Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Ghostbusters (1984) (35mm Prints request)

This is topic Ghostbusters (1984) (35mm Prints request) in forum Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets 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=3;t=000812

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 02-21-2003, 12:37 PM:

[beer]

As far as I know it's scope and I would guess Dolby A?

[ 03-28-2003, 08:25 AM: Message edited by: Michael Brown ]

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 02-21-2003, 12:45 PM:

Columbia Pictures
Scope
Dolby A and Mono prints
6 Reels

[beer]

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 02-23-2003, 07:31 PM:

MGM Culver City Lab (which AFAIK never struck dual inventory prints so all should be stereo)

-Aaron

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 02-24-2003, 12:58 AM:

I ran this movie in 1984 and we most certainly had a MONO print. We were expecting to show Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom in our only stereo-equipped auditorium all summer long so we got a mono print of Ghostbusters. When Ghostbusters became more popular, it moved to our "Number One" screen where we were forced to show it in mono because we didn't get a new print. Trust me, the heads and tails clearly said "mono" and I tried all the different stereo settings on the Dolby processor just for fun... but the print was very certainly mono. (Can you tell that it's still frustrating to think about it?) Not sure how many of those mono prints have been preserved over the years.

If memory serves, it's 1 hour and 50 minutes.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 02-24-2003, 11:13 AM:

Aaron wrote:

quote:
MGM Culver City Lab (which AFAIK never struck dual inventory prints so all should be stereo.

I have a print and it still says mono on the leaders. And the
track looks like mono on the bench.

Posted by Pete Lawrence (Member # 130) on 02-24-2003, 06:07 PM:

Just looked at a print I have access to at the moment. It's on 1984 film stock. "Stereo" is printed in the leader and the optical track is indeed in stereo. No mention of Dolby on it anywhere.

Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 02-24-2003, 06:27 PM:

Yep the last UK cinema print of "Ghostbusters" is scope and Dolby A, reason I know, is we have the print screened at the Odeon Cinema in Bournemouth for a student screening, almost sold out and a second is planned for this wednesday night.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 03-20-2003, 02:38 AM:

Yup.

I have a scope and Dolby A.
6 Reels
Scope

Also:

Polyester
Fugicolor
Etched cue-marks (white circles)

[ 07-29-2003, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: Michael Brown ]

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-20-2003, 09:53 AM:

polyester based? That print must have been a re-printed issue since they did not use polyester at that time.

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 10-09-2004, 02:00 PM:

It has been 569 days since the last post.

Posted by John Carpenter (Member # 1488) on 10-09-2004, 02:00 PM:

Ghostbusters – 35mm (1984):
*6 reels
*Sony
*ETS (print from Landover, MD Depot)
*Dolby A
*Scope
*107 mins
*Delivery company used – Danzas

Print # 4001: No missing footage, some light scratching.

edited - typo on # of reels (should be 6)

[ 10-10-2004, 10:08 AM: Message edited by: John Carpenter ]

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 10-10-2004, 12:38 AM:

Did you verify that all the reels were there since it is a six reel picture not five.

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 08-28-2006, 06:00 PM:

It has been 687 days since the last post.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 08-28-2006, 06:00 PM:

ETS print #4004 is a mono print struck on 2003-datecoded Kodak 2383 stock. [Mad]

Why would anyone strike a mono print in 2003?

Soundtrack is labeled "ESTAR MONO #2," and the leaders also claim in the picture area to be "Anamorphic original neg. 4-27-84 recut 5-18-84 recut 5-21-84." I have my doubts as to whether it's really an oneg print, but it's conceivable--it has Phare cues.

Print had light-to-moderate scratching. Decent for a 1984 title, not-so-hot for a 2003 reprinting.

I'm told that it gets a lot of bookings, though. ETS says they have 14 prints, out of which 5 are marked damaged and 9 of which are available.

--jhawk

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 07-31-2010, 01:21 AM:

It has been 1432 days since the last post.