Titanic 4K UHD (1997)

[bga84]

My local cinema had an intermission. Cal discovering the drawing in the safe was either the scene immediately before or immediately after break.

[Riddhi2011]

In India, every single film gets an intermission, and I prefer it that way. This has been the standard practice since the dawn of film projection here. It allows me to put some blood back into my butt, sore from sitting continuously. Intermission/Intervals are a relief. I can't imagine watching a movie in a theatre without a break, unless it had a really short runtime.

[blakninja]

Interesting! I always thought there was no intermission, that's how I saw it, straight 3 hours.

I guess some theatres added their own intermission! And it's not even at the same place in the movie. I know some theatres in the UK did have the intermission, so it does not depend on the country but depend on the theatre.

What do they show on the screen at the intermission? Sine the intermission is probably not part of the 35mm print but added by the theatre, does the movie just stop and some text appears saying we take a break?

[Scott in UK]

Originally Posted by blakninja

What do they show on the screen at the intermission? Sine the intermission is probably not part of the 35mm print but added by the theatre, does the movie just stop and some text appears saying we take a break?

From memory I've only ever once had an experience of a half time break during a cinema showing. And that was for Temple of Doom. Although as you say, I don't think every cinema at the time would of done that, it's each cinemas own choice to do so or not. (and it gets more ice creams sold I suppose) lt also wasn't a cinema I was familiar with either, because we was on holiday at the time in a different part of the country.

But to answer your question, text doesn't appear on screen, the curtains just began to close across the screen while the film was still playing. (And it was at the end of a scene, not just suddenly in the middle of it) Then the screen went black by the time the curtains fully shut. So it was simply the curtains beginning to close was how you knew. Oh and also probably the lights in the room came on.


And that even though it might of had a dedicated snack area when you first walk in, another way you would know a break is happening, is because a person would appear in front of the screen with a snack tray wrapped around their neck.

[apricissimus]

More movies should have intermissions. At home I almost never watch a whole movie straight through without pausing at least once. I don't think it hurts my enjoyment at all.

In any theater, there's bound to be many people who feel like they have to use the bathroom or stretch their legs during the latter part of the movie. Their enjoyment and immersion will definitely be enhanced by having an intermission. Physical discomfort will certainly take you out of the experience.

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by blakninja

Interesting! I always thought there was no intermission, that's how I saw it, straight 3 hours.

I guess some theatres added their own intermission! And it's not even at the same place in the movie. I know some theatres in the UK did have the intermission, so it does not depend on the country but depend on the theatre.

What do they show on the screen at the intermission? Sine the intermission is probably not part of the 35mm print but added by the theatre, does the movie just stop and some text appears saying we take a break?

In India every single theatre/multiplex gives an interval. It's not about what the theatre decides. During film projection days, the interval had a blank screen with music playing in the background. The music was sometimes from the film's soundtrack itself. The word "Intermission" or "Interval" used to be printed onto the film itself. SO, it was pre-planned where the first half would stop. With digital cinema, hey just stop at random parts of the film, even between actions or dialogues, which is really callous. But that's how it is now.

Here, during Titanic 3D screenings, the DCP would be stopped in the midst of Jack and Rose running away from Lovejoy as he spots them at a corridor outside their suite.

[blakninja]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

In India every single theatre/multiplex gives an interval. It's not about what the theatre decides. During film projection days, the interval had a blank screen with music playing in the background. The music was sometimes from the film's soundtrack itself.

Interesting.. an intermission would definitely take me out of the movie. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

[starmike]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

In India, every single film gets an intermission, and I prefer it that way. This has been the standard practice since the dawn of film projection here. It allows me to put some blood back into my butt, sore from sitting continuously. Intermission/Intervals are a relief. I can't imagine watching a movie in a theatre without a break, unless it had a really short runtime.

That sounds hideous. That's an excellent way to pull you right out of the movie.

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by James Luckard

Any intermission the film had in theaters anywhere in the world was added by that theater itself, against Cameron's express wishes.

That said, the cut after the line ""I believe you may get your headlines, Mr. Ismay!" is where the studio apparently wanted to put an intermission, and where Cameron was forced to add one by the technical limitations of VHS.

Here's the relevant portion of the published screenplay:

[Show spoiler]

The 3D blu-ray presentation is split across 2 discs. That's where the 3D blu-ray splits between the two discs, right after that line.

Even that statement from Cameron shows how full of himself he can be, and how little he cares about the audience. Regardless of how much the audience is into the film, 3+ hours is a challenge for many people without a restroom break. That's just biology. Not everyone can hold it as long as others. Plus extra time before the film begins to get seated, trailers, ads - that's easily 3 1/2 hours in that seat. It makes far more sense to have a planned, announced intermission that everyone can know is coming ahead of time and plan accordingly, and not miss anything important, than have a theatre full of people all guessing when is the best time to get up, with everyone getting up throughout the film randomly and possibly missing good stuff and bothering everyone as they try to sneak past you.

And if you try to hold it in for the last hour, it totally ruins your enjoyment of the film. So what did Cameron think he was accomplishing there by forbidding an intermission? Some of the Marvel films have the same issue. They just run too long without an intermission.

[starmike]

I never had to get up to hit the bathroom during a movie. Maybe people shouldn't buy sodas?

[mar3o]

Originally Posted by starmike

I never had to get up to hit the bathroom during a movie. Maybe people shouldn't buy sodas?

Seriously? This argument again? I've had this argument before in other threads and it baffles me.

Are you aware that different people suffer from different conditions, and sometimes holding it in for 3+ hours IS NOT AN OPTION? Even just getting older often means more rest room trips. I took my grandfather to see this in the theatre because he loved history.

There are lots of conditions that result in having to go to the bathroom more frequently. Diabetes for one, which is one of the most common conditions in the US. You can have diabetes and not be overweight by the way. And drinking lots of drinks beforehand has nothing to do with it. Lots of other conditions also mean more bathroom breaks. That doesn't mean they can't get out and have a life. Just that 3 1/2 hours in a seat is a long time to stretch it. It just leads to discomfort.

[Hindustani]

I recently read TITANIC was shot at 48fps, is this correct?

if so, Has it ever been screened anywhere at 48 fps?

[Pocketkid2]

Originally Posted by Hindustani

I recently read TITANIC was shot at 48fps, is this correct?

if so, Has it ever been screened anywhere at 48 fps?

No, it was not filmed in 48fps. But the recent 3D theatrical release had an HFR remaster that made a few shots look like they were in 48fps (using frame interpolation)

[dorian]

Originally Posted by Riddhi2011

In India, every single film gets an intermission, and I prefer it that way. This has been the standard practice since the dawn of film projection here. It allows me to put some blood back into my butt, sore from sitting continuously. Intermission/Intervals are a relief. I can't imagine watching a movie in a theatre without a break, unless it had a really short runtime.

To be fair, many Indian films are a lot longer than the average European/American film.

[starmike]

Originally Posted by mar3o

Seriously? This argument again? I've had this argument before in other threads and it baffles me.

Are you aware that different people suffer from different conditions, and sometimes holding it in for 3+ hours IS NOT AN OPTION? Even just getting older often means more rest room trips. I took my grandfather to see this in the theatre because he loved history.

There are lots of conditions that result in having to go to the bathroom more frequently. Diabetes for one, which is one of the most common conditions in the US. You can have diabetes and not be overweight by the way. And drinking lots of drinks beforehand has nothing to do with it. Lots of other conditions also mean more bathroom breaks. That doesn't mean they can't get out and have a life. Just that 3 1/2 hours in a seat is a long time to stretch it. It just leads to discomfort.

OK, so what's the solution? Intermissions are a thing of the past in the US. In this day and age you can determine exactly how long a movie is before you go see it. If someone has a condition they're aware of, there's nothing that can be done to make everyone happy. Sounds like this would be a perfect opportunity for some kind of subreddit for people that need to know when the best time to get up during a movie is, unless they feel they need to go to the first day's showing.

[cuzzin]

Originally Posted by Pocketkid2

No, it was not filmed in 48fps. But the recent 3D theatrical release had an HFR remaster that made a few shots look like they were in 48fps (using frame interpolation)

The HFR showings never actually happened.

[apricissimus]

Originally Posted by starmike

That sounds hideous. That's an excellent way to pull you right out of the movie.

A full bladder or sciatica pain from sitting too long really pulls me out of a movie.

[apricissimus]

Originally Posted by starmike

OK, so what's the solution? Intermissions are a thing of the past in the US. In this day and age you can determine exactly how long a movie is before you go see it. If someone has a condition they're aware of, there's nothing that can be done to make everyone happy. Sounds like this would be a perfect opportunity for some kind of subreddit for people that need to know when the best time to get up during a movie is, unless they feel they need to go to the first day's showing.

A good solution would be to have an intermission for long movies (maybe over 2.5 hours?).

Would it really ruin the experience for you? Would it ruin it enough for you that you'd want others with conditions that you don't have to be uncomfortable?

I'm personally in favor of doing a little extra to make things more accessible for a larger number of people.

[jvonl]

Originally Posted by frogmort

I for one love the technical jibber-jabber that we're privy to from certain people on here, and compared to the 'now shipping/running late/slipcase/scratches' updates, I get much more knowledge about the quality of the film itself from these people.

I expect people to have an opinion on the qualty of an individual disc release. I appreciate it.

Posts about 'everything is fine' 'shudduppa you complainin' are pretty much worthless. You have a nice setup, why do you begrudge people that have an opinion on the quality of a film version that's being released? Some are better than others. Some are not.

Wow! A bit sensitive, perhaps? Looked at my post to be sure, but I certainly never said (or implied) anything like that. By all means, geek out to your heart's content. I simply pointed that I (and many others) see no correlation between an anomaly in a frame (or six) that detracts from our ability to enjoy a movie. Yup, lots of opinions on here, including mine. And you know what they say...

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by cuzzin

The HFR showings never actually happened.

Really? I saw the '4K 3D' remaster in February and several bits looked weirdly smooth to me.

Even if no 2K48 DCPs went out to theaters, Titanic *did* get a HFR upgrade nonetheless: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...301588450.html