How much does it cost to properly scan and transfer Ultra Panavision 70/MGM Camera 65 Films? (4 Viewers)

[jayembee]

"The Hateful 8". They must be out of their minds, I would never spend even the price of a senior's theatre ticket on that piece of garbage.

I guess the "hateful" count is now at "9".

 

[Noel Aguirre]

It could be argued that the studios could afford themselves the luxury to strike a print even when it will not earn back that money in its entirety and many did just that. Even MGM did it with Khartoum, a film that nobody will accuse of raking in the money these days.

Here is a bunch of new 70mm Prints that have been struck over the years since the late 80s and that to my knowledge can/could be officially booked:

Warner:
2001

MGM:
West Side Story
It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World
Khartoum

Universal:
Vertigo
Spartacus
Airport

Sony:
Lawrence of Arabia
Lord Jim

Fox in pre Disney times:
South Pacific
Cleopatra
The Sound of Music
Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines
The Agony and the Ecstasy
Dr. Dolittle
Star!
Hello, Dolly!
Patton

According to Shawn Belston the only Fox 65mm productions that did not get new 70mm prints simply weren't in good enough condition to strike new prints without too much of an effort, namely Oklahoma! and Can-Can.

And then there are movies that are not closely associated with a single studio these days or that were funded independently:

Ben-Hur (cropped to 2.2:1)
Flying Clipper
My Fair Lady
Playtime

Warner is really quite disappointing when it comes to new prints, Fox was excellent, the other studios are somewhere in between.

And somebody who lives in L.A. he may also have been lucky to catch a screening of these or at least these are known to have been screened from new elements that however cannot be booked to my knowledge:

The Greatest Story Ever Told
Grand Prix
Ryan's Daughter

Where are these prints being shown? They're certainly not being shown in NYC. It’s all DCP here as far as I know.

 

[OliverK]

Where are these prints being shown? They're certainly not being shown in NYC. It’s all DCP here as far as I know.

They are shown all over the world.
I have only seen these prints in half a dozen European cinemas but I probably managed to watch about 80% of the movies I mentioned.

Many screenings worldwide should appear here so maybe something pops up in New York:

Now showing in 70mm in a theatre near you!

there are even festivals at the museum of the moving image, maybe again in 2023?

"SEE IT BIG!" 70MM Series @ Museum of the Moving Image, New York, USA

"SEE IT BIG!" 70MM Series @ Museum of the Moving Image, New York, USA

7OMM Festival 2016 in New York, USA

See It Big: 70mm! – Museum of the Moving Image

With a higher resolution and more light hitting the frame, 70mm film offers a bigger, brighter image than 35mm.

movingimage.us

 

[mskaye]

With a population of about 330 million in the U.S. alone, surely there is enough of a market demand to justify restoring and preserving films like El Cid or The Fall of the Roman Empire to a condition releasable as a Blu-ray, if not 4K, which might understandably be a stretch. More than two generations past the era when they were made, enough admirers are still alive who would appreciate seeing these films in as close to original condition as possible that, if not runaway best sellers, the releases could at least turn a decent profit and also allow younger film fans to discover titles like these for their epic visual and audio qualities (both have superb scores by Miklos Rozsa and Dimitri Tiomkin, respectively). Add foreign markets to the equation, and hopefully the effort would be financially viable.

There is no correlation between the population of the US and the need for blu rays of those two titles. I'm a film lover and love Anthony Mann's work and have zero interest in those films. For the record, my issue is not with those films but your assumption that this is a slam dunk excellent business proposition for anyone to do.

 

[Noel Aguirre]

They are shown all over the world.
I have only seen these prints in half a dozen European cinemas but I probably managed to watch about 80% of the movies I mentioned.

Many screenings worldwide should appear here so maybe something pops up in New York:

Now showing in 70mm in a theatre near you!

there are even festivals at the museum of the moving image, maybe again in 2023?

"SEE IT BIG!" 70MM Series @ Museum of the Moving Image, New York, USA

"SEE IT BIG!" 70MM Series @ Museum of the Moving Image, New York, USA

7OMM Festival 2016 in New York, USA

See It Big: 70mm! – Museum of the Moving Image

With a higher resolution and more light hitting the frame, 70mm film offers a bigger, brighter image than 35mm.

movingimage.us

Ah Queens. No wonder I’ve never been- I’m in Manhattan.
Has anyone seen a 70MM at this venue? Is it worth going under a tunnel or over a bridge for?

 

[OliverK]

Ah Queens. No wonder I’ve never been- I’m in Manhattan.
Has anyone seen a 70MM at this venue? Is it worth going under a tunnel or over a bridge for?

People go to another city, country or continent to watch these prints so I think you can risk to go to another part of New York to check it out for yourself.

They have a number of movies with James Caan coming up and for example next Saturday you could go there and catch The Yards in 35mm:

The Caan Film Festival – Museum of the Moving Image

This special September edition celebrates the life, career, and legacy of the legendary James Caan, who sadly died earlier this summer. The series brings together more than a dozen films spanning half a century.

movingimage.us

Maybe you could chat with some of the staff and ask when they will have their next 70mm festival.

 

[uncledougie]

There is no correlation between the population of the US and the need for blu rays of those two titles. I'm a film lover and love Anthony Mann's work and have zero interest in those films. For the record, my issue is not with those films but your assumption that this is a slam dunk excellent business proposition for anyone to do.

I was not seriously conflating demographics and demand, that part was tongue in cheek, only pointing out that there are enough fans of these epic films, which have sufficient evidence of being desired by comments I’ve seen over many years in this and other forums, that each would make for viable releases. I’m sure many of those requesting these titles may not even know who directed them, that one was an Allied Artists release and the other from Paramount. Maybe some just like Sophia Loren and disregard other factors. I know there are many releases I have no interest in that surface all the time, but I don’t begrudge anyone their tastes or titles on their want list. The varied tastes account for the fact that some films are offered I cannot fathom anyone wanting. And good for the fans if their wants are fulfilled. Would they be huge money makers, likely not, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t turn a modest profit.

 

[cadavra]

Where are these prints being shown? They're certainly not being shown in NYC. It’s all DCP here as far as I know.

The Aero Theatre in Santa Monica had a month-long 70mm festival this past July. I only went to MAD WORLD, and unsurprisingly it was sold out, as I imagine a few others were. And during my years in Repertory, there were plenty of theatres that regularly played 70s, especially those that had installed the projectors for the reissue of VERTIGO in the late 90s and were delighted to give them some more use, so I made sure those prints were not junked.

 

[M90GM]

The reality is, with the exception of massive hits and cult films, blu-rays of older titles are lucky to sell 5000 copies.

Let's hope the releasing companies do a better marketing job to create more of an interest in the old movies in an attempt to broaden the sales potential....while Kino continue to release a massive backlog of "ordinary" (as in average original b/o & critical recognition) titles Warner continue to lock down 100's of MGM "A" released titles (b/o, critical, "star" & technical benefits (C'Scope & stereo). Obviously the concern at Warner is there is too limited a market to warrant upgrading to Blu. Why does Kino & the other 2nd tier distributors not do a "deal" to unlock titles Warner will not use.....on going frustration as month by month fewer & fewer MGM titles are receiving Blu treatment...,

 

[Robin9]

. . . . Warner continue to lock down 100's of MGM "A" released titles (b/o, critical, "star" & technical benefits (C'Scope & stereo). Obviously the concern at Warner is there is too limited a market to warrant upgrading to Blu.

I don't know why you believe that when we have discussed this issue innumerable times in this forum.

The number of titles owned by Warner is enormous and the cost of preparing each title to their very high standard within their limited budget means only a handful can be released in any one year. Warner have released several titles for which there is probably a limited market and I have bought many of them, e.g. Athena, Great Day In The Morning, Underwater! etc. etc.

 

[OliverK]

I don't know why you believe that when we have discussed this issue innumerable times in this forum.

The number of titles owned by Warner is enormous and the cost of preparing each title to their very high standard within their limited budget means only a handful can be released in any one year. Warner have released several titles for which there is probably a limited market and I have bought many of them, e.g. Athena, Great Day In The Morning, Underwater! etc. etc.

I do not think that anybody wants Warner to release less high quality releases. But many people would rather see a lesser release for some titles instead of no release at all.

As Warner will not do it this would be an opportunity for other companies to release those titles, it is not as if Warner will be able to release them all over the next 10 or even 20 years.

But indeed we have been there before and it is up to Warner and not us to make changes.

 

[Panavision70]

What is the point of making a film today in Ultra Panavision when there are almost no theaters IN THE WORLD capable of showing such a film?

 

[mskaye]

What is the point of making a film today in Ultra Panavision when there are almost no theaters IN THE WORLD capable of showing such a film?

I think you are missing the point of that aesthetic choice. For the few filmmakers that choose to shoot in that format, and who have the Hollywood and financial clout to have it filmed and then projected on film in 65/70mm (Tarantino) in a few choice venues, it was worth it. Paul Thomas Anderson shot The Master in 70mm too. Even seeing it on Netflix, the image fidelity and the emotional impact of choosing to shoot in that format was very evident. And emotionally, for the cast and crew, they are working on something "SPECIAL" and that has a profound impact on everything in that entire film's production because of the resolution and sheer beauty of that format.

 

[OliverK]

What is the point of making a film today in Ultra Panavision when there are almost no theaters IN THE WORLD capable of showing such a film?

What is the point of shooting multiple movies in ever changing aspect ratios?
In each case the director wanted to do it and had the cloud to go through with it.

UP70 is a beautiful format and I like it much better than a presentation that leaves much of the movie without proper masking or with a significant part of the picture missing.

 

[Patrick McCart]

Large format photography is probably a little more practical now that there's digital intermediates and DCP projection. Most recently, NOPE, was shot in a mix of both standard and IMAX 65mm plus 6.5K Arri Alexa and Super-35. Quite striking when I saw it in 4K digital. I believe the Ultra Panavision lenses made for The Hateful Eight were also used on Rogue One, as well as Avengers Infinity War and Endgame.

 

[uncledougie]

I’ve just been made aware that Andy Serkis’s directorial debut, Breathe (2017), with Andrew Garfield was originally presented in the UP ratio of 2.76:1. It was recommended to me by friends and I see it’s to be shown on Starz this coming week, so I have set the DVR. That ratio is certainly a rare choice these days, and I hope it will be shown as originally filmed.

 

[Robert Harris]

I think you are missing the point of that aesthetic choice. For the few filmmakers that choose to shoot in that format, and who have the Hollywood and financial clout to have it filmed and then projected on film in 65/70mm (Tarantino) in a few choice venues, it was worth it. Paul Thomas Anderson shot The Master in 70mm too. Even seeing it on Netflix, the image fidelity and the emotional impact of choosing to shoot in that format was very evident. And emotionally, for the cast and crew, they are working on something "SPECIAL" and that has a profound impact on everything in that entire film's production because of the resolution and sheer beauty of that format.

With all of the large format digital alternatives available today, I’d prefer to see the added millions in cost going toward charitable pursuits.

 

[Worth]

I think you are missing the point of that aesthetic choice. For the few filmmakers that choose to shoot in that format, and who have the Hollywood and financial clout to have it filmed and then projected on film in 65/70mm (Tarantino) in a few choice venues, it was worth it. Paul Thomas Anderson shot The Master in 70mm too. Even seeing it on Netflix, the image fidelity and the emotional impact of choosing to shoot in that format was very evident. And emotionally, for the cast and crew, they are working on something "SPECIAL" and that has a profound impact on everything in that entire film's production because of the resolution and sheer beauty of that format.

I like film, I’ll even go out of my way to see a movie projected on film, but I seriously doubt anyone could tell the difference between something shot and projected in 65mm versus a film-out of something shot on an Alexa 65 at this point.

 

[mskaye]

I like film, I’ll even go out of my way to see a movie projected on film, but I seriously doubt anyone could tell the difference between something shot and projected in 65mm versus a film-out of something shot on an Alexa 65 at this point.

The director, the cast, the people making the film know the difference. Cinema experts and those that know cinematography can tell. I worked for a magazine for years. Some photographers shot on 4x5 or 8x10 film. To me, the people being photographed - we understood that they were doing something special and with intention. We didn't do it for the average reader to discern the technical difference.

 

[Brian Husar]

With all of the large format digital alternatives available today, I’d prefer to see the added millions in cost going toward charitable pursuits.

I was always “film film film” and I believed what Nolan and QT would say. And then I saw The Revenant, and most of it was shot with a new camera to me, the Arri Alexa 65. It was cinematic, probably how Lean and Freddie Young would have shot Lawrence if they were here today. I learned that it was a 65mm digital camera and you can use a whole bunch of 65MM lenses. Kind of thought Panavision would have been the first. I know they had a prototype around 2013, but now Panavision has the Millennium DXL 2 and you can use the Super Panavision Lenses on them. Now I am a convert. I just wish they would hype them up. We need old Hollywood hype. Filmed In Glorious Alexa 65.