quote:

---

Mon Jun 13, 9:51 AM ET

Director Steven Spielberg absolutely, positively won't reveal the plot for "Indiana Jones 4."

Spielberg, whose latest film, "War of the Worlds," debuted in Tokyo on Monday, said he and "Star Wars" director George Lucas are working on the movie together.

"If I did that, my really good friend and collaborator would have me on a silver platter," Spielberg told AP Radio. "I gotta be careful because if I tell you that he might take over directing 'Indy 4' himself. And I won't have a job."

Spielberg and Lucas hope to start shooting the new "Indiana Jones" movie next year with Harrison Ford.

Copyright © 2005 The Associated Press.

---

quote:

---

"If I did that, my really good friend and collaborator would have me on a silver platter," Spielberg told AP Radio. "I gotta be careful because if I tell you that he might take over directing 'Indy 4' himself. And I won't have a job."

---

quote:

---

In the end, Spielberg promised not only to keep making movies but to keep making them the old-fashioned way. He's not going to box everything in a computer. "I'm going to make all my films on film until they close the last lab down," he said to more cheers.

---

quote:

---

Spielberg Won't Shoot Films Digitally

Steven Spielberg has vowed to continue to make movies "the old fashioned way, " on celluloid rather than on hard disks. Speaking Wednesday night at the Smithsonian Institution's Baird Auditorium in Washington D.C., where he received the James Smithson Bicentennial Medal, Spielberg distanced himself from his longtime friend and sometime colleague George Lucas, who has announced plans to shoot his next Star Wars movie entirely on digital media. As reported in today's (Thursday) Washington Post, Spielberg told the Smithsonian audience: "I'm going to make all my films on film until they close the last lab down." The audience cheered.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

That is, if it ever gets made at all.

---

Of course it will get made: They just released the complete trillogy on DVD, so Lucas has to do something to make it incomplete, and, thus, require an updated "complete" set.
 

---

Posted by Mark Pierce (Member # 3196) on 06-16-2005, 02:53 AM:
 
I think that if Spielberg directs it'll be on film. If Lucas takes the reigns... I'm buying stock in ones and zeros!!!! ;-)
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 06-16-2005, 07:31 AM:
 
Just wondering if you guys bashed George Lucas in the same way when he pioneered digital sound post-production with Sprocket Systems/Skywalker Sound? Or, established the reference point in visual effects with ILM? Or, put Dolby Stereo on the map with "Star Wars"? Or, led the resurgence in popularity of 70mm with "The Empire Strikes Back"? What about TAP? THX? Even Pixar started as a division of ILM.

Just wondering.

I will always believe George Lucas is a visionary. He has incredible foresight. No other individual has contributed as much to filmmaking artifice as he has, and he continues to forge new vistas.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-16-2005, 07:43 AM:
 
I see nothing wrong with shooting and presenting movies digitally. But if you're gonna do that, please at least use a noticeably higher resolution than HDTV!
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 06-16-2005, 07:51 AM:
 
These are pioneering efforts. It has to evolve, but it won't if no one is using it. For example, the blue screen work in the first "Star Wars" was well below the quality of today's work; garbage mattes could be seen tracking around all the ships in the outer space shots. You will never see artifacts like that today. The technology needed to evolve, and it did... but it took time.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-16-2005, 08:26 AM:
 
You don't see garbage mattes today because they don't use model spaceships anymore. They use stuff designed in "Jr's First 3D Program" for Windows ME.
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 06-16-2005, 12:38 PM:
 
Wow! That sounds cool! Where can I get a copy of THAT program?
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 06-16-2005, 02:24 PM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

You don't see garbage mattes today because they don't use model spaceships anymore.

---

quote: Tim Reed

---

For example, the blue screen work in the first "Star Wars" was well below the quality of today's work

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

I got some good laughs from those sharks in "Deep Blue Sea." They're every bit as fake looking as the "Bruce the Shark" rig in Jaws.

---

quote: Aaron Haney

---

There is a difference between letting technology evolve when it needs to, and using it before it's ready merely because it's new.

---

quote:

---

Secure content arrives from KODAK Digital Cinema Services (our network operations center) — or other content preparation sources — on DVD-ROM, hard disk drive or, in the future, via satellite. Feature movie files arrive "encrypted" to prevent piracy, and "compressed" to reduce data-file size and make distribution more efficient.

The feature presentation, on hard disk drive or DVD-ROM, is inserted directly into the KODAK CineServer. In the server, it's automatically decrypted, decompressed, and sent to a feature-quality (up to 2K) projector for each auditorium.In this mode, the KODAK Digital Cinema Content Manager handles scheduling via its connection to the ticketing system.

---

quote:

---

Two Leading Digital Cinema Companies - Kodak and Barco - Forge Strategic Alliance to Serve the Worldwide Digital Cinema Market
Wednesday June 22, 12:00 pm ET
Kodak's Expertise in Color Science and Imaging and Barco's Leadership in Digital Cinema Projection Systems Come Together to Create Integrated Solutions for the Digital Cinema Market

LOS ANGELES & BRUSSELS, Belgium--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 22, 2005-- Eastman Kodak Company and Barco announced today they have formed a strategic alliance to more effectively serve the worldwide digital cinema market with a full menu of products, systems, and services, including installation and support.

---

quote: Louis Bornwasser

---

It looks to me that Digital television is revolutionary.

---

quote: Joe Redifer

---

Off topic a bit: Isn't the DTS DVD of Jurassic Park supposed to have pathetic subwoofer levels or something odd?

---

Yes, the sub-bass levels on the original DTS DVD release of "Jurassic Park" had really weak sub-bass. Unless you had a really high end subwoofer you wouldn't get much thump without cranking the levels. Universal has since fixed this. They offered a free trade in for the new version. I sent off for it and the "fixed" version does sound better --much closer to the system punishing DTS Laserdisc.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-28-2005, 06:27 PM:
 
Still off topic: I ask about Jurassic Park because my mom wanted to watch her DVD of it on my system, which she rarely ever has the opportunity to do, but she does appreciate good sound and widescreen and all that crap. She had the DTS only version of the DVD (which has a stereo Dolby Digital track). While she watched it, I was in another room on the other end of the house and the entire place was shaking like crazy. The mouse to my computer was rattling around, doors were shaking, it was pretty cool. I was wondering if perhaps it had too much subwoofer. But I take it that she didn't get the defective disc. Now I'm gonna have to borrow it from her to watch it. I didn't want to watch it because I had just watched my DTS LaserDisc a few weeks earlier, using the ZOOM mode on my TV and it was very grainy, as LaserDiscs tend to be.

What all this has to do with Indiana Jones: Attack of the Clones is beyond me.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-28-2005, 09:26 PM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

What all this has to do with Indiana Jones: Attack of the Clones is beyond me.

---

quote: Aaron Haney

---

I don't want to stop it. I just don't want it to look like ass.

---

Patience, man, patience. Vitaphone sounded like ass for the first couple of years; then optical sounded like ass for, what, 40 years? Anamorphic lenses looked like ass, really, until Panavision came along and eliminated the "mumps". You wanna talk image quality? Well, the switch from nitrate to safety stock was certainly a step down.

There is a context to this.
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-30-2005, 12:55 PM:
 
Still, the issue remains that commercial cinema must maintain an exclusive, higher standard of image quality for movies. It has to be something you can't equal at home. Instead it's moving toward something you can duplicate pixel for pixel at home.

For some considerable time now, I have known people who prefer watching DVDs at home because they invested a good amount of money in home theater systems. Over the past few years many theaters have allowed sound to just get weak for whatever reason. Sometimes theaters have no choice but to turn down the sound because of some old guy's complaints. In either case, I hear more comments like, "Batman was pretty good; it ought to sound fantastic on DVD!"


Whether anyone finds that kind of thinking stupid or not really makes little difference. It is a growing marketing problem of customer perceptions. The folks running movie theater chains need to get on the stick about this.

The same can of worms will be opened regarding 2K D-Cinema systems. Those with decent home setups will say, "I'll just get the HD-DVD or Blu-Ray disc and have every bit as good a picture at home." With complacent theater maintenance some markets can be expected to see a growth of viewers who find their home systems actually appear significantly better.
 

---

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 06-30-2005, 09:04 PM:
 
Bobby - while there are some people with great home theatre setups, the fact is that most people have large, but extremely crappy monitors and their audio is almost as bad. Since the advent of computer audio and MP3s, people have accepted far worse audio quality. So it's not that people can see it better in their homes, it's that people really don't give a damn about the quality or can't tell the difference. You know where most people buy their AV equipment today? From Wal-Mart or the equivalent.

I have never been to a home theatre that was setup properly. I've been to one that looked great (it was a multimillion dollar setup made to look like Radio City Music Hall), but the owner didn't even know how to operate it (he eventually called his son to get it going.) It was okay, but not great.

Even people with great equipment don't use it properly. They complain about letterboxing because they want the whole screen used, they turn the contrast up to ridiculous levels and they turn up the surrounds so there's more coming from the rear than the front (and that's if they don't place the surrounds in the front.) Or, they plug a $69 DVD player into an expensive monitor or use the video line out on a better player instead of the component video.

It's an unfortunate reality and I wish it weren't true, but it is.

It's not that I don't think that theatre owners should provide the best possible experience, but home systems generally don't make the grade either.

I saw Batman the other day on a screen that is normally quite good. The whole movie played in analog with no surrounds. No one in the theatre knew the difference. I eventually moved to another screen. It was like watching a different movie.
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-01-2005, 08:42 AM:
 

quote:

---

If 2K is plenty good enough for John and Kodak, then it should be good enough for the rest of us! Pretty soon Kodak will be an all digital company, as very few people will need film ever again. It's coming!

---

quote:

---

"We are committed to doing our part to help ensure that the digital projection technology of the future matches or exceeds the best possible image quality that exhibitors can present with 35 mm equipment," says Kodak Entertainment Imaging Division President Eric Rodli. "We believe that will ultimately require higher resolution digital projectors with a capacity for faithfully reproducing the full dynamic range of nuances in colors and contrast that today's films are capable of recording."

The Kodak CineServer unveiled at the conference is designed to enable exhibitors to decrypt, decompress and send content to up to 2K resolution projectors. Rodli says that Kodak is committed to a 4K system and will provide leadership as digital projection technology continues to evolve. He also stresses that film quality sets a moving target.

---

Last year set records for motion-picture FILM sales. This year may be even better.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-01-2005, 06:18 PM:
 
I know, with 900,000 screens of just the low budget stuff printed at super-fast speeds resulting in piss-poor registration! I sure hope you recycle a lot of that film somehow.

By the way, why even release 2K capable equipment if it's not good enough for you? You LOVE 2K! It is indeed good enough for Kodak or else they would not permit it to go to market. It is simple as that. Imagine all of those poor theaters that will have to upgrade AGAIN when the 4K comes out just to keep up with the Joneses. And then you'll come out with 8K and everyone will upgrade AGAIN! This had all better be free for theaters! And absolutely no theater should be left out. There can be no exceptions. I'm watching you guys!
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-01-2005, 06:29 PM:
 

quote: Martin Brooks

---

So it's not that people can see it better in their homes, it's that people really don't give a damn about the quality or can't tell the difference. You know where most people buy their AV equipment today? From Wal-Mart or the equivalent.

---