|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Play Time (Presented in 70MM)
|
Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover
Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003
|
posted 12-27-2010 09:46 PM
****
What a amazing Time!
Ok, officially, I love 70mm! What an intersting film. It was like observing people in everyday life. Reminds you of how simple movie narratives have become. There is so much going on in every shot it hard to know where to look and then you think you have missed something.
Not exactly a silent film, but kind of like one. I never really laughed out loud at all, but it was more of an amusement than homour. The door scene was funny.
Something I found intersting was that according to Roger Ebert the director lost everything (including his house) with personal bankruptcy because of this film. Also, it took three years to film on a set that was built for the built.
I knew that seeing this film in 70mm was a must as there might not be another opportunity to ever see this movie in 70mm, the jury is out whether tiff will continue playing 70mm films. I think they will. Also, it appear Roger Ebert claims that there is only one 70mm print in circulation.
The 70mm had so much detail. It really is amazing. No close up shots as everything is med-long shot. I was lucky enought to see a 70mm, (possible) 4K presentation, 35mm and then another 70mm print all back-to-back-to-back-to-back. I can honestly say, I was wrong, 70mm is the superior format. It was the most "life" like out of all format. Although 35mm is not what is used to be so I have heard.
There were some sequences where I really think it went out of 70mm from the source of restoration and thus were blown up. The blacks changed in these parts. There were only a few of the parts and they were near the end.
The print I did see had some issues, there were some scratches here and there, and the film was dirty and the beginning and end of the changeovers.
Like 2001:, I was amazed at the channel seperation. There seemed to be so much channel seperation. Going left to right and rare dialogue coming from the right/left speakers here and there. Were 70mm films made with better sound seperations?
As for presentation. The masking was not fully flat. I could see the black bars on the side. It looks like it was projected on scope with flat letterboxing. Can anyone confirm if this is the correct way of showing the film?
Also, there were a few jumpy sections and I noticed a splice every once in a while. Looks like this print has been mishandled.
Format: 70mm
Sound: DTS
The screen size was an average size. Not massive or wall to wall.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
David E. Nedrow
Master Film Handler
Posts: 368
From: Columbus, OH, USA
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 12-28-2010 02:42 PM
quote: Tom Petrov
Like 2001:, I was amazed at the channel seperation. There seemed to be so much channel seperation. Going left to right and rare dialogue coming from the right/left speakers here and there. Were 70mm films made with better sound seperations?
There was a time when directional sound was pretty common, not only in surround films, but also regular stereo.
I personally prefer that the dialog move with the character across the screen and around the auditorium (as necessary).
For some reason, studios, directors, and sound mixers have decided that it apparently disorients/confuses people when dialog moves, so dialog is now anchored to the center channel. Of course, they're perfectly will to do directional with sound effects, which apparently DOESN'T disorient people.
For example, if you get lucky enough to see a Cinerama presentation of HOW THE WEST WAS WON, or an old roadshow print of THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, all of the dialog is directional.
The sad thing is that now, with DVD and Blu-ray, studios are actually re-mixing films and locking in to the center channel what had been directional dialog.
On LaserDisc, THE TEN COMMANDMENTS has the directional dialog, but on an early release of it on DVD, the dialog was all in the center. I don't if that's still the case, but I'm always suspicious of "newly mixed audio" when it comes to new releases of classic titles.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brad Miller
Administrator
Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99
|
posted 12-28-2010 04:17 PM
quote: Tom Petrov
The print I did see had some issues, there were some scratches here and there, and the film was dirty and the beginning and end of the changeovers.
This is the problem with repertory prints. Assuming the print is destined to play only 1-2 times at an engagement, most people agree with me that running changeover puts less wear on the film. However once you hit that 3-4 showing mark, plattering puts less wear on the film because it isn't being constantly handled. Think about it. The ENDS of the reels are what is being handled each and every show on a changeover setup, hence the wear buildup at the ends of the reels. Just because someone isn't touching the actual first frame to be projected in no way stops the dirt buildup, which turns into general "wear" marks. The film DOES lay on itself and the dirt DOES migrate from layer to layer each time it is wound and unwound. Nobody seems to understand this except the crew I worked with at the GCC Northpark 1&2 and Steve Guttag.
Unfortunately this is why repertory prints are pretty much going to get worn, dirty and scratched. Mostly it is because people are too stubborn with their old practices of threading ON the countdown itself, rather than threading on an extended section of (usually additional) leader and motoring down to the starting frame. Likewise, additional tail leader is often required. I've all but given up trying to teach this to the old timers though. Even on a print like Playtime where typically there will be 30-50 of leader on it from the lab, I see people hand-winding reel to reel dragging the film across the side of the projector until they get to that precious start frame. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic