Nightmare Alley (2021) on 35mm

[David Ferguson]

Apparently Nightmare Alley (2021) is getting a limited 35mm release - but there's a catch - the 35mm release is of the "Vision in Darkness and Light" version, which is black and white. Although from what I can find online, the print was made at CPC London, who only print on colour film stock (for the moment).

From https://collider.com/nightmare-alley...s-los-angeles/:

Guillermo del Toro’s latest feature film Nightmare Alley is playing exclusively in Los Angeles for now, but according to a recent tweet from the famous fantasy horror director, this neo-noir thriller could be making an appearance in an appropriately classic black and white film style in New York in the near future.

...

Tickets are being sold out at several locations at the moment, but there are still quite a few openings from January 17-January 30. Some screenings are set to provide an authentic 35mm film experience. Here is the current list of places that still have open seats:

January 17 - AMC The Grove 4PM and 7:30PM, Landmark 7PM
January 18 - AMC The Grove 4PM and 7:30PM, Landmark 7PM
anuary 19 - AMC The Grove 4PM and 7:30PM, Landmark 7PM
January 20 - Landmark 7PM, Academy Museum 7PM includes Q&A with Del Toro
January 21 - Los Feliz 3 7PM (35mm) with Q&A includes Del Toro, Nuart Theatre [unspecified time]
January 22 - Los Feliz 3 7PM, Nuart Theatre 7:30PM includes Q&A with Del Toro
January 23 - Los Feliz 3 7PM (35mm), Nuart Theatre (35mm) [unspecified time]
January 24-27 - Nuart Theatre (35mm) [unspecified time]
January 28-30 - Aero Theatre (35mm) [unspecified time] includes Q&A with Del Toro

More information about tickets and screenings is expected to be announced soon, including details regarding the possible black and white screenings in New York.

[Martin Brooks]

Are you sure it's 35mm? Nightmare Alley: Vision in Darkness and Light is playing this weekend in NYC at the AMC Lincoln Square, AMC 34th Street, AMC 19th Street East, AMC Kips Bay 15 and the AMC Empirie 25, but the listings denote fit as being digital.

[Jerry G. Axelsson]

Martin, the lab CPC London has at least made one 35mm print (b/w on colourstock) for the New Beverly cinema. They have advertised this on Facebook. I asked why they made it b/w on colourstock instead of real b/w. Got no feedback...

[Kieran Hall]

The BFI's 2019 print of Mark Jenkin's Bait was similarly black-and-white on colour stock -- seems odd to me, because they do print on black-and-white stock for their Paper on Film service.

[Leo Enticknap]

I asked why they made it b/w on colourstock instead of real b/w. Got no feedback...

Has 2302 been discontinued, or temporarily unavailable due to supply chain problems? If the former, that would be a major blow to archives.

[Jim Cassedy]

I remember being being somewhat surprised when I ran THE ARTIST in 2011 to discover
it was printed on color film stock, especially since whichever lab made the 35mm prints did
such an excellent job of emulating a B&W print, right down to simulating a bit of 'bromide
bleed' in the titles. At the time someone told me that the reason it was printed on the color
film stock was because "there was no way to print DolbyDigital™ on B&W film". I've
since found out that this was incorrect, and I've even seen DD on actual B&W film since
then. - - but I'd sitll be curious to know why the choice was made to use color film stock,
and then go through a lot of trouble to make it look B&W.

A while back I had prints made of some old newsreels that I own the negative of.
The lab charged me more because, black & white was a "special order" process they
don't run every day, so I had to pay more for it. However, I was only having a few
prints made. If I was having a large quantity made, as I would imagine was done for
"The Artist" - - the price came down quite a bit. So I'd still like to know why they chose
to use color film stock.

[Michael Zarits]

At the time someone told me that the reason it was printed on the color
film stock was because "there was no way to print DolbyDigital™ on B&W film". I've
since found out that this was incorrect, and I've even seen DD on actual B&W film since
then.

Death Proof Reel 4 was B&W with DD too.

[Marcel Birgelen]

I remember being being somewhat surprised when I ran THE ARTIST in 2011 to discover
it was printed on color film stock, especially since whichever lab made the 35mm prints did
such an excellent job of emulating a B&W print, right down to simulating a bit of 'bromide
bleed' in the titles. At the time someone told me that the reason it was printed on the color
film stock was because "there was no way to print DolbyDigital™ on B&W film". I've
since found out that this was incorrect, and I've even seen DD on actual B&W film since
then. - - but I'd sitll be curious to know why the choice was made to use color film stock,
and then go through a lot of trouble to make it look B&W.

A while back I had prints made of some old newsreels that I own the negative of.
The lab charged me more because, black & white was a "special order" process they
don't run every day, so I had to pay more for it. However, I was only having a few
prints made. If I was having a large quantity made, as I would imagine was done for
"The Artist" - - the price came down quite a bit. So I'd still like to know why they chose
to use color film stock.

It's funny, but I instantly noticed that the Artist wasn't printed on B&W film, because of the presence of several emulsion scratches. Why they didn't go for a B&W film release is a bit beyond me, but maybe labs aren't really set-up for SRD on black and white or B&W film at volume may actually be much more expensive, especially back in 2011, when 35mm production was still a thing done at reasonable volume. But there should be no technical reason why it wouldn't work, actually, it should work better with black and white media than with any colored medium.

One exception may be SDDS. I'm not sure how their reader would cope with a black and white soundtrack instead of the typical blue, although I suspect it will work fine.

[Mitchell Dvoskin]

I assume it is the same reason that Young Frankenstein and other 1970’s B&W films were usually printed on color film stock. Cost, B&W film stock was, and probably still is, more expensive because B&W film stock contains silver, color film does not.

Further I suspect that many labs no longer have the chemistry needed to process B&W, limiting the studios to the few labs that can.

[Gordon McLeod]

I assume it is the same reason that Young Frankenstein and other 1970’s B&W films were usually printed on color film stock. Cost, B&W film stock was, and probably still is, more expensive because B&W film stock contains silver, color film does not.

Further I suspect that many labs no longer have the chemistry needed to process B&W, limiting the studios to the few labs that can.

Most labs that handle film will have to have B&W chemistry for sound negatives.

[Peter Mork]

I remember there being slight changes of tint between reels of The Artist, that you probably wouldn't have noticed with a color film. Someone on the old IMDb forum even remarked on it, wondering what artistic choice accounted for it; I responded that no, it's just because print chemistry makes perfect consistency reel to reel very difficult.

But I don't miss the early B&W prints from the switch to polyester base, the ones that shed emulsion leaving deposits in the gate that would throw off focus and cause a blizzard of dust onscreen. Schindler's List, Shadows and Fog were both major headaches for me. I even improvised a vaccuum cleaner with brush attachment to try to suck off the dirt as it fed off the platter. Sort of worked but not really. I assume that issue's been fixed - hope so.

[Kieran Hall]

One exception may be SDDS. I'm not sure how their reader would cope with a black and white soundtrack instead of the typical blue, although I suspect it will work fine.

Brad's review of dye transfer printing shows a black and white SDDS track which presumably played quite happily: http://www.film-tech.com/warehouse/r.../review31.html

[Leo Enticknap]

But I don't miss the early B&W prints from the switch to polyester base, the ones that shed emulsion leaving deposits in the gate that would throw off focus and cause a blizzard of dust onscreen.

Apart from reprints of archival titles, Twenty Four Seven is the movie that sticks in my mind for that. After every pass, the print shed so much crap all over every surface it passed across, from platter brain to take-up tensioner, that a good 15 minutes of cleaning was necessary between shows. And an FP-20/ST-200 is a relatively easy projector and platter combo to clean!

These issues were obviously resolved, though. I was out of the business between 2001-13, but when I started projecting again, the 2302 prints I handled, including brand new ones, didn't give any trouble.

[Stefan Scholz]

Most labs that handle film will have to have B&W chemistry for sound negatives.

From my knowledge of developing chemistry, the sound negative (document film) and positive fine grain print is different. Sound negative film has a different graduation, whereas print is to react soft for a variety of grayscales. Even though, it should be possible to adapt the process.

I had to learn as a young person luring around in a film lab, that color is a rather easy thing "if you want something printed", there's hundred thousands of feet per day, and "we can certainly do a couple of hundred to a handful hundred for you".
"Remember one thing, 16 mm, 70 mm, and Black and White is special order, where the order dept. wants to know exactly the project number to order film stock, with no surplus."
I assume from that, color printing due to the masses they did was a rather common, economic process. The rest involved extra cost, that they charged for.
As film these days, expect for archival purpose, is more or less a "fun thing" or "marketing gimmick", there's just low budget on it. And they have to go for the budget offer.

[Leo Enticknap]

Same syndrome as manual transmission cars (in the USA) - even though they're mechanically simpler, demand for them is so tiny that you'll pay more and wait longer if you go into the Honda dealership and ask for a manual Civic, versus the CVT automatic version. The film emulsion and processing chemistry for dye coupler color is more complex, but as it likely accounts for around 90% of the stock and chemistry sold, b/w is more difficult and pricey.