Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan Fathom Event September 10 and 13th (1 Viewer)

[Wayne_j]

For the 35th anniversary The Wrath of Khan will have a Fathom Event on September 10th and 13th. Introduction by Shatner.

 

[Osato]

For the 35th anniversary The Wrath of Khan will have a Fathom Event on September 10th and 13th. Introduction by Shatner.

Very excited about this event!
I have my ticket for one of the Sunday showings!

I just ordered this last night too!

https://mondotees.com/products/star-trek-ii-the-wrath-of-khan-ost-2xlp?variant=28163934851

 

[Osato]

For the 35th anniversary The Wrath of Khan will have a Fathom Event on September 10th and 13th. Introduction by Shatner.

Here is the event link:
https://www.fathomevents.com/events/star-trek-ii

 

[Tino]

I'll see this. But tbh I would rather see TMP on the big screen again.

 

[Osato]

48 hours!!!!!

https://trekmovie.com/2017/09/06/in...ked-if-he-would-appear-in-discovery-and-more/

 

[Osato]

Nick.....

https://trekmovie.com/2017/09/01/in...-shatner-and-the-unsung-hero-of-star-trek-ii/

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I'll see this. But tbh I would rather see TMP on the big screen again.

Want to pool resources and see if we can rent a theater and print? I don't know how much one of the smaller theaters would charge for a rental, or if Paramount would even rent a print out to them (though the IFC Center did get a 35mm print of Star Trek IV a few years ago, so anything's possible), but I'd be willing to pay $50 or maybe even $100 to see a 35mm print of TMP on the big screen.

 

[Osato]

Want to pool resources and see if we can rent a theater and print? I don't know how much one of the smaller theaters would charge for a rental, or if Paramount would even rent a print out to them (though the IFC Center did get a 35mm print of Star Trek IV a few years ago, so anything's possible), but I'd be willing to pay $50 or maybe even $100 to see a 35mm print of TMP on the big screen.

Yes!

Bill Hunt posted a rumor that a uhd blu ray release for Wrath of Khan is in the works for late this year or early next!!!!

 

[Josh Steinberg]

So, did anyone see this tonight?

I caught the 7pm tonight and have mixed feelings. When I bought the ticket, the theater had it scheduled to play on their second largest screen (their largest non-premium screen). For $12.50, that seemed worthwhile, and I was looking forward to it. But when I got to the theater tonight, they had moved it into their smallest auditorium, which didn't feel too much larger than my projector at home. I didn't want to ask for a refund since I had already traveled there and gotten snacks from the concession stand, but it was disappointing. The reason I usually don't attend these things is because they're usually not given presentations better than what I can do at home; I was excited that this would be different, and was disappointed that it didn't work out that way.

Probably about thirty people there, though I did see that another theater showing it in NYC was just about sold out. I swear I'm like a magnet for bad behavior in public places, and today was no exception. The couple in front of me were talking throughout the first half of the movie. Then, about halfway through the movie, her head seemed to disappear into his lap and the talking stopped. I didn't want to look any closer... Oh, and great little moment with another audience member earlier in the film. When Khan puts the creature in Chekov's ear and they show that closeup of the bug crawling in, one audience member just got up and practically ran for the exits! Guess she hadn't seen the film before...

The Shatner interview was a mixed bag. I always enjoy hearing Shatner talk, but the interviewer was a bit of a dummy. I can't believe he actually interrupted Shatner's recollections to correct a really minor detail, it just rubbed me the wrong way.

And I was surprised that, at least at my screening, it didn't look as good as the Blu-ray. Some parts looked pretty good, but others looked worn out, a little fuzzy, and had inconsistent sound quality. Ever see a movie in 35mm where it's clearly a combination of reels from different prints? That's almost what this was like, only it was digital so that couldn't have been the reason. But you'd get a nice chunk with good color, focus and sound, and then another chunk where the color seemed to drain a little, the focus and detail were less sharp, and the sound would seem oddly tinny. I really have no idea what the heck was going on there, but I was surprised that it looked inferior to the BD.

And yet, despite all of those nitpicks... it's The Wrath Of Khan. I can't not get swept up in it, and of course I got teary-eyed at the end. I always love this movie, whether it's on VHS or on TV with commercials or DVD or BD or a great 35mm print or a lousy DCP.

 

[Blimpoy06]

Josh, sorry for your less than ideal experience at the theater. I'm not a fan of digital presentations in theaters and tend to stay away even from new films for this reason. I did catch the Roger Moore Bond double feature this summer after his death. I attended mostly because a proceed of the earnings were to go to UNICEF, as he was a former ambassador. The presentation was flawless of both and I quickly forgot I was viewing digital.
I remember in advance of Star Trek VI in 1991 there were select theaters doing a "Sit Long and Prosper" showing of the first five films. I came away a new fan of TMP. Having only been 10 when the film was initially released I was unable to appreciate the artistry of the movie at the time. TMP is meant for the big screen. I hope to have a chance to see it that way again.

 

[Carabimero]

And I was surprised that, at least at my screening, it didn't look as good as the Blu-ray.

I saw it at 7pm and it didn't look nearly as good as the BD, IMHO. But it was great seeing it on the big screen again after 35 years.

I actually feel this way about most movies I see in the theater: they don't look or sound as good as movies in my home theater. I realize the larger you project an image, the less sharp it tends to be, but still, when I consciously focus on details of a picture in the theater and then later when it's released on disc I go home and compare, those theatrical details are rarely as clear in my memory as on my BD. When I get same-day comparison as with WOK, it confirms my belief.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I did catch the Roger Moore Bond double feature this summer after his death. I attended mostly because a proceed of the earnings were to go to UNICEF, as he was a former ambassador. The presentation was flawless of both and I quickly forgot I was viewing digital.

I had the same experience with those digital presentations - they looked fantastic.

actually feel this way about most movies I see in the theater: they don't look or sound as good as movies in my home theater. I realize the larger you project an image, the less sharp it tends to be, but still, when I consciously focus on details of a picture in the theater and then later when it's released on disc I go home and compare, those theatrical details are rarely as clear in my memory as on my BD. And when I get same-day comparison as with WOK, it confirms my belief.

It saddens me because I've seen plenty of examples of good theatrical presentations, both film and digital. At a minimum, I'd like what I see in a theater to equal what I see at home, and ideally I'd like it to exceed that. Unfortunately, that didn't happen here. I wonder if maybe this was sent over satellite or delivered as a compressed digital download, rather than a standard DCP? The new 4K master they used for the BD last year was also the source for this presentation - it should have looked and sounded flawless. (At least it didn't cost the $23.50 that my local theater wanted for Close Encounters!)

 

[Carabimero]

One odd thing about the release is nowhere on it does it say it's the director's cut. Given this, is this now considered the official release of the movie?

One nice thing was seeing this in the theater with my wife. We met shortly after this originally left theaters and never thought we'd have a chance to see it theatrically together. Dinner and a show---The Wrath of Khan!

 

[Wayne_j]

I saw a fathom events ad before IT today and they specified that it is the director's cut.

 

[Tino]

Every ad I have seen has said it's the directors cut.

 

[Carabimero]

I'm not talking about ads. Of course it's the director's cut. What I am saying is that NOWHERE ON THE ACTUAL FILM does it say director's cut. And I think that's wrong.

 

[Greg.K]

Saw this on Sunday. 2pm showing. Theater had maybe 20 or so people in it. It was interesting seeing this on the big screen again for the first time since '82.

I learned some things from the interview (For instance, I never knew Montalban was so buff in this film because he was losing use of his legs at that time and worked out more to compensate).

 

[Joel Fontenot]

I'm not talking about ads. Of course it's the director's cut. What I am saying is that NOWHERE ON THE ACTUAL FILM does it say director's cut. And I think that's wrong.

Does any director's cut actually say "The Director's Cut" on the film itself - opening credits, ending credits or otherwise? It is true that some "Special Editions" will have a section added at the end credits to account for additional work done on a film if any, but that's all I'm aware of.

 

[Jason_V]

Does any director's cut actually say "The Director's Cut" on the film itself - opening credits, ending credits or otherwise? It is true that some "Special Editions" will have a section added at the end credits to account for additional work done on a film if any, but that's all I'm aware of.

I honestly can't say I remember any extended/director's/work print cut renaming the movie in the in-movie titles.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Batman V Superman does say "Ultimate Version" in the feature, and Almost Famous is renamed "Untitled" but that kind of change onscreen is rare.

Another 1982 film, Blade Runner, retains its original title across all five versions.