Hollywood Cinerama Dome
6360 Sunset Boulevard,
Los Angeles,
CA
90028
6360 Sunset Boulevard,
Los Angeles,
CA
90028
143 people
favorited this theater
Showing 976 - 1,000 of 1,434 comments
Just FYI good discussion starting up on Grauman’s Chinese page RE how Arclight has started to get all the good bookings lately:
/theaters/1/
Last comment from me:
It wasn’t like that for the first couple years that the Arclight was open, but these days the Arclight is THE place in LA to see a film. Whenever I go you see celebrities and industry people who would really rather not deal with all the tourists on Hollywood Boulevard. My feeling is studios really want their films at the Arclight for the prestige factor. Its sad because the Chinese puts on a good show. A few years ago the Chinese and even Chinese 6 were getting films like Lord of the Rings: FOTR, Black Hawk Down, Star Wars Ep 1 and 2 and Insomnia. All of those would certainly play at the Arclight if released today.
I really don’t care what you’re comparing a pristine to 35mm print – the film always looks better to me. It’s really that simple. You like digital projection – great.
As to lowering the masking – you people do understand that that was always the norm, don’t you? I:85 was one ratio, and when it changed to scope the masking opened on the sides and the top masking came down – that is how it was until heaven knows when. Now there’s no difference in the height – they simply open the sides and it’s not right, IMO. At the DGA, 1:85 is 1:85 and 2:35 is something wholly other, as it should be.
haineshisway,
We’re not comparing pristine special 35mm prints to mediocre 1k digital nowadays.
Re: El Capitan’s screen. Yes, it’s not very big. 40ft?
To show the 2:35 “Narnia” at El Cap, it looked like they had to lower both the top and bottom masks in order to present a 2:35 image. That screen is obviously made for 1:85 Disney cartoons – not widescreen flicks. Nuff about that…
I saw Indy 4 on Friday at 11:40 PM. Great sound & picture – HORRIBLE MOVIE ENDING!
the El Capitan screen is not very big as it is on the stage. The largest screen holder in California is at the Chinese and the screen holder is 120 feet. The stage at the Chinese was ripped out to accommodate this large screen holder. The masking at the Chinese opens to 65 feet for 35mm scope the largest picture able to be projected without burning the film. It opens further for digital presentations.
Chris, it has been awhile since I’ve been to the restored El Capitan (different than the covered up decor of the theater then called Paramount) but the screen was anything but tiny or shoeboxy. Can you please estimate how many feet wide you perceive the screen is, for a scope film?
In my opinion, “tiny” is less than 20 feet wide, “medium” starts at 25 feet, “large” at 30 or 35 feet, “huge” at 50 feet, and “enormous” at 60 feet.
That was me, and the El Capitan was in a list of other theaters where I feel showmanship is still present. I honestly have only been to the El Capitan twice – had a good time both times, but have no memory of the screen size at all. Why on Earth would it be a small screen. When the theater was the Paramount it had a HUGE screen – saw The Music Man there, and Dr. Zhivago, and Doctor Doolittle and many, many other films.
Saw Indy at the Dome last night, presentation was fine, image was sharp and bright, sound excellent, it did look like the edges were cropped pretty badly for the trailers, particularly the bottom as the titles hit the edges, but the movie itself seemed ok. The ‘warping’ from the curved screen isn’t bad at all, i still like this theatre and give it a 9, it always brings back memories of a more exciting time visiting the cinermadome, though we certainly don’t live in exciting times anymore, at least for cinema. Reality has plenty of all the wrong kinds of excitement we need
So 35MM film but no 70MM for “Indy 4” after all. 1 out of 2 ain’t bad, I guess. I’m going to the 11:40 PM show with 30 members of my film club on Friday night. Hope it’s worth it.
And to the poster who lauded the El Capitan for it’s showmanship – I was just there for the first time in 7 years for “Narnia – Prince Caspian” last Friday. All the showmanship in the world won’t compensate for that tiny, shoeboxy screen they use! I’ve seen bigger screens in megaplexes! I’ll take The Dome/Arclight anyplace anytime anywhere!
How’s Indy doing at the Dome? I’ll be there with the kids Sunday!
JSA
no that’s just excessive.
i just looked online – in between midnight and 1:01am tonight – Indy 4 is playing in 12 out of the 15 auditoriums. is that a record?
technical question – how were 35mm prints actually blown up for their 70mm incarnations? Is it somewhat akin to the new trend of films being DMR’d to IMAX/70mm? Is the intermediate negative sourced? I know that for the recent engagments of ‘Iron Man’ and ‘Jumper’ on DC’s Uptown’s curved screens, the image wasn’t distorted, it was the near decolorization of the 35mm prints that were the issue.
If 35mm scope was blown up to 70mm, yes, as far as I know there would be some cropping involved.
You can find an excellent summary and comparison of the various aspect ratios using both 35mm anamorphic and 70mm processes at this page of the Widescreen Museum website:
View link
yea i was there for that Khartoom screening. But let’s take the two common ratio’s for most hollywood studio films, 1:85 and 2:35, is there a difference in ratio presentation whether it’s shown in 35 or 70? Most films are shot in 35, so most were blow-ups, so i would guess not. I mean for example the big difference between seeing Raiders or Temple of Doom in 70 was a brighter, sharper, more stable image and of course the sound, right?
Of course there are different ratios for different types of 70mm. The most common is 2:20 – there have been a handful of 1:85 ratio films in 70mm, and then, of course, there’s Ultra Panavision 70, whose negative ratio is 2:76 (I just saw Khartoum at the Egyptian and they did their best to preserve the 2:76 ratio, but their screen is just too small to have that work).
I agree with that, these big screens were meant for 70..no doubt about it! Though someone correct me if i’m wrong, is there any difference in the actual ratio of the presentation, whether it be 1:85, 2:35 or 2:40 whether it’s in 35 or 70? Cause i don’t think there is, 70 mainly gives you a higher resolution, sharper, brighter image, and of course mag sound in the old days. Though i’m not sure about this, especially for some of the old fashioned mega-wide scopes ala Vistavision, Ultra or Super Panavision 65mm, Todd AO, etc someone with better knowledge fill me in
In my opinion, there is no point in showing a 35mm scope print on a screen designed for huge 70mm presentation. It’s what’s wrong with every movie theater today – there is almost no difference in screen sizes. The height of 1:85 is not the height of 2:35, so just opening the masking doesn’t quite do it. There is no showmanship anymore. I’ll take curtains, the DGA, the Chinese, the El Capitan, any of those places where they have some idea of what the moviegoing experience should be like. The one thing it should NOT be like is sitting in your living room watching your big screen TV.
I think only the front rows get the advantage of the curved screen, as the image fills more of their field of vision. As you move farther back, the effect is lost. The last feature I saw at the Dome was Iron Man, and the image was neither dark nor soft. I noticed that the AMPAS logo on the trailers was warped, but I didn’t notice any distortion during the feature. I was sitting in about the middle of the house.
i’ve been reading some of the above posts about design flaws of the dome, the warped screen distorting the image, i guess it’s always been that way though i don’t recall it being a huge problem or distraction, I probably haven’t seen anough scope films there to pay enough attention. Though i do vagely recall someone commenting on how warped the german plane in Raiders of the Lost Ark was when it played there in ‘81. (whats the advantage of a curved screen anyway?) And then there is the dark and soft image issue on the screen, yea I seem to recall this was a problem in recent years, have they fixed or improved that? Haven’t seen anything there in quite some time. I thought the arclight was all about bringing picture brightness up to the highest standards, but it sounds like the main dome has posed a problem with this, mostly because of bad corporate (save money) decisions. This is really unfortunate, and all too typical
Moviefone also has the Dome feature indicated.
The Arclight tells you which film is playing in the Dome in their LA Times ad and on their website (Dome showtimes are in bold).
ahh, the guy who’d rather see digital presentation than 35mm? Well, hey as a film purist i’m with you there, I endlessly complain about the loss of 70mm, audiences these days don’t realize just how much better 70 was but the cost differences just couldn’t justify “progress” in the name of technology and mindless automation. Don’t worry, we’re still a few years away from seeing everything as a pixilated i-pod flash clip but it ain’t that far off. It’s all over anyway, so i pretty much stopped caring accepting the end of the world, the days when films were actually good and genuine cinemas & movie palaces existed, when films were an event, when things had more character, and the experience was gratifying, meaningful, before over-inflated ticket prices & parking enforcement drones, before everything became a target audience market niche, a comic book/videogame, when there was real life and possibilities, when everyone didn’t have that glazed empty dead look in their eyes, and, oh well you get the idea, those days are gone.
I have no anger. My comment was directed at a post I don’t consider trivial at all – some guy saying something that I consider completely ignorant and typical of what goes on in the world today.
I have no love for much of anything the Arclight does these days.