Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: BLADE RUNNER 2049 70MM?

This is topic BLADE RUNNER 2049 70MM? 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=012191

Posted by David J Hilsgen (Member # 2614) on 08-26-2017, 09:43 PM:

Is it the next 5/70

Posted by Terry Monohan (Member # 8285) on 08-27-2017, 02:25 PM:

Just because Warner ran a trailer in 70mm does not mean a release in theatres will be shown in 70mm film. We will have to wait and see If they make a few 70mm film prints, just a blow up from the reg image DCP probably.

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 08-27-2017, 02:49 PM:

IMDB lists 70mm as one of the release formats- -
but of course you know the usual disclaimer about believing
everything you read on IMDB, or the internet in general.
So- - I guess we'll all have to wait & see.

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 08-27-2017, 10:07 PM:

I am pretty sure it will be, as Warner Bros seems to be making a habit of this - Kong: Skull Island, Wonder Woman, Dunkirk. Seems likely that Blade Runner and Justice League will get the 70mm treatment.

I think we'll see 70mm prints for Murder on the Orient Express as well, from Fox, and I'm hearing tantalizing rumors that other studios are thinking of joining the party.

Posted by Julian Antos (Member # 5497) on 08-28-2017, 01:04 PM:

About two weeks ago WB told us they would not be making prints of this, but a lot can change in two weeks I suppose. Really hoping Fox follows through with ORIENT EXPRESS.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 08-28-2017, 04:14 PM:

While I obviously endorse this 70mm revival of late, I'm not sure what the merits could be for this movie.

It was filmed entirely on digital cameras and judging by the available trailer material, has to be a crapload of CGI in just about every shot. Yes, it was acquired in 6K, but after framing, cropping and post-processing, you can expect the end-result be close to 4K. So, why not just focus on a 4K release? That way, you can at least enjoy the benefits of multi-dimensional sound.

Those high-profile 70mm "roadshow" releases are expensive, so why not reserve them for features where it actually adds something worthwhile to the experience?

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 08-28-2017, 05:53 PM:

I agree - I'd much more want to see 'Orient Express' in 70mm than this.

Posted by Bill Brandenstein (Member # 7758) on 09-12-2017, 01:29 PM:

OK Daniel - what would it take to get an immersive soundtrack system to lock up with the DTS time code on a 70mm print? Surely it can't be THAT hard. If I can get a computer to play back 5.1 to a Super 8mm print at home, why can't immersive-to-70 be done in a booth?

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 09-12-2017, 03:24 PM:

How many 70mm projectors will we find in booths/auditoriums with immersive audio systems, or vice versa?

- Carsten

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 09-12-2017, 04:10 PM:

Bill, I believe it could be done and possibly not be too difficult. The trick is getting Dolby on board.

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 09-12-2017, 06:35 PM:

There were a few months when Barcos Alchemyserver was lacking Atmos capability. Installations of Barcos flagship laser projector thus were not able to play ATMOS. There was no way to drive these projectors with other servers. So, what they did was, they ran Dolby DSS servers in sync to the Alchemy server, the Alchemy server serving the picture, the Dolby server serving the ATMOS soundtrack through the CP850. It should work the same way with a film projector running as a master (or slave), with a tach reader or DTS sync track. I just don't think there is much interest in pursueing that approach. No money in it. You can sell 70mm as a special, or immersive audio, but doing both at the same time is probably not successful.

- Carsten

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-14-2017, 01:02 PM:

I'm not aware of any DTS time code sync functionality being present in the current CP850 firmware. Without this functionality, it will be a pretty futile exercise. Even if you manage to hit Play at exactly the right moment, good luck keeping your soundtrack lip-sync during the entire show. [Wink]

But yes, there are ways to do it, DTS has proven it can work reliably for more than two decades now, but it would at least need to involve some investments from Dolby, with regards to Atmos.

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 09-17-2017, 11:46 PM:

Random question, but film based DTS never changed right? Its the same system currently used on 70mm prints eh?

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 09-17-2017, 11:53 PM:

quote: Tyler Purcell
Random question, but film based DTS never changed right? Its the same system currently used on 70mm prints eh?

The technology never changed. DTS sold their Cinema division to Datasat, and Datasat has since licensed the technology to produce the timecode tracks and encoded CD-ROMs to a third party, but it's all the same system that's been in place since 1993.

Regarding syncing to one of the immersive systems - as has been suggested in the earlier posts, this is technically very feasible, but as a commercial endeavor somewhat iffy. It's not clear why Dolby, ATI (Datasat's new owners), Barco or Auro would invest in the R&D necessary to make this work for ~100 screens and 2-3 movies per year.

I mean if I were independently wealthy *I'd* do it, just because it would be cool, but it's going to be a tough sell to the companies that could.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-18-2017, 08:54 AM:

I think pairing DTS time code with d-cinema audio formats (like Dolby Atmos, DTS-X or high bit rate & uncompressed LPCM) is a worthwhile endeavor.

The very act of filming a movie in 70mm format and making prints of it is something quite a few industry people already feel is costly and unnecessary. They think "digital" is good enough (even if the implementation of 'scope is a letter-boxed, home-TV quality kind of thing). The 70mm film productions are something meant to please the minority of us who appreciate the difference in image quality.

Murder on the Orient Express will reportedly have a Dolby Atmos mix. The movie was shot on 65mm film. Currently viewers will not be able to watch the movie in 70mm film quality while hearing its Atmos mix at the same time. If you want the 70mm visuals you'll have to settle for a 5.1 channel lossy compressed digital audio mix. If you want the Atmos mix you'll have to settle for lower resolution digital video.

If 70mm film prints can be paired with the very best audio formats available that will increase their appeal.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 09-18-2017, 09:39 AM:

I can't imagine it would be all that difficult to write the software and throw together interface hardware to sync a D-cinema server playback with a DTS timecode track.

The ancient DTS software displayed the reel and frame number if you put a monitor on the DTS-6 processor. I'd be shocked if Dolby didn't have engineers that could do this in a week or 2. Hell, I bet Brad and the Film-Tech team could design something pretty quickly.

I think the bigger issue is Dolby working with the current owners of DTS's technology. Even thought the patents have to be expired, I don't see Dolby (or anybody else) investing to design timecode printers and readers.

I guess the question is how many auditoriums can play back 70mm AND are Atmos equipped? If it is only a handful worldwide then the investment of even a few weeks of man hours isn't worth it.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-18-2017, 10:22 AM:

LTC is provided for in a DCP so the better way is to equip the projector with a steeper motor and have it chase the DCP for sync

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 09-18-2017, 12:33 PM:

quote: Gordon McLeod
LTC is provided for in a DCP so the better way is to equip the projector with a steeper motor and have it chase the DCP for sync

Except that won't account for any missing frames if the film gets damaged and spliced. It would also require that ID frames are not chopped off when assembling prints.

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 09-18-2017, 09:50 PM:

A cheap and easy solution would be to do something like Auro-3D or the IMAX 12 channel system. The XD10/XD20 units support 8 channels; two together could play back up to 16 channels, more than enough to cover the 11.1 channel layout of Auro-3D or the 12 channel layout of IMAX.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-18-2017, 11:19 PM:

quote: Lyle Romer
I guess the question is how many auditoriums can play back 70mm AND are Atmos equipped?

Obviously there's not very many, but some theaters do have both. I know of one such screen at LOOK Cinemas in Dallas.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-19-2017, 12:23 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
The 70mm film productions are something meant to please the minority of us who appreciate the difference in image quality.

I'd argue that 70mm releases are meant to satisfy the demands of a handful of directors who are insistent upon it. I doubt the studios are doing this for us.

Does anyone know if...
...the 70mm screens are outperforming the digital counterparts?
...the studios are making a profit off the 70mm locations?

Marrying 70mm with DCP soundtracks might make for a very popular format -- and I don't think the studios (or theaters) want a reason to go back to film. Do you?

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 09-19-2017, 10:15 AM:

To my knowledge of the current servers they can not be made to chase time code
Where as a projector can be made to do so
with competent projectionist there should be no lost frames
If there were then a black filler just like Imax has to do

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-19-2017, 12:24 PM:

quote: Manny Knowles
Marrying 70mm with DCP soundtracks might make for a very popular format -- and I don't think the studios (or theaters) want a reason to go back to film. Do you?

Not really. The movie studio bosses and especially their media company bosses and investors, want film gone as soon as possible as a means of saving money. They have tunnel vision in regard to this. I don't think they know or care how important it is to get customers to see their movies in movie theaters, especially with what is now going on in the home video market.

The big problem with lower cost, faster to crank out, all-digital movie product: it looks and feels no different than the product I can see at home on the HDTV set. I don't feel like I'm missing anything at all by watching that kind of product at home. And since the movies go from theatrical release to the home viewing platforms in only 2-3 months time it's very easy to wait, especially when a couple can blow upwards of $50 or more for a visit to the theater.

For the movie studios it may not make any difference to them whether the customer watches the movie at home or in the theater. Unfortunately for those studios by the time the new movie shows up on home viewing platforms it is VERY EASY for the new movie to get lost there.

Both movie theaters and brick and mortar video stores provided a good marketing space for movie companies to push their new products. Theaters show movie trailers, display huge posters, banners and standees. Video stores were able to do some of the same things on a more limited basis. Now the video stores are mostly gone. I don't think movie marketing on the Internet or in some app is very effective.

Movie streaming is popular, but services like Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu put extreme emphasis on TV content (particularly their own). Unless you have a specific movie title in mind it can be really difficult to "re-discover" some recent movie release you didn't see in the theater and forgot all about it. Those streaming services have really been pulling back on the amount of catalog movies they carry. Netflix used to carry a lot of classic movies; now they hardly carry shit for classics. For a lot of those kinds of titles you have to be willing to pay at least $3-$4 for a rental from Amazon or buy a copy on disc (if the disc is even available anymore).

There is a shit ton of recent movie releases I haven't seen and probably will never bother to see. That especially goes for a lot of remakes, reboots, etc. When they were "new" at the theater (and if the reviews were good) there might be some passing curiosity to see it. Months later when that movie becomes available to watch at home it can easily disappear in the mountain of other stuff I haven't watched. I have at least a couple dozen or more TV episodes on my DVR I haven't made time to watch yet. It's turning into work or a chore to fit watching a 2 hour movie into that. I have a bunch of Blu-ray discs gathering dust on a shelf and a bunch of DVDs in storage containers. I rarely buy Blu-ray discs anymore; and I don't buy download versions of movies either. I know I'm not alone with this kind of behavior and growing disregard for buying & renting movies to watch at home.

So, from that perspective, I think it's pretty damned important for movie studios to be doing everything they can to attract customers back to movie theaters. The boom times of selling movies on home video platforms is finished.

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 09-19-2017, 12:27 PM:

My idea would be to create DTS soundtrack files that output an analog timecode instead of audible audio that a digital cinema server could "chase" and feed the uncompressed audio and object files to the CP850/IMS3000. Will it ever get done on a 100 screen scale? I don't think so. Could it possibly be done as a one off for a premiere or other such special screening? Maybe, if the studio was willing to invest in it and the third parties were willing to work on it.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 09-20-2017, 10:20 PM:

quote: Manny Knowles
Does anyone know if...
...the 70mm screens are outperforming the digital counterparts?

As a rough guage our 7Omm shows outsell the equivalent DCP by roughly 5:1

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-21-2017, 06:45 PM:

quote: Manny Knowles
Does anyone know if...
...the 70mm screens are outperforming the digital counterparts?

Oh absolutely. The one closest to me, For Dunkirk, the 70mm was sold out or close to it for at least a week, while the DCP was empty or near empty for that same week. The differential between the two was incredible.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-21-2017, 07:04 PM:

We've been down this trail before....I'd bet the 70mm is in the biggest/best auditorium, while the DCP is in a plain auditorium, so it's no surprise which one is going to sell the most tickets. I'd bet at least half or more of the people have no clue how the picture is getting to the screen, and only a tiny percentage know what "70mm" means.

I think if you had two identical auditoriums with identical showtimes, and put "70mm film" on one and "Digital" on the other, with no other promotional material, the ticket sales would be almost equal.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-21-2017, 07:14 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
I think if you had two identical auditoriums with identical showtimes, and put "70mm film" on one and "Digital" on the other, with no other promotional material, the ticket sales would be almost equal.

Agreed. But the point of the 5/70 and 15/70 releases is that they can be sold as being something special and unique. The 70mm locations for Dunkirk and H8 had special posters advertising that fact. If something is promoted as being special and unique, as opposed to "normal" (i.e. what every other movie looks like), it will potentially attract patrons. It works just like a "Dolby Stereo" logo on a marquee in 1980--even if people didn't know what "Dolby Stereo" was, they knew that it was supposed to be good.

Whether this concept actually sells more tickets in total or just shifts the same number of ticket sales towards the "special" venues is a different question.

Still, if I were an exhibitor or film distributor, I would tend to be in favor of anything that increased my profit, regardless of the format involved.

Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 09-21-2017, 07:17 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
We've been down this trail before....I'd bet the 70mm is in the biggest/best auditorium, while the DCP is in a plain auditorium, so it's no surprise which one is going to sell the most tickets. I'd bet at least half or more of the people have no clue how the picture is getting to the screen, and only a tiny percentage know what "70mm" means.

I think if you had two identical auditoriums with identical showtimes, and put "70mm film" on one and "Digital" on the other, with no other promotional material, the ticket sales would be almost equal.

This has not been my experience. Both theaters that played The Hateful Eight and Dunkirk in 70MM in Colorado, put them in a smaller auditoriums, unfortunately.

However, because there were so few places projecting 70MM, they both drew large crowds. People were coming in from out of town and even out of state.

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 09-21-2017, 07:55 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
We've been down this trail before....I'd bet the 70mm is in the biggest/best auditorium, while the DCP is in a plain auditorium, so it's no surprise which one is going to sell the most tickets. I'd bet at least half or more of the people have no clue how the picture is getting to the screen, and only a tiny percentage know what "70mm" means.

I think if you had two identical auditoriums with identical showtimes, and put "70mm film" on one and "Digital" on the other, with no other promotional material, the ticket sales would be almost equal.

I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on this. For this example I was talking about, It was an AMC, so there was pretty much zero advertising. In fact, on the amc website, the 70mm show still had the large "DIGITAL" tagline on it, with a much smaller "70mm film" tag below it. Beyond that, the digital got the Dolby Cinema screen, and the 70mm obviously did not. AND, they had competing show times. Despite all that, When I was looking for tickets days in advance, every single opening weekend showtime for the 70mm was sold out Thursday through Sunday, and there was less than a dozen tickets sold for the digital showings for the ENTIRE weekend. This trend continued for at least two weeks. HEAVY HEAVY sales for the 70mm, while the digital auditorium sat empty or close to it.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-22-2017, 01:02 AM:

I think Tarantino/Weinstein did a great job promoting the 70mm angle for H8. They gave the 70mm houses an exclusive for a number of days, and Tarantino made it widely known that the DCP would be a different cut of the film.

Nolan has also "branded" himself to be synonymous with 70mm and IMAX. And IIRC venues showing "Interstellar" on film also got a head start.

So, marketing does seem to matter. The above examples also "stack the deck" in favor of film by giving film a head start.

I'm wondering if the miscellaneous "filler" releases do as well without the huge "see it on film" marketing push, and the exclusive head start.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-22-2017, 11:53 AM:

Well maybe that theater has a very knowledgeable clientele, or the ticket sellers were pushing the 70mm. That said, I agree that word of mouth can be a very powerful thing, especially in the age of social media.

However I still think most people here would agree that the general public doesn't know or care how their picture gets to the screen. We have plenty of people here who still don't know we switched to digital. I gave a talk to a local civic group a few months ago, and took along a DCP hard drive to pass around...they were all astonished that we weren't showing "film" any more.

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 09-22-2017, 01:46 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
I still think most people here would agree that the general
public doesn't know or care how their picture gets to the screen

I would extend that statement to include many film-makers too.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-22-2017, 02:38 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
However I still think most people here would agree that the general public doesn't know or care how their picture gets to the screen.

And that's a BAD thing for theaters. The same members of the public who don't know or don't care how the movie is getting on the screen probably don't care if they see the movie in the theater at all. It may make no difference to them if they see it at home on the living room TV set in HD or "4K" for far less money. It may make no difference to them if they watch the movie on an iPad® or iPhone®.

Title exclusivity via the theatrical release window is the only common advantage commercial movie theaters have over the home. It's something everyone understands. But it's an advantage that is now greatly diminished via 2-3 month windows that are very easy to wait out. And then there's all the people who don't need to wait to watch at home, thanks to modded Fire Sticks and other easy to use methods of piracy.

Most people don't know the technical details about the content movie theaters show. Then there are people like me who know the technical differences between what the commercial movie theater is showing and what can be had on a retail Blu-ray disc or Netflix stream. Even I feel very indifferent about seeing most movies in a theater. The quality difference from a theater's digital presentation and the one I'm seeing in the home is a very narrow difference. I'd go to theaters far less if I didn't have a girlfriend, and we go to the show maybe once a month if even that.

Commercial movie theaters are trying various things to attract more customers, but they're still at the mercy of movie studios and the technical quality of the product being delivered. A commercial movie theater can't do anything to improve the visual quality of a TV-resolution DCP. The theater could have a top of the line sound system installed, but if the studio does a half-assed job on the sound mix the Dolby Atmos logo won't mean squat. 70mm can make a difference on some of these issues, at least for high end movie theaters lucky enough to get 70mm film prints.

quote: Manny Knowles
I think Tarantino/Weinstein did a great job promoting the 70mm angle for H8. They gave the 70mm houses an exclusive for a number of days, and Tarantino made it widely known that the DCP would be a different cut of the film.

I really liked the roadshow booklet they gave to customers. It's just too bad the 70mm shows couldn't get booked onto bigger, better screens. In Oklahoma City the movie played, seriously letter-boxed, on a modest-size AMC multiplex common width screen. That was despite the fact there were larger, common height screens in that area more fitting for an Ultra Panavision 70 image.

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 09-23-2017, 01:24 AM:

quote: Manny Knowles
Does anyone know if...
...the 70mm screens are outperforming the digital counterparts?
...the studios are making a profit off the 70mm locations?

I have it on very good authority that the distributors have been pleasantly surprised by how much 70mm screens overperform, to such a degree that studios that have not gone down this road are now considering it, and there is some discussion about how to keep this ball rolling. I am permitting myself some cautious optimism for the future of 70mm exhibition.

Posted by Tyler Purcell (Member # 9213) on 09-23-2017, 03:52 AM:

I had a talk with Christopher Nolan about this very subject tonight and he was on the same page I am... which is that we've gotta make more 70mm releases to keep the equipment and workflow alive and well. We know there are two more 70mm releases this year no matter what... PT's new movie and Murder on the Orient, but both will be playing in limited release in NYC and LA only evidently. Our theaters always run 70... so the focus should be on the smaller one's, the theaters that don't always run it, giving them a chance TO run it and keep current. I hope Murder does well on 70 for it's limited run because that will be that studio's first release on 70 in decades.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-23-2017, 03:30 PM:

I saw the latest trailer for Murder on the Orient Express. It announced "exclusive" 70mm engagements for NY and LA. While that news may be nice for movie-goers in the NY and LA markets, it's really going to suck for everyone else if all the other large markets in the US are excluded from showing 70mm prints. Why bother filming a movie in 65mm format if only a couple theaters could show it that way?

Murder on the Orient Express is another movie I was hoping would be shown in 70mm at LOOK Cinemas in Dallas, where screen #1 can show both 70mm and Dolby Atmos (but unfortunately not both at the same time).

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 09-24-2017, 12:31 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
Why bother filming a movie in 65mm format if only a couple theaters could show it that way?

Although I 100% agree with you that it'd be a shame for only NYC and LA to see 70mm prints, shooting on 65mm provides benefits for the DCP as well. The higher quality source image really does make a difference in the final product, from the DCP down to the Blu Ray / UHD Blu Ray release.

Posted by Aron Toplitsky (Member # 6950) on 10-06-2017, 08:42 PM:

Bobby,

I will be in the Dallas area with my girlfriend in about a month. Do you recommend visiting Look Cinemas, Alamo Draft House or both?