my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Little Women in 35mm (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Little Women in 35mm Chris Haller Film Handler Posts: 68 From: Rochester, NY, USA Registered: Dec 2015 posted 12-17-2019 06:28 AM                     So, The Little Theater here in Rochester is apparently showing the new adaptation of Little Women in 35mm. They have it listed as such on their Facebook page, which was updated last night. Anyone else have this one booked for their screens?  |  IP: Logged Jim Cassedy Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1661 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Dec 2006 posted 12-17-2019 07:23 AM                     Last week at a Christmas party populated with a plethora of plastered projection people, I do recall a rumor going around the room that it had been booked into two San Francisco theaters in 35mm. But I can't confirm that 100%  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-17-2019 08:30 AM                        In the Boston area, it will be playing in 35mm at (at least) the Somerville Theatre and Coolidge Corner. Otherwise, I don't know much about this--why is it being released in 35mm? Director's preference? Photochemical process from camera negative to print? Cheesy marketing gimmick? Something else? (edit: spelling) [ 12-17-2019, 11:46 AM: Message edited by: Scott Norwood ]  |  IP: Logged Mark Lensenmayer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1605 From: Upper Arlington, OH Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-17-2019 11:44 AM                     35mm at Gateway Film Center, Columbus.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 12-17-2019 12:12 PM                        According to IMDB, this was indeed shot on film (35mm 3 perf) with Kodak Vision negative. But at best, all editing and processing is done in 4K digital then everything is out to film. It won't be a straight through camera to projector film process. So digital out to film in this day and age is about as good as it will ever get. No one is going to edit on film. Then you throw in what we have all been talking about here in many times, i.e., the condition of existing printers and who's left in the business to operated said equipment. Add to that the state of existing 35mm projection equipment and who's left in the booths to operated said equipment, not to mention having the knowledge to properly care for a 35mm print (better see it in the first week)...I mean, we all know what the state of film presentation was in the years prior to digital; I can't believe it has magically gotten better in the last 10 years when NO on was running film. So, it's questionable as to what advantage an audience is going to get by seeing it on celluloid. Plus, Scott's questions really need to be answered as well. Oh, and not for nuthin, but do these producers REALLY believe there is an audience out there that is pining for yet ANOTHER version of this title...four versions; really?  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-17-2019 12:51 PM                        Shooting on 3-perf doesn't necessitate a DI. It is possible to cut the camera negative (even if the film is edited electronically; the Avid will happily make a cut list for a movie shot on 3-perf) and make a 4-perf negative optically. There are some negative-cutting issues with 3-perf involving visible splices, but that is not a big deal if the thing is going to be optically printed, anyway. Whether or not they did this is a different question, of course.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-17-2019 01:48 PM                     This 4K DI thing also seems to have become opular for making today's 70mm prints. I feel some accountant figured out they could eliminate an expensive step in making 70mm prints and told them if you want them then do it this way. Well, why even bother unless? A little nicer light, and dust and dirt are not magnified quite as bad is about the only advantage left. Even the DTS sound is a compromise over what it used to be, leaving today's 70mm in a shambles. Yes... there have been a couple exceptions. But all this is about distribution being cheap like they always are. I also worked on several movies and TV shows that shot on 3-perf. I never could understand the reason why they would choose to do that, because back in the 80's and 90's the extra optical work needed more than offset any lower film costs. Kind of like shooting in Techniscope and having to have the namorphic I.N. made when shooting in Scope would have just been easier. One TV show DP said he liked 3-perf because they did not have to reload as often and his Arri BL ran a tad bit quieter. BTW: All the Dailies I ran from all those shows came in as 4 perf. So both Technicolor and Deluxe must have had special printers just for doing that in one step back in the day. Mark  |  IP: Logged Chris Haller Film Handler Posts: 68 From: Rochester, NY, USA Registered: Dec 2015 posted 12-17-2019 03:33 PM                     I have to admit that it was a bit perplexing to see this get prints. But it was shot on film, and its a prestige film that Sony is pushing hard to get award season recognition for this one. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood must have drawn good ticket sales for screen with 35mm prints. Might have been better per screen than the digital presentations, prompting them to try their hand at the same kind of magic. But this film doesn't quite have the draw that Hollywood did. And the awareness for prints doesn't seem to be nearly as high this time around. Either way, I had quite a few issues with all aspects of the print presentation of Hollywood here at The Little. If I can't get in to see it within a day or two of it opening, I'll just go see it at the local multiplex. Or maybe I'll just do that anyways. They seem to run film just for the "experience," and I need a bit more than that.  |  IP: Logged Carl Martin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1424 From: Oakland, CA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 12-18-2019 05:33 AM                        quote: Jim Cassedy I do recall a rumor going around the room that it had been booked into two San Francisco theaters in 35mm. the 4-star and... who else? the balboa site doesn't mention 35mm, which it typically does when applicable. it doesn't appear to be coming to the new mission. curious!  |  IP: Logged Benjamin Ruder Film Handler Posts: 4 From: Chicago, IL USA Registered: Feb 2019 posted 12-18-2019 11:07 AM                        quote: Chris Haller Either way, I had quite a few issues with all aspects of the print presentation of Hollywood here at The Little. If I can't get in to see it within a day or two of it opening, I'll just go see it at the local multiplex. Or maybe I'll just do that anyways. They seem to run film just for the "experience," and I need a bit more than that. That's too bad considering all of the talent available in the area associated with the George Eastman Museum.  |  IP: Logged Chris Haller Film Handler Posts: 68 From: Rochester, NY, USA Registered: Dec 2015 posted 12-18-2019 11:19 AM                     quote: That's too bad considering all of the talent available in the area associated with the George Eastman Museum. [Frown] The crew over there is on an entirely different level. I have literally never seen a bad presentation at the Dryden Theater unless it was another studio's rough archive print of the movie. They do tech screenings of every show beforehand and are very upfront if the print they have is less than decent. I've seen everything from lab fresh to absolutely ANCIENT prints there that have been screened to perfection. There seems to be little cross over between the staff there and The Little.  |  IP: Logged Sascha F. Roll Expert Film Handler Posts: 140 From: Berlin, Berlin / Germany Registered: Sep 2015 posted 12-18-2019 01:02 PM                     It should also be noted that the last 35mm release ("Marriage Story") was even printed in pillar boxed 1.66, that was a "Wtf" moment for me. One would think that every cinema that is capable of playing 35mm in 2019 also does have a set of lenses and aperture plates for 1.66. Instead they decided to throw away resolution...  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 12-18-2019 03:30 PM                     That's definitely against the standard going all the way back to the very first 1.66 ratio film. Not a single theater in the world will be properly setup for that. The same thing happened with the 70mm prints of Justice League and The Joker. They were 1.85 within 2.40 within the 70mm frame of 2.21  |  IP: Logged Tyler Purcell Expert Film Handler Posts: 180 From: Van Nuys, CA Registered: Dec 2015 posted 12-24-2019 01:29 AM                        Mark, I shoot 3 perf nearly exclusively. The great thing about it is that for digital finish (which is all anyone really does anyway) you have a 1.75:1 negative, which fits the 16x9 HD frame perfectly. So all you need to do is crop a bit for 1.85:1 and that's your "theatrical" aspect ratio built-in to the format. 4 perf is wasteful in this day where nearly everyone shoots spherical and requires a 16x9 (1.75:1) aspect ratio version at minimal. 2 perf is common, but again it's process to photochemical finish blows, like 3 perf does.  |  IP: Logged Chris Haller Film Handler Posts: 68 From: Rochester, NY, USA Registered: Dec 2015 posted 12-25-2019 05:18 PM                     Update: looks like Rochester got passed over for this one at the last minute. No 35mm print here after all. To the multiplex I go.....chances are whatever mystery meat digital they run at Cinemark Tinseltown would’ve been better anyways!  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.