Guys, I know this is a sore topic for many who would have loved the Smilebox version but can't get it because it's only available in Blu-ray, but let me just say, if you've been waiting for a good reason to get a Blu-ray player, this should be it. I imagine the letterbox version looks great in SD, but the Smilebox version is nothing short of astonishing.
I scanned through the letterbox version last night after watching the Smilebox version, and while it's without a doubt an amazing transfer, it just doesn't give you the sense of depth that the curved screen simulation provides.
I'd love to see THIS IS CINERAMA the same way, and of course, TWWOTBG, but I wouldn't hesitate to double-dip to see the 50's and 60's big screen epics in Smilebox HD, as well. I really hope this title is a big hit for Warners and that they decide to make Smilebox the next step in video presentation for large format epics like this one.
It would be interesting as a curiosity, but in the case of true three-panel Cinerama films, it makes a lot more sense due to the image consisting of three separate wide angle frames photographed at angles to each other. The curvature on real Cinerama films is justified by the way they were photographed whereas on the other large format films, it had to be artificially introduced.
It was originally planned as a two disc set Brian, but it was switched to three (both the SE and UCE, despite internet scuttlebutt to the contrary) - two for the film, one for the extras.
I think you are right, Ken, for all the films you mention save 80 Days. The early Todd AO installations all had reasonably deeply curved screens although this was dropped from about "South Pacific" onwards. When this opened in London in April 1958, the depth of the curve had dropped to about 5 feet. Originally, it was much deeper.
I would love a smilebox 80 Days( although I wait patiently- well not really- for my HTWWW and have yet to see it), but given the poor state of the negs, this would appear unlikely.
There were nine films that were filmed in a 3-strip process and promoted as being "In Cinerama" that could benefit from being shown in the Smilebox process. The five Cinerama travelogue films, Windjammer which was filmed in Cinemiracle, How The West Was Won, The Wonderful World of The Brothers Grimm and also Cinerama's Russian Adventure which was filmed in the Russian Kinopanorama 3-strip process.
There were also twenty films - It's a Mad, Mad, Mad World, Circus World , 2001: A Space Odyssey, etc. that were filmed in various 70mm and 35mm film formats that were later promoted as being "In Cinerama" and projected on the deeply curved Cinerama screen. I guess they could be released in the Smilebox process if people wanted to see what they would have looked like on a Cinerama screen. The Ultra Panavision films would look the best as they have a 2.76:1 aspect ratio and were cropped to 2.6:1 on a Cinerama screen. But the remaining films that were mostly in 70mm which were 2.2:1 would have to be stretched to 2.6:1 so, they would look distorted if Smileboxed.
I agree, but I think we'd have to admit that any - any- film projected onto a deeply curved screen, including true Cinerama films, are subject to a certain amount of distortion. HTWWW itself, whether shown flat or curved, distorts because of the very wide-angle lenses used by the Cinerama camera. I don't think these films ever meant to look realistic, otherwise they would have been shot and exhibited flat.
Personally, I hate watching modern scope movies at the Cinerama Dome because they are not shot to be shown on a deeply curved screen, so the distortions are ugly and unintended, to say the least.
But Ultra Panavision pictures like BEN-HUR, MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY, KHARTOUM and IAMMMMW definitely had deep curvatures in mind when shot. I think they'd be very appropriate in Smilebox, as would the early Todd-AO movies and 2001.
I don't think Ben-Hur or Mutiny on The Bounty were shown on any Cinerama screens during their roadshow release. On the documentary for It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, Stanley Kramer mentions it wasn't until they had completed or near completion of the film that UA decided to promote it as being 'In Cinerama'.
I saw Ben-Hur on a reissue at the Casino Cinerama theatre in London, circa 1970, and it looked terrible on that screen and I saw it again at a Cinerama theatre in Bristol, UK, and it didn't look right there, either. The only non three-panel films that looked OK on the deep curve were Mad World, Grand Prix and 2001. I guess we should also include The Bible and Patton which were also designed for the deep curve D-150 process.
You'd have to wonder whether you saw an Ultra Panavision print or a flat 70mm print. I saw a flat 70mm print of BEN-HUR at the Cinerama Dome and it didn't look right, either. I imagine a wider UP print would be a different story, but I really don't know. Either way, the film would look a bit distorted but my whole point is that the Smilebox, whether in its extreme current form in the HTWWW DVD or in a softer (less "curved") form, would give the film some of its original giant screen oomph.
What I think most people don't realize is that when Cinerama converted from 3 strip to single strip, they also masked off a considerable amount of the sides of the screen. I know that at the Honolulu Cinerama, they moved both side masking panels inwards about 5 or 6 feet when they converted for single strip. Even with that change they still needed specially ground lenses to achieve reasonable focus across the entire image.
To the best of my knowlege, Ultra Panavision / Camera 65 were not usually presented on curved screens at all. I know that when I saw "Mutiny On The Bounty" in San Francisco at the Coronet or Baronet (I don't remember which) using 70mm anamorphic, I was very disappointed when the deeply curved curtains opened to reaveal a totally FLAT screen. Even then, they had focus problems due to lens drift from the heat of the arc lamps.
In a stationary screenshot, the smilebox version looks quite odd to me. Things may be different with a moving picture though.
One big disadvantage of the smilebox transfer is the noticable cropping at both sides, which is hereby confirmed to exist not only in the clips from the Cinerama documentary but in the feature itsself.