70 MM Film May Make A Comeback In Theaters.

[spectre08]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

Like your icon, glad I got to see that Spike Lee masterpiece projected in beautiful 35mm back in 2002!

i was working in a theater when it released. I think I watched it a dozen times before it left.

[klauswhereareyou]

Originally Posted by spectre08

i was working in a theater when it released. I think I watched it a dozen times before it left.

Would you rather have watched it digitally projected?

[spectre08]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

Would you rather have watched it digitally projected?

I wouldn't have cared one way or another, and I can't be entirely sure I didn't. That was around the same time we were getting our first digital projectors.

[klauswhereareyou]

Originally Posted by spectre08

I wouldn't have cared one way or another, and I can't be entirely sure I didn't. That was around the same time we were getting our first digital projectors.

I'm preaty sure if you did actually get digital projection in 2002, you'd have known the difference. It looked like real crap back then.

[spectre08]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

I'm preaty sure if you did actually get digital projection in 2002, you'd have known the difference. It looked like real crap back then.

I don't' remember. The only thing I'm actively aware of with the digital projectors we got is that we hooked an XBox to one after hours the first weekend, and that was AWESOME.

I don't know what films we actually showed on it.

[GC Riot]

I'm gonna go ahead and say... no.
Analogue film is dying, and I don't see why it shouldn't. Sure, it technically does look better today then what digital does, but it's only a matter of time before digital leaves analogue in the dust when looking at how fast the technology is evolving.
Analogue is big, expensive and cumbersome, and the long term effects on the environment is also a factor why it should go away. I get the whole "charm in/look of analogue" and the "challenge of shooting analogue" and "preserving our legacy" and all the other arguments, but I personally just think that's backwards thinking and a very narrow-minded and conservative mindset. So yes, judging by the poll, I'm in the clear minority that analogue should just go away and leave room for the future.

[jscoggins]

This is not a comeback in any sense of the word.

[Himmel]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

This is not a comeback in any sense of the word.

A redundant comment as usual....i said MAY make a comeback if this proves successful.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by Terminated

A redundant comment as usual....i said MAY make a comeback if this proves successful.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Terminated

Finally changed that dreadful avatar i see.

A pic from a Wes Anderson film is dreadful? You are hyperbole central.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by Terminated

A redundant comment as usual....i said MAY make a comeback if this proves successful.

We MAY get 1 or 2 movies shot and projected in 70mm per year. It's an increase, but it's not a comeback. Digital photography and projection will be the overwhelming majority for the foreseeable future. Ironic when you think that just 10 years ago, theater chains were pissed about having to replace analog projectors with digital ones.

[klauswhereareyou]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

We MAY get 1 or 2 movies shot and projected in 70mm per year. It's an increase, but it's not a comeback. Digital photography and projection will be the overwhelming majority for the foreseeable future. Ironic when you think that just 10 years ago, theater chains were pissed about having to replace analog projectors with digital ones.

Which is why they are pissed when directors actually want to exhibit their films on films (ex. Interstellar)? It was a change pushed on the theaters by the studios, but not necessarily those behind the camera or the audience. If anything ticket prices have skyrocketed in the last few years, and I think we have digital projection to thank for that since the theaters passed the buck onto the consumer since Hollywood didn't pay for the vast majority of the equipment upgrades.

[jscoggins]

Yup, and they were pissed about Paramount asking them to re-install film projectors to show Interstellar.

There will always be die-hard film nuts with enough money to maintain an art house with a film projector. That doesn't make the practice prevalent or sensible.

[spectre08]

thank goodness for Alamo Drafthouse

[imsounoriginal]

The funny thing with Interstellar was that the only benefit to a theater taking the trouble to re-install analog equipment was to able to show the film 2 days before its wide release, so it got an extra 2 days of revenue in the middle of the week, when revenues are lower anyway. After that, every theater had it and it was shown in digital and film. The only film theaters that really benefited were the 70mm IMAX ones, and those are the only theaters where I feel that film projection should remain; they really are the best.

[klauswhereareyou]

Originally Posted by spectre08

thank goodness for Alamo Drafthouse

Unfortunately for those of us who live in Middle America, our options were taken away around 2012. But yeah I don't expect things to change around here, especially since our two art houses that specialize in showing exoitic marigold crap switched to digital also. That would be like expecting McDonald's to put in new grills instead of nuking their burgers!

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

The funny thing with Interstellar was that the only benefit to a theater taking the trouble to re-install analog equipment was to able to show the film 2 days before its wide release, so it got an extra 2 days of revenue in the middle of the week, when revenues are lower anyway. After that, every theater had it and it was shown in digital and film. The only film theaters that really benefited were the 70mm IMAX ones, and those are the only theaters where I feel that film projection should remain; they really are the best.

I would not be surprised if the theaters showing the movie on film actually lost money when you factor in the cost of retrieving the 70mm projectors from warehouses, installing them, calibrating them, uninstalling them, and putting them back in warehouses.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by jscoggins

I would not be surprised if the theaters showing the movie on film actually lost money when you factor in the cost of retrieving the 70mm projectors from warehouses, installing them, calibrating them, uninstalling them, and putting them back in warehouses.

Yup. I'm pretty sure the non-IMAX theaters were showing 35mm prints, but even then I doubt the costs of re-installation were really worth it.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Yup. I'm pretty sure the non-IMAX theaters were showing 35mm prints, but even then I doubt the costs of re-installation were really worth it.

Some places had 70mm prints, too.

https://interstellar.withgoogle.com/ways-to-see

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

We MAY get 1 or 2 movies shot and projected in 70mm per year. It's an increase, but it's not a comeback. Digital photography and projection will be the overwhelming majority for the foreseeable future. Ironic when you think that just 10 years ago, theater chains were pissed about having to replace analog projectors with digital ones.

Per year? the three listed in this thread are years apart, I doubt you will see 4 in the next 10 years