James Bond film formats

[Shawn M. Martin]

No Time to Die is the cover story of next month's American Cinematographer, which went to print before the release date got pushed back. It has the formats as:

- 35mm anamorphic (Panavision) for most of the film
- 15/65mm (IMAX) for "scenic action sequences"
- 5/65mm for dialogue scenes within IMAX sequences (because the IMAX cameras were too loud) - Panavision System 65, then Arriflex 765 near the end of filming when the System 65 cameras were unavailable. The 765s were mostly used by the second unit, for the same purpose above as the System 65s

[Michael Coate]

I was reading recently about On Her Majesty's Secret Service and supposedly it was the first Bond film released in stereo sound. According to the old forum archive, prints were mono. Anyone have any further knowledge?

While researching the 007 movies in the early 2000s for some magazine coverage of their DVD releases, a source at those films’ production company informed me the reel that included the avalanche sequence in “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service” was mixed in stereo and presented in mag at Odeon Leicester Square.

[Carsten Kurz]

Skyfall had quad format 35mm prints (although by this time DTS theatrical had been changed to Datasat Digital Sound), a 4K DCP and 12 track audio for IMAX with Laser auditoriums.

Neither IMAX Laser nor IMAX 12-track digital audio existed when Skyfall was released in 2012.

[Marcel Birgelen]

No Time to Die is the cover story of next month's American Cinematographer, which went to print before the release date got pushed back. It has the formats as:

- 35mm anamorphic (Panavision) for most of the film
- 15/65mm (IMAX) for "scenic action sequences"
- 5/65mm for dialogue scenes within IMAX sequences (because the IMAX cameras were too loud) - Panavision System 65, then Arriflex 765 near the end of filming when the System 65 cameras were unavailable. The 765s were mostly used by the second unit, for the same purpose above as the System 65s

In other words: aspect-ratio-switcheroo-gallore...

No matter how awesome footage shot in 15/65mm and presented in proper 15/70mm looks, it doesn't justify the constant aspect-ratio switching that often results from recording stuff in all those different formats.

[Allan Young]

In other words: aspect-ratio-switcheroo-gallore...

No matter how awesome footage shot in 15/65mm and presented in proper 15/70mm looks, it doesn't justify the constant aspect-ratio switching that often results from recording stuff in all those different formats.

See, I'd argue the opposite. 15/65 footage presented in 15/70 looks so awesome, it easily justifies the necessary aspect-ratio switching.

In any case, as I pointed out upthread, there doesn't appear to have been any 15/70 prints of this title struck.

[Marcel Birgelen]

See, I'd argue the opposite. 15/65 footage presented in 15/70 looks so awesome, it easily justifies the necessary aspect-ratio switching.

In any case, as I pointed out upthread, there doesn't appear to have been any 15/70 prints of this title struck.

No, but it will get a Digital IMAX release and the laser locations will probably see the original aspect ratio.

For me, a perfect movie presentation still needs to have the screen properly masked and I find the constant switching of aspect ratios extremely disturbing. I've watched a few IMAX 15/70 presentations of feature films like those made by Nolan, but especially switching from the "full" IMAX aspect ratio back to letterboxed 2:35 feels to me like the movie is getting "caged", it almost feels claustrophobic to me. Also, watching a scope movie on an unmasked, classic IMAX screen really defeats the purpose for me, the picture isn't any bigger that way and most "proper" cinemas offer a far more comfortable seating arrangement.

[Shawn M. Martin]

In other words: aspect-ratio-switcheroo-gallore...

Yeah, I forgot to mention that they framed the IMAX stuff in both 1.43:1 and 1.90:1 to account for the differences in venues, with 5-perf "usually tiled for 1.43:1" according to the DP.

And yeah, as far as I can tell, there will be no 15/70 prints.

[Allan Young]

For me, a perfect movie presentation still needs to have the screen properly masked and I find the constant switching of aspect ratios extremely disturbing. I've watched a few IMAX 15/70 presentations of feature films like those made by Nolan, but especially switching from the "full" IMAX aspect ratio back to letterboxed 2:35 feels to me like the movie is getting "caged", it almost feels claustrophobic to me. Also, watching a scope movie on an unmasked, classic IMAX screen really defeats the purpose for me, the picture isn't any bigger that way and most "proper" cinemas offer a far more comfortable seating arrangement.

I'm in complete agreement about proper masking - something that has increasingly gone by the wayside in recent years, with many cinemas presumably deciding that the "clean edge" of digital presentations makes it less necessary. And yes, if the entire film is presented in 'Scope on an IMAX screen, I'd much prefer to catch it in a traditional auditorium. I once saw a 5/70 print (Tron) on an unmasked IMAX screen, windowboxed on all sides. Quite horrible. Wouldn't do that again in a hurry.

But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the expanding aspect ratio business. Where you find it "extremely disturbing", I find the occasional expanding to full frame IMAX quite exhilirating.

[Allan Young]

Yeah, I forgot to mention that they framed the IMAX stuff in both 1.43:1 and 1.90:1 to account for the differences in venues, with 5-perf "usually tiled for 1.43:1" according to the DP.

So the 5/70 footage is being cropped at the sides for the 1:43:1 venues? Makes sense. Switching between 1.43:1 and 2.20:1 within the same scene would be highly distracting.

I'm guessing all the footage will be cropped throughout for the 1.90:1 venues?

[Marcel Birgelen]

We will only know when we see the end-result... I remember I walked out of the theater when watching Transformers: The Last Knight, not just because of the abysmal, nonsensical story line that only served as a thin veil to move from one overblown action scene to the other, but also because the aspect ratio kept changing around all the time, even mid-shot. It was just completely insane and awfully distracting. There is an entire reddit about it... And apparently, even the frickin' trailer has 8 different ARs in it...

At least Nolan has the decency to keep the aspect ratio largely consistent for the same scene or at least the same setting: e.g. outdoors: full IMAX frame and indoors 2.35 or 2.20.

[Michael Coate]

Where is Michael Coate when we need him.

Okay, how’s this....

I commented earlier in this thread regarding the audio of “On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.”

If Moonraker had any 70mm they must have been playing in Los Angeles only. There were no 70mm prints of it in New York.

Moonraker. Rumours (unconfirmed) for years of a 70 strike.

I can state with reasonable certainty that not a single market in the United States advertised a 70mm presentation of “Moonraker.”

On the historical “Released in Dolby Stereo” publications, “Moonraker” appeared with a 70mm notation in advance of its release. Upon the movie’s release, the 70mm notation disappeared never to return, which one could interpret as the 70mm release was canceled.

However... it appears “Moonraker” had some 70mm prints for international, foreign-language markets (but those would’ve been dubbed or subtitled). The late projectionist (and Film-Tech member) Bob Throop swore it ran in 70mm at the Rivoli in New York. Other sources have pointed to the Rivoli as well. The only way this can be true, though, is if United Artists had a mandate to not advertise the 70mm print or a 70 was used only during pre-release screenings (premiere, invitational previews, etc).

One of the problems/challenges in sorting out this stuff, especially when dealing with eyewitness testimony (aka long-term memory), is that it is easy to get the 007 movies confused with one another because there are so many of them and, especially from the mid 60s through the late 80s were being made at every-other-year intervals. The only 007 movie confirmed to have been shown in 70mm in the United States in their original releases with appropriate advertising was “Octopussy” (and, if you wish to count it, “Never Say Never Again”). All bets are off when it comes to addressing international release histories.

I have 70mm playdate histories up at In70mm. com if anyone’s curious where Octopussy or Never Say Never Again screened in 70mm in North America.

Goldeneye. Dolby SR-D

A scan of a few frames from a print with DTS (and no SR-D track) appears in the GoldenEye entry of my 007 anniversary retrospective series. Dual inventory? Faulty memory?

Casino Royale. Dolby SR-D

A scan of a few frames from a print with all digital formats appears in the Casino Royale entry of my 007 anniversary retrospective series.

Regarding custom 70mm prints for Norway to be played at the Spectrum in the 1990:s. The Bond title done in 70mm was "TOMORROW NEVER DIES".

The print was imported to the U.S. and screened in Los Angeles on November 13th 1999 during the American Cinematheque’s “Blow Your Mind: The Great Big 70mm Film Festival.” I attended. English-language DTS discs were used for the audio. Print included some Scandinavian subtitles.

68F790DF-AB58-4CB5-82AF-162F1173E268.jpeg

6D3FDAB6-9376-4164-B048-847941D5FCA6.jpeg

[Marcel Birgelen]

A scan of a few frames from a print with DTS (and no SR-D track) appears in the GoldenEye entry of my 007 anniversary retrospective series. Dual inventory? Faulty memory?

I'm almost entirely sure that GoldenEye did have SRD tracks, at least as part of some international releases, as I've played it myself in SRD. The house it initially played in, didn't even have DTS at that time. I'm also pretty sure it didn't have SDDS, because I've seen it first in one of those then recently refurbished AMC screens in San Francisco, with only SDDS as digital audio system, so I was disappointed it was presented in very hollow-sounding analog audio.

[Bobby Henderson]

The 1995 release of Goldeneye did support both DTS and Dolby Digital. But SR•D prints and DTS time coded prints were in separate inventories. During the fall of 1995 the film printing labs were still getting the kinks out of making film prints with multiple digital sound formats on the same print. I remember a print of Strange Days having some reels in Quad Format but other reels missing the SDDS data, just solid light blue color on the edges instead.

[Jerry G. Axelsson]

35mm prints in Sweden of GOLDENEYE was SRD/DTS combined upon release. Prints by Rank UK.

[Marcel Birgelen]

I also remember an SRD and DTS timecode track, but my memory could be faulty. Goldeneye was in 1995, by then, prints with both SRD and DTS timecode were starting to become pretty common around here. I remember seeing some prints with blue edges but no SDDS data back in the day, but I can't remember a specific print.