Haggai

Jack, that's too bad. Relative to my last post, I have seen 2001 in 35 mm, so less jealousy from me now.

Zen, I DID see Lawrence in 70 mm two weeks ago, sorry my post didn't make that more clear. It was indeed an astonishing experience, and the first sunrise was as mind-blowing as everyone says it is. But, I stand by my irritation whenever somebody says "you've never seen it AT ALL until you've seen it that way!" It makes a big difference, absolutely, but I don't like it when people who don't have access to theaters who show things in that format (i.e., most people in the US) are made to feel like posers.

Peter Kline

Jack, talking to a human can sometimes have advantages.
Sorry to hear that its only a 35mm print - even if it is a brand new one. However, to be honest, showing a 70mm print on a deeply (or moderately deeply curved at the Dome) screen does remove some image from view. The geometry makes it necessary to over project and you lose the top and bottom of the image, particularly in the center. Even if the 70mm print were "rectified" that would only compensate for the slight stretch on either side. Since there were no 70mm Cinerama prints that were rectified for "2001" that is a moot point. I think showing the film in 70mm on a flatter or only slightly curved screen such as the one at the Egyptian, provides a much better presentation. Just trying to make you feel better..........

Jack Briggs

Hey, even a 35mm print is better than in a home theater, in many ways. Though I did pass up on a recent 35mm run of this film at the New Beverly Cinema just a few blocks from me. What with the New Beverly's lousy sound and hard seats, I would much rather screen the DVD on my main HT system. Better sound, comparable image, albeit taking up much smaller real estate.

However, a new 35mm print screened in any of the other Arclight venues would be nice.

Again, sorry for the letdown. I will note, though, that the AFI promo copy used at Arclight's Website discusses the 70mm shoot. Which led me to think, well, obviously, they're running this thing in the Dome.

I blame faulty intelligence.

PeterK

If the movie was originally filmed on 35mm how is there a 70mm copy available?

Peter Kline

PeterK (nice name)
The film was shot in 70mm. There were reduction prints made to 35mm where theatres couldn't show 70mm films. Some films shot in 35mm were blown up to 70mm during the heyday of the format in the 60s and 70s to take advantage of the medium. Many so-called IMAX films now showing are original 35mm films blown up to 70mm for presentation.

Zen Butler

My ticket says it's playing in the

Upper 10

PeterK

So What kind of screen size are we talking here?

Peter Apruzzese

If it's the newer 35mm version, the print should contain analog Dolby Stereo, DTS and Dolby Digital, playback will be dependent on what the venue supports. They haven't made any prints (of anything) in magnetic stereo since 1984 or so.

I'm playing it in DTS...

Movies the way they were meant to be seen: Big Screen Classics at the Lafayette Theatre

Jack Briggs

Well, Peter, your sig message says it all.

So, how many still want to see this thing?

Zen Butler

Jack, I'm sorry this is such a disapointment for you.

Although, I have a decent enough rig, a 35mm presentation is always welcome.

So far Jack, RobertR and I are going and already have our seats reserved. Grant B(from Haight/Ash), will be at his spot in Long Beach, he is a possible.

Jack Briggs

Then, I suppose my friend Laura and I will be there. Haven't spoke to Dave since Friday.

Since — ahem — I have seen this film a couple of times, I'm not as seat-critical. It would just be more for the fun of getting together and, oh yes, there happens to be a very nice film planned for tonight ...