70MM FILMS -HOW MANY HAVE YOU SEEN? (1 Viewer)

[Robert Harris]

35 to 70 blow-ups only work visually (audio is generally quality 6-tracks) when the prints are struck either directly from the 35 OCNs, as with Zhivago, or if the 35 is taken from OCN to a 65 dupe to 70 print.

Some were created going 35 IP to 65 dupe, and any large format look was lost.

RAH

 

[AdrianTurner]

The Coliseum in London was the best Cinerama I ever saw. Bradford's screen is too small but the sheer emotion of seeing HTWWW and Brothers Grimm in three-strip outweighed all the technical weaknesses of both cinema and print condition. The Royalty in London was always a rather poor Cinerama venue. I also saw My Fair Lady on the Cinerama screen in Birmingham and Ben-Hur in Bristol. Neither looked any good on the curve.

 

[AnthonyClarke]

Oklahoma! and South Pacific and My Fair Lady were the standouts for me, in Melbourne, and 2001 A Space Odyssey in its original run in Paris in about 1968. At least I'm presuming it was 70 mm but am happy to be corrected .. I remember it on a big wide curved Cinerama screen.
There were many many more but they were the absolute standouts.

 

[trajan]

Does anyone believe Fox will release these two TODD-AO pictures anytime soon--DOCTOR DOLITTLE ----STAR! Same with Warner and RYANS DAUGHTER.

 

[DP 70]

The only other ones I can recall Derek that were blow up to 70mm and shown in D150 at the Marble Arch Odeon were Lion in Winter and the Professionals. As far as the worst blow up to 70mm I have seen, it was Gettysburg which I saw down here in Sydney . Excellent film but looked like crap. I did see Song of Norway at the Casino and must say it looked superb. Pin sharp, great colour and a good sounding sound track that made the most of the sound installation there.Although the reviews were only too happy to heap scorn on it , approached in the right mood, it was silly but enjoyable fun. Ran for about a year there and was, as it was made on a shoe string, was financially successful.

Thanks again John, I have seen The Lion in Winter twice in 70mm and the soundtrack was Mono.

 

[john a hunter]

Thanks again John, I have seen The Lion in Winter twice in 70mm and the soundtrack was Mono.

You are probably right about the sound for Lion. Can recall the picture but not the sound which probably means mono. I do seem to recall the Professionals as stereo though.

 

[SteveJKo]

Actually, what attracts me most, is that with so few venues / projectionists capable of safely and properly projecting 70mm on film, 4k is the only way to go.As far as picture quality, 4k has the edge.RAH

Mr. Harris, what about the other side of the coin? If 4k projection now has the edge in the presentation of 70mm films, are there any digital cameras that now (or about to enter the market) have an edge on Super Panavision, Technirama, Vistavision, Todd-AO, and the like? I have to admit I miss the days of seeing the photographic process name up there on the screen (I can't even remember the last time I saw a credit for anamorphic Panavision). The showman in me would love to see a credit for "Super Panavision 70 Digital", or something along those lines, up there on the big screen.

 

[DP 70]

Mr. Harris, what about the other side of the coin? If 4k projection now has the edge in the presentation of 70mm films, are there any digital cameras that now (or about to enter the market) have an edge on Super Panavision, Technirama, Vistavision, Todd-AO, and the like? I have to admit I miss the days of seeing the photographic process name up there on the screen (I can't even remember the last time I saw a credit for anamorphic Panavision). The showman in me would love to see a credit for "Super Panavision 70 Digital", or something along those lines, up there on the big screen.

If its all Digital why put 70 in the credit?

 

[ROclockCK]

Anyone know what happened with Far and Away? Although a handsome production, which received very good quality presentation in one of our best THX venues of the day, it never quite looked like large format to me...or at least as I remembered it...especially in terms of screen transparency*.

* I actually asked the theatre manager if they had been given a 35mm print by mistake.

 

[SteveJKo]

If its all Digital why put 70 in the credit?

Very true, unless there was some sort of sensor or something to indicate it's qualities were similar to 70mm film.

 

[Robert Harris]

Mr. Harris, what about the other side of the coin? If 4k projection now has the edge in the presentation of 70mm films, are there any digital cameras that now (or about to enter the market) have an edge on Super Panavision, Technirama, Vistavision, Todd-AO, and the like? I have to admit I miss the days of seeing the photographic process name up there on the screen (I can't even remember the last time I saw a credit for anamorphic Panavision). The showman in me would love to see a credit for "Super Panavision 70 Digital", or something along those lines, up there on the big screen.

Afaik, film still has the edge over digital as a capture mechanism.Depends though upon final use. If playback will be solely over broadcast, shouldn't matter.For theatrical, film, but that infrastructure is lessoning daily.RAH

 

[Robert Harris]

Anyone know what happened with Far and Away? Although a handsome production, which received very good quality presentation in one of our best THX venues of the day, it never quite looked like large format to me...or at least as I remembered it...especially in terms of screen transparency*. * I actually asked the theatre manager if they had been given a 35mm print by mistake.

Many theatres no longer had the ability to properly run a quality 70 performance...Or didn't care to.RAH

 

[OliverK]

Anyone know what happened with Far and Away? Although a handsome production, which received very good quality presentation in one of our best THX venues of the day, it never quite looked like large format to me...or at least as I remembered it...especially in terms of screen transparency*. * I actually asked the theatre manager if they had been given a 35mm print by mistake.

I saw Far and Away back to back with other 70mm prints like Mutiny on the Bounty and Cleopatra - guess which one looked like 35mm... So I have to agree that it certainly did not look the part, same impression here. Plus it didn't have a 70mm feel to it with regard to its cinematography and story, that didn't help either.

 

[ROclockCK]

Many theatres no longer had the ability to properly run a quality 70 performance...Or didn't care to.RAH

But as OliverK noted, other decades-older large format pictures looked much better than Far and Away even unspooling in the same venue.

Could there still be a beautiful 4k DCP experience in there somewhere...closer to what we associate with large format...if Universal goes back and rescans the original negative?

 

[trajan]

FAR AND AWAY had very heavy filter difussion in its cinematography. This may be a factor. Off subject,but I would like Universal to go back and scan the TODD-AO elements of AIRPORT. Now that would be impressive. I know, that will never happen.

 

[john a hunter]

Many theatres no longer had the ability to properly run a quality 70 performance...Or didn't care to.RAH

I seem to recall that of the 350 odd 70mm prints only a select handful came from the original neg. That plus old lenses that couldn't resolve the better emulsions and as Robert says, lack of care, resulted in such a poor result.

 

[OliverK]

I seem to recall that of the 350 odd 70mm prints only a select handful came from the original neg.

Probably the reason why the print that I saw was so disappointing, others looked very sharp in the samevenue over the course of three days that I was there. I thought that both Far and Away and Hamlet were unsuited for a revival of the 70mm format and Hamlet also looked mediocre.

 

[Cinescott]

Sadly, I have only seen one true 70MM presentation, and that was Lawrence of Arabia in '89. I have seen a number of blow-ups to 70, but they didn't have anywhere near the same impact, those being Close Encounters in '78 and The Empire Strikes Back ('80?).

 

[cinerama10]

Many theatres no longer had the ability to properly run a quality 70 performance...Or didn't care to.


It could also be a case of cinemas not being allowed to show a 70mm film if it has previously been screened in a digital version . (At least that is the case in Australia for all films). 2001 A SPACE ODYSSEY gets shown in 70mm in Melbourne but in Sydney it is only shown in digital. This is despite both cinemas having 70mm projectors and generally sharing 70mm prints. (THE MASTER-for example).

Today it is often a case of the sound on digital films being played too loud..It puts me off going to the cinema . With film, the sound was generally played at a reasonable level as there were projectionists to monitor the situation. Today automation has taken over.. Only once did I ever experience a 70mm film having the sound played so loud that it drowned out much of the dialogue in places. That was when I saw APOCALYPSE NOW in Paris.

Also just how many projectionists are truly trained in showing film

 

[cinerama10]

Does anyone believe Fox will release these two TODD-AO pictures anytime soon--DOCTOR DOLITTLE ----STAR! Same with Warner and RYANS DAUGHTER.

They have already been released on DVD.I suppose you mean them being released on Bluray? STAR is brilliant and one of the most underrated films of all time.Stunning in 70mm. it was also a massive flop. Ryan's Daughter was overlong but watchable .DOCTOR DOLITTLE did nothing for me or anyone else. Not worth being released on bluray. I would love to see CAN - CAN released on bluray.