and a reminder of just how versatile and amazing film is.

Watching digital projection develop has been interesting. I remember going to every theater in LA that had a DLP system installed for "Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace" to compare the picture, and walking away convinced we were years away from seeing digital projection that posed any serious threat to film. The 70MM presentation of "The Hateful Eight" tonight was meant to send a clear signal to the film press that was assembled: film is still the very best way to see a movie like this. I know that every single time I see "Lawrence Of Arabia" presented in 70MM, it knocks me flat. And certainly, some of those presentations have been less than perfect. As a print collector, I'm sure Tarantino has seen plenty of prints that are ragged, distressed by time and countless runs through a projector, and that's just part of things. Prints carry history with them; every single break, every build-up or break-down, every imperfection… they are all battle scars, proof of the life of these prints.

Instead of the triumphant demonstration they were hoping for, the presentation of the Crest was a serious disaster. I'm not sure why anyone would stage a screening as significant at this one and not do a tech run-through first, but it happened. There's no way any competent projectionist would have seen what we saw tonight and gone ahead with the screening. There are many reasons tonight could have gone wrong, not least of which is because the projectionist's union that was at full-strength when I moved to LA is no longer in charge of things. One thing that happens when you have dedicated, well-paid, well-trained projectionists in every single booth is that you can expect things to be handled properly, and if there's a problem, you can expect that problem to get fixed. Fast.

From the moment the film began with the OVERTURE card depicting a horse-drawn carriage riding through snow in front of a stylized mountain range, Ennio Morricone's big lush score creeping in, there was a problem. The carriage was in the center of the screen, towards the lower third of the image, and right there, almost framing the carriage, was a soft-focus spot that kept dilating in and out of focus.

The film played for two hours, until the intermission, and nothing changed. For the entire thing, that maddening focus issue continued. When the lights came up, I heard several people talking about it, puzzled why no one seemed to be doing anything about it. Eventually, someone announced that they would be showing the second half of the film via digital projection because the 70MM was no longer working.

How embarrassing is that?

You have this movie that is being sold in large part on the visual experience that only SuperPanavision 70 can deliver. And on the night you're showing it to press that is going to be responsible for spreading the word about what an indispensable part of the experience the special 70MM projection is… it fails. And whether it's the fault of the theater or the projectionist, the studio is still responsible for making sure that the film they're screening is given the best possible chance to impress.

Here's the really awful part, the thing that I feel bad writing: once they switched over to the digital projection, it looked better. And not just in that one out-of-focus spot, either. Robert Richardson has done some of the best work of his career while working with Tarantino, and looking at the film's second half, we were given a reference-copy look at Richardson's work. Because the 70MM lens was simply not working right, that overall softness could not communicate the rich burnished-leather look of the film. In the fuzzy first half, many of the details of Minnie's Haberdashery, the isolated mountain roadhouse where most of the film takes place, were lost in that vaguely focused background. In the second half, it felt like you could explore every corner of that amazing set, and it also brought all of those great faces into sharp focus. It really was night and day in all the most important ways.

To be fair, I talked with three people who attended the Linwood Dunn screenings on both nights, and they said the 70MM presentation there was terrific. But saying that only underlines just how off the Crest's presentation was. Digital has plenty of its own potential pitfalls. I remember sitting through a press screening of Steven Soderbergh's "Che," and at one point, we reached a scene where there was an American speaking English who visits Che, and there were no subtitles. Since the first half of the film had been subtitled, I thought it was a stylistic choice. "Oh, I see. We're supposed to feel like the American who is visiting them, since he probably doesn't speak Spanish." Nope. Somehow, the digital projector just stopped reading the subtitles, and after they tried to fix it for a full half-hour, they cancelled the screening.

But that screening wasn't set up to dazzle us with the virtues of digital projection. Tonight's screening was designed to make all of us walk out and proclaim, "Drive as far as you have to, but make sure you see 'The Hateful Eight' in a theater that's playing the 70MM roadshow version. And unfortunately, because most theaters and theater projectionists working right now have no practical experience with 70MM, I suspect ours will not be the only ruined screening, nor will it be the only one where they switch over to the digital back-up instead of screening the film print.

Obviously, one press screening of one movie is not enough to cause the entire industry to suddenly make a unilateral decision that shooting and releasing on film is impossible, but I guarantee that other studios are paying attention to see what kind of headache they can expect if they also tried to shoot and release a film in SuperPanavision. And each one of these moments pushes the entire industry a little bit closer to film being nothing more than a fetish. In the most recent season of "Project Greenlight," one of the main ongoing battles for filmmaker Jason Mann was that he really, really, really wanted to shoot on film. And in the end, after much arguing with Effie Brown, the film's producer, he got his wish. And in the end, it made no difference.

It is going to be more and more difficult to get a studio to agree to this kind of thing, and if they don't have to do it, they aren't going to do it. They are not going to give in to requests to shoot on film unless it can be demonstrated that film is reliable and cost-efficient. They're going to take the path of least resistance, and even if they do allow a filmmaker to shoot on film, they're really going to have a problem finding screens that are dedicated to film where there are projectionists who are trained to deal with it.

I wish Tarantino all the best with the film, and I'll have my review of it for you on December 21st. But what happened tonight felt like a pivot point for a larger conversation, and it seems doubly ironic that a filmmaker so devoted to actual film would end up inadvertently giving ammunition to those in the industry who are ready to completely abandon the format.

One screening of "The Hateful Eight" may not determine the entire eventual fate of film, but it certainly sent a message.

And besides… it's already happened at least one other time…

---

 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 12-03-2015, 11:41 AM:
 
"Drew McWeeny"? Really?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-03-2015, 11:54 AM:
 
This is at least the 3rd failure now, and we're still on press screenings. I was really hoping my predictions would not be true, but sadly they seem to be on target.
 

---

Posted by Thomas Hauerslev (Member # 566) on 12-03-2015, 12:41 PM:
 
Don't believe everything you read. Complainers are always fun to read. Complaining gives them a feeling of being important. Gives them something to do every day.
 

---

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 12-03-2015, 01:16 PM:
 
The issue at the Crest is not a subtle complaint in any way. I hope this is a WAKE UP call to Tarantino and his people.
 

---

Posted by Mark Campbell (Member # 4411) on 12-03-2015, 02:18 PM:
 
I like the Crest Theatre but for is it really the venue for a "Roadshow" ultra-Panavision film? The screen is not that big so you might as well be playing it at a multiplex. With that aspect ration the image would just be a small strip down the middle of the screen. To me a "Roadshow" should play at a Chinese or Cinerama Dome or Village etc. No the AMC multiplexes that are popping up on the list of theaters.

Sadly Star Wars really killed it for this Roadshow rollout.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-03-2015, 02:49 PM:
 
(donning my tin foil hat)

I'm wondering if some people in the food chain of this movie's release are purposefully being neglectful with planning and execution. There's lots of people out there absolutely sold on a digital-only movie industry and want film to just die already. A high profile failure of a 70mm film release would let that happen. I know I repeated this a few pages ago, but I'm really getting suspicious now.

These technical failures really have less to do with 70mm being "not as good as digital" and more to do with damned incompetence.

Way back in the old days before we had iPhones, lived in homes with dirt floors and had to walk 15 miles to school in the snow and sub-zero cold quite a lot of movie theaters seemed to have no problem running 70mm film prints. But today, in the year 2015, post "Back to the Future" day, some movie industry people can manage to plan and deliver a 70mm press screening successfully. That's incompetence. But the 70mm format will get all the blame for these high profile disasters as well as the multiplex disasters that seem likely to occur once the movie is released.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 12-03-2015, 05:13 PM:
 
I have seen one of the BL&S setups and it does have a modified dual arm fail-safe. The Ground rollers and fanged ball bearings used in cue detection removed. there is also a tension fail-safe included for the platter. I was getting some of the focus drift in the center as well.
 

---

Posted by Eric Carter (Member # 1392) on 12-03-2015, 07:51 PM:
 
Three more 70mm venues:

Regal E-Walk New York
AMC Loews Lincoln Square New York
The Landmark Los Angeles
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-03-2015, 10:47 PM:
 
Question for those who are showing this: are you charging normal admission prices, or a higher-than-normal "roadshow" price?

It never would have occurred to me that ticket prices might be higher for H8 than for a regular first-run title, but I saw an article today that suggested that some theatres would be charging a premium for it.

Also, for once, we have a positive article in the Washington Post about this release as a noble effort to save cinema by differentiating it from television. Much as the industry did in the 1950s.
 

---

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 12-03-2015, 10:50 PM:
 
Anybody been to the Landmark in West LA? Are any of the screens big enough to do this justice? Their largest room seats 300. Note: art house, not a road show venue.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 12-03-2015, 11:17 PM:
 
Grand Lake regular prices.

The Landmark showed the Master in 70mm.
 

---

Posted by Paul H. Rayton (Member # 1817) on 12-04-2015, 12:14 AM:
 
Was informed today that the premiere will be at the Cinerama Dome on Monday (next week), here in L.A. There may be a New York premiere as well, but I didn't get any info on that.

Other info: the print (for reel-to-reel houses) is on 5 "double" reels. Heavy!

The overture is a total of about 3' 11", more or less. There is a title ("Overture") in the picture -- which might not have been needed in the days of yore! -- that shows until 2' 50". Then that word fades out and the music continues for approx. another 20 seconds.

The intermission is at the end of "reel #3", and all the black film is on there at the end of that reel. Can't explain why, but there it is. The entr'acte (intro) music (45 seconds), to start the second half, is at the head of "reel #4".
 

---

Posted by Fredrik Sandstrom (Member # 8171) on 12-04-2015, 01:42 AM:
 

quote:

---

The overture is a total of about 3' 11", more or less. There is a title ("Overture") in the picture -- which might not have been needed in the days of yore!

---

quote: Stephan Shelley

---

The Landmark showed the Master in 70mm.

---

quote:

---

Other info: the print (for reel-to-reel houses) is on 5 "double" reels. Heavy!

---

quote: Stephan Shelley

---

Cinemark is not letting any outside techs access to there theatres until Dec 22. Can not go in and even do a site check.

---

quote:

---

Quentin Tarantino wants you to know that the only way to fully appreciate his new movie is to see it under a combination of conditions that hasn’t been used in nearly 50 years. Anything less and you are not truly a connoisseur of film.

He asserts that you must watch the western “The Hateful Eight” at a 70mm “roadshow” screening. Is this a marketing stunt? Or just the whimsical demands of a self-indulgent auteur? After all, very few theaters are capable of projecting 70mm film anymore, having made the switch to digital. More importantly, if you ask a typical person what 70mm means, they’ll most likely shrug and get back to whatever television show they’re watching.

But Tarantino sticks to his guns, and on Christmas Day, 96 theaters in the U.S. and four in Canada will be outfitted to screen all three hours and two minutes of Tarantino’s latest the way it was meant to be seen (according to the director, anyway). The cost to make this happen? No one is divulging exact figures, but a feature in the New York Times threw out some guesses: Possibly in the range of $60,000 to $80,000 per screen. And that doesn’t include fees to hire and train projectionists — a nearly extinct breed.

So do we roll our eyes at Tarantino’s willingness to inconvenience exhibitors? Deride his obsession with passe technology for the sake of nostalgia?

Not after watching the movie’s first featurette. Tarantino has worthy aspirations. He’s trying to save the film industry.

The seven-minute movie about the movie is one part history lesson, one part film procedural and 100 percent persuasive marketing. Wisely, Samuel L. Jackson does most of the talking. The actor has always been the epitome of cool, so when he says that seeing the movie in 70mm “will make your enhanced viewing even doper,” we want to toggle over to Fandango, credit card in hand.

So what is a roadshow? It’s a throwback to a time when people got excited about going to movies. In the 1950s and ’60s, certain films played in a limited number of theaters before getting wide releases. Those advanced screenings were classy events. “People even got dressed up,” Jackson marvels in the featurette. An overture preceded the feature, and an intermission gave people a chance to stretch their legs; programs were handed out. These screenings also had extended cuts of the movie, treating early viewers to additional footage.

The roadshow release of “The Hateful Eight” has all that and begins on Dec. 25 with a one-week run, after which theaters that aren’t outfitted for 70mm will show the movie on 35mm and digital.

Tarantino, along with Christopher Nolan, is among the biggest defenders of celluloid, so of course the featurette breaks down the wonders of 70mm film. More than just a delightfully analog approach, shooting on 65mm film (which is then printed on 70mm) offers directors more space within each shot. It’s twice the width of the standard 35mm, so there’s more room for visual elements within every frame and, when projecting the image on a big screen, little loss of picture quality.

It’s especially nice for vast landscape shots and gives movies an epic feel. Think: “Gone With the Wind,” “Lawrence of Arabia” and “The Sound of Music.”

The “Hateful Eight” is a western shot in Telluride, Colo., so it’s ideal for the wide-format treatment. The movie takes place shortly after the Civil War and focuses on eight people, including a bounty hunter and his prisoner, who are holed up together in a haberdashery during a blizzard. Jackson stars alongside Kurt Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh and Bruce Dern, among others.

According to the director of photography, Robert Richardson, “when you see the grain of 70, you see the color of 70 — like the wide shot inside the barn and the close-ups of the faces — it’s beautiful.”

But Tarantino took it a step further by shooting in Ultra Panavision, which, as Jackson explains, is “the widest format there is.” “The Hateful Eight” is only the 11th film ever shot this way. Others include “Ben-Hur” and “Mutiny on the Bounty,” and prior to “Hateful,” the most recent movie was “Khartoum,” in 1966. To make this happen, the crew had to refurbish decades-old lenses and retrofit cameras.

Even the movie’s editor wasn’t entirely prepared for the virtuosic scale of images with an aspect ratio (the ratio of width to height) of 2.76:1. During an interview with CineMontage magazine, Fred Raskin said, “I’m a little ashamed to admit that, aside from my general excitement at seeing the 2.76:1 compositions, I don’t think I was aware there would be any difference creatively. But once the footage started coming in, the combination of the beauty of the 70mm and that super-wide aspect ratio led us to hold on to wide shots substantially longer than we would have otherwise. When you are seeing these beautiful compositions – and the clarity of the image is such that you can see the depth of the performances in the actors’ eyes – why would you cut away?”

Basically this is a lot of effort to remind people that there’s a difference between film and television — and that’s a lesson the movie industry desperately needs to be spreading right now.

Tarantino hasn’t always explained things in the most tactful way. At the Cannes Film Festival, he offended people with his elitism when he declared, “digital projections, that’s just television in public. And apparently the whole world is OK with television in public, but what I knew as cinema is dead.”

That’s a little melodramatic, and less established directors will explain that digital filmmaking has it’s place; it’s much cheaper, which has democratized the art form. Just look at the magnificent low-budget “Tangerine,” which was shot on an iPhone, and probably wouldn’t exist otherwise.

And yet, Tarantino has a point. Making television and making movies has never been more alike.

Just talk to someone who has done both. Director John Wells, a producer and director who worked on “E.R.,” “The West Wing” and “Shameless,” plus the film adaptation of “August: Osage County,” has seen the vast differences between the mediums disappear.

“We have more resources on [recent] shows than on any of the films I produced 10 years ago,” he said recently while promoting his film “Burnt” with Bradley Cooper. “The technology has changed in the sense that there’s no difference in the physical product between doing [the upcoming series] ‘Animal Kingdom’ and doing ‘Burnt.’ We’re using the same tools and shooting them the same way with all the same personnel.”

Throw in the fact that television tends to take more risks with fresher stories and diverse casts — not to mention the sheer volume of options — and the result is that fewer people go to movies. The talk around the water cooler is rarely about what came out at the multiplex last weekend. Everyone’s too busy rehashing what premiered on HBO last night.

Say what you will about his opinions and methods, but Tarantino is fighting a worthy battle by trying to re-assert the divide between the two art forms. You won’t get dressed, much less dressed up, to watch television, he’s reminding us. You can’t enjoy the breathtaking immersion of Ultra Panavision in your living room.

The payoff will likely be good for Tarantino. Police officers notwithstanding, the director knows how to get people excited about the power of movies. After all, “Django Unchained” and “Inglourious Basterds” scored big at the box office without the novelty of a roadshow. But he’s not going to be able to do it alone. In order to save movies, the whole industry is going to have to rethink the existing paradigm. Studios and filmmakers need to understand that A-list stars and familiar characters aren’t guaranteed to tear people away from their flat screens.

But a new story delivered in a way few have ever seen? Maybe Jackson says it best: “It’s pretty cool, huh?”

---

quote:

---

The roadshow release of “The Hateful Eight” has all that and begins on Dec. 25 with a one-week run, after which theaters that aren’t outfitted for 70mm will show the movie on 35mm and digital.

---

quote:

---

It’s a throwback to a time when people got excited about going to movies.

---

• 3+ hour movie
• 70mm film (5 perfs instead of 4, so VERY close to the edge of the platter)
• No FilmGuard (so no static control or true cleaning/wet gate projection)
• Polyester film stock (mmmmmmm....delicious static!)
• Small center rings, not the oversize ones like I use (the smaller rings makes timing super critical towards the end of the movie)
• Who knows what kind of LEDs are in the platters coupled with what variations of control cards, motor drive puck size and light filter. Each of those needs to be calibrated differently too! Remember all of these platters are Christie AW3s from varying vintages.
• Not necessarily a known fact yet, but I doubt the platter decks were buffed and grooved during the rebuild, so any knick on the surface of the platter can send the payout arm into full throttle and sling the print without even a grooved surface to help it stay put.
• And the biggest one after adding up all of the above...no Safety Rings. Yup there it is, right there.

Need I go on? Suddenly the decision to waste money on useless PTRs seems pale in comparison, doesn't it?
 

---

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 12-06-2015, 07:08 AM:
 
Wow that does sound kinda sketchy. Oh has anyone seen 70mm on a tower? A theatre near me used to do 70 and has some 70mm tower reels up on the wall. Looks like they could hold about 90mins, so You would to do a real intermission.
 

---

Posted by Thomas Hauerslev (Member # 566) on 12-06-2015, 08:51 AM:
 
Ho Paul,

Towers with 70mm in London: http://www.in70mm.com/news/2015/london/gallery/index.htm

Tower with 70mm in Copenhagen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5TIn5JmDk4
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 12-06-2015, 08:51 AM:
 
David Bordwell blogs about Hateful 8 and has some comments from Boston Light, plus pictures of their "platter farm":
Bordwell's Blog
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-06-2015, 10:06 AM:
 
This is a picture of the "Assembly Room" in Valencia, CA where the "Hateful Eight" 70mm
prints are being made up. Film will be ultrasonically welded. (Not Spliced) A shipping case
can be seen against the wall on the far right.

 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-06-2015, 05:52 PM:
 
Don't forget...not only is it polyester film...but WINTER time...low-humidity, combined with the extended length to all but guarantee some static issues.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 12-06-2015, 08:17 PM:
 
Brad, do you not have any more platter rings in stock?
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-06-2015, 10:01 PM:
 
"The Boys Behind the Booth" (headline of the David Bordwell article linked by Martin) - ironic, given that many if not most of the workforce at the Valencia facility are women!
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-06-2015, 11:38 PM:
 

quote: Paul Mayer

---

Brad, do you not have any more platter rings in stock?

---

Nope. Sold the last one about 3 years ago I'm guessing it was. (Maybe it was only 2 years ago, not sure.) Since then I've only had one inquiry about them now that digital has all but taken over.

I offered to make a production run of 100-120 for Chapin at cost to help this project, but apparently he felt it wasn't needed. I think Mork put it best.


 

---

Posted by David J Hilsgen (Member # 2614) on 12-07-2015, 12:18 AM:
 
I agree with brad i'd say about 60 prints are going to get destroyed. everything up north will be the first to go .when i ran interstellar i had 4 humidifiers running, also walled that area of the booth off, used film guard & a anti static vac that i ran the film thru .also i think they are going to have audio drop outs, if there running a single dts system.now what theatre will be the first to have a print go flying ?
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-07-2015, 12:37 AM:
 
Given the fact at least some of the people responsible for the release of The Hateful Eight know better, and would have been best advised to bring experts like Brad Miller into the loop, but refused to do so, more and more I'm thinking this "biggest 70mm release in over 20 years" is really going to be a subversive act of sabotage meant to make film look bad and have everything go digital only once and for all.

Maybe that sounds paranoid, but given the egos and bias involved, I'm not going to put that conspiracy theory out of my mind.

If a lot of these 70mm Hateful Eight prints go flying those screening disasters will not prove once and for all that film is inferior to digital. The only thing it will prove is Hollywood studios are incompetent as fuck at doing anything professional at all anymore when it comes to commercial theatrical screenings.

The movie studios are basically doing the same thing that Applebees and Chili's does to your "steak": throw the pre-cooked slab of whatever it is into an industrial microwave and nuke it. That's movie-going for you now. Yeah, digital has made it "better" when measured against a low average of neighborhood multiplex theaters. But the splendor of top tier movie-going showmanship is all but gone. Now you have some high priced "premium" theaters that are honestly only marginally better than a big HDTV set in the home living room when you get down to it.

It really pisses me off they can't get something like a 70mm film release done right. It's pretty damned pathetic. The movie industry has done this to itself. They didn't do anything to maintain any film-based infrastructure for production or exhibition. The industry said "fuck you" to its own heritage. They've sold movie theaters extremely expensive digital projection gear that will be prohibitively costly to replace or upgrade in order to "keep up with the Joneses" in terms of new technology filtering into home living rooms. And then they have all the Save The Cat! paint by the numbers scripts. So many movies are barely worth watching once; forget owning a copy of them on Blu-ray.

The Hateful Eight in 70mm was an opportunity to show how movies could really be presented. But now with all these odd details showing up the effort just seems like a sad waste of time and money.
 

---

Posted by Tim Androes (Member # 9010) on 12-07-2015, 01:43 AM:
 
couple more things to consider...
-big shipping case...how is the print packed inside? pictures?
-whole case to the booth or take the print out near the booth stairway/access?
-shipper? some trucking company "drops" the case? print arrives damaged..overnite me a replacement?
-case locked and we get key how long before showtime?

whether you're using tape or glue or sonic weld it is still a splice
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 12-07-2015, 09:28 AM:
 
I think every one is making a big deal out of the shipping pre assembled prints
We have been doing it for years with out issues in the large format world and in 25 years I never had a ultrasonic splice fail at cinesphere
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-07-2015, 09:41 AM:
 
They should put 5-10 minutes of junk film on the head, after the threading leader and ahead of a dozen feet of solid black which is where you'd either cue the shutter to open or you'd punch in manually to ensure a clean start.

As is you'd be doing something like this:

You thread up.
You recheck everything in the entire path.
You crank ahead manually
If all looks correct, you bump the motor briefly.
Check again,
If all's well, run down to where you will start from.

Add the junk film and the show is made even more bullet proof.
Do all the above and then start 5-10 minutes early.
While the junk film is running through you can actually walk around and verify that everything is fine on both the platter and the projector. A loop looks a little too big...stop and fix. Miss a roller...stop and fix. No marring the print. If all is good you just keep running and punch in at the right moment. Even the less experienced have a better chance for totally error-free projection.

Adding a little junk film to the tail will be a good idea, too.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-07-2015, 09:53 AM:
 

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

Maybe that sounds paranoid, but given the egos and bias involved, I'm not going to put that conspiracy theory out of my mind.

---

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

This was that the theaters which took the 5/70 prints were on their own as far as equipping and staffing was concerned: the result was 12 out of the 15 prints damaged to the point of unacceptable presentation within a week.

---

Interstellar certainly had mishaps with its 5/70mm prints and 4/35mm prints as well (a "flagship" AMC location in Dallas ruined its 35mm print during the first show). Pretty embarrassing.

Of the three Interstellar 5/70mm prints that came away unscathed, those were probably the three 5/70mm prints that played in Dallas, handled only by Brad Miller and his crew. It might have been prudent for Paramount to take note of what worked and what didn't work after the Interstellar theatrical run and perhaps share those notes with anyone running film presentations. BLSI may have a great reputation and all, but the point by point warnings Brad has made about The Hateful Eight release still stand.

It also bears repeating Weinstein & Co. are foolish to force this movie into the market on Dec. 25 when Star Wars: The Force Awakens will still have a stranglehold on virtually all the movie screens with decent 70mm presentation potential. It may be the biggest 70mm release in 23 years, but very few theaters are going to be able to show this movie in the scale it should have been presented. A lot of customers are going to be watching this 70mm show on some pretty modest sized screens. They should have just run a NY & LA exclusive on Dec. 25 for Oscar ballot qualification and then waited until mid January, after Star Wars has died down, to platform it out to other theaters. Roadshows have done exactly that in the past. Why treat this any different? January on into early February is usually a wasteland of crappy movie-going. A huge 70mm film release could get a lot of uncontested publicity during that period.
 

---

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 12-07-2015, 11:14 AM:
 
BL&S posted a pic on Facebook of 70mm running at the Continental 10 in Denver. Looks like a new lens.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-07-2015, 01:14 PM:
 
It will be interesting to see how they handle replacement reels. At some point, there will be a lab defect or an operator defect and a reel or two may need to be swapped, either before opening day or days/weeks into the run.

Also, not every booth is easily accessible. The shipping box and built-up prints may not fit in some theatres or booths. That will be "interesting" as well.

(No doubt, someone has already thought of both of these issues, but it will be interesting to see the solutions.)
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-07-2015, 02:53 PM:
 
How the hell are they getting 70mm at the Continental? The old booth was big and spacious but the new booth (up a skinny flight of stairs) is smaller than my bathroom. It can fit a platter of course but damn I can't imagine trying to get an assembled print up those stairs and around any corners, etc. My guess is that they're not even running it on the big screen. Probably auditorium 6 would be my guess. Right by the offices and break room.

Also, who the hell is running the show? Regal kids? Oh god...

Winters in Denver can be ultra staticy like Steve said. I mean it's more static-prone everywhere but it's much worse in Denver trust me. They will have fun with that print without FilmGuard. Or likely even a Safety Ring. Not having a safety ring is stupid.
 

---

Posted by Phil Ranucci (Member # 3820) on 12-07-2015, 02:55 PM:
 
We got our lens and test film and a test reel.



 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-07-2015, 02:57 PM:
 
Reports are coming in for people who have attended preview screenings at the Sam Goldwyn Theater that the movie is very boring and over-long. I'm holding out hope though....

Mark
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-07-2015, 03:08 PM:
 
David isn't joking about 70mm film and humidity. During the Interstellar run Dallas got hit overnight with a crazy drop in temperature and when we opened the booths that next morning we found the film was curled insanely. Here is a crappy phone video showing how bad it was. It took racing out to add humidifiers as well as some McGuyvering of the brains to separate the payout arm's guides and even removing the stripper rollers on the platter brain to buy some time to get the film to lay flat again. We didn't have any issues with static (because we used FilmGuard of course), but the curl would've been even worse if we had not been using FilmGuard.

It will be interesting to see one of these new AW3 brains. Earlier this year when I was warning Chapin of the curl issues and some of the hacks we ended up making to the brains, he told me Larry Shaw was going to redesign them so it would not be susceptible to curl scratching. I still haven't seen a picture of one, but am very curious to see what all tips he used of mine and what else he came up with.

Steve is dead on the money about leader. On my installs there was a generous length of threading leader and then 2, yes two solid MINUTES of more leader. This was so the projectionist had plenty of time with the film running at normal projection speeds with all of the booth lights on to check for any issues. Back at GCC Northpark we always referred to that as "abort leader". It's there for a reason, to protect the print and provide ZERO excuse for a misthread.

After the 2 minutes the system would auto-stop at a specific cue point. We then ran the intro and trailers from the digital projector and 60 seconds prior to the last DCP clip a cue on the DCP server triggered the automation on the 70mm system which started the projector rolling again. At this point we are talking normal projection leader, 2 minutes of leader with all of the booth lights on full and the projectionist inspecting everything at full speed, then another full minute of protection leader where the projectionist could re-check the entire path again (although with low booth lighting levels and a flashlight). When the DCP finished the changeover would initiate from digital to film flawlessly every time perfectly on cue. I actually shot one of these with my phone. It's a big file, but it's here.

BTW in that changeover video, yes we ran the previews in flat and the masking is slowly opening to scope on the Paramount logo. The system was all completely automated. Once the projectionist had the system threaded and started the 3 minute abort leader running, there was nothing else required of him for the entire show. This was simple to do, and although I can appreciate the theory that if a system is manual it forces the projectionist to be there, the reverse of that argument is that it also distracts the projectionist from watching the system for problems because he is too busy pressing buttons to make the show run. Running manual like that also doesn't ensure every show is perfectly timed, and remember with few exceptions, there won't be real projectionists with years of experience running these. Case in point, these BLSI systems don't even have a simple up/down cue for lighting. How many intermissions are going to play through with the lights fully down? Any guesses? I'm going to bet a staggering amount of them!

In regards to shipping the print fully built-up, this is where more mistakes were made. First off, they are essentially using a Goldberg Show Shipper, but with bigger flanges. The size of the hubs on those are smaller than a standard Christie center ring, so that means the first show (and the final show) the platter must be calibrated to run faster, which means at the end of the show the potential for print throwing and takeup arm crashing into the motor is extremely high.

Also shipping on essentially an aluminum split reel is nuts in my opinion. Even IMAX didn't do that. IMAX shipped on special platter/shipping decks, which is what I tried to convince them to do. The AW3 platter deck has a honeycomb center and won't collapse or bend during shipment. The print could've also been easily strapped to the platter deck and a custom crate built for far less money. Plus when the print needs to get onto the platter, it's just a matter of sitting the deck on the axle. I can't imagine what will happen when those little plastic mushroom pieces on the hub of that split reel crack and the flange comes popping off. Granted I haven't seen one of these, but unless it was completely re-engineered, that's a distinct possibility. Then again if it was completely re-engineered, they could've addressed the center ring size issue, which clearly they didn't in looking at the pics.

Oversize rings like I use should have also been used. They make it so the top speed can be roughly HALF of what would otherwise be needed. This means by the end of the movie, the potential for throwing is SUBSTANTIALLY lowered, plus the takeup arm crashing is also noticeably lowered.

Here is a picture of one of my prints of Interstellar.



In regards to Sam's comment about how the print will be close to the edge of the platter, note also the use of the Film-Tech Safety Ring that sits around the edge of the platter in that picture above. Those were tested with a 200 pound hit too. It's impossible to have a tail wrap or a thrown print when these are used.

Then again if Kelmar film cleaners with FilmGuard had been spec'd for this deployment instead of that total waste of money on PTRs, static would have been eliminated AND the prints would have had wet gate projection.

Going back to the oversize rings point again, I'll bet a dollar Weinstein has no idea about the takeup arm crashing issue. If they have been made aware, then THREE technical screenings of the movie would have been ordered (as in with the install tech present for each of them). The reason is EACH DECK must be verified for proper calibration in the last reel of the movie. The gold standard test for this is to take the takeup deck and force spin it faster so the takeup arm almost reaches a crashing point to the motor, then hand brake it quickly to a dead stop. Now watch for a few seconds as the takeup deck then tries to spin 200+ pounds of weight from a dead stop to film speed.

What will happen is inertia will kick in and keep the platter spinning when it should be slowing down. (You've really got to be careful doing this test by the way.) Basically if you have a 3 hour 70mm print and the platter is properly calibrated, the takeup should completely stabilize within 10-15 seconds again with no oscillation of the takeup arm. Unfortunately without a full weighted down platter, you cannot truly check the calibration, so that means 3 runs of that 3 hour movie with the install technician present!!!

Since all of these platters were cobbled together from varying vintage AW3s they collected, some will have red leds, some will have green leds and some will have infrared leds. There are also 2 different types of light filters in the platters, 2 different types of led cards and different types of speed control cards (some of which will blow the fuses after a little bit of operation depending on the type of led used and settings in the led card). I've found depending on the combination used depends on how the platter must be calibrated for proper timing.

Are we to believe BLSI has extensive experience with all of the variations of the Christie AW3 platter over the years? I won't say that they don't because maybe they do, but my bet is probably not, as they were hard-core Kinoton guys. Even if they did have an AW3 platter expert on staff, did he test and calibrate each deck with a fully loaded 3 hour 70mm feature at the end of the print? I highly doubt it, and depending on the combination of parts from the varying versions of the AW3s over the years will depend on how the calibration actually must be done.

Then again the payout arm tension spring adjustment also plays into this, as that will affect the angle of the film as it enters into the brain (which could cause scratching on the payout arm) as well as the "punchiness" of the payout along with how the platter handles any knicks in the surface of the deck.

This is yet another reason why I have such high concerns for the ends of the prints not having major problems. People will try and blow it off as to "the print was just too close to the edge of the deck", but any issues could be easily avoided with the proper setup, calibration and ancillary tools. We didn't have issues with Interstellar and that had a similar running time. My theater (GCC Northpark in Dallas) was also according to Paramount the only one that didn't have to at least have reel 10 of Titanic in 70mm replaced due to thrown prints and tail wraps. (Titanic's total print length was 20 minutes longer than Hateful Eight.) This tells me even 20 years ago most people were not fully in the know of all the little things to be cautious of to calibrate an AW3 for a 3 hour 70mm feature.

Leo, BLSI has made a name for themselves doing bizarre one-off setups (bizarre meaning difficult working conditions), but I don't think they have extensive experience dealing with the typical theater-level person. They did take some of my advice on idiot-proofing the systems (such as removing unnecessary 35mm components, of which I hope they are saving and keeping with each projector, otherwise they are doing a disservice to film's future by essentially destroying all 35mm capability from some of the few remaining machines left). However in my opinion even the center ring/safety ring example I just wrote about above (or any of the other various points I've made along with other forum members) shows they aren't taking every step possible to ensure these shows truly run smoothly, and they have had a year to figure it out.

It's frustrating because with the substantially-higher-than-digital price tag BLSI is charging for these old film systems as well as Bobby's various points, if this doesn't go well, this really will be that final nail in the coffin for film. I can hear every studio executive already saying "all that money and the film shows still had lots of failures! We will never, ever release on film again!"

So at this point in my opinion the future of film surviving as an exhibition format is all on the shoulders of Chapin Cutler, as he is the one who called the technical shots for the Hateful Eight film release. If this goes smoothly, then all of us lovers of 70mm and film needs to give the guy a pat on the back and buy him a beer. If this goes badly, then lovers of 70mm and film will have to find themselves a nice metal pipe and lure him into a back alley somewhere.
 

---

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 12-07-2015, 06:35 PM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

My guess is that they're not even running it on the big screen. Probably auditorium 6 would be my guess. Right by the offices and break room.

---

quote: Mitchell Dvoskin

---

Anyone here know if H8FULL at Lincoln Square is going to be in the big "non-imax" auditorium, the one that used to have 5/70 in it's pre-digital life? If so, Lincoln Square will be the place to see it.

---

This will be an interesting exercise in contractual resolve (or perhaps big chains getting preference...)

Supposedly the standard terms on SW are four week minimum in the multiplex's largest house. That would be the "Loews" house at the Lincoln Square, which seats somewhat under 900.

However, it's also in the IMAX house (3D) which seats 600 for standard IMAX or about 480 for 3D. But it's in a handful of other auditoriums as well (out of the 13). So if a location devotes multiple screens to a release do they get excused from that contractual obligation? Or is it just because it's one of the handful of 800-lb gorilla exhibs?
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 12-07-2015, 07:26 PM:
 
The Tower in Sacramento, CA today got their BLSI provided equipment:

 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 12-07-2015, 07:53 PM:
 
Well that was quick and not showing my best side. I just got home from there an hour ago.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-07-2015, 08:01 PM:
 
How does one get in touch with Tarantino? One of y'all must know someone who knows someone. He needs to see this thread (specifically this page and Brad's post). Someone make it happen. And ignore Mark's post!

PS - How the hell does your phone shoot interlaced video, Brad? I've never seen a phone shoot interlaced. Maybe it's an Android thing?
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-07-2015, 08:09 PM:
 
Are the BL&S setups using beam spreaders in the lamphouses? Everyone seems to have a different opinion on their usefulness (or lack thereof).

Joe--haven't you heard? Interlaced video is the wave of the future!
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 12-08-2015, 12:46 PM:
 
Very long interview with Hateful 8 cinematographer in Variety:

quote:

---

Robert Richardson on the Ultra Panavision Experience of ‘The Hateful Eight’

Robert Richardson on Bringing 'The Hateful
DECEMBER 8, 2015 | 09:46AM PT
A deep dive into the nuts and bolts of bringing Quentin Tarantino's 70mm

Robert Richardson has been Quentin Tarantino’s DP of choice since 2003’s “Kill Bill: Vol. 1.” The relationship has distinguished Tarantino’s visual language considerably from that of films like “Reservoir Dogs,” “Pulp Fiction” and “Jackie Brown,” which established his voice in the 1990s. On “The Hateful Eight,” the collaboration reaches new heights with not just a 70mm production, but one captured through archaic, wide-angle Ultra Panavision 70 lenses that haven’t seen the light of day since 1966’s “Khartoum.”

---

quote:

---

Old Lenses Give Depth to ‘The Hateful Eight’
Hateful Eight Cinematography Robert Richardson
DECEMBER 8, 2015 | 09:45AM PT
Retrofitting a bloody Western with all-but-forgotten tech.

Kristopher Tapley

Quentin Tarantino wanted something special for “The Hateful Eight.” He knew he wanted to shoot it in 70mm — so much so that the words “in glorious 70mm” are peppered throughout his infamously leaked screenplay.

---

quote:

---

Quentin Tarantino asked a bunch of newly trained projectionists to screen a 350-pound film on over 100 salvaged projectors. What could go wrong?

By Tasha Robinson on December 8, 2015 09:45 am

When the script for Quentin Tarantino’s new film The Hateful Eight leaked in early 2014, press outlets paid more attention to the way his screenplay described the look of the film than they did to the plot. His opening scene-setting text describes a shot “…in big super CINEMASCOPE 70MM filmed gloriousness.” The same words crop up over and over: “Snow banks go rolling by in GLORIOUS 70MM SUPERSCOPE.” “We see what Maj. Warren describes in BIG WIDE 70MM SUPER CINEMASCOPE.” “The sun’s out and it’s amazing looking in 70MM SUPERSCOPE.”

Clearly the format was an important part of Tarantino's vision. He's always been a cinema buff who strews his work with references to past films and tends to bring the entire history of film into any interview. Ultimately, he didn't shoot in Cinemascope, but only because he did something riskier and rarer: he revived Ultra Panavision, a format that's been used on less than a dozen films, and none since 1966's Khartoum. The process, which produces a 70mm image even more panoramic than Cinemascope, requires custom lenses to shoot and project. When he tours with the film in December, for a special event roadshow reportedly planned to hit about a hundred cities, the venues are going to have to play the film with newly acquired equipment, at a reported cost of up to $80,000 per theater, according to The New York Times. The plan is for the film to open on Christmas and run for two weeks only in the 70mm theaters, before it hits multiplexes in a conventional digital form.

"Few film houses are equipped with the gear even for conventional 70mm"

There's already been a minor resurgence in 70mm film screenings over the past few years, with Paul Thomas Anderson's The Master and Inherent Vice and Christopher Nolan's Interstellar all getting limited runs in the larger format. But the Hateful Eight 70mm roadshow is a project on a much vaster scale. Interstellar opened on only 11 screens in 70mm, and the theaters playing it could use conventional 70mm lenses. Few film houses are equipped with the gear even for conventional 70mm; that Times article claimed the The Weinstein Company effectively had to "corner the market" on existing 70mm projectors, buying out collectors and scavenging parts in order to temporarily equip the roadshow venues. "Configuring the lens took six months alone," Weinstein distribution chief Erik Lomis told Deadline's Anthony D'Alessandro in a recent interview. "The more projectors we got, the more parts we realized we were going to need."

But there are risks associated with working with nearly obsolete technology. Persistent focus issues at an early critics' screening at the Crest Westwood theater in Los Angeles led The Weinstein Company to stop the 70mm projector midway through the show and complete the screening with a digital copy of the film. Russ Fischer reported on the specific problems at The Playlist, in a piece that called the screening "very near disastrous," and suggested "the big comeback of 70mm may be over before it ever really starts." Hitfix critic Drew McWeeny is kinder in his concerned essay "What One Bad Screening Of The Hateful Eight Means For The Future Of Film," but while he acknowledges that film's imperfections as a medium are part of the appeal, he also calls the screening "a serious disaster." Sam Adams at CriticWire followed up with "Could The Hateful Eight Kill Film Instead of Saving It?"

That's a lot of broad concern over one screening and a single, clearly faulty projector — digital screenings have their fair share of isolated technical glitches as well, and any professional film critic has at least a couple of stories of digital screenings being restarted from the beginning. A later screening of the film at the Crest went more smoothly, according to The Verge's Bryan Bishop. (He did notice, however, that "the right third of the frame was definitely a touch soft," and the projection was a little dim.)

Still, an early critics' screening of a heavily anticipated film is a particularly unfortunate time to have tech issues: critics are a finicky, detail-oriented audience whose complaints can have an exceptional reach. And given the size of the investment the theaters and Weinstein are making for the special tour, a series of technical problems undermining the roadshow's reputation could be a financial disaster as well as a PR issue. There's a lot of pressure on both the studio and the theaters to make sure these screenings go smoothly.

Dana Morris, the general manager of the Crest Westwood, says the theater spent weeks preparing for its Hateful Eight screenings, bringing its old 70mm projector out of retirement. "It's been a lot of work," he told The Verge. "We brought in this expert who's been here two weeks every day, all day long, and he's coming back all day today to tweak [the projector] to get it ready for tomorrow, because we're showing it two more times." The initial attempt to get the Crest's existing 70mm projector out of storage and back up to speed involved "ordering parts from all over the country."

Even normal 70mm presents some significant extra problems, Morris says. The Hateful Eight print arrived preassembled. The film is more than three hours long, so the immense reel arrived in a custom case, and weighed around 350 pounds. The delivery man needed a forklift to get it onto the truck, and it took four people just to get it up to the projector booth.

Ultra Panavision's 2.76:1 aspect ratio is likely to be a special challenge even in locations where Weinstein provides the projector and the lens. The Ultra Panavision lenses will need to be adjusted onsite for the shorter booth-to-screen throw of modern theaters. And many houses won't have a screen that makes full use of the unusually wide format. Fischer's Playlist piece complained that the Crest "didn't properly place the matte curtains around the screen, so the top and bottom edges faded off into fuzziness rather than having the crisp delineation those mattes are meant to provide." But Morris says the Crest's adjustable curtains, known as the masking, simply don't have a setting for Ultra Panavision. "We just couldn't bring the masking up any higher. It was two feet narrower [vertically] than a normal movie." Some theaters will make special modifications for the roadshow — Chicago's Music Box Theatre is installing a new 40-foot screen for the event, as well as a new sound system — but that adds a further financial pressure for the screenings to come off flawlessly.

Union projectionist Diego Gorbea, one of the IATSE Local 33 members who's been hired to screen the film for the Director's Guild in LA, says Hateful Eight has been playing "all over town for the last couple of weeks," in a series of screenings for the DGA, the Academy Of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, and selected members of the public, none of which have had any issues. Though he didn't work at the Crest screening, he says it suggests the kind of issues the roadshow may have in trying to train non-union, inexperienced staffers onsite on complex, unfamiliar equipment. The Times article quotes Boston Light & Sound co-founder Chapin Cutler as saying the company will be handling projection for the tour on a case-by-case basis: "One way or the other, we will fulfill this need ... It will be a combination of house staff that we can train, professional projectionists that we can bring in, projectionists that we can find locally, and potentially some technical staff that we'll bring in."

Gorbea is dubious about the idea of jumping site staff into a series of high-profile screenings if they don't already have significant 70mm experience. "In my experience, I would say that running 70 is a little more tricky. Usually you need to teach a baby to crawl before they can walk. Usually with projectionists, you teach them 35mm first, and then you move them to 70." And the added challenges of working with outside equipment becomes significant, especially for "platter" theaters, where the film comes prebuilt as that single 350-pound reel. "By no means can you take someone who is not trained and run a platter show," Gorbea said. "That's just not going to happen. You have to thread up that thing through the platter, then through the projector, then back to the platter ... The threading itself is more difficult."

On the other hand, projectionists working with single-reel projectors, and switching back and forth between them throughout the show, don't have it much easier. "With platters, you only have to thread it up once," Gorbea said. "With reel-to-reel — Hateful Eight is 11 reels long, so you have to thread it up 11 times, on two different projectors. There's more room for mistakes."

For Tarantino, though, there's more room for magic, as well. He still considers digital projection in theaters to be "HBO in public." He's holding onto history by holding onto 70mm and Ultra Panavision, but he means for the roadshow to echo history as well. The touring 70mm prints of Hateful Eight will include six minutes of extra footage, the kind of bonus used in traditional prestige tour shows to bring viewers to theaters for a special event. Tarantino and his cast explained more about his vision in an 8-minute featurette touting the excitement of the special event roadshow and the quality of the visual format. The word "glorious" comes up a lot. "Ultra Panavision!" Samuel L. Jackson enthuses. "When you absolutely, positively got to wow everyone in the room! Accept no substitutes!"

With this tour, Tarantino is still fighting for the future of cinema as a public, social experience, with every film as a super-sized epic, and every screening as a noteworthy special event rather than a vague part of a nightly Netflix blur. It's too soon to judge whether this tour will help his cause or hurt it. But even if the Crest Westwood issues are repeated elsewhere, touting isolated screening problems as "the death of film" is overstating the situation considerably. There's a difference between routine film screenings (on 35mm, or even special event 70mm screenings that don't use custom equipment to revive a defunct technology) and the exceptionally ambitious Hateful Eight touring program. If the roadshow encounters significant technical issues, it'll be an expensive embarrassment for The Weinstein Company and a disappointment for Tarantino, but it won't be a referendum on shooting on film, or projecting it in a prestige setting. If film dies, it'll have more to do with cost, convenience, and utility than with the question of how many Ultra Panavision lenses one company can Frankenstein together for a quixotic quest.

"It might be expensive or embaRrassing, but it won't be a referendum on film"

And if the roadshow succeeds, it'll be a positive model for special event cinema events, and for the directors still touting the technical qualities of 70mm film. Some early reports — sparked by an interview Tarantino gave at Comic-Con earlier in 2015 — claim Gareth Edwards' Star Wars: Rogue One, the first of the Star Wars Anthology films, is shooting in Ultra Panavision as well. If that's true, Edwards is one of the few who really needs to worry about whether Tarantino and the Weinsteins can pull it off. For the rest of us, all that matters is whether the special screenings amount to the premium experience they're meant to be.

---

 

---

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 12-08-2015, 10:27 PM:
 
Hey guys, first post here...

Little introduction... I've been working with Thomas Hauerslev from in70mm.com for half of this year, bringing Hateful Eight news to the public. Whilst I'm probably fully capable of running a 70mm film, I'm not a projectionist... just a passionate filmmaker dedicated to celluloid.

Now that the introduction is over, lets talk about Hateful Eight.

As most of you already know, Quentin did all of his screenings for the film at the DGA and I was present for a few test screenings prior to shooting and after the film was made. What I can tell you right off the bat is how impressive I am with the outcome. Not only did the test material look amazing, but the projection so far at every venue has been outstanding. I've seen my fair share of bad 70mm projection, just this year I saw a horrible print of Bakara that looked like it had been dragged through the mud. There were constant visible scratches, probably due to cinching the prints on the spool and not ever cleaning them. There was also substantial dirt build-up at the heads and tails of each reel, to the point even before the cue mark, it was just littered with black dots. Worst part is, the projection was horrible as well. Clearly the aging projectors at the particular venue (paramount lot screening room) needed a bit of work prior to actually showing the film. The film would move in the gate left to right very slowly and there was a lot of flicker. It was embarrassing for the filmmaker who was present. When I asked him how many times the print had been shown, he shrugged and said it was struck less then 10 years ago and had only been shown at venues like this. I did thank the projectionist after the screening, as it was very cool of him to make it all work and it wasn't his fault.

The original camera test for Hateful Eight actually looks better then the film for many reasons. One of which is Richardson's use of all natural light, something which is quite the opposite in the over-lit single set piece of the final film. With this natural light, it really felt you were in a real western, something I hadn't seen before. The final film itself, does share much of that quality, but of course the final film is shot in winter, where things are more bleak. This threw me off a bit because honestly, I was really hoping for some beautiful exteriors and they just didn't exist. Quentin's vision came from a film called "The Great Silence" which is I gather full of snow. So all of that white imagery was great for checking flicker and I'll say this much, the DGA screening room had ZERO flicker. Thank GOD someone knows how to calibrate film projectors properly!

I saw Hateful Eight a week after it started showing for members. The print had been projected a few times and it was setup in an A/B change over style configuration. The projector started by hand, the projectionist looking out the window, making a small focus tweak as the red curtain opened onto the red overture card. The image had some registration issues, but nothing crazy, nothing an audience would notice. For me, the only issue was a small blob of defocused image on the right side of the screen. It literally looked like someone was changing the focus in one part of the image, very strange. I can't imagine how that problem would have occurred because the rest of the image was perfect and it was in such a small area. After the first reel change however, the problem went away and never came back. In fact, the rest of the screening was flawless in every detail. Even the end credits had zero registration problems, even though it was clearly on the B projector. So maybe just one of their projectors has a problem and maybe they didn't use both during the test screenings. I found it very odd and unfortunately, I missed seeing it again this past weekend, so I've only seen it once there.

For people interested in the film itself and what it looks like. I will say as a professional cinematographer and filmmaker living in Los Angeles, it looked outstanding. Richardson did a great job (as always), the colors are amazing, the crispness of the image is something that rivals digital in every way. It blew away every single 70mm screening I've seen prior, this was BY FAR the best 70mm film I've seen. I thought Hamlet looked great, I thought The Master looked wonderful and Interstellar even though it was a blow up, looked pretty darn good. Those films can be ignored because Hateful Eight is the top dog in my book. Even the classics can't hold up to this, mostly because today's stocks are so darn good. Quentin and Richardson reset the clock on 70mm to a point that will probably stand for quite sometime until someone else gives it a go.

In terms of the content, I've been sworn to secrecy... but I can say a few things. Had Quentin done another Django or Inglorious Bastards, it could have the potential to garnish him with some serious oscars. However, Hateful Eight feels like a film that came from Quentin of 1995, back when he was just starting out and was trying to make cool films, stuff only he wanted to see. Hateful Eight is the film he wanted to do all those years ago, but couldn't make happen and only made happen today due to his stature as a filmmaker. The Weinstein's bet the horse and cart on this film being a success and you know what, after careful contemplation, I think it WILL be a hit. I think it will do very well because ya know what, we sure need a decent western today and it's just that. Great little story, fantastic cast, witty dialog, very funny and extremely well made. Sure, there is going to be a lot of negative press, mostly by people who don't understand Quentin's straight-faced humor OR don't like the violence. I do think it's one step forward for film projection and two steps backwards for his career. I was personally hoping for the intelligent films he's been making recently, but I got a silly western instead. No real beef's, just not what I was personally expecting. I can't wait to see the film again in a few weeks!

A few side notes...

First off, screening this film around the country in 70mm a week after Star Wars, is absolutely retarded. They should have done limited screenings in New York and Los Angeles at the big venues starting this week since the prints are already made. Then when Star Wars comes out and those theaters get busy, move the prints to smaller venues for two weeks and open wide Jan 1st 2016.

Second, the film should only have been screened at venues with 70mm projectors already. Spending the money and time to ship projectors is incredibly wasteful, especially since the projectors will wind up going back after it's done. I would have made 35mm prints for venue's without 70mm and sent a technician around to tune ALL the 35mm and 70mm projectors. Also, there are MANY theaters with 70mm projectors that normally don't show films. So they COULD have four-walled Hateful Eight in those theaters, rent the places out for public viewing and a special event screening, instead of showing the film at cineplexes... how yucky is that. You go to theater 7 at AMC to see a roadshow film? What a joke. Every little independent theater should have been contacted, even if it was attached to something else and been given the opportunity to screen the film. That would have been fantastic and in my opinion, worth the effort, rather then simply shipping projectors to places who don't understand how to use them.

Third, no digital release. I would have not done a digital release at all. I think it's a mistake because it just gives people an excuse to compare the 70mm to something else. I'd ship 35mm and 70mm prints and move them around the country, going from city to city. That's what they're doing in Europe. They're getting a hand-full of prints and moving them from theater to theater. If you wanna see it, you've gotta show up and watch it. To me, that's the whole point of a "roadshow" screening. It's in your town one moment and gone the next. I'm sure the Weinstein's wouldn't allow Quentin to do that, especially in places like Asia, where the film will be a huge hit for sure. Still, it would have been acceptable for this country and may have cost substantially less money and in my view, been a lot more interesting. Digital projection is boring in every single way, so even 35mm would have been better.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-09-2015, 10:34 AM:
 

quote: Tyler Purcell

---

Second, the film should only have been screened at venues with 70mm projectors already.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

I saw it while I was on vacation in London at the Odeon West End about a month after the release date and that print was still in very decent shape (there were some light vertical scratches that I would not say were acceptable, but would not bother most people).

---

quote:

---

It will be interesting to see one of these new AW3 brains.
<edit> . . . I still haven't seen a picture of one

---

Well, here's 3 pictures of one for you:






Happy now?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-09-2015, 05:26 PM:
 
Thanks Jim. Definitely interesting.

It appears they took the latest green Christie rollers and basically did a clone of the inboard side on both sides. (This permits the roller to fit on the 35mm shafts.) I hope they are training such NOT to run your literal fingers between the brain rollers when threading and ONLY sliding the film between them. That bad practice would cause the black Christie rollers (which also used the 35mm shafts) to wobble and then you have the film bouncing bad enough to kill dts timecode tracking or literally have the film ride itself right up and out of the brain. I understand why they did it (to make the conversion super simple and cheap), but the tiny extra cost to replace the shafts with longer ones to prevent wobbling should've been trivial (only a few bucks a system) when making in bulk.

Good to see they at least have the later design angled stripper rollers and the payout arm fingers/wishbone of the latest model, BUT that won't stop scratching if anyone starts to have curl develop! (See my videos above and imagine film with that degree of curling making it through the payout arm or the fixed stripper rollers without laying scratches down the center of the film and you will agree.)

I guess they didn't like my modification to spread those fingers out a little bit or widen the outer parts of both to help protect from curl scratching when they manufactured those parts. It would've helped substantially.

Was the test roll sent emulsion in or out? The film will naturally want to bow outward, so the middle of the film that cups outward from being flat will need to be wound toward the center ring to help keep it flat. Typically this means winding emulsion out. BLSI are big Kinoton guys and Kinoton is an emulsion in company, so I'm wondering if that is how the prints are coming and people being trained.

Similarly when pulling the film from the brain to the first roller on the column, I saw some pics this morning where the film was being twisted such that the top of the film was being twisted toward the operator (like a Kinoton). That is definitely not correct for an AW3, as first off it puts extra unnecessary twist on the film, but more importantly that makes it so the film can slide out of the roller bracket if the bracket isn't perfectly aligned. Since the little white "keeper" pins BLSI manufactured on that picture I saw were not of normal Christie size, they won't really hold the film onto the roller in such a scenario of the bracket being a little out of alignment. This is because threading with top edge of the film toward the tree keeps the bottom edge of the film "pressing downward" against the outboard flange of the roller, meaning even if the roller is a bit off alignment, it won't come off the roller. Hopefully that was just a misthread I saw and not official training. (Jim's picture just above my post is the correct twist, BTW.)
 

---

Posted by Mike Babb (Member # 1379) on 12-09-2015, 06:45 PM:
 
Hey guys,

i've been reading this topic with interest and occasional annoyance. It's important to start by saying I don't speak for anyone except myself but it seems like some people are predisposed to assume things are going to go poorly and predict how. I respect the amount of experience in this forum, and have benefited from reading on this topic and many others over the years. I have the experience to know many points are on target. And I share concerns and do my best to address them. Debating PTR rollers or platter static or timing is fine. Attributing any intention to make this project go badly to people involved in my opinion is out of line.

Chapin, Larry and BLS have balls of steel for taking on this monumental project. I'm happy to be included, as well as a member of my staff, and many of my good friends in the industry. I think what annoyed me was the suggestion that anyone has anything but the best intentions for the quality presentation of this film and the quality of the installations. There have been and still remain many challenges. We all know them, the film tech commenters and the people on the inside. Give us the benefit of the doubt. Sam Chavez, Clyde McKinney, Larry Shaw, Chapin Cutler, Paul Pearson, Michael Schaffer...these are some of the names among many many others helping to make this a reality.

"Given the fact at least some of the people responsible for the release of The Hateful Eight know better, and would have been best advised to bring experts like Brad Miller into the loop, but refused to do so, more and more I'm thinking this "biggest 70mm release in over 20 years" is really going to be a subversive act of sabotage meant to make film look bad and have everything go digital only once and for all."
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-09-2015, 06:53 PM:
 
Mike, I think you are reading too much into this thread. The point is everyone here are true lovers of film and I think I speak for everyone when I say we want this to go wonderfully and for film, and specifically 70mm, to make a comeback as an exhibition format. However the overall jest of the discussions here is that this really CANNOT FAIL or film WILL be dead as an exhibition medium.

That's where you are seeing any annoyance/anger/grumblings come from because deep down we all want this to succeed, but there are realists out there (myself included). As such when someone DOES make a blatant mistake in the master plan, that affects everyone here, even if it is just someone like Bobby who is an avid film lover but has nothing to do with the setup and exhibition, it hurts.

Nobody said anyone involved didn't have balls of steel, but keep in mind BLSI is also being compensated "gloriously" and VERY MUCH financially for this work. While many items here are opinions being discussed, that doesn't change the fact that some decisions were just flat out wrong. The biggest design mistake that comes to mind is not issuing Safety Rings...and keep in mind I offered to make them at cost to see this project succeed, meaning I had zero financial interest in making a buck. Sure making a small production run for just this thing at this point would've been more expensive than when I made them in bulk many years ago, but at an estimated $150/screen cost...really??? Compare that to the overall cost of each system for the guarantee that no tail wrap or thrown print could occur and you tell me that wasn't a decision NOT in the best interest of this succeeding.
 

---

Posted by Mike Babb (Member # 1379) on 12-09-2015, 07:09 PM:
 
We're all on the same page then, although I pasted the quote in as a specific example of what I felt was unfair.

You know I was a customer of the safety ring and sold many to my customers in Michigan who had static issues. Some of my customers chose not to buy them and/or didn't have significant static issues. Many thousands of platters have run without them for many years.

All I am saying is in regards to Bobby's statement, I believe everyone involved is doing it for the love of the project, and have the best intentions, even if they are being fairly compensated for their efforts.
 

---

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 12-09-2015, 07:29 PM:
 
Hi Mike
Being in Michigan do you know which theatre might have the biggest/best set-up for Hateful Eight?
I'm 2 hours away and trying to get an inside scoop.
 

---

Posted by Mike Babb (Member # 1379) on 12-09-2015, 07:36 PM:
 
Victor, one of my friends did Michigan and I would imagine the quality is excellent however MJR Southgate is closest to you, and I seem to remember hearing they were masking it down to 2.76 aspect ratio. I am not sure about the others.
 

---

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 12-09-2015, 07:47 PM:
 
Thanks Mike
Any idea of screen size at MJR Southgate?
One screen is in Toronto but the width is only 45 feet.
 

---

Posted by Mike Babb (Member # 1379) on 12-09-2015, 07:53 PM:
 
Sorry, I don't but I messaged you their email address, they should be able to tell you.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-09-2015, 08:55 PM:
 
Seeing as how my quote was brought up, I'll respond to that.

I'll admit that maybe I'm being a bit unfair with conspiracy theories of people intentionally setting up this 70mm release to fail. But I do bring that up because there definitely is a contingent of digital fanboys who at least talk as if they want film dead, buried and put into the distant past. This high profile Ultra Panavision 70mm release would be the perfect opportunity to, once and for all, put the movie industry on a film-free path if this 70mm release is a debacle.

I don't think anyone in this forum is being unfair at all by saying a number of bad calls were made.

I would start with the Weinstein Co. for choosing to release The Hateful Eight only 7 days after Star Wars. That alone was a really bad choice. The Hateful Eight, presented in Ultra Panavision 70mm, is the kind of movie that needs every giant sized screen it can book. Unfortunately Star Wars has a monopoly on most of those screens for at least a month solid. Everyone knew when this new Star Wars movie was being released. So why did they force The Hateful Eight into that schedule anyway? Were they just hoping things would work out somehow on a wing and prayer? Or was it just a combination of some super huge egos not thinking ahead?

Because Weinstein and maybe even QT insisted on a Christmas Day release, this 70mm Ultra Panavision movie is going to be playing on a lot of ordinary multiplex screens not even worthy of 70mm, missing lots of other bigger screens that would have been better for 70mm shows, and missing entire movie-going markets that could have used at least one 70mm engagement. I hope I'm wrong, but if the Dallas-Fort Worth market (with a population of nearly 7 million people) winds up not getting a single 70mm print that alone will be an idiotic travesty.

If they had really chose to follow a true "road show" format release, this 70mm release could have been platformed out from an initial New York and Los Angeles premiere and gradually expand to other markets, cover the markets more evenly, and actually make it easier to do the 70mm release correctly!

January and April both tend to be movie-going wastelands where big studios tend to shove their turd-quality product into theaters before the Summer movie season frenzy. The Hateful Eight could have taken big advantage of that.

26 years ago, Robert Harris' restored Director's Cut of Lawrence of Arabia was released in theaters in 70mm Dolby SR during that kind of pre-summer time frame. It had no problem getting big screens like the Ziegfield in Manhattan and keeping it on into May.

Obviously Brad has covered all the technical points.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-09-2015, 08:59 PM:
 

quote: Mike Babb

---

You know I was a customer of the safety ring and sold many to my customers in Michigan who had static issues. Some of my customers chose not to buy them and/or didn't have significant static issues. Many thousands of platters have run without them for many years.

---

quote: Geoff

---

According to Harkins' website, star war is booked in the largest auditoriums on 12/25 at the Scottsdale and Tempe theaters, validating Bobby's point about H8 not being on screens that would truly benefit from all of the millimeters.

---

quote: Geoff Jones

---

According to Harkins' website, star war is booked in the largest auditoriums on 12/25 at the Scottsdale and Tempe theaters, validating Bobby's point about H8 not being on screens that would truly benefit from all of the millimeters.

---

All of Harkins' big screen Cine Capri auditoriums are booked solid with Star Wars: The Force Awakens in 2D, but with Dolby Atmos. Those screens would have been pretty good for an Ultra Panavision 70mm show.
 

---

Posted by Paul H. Rayton (Member # 1817) on 12-10-2015, 12:09 AM:
 
The premiere (at least the US premiere) was earlier this week (Monday evening) at the Cinerama Dome. Nice big picture on their massive (Cinerama) curved screen, hooray! That audience was pleased (based on press reporting seen), and they're the lucky ones.

BUT -- starting any time now, the Dome will be closed down (if they haven't already) in order to be set up for laser projection, for the express purpose of (you guessed it) the run of "Star Wars". So the chances of seeing any more "Hateful Eight" in there now is ... well, can you have a "less than zero" percent?

And it won't be at the El Capitan (Star Wars in Dolby Vision), and it won't be at the Chinese (Star Wars, presumably in the Imax version). There are a few of other "big screen" venues left in the greater Southern California area, but I'm not holding my breath. Maybe the big screen at the Regal in downtown L.A.? (We might hope). And, as I alluded to in an earlier post, the so-called "Big Newport" in Newport Beach. But I (we) live in fear of "H8" showing up in some place with a 25' screen. Whoopie-doo.
 

---

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 12-10-2015, 12:34 AM:
 
I think the Dome will run Hateful Eight. They obviously got a platter version of the film because they only have 1 70mm projector in that booth. I hope they run it a few times, just so we can get the experience. They'll absolutely run it in the down stairs theaters, which are really good and they do have other 70mm projectors around, both there and here in Sherman Oaks where I live. I'm surprised they aren't just showing it at the Egyptian. They could sure use the money, why not show it full-time? Maybe not enough money for marketing? eh...
 

---

Posted by Eric Carter (Member # 1392) on 12-10-2015, 02:22 AM:
 
Sadly, the Dome is already selling tickets for STAR WARS shows on Christmas Day...

quote:

---

Going back to that late winter release of Lawrence of Arabia in 1989, LOA actually managed to keep the Ziegfeld screen well into the summer. I watched Batman in 70mm at Cinema One and then walked a few blocks to see a real 70mm movie, LOA, which was still playing at the Ziegfeld. BTW, the print was still in great shape at that point. But that was 1989.

---

The Ziegfeld ran the 1989 LOA restoration reel-to-reel. BTW, a friend who is a Hollywood D.P. saw it there and said "We don't have projection like that in L.A.!"
 

---

Posted by Mike Babb (Member # 1379) on 12-10-2015, 08:31 AM:
 
Brad, if I had rings I would happily use them, I have recommended them to my customers in the past. I am not arguing against, I am only saying not using them doesn't equate to a desire for the project to fail.

Joe, we'll see what happens. And the bonus question(s) I don't know enough to provide public forum answers. Remember, I posted to defend my friends and co-workers, not to speak on behalf of the project, even if I could answer authoritatively, which I can't.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 12-10-2015, 08:38 AM:
 
I sold a number of 1960s JJs to BLSI. I toured their facility. Of course their attention to detail and quality workmanship has a long history. It is irrational to think of them as simply the Kinotone dealer. They were around for a very long time before Kinotone entered the picture. Larry, Chapin, Sam Chavez and I are similar age and technical background. Their selection as prime contractor to install and check out the equipment is a perfect match.

They were careful to state that training and operator qualification was beyond the scope of their contract.

Even if I were still in business, I would not be able to compete with them, except in terms of quality. They are doing quality on a grand scale. For this reason, they have no peers.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 12-10-2015, 09:17 AM:
 
The West Plano Cinemark in Plano, TX is now listed on the official theatre list. Not sure which auditorium they'll put it in, but the XD will have SW
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 12-10-2015, 09:32 AM:
 
If Tarantino really wanted to do it right, wouldn't he convert his own theatre?
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-10-2015, 10:11 AM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

Was the test roll sent emulsion in or out?

---

I was not there when they unpacked the test roll.
I'm sure Stephan Shelly, who reads these forums, can answer that.

One thing Stephan & Sam told me to watch out for was this:

Do you see the potential problem?
The 35mm soundhead has been stripped of all rollers
and two 70mm "bypass" rollers are mounted on the front.
If you open the soundhead door, the hinge will smash into the
lower roller. Since I have a tendency, out of years of habit, to
open that door to check threading before starting a show, or
sometimes even during a show just to make sure things are
running smoothly, I'm thinking it would be a good idea to
duct-tape the door closed to avoid damaging the roller &/film.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-10-2015, 10:15 AM:
 

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

They were careful to state that training and operator qualification was beyond the scope of their contract.

---

quote: Jonathan Althaus

---

The West Plano Cinemark in Plano, TX is now listed on the official theatre list. Not sure which auditorium they'll put it in, but the XD will have SW

---

quote: Tyler Purcell

---

I'm surprised they aren't just showing it at the Egyptian. They could sure use the money, why not show it full-time? Maybe not enough money for marketing? eh...

---

quote: Fredrik Sandstrom

---

Hey, I saw that print and those scratches too, about that time (December last year). The damage was in two reels I think, and the rest of the print was perfect. I don't know if this is what Leo means by "seriously damaged"; I would not describe it as such because the lines were very thin and not really noticeable except in a few bright scenes.

---

quote: Eric Hooper

---

What is up with all of these San Francisco Bay Area locations so close to each other getting 70mm prints? Yet, places like DFW only getting one print in Plano? Or the majority of the rest of the country getting none....?

---

It's the sad consequence of releasing the movie at the same time as Star Wars. Of the 40 or so theaters in the US that will be playing the movie in 70mm, most of them will be playing the movie on some smaller screen while Star Wars, presented in HDTV resolution 2K 3D, gets all the big screens.

 

---

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 12-10-2015, 02:25 PM:
 

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

The really ironic thing is that unless he has a 35 'scope print made, Tarantino can't show it in his own theater.

---

I understand there are about 10 35mm reduction prints of the Roadshow Version being struck.
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 12-10-2015, 02:41 PM:
 
I saw some mention in this thread of screens being "masked down" to show this movie. Doesn't this mean that the picture that the audience sees will actually be SMALLER than if it had been filmed in standard scope or flat resolution since it still has to fit onto the regular movie screen? If so, then what was the point? I don't see the advantage of a short narrow picture when it could fill the screen if it was a standard resolution.

What am I missing?
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-10-2015, 03:01 PM:
 
Does Tarantino's own theater have common-width or common-height masking? He may not even know about common-width screens. He just assumed that wider = more grandiose and usually that's true. Unfortunately the large majority of theaters today kind of suck.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-10-2015, 03:02 PM:
 

quote: Mike Babb

---

Brad, if I had rings I would happily use them, I have recommended them to my customers in the past. I am not arguing against, I am only saying not using them doesn't equate to a desire for the project to fail.

---

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

They were careful to state that training and operator qualification was beyond the scope of their contract.

---

That right there is proof enough BLSI isn't dumb.

quote: Jim Cassedy

---

The 35mm soundhead has been stripped of all rollers
and two 70mm "bypass" rollers are mounted on the front.
If you open the soundhead door, the hinge will smash into the
lower roller. Since I have a tendency, out of years of habit, to
open that door to check threading before starting a show, or
sometimes even during a show just to make sure things are
running smoothly, I'm thinking it would be a good idea to
duct-tape the door closed to avoid damaging the roller &/film.

---

Hey Jim, I've got a question. Is there something preventing you from threading straight through the empty soundhead? Everything in there is gone, so the only obstruction I can think of would be where the 35mm sprocket used to be, but that may be fixable by adjusting the fore/aft of the failsafe mount.


 

---

Posted by Rick Raskin (Member # 1561) on 12-10-2015, 04:12 PM:
 
Seems to me it would have been simpler to remove the optical head.
 

---

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 12-10-2015, 04:28 PM:
 

quote: Geoff Jones

---

According to Harkins' website, star war is booked in the largest auditoriums on 12/25 at the Scottsdale and Tempe theaters

---

quote: Rick Raskin

---

Seems to me it would have been simpler to remove the optical head.

---

quote:

---

Your options to see THE HATEFUL EIGHT are about to open up just in time for the holidays, as The Weinstein Company is in the process of altering their rollout for Quentin Tarantino's latest film.

Confirmed by multiple sources, the studio is set to allow a small number of theaters in select cities to show a DCP (Digital Cinema Package) version of Tarantino's Road Show cut of THE HATEFUL EIGHT as of Christmas Day. As it previously stood, that edit of the film - complete with overture and intermission - was only going to be shown in 70mm, with digital presentations coming on-board in early-January for the wide release, but even that plan has been shifted now with the movie moving up on the calendar from its initial January 8 release date to January 1.

How exactly did we get here?

The Weinstein Company's goal was to have THE HATEFUL EIGHT in 100 theaters for Christmas Day, helping to retrofit a number of venues to be able to project 70mm as Tarantino intended. However, they also insisted that the theaters pick up the cost of the 70mm prints, which is rather expensive. As a result, many prospective locations balked at showing the film, believing that they'd end up in the red once the film's run was done, unable to sell enough tickets in their moderately-sized houses to justify the cost. A number were still game to press on, but TWC's target was effectively cut in half, with 70mm showings being cut down to about 50 theaters.

In the hopes of boosting those numbers up once again and making the film a bit more accessible to those who would like to see the Road Show cut, the DCP option surfaced. The number of locations that will be showing the film in that way is still being finalized, but what I'm hearing is that it'll be around 50 in order to hit that 100 theater total they'd wanted originally.

On January 1, the multiplex version will kick in, offering audiences the option to see a slightly different cut of the film, with no overture nor intermission in tow, thus shortening the exclusive window the first wave of theatergoers will have all to themselves.

This obviously wasn't the plan for Quentin Tarantino or The Weinstein Company, but once those 70mm venues didn't come close to matching what they had hoped for, a new strategy needed to be employed... and this is it. Although this has yet to be confirmed, we expect an announcement of this change very soon.

THE HATEFUL EIGHT (Road Show edition) arrives in select theaters on December 25 - 70mm and DCP before its wide multiplex release on January 1.

---

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

A review in the national press described it as "a huge vertical green line in the middle of the screen," suggesting that the emulsion was being seriously gouged.

---

quote: Jim Cassedy

---

I'm thinking it would be a good idea to
duct-tape the door closed to avoid damaging the roller &/film.

---

quote: Frank Cox

---

Doesn't this mean that the picture that the audience sees will actually be SMALLER than if it had been filmed in standard scope or flat resolution since it still has to fit onto the regular movie screen?

---

quote: Sean Weitzel

---

Oh hey look at this interesting turn of events: The Weinstein Company making changes to The Hateful Eight release

---

quote:

---

Confirmed by multiple sources, the studio is set to allow a small number of theaters in select cities to show a DCP (Digital Cinema Package) version of Tarantino's Road Show cut of THE HATEFUL EIGHT as of Christmas Day. As it previously stood, that edit of the film - complete with overture and intermission - was only going to be shown in 70mm, with digital presentations coming on-board in early-January for the wide release, but even that plan has been shifted now with the movie moving up on the calendar from its initial January 8 release date to January 1.

---

quote:

---

= admission of failure.

---

Sadly I have to agree. This is really bad news and won't be forgotten the next time a high profile director tries to do a film-based release.

I know this has been said many times before and I'm not a studio executive, so obviously I am missing something crucial here to the master plan...but WHY can the release not simply be delayed until this space movie has done it's thing and take over the biggest auditorium with 70mm? That would give more time to work out any kinks in the master plan, more time to install, more time to recruit, and more time to give this thing the best chance at success possible. Does something horrible happen if the ticket money arrives 3 weeks later?
 

---

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 12-11-2015, 12:46 AM:
 
Something horrible probably does happen -- whatever financing they got for this thing probably comes due on that date and payments need to be made. So holding back the release would be ruinous to some of the backers.

So I suspect, anyway.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-11-2015, 02:04 AM:
 
Also they want it to be eligible for Academy Award nominations I'm sure. Still, that doesn't mean it needs to have a wide release in 2015. It just needs to open in one or two small art houses or some such and play a few shows for the public (which as far as I'm aware it has already done). Early February would be best. Everyone is calmed down. No Star Wars worries from either the techs or the theater management. Star Wars is already available to rent on VHS by then. Big screens almost guaranteed. Better presentation for EVERYBODY. 70mm as it should be. I think the movie would be far more successful as well as it would have next to no realistic competition. Just because something's released in February doesn't mean it sucks. BUT NO! Big movies MUST be released in summer or on a holiday weekend! Or else it is absolute shit!

This all really upsets me. I just can't comprehend the carelessness in planning of the dates here. None of us want it to fail, but Bobby may be onto something when it comes to the big-wigs and their planning of this release.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-11-2015, 02:25 AM:
 

quote: Bill Brandenstein

---

Can you just imagine the meeting where that was worked out with Tarantino?

---

quote: Daniel Schulz

---

I understand there are about 10 35mm reduction prints of the Roadshow Version being struck.

---

I suppose these are letterboxed to preserve the full width?

They should make 16mm prints too. 16mm scope is 2.66, very close to the UP70 ratio.
 

---

Posted by Richard May (Member # 2627) on 12-11-2015, 07:19 AM:
 
Leo, that was toooo fucking funny!!!!!!!!!
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 12-11-2015, 08:10 AM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

..but WHY can the release not simply be delayed until this space movie has done it's thing

---

quote: Frank Cox

---

I saw some mention in this thread of screens being "masked down" to show this movie. Doesn't this mean that the picture that the audience sees will actually be SMALLER than if it had been filmed in standard scope or flat resolution since it still has to fit onto the regular movie screen? If so, then what was the point? I don't see the advantage of a short narrow picture when it could fill the screen if it was a standard resolution.

---

quote: Mike Babb

---

Hey Brad, yes I accept what you are saying now and in the previous posts, it stemmed out of Bobby's comment about intentional sabotage but that's ancient history in internet forum world...we all want it to go well, agreed.

---

The Weinstein Co. & QT insisted on releasing The Hateful Eight in Ultra Panavision 70mm on Christmas, knowing full well Star Wars would have a monopoly on all the big screens. Many of these smaller, multiplex theater auditoriums have crappy common width screens, which is going to make this movie smaller than a garden variety 'scope movie.

To top it off, we're now going to have DCPs in the mix, that way the movie can play on more than one screen in the multiplex and customers won't have any damned idea for certain if they're watching 70mm or watching "TV in public." The picture is going to be so small it will be hard to tell the difference!

Maybe everyone involved with this movie's release wants things to go well. Maybe there's no deliberate attempts at sabotage going on to crap all over the reputation of film. Instead, it appears we have both ignorance and incompetence present at the top level of this. It may not be a deliberate fuck-up, but it is a fuck-up nonetheless because the decision makers didn't care enough about important details and realities about booking movies into commercial theaters. Those rich guys are woefully out of touch.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-11-2015, 10:16 AM:
 
I just found out I'll be running a Hateful Eight screening next week at Dolby.

- - But it will be a DCP version. I'm not sure if this event is a "press"
or an "Academy/DGA" screening. (Probably the latter)

I understand that they had discussed running 70mm, but the logistics
and insane expense of shipping one of the limited number of 70mm prints
(two ways) for just one screening put "the nails in the coffin" for that idea.

And, to be technically blunt- - although Dolby has a fantastic facility, the
screen there is only about 27ft wide, undercutting the "70mm experience".
(Although it apparently be just like watching the 70mm version at most
multiplexes! LoL)

I'm going to be really curious to takalook at the DCP drive when it arrives
next week to see if it's a special "roadshow' or 'standard' version DCP.

I understand their reasons for 'going digital' for this event, even though
I'd gone & checked out the projectors last month 'just in case' they sent
a 70mm print.

(One of the Kinoton 35/70's At Dolby)


(If the walls weren't almost two feet thick and filled with tons of
soundproofing, I'd almost consider running 70mm loops through
the projectors while screening the DCP, so some people in the
auditorium might THINK they're watching 70 by hearing the
projector noise. But the facility is too perfectly sound-proof for that!
lOl
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 12-11-2015, 12:28 PM:
 

quote:

---

And, to be technically blunt- - although Dolby has a fantastic facility, the
screen there is only about 27ft wide, undercutting the "70mm experience".
(Although it apparently be just like watching the 70mm version at most
multiplexes! [Roll Eyes] LoL)

---

quote:

---

The Weinstein Co. decided Friday to move the wide release date for Quentin Tarantino’s Western forward from Jan. 8 for the 35mm digital print version of the film.

---

quote: Rick Cohen

---

Meanwhile, Star Wars will be grossing a half billion dollars domestically in its first two weeks of release, almost entirely on DCP.

---

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

The scene: late afternoon in a nondescript conference room in a 1990s office block........

---

Where's the "like" button?!!
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 12-11-2015, 08:44 PM:
 
TWC is making the exhibitors charge a 70mm surcharge. Just like 3D.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 12-11-2015, 09:18 PM:
 
A tip of the hat to Leo. Mighty fine piece of dialog writing you've crafted there. Your guild card will be waiting for you over at the WGA in the morning...
 

---

Posted by Chris Haller (Member # 9206) on 12-11-2015, 09:18 PM:
 
If IMAX can get away with charging 14 some odd dollars for 2K 3D, I think we can all pay a few extra dollars to get some real 70mm projection!
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-11-2015, 09:30 PM:
 
I don't agree with having a surcharge for 70mm, but that shit works like there's no tomorrow. It DOESN'T MATTER if the presentation is better or not. Just as long as people *think* they are getting something better by paying more for the ticket price, they will do it. But let's not forget that most people happen to be severely retarded. If you just gave them 70mm and no surcharge they'd wonder how it can be any better if the price is the same.
 

---

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 12-11-2015, 09:55 PM:
 
I just wish someone would shut down 3D and the obsession with films being shot and made specifically for 2D being hastily and poorly converted to 3D so every single one of our decent big theaters can charge $20 dollars to show you movie that looks nothing like the original directors intent. Here in Hollywood, there isn't a single screening of Star Wars in 2D in a big theater. They're throwing you into a bread box with crap sound, 2k projector and probably some mice running around in order to see it in 2D. I'll GLADLY pay $20 for a full 15/70 2D IMAX presentation at a big theater. If IMAX just marked 15/70 better, explaining how much more resolution it has over ANY digital projection system, they COULD have kept film alive. However, they've pushed film aside and are replacing everything with either substandard double 2k projectors or laser 4k. Now I'm OK with the laser projection, it looks really good but it's nowhere near 15/70. Plus, good luck seeing it in 2D! For all those poor people who actually wish to see the movie and not be "wow'd" by some visual ride like you'd have at a theme park.

I had really hoped JJ wouldn't have gone the 3D route, but the studio's demand it because they make more money by spending less! It's a win-win!
 

---

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 12-11-2015, 10:28 PM:
 
If you look at various theater websites, many of them have a lot more 2D showings than 3D, at least here in Denver. That makes me think the demand for 3D might be fading outside of La-La-Land.

On the 17th, Harkins Northfield has 15 2D showtimes (including their largest screen), and only 4 3D showings. The local Alamo Drafthouse has 30 2D showings on the 18th and only 2 3D showings. Several of the Regal theaters in town are alternating between 3D and 2D showings on their R-Pee-X screens.

I'll be seeing it on the big screen at Harkins in 2D.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 12-11-2015, 11:08 PM:
 
Thing are unraveling by the hour. Check out this article. Some theatres are going to be able to open A Roadshow version DCP on Dec. 25th just like the 70mm.

http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/exclusive-the-weinstein-company-making-changes-to-the-hateful-eight-release-123

quote:

---

Exclusive: The Weinstein Company making changes to The Hateful Eight release

by: Billy Donnelly

Your options to see THE HATEFUL EIGHT are about to open up just in time for the holidays, as The Weinstein Company is in the process of altering their rollout for Quentin Tarantino's latest film.

Confirmed by multiple sources, the studio is set to allow a small number of theaters in select cities to show a DCP (Digital Cinema Package) version of Tarantino's Road Show cut of THE HATEFUL EIGHT as of Christmas Day. As it previously stood, that edit of the film - complete with overture and intermission - was only going to be shown in 70mm, with digital presentations coming on-board in early-January for the wide release, but even that plan has been shifted now with the movie moving up on the calendar from its initial January 8 release date to January 1.

How exactly did we get here?

The Weinstein Company's goal was to have THE HATEFUL EIGHT in 100 theaters for Christmas Day, helping to retrofit a number of venues to be able to project 70mm as Tarantino intended. However, they also insisted that the theaters pick up the cost of the 70mm prints, which is rather expensive. As a result, many prospective locations balked at showing the film, believing that they'd end up in the red once the film's run was done, unable to sell enough tickets in their moderately-sized houses to justify the cost. A number were still game to press on, but TWC's target was effectively cut in half, with 70mm showings being cut down to about 50 theaters.

In the hopes of boosting those numbers up once again and making the film a bit more accessible to those who would like to see the Road Show cut, the DCP option surfaced. The number of locations that will be showing the film in that way is still being finalized, but what I'm hearing is that it'll be around 50 in order to hit that 100 theater total they'd wanted originally.

On January 1, the multiplex version will kick in, offering audiences the option to see a slightly different cut of the film, with no overture nor intermission in tow, thus shortening the exclusive window the first wave of theatergoers will have all to themselves.

This obviously wasn't the plan for Quentin Tarantino or The Weinstein Company, but once those 70mm venues didn't come close to matching what they had hoped for, a new strategy needed to be employed... and this is it. Although this has yet to be confirmed, we expect an announcement of this change very soon.

THE HATEFUL EIGHT (Road Show edition) arrives in select theaters on December 25 - 70mm and DCP before its wide multiplex release on January 1.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

If you just gave them 70mm and no surcharge they'd wonder how it can be any better if the price is the same.

---

quote: Tyler Purcell

---

I mean, its playing in 2D here as well (probably even more theaters then 3D), but not in the 6 good theaters, only in the smaller ones.

---

quote: John Hughes

---

Tarantino asked the audience to give the Projectionist a round of applause for the perfect presentation

---

Now that is a rare sight these days in the Digital world where the Director invites the Audience to congratulate the Projectionist
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 12-12-2015, 07:16 PM:
 
A big for a long forgotten trade, which Tarentino recognizes very well.

Also, give a to our servicemen where ever they are for a job well done.

- Monte
 

---

Posted by Simon Wyss (Member # 6218) on 12-13-2015, 03:20 AM:
 
Crazy, when will somebody discover that a movie shot in Academy aspect ratio and with a monotrack looks and sounds well projected high and played over speakers in an acoustic wall?

24' by 32', spherical lenses, good story

And least lab problems!
 

---

Posted by Thomas Hauerslev (Member # 566) on 12-13-2015, 10:25 AM:
 
At the same time as some of you continue to sit and complain like old bitter men, who always knows better (and everyone are fed up listening to), the French premiered "H8" Friday night for 2500 spectators.

http://www.in70mm.com/news/2015/grand_rex/index.htm
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 12-13-2015, 10:52 AM:
 
but the roadshow engagement will overlap with the DCP shorter version til the 8th of January - right?
 

---

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 12-13-2015, 11:27 AM:
 

quote: Thomas Hauerslev

---

At the same time as some of you continue to sit and complain like old bitter men, who always knows better (and everyone are fed up listening to), the French premiered "H8" Friday night for 2500 spectators.

http://www.in70mm.com/news/2015/grand_rex/index.htm

---

quote: Thomas Hauerslev

---

At the same time as some of you continue to sit and complain like old bitter men

---

Who's complaining like bitter old men? Please back up your statement with some examples.
 

---

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 12-13-2015, 07:48 PM:
 
I'm pretty sure I complain like a bitter old man.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-13-2015, 10:36 PM:
 
Is the "roadshow" version DCP going to be available to any theater that wants to book it? I would rather play that than the standard (presumably intermission-less) version but we won't have our screen available till mid-January, due to some space movie epic clogging up the works.

Oh wait, I don't want to sound like a bitter old man so scratch that last bit.
 

---

Posted by Eric Carter (Member # 1392) on 12-13-2015, 11:23 PM:
 
It looks like the theatre list will be coming out on Monday, Dec. 14th.


 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 12-14-2015, 11:53 AM:
 
Get your tickets:
Official Ticket Site
 

---

Posted by Eric Carter (Member # 1392) on 12-14-2015, 12:20 PM:
 
Here's a list of all of the US/Canada markets that will be getting HATEFUL EIGHT in 70mm:

New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Dallas, San Francisco, Boston, Atlanta, Washington DC, Houston, Detroit, Phoenix, Seattle, Tampa, Minneapolis, Denver, Miami, Cleveland, Orlando, Sacramento, St. Louis, Portland, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, Baltimore, San Diego, Nashville, Kansas City, San Antonio, West Palm Beach, Birmingham, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, Oklahoma City, Austin, New Orleans, Providence, Knoxville, Santa Barbara, Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver.
 

---

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 12-14-2015, 12:54 PM:
 
Looks like I will have 2 choices in Denver: Regal Continental & AMC Promenade.

I won't be able to see it until the 28th.

• Which one will be showing it on a larger screen?
• Which one will have scratches on the print by then?
• Which one will have trashed the print and replaced it with the DCP by then?

quote: Daniel Schulz

---

Nice write-up, thanks for sharing. I wish they'd mention Datasat rather than DTS, as the Datasat crew are working so very hard on this movie and of course DTS is not involved at all, but Datasat's marketing woes are well established I suppose. Datasat prepared not only the soundtrack, but also the French subtitles, projected using the Datasat CSS subtitling system.

---

quote: Scott Norwood was the last to post

---

Others?

---

quote: Mike Heenan

---

So what happened to the previous news where the number of 70mm installs was dropped to about 50? Will some theaters pull a switcheroo and advertise 70 but show the DCP?

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Texas - Austin - Paramount

---

quote: Geoff Jones

---

Looks like I will have 2 choices in Denver: Regal Continental & AMC Promenade.

---

quote: Geoff Jones

---

Which one will be showing it on a larger screen?

---

quote: Geoff Jones

---

Which one will have scratches on the print by then?

---

quote:

---

Which one will have trashed the print and replaced it with the DCP version

---

.... This makes me wonder if the AMC venue will have 70mm to begin with. EDIT: It is indeed 70mm.

Just watch it and if after 15 minutes it looks and/or sounds like ass walk out and get a refund. NOT A PASS!
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 12-14-2015, 03:36 PM:
 
Tower #1 still had its 35mm equipment and platter until we took it out for JJ's and BSL's platter.

They did remove all the film gear out of the other two screens.
 

---

Posted by Paul H. Rayton (Member # 1817) on 12-14-2015, 03:37 PM:
 
Scott -- the "Tower" in Sacramento is (was) definitely 35mm only, confirming your "?" about that location. (There were some photos earlier in this thread from when Sam Chavez was there installing the equipment in there, about a week ago or so.)
 

---

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 12-14-2015, 03:39 PM:
 
I believe the rumors we heard of digital being put in for film are wrong.

The release list clearly separates 2D digital from 70mm and the theaters I'm seeing on the list make sense.

http://tickets.thehatefuleight.com/showtimes
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-14-2015, 03:53 PM:
 
It is not listed on the tickets site for some reason, but this article adds this theatre:

Tennessee - Franklin - Carmike Thoroughbred 20

If true, this is theatre number 99.

Thanks for the notes about the Tower; I updated the original post.

Assuming that all of the BL&S installs are platter-only, the number of reel-to-reel prints will be remarkably small for this release. The Music Box, AFI Silver, Coolidge Corner, Somerville, Alamo, and the Hollywood and maybe a couple of others (maybe in NYC) are the only ones that I can think of that will need them.

I don't know the deal with the Cinebistro, but I assume that the equipment was installed temporarily for Interstellar. If anyone knows the real story, please post here or let me know privately.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-14-2015, 04:16 PM:
 
I just got confirmation, all 96 of those are real 70mm film presentations.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-14-2015, 08:29 PM:
 
Wow...to answer my earlier question, ticket prices on this seem to be universally higher than normal. A cursory look at some theatre web sites reveals the following, for an evening show on 12/25:

Somerville - $15
Coolidge - $15.25
AMC Boston Common - $18.89 (?!?)
AFI Silver - $20 (!)
 

---

Posted by Marcus Johnson (Member # 8704) on 12-14-2015, 08:55 PM:
 
Interesting. The Ritz is charging $15 a ticket, and their normal weekend evening price is $11. I don't remember much of a surcharge for Interstellar last year (maybe a dollar or two) and aside from the Ultra Panavision lenses they already had a full 70mm + DTS installation. I wonder if Weinstein is charging a high print rental fee?
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-14-2015, 08:58 PM:
 
I looked at the AMC location in Oklahoma City. It looks like there is a $5 surcharge for the 70mm show ($15.81 as opposed to $10.39) But their listing makes no mention at all of the 70mm presentation. What's worse, apparently there is supposed to be a "2D" DCP of the movie in the same theater. But there seems to be only one screen's worth of showtimes listed. Maybe the "2D" print is on hand as a backup if the 70mm print gets shredded in short order.

Frankly I'm really surprised AMC has been able to grab so many of the 70mm bookings. I would figure various things, including a colossal failure of Interstellar in 35mm in one of their top locations, would have put them at a disadvantage.

FYI, the $15.81 price they're charging at that theater is the same price as the IMAX-3D show of Star Wars in the same theater.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-14-2015, 09:43 PM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Wow...to answer my earlier question, ticket prices on this seem to be universally higher than normal.

---

There is a surcharge just like LIEMAX.
 

---

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 12-15-2015, 12:31 AM:
 
Some of the local theaters in SoCal look to have about a $5 surcharge; for example, AMC has it for $19.49 instead of 14.49 for other shows at the same time.
 

---

Posted by Simon Wyss (Member # 6218) on 12-15-2015, 03:06 AM:
 
In this town general entrance fee is 18 Francs, US$ 18.35 as of today.
 

---

Posted by Kris Verhanneman (Member # 5562) on 12-15-2015, 03:45 AM:
 
We will run the 70mm version for 2 shows in their roadshow for France. Entrance fee is the normal price 11.30 euros.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 12-15-2015, 07:41 AM:
 
I just noticed the twenty dollars over at the Silver - why? that's insane.
 

---

Posted by Ed Inman (Member # 2583) on 12-15-2015, 09:43 AM:
 
Some of the theaters claiming 70mm yesterday show up today as "2D' (i.e. digital). New Orleans (Harahan) and Birmingham (Hoover) among them. It also looks like that in many smaller markets the only tickets actually on sale are for "2D" with "showtimes unavailable" for 70mm. This leads me to believe the jury is still out on how many 70mm installations actually get done. I guess we'll see.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-15-2015, 10:14 AM:
 
I read on another site that the presentation at the Egyptian in Hollywood was awful. Image weave and blown out highlights and other focus issues. Anyone else hear about what happened there?

Mark
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-15-2015, 10:23 AM:
 
There appears to have been an issue with one of the two prime/anamorph combos supplied by BLSI. If we swapped them between projectors, the problem moved with the lens. I was only there for the last reel and a half (a co-worker was projecting that show and I was working a later one), but could not see any "weaving in and out" - the image was consistently a bit soft on the #2 machine.

A related issue was that we suspect that the print had been unevenly waxed: some residue came off on our finger one side only, and it ran through the projectors far more noisily than any other polyester 70mm print we've played on those projectors. But we don't think the effects of that were visible on the screen.
 

---

Posted by Ed Inman (Member # 2583) on 12-15-2015, 02:35 PM:
 
UPDATE: As of 2:30 CST the ticket site is showing New Orleans (Harahan) and Birmingham (Hoover) as 70mm venues again. I hope that is correct!

It's also claiming Montgomery AL will have a 70mm print but not opening until New Year's Eve. I thought all the 70mm venues were to open by Christmas Day. Not sure what to believe.
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 12-15-2015, 03:45 PM:
 
The H8 web site now indicates that the AMC Garden State Plaza in Paramus NJ will be having a 6pm Christmas Eve show (Dec 24), but if you click to buy tickets for any of the dates, it tells you that no showtimes are available.
 

---

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 12-15-2015, 07:14 PM:
 
The Hateful Eight 70mm Roadshow Tickets Official Searchable Web Thingy

Guess I could see it in KC.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-15-2015, 07:27 PM:
 
Here is another oddity: there is now a listing for 70mm at the AMC Indianapolis 17 in Indianapolis, but with an opening date of 12/31. WTF?
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 12-15-2015, 10:42 PM:
 
This "roadshow" is getting stranger by the minute it seems.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 12-15-2015, 11:23 PM:
 
according to Stephen Colbert (and his interview with Quentin) - the wide release is now Dec. 31st ... okaaay - the window between the roadshow and the DCP wide release keeps on shortening.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 12-16-2015, 10:36 AM:
 
Hmm. Roadshow_70mm or roadshow_DCP?

I see Albuquerque is going to get its first 570 showings ever with this roadshow release (at the Cinemark Rio 24 - don't know which screen). 'Bout time!

And this pic from AFI Silver getting their print on reels... as God and intended.


 

---

Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 12-16-2015, 02:20 PM:
 
Poor QT. Who told him to put his picture up against the most anticipated movie of the year?

http://deadline.com/2015/12/the-hateful-eight-star-wars-force-awakens-arclight-theater-fight-1201668018/

Quentin Tarantino Blasts Disney On Howard Stern Show As ‘Force Awakens’ Pushes ‘The Hateful Eight’ Out Of Cinerama Dome

Quentin Tarantino went on the Howard Stern Sirius radio show and spoke about how Disney is strong-arming Arclight Cinemas to push the director’s 70MM presentation of his eighth film The Hateful Eight aside in favor of Star Wars: The Force Awakens in LA’s famed Cinerama Dome. The director first learned about this on Monday. The western was originally due to play there claims Tarantino starting on Dec. 25th, but now Force Awakens is getting an extended play through the holidays.
“It was real bad news and it fucking pissed me off,” Tarantino told Stern. “They are going out of their way to fuck me.”

All per Tarantino: when ArcLight Cinemas told Disney they were honoring their contract for Hateful Eight, Disney threatened to pull Force Awakens from all ArcLight locations.
For years there was a clearance boundary whereby if a film was playing at the Chinese Theater on Hollywood Blvd, then it couldn’t be playing at the Cinerama Dome. But that’s not the situation here with Star Wars: The Force Awakens: It’s playing at the TCL Chinese Theater, Disney’s El Capitan and The Cinerama Dome.

Living here in L.A., The Cinerama Dome is a prized venue for Tarantino. In fact the Cinerama logo appears in the opening credits of The Hateful Eight. The premiere for the film was held on Monday, Dec. 7 at the Cinerama Dome and the director told Deadline’s Pete Hammond, “I made The Hateful Eight for the Dome … This is the first time seeing it at the Dome for me too, and it was like I hadn’t even seen it before, not like this.”

“It’s vindictive, it’s mean, and it’s extortion,” Tarantino added. The Oscar-winning fimmaker further added that his beef isn’t with Force Awakens director J.J. Abrams, but with the top suits at Disney. In fact, Abrams worked with Tarantino when the director starred as McKenas Cole on Abrams’ ABC show Alias. “I made a lot of money for the Disney corporation,” Tarantino told Stern referring to the days when Disney owned Miramax and released such titles as Pulp Fiction ($213.9M worldwide) and the Kill Bill two pic saga (combined $333M worldwide) as well as Jackie Brown ($40M domestic).

It’s no secret that there is a particularly hard fight for screens this holiday season with a glut of films and in fact, Hateful Eight wisely changed up its distribution pattern to accommodate that glut. “It’s so damn crowded right now that everyone is pushing everything,” said one exhib about the fight for screens. “I had (one studio) tell me I have to hold (their movie) on one line while on the other I had (another studio) screaming at me about (their film). “The real problem is that it’s too packed and it’s hard to juggle all these films and we are telling them (the studios) that’s there are too many movies to juggle right now.”
During the broadcast, Stern told Tarantino that Walt Disney Company CEO Bob Iger was an avid listener. The radio host addressed an absent Iger during the show, calling out: “Listen Bob … I don’t give a shit about this theater. Quentin’s a weirdo — sorry Quentin … They’ve got the stupid 70mm – they got all that shit that he cares about. He just wants to show his goddamn movie there. You’re sitting on top of the world. You’ve got Star Wars. What, do you need this?”

Deadline has reached out to the Weinstein Co. and Disney, and is waiting to hear back.

In a statement yesterday, Arclight Cinemas announced how they were preparing for Star Wars: The Force Awakens; that the Dome was upgraded with dual-head Christie 6P laser projectors and Dolby 3D, which can project more than double the light of an average 3D projection system and enable moviegoers to see the nuances in Star Wars: Episode VII.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 12-16-2015, 02:52 PM:
 

quote:

---

“It’s vindictive, it’s mean, and it’s extortion,” Tarantino added.

---

quote: Tarantino

---

“It was real bad news and it fucking pissed me off. They are going out of their way to fuck me.”

---

quote: Mark Ogden & "Deadline"

---

Quentin Tarantino went on the Howard Stern Sirius radio show and spoke about how Disney is strong-arming Arclight Cinemas to push the director’s 70MM presentation of his eighth film The Hateful Eight aside in favor of Star Wars: The Force Awakens in LA’s famed Cinerama Dome. The director first learned about this on Monday.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

I wonder if they ever considered foregoing anamorphic projection lenes entirely and just optically printing the anamorphic negative and making spherical prints.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

To illustrate just how bad Star Wars is able to Bogart all the screens Disney wants just look at what they did with the premiere: three different theaters on Hollywood Blvd. right next to each other. The Dolby Theater, The TCL Chinese Theater and the El Capitan.

---

quote: The Hollywood Reporter

---

California
Arclight Hollywood, Pacific Theatres, Los Angeles
The Landmark, Los Angeles
Cinemark 18, Los Angeles
AMC Burbank, Los Angeles
Arclight Sherman Oaks, Pacific Theatres, Los Angeles
Del Amo 18, Torrance
Long Beach Stadium Regal, Long Beach
Regal Irvine Spectrum, Irvine
Grand Lake Theater, Oakland
Cinemark San Francisco Center, San Francisco
Cinemark Century 21 Theatre, Pleasant Hill
Cinemark Century Oakridge, San Jose
AMC Mercado, Santa Clara
Cinemark Century Daly City, Daly City
Cinemark Union City 25, Union City
AMC Mission Valley, San Diego
Arclight LaJolla, Pacific Theatres, LaJolla/San Diego
Grossmont Center, La Mesa/San Diego
Tower Theatre, Sacramento
Riveria Theatre, Santa Barbara

New York
Lincoln Square AMC, New York City
Village East VII, New York City
E-Walk Regal, New York City
86th Street, New York City
New Roc City Regal, New Rochelle
Garden State AMC, Paramus
National Amusements Farmingdale Multiplex 14, Farmingdale

Texas
AMC Arlington 18, Arlington
Dallas Northpark AMC, Dallas
Cinemark West Plano, Plano
Regal Houston Greenway Grand, Houston
AMC Houston Gulf Pointe, Houston
Santikos Palladium 19, San Antonio
Austin Alamo Drafthouse, Austin
Cinemark Tinseltown, Austin/Pflugerville

Florida
AMC Veterans Tampa, Tampa
Regal Kendall Village, Miami
Regal Waterford Lakes, Orlando
AMC Downtown Disney, Orlando
Cinemark Beach Palace, Boca Raton
Carmike Parisian, West Palm Beach
AMC Miami Aventura, Aventura
Cinemark Miami Paradise, Davie

Illinois
Chicago River East AMC, Chicago
Icon, Keresotes, Chicago
Music Box, Chicago
Crestwood AMC, Chicago/Crestwood
Evanston 18 Cinemark, Evanston
Barrington 30 AMC, South Barrington

Washington, D.C. Area
Regal Gallery Place, Washington, D.C.
AMC Tyson's Corner, McLean
AMC Potomac Mills, Woodbridge
AFI Silver Theatre, Silver Spring
AMC Hoffman Center, Alexandria

Pennyslvania
Cherry Hill AMC, Philadelphia
Regal Riverview Plaza, Philadelphia
MAC Neshaminy Bensalem, Philadelphia
Regal King Of Prussia, Prussia
AMC Waterfront, Pittsburgh

Massachusettes
AMC Boston Boston Common, Boston
Boston Coolidge Corner, Brookline
Boston Somerville 5, Somerville

Michigan
Detroit Forum 30, Detroit/Sterling Heights
AMC Livonia, Detroit/Livonia
MJR Southgate Cinema 20, Detroit/Southgate

Arizona
Harkins Tempe Marketplace, Tempe
Harkins Scottsdale 101, Scottsdale
AMC Phoenix Westgate, Glendale

Maryland
Bow Tie Annapolis Mall, Annapolis
MAC White Marsh, Baltimore
Cinemark 78 Egyptian, Baltimore/Hanover

Colorado
Regal Continental, Denver
AMC Denver Westminster 24, Westminster

North Carolina
Regal Stonecrest, Charlotte
AMC Southpoint, Raleigh/Durham

Oregon
Regal Bridgeport, Portland
Hollywood Theatre, Portland

Georgia
Regal Atlantic Station, Atlanta
AMC Southlake Pavilion, Morrow

Washington
AMC Seattle Pacific Place 11, Seattle
Cinemark 57 Lincoln Square, Bellevue/Seattle

Tennessee
Carmike Thoroughbred, Nashville
Regal Pinnacle Stadium, Knoxville

Minnesota
AMC Southdale, Minneapolis/Southdale

New Jersey
Hamilton 24 AMC, Hamilton

Ohio
Cinemark Valley View, Cleveland/Valley View

Missouri
Wehrenbrug Ronnies, St. Louis

Wisconsin
Marcus Brookfield Majestic 16, Milwaukee/Waukesha

Kansas
AMC Town Center Leawood, Kansas City

Alabama
Carmike Birmingham Patton Creek, Hoover

Nevada
AMC Las Vegas Town Square, Las Vegas

New Mexico
Cinemark Rio 24, Albuquerque

Oklahoma
AMC Quail Springs, Oklahoma City

Louisiana
AMC Elmwood Palace, New Orleans/Harahan

Rhode Island
National Amusements Providence Place, Providence

Canada
Cineplex Toronto Varsity, Toronto
Cineplex Banque Scotia, Montreal
Cineplex Latin Quartier, Montreal
Cineplex Vancouver Park, Vancouver

---

quote:

---

And this pic from AFI Silver getting their print on reels... as God and [steve] intended. [Smile]

---

On reels, yes...doubled up reels no. I have no problem shipping them out that way but don't approve running them that way. Care to lift 5-reels of 35mm over your head to aim for a 1/2" spindle 5 times a show? For what? To save a few changeovers? If you can make 4 good ones you can make 9 good ones. And, in the unlikely event of a mishap, you've only endangered 1 reel, not 2.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-17-2015, 10:53 AM:
 
Confirming that there definitely will be 4k 'Roadshow'
DCP's issued as backup in case of catastrophic film failure.

I'm running this one tomorrow at a special press/preview screening.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-17-2015, 11:44 AM:
 

quote: Bill Brandenstein

---

Is he really that out of touch?

---

quote: Tyler Purcell

---

Yeppers, Quentin and co screwed the pooch on this one royally!

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

Quentin, we don't tell you how to make your movies; why don't you keep away from the exhibition side of it?

---

The weird thing is that unlike most other Hollywood A-listers, he actually owns and operates a theater, and so Tarantino, of all people, should know how to work the distribution system to give his show the best possible release.

But there again, it's a theater in the heart of Hollywood that shows almost exclusively cult/grindhouse type stuff, and so the normal economics of the biz don't really apply to him. Plus, he has the option of subsidizing the New Bev with other income if he needs to.
 

---

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 12-17-2015, 09:27 PM:
 
Yes the timing against Star Wars is dumb but the only thing QT spoke about on Howard Stern was one theater! One booking! The Cinerama Dome! He was not talking about any other screen being dominated by Star Wars.
He's fine with Star Wars taking everything else but they had a deal with the Dome and the Dome wanted to honor it. They are Ultra Panavision perfect for a Ultra Panavision revival.
They(Disney)threatened the Dome saying "you will not honor The Hateful Eight booking if you want Star Wars at all your other Pacific theaters!"
That is a big pile of and Disney is simply trying to QT by deliberately going after the one screen QT really cared about.
I respect most of you here but...the anti QT jabs are starting to get under my skin. Endless Hating on his films like a bunch of jaded art house snobs. I can say that because I work at a art house surrounded by QT Hating, jaded art house snobs.
He may be naive but QT is passionate about movies and film.He puts everything into it. The WTC yes men are likely the ones who should have insisted on different release dates instead of blowing sunshine up Quentin's ass.
Quentin puts his money and energy into programming the New Bev all the while writing and making movies the world(most of)loves.
I believe the suits around him at WTC failed him and 70mm by encouraging a Christmas release.
 

---

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 12-17-2015, 10:44 PM:
 
^ 'Django Unchained' opened on Christmas day in 2012 - it had no problem, but of course it didn't have to deal with a Star Wars movie release.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-17-2015, 11:44 PM:
 
Django Unchained wasn't being released in an exotic film presentation format. So it didn't really depend on getting booked into certain kinds of venues. The Hateful Eight, being filmed in anamorphic 5/65mm, needed every big venue it could have booked.

Had QT waited a couple or so months he could have had just about any venue he wanted. Hell, he probably could have even set up a deal with IMAX and temporarily put 5/70mm into a bunch of those theaters. But no, they had to go up against Star Wars. This is just an example of someone not picking his battles wisely.
 

---

Posted by Aron Toplitsky (Member # 6950) on 12-18-2015, 01:27 AM:
 
Thanks for that list!!

I’m curious about that 70MM list and which of those theaters can properly (like the Cinerama Dome) project an Ultra-Panavision 2.76:1 aspect ratio and not mask it down. I'm also curious as to how many will be showing it on unmasked screens? I emailed Arclight Hollywood and asked if they would consider moving Hateful Eight into the Dome once Star Wars makes its mandatory big screen run. I noticed Arclight Hollywood 70MM showings are already sold pretty well. I’m quite surprised and a little concerned that my local cinema Del Amo 18 in Torrance CA, is showing a 70MM print. I hope they can handle it.

Are most directors and studios so out of touch that they don’t realize most large format screens have no masking? I just wish they would shoot more 1.85 movies, that way the image will be larger on those screens and at home on Blu-Ray.
 

---

Posted by Sascha F. Roll (Member # 9043) on 12-18-2015, 03:39 AM:
 

quote: Steve Guttag

---

On reels, yes...doubled up reels no. I have no problem shipping them out that way but don't approve running them that way. Care to lift 5-reels of 35mm over your head to aim for a 1/2" spindle 5 times a show? For what? To save a few changeovers? If you can make 4 good ones you can make 9 good ones. And, in the unlikely event of a mishap, you've only endangered 1 reel, not 2.

---

quote:

---

They(Disney)threatened the Dome saying "you will not honor The Hateful Eight booking if you want Star Wars at all your other Pacific theaters!"

---

quote: Aron Toplitsky

---

I’m curious about that 70MM list and which of those theaters can properly (like the Cinerama Dome) project an Ultra-Panavision 2.76:1 aspect ratio and not mask it down.

---

quote: Victor Liorentas

---

That is a big pile of and Disney is simply trying to QT by deliberately going after the one screen QT really cared about.

---

quote:

---

THR reveals that Warner Bros. is mulling over releasing "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" in 70mm, as Zack Snyder shot parts of the movie in 65mm IMAX. The studio is also considering re-releasing catalog titles that were shot in the format, like David Lean's epic "Lawrence Of Arabia." Certainly for theaters, this could be a boon, as it will allow them to put a premium price on the ticket and to sell a new kind of cinematic experience. But again, it will be interesting to see how 70mm catches with audiences in the weeks ahead, and whether it's something that will resonate beyond being a unique selling point for "The Hateful Eight."

---

 

---

Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 12-18-2015, 06:10 PM:
 
How is Warner Bros. going to re-release Lawrence of Arabia? In the first place, it's a Sony/Columbia title. Also, I thought the original negative was no longer in good enough shape to strike prints from.

Sounds like a job for Robert Harris, at any rate.
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 12-18-2015, 06:28 PM:
 
Lawrence of Arabia was already restored by Robert Harris in 1989. There are beautiful prints out there.

Now if only we can go back to magnetic sound
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-18-2015, 08:18 PM:
 
I don't know about anyone else, but I personally would be willing to pay a premium to see 65mm originated content on 70mm film prints. That's a big deal to me. It means a shit-ton more than mere HDTV resolution 3D bullshit blown up great big and premium charged when I can pretty much watch the very same digital shit at home for far less money.

quote: Sean Weitzel

---

Now if only we can go back to magnetic sound

---

Here's what they need to do with the 70mm film prints. Since DTS/Datasat seem to be punting the film-based tech over to FotoKem, why not take that time code and tie it into modern d-cinema sound systems?

From my point of view it is flat out doofus bullshit retarded to not allow a 70mm film print to be twinned with state of the art sound like Dolby Atmos. Technologically speaking this is entirely do-able. There is absolutely zero excuse against making something like that happen. So fucking make it happen Hollywood!
 

---

Posted by David J Hilsgen (Member # 2614) on 12-18-2015, 08:23 PM:
 
Warners all ready called us here, at willow creek in plymouth ,mn on batman vs superman, we said we would take the 70 print. also i got a call from I.A local 219 which i'm a member, that they are looking for projectionist for hateful 8 & the pay is $800.00 a day for 8 hour shift there is 2 shifts a day so total pay out is $1600.00 a day & $1600.00 a day per shift for holidays plus hotel mileage & $72.00 a day for meals. sounds, to good to be true or are they getting desperate.anybody else here about this.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 12-18-2015, 08:39 PM:
 
Something like that in San Francisco as well.

Stephan
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-18-2015, 09:15 PM:
 
I don't like to post exact salary information.
Some of my employers have an NDA.
But the figures quoted are more or less correct.
 

---

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 12-18-2015, 09:53 PM:
 
I do think people are tired of the 3D revolution! I know people will pay a premium to see something in 70mm IF it was originated in that format, like Hateful Eight. My only concern is hollywood using it as the new "gimmick" and simply scanning out digital onto film, which is a waste of money and time. That would ultimately not work, but hey I can't complain. If Hateful Eight projection is a success in the box office, it may be big news to the studio's.

I've had LONG talks with the powers at be over at Panavision about potentially making an all-new 65mm camera and they were contemplating it. They have the movements and all the CAD drawings to machine them on their mill, it's just a matter of the demand. Arri was going to dismantle their 765 fleet and they're actually all out on productions to this day! Same goes for al the cameras in Germany. Right now if you wanted to shoot on 65mm, you'd have a hard time booking a camera. So in my eyes, that's pretty good news for the future of large-format filmmaking.

Not saying digital is bad, but 70mm 5/70 and 15/70 is just better and in my eyes, it's the experience current theaters are lacking. It's an exciting time to be involved with the film industry, I'll say that much! it's an opportunity for younger people to learn film production and handling.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-19-2015, 01:21 AM:
 
I did some sort of press/preview screening of HF-8 tonight and I was quite
surprised when the old C-I-N-E-R-A-M-A banner came up on screen right after
the Weinstein logo at the start. Wasn't expecting that! Nice surprise!

Another surprise- - -
You don't see many movies that list a "chicken wrangler" in the credits. . .
 

---

Posted by Simon Wyss (Member # 6218) on 12-19-2015, 03:59 AM:
 
Why not six analogue optical tracks on 70mm prints? Absolutely feasible, no danger of magnetic damage, no additional thickness, no striping needed, printed together with the image, no head wear, linear response, and at 5 perfs. times 5 per frame times 24 per second there are 570 mm of linear surface for resolution. Slit height of half a mil delivers 22.4 kHz limit frequency.
 

---

Posted by Richard May (Member # 2627) on 12-19-2015, 07:02 AM:
 

quote:

---

It's an exciting time to be involved with the film industry, I'll say that much!

---

quote: Tyler Purcell

---

Does anyone know why dolby didn't develop a 70mm dolby digital system?

---

I don't know for sure, but my best guess is that developing 70mm SRD would have undermined one of the main selling points for SRD itself, which was that the studios could have awesome sound without paying to make 70mm prints.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-19-2015, 12:43 PM:
 
For those of you who might be curious- -

"Print Move" at 7am this morning. It was delivered a
couple of days ago, but theater staff has been too
busy, thanks to Star Wars, to deal with getting it up
to the booth. So they brought professional movers in.

At this location, the elevator doesn't stop at the booth
level. So it was easier to go up to the floor above, and
bring it DOWN the stairs rather than try to carry it UP.


Safely on the platter! It took 4 guys to do the move (5, if you
count me supervising) Top deck was removed to make lifting &
centering it on the middle platter easier.

 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-19-2015, 03:30 PM:
 
Bobby,

Dual-band sound is something that has been doable for decades and decades (think Cinerama or Fantasound, if you want). In later years, I did countless screenings with dubbers interlocked to prints.

In the DTS/Datasat realm, there have been timecode chasers as IMAX competitors and even IMAX also always was double-band first using conventional dubbers and then migrating over to the likes of CDs. So yes, the technology has been around take a time code and have the sound chase the picture (or whatever device has the blessed timecode.

There is the question of putting that in conventional theatre hands and taking the risk of something going wrong as well as the cost versus the number of venues that would utilize it. Having the DCP interlocked to a film projector is an interesting prospect. I would presume that the systems set up for dual projector 3D would have the timecode chasing ability and it would be a matter of having a device that would take the Datasat time code (since that is what would be on the film) and having either software in the DCinema system or a box that converted it to usable timecode (I believe Datasat uses its own proprietary time code.

Like so many things...the technology is certainly there but there would have to be enough interest. Certainly, it would have cost less to adapt the Datasat time code to a DCP server than all of this effort over UP70 versus good old SP70 (that would have been a bigger picture in 99.9% of the venues running it).

I think it will be a matter of if this 70mm thing catches on as an "Event" distinction or is a flash in the pan that brought nothing perceivable (from the spreadsheet standpoint) to the table.

Then again, this industry is so lazy that when they made a DCP of a genuine Todd AO movie of Oklahoma!, they didn't offer the ToddAO 6-track mix as a version file but instead offered a 5.1 (naturally to ensure it plays everywhere) and a stupid 7.1 version where the back surrounds are dead during the entire movie. Thus far, the only excuse I've been given is that the people that did the DCP mix "thought" that no or very few theatres could have played back the 6.0 mix (wrong) and that those that want the 6.0 mix had/have the option of getting the Atmos mix to get the full 5-screen channels. Now think about that one. They didn't want to provide 6.0 version file because that they thought that the type of venue that would play a "classic" title like Oklahoma! would not be able to handle a 6.0 mix (it would be in the 7.1SDS format in DCI vernacular...a defined format and one of the few)...but instead "thought" that there would be more Atmos theatres likely to play the title and put forth the time/effort to create an Atmos mix of an Academy Award winning sound mix rather than, at least, provide the original mix as an option. These are the people you want to "think" about giving 70mm options on sound mixes? They live in their own bubble of Hollywood and what they see immediately around them. ANY cinema that has some form of matrix sound processor can handle a 7.1SDS (think SDDS' format) with the most simple of configurations...processors like the QSC DCP, Datasat AP20, Q-Sys, CP850 and ANY generic DSP based sound processor. This isn't very hard to do. It doesn't require special skills and can be cued just like any other DCP movie.

The set up isn't complicated. Here is an example:



I would have liked if QT had offered a version of H8 with either an SDDS-8 track formation or go whole hog and have 5-across, plus 4 surround and subwoofer. Again, just version files and if you are going to do the widest picture, put five speakers back there to fill the width of your image (for those that can). Those sites that play classic 70mm titles have had the option for the original 6-track mixes on most of those titles and seem to do just fine.
 

---

Posted by Aron Toplitsky (Member # 6950) on 12-19-2015, 06:23 PM:
 
Forgive me for not knowing the answer to this question, since I'm not a "film handler" as it indicates on my profile, which by the way I have been unable to change, anyway which sound format are 70MM prints using these days? I would think still DTS encoded on the print with the CD-ROM audio disk separate?

Can an object based mix be done for a 70MM print?
 

---

Posted by Terry Monohan (Member # 8285) on 12-19-2015, 07:04 PM:
 
Thanks Jim for posting the images. Can you imagine If the platter film rolled out of the crate box and got loose down the stairs.
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 12-19-2015, 08:19 PM:
 
Aron, you are correct It's the same system as DTS sound for 35mm with the time code instead of printed inboard between the sprockets and picture, printed on one side where magnetic tracks used to be applied. I don't believe the DTS film system ever expanded beyond 5.1 channels. Also, the later processors had the ability to copy the audio off of the CD-ROM discs into an onboard hard drive to minimize the chance of playback being interrupted due to disc damage or other equipment failure. A lot of these 70mm DTS installs also employ two stacked processors with one acting as a failover.
 

---

Posted by Aron Toplitsky (Member # 6950) on 12-19-2015, 09:38 PM:
 
Thanks for the info Sean. I guess it makes sense for 70MM not to expand beyond 5.1 since digital cinema has become the norm. I find it particularly interesting how the audio is imported from the discs on some processors. That makes total sense.

So let me throw a question out there for all who care to answer. I’m a huge fan of cinema, especially the tech side of things, which is why I’m on this site. There are some things I’ve read that just go over my head, but I’ve learned a lot. Most of what you guys talk about on this site reminds me of some of the work I do in broadcasting, for example dealing with servers, files and of course video. My question, what advice would you all have if someone like myself wanted to get into the theatrical digital projection world, in the city of Los Angeles?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-19-2015, 11:13 PM:
 
Sean, yes dts has "special venue" systems and various options to increase the channel count and layout. Also very few of these Hateful Eight installs are actually using stacked processors for failover redundancy.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-19-2015, 11:31 PM:
 

quote: Aron Toplitsky

---

Can an object based mix be done for a 70MM print?

---

quote:

---

Oh Victor, you are so delightfully naive; Disney aren't out to fuck over QT, Disney are out to fuck over everyone, and to do this all of the time. QT isn't special, he's just another bit of collateral damage that got in the way of the mouse.

---

quote: Richard May

---

So if the digital audio drops out, there is no back up audio to revert to?

---

Correct. Fortunately, in my experience, the 70mm film DTS timcode
tracks area bit more "robust", for lack of a better term, since they are
larger than 35mm, and a bit less prone to dust or dirt errors.

In the event of some sort of catastrophic film failure, there will be
a 4K "Roadshow Backup" DCP running about a minute behind the
70mm, that can be switched over to if necessary to 'save' a show.

FYI- - -
The soundtrack for my H-F-8 print arrived on a USB stick & not disks.
 

---

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 12-20-2015, 12:00 PM:
 
So I'm going to make a short report about a screening last night at LACMA of Hateful Eight. I'm very concerned about this problem and figured if I brought it to the attention of you guys, maybe something can be done before release.

This is the 2nd time I've seen the film with focus issues. The first time was clearly a problem with the gate as it never came back after they switched to the 2nd projector. Last nights screening was clearly a problem with the lenses. They got 4 lenses from BLS and all of them had focus issues. According to the lead projectionist, the front element was unscrewed when they got it and they did the best they could at re-assembling.



In this test pattern, you can clearly see the left side of the screen is out of focus. This was a similar problem on both projectors AND I will say, as the lenses heated up, the problem got worse. By the end of the show, half of the screen was out of focus and it was very random. On one projector it was half of the upper portion. On the other projector, it was lower and to the left like in that test pattern.

I tried to confront the projectionist again after the show, but he wasn't very interested in talking, maybe afraid I would write something... which is why I'm leaving his name out. He did answer my questions though and I just gave him my condolences for the issues that were out of his hands. It's a real shame because the projectors themselves worked great, the print looked amazing, but the focus issue was a real bugaboo. If this is the way 'Hateful Eight' will be screened everywhere, it's going to be a huge problem.

I really suggest that people do full run throughs and get the lenses super hot because it's absolutely a temp related issue. It's clear one of the elements is shifting just slightly and that's where the problem is coming from. Here in So Cal it maybe an easy fix, but in other places of the world, it's much more challenging, requiring BLS to test and deliver a different lens. The fact ALL four lenses at the LACMA screening had loose front elements, really gets me peeved because it has to be a shipping issue. I know for fact BLS wouldn't deliver a lens like that.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-20-2015, 12:13 PM:
 

quote: Jim Cassedy

---

Basically, it would be technically possible, but not really practical or
commercially viable at this point in time. But, on a strictly theoretical
level, it could be done.

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

to get DTS time code on 70mm or 35mm film prints to sync with sound formats in a d-cinema server.

---

Just to clarify the conversation I was having with the Dolbyguy-

They have mixing facilities there. In many cases, they have the original tracks,
or the mixed version final master sound tracks on their audio system servers
there that they use for mixing, editing and archiving.

They can sync those with other analog devices in the booth, such as a
2"/24 track tape machine and another big multitrack analog tape deck.
(Can't recall if it's 1/4 or 1/2 inch) So it seemed to me that if they
could sync their digital audio system servers with several mechanical
audio playback devices (or vice versa), you could, in theory, sync a
digital ATMOS track with the 35/70's, using a DTS type timecode.

I wasn't discussing trying to get it to sync with a standard DCP server.
(But, if we can put a man on the moon. . . . I suppose it's possible
if you want to take the time & trouble to putz around doing it)
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-20-2015, 03:19 PM:
 
There are two brands of anamorphic lenses out there for H8...Hyperion (which can do forward and reverse) and ISCO (Schneider). Any word on which lenses are having focus stability issues (or if both brands are having issues)?
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 12-20-2015, 06:15 PM:
 
Please make it be ISCO...please make it be ISCO...


 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-20-2015, 08:00 PM:
 

quote: Tyler Purcell

---

I really suggest that people do full run throughs and get the lenses super hot ...

---

quote: Matt Zoller Seitz

---

An extraordinary display of directorial craft, but an ugly movie—so ugly that it seems as if the director is daring his harshest detractors to see it as a confirmation of their worst fears about his art.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Will people even know about the December 25th dates

---

quote: Philip Wifflief

---

We received our print with inboard vertical base scratches on several of the reels...

---

quote: Simon Wyss

---

Cinch marks from transport?

---

quote: Bil Brandenstein

---

suppose if I want to see pretty pictures in 70mm, I'm going to need to head down to the Imax theater at California Science Center, because now I'm certain that H8ful is a movie I have no interest in seeing.

---

quote: Richard May

---

Wow. Just quickly reading through all those responses. Seems like there were many issues. That sucks but expected I think.

---

I dunno, most of the issues seem to be related to the aspect ratio and lack of masking (lots of cinemas seem to be framing the image to either the top or bottom of screen rather than centering it). Which is a problem, of course, we all want proper masking, but we know that was going to be an issue. As far as actual playback problems there seem to have been a few but my sense from the thread is its going well! Good to hear about the number of sellouts too, that bodes well for this 70mm experiment maybe sticking around for future films.
 

---

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 12-26-2015, 11:58 AM:
 
Not as many out of focus issues as I expected on the Reddit page. Most of the issues seemed so easy to fix. I'm absolutely shocked about the out of sync audio issue. That's such an easy fix, it just shows you whoever set up the projectors, didn't really bother to make sure they worked!!! Even a film loop with audio would have sufficed to make sure it worked.

Some of the other errors were just flat-out ridiculous and things that are not format specific.

I was really scared the roadshow would be a problem and it looks like I was right. I bet most theaters switch to DCP this coming week since it goes wide in digital.

Of course, Arclight Hollywood, Sherman Oaks and LaJolla have excellent reviews, not a single hitch. I bet they don't even have the digital projector running, no need to! That's what happens when you have staff projectionists that know their shit!
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 12-26-2015, 01:50 PM:
 
I read virtually all of the reddit comments and found a few disturbing trends:

1: "Overture" was mirror image... Seriously, how many idiots don't know how to tell the right side of 70mm? Maybe each of those locations need to put tape on the leader saying "this side out dumbfuck" or something.... this shows either lack of training or worse, the old multiplex method of projection...let's have one qualified guy try to teach the popcorn jockeys how to do it...

2: I saw a few episodes of brainwraps and at least one thrown print...

3: The out of sync issues, also unacceptable IMHO. That shows lack of care in threading to maintain proper loop sizes. See #1 above.

4: Some sound dropouts...either bad printing, or more likely when the DTS readers were set up they were not checked for proper alignment and LED level...

5: At least one rectifier ("power supply") failure... I hope BLS wasn't sending out any of the horrid old style black Strong switchers.. (and as a point of curiosity, were any spares available to possibly be left at some locations?)

6: AFI got, as expected, a near perfect review, except for a slight curtain squeak..you'd better jump on that Steve Guttag.

Also of note that the Del Amo Torrance comments said QT was at a screening with some tech issues...as someone who had worked with QT I have to call BS on that...either the guy was lying about the issues, or more likely lying about QT being there....as QT would have been screaming at the theatre manager and projectionist for the issues (if he really was there). QT is a very demanding perfectionist when projecting his shows...
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-26-2015, 02:14 PM:
 
Tony,

The curtain was serviced specifically for this show and is slated to be replaced in 2016 (as well as the track)...so yeah...the AFI is "on that." And, for them to "hear a squeak" they would have had to be in the front part of the theatre...it wasn't loud (not as loud as most carriers seems to be as they clack together...which doesn't happen at the AFI). The Silver was built to THX standards so at NC30 or lower...you will hear EVERYTHING. I'm not too worried about the show there. They have professionals.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-26-2015, 02:19 PM:
 
Looks like in Denver (so far) the Regal Continental threaded it backwards resulting in the backwards overture and the AMC Westminster Promenade 24 had soft focus and a brain wrap.
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 12-26-2015, 03:25 PM:
 
The one in Kansas City basically sold out solid all weekend Thursday thru Sunday.

I went to the Thursday 9:45 and it was near perfect. Projectionist was very attentive and was constantly checking film path with flashlight.

The Reddit thread suggests they had an issue Friday 7:00 though. Curious if they're back to film. Hope so.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-26-2015, 06:42 PM:
 
Reading reviews on Reddit is a little like reading restaurant reviews on Yelp. Gotta beware some may be BS. I'm fixing to check out the 70mm show at AMC Quail Springs Mall. Shows have been selling out.
 

---

Posted by Philip Wittlief (Member # 1724) on 12-26-2015, 06:48 PM:
 
I'm not sure what happened at other sites with audio sync issues but our first show this morning started out of sync. It ran fine all 4 shows yesterday and nothing was touched. The offset on the XD20 had to be moved by 10 frames on the fly. After the show the XD20 was power cycled and our original offset was back to be correct. BLS recommended that the XD20 gets rebooted each day.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 12-26-2015, 09:13 PM:
 
Attended a screening at AMC Northpark in Dallas. Terrific presentation of course, but it's painful to see such a gorgeous movie designed for a giant screen play in these multiplex houses. Event the larger ETX, XD, etc. just wouldn't do it justice. A room designed for scope films is really what is needed. Despite being so wide, the screen area just felt so small in such a space.

I really want to see this one again.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-26-2015, 11:57 PM:
 
Apparently there have been a number of problems on this first day of Hateful Eight in 70mm. I have received requests for "quick fixes" for the scratching issues, so here is a quick document I made to show a few easy things the projectionist can do to keep their prints from getting brain-scratched.

Download pdf file here
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-27-2015, 12:25 AM:
 
I just got back home from watching the 7:00pm show at AMC Quail Springs Mall 24 in Oklahoma City. Treacherous drive on I-44 both ways; I'm just thankful the snow and ice is still out to the West as I write this.

Anyway, presentation quality at this AMC site was pretty good apart from some obvious annoyances I kind of expected. There were no audio problems at all; the sound quality was actually pretty good and they had the sound turned up enough so it had some kick to it. The gun shots and exploding human tissue had some good punctuation. There were no sync issues. No "overture" card threaded backward either.

The movie was stuck in auditorium #12, which probably didn't seat more than 250 people. AMC should have had this in a much bigger auditorium. Every show has been selling out. I arrived at the theater over an hour early. It's a good thing I did because there was already a line outside the auditorium!

I expected a common width screen and that's what it had. I sat closer than usual, knowing the movie would be seriously letter-boxed (and smaller) on this flat ratio screen. They had the movie framed toward the bottom of the screen. I don't think they had the film gate and aperture plate very well set up on this projector because the bottom edge of the frame was fairly soft. With a proper common height screen and proper masking all of that would have been hidden from view.

The film print was still in pretty good condition. There was one issue: during the Overture card I could see a thin, black vertical scratch on the far right end of the frame. Thankfully it disappeared maybe a minute or two after the overture finished. The rest of the movie had just a tiny bit of debris here and there. Focus was decent, but not the best I've seen from real 70mm. I wonder if some of that softness was coming from those vintage 1.25x anamorphic lenses used to photograph the movie.

The theater staff wasn't very on the ball about the movie's printed roadshow program. They had them stashed back at guest services. They should have been handing out these things at the entrance into the theater. A bunch of people didn't even know about them.

Pretty good movie though. Better than I expected actually. I was worried this was going to be a very long, very boring Deathproof: Part 2. At least the long monologues in this movie built up to something.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-27-2015, 10:10 AM:
 
I've been reading about some of the presentation problems.

>"ERUTREVO" sdrawkcab: Obviously no good excuse for this!

>SOFT FOCUS: Can't understand this one. Perhaps some venues
had access to better prime lenses or were better set-up than others.
I know on "my screen", the image is razor sharp.
(Thanks to hard work by the installers)

>Sound Sync: Haven't run into this during screenings so far. My
DTS is shut down overnight, so it's getting a re-boot every morning.

>Thrown Print? : (according to one report) All the locations
I'm aware of around here got platter safety rings.


One thing I have to watch out for is that the framing really needs to
be precise or I'll see negative splices on screen. BLSI sent out a test
reel of actual H-F-8 footage, and it took several run-throughs of that,
(and a steady hand), but I've finally found the 'sweet spot' for the
framing knob.

Tony- - In regards to your question about spare rectifers- -
BLSI did send out some spare parts kits, but to the best of my
knowledge, spare rectifiers (power supplies) weren't included.

My booth and some others I've seen pictures of, all have CHRISTIE
consoles. I walked around the other 8 booths in the multiplex I'm
at and there are several unused, consoles that have been pushed
into corners collecting dust. I suppose in a catastrophic rectifier
failure, parts, or the entire power supply, could be cannabilized
from one of them.

Also, I'm not sure that any "pocorn jockys" are actually running these
shows. Every venue I'm aware of has brought in a dedicated projectionist.
(but from some of the problem reports I've seen, some guys are apparently
more dedicated than others!)

One thing I think I've finally got the theater staff trained to realize, is
that the auditorium lights are SUPPOSED to be 'on' (half level) during
the OVERTURE. (Or ERUTREVO, if you've threaded incorrectly)

For the first couple of shows, they'd keep yelling "THE LIGHTS ARE
STILL ON" over the radio, and once even sent a kid upstairs to tell
me to turn them off.

I think I've finally explained it enough that they get the point now.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-27-2015, 10:24 AM:
 
Is anyone else keeping the 70mm for more than the initial two-week run? I know that Somerville plans to hold it for at least a month. Is anyone else doing that? Is that even possible for the rental venues, or are they stuck with switching to DCP/35mm after two weeks?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-27-2015, 12:49 PM:
 

quote: Jim Cassedy

---

SOFT FOCUS:
Can't understand this one. Perhaps some venues had access to better prime lenses or were better set-up than others. I know on "my screen", the image is razor sharp. (Thanks to hard work by the installers)

---

quote: Jim Cassedy

---

Sound Sync:
Haven't run into this during screenings so far. My DTS is shut down overnight, so it's getting a re-boot every morning.

---

quote: Jim Cassedy

---

Thrown Print? : (according to one report)
All the locations I'm aware of around here got platter safety rings.

---

I wonder if you can thank Mr. Chavez for that. I saw a safety ring in a picture from one of his installs and pointed it out to him. I'm wondering if perhaps he got with the theater and was able to loan their old safety rings that they don't use anymore to the other area locations.
 

---

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 12-27-2015, 12:50 PM:
 
Jim, I know at Harkins Tempe Marketplace they have threading limited to senior management and a couple IMAX guys, but no one monitored the film during the intial shows and they had a bottom roller fail which caused damage to the print. In the photo i received it appears to be towards the credit section, I'm assuming they fixed it but haven't heard yet.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-27-2015, 02:26 PM:
 
Brad-
Sam Chavez and Stephan Shelley did a fantastic job on the install here.
Sam spent a lot of time getting the aperture plate & astigmatism adjusted
correctly, and also did a complete EQ of the auditorium.

Stephan did an unbelievable job timing the platters.
I've never seen a platter deck run so smoothly! Thanks Guys!


 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 12-27-2015, 03:33 PM:
 
Thanks Brad, in fact I did find a second safety ring and the Tower allowed me to borrow it for the Kabuki run of H8.
 

---

Posted by Mark Fontana (Member # 153) on 12-27-2015, 11:32 PM:
 
A few pictures from the temporary installation at AMC Southdale 16 in the Minneapolis area are here courtesy of IATSE Local 219. This reddit thread about the Southdale engagement mentions that the print was already very scratched at the very first preview screening on 12/24. Apparently all of the opening weekend shows sold out. Too bad Muller Willow Creek wasn't allocated a print too.
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 12-28-2015, 12:12 AM:
 
Sam, Is the Tower properly masked for H8? It's a toss up for me to see it there or at the Grand Lake. The Grand Lake is supposedly properly masked but The Tower is an easier drive and I would much rather see it there.
 

---

Posted by Eric Carter (Member # 1392) on 12-28-2015, 12:21 AM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Is anyone else keeping the 70mm for more than the initial two-week run? I know that Somerville plans to hold it for at least a month. Is anyone else doing that? Is that even possible for the rental venues, or are they stuck with switching to DCP/35mm after two weeks?

---

quote: Sam D. Chavez

---

Best overall of the ones I did is the Kabuki.

---

quote: Tom Hayes

---

Is QT's desire to present a film this way going to damage it for the vast majority of people who see it?

---

quote: Geoff Jones

---

My brother is wondering which theater to see it at in San Francisco. It sounds like the Kabuki is it? Is the screen decent-sized?

---

I measured the screen the other day, and it's just a hair under 31ft wide.
You'll have to 'do the math' to figure out the height.

<edit> D'oh! I didn't notice that Sam had already responded to your question.

quote: Phil Ranucci

---

Everybody running the DCP backup?

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

the digital machine IS NOT projecting "black video"

---

quote: Phil Ranucci

---

We are having one platter that 'hunts' taking up at about the 2 hour mark. Takes up,but makes the operators nervous

---

quote: Sally Strasser

---

No DCP backup playing here, per AMC.

---

quote: Sam D. Chavez

---

Kabuki screen is 12 x 31 and 50 Ft. throw more or less.

It's large in context as the house is wide and about 300 seats.

---

quote:

---

Saw the 3pm showing on Christmas Day. Drove 2 hours to the theatre and was pretty disappointed to be honest. The screen was one of the smallest I've been to, the projector seemed out of focus, it was not positioned correctly, and a few frames of film about 3/4 through the movie actually burned up!

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

That's odd. I received a report from the AMC Westminster Promenade 24 that the audience saw the film stop, burn and bubble up. The movie stopped and 10 seconds later it was back on screen. Sounds like a DCP backup to me.

---

quote:

---

the first showing in Westminster had stopped the movie and gave everyone a refund due to several issues.

---

So presumably, they spliced it back together minus whatever they destroyed and are still showing it in 70MM.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-28-2015, 06:44 PM:
 
Yep. Auditorium 6. I called it! Unless one of their newer auditoriums is bigger than #6, but I doubt it. #6 was the favorite auditorium of the staff before it became a 10-plex. It was one of the two THX auditoriums. The staff much preferred that auditorium over the D-150 screen. Unfortunately the part of the booth for that auditorium is in a very high foot-traffic area right by the manager's office and staff breakroom (unless things have changed), so it'll get dirty faster than if it were somewhere else in the booth.
 

---

Posted by Jock Blakley (Member # 6552) on 12-29-2015, 07:31 AM:
 
For those who are curious:



If my reading is correct, reels 2, 8, and 9 are the same between roadshow and general versions.

--

There are six confirmed locations in Australia now, three each in Melbourne and Sydney. Prints here are being distributed on cores (in 2500 ft cans inside two-can boxes) as 11 reels (intermission reel 6C separate), with a 12th can for the DTS discs.

As I'm running changeover this is a bit of a pain, since I don't have that many house reels.

Roadshow release opens here on 14 January with general release following on 21 January. I wonder if the distributor here was a bit more sensible about overlap with Star Wars?

On a less-happy note though, I am hearing it suggested that we're "contractually obliged" to have the douser and curtains open for the overture card. Is this happening anywhere else?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-29-2015, 02:16 PM:
 
Jock, the movie will fit comfortably on five 22" house reels.
 

---

Posted by Rick Cohen (Member # 6140) on 12-29-2015, 02:34 PM:
 
What was originally planned as a two week 70mm roadshow exclusive at only 100 locations, is now a wide release with DCP preview showings beginning on December 29.

Rampant piracy of the screeners may have had a lot to do with moving the wide release up by ten days, but if I had gone through the trouble and expense of installing 70mm in the booth under the presumption that it would be a 14 day exclusive run, I would be very unhappy with TWC.

Also an interesting article appeared in Tuesday's Variety regarding various projection problems at 70mm locations. One theatre goer in Pennsylvania tweeted,

"Best part of the broken 70MM projector/Hateful 8 print at King of Prussia? The snide theater manager 'This is why we don't do film.'"
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 12-29-2015, 04:14 PM:
 
Link to above article:

http://variety.com/2015/film/news/hateful-eight-70mm-projection-problems-1201668461/
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 12-29-2015, 05:01 PM:
 
Jock- Nice chart! I had manually made something similar when I was doing
some press/preview screenings several weeks ago.

One minor FYI 'nit-picky' point- - The "Intermission Reel"
comes up
as "Reel 13" on the DTS playback display. But that's not a big deal.

As far as curtains open or closed for the "Overture"- -
Weinstein sent out a 'run-of-show' sheet with the print, but
I'm
a projectionist, not a lawyer, so I don't know if that constitutes
a "contract" I will say that the first time I ran the flick, I was
pleasantly surprised that the "overture" card graphic didn't look ad
hokey as I'd imagined it to be. Also, having it there is a great way to
touch up focus, or blow hair out of the gate, etc, if necessary before
the main titles come up. So I've actually found it useful.
(not that I've actually had to do either of those two things...)
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 12-29-2015, 06:24 PM:
 
Am I to assume the overture plays with a "Overture" title card projected on the screen with the 70mm showing of HAREFUL 8? During all the road shiws I have seen in the past, the music plays when the curtain is closed and lights dimmed and nothing is projected on the screen. When the majority of these movies were released on video, titles cards that say OVERTURE, ENTR'ACT and EXIT MUSIC are used and I totally dislike it because that was not the way the movie was shown in theatres during a road show.

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Phil Ranucci (Member # 3820) on 12-29-2015, 06:46 PM:
 
Overture title card plays throughout.Intermission card ~13 seconds. 2nd half starts with music then Chapter card fades up.
Oh yes, QT uses chapter cards.
Also,I was told today the heat glass is cracked. Highlight II console, 3K lamp.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-29-2015, 06:50 PM:
 
So a little less than an hour ago the theater I am running 70mm at started playing the theatrical version DCP on another (slightly smaller) screen. It was a Christie projector on a silver screen.

Yuk!!! It did not look good at all after watching the 70mm for the last couple of weeks. In comparing the Christie screens to the Sony screens, it will look even worse when it goes onto one of those lifeless Sony screens that look like someone turned the contrast control to 0, the brightness up to 100 and the color setting down halfway.

This isn't me being a lover of film, because I've seen some damn good looking digital, but ANYONE would notice the difference here. It really is no comparison.
 

---

Posted by Sally Strasser (Member # 211) on 12-29-2015, 08:11 PM:
 
I have to agree with Brad...checked the DCP out briefly on another screen on intermission...it kinda looks blue and faded. Not sure what this location does in setting up their Sony's-- color shooting etc. Glad I'm on the film screen!! Dazzled by the detail in the image.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 12-29-2015, 08:41 PM:
 
Good ol' LCoS System, wins out every time in the Rotten Tomatoes Category.

Bet one saw a good hot spot on that silver screen.

With this 70mm run, are beam spreaders being used, or is the lamp focus sufficient to fill the aperture?
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 12-29-2015, 08:50 PM:
 
We're using a beam spreader.

I wonder if it's a conscious effort to make the DCP look 'bad'...
 

---

Posted by Brian D. Whitish (Member # 825) on 12-30-2015, 01:52 AM:
 
I just saw the 70mm presentation at Seattles Pacific Place. counting ceiling tiles about 44 feet wide. Common height screen. Black bar at bottom of image. Had a noticeable flicker. Was not as bad on the indoors scenes. Credits had a trailing ghost. Small scratches in middle of image about a 1/4th of the way over on both sides. Very light scratches. Sound was good. Focus was soft but okay on top 2/3rds of the screen, out of focus on bottom third. Actually better than I thought it would be. Would have loved to see this at Cinerama on the deep curve Cinerama screen. I will probably see it at Bellevues Lincoln Square to compare.
 

---

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 12-30-2015, 08:32 AM:
 
Brian, were your scratches tiny and near the bottom of the frame? I saw it last night at Harkins 101 in Scottsdale and the print was still spectacular, except for these tiny row of scratches near the center of the frame leading towards the right, just slight above the bottom edge of the frame. I counted about 8 or 9 total. Very small and not distracting at all, audience probably didn't care/notice.
 

---

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 12-30-2015, 10:52 AM:
 

quote: Tyler Purcell

---

Does anyone know why dolby didn't develop a 70mm dolby digital system?

---

They did, sort of. They patented a 70mm version of Dolby Digital. I forget if it was going to be printed inside or outside the perfs but basically they were going to stretch the data blocks 1.25 times.

All it would need is a 70mm reader with the right size rollers and the camera positioned in the right place. The processor would "see" the dots exactly the same as it did for 35mm due to the increased film speed.

Reliability may have been an issue but, in well run booths, the 35mm version was pretty reliable. I guess the theory would be that 70mm would be cared for more and make dropouts very unlikely.
 

---

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 12-30-2015, 06:00 PM:
 
I found the Dolby Patent listed above. Interesting that they didn't mention CDS as prior art.

It is titled "Compatible digital soundtracks for 70 mm motion picture film" and is patent no. 6,011,610 if you want to find it on the uspto.gov site.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 12-30-2015, 07:11 PM:
 
Grand Lake is planning on running the 70mm for the foreseeable future. If we can get the lens that works it will change auditoriums at some point. 3 of the 4 screens can show 70mm.

Have to point out that West Side Story has graphics during the overture.
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 12-31-2015, 12:00 AM:
 
I just want to post kudos to the team involved with the BLSI install at the Tower in Sacramento, CA. Sam Chavez, Chaz Philips, Matias Bombal and others. I saw the film today at 11 am. Tack sharp corner to corner and a flawless print. Dare I say Brad Miller standard flawless as in not a mark or hair on it throughout. Audio was perfect as well. Masking was right on. I was handed a program with a smile upon entry to the cinema. If *anything* I thought the light was a tiny bit uneven. Left side I saw some strobing on the outdoor scenes and the right side was a tiny tiny bit dim but no strobe. Again Bravo and thanks for film done right.
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 12-31-2015, 12:32 AM:
 
Thanks Sean.

I was just there working on the left side light issue after you were. The artifact you describe Is caused by light leaking around the right edge of the shutter. This is a long time issue with JJ as it was designed to work with the narrower cone of light from an arc lamp. The faster reflectors in xenon lamphouses enable this and I think the stretch on the lens makes it even more noticeable. it looks like travel ghost with something added.

Kudos to the projection crew as the print is still perfect. Kabuki is still pristine as well as is the Grand Lake. Not so a couple of others that will go unmentioned.
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 12-31-2015, 04:12 PM:
 
It is very unusual to see a display ad in my local newspaper anymore except on Friday's in the movie section of their weekend entertainment tabloid. One was however featured in this morning's Honolulu Star Advertiser for HATEFUL 8 measuring about two column inch by 6 inch. It was probably due to the fact that today is New Years eve. The ad was very nice and it even says "See it In 70mm at Select theaters" I am planning to see it next Tuesday at Regal's PearL Highland and I hope the presentation from the DCP will be very nice because the original source was from an Ultra Panavision 65mm negative.

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 12-31-2015, 05:09 PM:
 
Sorry Claude...but the DCP will pale compared to a well projected 70mm Ultra Panavision screening.
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 12-31-2015, 06:07 PM:
 
Did you see the digital version of HATEFUL EIGHT, Victor.? Even if the theatrical digital version might not look great, I know the blu ray when it comes out, will. Actually, I am looking forward to the blu ray because it most likely will feature the Road Show as well as the regular theatrical version using seamless branching

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 12-31-2015, 06:21 PM:
 
Yes I have done comparisons and it's a shame everyone can't see it in 70mm Ultra Panavision.
That said...you can still see some of the quality via DCP.
Even a computer monitor shows some of that 7omm texture but when I saw the actual 70mm projection...I was in heaven.
 

---

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 12-31-2015, 07:03 PM:
 
In line for the 7pm show at The Continental in Denver. They are out of booklets. Sad Jonesy.

To warm up my h8, I peeked in the original auditorium, the one that used to have a deeply curved 78' wide D-150 screen, but was replaced with a smaller screen and

Han and Liea were hugging. The image looked dim.

More later. Please don't F this up Regal.

Oh, Joe, The Hateful Eight is in auditorium 9. There is a hallway behind the original screen, with #8 on the left (directly behind the original screen) and #9 on the right.
 

---

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 12-31-2015, 07:21 PM:
 
http://www.indiewire.com/article/what-its-like-to-be-a-hateful-eight-70mm-projectionist-with-quentin-tarantino-watch ing-20151231

What It's Like to Be a 'Hateful Eight' 70mm Projectionist (With Quentin Tarantino Watching)

Editor’s Note: Adam Witmer is a 22-year-old senior at UNC School of the Arts in Winston Salem, North Carolina, where he works in film preservation and as a projectionist at one of the largest film archives in the country. At this very moment he is the projectionist at the AMC Burbank 16 in Los Angeles for Quentin Tarantino’s 70mm Roadshow of "The Hateful Eight."

When I first heard about the plans for "The Hateful Eight" 70mm screenings, I quickly contacted Boston Light and Sound about being a projectionist for Quentin Tarantino’s Roadshow. I had a strong sense this would be something historic and I desperately wanted to be part of it. I emailed and called BL&S every other day trying to get my foot in the door, but was told over and over again to be patient and remain flexible while they worked out the scheduling. Finally, at 1am on Christmas Eve, I received an email saying they needed me to fly to Torrance, California to split some shows with the AMC Del Amo 18’s current projectionist. The next morning I was on the phone with a travel agent booking flights and hotels, and at 2pm, barely 13 hours after being assigned, I hopped on a plane. I arrived in Torrance in time to run to the theater and see the projection system during the final show of the evening.

Before I go on, I should mention that I have years of experience projecting 35mm and 70mm film on a two-projector, reel-to-reel system, but I’d never used a platter system like this before. The weeks leading up to the Roadshow, I’d done lots of research, looked at manuals and diagrams, and talked to some of the installers of the system. So, while I arrived with a solid grasp on how the system worked and what I needed to do to make it work, I’d never actually touched the system before I arrived in California.

The next morning in Torrance I had some time before our first show, so I practiced and became familiar with the platter system. Together, the other projectionist and I got the first show of the day up and running without any major issues. While we were threading up for the second show, however, the theater manager raced upstairs to inform us of a new development, "Quentin Tarantino is here and wants to introduce the film."

I’ll be honest, I was more than a little anxious. This was only my second time with my hands on these machines. Sure enough, as soon as the patrons took their seats, Tarantino walked to the front and introduced the movie. He took a seat in the fourth row, and we started the show without a hitch. I checked the projector to make sure it was running correctly: all good. I checked the platter, and that’s when I noticed it: The brain.

Now, the brain controls the pay-out platter’s speed based on the tension of the film. It sits in the center of the film on the pay-out platter, and the film goes through it before anything else. The film runs through a little arm, and depending on the tension, tells the platter to spin faster or slower in order to provide a consistent feed to the projector. Essentially, it’s like the gas pedal in a car.

Imagine that you are driving your car and have to maintain 55mph on a road with lots of hills. Going down the hills you don’t need to press the gas as much because you can coast, but on the way up a hill, you have to really floor it to maintain that speed. Now imagine that your gas pedal sticks. It’s unresponsive, and you can’t push it down past a certain point. So now as you climb those hills, you gradually slow down, and eventually get to the point where you can’t make it up.

It was as if the arm was bouncing off an invisible wall. The film would tighten, pull the arm, and then suddenly the arm could go no further. The platter wasn’t being told to spin fast enough, so the film started to wrap itself around the brain. It scared the hell out of me because I knew that if it kept tightening it would seize the brain, become tangled amongst the rollers, possibly tearing or creating a massive knot that would stop the show. In desperation, I grabbed the arm with my fingers and pushed it to the left, forcing it to speed up. The platter responded and the film unwound. Problem solved, yes? Until I let go.

I released the arm, and the same thing started happening again. I put my finger on it, and again it responded. Now, I don’t know about you, but Quentin Tarantino is the last person I want witnessing any hiccups in my screening, and it was then that I realized I was going to have to hold my arm at shoulder height, reach across the film, and manually drive this mechanical beast for the duration of at least the first half of the film.

For 90 minutes, the other projectionist and I took turns operating the throttle. I’d go for five to ten minutes, switch arms, go another few minutes, then switch out with my partner and take a break. We switched back and forth like this up until intermission, when we could finally stop the projector and poke around. We had a back-up brain and swapped it out. This brain had the same issue (we later isolated the problem to within the gears of the platter itself), but we had luck on our side.

By this point in the movie, half the film is off the platter, and it doesn’t need to spin as fast. The arm was able to handle the tension at this point, and we could allow it to regulate itself under close supervision. The intermission was perhaps five minutes longer than usual while we troubleshooted, but other than that, from the audience's’ perspective (and more importantly, Tarantino’s), the film went off without a hitch.

The job of a projectionist is to manage and fix problems as they arise without the audience being aware. We are the buffer between the chaos of projection and their experience. Every time a show needs to switch to DCP because of a problem, or a show shuts down for a technical issue, there have been 10 equally large issues that the projectionist covers. Many of these projectors are practically antiques, the platter systems were never intended to support the weight and size of 70mm, and entire new pieces of equipment had to be specially manufactured for this production.

Because of this, dozens of tiny mechanical failures are bound to happen, and part of our job (the above story is a prime example) is to make sure small issues don’t propagate into catastrophes. Just today, I’ve had a lamp shift slightly to the right creating a vignette effect at the left of frame, a fuse blow, and a lens slightly scoot forward in its housing, causing me to have to refocus and tighten it down.

Film is a temperamental medium. It doesn’t always want to do what you want it to. There’s a lot of sweat and dedication behind the glass in the back of that auditorium, and that is often overlooked. The projection is the pickiest one in the entire crowd, and we do everything we can to uphold the quality standards we so often fail to see in modern megaplexes.

Not to mention, projectionists were flown to their Roadshow location at most a day before their first show. And that’s not walking into a system that is ship-shape and ready to go. They had to unpack the film, load it onto the platter, and get it ready to project, which takes no less than five hours in and of itself. Then they have to learn the system, because no matter how experienced you are, every system is slightly different -- I was moved to AMC Burbank 16 after my first day in Torrance and it took time to feel out that projector and learn its nuances. All this while not being able to practice or test fully because I started running shows immediately upon arrival.

Now that the Roadshow has started, we work 15 or 16 hours per day, with no days off for the duration of the run. Sleep deprivation begins to become a legitimate issue as your reflexes begin to slow, particularly for the late evening shows. I leave the booth by 2:30am every night, and I’m back in at 10am the next morning. That said, I’m lucky in that I only have four shows per day. Some projectionists are doing five shows a day, making for 20 hour days without a break.

"The Hateful Eight" looks incredible projected in 70mm, and the difference between the print and the DCP are striking. The print’s colors are more saturated, the blacks are blacker, the whites are whiter, and the entire thing is much crisper and, for lack of a better term, deeper. The DCP looks flat and washed out. But along with that quality difference comes a need for finesse and care on the part of the projectionist. This job is by no means easy; it’s really fucking hard. We are only human, and these systems are only machines. It’s the price we pay for that beautiful, quality image. But it’s undoubtedly worth it, and I think audiences are starting to understand that.

Tonight the DCP of The Hateful Eight opened at my theater, with 60 tickets sold. Simultaneously, in my house: packed seats, 300 strong. And they got a great show.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-31-2015, 07:35 PM:
 
I've seen this article passed on a number of times today now and I'm going to skip over all of the incorrect bits of the article and instead point out the specific quote that makes me roll my eyes every time I see this article.

quote: Adam Witmer

---

This job is by no means easy; it’s really fucking hard.

---

Really? It's "really fucking hard"???

Ok so I get it, the guy has never ran a platter before...but to say the job is "really fucking hard"? I wonder how he would do behind the concession stand at a busy theater trying to serve 2000 impatient people in an hour...or working at McDonald's...or perhaps digging ditches? What if this guy was promoted into a managerial position and had to deal with the general public directly when something goes wrong?

The job isn't hard at all. You just have to have:
*Proper training (or experience).
*Equipment that has been setup and calibrated properly.
*Reasonable intelligence and problem solving abilities.

It appears to me from the story as he wrote it like this guy had the third, but was lacking the first two. Had the light filter not been misaligned on the shaft of the axle, it would not have been rubbing up against the photocell in the arm of the platter. I know AW3s inside and out and that is EXACTLY what happened. It's a crazy-easy fix too with just an allen wrench, but what is perplexing to me is that for the platter to be calibrated properly during installation and setup, this would've HAD to have been noticed, yet it was not corrected.

Since that very basic part of the calibration was missed, I wonder if that platter will end up getting an award for distance in the print toss competition. If that happens, I wonder how he will describe it. What's worse than "really fucking hard"?

(Sorry Adam, you're probably a great guy, but the way that article quoted you is a bit on the whining side.)
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 12-31-2015, 07:55 PM:
 
There is a rumor going round about the 70mm run ending next week. While some places may be dropping it in favor of a DCP, where I work intends on running the 70mm as long as there is demand for it.

Anyone else heard this?
 

---

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 12-31-2015, 08:04 PM:
 
What's really Fucking hard is being me and not getting to run it!
 

---

Posted by Mark Fontana (Member # 153) on 12-31-2015, 08:19 PM:
 
Saw the first show of the day at AMC Southdale in Minneapolis. They are no longer selling out, especially with another screen offering the DCP now, but attendance was still very strong.

There weren't any major technical problems, but the general setup could have been better. The temporary installation is in a larger auditorium with stadium seating and no curtains, running a JJ from a secondary porthole about five feet off center, with a fairly short throw onto a (toroidal?) curved screen, resulting in the expected distortions. The focus was about as good as could be hoped for, given the above plus the complexity of anamorphic thrown in.. definitely not close to the sharpness of flat 70mm on a flat screen. There was no top or bottom masking to hide visible debris on the aperture plate.

A vertical green scratch was present for over half the duration about 5% in from the right, and there were a handful of darker vertical scratches in the left and rightmost 5% or so. No major blemishes in the middle except in two scenes in the final chapter, where it appears there had been some excessive handling.

The left side was slightly brighter- thanks to Sam Chavez for explaining how this can be caused by the JJ. There was a tiny bit of travel ghost, noticeable mostly during the chapter titles.

I didn't see any cue dots. I guess they were omitted from the prints BL&S built up for platter use.

AMC apparently got permission from TWC to run 30 minutes of digital preshow (mostly obnoxious commercials) as long as the overture started at showtime.

Aside from the 70mm presentation, the score was one of the highlights for me.

No one seems to be able to use a hammer properly in this movie...
 

---

Posted by David J Hilsgen (Member # 2614) on 12-31-2015, 08:48 PM:
 
I think the installs were kind of rushed, i agree with Brad that it is an easy fix on the platter. If i were not committed here with muller family theatres keeping every thing going not only in the booth , RTU ,poppers ect. also I'm a electrician to,and we got passed up on H8 70MM at the willow. i would've went out and worked one of these jobs.
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 12-31-2015, 09:22 PM:
 

quote: Mark Fontana

---

The left side was slightly brighter- thanks to Sam Chavez for explaining how this can be caused by the JJ. There was a tiny bit of travel ghost, noticeable mostly during the chapter titles.

---

Just to be clear, the left side is not brighter because of the light leakage around the right shutter blade, just a coincidence. I was not able to achieve absolutely perfect light flatness under the time constraints of the installation and dealing with a number of other unrelated but equally important issues that ensured a reliable and scratch free presentation.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-31-2015, 09:47 PM:
 
Oh geez, someone just pointed out to me a discussion on Reddit regarding the AMC Burbank.

quote:

---

Yeah, scratches and whatnot will appear with time

---

Well there we have it folks. Film "just gets that way" and apparently there is nothing we can do about it.
 

---

Posted by Simon Wyss (Member # 6218) on 01-01-2016, 06:47 AM:
 
Witmer is a name known in this country. Adam might have ancestors here, so in some way I respond to a fellow countryman.

Welcome to film projection! A youngster has just entered our world, by chance on The Hateful Eight. How many times did I have to hold a button or a lever with an apparatus at a festival and at the cinemas I was regularly engaged? When a freshly appointed professor for film history at the University of Zürich asked me whether I’d do some projection for her, she lectured about the US documentary in the thirties, we both wouldn’t know that I would have to keep my finger on a little roller near the sound drum on a 16mm projector that allegedly was serviced by the uni’s tech department.

I don’t understand why the Weinstein people and Tarantino didn’t want to minimise the number of technical risks inherent with A) wide film, B) Ultra-Panavision 70, and C) an unusual length. I mean, facing the fact that you already have too few trained projectionists, why not the decision in favor of reel-to-reel operation? A reel spindle with its friction is so much simpler and devoid of electric contacts and the whole enchilada than platters.

The more I read about film-backs the more I miss the dependable basic 35mm technics. Apart from the landscape scenes, doesn’t a cabin setting rather call for the good old three-to-four aspect ratio? Four perforation holes pulldown of standard film, spherical lenses throughout, cheaper prints as well as meaningful activity of boothers, folks, there have been openings of quite different size. When King Kong got started in 1933 the technical tasks weren’t ridiculous at all. Highly flammable prints in the beam of high-intensity carbon arcs, thousands of patrons in the house . . .

Can it be that The Hateful Eight wouldn’t have had a chance if produced and presented as an Academy image mono-sound 35mm movie? Has today’s cinema only so little content that a hyped form remains as the single big attraction? Frankly, my dears, for Tarantino’s films I don’t give a damn.
 

---

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 01-01-2016, 03:35 PM:
 
Sam: I have removed all obstructions inside the shutter assembly and made blades that had larger diameter, just barely clearing the nearest casting. SA projectors had the same problem. Regrettably all blades (350) were scrapped when we shut down.

You could also insert a shutter aperture that does not move. (bent piece of metal will work)near the sight glass.
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 01-01-2016, 04:47 PM:
 
With how well Tarantino used UP70 in the cabin, I feel like it needed it. There was always stuff going on in the background that needed to be seen.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-01-2016, 05:03 PM:
 

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

I have removed all obstructions inside the shutter assembly and made blades that had larger diameter, just barely clearing the nearest casting.

---

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

You could also insert a shutter aperture that does not move. (bent piece of metal will work)near the sight glass.

---

Another good solution, not that I would've expected anything else from Mr. Century.
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 01-01-2016, 05:07 PM:
 
Most have probably seen this but for archival reasons:

Meet the Brave Projectionists Behind 'The Hateful Eight' 70mm Roadshow

By Chris O'Falt | Indiewire
December 31, 2015 at 2:04PM

Have “The Hateful Eight” roadshow problems been overblown?

http://www.indiewire.com/article/meet-the-brave-projectionists-behind-the-hateful-eight-70mm-roadshow-20151231

quote:

---

Before delving into the Sisyphean task of putting together the 100 theater roadshow and some of the problems with individual 70mm screenings you’ve been reading about, it’s important to first remember that while the ability to shoot on film might have recently come back from near death, the battle between digital and film projection has been over for awhile now. Even at the prestigious, filmmaker-friendly New York Film Festival -- whose state of the art facilities are the rare venues still capable of screening 35mm -- movies that were shot on celluloid, like "Carol," "Bridge of Spies" and "Listen Up Philip," have screened digitally (DCP). Recently, only "Inherent Vice" screened there in 35mm and that was big deal.

So the idea of a three-hour 70mm film, shot in Ultra Panavision -- a format for which hasn’t been used since 1964 and has an unruly 2.76:1 aspect ratio -- screening four to five times a day in 100 different commercial theaters that ripped out their 35mm projectors years ago? Ridiculous. Yet that’s what Boston Light and Sound, a speciality projection and sound company, was tasked with early this year when they were approached by The Weinstein Company about "The Hateful Eight" roadshow.

BL&S Co-Founder Chapin Cutler
Boston Light and Sound
BL&S Co-Founder Chapin Cutler
The parameters of this project are nuts," explained Matt Jones, a curator of the Moving Image at the Moving Image Archives at the UNC School of the Arts, who is currently a roadshow projectionist at the AMC Potomac Mills 18 in Virginia. "They don't make parts anymore, there is practically no industry left for film projection. So it's a minor miracle they got it all pulled together in the first place. This is my first time working with BL&S, and I am truly astounded by their expertise and how game they are for all of it. It's a company of techs and engineers, so it must have killed them how quickly this had to move. But between the technical feat itself, the negotiations with 100 disparate venues, and dealing with a Hollywood studio and its timetable everything, has had to pull together fast."

Added BS&L’s co-founder Chapin Cutler, "By any metric, this project should never have come off as it has."

The project began with a nationwide search for 70mm equipment that had been abandoned or destroyed. Because there were not enough working or complete projectors and backup parts, BL&S had to design and manufacture 125 different parts, including gears, shafts, sprockets and rollers. They would also have to manufacture two different anamorphic lenses that could widen the image to accommodate Ultra Panavision’s extremely wide aspect ratio, develop kits that allowed old 35mm platters to handle the extra weight of a 3-hour-and-20-minute 70mm print, and locate and refurbish DTS playback systems to properly play the film’s sound. Oh, and so as to not burden DCP theaters that ripped out their film projectors years ago, all of this would need to be designed as a plug-and-play kit that could be shipped and quickly assembled in projection booths around the country.

To give you a sense of just how vast this undertaking was, watch this three minute tour of all the once obsolete equipment that needed to be found, restored and retrofitted for the roadshow.


The Projectionists

Possibly the hardest job in pulling off the roadshow has fallen on the projectionists. To man 100 booths, BL&S scoured the country for the best possible candidates, reaching out to film festivals and cinema archives, training current projectionists, asking their own technicians to step into the position when necessary, and pulling celluloid projectionists out of retirement.
Hateful Eight Projectionist Jason Garnett
Hateful Eight Projectionist Jason Garnett
The deck is stacked against these technicians right from the get go, with a majority getting their assignments late in December and given at most a day at their roadshow theater to prepare.

"The technician assigned to the venues in Florida told me that when he used to work for a large theatre chain setting up projectors, they would spend a month testing and working out kinks before it was ready for showing," explained Noelle Alemán, a roadshow projectionist stationed at the Regal Kendal Village Stadium 16 in Miami.

The reality is that, while BL&S did an amazing job building the 70mm projection system in time for the roadshow, the projectionists needed even more time to prep for the cobbled together machines. Scott DuVall, projecting "The Hateful Eight" at the AMC Southlake 24 in Morrow, Georgia, told Indiewire, "With the way some of these theaters have been outfitted and, for a lack of a better word, Frankenstein'd together, every venue is a minefield of potential issues to overcome."
"Many of these projectors are practically antiques, the platter systems were never intended to support the weight and size of 70mm," wrote Adam Witner, in an article for Indiewire about his experience projecting for the roadshow. "Dozens of tiny mechanical failures are bound to happen, and part of our job is to make sure small issues don’t propagate into catastrophes."

Alemán told Indiewire about one of her close calls: "[It was] the last 20 minutes of the [show] and the film very nearly fell off of the platter. I caught it in time, but because of how distorted it got, I had to hand-feed the film through the rollers for the last 20 minutes. Let me tell you, that was the most nerve-wracking and agonizing 20 minutes of my life."

Hateful Eight Projectionist Jason Garnett
Hateful Eight Projectionist Jason Garnett
For this article, Indiewire talked to seven different "Hateful Eight" projectionists and all of them told the same story: for every one problem that interferes with one of the roadshow screenings, there are nine near catastrophes they are able to prevent. It's intense and grueling work.

Roadshow projectionists screening the movie four times a day are working 16-hour shifts, while five shows a day means a 20-hour shift, all without a day off for 14 straight days. They are sleep deprived, hungry and most are stationed in a strange city away from their families for Christmas and New Years. What's developed though is a support network amongst the projectionist, who stay in constant contact over their smart phones, lending technical and emotional support.
"I can tell you in all of my years I've never worked with a more talented and dedicated group of people," wrote Cinemark Paradise 24 projectionist Jason Garnett in an email to Indiewire. "What we're pulling off is nothing short of a miracle. It's cinematic history and I know everyone loves being a part of it." And that's what really binds the BL&S employees and their projectionists together more than anything: they are all cinephiles, just as passionate about film being projected as Quentin Tarantino himself.

Hateful Eight
Wrote projectionist Matt Jones:

"I've seen this print 22 times so far. There is no question it's light years better looking than the DCP. The digital files is flat, dull by comparison. And I've had shows that simply couldn't have gone better, but I've also had to stop a few times to work on something, and I'm sure I've disappointed a couple audiences in the process. But what we're doing here is allowing audiences to see what we've lost as a society. It's a glimpse into how things were, and all the effort is worth it when you talk to someone who truly experienced something different than what they've become used to. The excitement is palpable!"

"I'm not naive enough to think we can turn the clock back on an entire industry, but it is my fervent hope that we are engaging our audiences not only with watching film, but that we are opening some eyes to how far the industry has drifted from how it began and thrived for the better part of a century, and maybe even make them consider if that has been for the better or not. We're demonstrating that film is not dead, that there are still true believers ready to rage against the dying of the light!"

As for the problems themselves, most projectionists, with the support of BL&S's 22 roving technicians, feel as if the worst is behind them. They also believe that the problems have been overblown: "Our failed show ratio is way below 1% when you add them all up," reports BL&S's Chapin. "It is unfortunate that they happened. But, as with modern technology, occasional problems do occur. They can’t be avoided."

"No one has done this before, certainly to this extent, by most measures, it has been a success," he concludes. "We have learned from it, and if given the opportunity again, will certainly improve our track record. But, given the response, including audience members waving at the projectionist when they leave the theatre, I believe that Mr. Tarantino and The Weinstein Company have provided an experience many will remember for a very long time."

---

quote: Bill Brandenstein

---

There was visual detail there far superior to the Star Wars IMAX screening we'd just seen, no doubt because it was true 4K, which Star Wars most definitely is not.

---

quote: Buck Wilson

---

Meet the Brave Projectionists Behind 'The Hateful Eight' 70mm Roadshow

---

Y'all are so brave and courageous. And brave. True heroes. It takes some serious balls of steel to run film. Not sure how it's even possible.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-02-2016, 04:18 PM:
 
Joe, BLSI supplied Osram bulbs. Now do you understand the "brave" part?
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 01-02-2016, 06:12 PM:
 
True, the H8 content is 4K, but a good chance that the majority of the DCP screenings are doing 2K presentations.

We're shooting ours through a 2K Barco.
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 01-02-2016, 08:32 PM:
 
Oh no Sam. Someone on the internet claims there was a problem "jam/melt" last night during the overture. He went on to say the rest of the show was fine. Is that true?
 

---

Posted by Manny Montes (Member # 5639) on 01-02-2016, 08:55 PM:
 
it's unfortunate how there is very little unbiased media now, I would have loved to read about the technical aspects of the roll-out and how they handled it, its definitely a feat. Then again I did get to enjoy part of the roll-out so I have a slight idea at least locally about what it took. It seems that with this issue (70mm) there is no middle ground, each article is either "it was a waste of a rollout and tarintino is a big cry baby for a dead medium" or "the public should be honored that these projectionists risked their lives for 70mm film which is basically the next coming of jesus"

I watched it and thought, wow this was great, great vivid color and light on screen. The only perplexing aspect was the format, not sure why he would choose to shoot in a wide format for a movie that is mostly shot indoors and most cinemas don't have screens wide enough to accommodate. But I definitely think these projectionists were "honorable" or anything like that, it was a job they signed up for, yes the hours suck, its tough.
 

---

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 01-02-2016, 09:16 PM:
 
Just chiming in to report on my first screening of the film with the general public - a noonday Saturday show in one of the big houses at Arclight Hollywood. Honestly I'm sort of glad it's there and not in the Dome, as I'm not a big fan of the deep-curve screen in the Dome.

I am happy to report on a near-flawless presentation - no curtain of course, but the large screen (a constant-height screen) was properly masked off to 2.76:1. The image was bright and steady, perfectly in focus, and the sound was great. My only concern is that only a week into the run the print is showing some scratches - the first a light vertical scratch on the left-hand side of the print, for the first 10 minutes or so of the movie. The other scratch is something I don't remember ever seeing before, as it was not vertical but stayed stationary in the middle of the screen towards the top left quadrant - a sort of cross-hatch pattern, only noticeable on bright images.

The audience responded enthusiastically, and it was gratifying to me to see all the hard work from the filmmakers, Weinstein, Datasat and especially Boston Light & Sound paying off through sold-out houses running the show in Ultra Panavision.
 

---

Posted by Sam D. Chavez (Member # 1841) on 01-02-2016, 09:23 PM:
 

quote:

---

Oh no Sam. Someone on the internet claims there was a problem "jam/melt" last night during the overture. He went on to say the rest of the show was fine. Is that true? [Frown] [Frown]

---

quote: Matthew Vaughn

---

Not a fan of the film but the image was very beautiful. The best color rendition I've ever seen.

The projector jammed during the overture and you could see the film melting.

The focus was a bit odd. One second it looked perfect and the next it looked soft.

---

quote: Matthew Vaughn

---

It wasn't a big deal. It was a minute into the overture and we only had to wait about 4 minutes. The rest was excellently presented

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

I have a hard time not taking offense at people trying to claim this effort on the part of BLSI & Weinstein was a failure.

---

Is anyone actually claiming that? I think that the result so far has surpassed most expectations (including mine). The film itself is good and the ticket-buying public is responding to that. The prints seem to have mostly survived intact (so far). And the number of lost 70mm shows seems to be going down (or at least the crazy Internet people have stopped going to see it). In the Boston market (three theaters, two of which are permanent 70mm installations), to my knowledge, there has been exactly one lost 70mm show (at one of the permanent installs; I am told that it was fixed quickly), and that was due to a freak mid-show part failure, not an installation, maintenance, or operator problem. I am sure that many other markets have had similar success rates.

I give QT and TWC (and BL&S and everyone else involved with this) a huge amount of credit for trying to do somthing different and special with this release. I don't know what the expectations were for boxoffice grosses, but the press seems to think that the H8 grosses are very good thus far. I hope that other distributors and filmmakers take note and consider doing more 70mm releases in the future. Next time, maybe the press screenings will go better.
 

---

Posted by Mike Babb (Member # 1379) on 01-03-2016, 09:30 AM:
 
Hi Sam, I countered Joes jokes with a bacon and shit sandwich, I'm familiar with his comments over the years and I wrote my reply with a smile. Also most of us in the industry are familiar with the shit sandwich, with or without bacon.

Anyway, the information on here, concerning the shutter light leakage as just one example, addressed by your response, Louis and Brad as well, is very valuable. I'm sure next week at Sundance we'll all be sitting around at meals swapping stories and knowledge and jokes about H8, just as it is happening here virtually. I'd be happy to have Adam Witmer at the table.
 

---

Posted by Sally Strasser (Member # 211) on 01-03-2016, 11:23 AM:
 
I have gotten useful information from this board for years, and appreciate it!

The hardest part of the job is remaining attentive and consistent when you don't have that much sleep...it's not a hard job but attention to detail and cleanliness is imperative of course.

Last night I even looked up the term "film spoking" here...forgot the term for it but knew what it was...

There's a lot of great info in here, and I'm glad Film-tech is here!

So far my print is clean and without a scratch...hoping to return the print in this condition!

And Mike, see you at Sundance!
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-03-2016, 12:51 PM:
 

quote: Mike Babb

---

Yet most of 100 working right now projecting film are not here. Why do you think that is? My guess is it's a bit like a bacon and shit sandwich. Regardless of how much you like bacon, it still leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

I never signed any NDA, but I have had inside knowledge of a decent amount of what has been going on over the last several months.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

I don't understand your competition comment. Film-Tech is not in competition with BLSI. I would have never accepted the contract to source and rebuild 100 systems.

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

The reason people post more to facebook and so forth is because people want to play around on their phones all the time and it's quite simply...easy.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Is anyone actually claiming that? I think that the result so far has surpassed most expectations (including mine). The film itself is good and the ticket-buying public is responding to that.

---

quote: Quentin Tarantino

---

Just to let you guys know, most of the projectionists showing the film around the country are showing it on a platter system. Uh where it’s just like they put it all on one big giant platter and then they play it that way it’s like less idiot proof. Uh… however, uh rather than idiots do it I’d rather it be done that way… however… as the people who know know, the best way to show it is on a changeover system where like each reel is on a different projector and you’re changing over. And that’s the way it’s really… the right way to be done. And that’s how they do it here!

---

quote:

---

But wait! Those changeover marks are on the plattered prints as well!

---

quote:

---

A good projectionist will make either (platter or changeover) a success and a bad projectionist will make either fail.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

I’ve seen bad changeover shows as well, where every other reel was slightly out of frame.

---

Not to mention ones in which one of the lamphouses has a worn-out bulb and/or rectifier diodes, resulting in 20-minute changes between a steady, bright picture and a dim, flickery one.

The origins of changeover elitism were in the FIAF film archives in the 1960s and '70s, when FIAF's technical commission responded to the invention of platters (and towers) by deciding that cutting the leaders and tails off a print was a more sinful act than sodomizing your first born child, and that nothing could possibly be done to a print on a changeover installation that could ever cause that much harm. Their anti-platter fatwa remains in place to this day, and I have known of cases of well-maintained platter houses run by professionals being denied prints, while dirty and poorly maintained changeover booths run by projectionists whose skills base barely extended beyond threading and rewinding were regularly allowed to screen priceless and irreplaceable prints.

About the only substantive argument I can think of to support the archives' platter-phobia is that an error or accident in a changeover house is only likely to damage one reel (or half the print, if it's a projector fault that goes undetected for the entire show), whereas the equivalent problem in a platter house will damage the entire print.

Otherwise, either system in the hands of a professional will deliver a good presentation and an undamaged print, and vice-versa.
 

---

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 01-03-2016, 11:55 PM:
 
File this one under 'platter myths'.

Platters are advantageous is so many ways...the fact that you don't need to rewind the film after each show clearly means less handling...and once you add FilmGuard there is no contest.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-04-2016, 12:29 AM:
 

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

About the only substantive argument I can think of to support the archives' platter-phobia is that an error or accident in a changeover house is only likely to damage one reel (or half the print, if it's a projector fault that goes undetected for the entire show), whereas the equivalent problem in a platter house will damage the entire print.

---

Indeed this is about the only legitimate argument I've heard for reel to reel, BUT reel to reel houses should never "build up" their prints onto large reels or it defeats much of the purpose. Also even if half of the print is damaged and half is fine, what good is the print at that point anyway? Half a damaged print still = a damaged print.

Let's also not forget that historically on prints that were run on changeovers, the head and tail of each reel becomes FAR more worn than a print ran on a platter over time. Also often there is an obnoxious "parade" of cue marks distracting even more from the presentation. It's also not uncommon to find stretched or damaged sprockets at the head and tail of the reels (typically when "built-up" to larger reels).

I've said it hundreds of times...and this is assuming there is a competent projectionist involved...if a venue is going to show the print less than 3 or maybe 4 times, it's better to run it reel to reel on changeovers using the original shipping rolls (no build-up). If a venue is going to run the print more than 3-4 times, it's best to platter it. That statement is based upon as I said, a competent operator and to achieve the overall least wear inflicted to a print during projection.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-04-2016, 12:38 AM:
 
It can happen without any building up. If, for example, a roller binds or a piece of abrasive crud lodges in a particularly destructive spot in the film path, and that is combined with a "projectionist" who doesn't feel the need to inspect or clean the film path between reels, then reels 1, 3 and 5 or 2, 4 and 6 are going to get scratched. I have encountered many prints, including ones in the collections of FIAF member archives, that have scratching, perforation or other mechanical damage on either the odd or the even-numbered reels, so it does happen.

If you're an archive that preserves the source IN from which the print has been struck, then the cost of reprinting three reels is not as bad as that of reprinting six.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-04-2016, 12:47 AM:
 
True, but in common practice, how often does that scenario actually happen, where new reels are actually printed?
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 01-04-2016, 02:09 AM:
 
Re: public relations argument-
I don't think anyone here, even the most cynical, intended to directly put down any operators. Even the "It's fucking hard" guy... perhaps he didn't mean "threading a projector is more difficult than pushing a solid state Irem rectifier equipped XeTron console up a narrow flight of stairs alone" type of hard but more of a "the whole scope of this project and task as a job, including the long hours, is exhausting". And of course we can't dismiss how journalists twist words and quote out of context. I've had it happen to me. It's not fun.

Face it, I'm quite sure nearly every single soul still in the film industry is there by choice. Despite possible difficulties. Because it's, as we all know, rewarding as fuck.

This forum is VERY intimidating to walk into as a new user. But if you're committed, and read up, you'll realize there's a reason for everything and that it is one of the best functioning forums on the web. It's more of a working, operable archive. You respect it like a high class library. Be quiet!

Re: Quentin Tarantino-
First of all, Hats off. Mad respect. It takes balls to demand this type of exhibition, and I thank you deeply for it.

BUT

It truly infuriates me that you a) seem to not have a goddamn clue about what happens in a booth and b) with that lack of knowledge, spew utter bullshit about equipment you know nothing about. Come on. Read up. Don't make yourself like like a dummy in front of your biggest fans. Beyond that, you're spreading dirty dirty misinformation to the general public who knows nothing about exhibition and will take your word for it, and bam, whole new generation of people who don't know what they're talking about.

You should register so we here and yourself can work TOGETHER on your next project!

****We're ANGRY because we CARE!****
 

---

Posted by Rick Cohen (Member # 6140) on 01-04-2016, 04:02 AM:
 
After watching the video, I think QT was only trying to convey to the audience that a changeover booth is something rare and cool, and he was very excited to be in a theatre that had that capability. In explaining the difference between plattering a print and using a changeover system, he used a poor choice of words, but I do not think his intention was to imply that people who run prints off a platter system are idiots, only that it is (generally speaking) more difficult to run a changeover booth.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-04-2016, 06:35 AM:
 
Nah...Changeovers are the best! Always have been always will be. Check out the "mods" that may need to be done to keep the AW370 from scratching in low humidity climate months. Or if precise timing is performed...etc.

I agree that building up the reels for the changeover people was not the best idea. It was presented to me as a shipping cost savings since half the reels/cans would be required. The built reels, in my opinion were too heavy. 2-reels of 70mm is the same weight at 5-reels of 35mm and you are going to have to lift that above your head and hit a 1/2" target on each reel. From a presentation standpoint, if you can make 4 good changeovers, you can make 9 good ones. I'll put my changeover prints, after the run up against anyone's platter prints. Since I clean on the rewind and put on extra leader for handling, and rewind at reasonable speeds with gradual acceleration, I never had a problem of this "extra handling" that others allude to.

As a percentage of prints run for the 1-week exclusive (and by category), how many of the prints received permanent damage (visible scratches, burned frames or otherwise needing a splice) in platter versus the reel-to-reel venues? And how about as a percentage of the method?

The more one dumbs down the operation, the more you cultivate that level of person. While there are many that will continue to rise to the occasion to give their level-best regardless of the circumstance, it is against human nature (which tends towards lazy/easy) to sit next to a machine for over 3-hours waiting and still paying absolute attention. I'm not saying it can't be done (I've done it a lot, myself and let me tell you running "Sophie's Choice" on a platter for a season is one boring job in a single).
 

---

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 01-04-2016, 06:47 AM:
 
The rewind/extra handling remark doesn't apply to you, Steve.
 

---

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 01-04-2016, 07:23 AM:
 
Anyone have an idea about the Regal Atlantic Station 70MM showing for the local Atlanta guys? Checked out the reddit thread , but saw no responses that were informative about the projection quality in that theater for this roadshow.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-04-2016, 12:24 PM:
 

quote: Brad Miller

---

True, but in common practice, how often does that scenario actually happen, where new reels are actually printed?

---

quote: Steve Guttag

---

As a percentage of prints run for the 1-week exclusive (and by category), how many of the prints received permanent damage (visible scratches, burned frames or otherwise needing a splice) in platter versus the reel-to-reel venues? And how about as a percentage of the method?

---

quote:

---

I is there an additional charge to see HATEFUL EIGHT in 70mm if the digital version was also playing in the same complex?

---

At least at my theater (Century 12 Evanston), there is a price difference. Adult for digital is $10.15 non-matinee while 70mm (AKA "special program") is $12.90. No matinee for 70mm either.
 

---

Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 01-06-2016, 06:51 PM:
 
Is there a reason that this film would NOT play on a Kinoton 35/70 machine? I noticed today that the ArcLight Hollywood is running their print from what I take to be a BLS machine, a Century JJ with a Christie console. I know for a fact there are several 70mm capable Kinotons in this complex, I've seen them in person, and almost a years ago today I watched Inherent Vice from one of them. The image from this machine wasn't the last word in steadiness either, there was was noticeable jitter, mostly on the Overture card and the chapter titles. The print itself was in pretty good shape, but there was some roller scratches throughout, mostly only noticeable on the bright exteriors.



PERFECT masking, dead nuts on. Tarantino was pissed that he didn't get the Dome, but Auditorium #3 is more than large enough.


 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 01-06-2016, 07:14 PM:
 
I am running it on a AA Norelco at the Grand Lake in Oakland CA.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 01-06-2016, 07:23 PM:
 
Yes, that's one of the BLS projectors in your photo.

quote: Mark Ogden

---

Is there a reason that this film would NOT play on a Kinoton 35/70 machine?

---

quote: Jim Cassidy

---

Hateful 8 Requires a custom sized aperture plate.

---

quote: Mark Ogden

---

The image from this machine wasn't the last word in steadiness either, there was was noticeable jitter

---

quote: Bill Brandenstein

---

Please explain how it would differ from a normal 2.20:1 plate, thanks.

---

quote: Sam King

---

I believe the only 35/70 Kinoton projector at Arclight Hollywood is in the Dome.

---

If nothing has changed since this photo was taken in 2009, then it certainly is a Kinoton at the Dome:


 

---

Posted by Jerry Axelsson (Member # 3175) on 01-07-2016, 04:40 PM:
 
When I was there in the booth in 2013, the Kinoton FP-75E was still installed and ready for use.


 

---

Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 01-07-2016, 05:40 PM:
 

quote: Steve Guttag

---

multiple prints have been identified with a shaky reel 1A and a static card, like the Overture Card is going to shine a light on it. Odds are, the image shake you saw was NOT an artifact of the JJ.

---

quote: Buck Wilson

---

last show for the 70mm

---

quote: Geoff Jones

---

The 70MM showings appear to be done in Denver also. What's the story? Are the prints being moved to other theaters? Or are they simply being retired so that the theaters don't have to keep paying projectionists?

---

quote: Jonathan Goeldner

---

here in the Washington DC area - the AFI Silver is presenting it still in 70mm til next Thursday. (which by the way when I saw it on the 7th - was a truly outstanding presentation)

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

The news reports from December note Warner is interested in doing a 70mm Batman vs. Superman release

---

quote: Jesse Skeen

---

Any reason why Hateful Eight, having an intermission, wasn't run as two separate films?

---

quote: Jesse Skeen

---

Seems a waste to just have film running for the length of the intermission, though I suppose that saves anyone from having to go upstairs more often.

---

quote: Jesse Skeen

---

Any reason why Hateful Eight, having an intermission, wasn't run as two separate films?

---

quote: Mike Heenan

---

I'd find it hard to believe EVERY location had someone in the booth at all times.

---

quote: Mark Hajducki

---

Was the intermission black film or something more robust (such as fullcoat magnetic for 35mm). Was the douser closed for the intermission?

---

quote: Buck Wilson

---

At least at the location I saw it at, just standard black film, douser open, projected on screen.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Yes, the intermission reel is processed, black film with DTS timecode. It shows up as "reel 13" on a DTS XD20.

---

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Was the "reel 13" thing designed to prevent reel-to-reel houses from cutting the intermission short, since the "reel 13" timecode would prevent an early changeover into a lower-numbered reel?

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

How long can a reel by in the DTS/Datasat system? Can you have, say, 2 "reels" for a two hour movie? Or one reel per disc? Or are they limited by 20 minutes for some reason? Is there a reason that the system uses "reels" at all? I see no need for DTS/Datasat reels to match real life film reels. Just as long as it sees the timecode it plays the proper spot.

---

quote: Daniel Schulz

---

There is also an absolute mathematical limit to the length of a DTS reel, but to be honest I don't remember what it is - around an hour or so I think. I remember there being one or two one-off special venue shows that came to us as a continuous long-play printmaster, and we had to create an arbitrary "reel change."

---

quote: Daniel Schulz

---

Even in the digital cinema era, DCPs are still typically delivered as reels, or perhaps I should say "reels."

---

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

Most of the DCPs that I receive (including almost all of the Deluxe/Technicolor ones) simply have one large MXF file each for the pic and sound.

---

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

The splitting into reels feature is a bit like VFs and XML-encoded subtitles: it isn't used very much.

---

I don't know where that's coming from, either. In the above listed DCPs, they all had VFs for 7.1 audio (where applicable) and/or open captions (for hard-of-hearing).

The recent release "Youth" even had timed-text ("XML") open caption subtitles (for foreign spoken language) and timed-text closed captions in the same DCP.

I *will* give you, however, that for brief on-screen language translation, it is common to just burn-in the subtitles.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-17-2016, 01:40 PM:
 
The last few Deluxe/Technicolor titles I can remember looking at are Carol, Far From Heaven and the Indiana Jones trilogy, and they all had a single video and audio file.
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 01-17-2016, 01:48 PM:
 
My experience mirrors Adam's. Note I did have an issue with one site on "Youth" and it didn't want to transfer theatre-to-theatre. It would fail hash...implying that the files were altered in some manner after authoring. They would load fine from CRU to server though.
 

---

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 01-17-2016, 04:34 PM:
 
The release version of "Carol" most definitely has reel breaks. The package name is Carol_FTR-1_F_EN-EN-CCAP_US_51-VI_2K_WC_20151116_DTB_IOP_OV.

We had the same problem with "Youth" not transferring screen-to-screen with Dolby servers, but working fine from the TMS.

The Dolby logs showed in each case the transfer stopped the on-screen subtitle file, which were just named as UUIDs instead of a typical .ttf file name. We sent the error up the chain to Deluxe and never heard back.

Now back to your regularly-scheduled Hateful Eight discussion!
 

---

Posted by Chris Walker (Member # 9283) on 01-18-2016, 03:14 PM:
 
Hey Paul, you might be interested to know that the 70 mm print and film projector is still at Parisian 20 in West Palm Beach...yet to be picked up. No word yet on whether we would get a 70 mm Batman vs. Superman.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 01-18-2016, 03:43 PM:
 
I'm not surprised that the equipment is still there. However I am surprised that the print is still there.
 

---

Posted by David J Hilsgen (Member # 2614) on 01-29-2016, 01:49 AM:
 
How many 70 prints are still running?
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-29-2016, 01:50 AM:
 
Mine is...but we only opened it January 14th here.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 01-29-2016, 06:01 AM:
 
Unless anyone has picked it up since the initial release, the US seems to be down to twelve 70mm venues:

AFI Silver Theatre
Alamo Drafthouse Ritz
ArcLight Hollywood 15
ArcLight La Jolla 14
Arclight Sherman Oaks
Grand Lakes 4
Hollywood Theatre
Ronnie's 20
Somerville 5
The Landmark
Tower Theatre 3
Village East Cinemas 7
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 01-29-2016, 10:51 AM:
 
I've heard rumors from three different sources (one usually pretty reliable)
that the 70mm HF-8 might make a short return to some venues if it wins
one, or all three, of the Academy Awards it was nominated for.

I know the print and projector are still just sitting at the theater I was
assigned to, and I got an inquisitive e-mail the other day asking about
my availability. But, as I said, at this point it seems to be just a rumor.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 01-29-2016, 08:02 PM:
 
Grand Lake is still running its 70mm print. 3 weeks screen two, 2 weeks screen one and now back to screen 2.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-04-2016, 12:01 PM:
 
Based on online showtime listings, it appears that this is down to 8-10 theatres in the US as of tomorrow:

AFI Silver Theatre
ArcLight Hollywood 15
ArcLight La Jolla 14
Hollywood Theatre
Ronnie's 20
Somerville 5
Tower Theatre 3
Village East Cinemas 7

H8 is also listed as playing at the Alamo Drafthouse Ritz and The Landmark (both previously 70mm locations), but neither specifically lists it as being 70mm.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 02-04-2016, 12:38 PM:
 
At the Grand Lake H8 moves to screen 4 which is digital only. It will be the standard digital version without intermission. We are keeping the print for a few week incase we will show it again in 70mm.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-04-2016, 01:31 PM:
 
I played print #52 at the Aero, Santa Monica last night, and it appeared to be a new and unused copy. No trace of any fingerprints or as much as a spec of dust anywhere on it, and the heads and tails were all uncut. Whoever scribed the changeover cues onto it must have been wearing gloves, as must anyone who projected it before, if it has been.

I wonder if they ended up striking more prints than were needed for the initial run, with the result that we got a virgin one that was left over. In any case, it looked and sounded great.
 

---

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 02-04-2016, 05:09 PM:
 
Not 70mm, of course, but Tarantino now has brought his flick home to roost at the New Beverly Cinema, where it's playing all month in various combinations of double features and a few single shows in the evening, and the "multiplex version" at some midnight screenings. So that means there's 35mm available in both the roadshow and conventional versions.
 

---

Posted by Rachael Barbash (Member # 5158) on 02-04-2016, 08:06 PM:
 
We're entering our 4th week with the print at Gateway Film Center in Columbus.

Something new happened last night. Around reel 8 the DTS reader on the projector stopped reading so we lost sound. Our tech came in this morning and adjusted the roller above the projector head. His thought was that the angle was bad going by the DTS therefore it couldn't read it.

Since then we haven't lost sound but I have noticed that the DTS's green light will flash sometimes, making me think the sound will go out again, but so far it always comes back on. Do you think this is again caused by a bad angle? Dirty film?...
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 02-04-2016, 08:10 PM:
 
Funny story going around about how the guitar smashed in the second half of the film turned out to be a priceless 145-year-old Martin, on loan from the Martin factory to the movie production. It was supposed to be swapped out with a replica for the smash, except no one told Kurt Russell about that. Others claim Tarantino set up the smash on purpose in order to get the genuine reaction he got out Jennifer Jason Leigh in that scene.

Here's the article:

quote:

---

Martin Responds to “Hateful Eight” Destruction of Antique Six String

Feb 04, 2016 by Chris McMahon

Reverb’s story “The Hateful Eight” Hates on Six Strings” contains information about the destruction of the priceless 145-years-old instrument that Dick Boak, director of the museum, archives and special projects for C.F. Martin & Co., says the company was not previously aware of.

In the film, John Ruth, played by Kurt Russell, grabs a guitar from Daisy Domergue, played by Jennifer Jason Leigh, and smashes it, eliciting horror. However, the smashed guitar was an authentic Martin from the 1870s, on loan from the Martin Guitar Museum, rather than one of several copies on hand for the shoot.

“We were informed that it was an accident on set,” Boak says. “We assumed that a scaffolding or something fell on it. We understand that things happen, but at the same time we can’t take this lightly. All this about the guitar being smashed being written into the script and that somebody just didn’t tell the actor, this is all new information to us. We didn’t know anything about the script or Kurt Russell not being told that it was a priceless, irreplaceable artifact from the Martin Museum.”

According to the film’s Academy Award-winning sound mixer Mark Ulano, as quoted in SSNInsider.com, the scene was to be shot up to a certain point, a cut made, the guitar swapped out for a double and for the double to be smashed. “Well, somehow that didn’t get communicated to Kurt, so when you see that happen on the frame, Jennifer’s reaction is genuine,” Ulano said, as quoted in SSNInsider.com.

As a result of the incident, the company will no longer loan guitars to movies under any circumstances.”

Further, Boak says that Martin did not offer a replacement, as stated in the SSNInsider.com. "As a result of the incident, the company will no longer loan guitars to movies under any circumstances,” Boak says.

To add insult to injury, Boak says the guitar was insured for its purchase price, which doesn’t reflect its value as an irreplaceable museum artifact. Boak also says that Martin requested that the pieces be returned for a possible restoration, not for inclusion in the Martin Museum as stated in SSNInsider.com. “Upon inspection of the pieces, we realized that the guitar was beyond fixing,” Boak said. “It’s destroyed.”

“We want to make sure that people know that the incident was very distressing to us,” Boak says. “We can’t believe that it happened. I don’t think anything can really remedy this. We’ve been remunerated for the insurance value, but it’s not about the money. It’s about the preservation of American musical history and heritage.”

* * * * *

Link to original Reverb story:

“The Hateful Eight” Hates on Six Strings: Film Includes Real Destruction of Antique Martin

Feb 02, 2016 by Chris McMahon

Amidst all the violence in Quentin Tarantino’s latest film “The Hateful Eight” is the scene in which John Ruth, played by Kurt Russell, grabs a guitar from Daisy Domergue, played by Jennifer Jason Leigh, and smashes it, eliciting horror.

“What was supposed to happen was we were supposed to go up to that point, cut and trade guitars and smash the double,” explains the film’s Academy Award-winning sound mixer Mark Ulano, as quoted in SSNInsider.com. “Well, somehow that didn’t get communicated to Kurt, so when you see that happen on the frame, Jennifer’s reaction is genuine.”

The victim was an authentic Martin from the 1870s, on loan from the Martin Guitar Museum, Ulano said, and everyone was pretty freaked out when they realized what happened. “Tarantino was in a corner of the room with a funny curl on his lips, because he got something out of it with the performance,” Ulano added.

Martin Museum representatives asked only two questions when informed about the destruction of the loaner, according to SSNInsider.com: “Do you need another one?" And "Can we please have all the pieces to display in our museum?”

“The Hateful Eight” is set in the years just after the American Civil War, which ran from 1861 to 1865. While the film earns points for authenticity in terms of the guitar, the song played by Domergue is the traditional Australian folk ballad "Jim Jones at Botany Bay," which was published in 1907, almost four decades after when the film was set.

---

quote: Paul Mayer

---

Funny story going around about how the guitar smashed in the second half of the film turned out to be a priceless 145-year-old Martin, on loan from the Martin factory to the movie production.

---

Jennifer Jason Leigh did a Q & A after the Aero screening I officiated at yesterday evening at the Aero. She said that she rehearsed a scene with the guitar many times, coveted it and was prepared to buy it as a souvenir of her role in the production, and was devastated when it got smashed.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-08-2016, 12:45 AM:
 
My schedule has been quite busy as of late, but here they are...finally.

Once the Weinstein systems were dropped into place by BLSI, Dan Lyons and myself went into all of the Texas sites and made adjustments and improvements to the systems as needed. We then handled training and staffing by a great group of projectionists.

The 7 sites Film-Tech oversaw:

Cinemark West Plano (Plano, TX)
Lead operator: Emma Tomiak
Backup operator: Dan Lyons

AMC Gulf Pointe (Houston, TX)
Lead operator: Bill Martin
Backup operator: Aaron Sisemore

Edwards Greenway (Houston, TX)
Lead operator: Eric Richard
Backup operators: Tyler Mann, Aaron Sisemore

Santikos Palladium (San Antonio, TX)
Lead operator: Paul Hemme
Backup operators: Tim Walls, Manny Knowles, Tyler Mann

Cinemark Pflugerville (Pflugerville, TX)
Lead operator: Jonathan Froes (ended up running all shows)
Backup operator: Tyler Mann

AMC Parks (Arlington, TX)
Lead operator: Jeremy Spracklen (ended up running all shows)
Backup operators: Brad Miller, Dan Lyons

AMC Northpark (Dallas, TX)
Lead operator: Brad Miller
Backup operator: Dan Lyons

Photos from the 70mm Hateful Eight engagements from the Film-Tech group

Also...

70mm Hateful Eight at the AMC Parks video

If anyone has photos or videos from any of the other theaters that ran Hateful Eight in 70mm (even if they were not on Weinstein equipment), please consider sending them in to me so I can add them to the archive here to preserve for the future. (This archive will be around essentially forever. Websites such as Instagram and Facebook are not archival.)
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 02-08-2016, 07:00 AM:
 
That is fantastic. Gorgeous. Good job guys!!

I like the color coded rollers. Did you do that or BL&S?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-08-2016, 11:34 AM:
 
Buck, that was a new thing for me. I had never done any sort of color coding before on the rollers before. Historically when I've trained people on 70mm before I simply made sure the leader had a black "soundtrack" line drawn down the outboard edge of the leader so the entire process was very familiar to them. The "soundtrack line" is super easy to mark by positioning a Sharpie marker on a bracket lightly pressing into the soundtrack area of the leader next to a roller, then just turn the projector motor on to draw that line.

Since every 35mm projectionist understands "soundtrack edge", that has always been more than sufficient to prevent "ERUTREVO" threading mistakes in 70mm. However since BLSI made up special red/green leaders for this release instead of a soundtrack line, I just went with it, right down to putting little strips of red and green tape on the top of the dts reader and in the soundhead just above the failsafe. Color coding the platter rollers was simply a way to foolproof anyone running the shows that had not ran 70mm in recent years (which was most of them) and was nothing more than 1/2 inch red and green electrical tape.

While yes I know historically 70mm has no "soundtrack edge" (since 3 channels of magnetic audio are on each edge), ever since dts70 came around it actually DOES have a soundtrack edge just like 35mm.

I chose electrical tape because it removes easily in the event the equipment is relocated to a different auditorium/theater and the threading orientation changed. That way the marks were in no way permanent.

Yeah those markings were overkill and unnecessary for most everyone running our screens, but the possibility that an operator could get sick and we would have to call in a backup that had not ran that particular site, it just made sense to mark them all. It only took maybe 5 minutes max per site to do. (Frustratingly it did however take us probably 15-20 minutes per site to rub off the red and green scribble marks all over the edges of the rollers from the installers that marked some of the rollers backwards. I wish they had used electrical tape, as whatever they used did not come off easily and it was fresh at the time.)
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 02-08-2016, 11:37 AM:
 
Great pics Brad, thanks for posting them.

I am wondering, what was that funky looking automation I saw on some of the consoles with the big red, green and yellow (orange?) lights? Is that something that BLSI whipped up? It looks like they also used VFD's...
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-08-2016, 11:43 AM:
 
Yup, that was a BLSI design. Someone directly linked to the project like Michael Schaffer (who I think still lurks around here from time to time) could explain in more detail, but essentially BLSI ditched all of the original Century projector motors and installed new 3 phase motors with power inverters on them, which was a great decision. It wasn't an "automation" of any sort really, just a way to start and stop the motor. They did however loop the failsafe (which did not read cues, just triggered when the film tailed out) and a homebrew tension roller on the platter into the inverter, so if either tripped it would open the lamphouse interlock circuit to kill the lamp and stop the motor. Very simple, nothing fancy, but it did the core job.

We did however remove all of those homebrew tension failsafes from our screens (along with the silly PTRs). We didn't unwire the tension rollers, but I saw too much potential for scratching on the tension roller bracket and there were occasional issues with them triggering when they shouldn't. It would have been impossible for our sites to have had a brain wrap, tail wrap or a thrown print anyway since we were all running FilmGuard and had platter safety rings...so I just removed them from the platters.
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 02-08-2016, 11:54 AM:
 
Cool, thanks.

Glad the chose the 3-phase motor route..as in some cases 3 phase motors are cheaper than their single phase counterparts. Plus, they are now ready if anyone wants to do something in any speed other than 24fps.

Simple is definitely better for failsafe/automation in many cases.

As for the tension rollers, were there ever any that worked right? I don't recall any that did in all my years in the service biz and running film.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-08-2016, 01:06 PM:
 
I might have missed some product out there, but Neumade had a pretty good concept. It was a weighted roller on a vertical pulley (similar to a SPECO platter's takeup). Basically when the payout tension became greater than the weight of that roller which moved up and down, the roller would lift up off of the microswitch and still have about 8 feet of film that could continue to be pulled while the projector was ramping down.

SPECO integrated this design into their LP-271 platter, but the elevator was quite short so it only bought a few feet of ramp down damage.

Most other failsafe tension systems were nothing more than a roller on a hinge that lifted up an inch, so by the time it lifted up, damage that had already occurred was permitted to get worse as the system slowed down to a stop. That's what the BLSI/Weinstein contraption was. Getting the springs on those just right is also difficult, whereas Neumade's concept of simply changing the weight of the tension/accumulator roller was far more precise and repeatable.

The BLSI systems had a 10 second ramp up and a 10 second ramp down. I had suggested the 10 second ramp time to Chapin close to a year ago and apparently he agreed with the idea since that's how they shipped out. I didn't however think to mention to him at the time I preferred a 5 second ramp down at the time though. The reason is if there is a need to get the system to stop quickly, 10 seconds is an awful lot of film to keep yanking. As the Weinstein systems were only running for 2 weeks, I didn't want to alter any of the factory programming, so I just left it. The mods I made in no way altered the original design of their system. For example leaving the tension roller underneath the platter or coiled up under the lamphouse, or even packing the PTR roller back into the shipping boxes made no permanent alteration to the system that couldn't be put back within a couple of minutes by a non-tech.

I've never really liked any of them though. Having abandoned the idea of running film dry close to 30 years ago, I've never had, nor had any theaters I'm aware of, have a brain wrap when using FilmGuard, so they are nothing more than a waste of money and a potential show-killer to me.
 

---

Posted by Tim Asten (Member # 4051) on 02-08-2016, 05:13 PM:
 
Is that Victoria 8-70 new? Cinemeccanica seem to imply that they are available on their website. Also was film-slap a major issue on this machine?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-08-2016, 10:51 PM:
 
The machine didn't look new. I think it was just refurbished, but who knows. The image was perfectly steady though.

None of the Weinstein projectors had any of their 35mm parts (nor mag penthouses/heads). So as far as the one format of film these machines could run, no the V8 could not run polyester 70mm without scratching it "as is" with any lower loop size. That's why I added the extra idler roller that you saw in the pics to hold the film at an angle necessary to form the lower loop without the film slapping up against the pad roller.
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 02-09-2016, 01:10 PM:
 
What was causing the scratching on the Vic 8 we used to run a lot of poly stock in70 on them with out issues so rather curious
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-09-2016, 01:42 PM:
 
Weren't there both straight and curved gate options with the Vic 8? If so, maybe that has something to do with it.

I used a pair in the '90s, including regular 70mm, and cannot recall that we had any scratching issues. But those prints were probably all acetate and it's been at least 15 years since I've touched one, so I'm probably misremembering.
 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 02-09-2016, 02:28 PM:
 
May as well be a completist:
Onion AV Club

quote:

---

Win a limited-edition vinyl copy of The Hateful Eight soundtrack
By Katie Rife@futureschlock
Feb 9, 2016 1:53 PM
Ennio Morricone was recently nominated for an Oscar for his work on The Hateful Eight, a well-deserved accolade for a legendary composer whose style has become synonymous with the spaghetti Western genre. A vinyl pressing of the Hateful Eight soundtrack was released by Jack White’s Third Man Records—and quickly sold out—late last year. But now film soundtrack freaks, analog fetishists, and anyone who likes to pretend they’re engaged in a tense standoff while they’re washing the dishes have another chance to get a copy of Morricone’s excellent score on wax.

The Verve Music Group is releasing a deluxe double-LP collectors’ edition of The Hateful Eight soundtrack, including the score as conducted by Morricone and performed live at Abbey Road, as well as snippets of dialogue from the film and pop tracks from The White Stripes and Roy Orbison. The A.V. Club is giving away five copies of this special hand-stamped, limited edition release, of which only 1,000 will be made. It also comes with a digital download of the soundtrack, CD, and Hateful Eight litho print, and retails for $136.

To enter to win one for free, send an email to avcontests@theonion.com with the subject line “The Hateful Eight.” Please be sure to include your full name and mailing address in the body of the email. U.S. entrants only. We’ll select our winners, at random, from eligible entries on Friday, February 16. Winners will be emailed directly with further instructions for claiming their prize.

---

quote: Tony Bandiera Jr

---

It looks like they also used VFD's...

---

Tony- here's a close up of the VFD module panel. BLS had
them programmed with a full 10sec ramp-up 24fps, which
made start-up very smooth on the projector, film & platters.


What you see in the photo is only the control panel, there's
a compact box of associated electronics mounted inside
the console. I liked these units so much I've already ordered
one online for a future project I have in mind. I got it for only
a couple hundred bux so it wasn't too expensive.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-09-2016, 06:27 PM:
 
Gordon, please pardon the very crude drawing.



Basically without the second idler (from a Century JJ) that I put onto the machine, the emulsion side of the film would rub up against the bottom of the pad roller (as I so poorly drew on the picture above).

The 70mm polyester film simply would not wrap snugly around that thin idler directly below the intermittent pad roller because of the stiffness of the film and the lack of any real tension at that point.

Installing a second idler roller below the existing idler caused the film to be pulled downward at about the 11:00 to 12:00 position of the first idler roller instead of at 9:00 without the second idler roller.

We tried it with the smallest possible loop all the way up to a loop so big it slapped into the turret. And yes we tried EVERY loop size, incrementing it one perforation at a time. The machine absolutely could not be threaded at any loop size without laying scratches on the emulsion while using the test reel which was the same film stock, same lab, same everything as the feature. There were 3 of us that witnessed it and if you want to take a look, I did shoot a few videos as examples.

Here is a short video of the smallest loop we could make on the machine. This is from 0FPS all the way up to 24FPS at about the 38 second mark. (This is a slow motion video.)

Here is a short video of a loop 1 perforation larger. This is from 0FPS all the way up to 24FPS at about the 38 second mark. (This is also a slow motion video.)

It only got worse from there as the loop was made larger and larger.

Now there was a pre-threaded hole there that the Century idler fit right into, so my question is (since it's been 20 years since I've ran a V8), what roller USED to be there? Was it a 35/70 roller? What was the intended 70mm threading path on a fully equipped 35mm/70mm machine?

Regardless, we did what we had to do to ensure the print didn't get a mark on it.
 

---

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 02-09-2016, 07:11 PM:
 
I wonder if that threaded hole was part of the (removed) 35mm optical sound head assembly.
 

---

Posted by Ron Lacheur (Member # 1126) on 02-09-2016, 08:27 PM:
 
It's for the roller that sits on top of the sound drum. The arm is spring loaded and you move and hold it up while threading around the drum.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-09-2016, 08:50 PM:
 
Thanks Ron, that is how I remembered it (I just didn't trust my memory on the V8 since I don't have a lot of time on that machine). I've no idea how a V8 could run the current polyester 70mm then without laying some level of scratches on the print. The videos I posted on the previous page should be more than ample proof.

I would assume in Canada there is a certain amount of the film behaving differently due to the climate, but I have noticed with Interstellar and Hateful Eight that these 70mm polyester prints of late simply aren't the same as 70mm polyester prints of before (such as Titanic, Vertigo, etc). In fact when I was setting up Interstellar last year Paramount loaned me their only surviving reel of Titanic to use and it behaved as I remembered, but the Interstellar was stiff and curled pretty bad.
 

---

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 02-09-2016, 08:56 PM:
 
Pages 47 and 51 of the Vic 8 operation manual show the 35mm optical, 35mm magnetic and 70mm magnetic threading paths. The magnetic threading paths do not have the optical head and damper in the film path to smooth out the flapping of the film from the intermittent movement.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-10-2016, 08:22 AM:
 
Brad--what is the issue with the timecode on reel 8? I can confirm as of last night that the print at Somerville tracks perfectly fine (steady LED) throughout the entire reel. This is with new-ish DTS readers purchased in 2012-ish (they say "DTS," not "Datasat," and are supposedly among the last of the regular production units before the H8 units were made). The player is an XD20, if that matters. The theatre has had zero sound issues throughout the run (which ends tomorrow night).
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-10-2016, 10:26 AM:
 
None of our locations had any sound issues either, but several of us noticed the timecode blinked in during reel 8.

It didn't bother me at all since it only needs a blip of timecode every 8 seconds to keep rolling, but it was noticed. All of ours to my knowledge were the new readers produced in 2015, but I can't be 100% certain of that. Someone from BLSI would need to verify with their paperwork or serials what went where.
 

---

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-10-2016, 01:29 PM:
 
Not a 100% guarantee, because I wasn't aware of any issues at other places, so I wasn't looking specifically for this. But I studied that print throughout the run, and took a fair amount of notes, including timecode, and other aspects. I did not notice any issues with the timecode on the print I ran. I was very nervous about being "the one" who screwed up one of those shows, so I definitely nursed that print more than usual, I think. (I am an advocate of having a healthy sense of paranoia as a projectionist.)

I wonder if there were multiple internegatives for those prints..? That's something that could explain some of the prints having the issue.
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 02-10-2016, 01:37 PM:
 
the violent shacking of the loop coming off the intermittent sprocket suggest a sprocket issue i have never seen a loop behave like that on a v8
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-10-2016, 04:25 PM:
 
Gordon, that's a good point. I had not even thought of that possibility since I didn't hear the typical sound of hooked sprocket teeth, but then again in fairness I've not audibly memorized the "sound of a V8" either. (I can hear that from 50 feet away on a Century.)

Still though, there was no indication of the film getting that tiny "yank" as it unrolled off of the sprocket in the slow motion video either...and the loop ran perfectly steady with the addition of the extra idler roller.

That makes me want to go take a real close look at the sprocket teeth on that machine though.
 

---

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 02-11-2016, 11:53 AM:
 
Brad: Thanks for the info on the tension failsafes..I think I may have one of the crappy ones (Platter roller on a spring loaded microswitch) in my parts pile with my late gen AW3.

Jim: Thanks for the info on the VFD drive..looks like a pretty good deal..I paid over $300 for the A-B drive on my test stand many years ago. I still have that drive and motor...may adapt them to my P35GP.
 

---

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 02-12-2016, 09:19 AM:
 
The 70mm road-show version credits mention a Digital Intermediate. Does that mean the whole movie went through a DI process? I take it for granted that this flic used a lot vfx for it's splatter-shots and other things. But that would not necessarily mean it had to undergo a complete DI. Does this refer only to the DCP version, which, I assume, has been scanned from the film master?

- Carsten
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-12-2016, 11:49 AM:
 
I seem to remember that as part of the promotion of this movie, it was claimed that all post-production was done photochemically, including editing using workprints on a Moviola. Therefore, if that's true, then the only digital processes done would be to scan the cut camera negative, apply fades, dissolves and other "opticals" digitally and from there create the DI master from which the digital release media were made - DCP, BD, compressed-to-hell version for airplane seat-back entertainment systems, etc. etc.

As a sidenote, I wonder if the audio recording and post was an analog workflow, too, e.g. location recording on a crystal-synced Nagra, editing and mixing using multiple 35 mag elements and that sort of stuff, or if they wussed out on that.
 

---

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 02-12-2016, 12:31 PM:
 
The film was finished photochemically, you can tell right away because anything that goes through the DI process and printed back to film, generally has flicking silver syndrome in the blacks OR softness blurring caused by the de-graining filters.

They didn't use a complete analog workflow however. The film was cut digitally, the audio was recorded digitally (including the score) and the credits head/tail were created digitally as well. So those shots went through a DI process to add credits, which is pretty typical.

Yea, it would have been cool to have a complete analog workflow, but honestly we don't have the infrastructure to make it happen anymore. Photochemically printing is already hard enough, I can't imagine what would happen if he wanted analog audio, I think he would have been fired and sent to the loony bin! LOL
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 02-12-2016, 12:47 PM:
 
What happened to Bruce Dern in the 70mm souvenir programs?

The centerfold of the program randomly features one of the eight actors except, as far as I have been able to find out, Bruce Dern.
 

---

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 02-12-2016, 01:28 PM:
 
Regarding the Digital Intermediate, I finally found this statement by Tarantino himself at: http://postperspective.com/list-interview-quentin-tarantino-hateful-eight/

---
I assume the DI had nothing to do with the film print?
Right. We only did a DI for the DCP, so there would be like a film element that the DCP had to deal with as opposed to taking it straight off the negative. I usually do a DI but this was the first time I didn’t do one for the film print. I went the Chris Nolan way.
---

- Carsten
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 02-12-2016, 01:55 PM:
 
Makes sense, though analog recording of the music using authentic 1960s mics and tube preamps could have added some atmosphere. Though it would probably have been lost in the transfer to DTS/Datasat.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-12-2016, 02:00 PM:
 
I wish they could use the DTS/Datasat time code to sync other higher quality audio formats on a d-cinema server. Just moving up to uncompressed 24-bit LPCM 5.1 would be a worthwhile improvement.
 

---

Posted by Ari Leedsw (Member # 9336) on 02-22-2016, 09:32 AM:
 
Thanks for that imput, Carsten:

One thing I'd like to point out is that this hasn't been Quentin's first non-DI, as that was standard before the mid-2000s.

The ratio of DI:Photochemical cut neg. reached parity around 2005, I think.

You can tell from the credits that it's cut neg. because there are credited negative cutters, and I think the credit was flatbed editor something like that.

They specifically mentioned and specified editing being done with worprints, and I think there was a credit for dailies and workprint printing as well.

I'm pretty sure they took the master positive and scanned that for the DCI. Well over 4K on 70mm, so no problems or quality loss there, and substantially-easier, practically non-existent color correction when you are scanning a timed positive.

@Tyler Purcell: MY understanding is that the only digital was added in. Film scanned in, manipulated, lasered back out onto film, then cut into the non-digital original camera negatives in A and B rolls.

Agreed, "Nolan approach."

Anyone else notice the negative scratch on a few frames (sloppy, sloppy, sloppy! ;-) ) and the camera timing misalignment on the fire?

I thought it was on the print at first, but then I noticed the slight projector weave was the opposite of that shot.

As to analog sound, yeah, looks like the infrastructure has crumbled. What a shame they couldn't have done a proper analog stereo track.

To be honest, digital sound has gotten so good, the difference has really been lost, i.e., not night and day like film and digital.
 

---

Posted by Stephan Shelley (Member # 8587) on 03-16-2016, 07:45 PM:
 
Grand Lake's print is being picked up this week. Looks like Film-Tech Cinema Systems is going to warehouse the prints.
 

---

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 03-18-2016, 09:27 AM:
 
Ad in New York Times 3/18/16 regarding HATEFUL EIGHT:

"The spectacular 70mm Roadshow Version is back in Theaters for an exclusive one-week engagement."

At the bottom of the ad, it says:

"Presented in Digital Projection in New York, Los Angeles and Kansas City".
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-18-2016, 11:46 AM:
 
Mark, can you get a scan of that ad?
 

---

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 03-18-2016, 12:22 PM:
 
The Village East Cinema ran H8 in 70mm last winter. Now, according to their web site, they are running the Digital Roadshow version.

Village East Cinemas

As the above now playing link will not be meaningful for long:

quote: City Cinemas

---

Golden Globe winner – Best Original Score

About

Some time after the Civil War, a stagecoach hurtles through the wintry Wyoming landscape. The passengers, bounty hunter John Ruth (Kurt Russell) and his fugitive Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh), race towards the town of Red Rock where Ruth will bring Domergue to justice. Also starring Samuel L. Jackson, Tim Roth, Demian Bichir, Walter Goggins, Michael Madsen, and Bruce Dern.

The Digital Roadshow engagement of THE HATEFUL EIGHT recreates the grand film exhibition style popularized 1950s and ‘60s and that brought audiences to theaters with the promise of a special event. Filmed in Ultra Panavision 70, filmmaker Quentin Tarantino and his team shot this epic using unique anamorphic camera lenses and 70mm film in an incredible aspect ratio of 2.76:1.

Directed By
Quentin Tarantino

Written By
Quentin Tarantino

Cast
Samuel L. Jackson, Kurt Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh

---

 

---

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 03-18-2016, 03:48 PM:
 
Here is the ad from the New York Times, March 18, 2016, Page C9


 

---

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-18-2016, 04:25 PM:
 
Love the asterisk
 

---

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 03-18-2016, 10:00 PM:
 
Yeah, it also opened today at the Edwards Cinemas here in Bakersfield, CA.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-18-2016, 10:57 PM:
 
Kansas City? That seems to random.
 

---

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 03-19-2016, 11:48 AM:
 
Well that's misleading as fuck.
 

---

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 03-19-2016, 02:51 PM:
 

quote: Martin McCaffery

---

Love the asterisk

---

Took me some time to find that asterisk, for the most time I just thought it was a scan artifact!
 

---

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 03-20-2016, 01:23 AM:
 
Yep, welcome to the digital age.

Even if you purposely make a movie on film and distribute it that way, somehow digital will mess it up. LOL
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 05-12-2016, 01:50 PM:
 
I've always said: "Sooner or later, EVERYTHING shows up on e-bay";
so, keeping that in mind- - check out this listing I spotted online:


. . . and you know they're authentic, because the description says:
"All film cell are genuine-authentic, actually used in movie theatres.
Some film cells may have run lines, scratches, mild abrasions, colour
fade and sometimes even traces of lubricant from a film projector"

Oh, Geez!

Just for fun, I did some math:
A 70mm print of "Hateful 8" contains 240,480frames.(not counting the
intermission. (who would want to buy abuncha blank/black frames?)

If this guy cuts a print into 3 frame clips like in the photo above, and
sells them all, he could potentially make over $80,000. But I seriously
doubt he'll sell more than few of these - - - - if any at all.
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 05-13-2016, 01:31 PM:
 
Black frames would be useful as leader provided the DTS track doesn't confuse matters. Maybe flip it.
 

---

Posted by Terry Monohan (Member # 8285) on 05-14-2016, 08:50 PM:
 
The DVD Blue Ray version came out a few weeks ago and looks ok. I hear later on they will release the 70mm roadshow version to Blue Ray DVD with overture, intermission ect and extra footage. Will It look any better on Blue Ray then the copy I have? Did they make the current H8 DVD from the 70mm print or will they wait for the more expensive roadshow version?
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-14-2016, 09:48 PM:
 

quote: Terry Monohan

---

The DVD Blue Ray version came out a few weeks ago and looks ok. I hear later on they will release the 70mm roadshow version to Blue Ray DVD with overture, intermission ect and extra footage. Will It look any better on Blue Ray then the copy I have? Did they make the current H8 DVD from the 70mm print or will they wait for the more expensive roadshow version?

---

quote: Steve Kraus

---

Is it safe to presume that the majority of the 70's
have been junked by now?

---

quote:

---

so, keeping that in mind- - check out this listing I spotted online:

---

quote: Martin Brooks

---

I just checked eBay and I couldn't find it, so it was probably taken down after a complaint by the studio

---