Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Any complaints about the B&W of Sin City?

This is topic Any complaints about the B&W of Sin City? in forum Ground Level 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=5;t=001414

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 04-03-2005, 10:40 AM:

Well, I knew they would happen. I've been getting a few complaints about it being mostly in B&W. What do ya'll do in that situation?

Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 1016) on 04-03-2005, 10:59 AM:

Haven't had one complaint or comment...well, other then people thought it was boring. Seems like most of the guys like it and the gals don't, big surprise there.

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 04-03-2005, 11:34 AM:

Richard -

People at a drive-in notice the action on the screen? That's news to me!

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 04-03-2005, 11:47 AM:

I've been getting a few complaints about it being mostly in B&W.

You explain that you don't make them, you just show them... [Smile]

Posted by Peter Kerchinsky (Member # 1098) on 04-03-2005, 12:22 PM:

Richard
You're talking about patrons in Florida, right?

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 04-03-2005, 01:15 PM:

Hand them a reel of B&W film and a pack of Crayola colored markers. Tell them to color in all the pictures on THIS reel. When they are done with that one, tell them that there are 6 more just like it.

They don't have to worry, though. Not ALL of the film is in B&W. They can skip the parts that are already colored in.

If they don't like that answer, just tell them that the projector is running out of Technicolor. The truck didn't make it on time to refill the tank before the show started. However, if they put a piece of colored cellophane over their windshield they can STILL have a movie in color. Hey! If they wear glasses they can save a LOT of money buying cellophane. They only have to cut two little pieces to cover their glasses! (What a bargain!)

[Big Grin]

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 04-03-2005, 01:17 PM:

Black & white sequences (or new films made in b&w) can bring out the strangeness in many people.

After a screening of THE GREAT DICTATOR (new restored version), one angry customer complained about the film being black & white.
The manager told him politely that this was the way the film was shot and intended to be seen.

Customer:
Why did they do that?

Manager:
You see, that film was made in 1940, when black and white was still common.

Customer: (grumbling)
I see...but why didn't they put some color in now?

Some people feel cheated when you show them b&w, except when it it obviously cool. Like some kids I heard coming straight from VAN HELSING, they never had seen an old Universal horror movie, but they talked about how cool the opening sequence had been.

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-03-2005, 04:03 PM:

Amazingly Kill Bill Vol. 2 didn't garner any complaints, which is startling since people bitch all the time about the speakers on the wall not working...Oh, I'm sorry, but SURROUNDS aren't supposed to have dialog on them, what else would you expect to hear in Home on the Range?!

Posted by James Faber (Member # 2796) on 04-03-2005, 07:39 PM:

You didn't get any Kill Bill complaints? I got plenty! I had to catch myself a couple times. The word, "moron," almost slipped out once or twice.

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-04-2005, 12:34 AM:

Nope. I never heard a peep about KB2.
I did however get a "is it supposed to be this quiet?" durring the opening studio logos of Signs once though. (They're silent).

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 04-04-2005, 01:11 AM:

The only thing I liked about Van Helsing was the opening black and white scene, wish they had done the entire flick like that.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-04-2005, 02:35 AM:

Brother! Did any of these FLA patrons ever see Dorothy singing "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" on the big screen in that glorious sepia toned B&W segment of "the Wizard of ID..er OZ?", or the opening segment of Butch and the Sundance of that 1969 FOX flik "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid", or that feature that came out back in '98 called "Pleasantville" from New Line, with all of the B&W scenes that were in that feature?

That's pretty stupid to complain on B&W segments in a movie. Some people out there in FLA been doing too much METH!

Funniner than a skunk eating shit, Randy. Wonder of them FLA people will buy that, let alone will agree with it.

quote:
Oh, I'm sorry, but SURROUNDS aren't supposed to have dialog on them, what else would you expect to hear in Home on the Range?!

I get that crap some of the time as well, especially from the home theatre idiots who think that they know it all when they say "well, my system at home does this?" Don't you just want to bitch-slap them silly and tell them how the bear shits in the woods? Take your SONY POS matrix crap and sit and spin on it for a while.

-Monte

Posted by Peter Kerchinsky (Member # 1098) on 04-04-2005, 04:39 AM:

Amen, Monte

Posted by Adam Wilbert (Member # 1184) on 04-04-2005, 02:34 PM:

quote: Christian Appelt
After a screening of THE GREAT DICTATOR (new restored version)

forget about color. Those patrons were lucky to even get sound! Wasn't The Great Dictator Chaplin's first talking picture? (Modern Times doesn't really count)

I got the same complaints back when I ran Three Kings. "its washed out"... [Roll Eyes]

Working in a copy shop, I get customers all the time that think that photocopying a b/w photo on a color copier will magically make it a color photo. [Confused]

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-04-2005, 03:09 PM:

Adam, you can't be serious...That's some sh*t.
Richard, I'll ask my buddy down in FL where he lives, I'll send him on over to your theater to terrorise you sometime [Wink]

And word to Monte.
It's true however, it's the home theater goons that drive me nuts. This is why I'm intent on building mine out of cinema equipment and have 86'd the complex Linux based PVR I was going to build.

Now, back on topic: The local paper in Los Banos where I work reviewed a movie playing at my theater. Ring 2. I'm considering calling him up to offer my input on the technical elements...
He mentioned something about the color not looking right towards the end...Friggin' doofus.
And he classified it as a bad horror flick...When it's clearly a bad suspence/sci-fi flick.

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 04-04-2005, 04:29 PM:

I honestly think that the customer didn't like the movie and was trying to find a way to get her money back. We informed her that the film was intended to be this way and her money would not be refunded for that reason.

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 04-04-2005, 06:18 PM:

quote: Adam Wilbert
Working in a copy shop, I get customers all the time that think that photocopying a b/w photo on a color copier will magically make it a color photo.

When I worked in a photo shop years ago, a customer asked me questions about a device for transferring slides to video, you know these combinations of ground glass, mirror and closeup diopter.

I explained the device to him. He asked me about moving pictures.
I assured him that he could transfer his Super-8 films too with the unit.
He kept talking to me in a very strange way, not asking direct questions, and he seemed to believe I was keeping some valuable information for myself. After ten minutes of code talk, I found out that he was looking for a device...

...to transfer his color slides to video AND MAKE THEM MOVE LIKE HOME MOVIES! [Eek!]

Today, I would ask that guy to call George Lucas and ask not only for 3D but 4D digital image processing! [Big Grin]

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 04-04-2005, 07:05 PM:

And don't forget about "Raging Bull" (unless I missed it in someone else's post.)

Posted by Daniel Alt (Member # 2303) on 04-04-2005, 07:45 PM:

My only problem when I went to SEE Sin City was the box office person who didn't know "left" from "right". I was wondering why every patron in front of me bought their ticket and then went and struggled with a locked door, before going back around to the open door to the theater.

After buying my ticket, I realized why... "Thank you sir, door's on your right!"

Me: "No, it's on YOUR right. My LEFT."
Him: "Your Right, yes."
Me: "No, MY LEFT!"

*bangs head against wall*

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 04-04-2005, 09:49 PM:

People who gripe about B&W, tell'em the "Special Edition" video will be in color.

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-05-2005, 03:46 PM:

I offer the following 2 excuses, the 3rd is actually given by our management staff whenever someone percieves there's something wrong but generally isn't:
They shipped us an out dated VHS so we're improvising...

One of the composite cables came loose off the dvd player...

We have obsolete equipment...

Posted by Wolff King Morrow (Member # 2226) on 04-05-2005, 03:51 PM:

quote: Daniel Alt
Me: "No, it's on YOUR right. My LEFT."
Him: "Your Right, yes."
Me: "No, MY LEFT!"

*bangs head against wall*

Maybe he meant "You're right, yes" when you corrected him. [Wink]

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 04-05-2005, 04:09 PM:

No! Your OTHER right hand! [Big Grin]

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 04-05-2005, 07:58 PM:

The complaints about black and white don't surprise me at all. It doesn't surprise me either that some genius would ask why the distributors didn't put some color into a B&W movie made in 1940.

Here's one I found astonishing. In 1990, I was watching a 70mm showing of "Fantasia" at the Gramercy Theater on 23rd Street in NYC. The movie started playing, in its 1.33:1 aspect ratio. A couple ladies one row ahead of me muttered, "we should have gone to the Ziegfeld theater where they have that Panavision stuff."
[uhoh]

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-06-2005, 02:26 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
where they have that Panavision stuff."

....or, you get folks coming out the house in a whirlwind of anxiety, complaining to the manager that when the show started that the screen suddenly got smaller. What has happened is that house had a double feature-each in their own lens format. First feature was in flat and the second being in scope. And when the show was beginning, the masking was coming down for the scope presentation due to the console's automated lens/masking process.

Then....(please, no offense to Mike and his Roxy on this one..) you get people coming out complaining that the screen isn't filled all of the way with the movie and feel that their being cheated of a full-screen presentation and actually demand some of their money back.

What happens on this one that there is no adjustable maskings at this one theatre-just damned floating screens. Where the rest of the town' multiplexes have full adjustable maskings in which the people are used in seeing.....and this feature that the folks are complaining about, is in flat being presented on a full 2.39/1 screen.

TACKY!!

-Monte

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 04-06-2005, 02:33 AM:

Our assistant manager came out of Constantine a while back (scope feature) wanting to know why there was big gaps on the sides of the screen (during the ads)...

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-06-2005, 03:02 AM:

LOL... isn't ignorance bliss at times? - Monte

Posted by Wolff King Morrow (Member # 2226) on 04-06-2005, 11:45 AM:

Dominic I have that happen once a month regularly. I also get busted for stadium seating causing keystoning.

The best though was when a police officer asked me why VHS tapes are so much smaller than films, seeing as how they hold the entire movie in them. I was pretty much at a loss for words!

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-06-2005, 12:05 PM:

When "Empire of the Sun" played in 70mm at the Edwards Big Newport, people complained that it couldn't possibly be 70mm because the screen image was too small. Same for "ET".

Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 04-06-2005, 12:07 PM:

quote:
The best though was when a police officer asked me why VHS tapes are so much smaller than films, seeing as how they hold the entire movie in them. I was pretty much at a loss for words!

Just tell them you have higher quality tape for your theatre so it has to be bigger.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-06-2005, 01:51 PM:

(I miss the old EDWARDS..great company to work for....)

True, I remember seeing E.T. in 70mm at a "CinaclePlex Odeon", and I remember hearing people griping on the slight keystone of the picture and the film wasn't completely filling the screen,which was a full-ratioed scope screen. This would bring up an insteresting question on why studios would strike 70mm prints on flat features from a 35mm negative. Granted, the picture does look better, but just more grain detail would come out as well.

Also, it tickles my funny bone when people would see me operate projectors at drive-ins and awe about "those big cameras", and that "big tape" that I used to show the movies.

-Monte

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 04-06-2005, 03:59 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
"we should have gone to the Ziegfeld theater where they have that Panavision stuff."

Hm, how about a Ultra-Panatar variable anamorphic lens?
You could easily expand FANTASIA to scope proportions, like they did in the infamous "SuperScope" re-release of that film in the 1950s. [Big Grin]

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 04-07-2005, 02:59 PM:

For customers who think you're using tape, you should get your hands on an old no-longer-in-service 2-inch quadruplex video recorder and put it in view somewhere in the lobby. The 2 inch tape is wider than film. Rig it up somehow to make it looks like it is working, although it isn't.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-07-2005, 03:08 PM:

Existing 2-inch quad machines are valuable for spare parts, even if they no longer work. A day will come when no machines are still working to play those old tapes (assuming the tapes were stored correctly and were not erased to reuse), so migrating thousands of those old television shows to current digital formats is a big business for some. Unfortunately, much material will be lost forever. [Frown]

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-07-2005, 03:24 PM:

quote: John Pytlak
Unfortunately, much material will be lost forever.

If one does a search on videotape, there is quite a few collectors of the AMPEX "quad" machines who are dedicated "vidiots" Here is one of them and he as quite the collection.

www.lionlamb.us/quadpark.html

Monte

Posted by Dean Kollet (Member # 1789) on 04-07-2005, 09:50 PM:

Richard, how long after the movie started did they come to complain? If it were after, say, 10 minutes I'd just give them a pass or refund, no harm done.

Posted by Alan Dallas (Member # 2537) on 05-01-2005, 03:11 PM:

quote: Dominic Espinosa
Our assistant manager came out of Constantine a while back (scope feature) wanting to know why there was big gaps on the sides of the screen (during the ads)...

Hahahah! I lost count how many times I've been called on the radio to Close the masking on a screen during the Trailers because of the Piller Boxes you get with Flat on Scope.

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 05-01-2005, 03:50 PM:

quote:
Oftentimes it was done to provide six-track mag stereo that was superior to the then-dominant stereo optical 35mm prints. ALtrhough I think the 35mm to 70mm blow-ups of FLAT fiolms still looked better, though (although sloppy and rushed lab work could render poor results). Also, just the 70MM presentation ads spelled "importance" and was a great marketing tool.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-01-2005, 06:39 PM:

The 70mm logos seen in stack ads of the 1980s and early 1990s were pretty cool. The design of stack ads have arguably taken a step backwards in recent years. Shows with big 70mm logos on them really did seem more important -especially in regard to the ads in New York and Los Angeles.

I've seen mixed results on how flat films have looked in 70mm. Sometimes the show would look a bit better, but I just shugged off the use of 70mm only as a means of getting 6-channel magnetic surround sound. I think bigger differences of quality gains in blowing up to 70mm have happened with films shot in true anamorphic 'scope -as well as careful transfers of Super35 elements to 70mm.

I can recall a few occaisions of seeing movies in 70mm where I fully expected a 'scope ratio feature but saw something flat instead.

"Total Recall" had to be one of the bigger disappointments in the aspect ratio surprise department. That's mainly because there was a pretty good 70mm teaser trailer that was framed more for 'scope. I saw that one attached to "Glory" and "Born of the Fourth of July." I was also disappointed by that aspect ratio treatment since I had seen a number of pretty decent Super35 to 70mm blow-ups, such as "The Abyss" for instance.

"Batman" was similarly disappointing for its 1.85:1 framing. But I was disappointed by that film in just about every respect. I walked a few blocks from Cinema One over to the Ziegfeld to watch a REAL 70mm movie, the director's cut of "Lawrence of Arabia."

I kinda figured "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" would be a flat feature on 70mm. Still, it is kind of odd that it carries the "Filmed In Panavision" term within its end credits.

"Aliens," "Glory," "Spaceballs" "Mountains of the Moon," Bernardo Bertolucci's fairly forgettable "The Sheltering Sky" and a few others I'm forgetting were also surprising to be flat. The previews just made them seem like they would be in 'scope.

Just an attempt to get the subject back onto topic......

...what do you think the complaints about the B&W of "Sin City" would have been like if the show had been shot on film and blown up to 70mm? I guess you would have griping about both the aspect ratio and odd use of color or complete lack of color.