Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Campaign for 'Raiders Of The Lost Ark' to be re-issued...

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Campaign for 'Raiders Of The Lost Ark' to be re-issued... (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Campaign for 'Raiders Of The Lost Ark' to be re-issued...

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 01-01-2001 03:05 AM

'Raiders Of The Lost Ark' has its 20th anniversary this year.

Go to www.indy20.com and click on the 'yes' button to try and get Paramount and Mr. Spielberg interested in a re-issue.

There's also a trailer for its 20th anniversary. The trailer's a fake (but very good) made by the same guy who made the Star Wars Episode 2 trailer on theforce.net but what the hey...it's something.

If they can re-issue The Exorcist and make money, surely Indy can make it back to the big screen, eh?

Couldn't hurt...

...trust me.

| IP: Logged

Michael Barry
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 584
From: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 01-01-2001 07:27 AM

Yes! I can't see how this could possibly fail.

A 70MM blow-up and/or IB Tech prints wouldn't hurt, either! A fully remastered soundtrack in DTS is a must too, of course...

Do it!

| IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 01-01-2001 10:14 AM

It's hard to know how re-releases will do nowadays. People can watch a film at home, and with a good DVD/television/stereo system, have a pretty "high-quality" presentation (admittedly not as good as film, though.)

Seeing a film (especially a film like "Raiders") in a theater will always be cool, but will it earn enough to pay for a re-release?

Here is an example where if the theaters could offer something "different" (like "Raiders" in 70mm) the public would come back to the theater.

It's sort of strange how the public welcomed (by spending their money) improvements in other areas of quality, (CD's over LP records; DVD's over video tape) yet the studios feel the public won't pay for 70mm.

I think any theater running 70mm should be able to charge, say, $1 more, and that money should go directly to the theater to offset the cost of 70mm maintaince. I feel most people will spend the extra money when they realize what they are getting in return.

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-01-2001 12:52 PM

There should be no higher maintance cost for 70mm since the head wear issue is not there with modern DTS 70 prints and even the teccon heads showed minimum wear

| IP: Logged

Brett Rankin
Film Handler

Posts: 78
From: Sierra Madre, CA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-01-2001 03:52 PM

I don't see how a Raiders rerelease could fail, either. I mean, come on, even "Grease" did well a few years ago (not to offend those who like the film...). I saw Raiders at the Egyptian in Hollywood a few months ago and it sold out hours before showtime. You can't say it isn't a popular film- I would consider it almost an equal of Star Wars, and look at what kind of money that brought in.

And it would be an excellent promotion for the much rumored part 4...

| IP: Logged

Ian Price
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1714
From: Denver, CO
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-01-2001 06:46 PM

My big fear is that because I don't have a premire house in a big city with 70mm, if I were to book Raiders or 2001 that we would get poor performance. But just because I fear it doesn't mean I won't do it. If I can get Raiders or 2001 then I will give it a go.

| IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 01-01-2001 07:59 PM

Yes, I was forgetting about DTS 70mm for the moment (I've only run mag 70mm.)

But, that $1 extra would go towards paying a real operator, also.

I think that nationally, "Grease" did not do very well. Also, it was advertised as being "restored," yet it looked like shit. Now the studios will mis-use the term "restored." They will confuse a "Lawrence of Arabia" type job with "Grease" and will not go see it.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-01-2001 08:32 PM

How long do 70mm mag heads last, anyway? Mag heads in tape recorders can last thousands of hours, and I find it hard to believe that mag-striped film would wear down the heads substantially faster than magnetic tape (after all, tape is more likely to withstand high tension than film).

I do know that the Colonial Williamsburg Visitors' Center runs their tourist film (about 34 minutes, mag-striped 70mm) 19 times a day in twin theatres on JJs and they get about 2500 runs (or more) per print before the mag stripes start to lose the high frequencies and I believe that their heads last longer than that. I'm pretty sure that they're using the Teccon heads rather than the Ampex heads...

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 01-01-2001 08:58 PM

Scott:

Teccon heads can be good for up to 20 million feet. Tracks 1 and 6 often start to loose head contact first.

Steve

| IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 01-01-2001 11:18 PM

I hope you are all going there to vote.

| IP: Logged

Paul G. Thompson
The Weenie Man

Posts: 4718
From: Mount Vernon WA USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 01-02-2001 01:41 AM

I think it will do well on the second time around if you the double feature thing with another Indiana Jones movie.

| IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 01-02-2001 09:05 AM

We were only able to get 3 "runs" out of a Teccon mag head before it died. (The Teccon head "sounded" much better than the Ampex we were buying.) By "run" I mean a 3 month (or so) length. Steve is right; usually the outside tracks wear more than the center.

To keep the entire width of film even on the heads (to read the tracks correctly) there's a lot of pressure on the film as it passes over the heads; much more than a regular tape-recorder.

This was better than the Ampex's, which only lasted 1 or 2 runs at best.

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 01-03-2001 07:14 AM

I agree with John Walsh --- the reason the mag heads used for film wear faster than those used with audio and video tape is the increased tension required to maintain good contact between the magnetic strip and the head with the much thicker film stock. Polyester film base is 0.0047 inches (120 micrometres) thick, whereas most magnetic tape is well under 0.001 inch (25 micrometres) thick.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

| IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-03-2001 02:32 PM

I usually find the teccon heads last about 2 years in most of local theatres when 70 was the norm in them (almost all year)
dirty prints seemed to cause more wear problems than anything

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 01-03-2001 02:49 PM

With efficient film cleaners now available to theatres, dirty prints should be a thing of the past, eh? Seriously, using a film cleaner helps improve quality in many ways.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.