I happen to be one of those who feel that 70mm revivals are not only entirely possible, but with the aid of the proper technical people around the country (or world) not a difficult proposition to put on the road.
Columbia makes LoA and Lord Jim available in 70. Thanks to Fox’s Schawn Belston and his staff, Fox has opened the cans of many 65mm origination productions that haven’t seen the light of day in decades… and printed them along with preservation elements.
Some others still need to be restored before they go before the public.
DTS, with their timecoded 70mm system has made print production and distribution far easier than it was in the past. I recall situations in which beutiful new prints would be damaged in either striping or sounding. And one doesn’t know until you attempt to screen the finished product.
There have been comments made in the recent past that Ultra-Panavision shows carry with them problems endemic to the breed and cannot easily be run. I don’t believe this.
With the help of highly trained and impassioned projectionists and technical directors, new 70mm prints can be tracked, inspected and distributed without major fear of the inevitable short life span that wreaked havoc on them over the past decade. Many of those technical people visit this site. Others, like Chapin Cutler and Larry Shaw of Boston Light & Sound, James Bond of Full Aperture Systems, and Steve Guttag of Cardinal Sound, can easily bring what many consider a dream to reality.
All of this must come hand in hand with the thoughtful cooperation of the programmers who must represent their various theatres as quality venues, and see that they are not only up to the task of having proper projectionists in place on quality equipment, but creating a situation via which prints need not be constantly set up and broeken down in 1 or 2 day runs.
With proper publicity and promotion, the public not tuned into CT can be brought into their local high end venues, whether that venue is set up for 70mm or a projector is brought in, set up and run by special techs. The starting point is a theatre with a huge screen and qualty audio.
Again, DTS makes this easy.
My son had grown up watching Ben-Hur on laser disc or via 4 track mag print screened at our home, albeit on a small screen. A couple of years ago, while he was looking at colleges, I arranged for a screening of the chariot race sequence at Panavision via an unfaded C65 print.
The wide-eyed awe and enthusiasm in seeing something like that for the first time need not be a unique experience.
There is a huge difference between Mr. Wyler’s work on DVD and on 60 foot screen surrounded by 1,000 fellow patrons, who have been shorn of cell phones.
It can be not only reasonably “portable,” but a viable alternative to the norm. But the entire situation must be planned and brought together from the ground up, with everything known in advance.
There is absolutely no reason why 70mm screenings cannot be as successful now as they were forty years ago.
A studio will be much more likely to strike a new print, or go through the expense of newly color correcting a printing element, if they know that ten or twenty or more playdates all await that new print, and that the print will survive the showings.
Yes. One does get a finer quality image for a number of reasons inclusive of the large format print which adds image stability, illumination, etc, but still not anywhere near 65mm origination standards. Unfortunately, this is why (since the blow-ups were derived from Onegs) that many of those original negatives are trashed.
The print of MW is what it is. It has not been fully color corrected, has faded dupe sections, inclusive of the main titles, and improperly placed radio calls. While it is instructive as a test print or to demonstrate the current state of the original negative, it is a starting point for a proper restoration, and should not be construed of as final release print, which I don’t believe was the intent of its creators. It was printed for a special anniversary screening, and its use should have ended there.
There were specific guidelines set up for the running of MW in November 1963. These were printed and distributed to all venues. They are the most specific projection instructions that I’ve ever found. When a filmmaker places their wishes in writing, they should be followed to the letter wherever and whenever possible, unlike the abortive screenings of MW at the Dome. Little is gained by doing things improperly.
The current 70mm print of Mad World is a bastardization, using some of the elements which we turned over to the studio for safekeeping. The film is in need of a proper restoration, if not reconstruction, and the print is not recommended.
Regarding the use of 35mm prints for presentation purposes, it should be noted (this is a discussion which recently took up space on another website) that the format affords the viewer possibly 20-25% of the on-screen quality of a true 70mm print.
Cinematic perfection is something difficult, but decidedly not impossible, to achieve.
When it is achieved, there are generally a number of things that fall into place, or are brought into place beforehand.
A new print is always nice, that has been screened in advance to check for lab defects.
A Tech or techs are always welcome to check everything from the illumination source to the cleanliness of the porthole.
Someone from DTS or Dolby is always a welcome visitor to make certain that all channels of amplification are all systems are properly functional.
And then we have the big one:
Rehearsal.
From the lowering of curtain lights to the end of the show.
But most of this simply doesn’t occur unless one is overseeing special occasion.
So some of the questions that should arise for a “non special occasion” might be these:
Should the operator or projectionist open the 13 cases of film and inspect the print on a bench before attempting to screen it? Replacement reels are available if a problem is found in time, and the studio is extremely professional in handling these situations. They want to screening to be as perfect as possible.
Should one time the lights and curtain cues to the film before running the print before the public?
Should prices be lowered for classic films double the length of a normal film? I can answer that one.
“No.”
If one takes into consideration a nominal discount for students and / or the elderly, the ticket price for a 70mm presentation twice the normal length of a normal film should not be less than $20 or thereabouts.
And at that price, one can afford to bring in the necessary techs to see to potential problems beforehand and make the screening special.
Proper projection is not brain surgery, but a certain number of things need to be done in advance to make certain that the show goes on in the style befitting a theatre like the Ziegfeld.
I would have been nice if all this went off without a Hitch, but certain things need to be set in motion in advance.
I placed calls to Craig O'Connor toward the end of February and never received a response.
To JSA
I happen to be one of those who feel that 70mm revivals are not only entirely possible, but with the aid of the proper technical people around the country (or world) not a difficult proposition to put on the road.
Columbia makes LoA and Lord Jim available in 70. Thanks to Fox’s Schawn Belston and his staff, Fox has opened the cans of many 65mm origination productions that haven’t seen the light of day in decades… and printed them along with preservation elements.
Some others still need to be restored before they go before the public.
DTS, with their timecoded 70mm system has made print production and distribution far easier than it was in the past. I recall situations in which beutiful new prints would be damaged in either striping or sounding. And one doesn’t know until you attempt to screen the finished product.
There have been comments made in the recent past that Ultra-Panavision shows carry with them problems endemic to the breed and cannot easily be run. I don’t believe this.
With the help of highly trained and impassioned projectionists and technical directors, new 70mm prints can be tracked, inspected and distributed without major fear of the inevitable short life span that wreaked havoc on them over the past decade. Many of those technical people visit this site. Others, like Chapin Cutler and Larry Shaw of Boston Light & Sound, James Bond of Full Aperture Systems, and Steve Guttag of Cardinal Sound, can easily bring what many consider a dream to reality.
All of this must come hand in hand with the thoughtful cooperation of the programmers who must represent their various theatres as quality venues, and see that they are not only up to the task of having proper projectionists in place on quality equipment, but creating a situation via which prints need not be constantly set up and broeken down in 1 or 2 day runs.
With proper publicity and promotion, the public not tuned into CT can be brought into their local high end venues, whether that venue is set up for 70mm or a projector is brought in, set up and run by special techs. The starting point is a theatre with a huge screen and qualty audio.
Again, DTS makes this easy.
My son had grown up watching Ben-Hur on laser disc or via 4 track mag print screened at our home, albeit on a small screen. A couple of years ago, while he was looking at colleges, I arranged for a screening of the chariot race sequence at Panavision via an unfaded C65 print.
The wide-eyed awe and enthusiasm in seeing something like that for the first time need not be a unique experience.
There is a huge difference between Mr. Wyler’s work on DVD and on 60 foot screen surrounded by 1,000 fellow patrons, who have been shorn of cell phones.
It can be not only reasonably “portable,” but a viable alternative to the norm. But the entire situation must be planned and brought together from the ground up, with everything known in advance.
There is absolutely no reason why 70mm screenings cannot be as successful now as they were forty years ago.
A studio will be much more likely to strike a new print, or go through the expense of newly color correcting a printing element, if they know that ten or twenty or more playdates all await that new print, and that the print will survive the showings.
RAH
To Ed Solero…
In answer to your question re: 35 blow-ups…
Yes. One does get a finer quality image for a number of reasons inclusive of the large format print which adds image stability, illumination, etc, but still not anywhere near 65mm origination standards. Unfortunately, this is why (since the blow-ups were derived from Onegs) that many of those original negatives are trashed.
RAH
The print of MW is what it is. It has not been fully color corrected, has faded dupe sections, inclusive of the main titles, and improperly placed radio calls. While it is instructive as a test print or to demonstrate the current state of the original negative, it is a starting point for a proper restoration, and should not be construed of as final release print, which I don’t believe was the intent of its creators. It was printed for a special anniversary screening, and its use should have ended there.
There were specific guidelines set up for the running of MW in November 1963. These were printed and distributed to all venues. They are the most specific projection instructions that I’ve ever found. When a filmmaker places their wishes in writing, they should be followed to the letter wherever and whenever possible, unlike the abortive screenings of MW at the Dome. Little is gained by doing things improperly.
The current 70mm print of Mad World is a bastardization, using some of the elements which we turned over to the studio for safekeeping. The film is in need of a proper restoration, if not reconstruction, and the print is not recommended.
Regarding the use of 35mm prints for presentation purposes, it should be noted (this is a discussion which recently took up space on another website) that the format affords the viewer possibly 20-25% of the on-screen quality of a true 70mm print.
RAH
To JSA…
I love the innocence of all this in terms of what to screen.
There are no viable large format prints of either The Alamo or Spartacus to be had from distribution sources.
RAH
Some miscellaneous musings on the situation…
Cinematic perfection is something difficult, but decidedly not impossible, to achieve.
When it is achieved, there are generally a number of things that fall into place, or are brought into place beforehand.
A new print is always nice, that has been screened in advance to check for lab defects.
A Tech or techs are always welcome to check everything from the illumination source to the cleanliness of the porthole.
Someone from DTS or Dolby is always a welcome visitor to make certain that all channels of amplification are all systems are properly functional.
And then we have the big one:
Rehearsal.
From the lowering of curtain lights to the end of the show.
But most of this simply doesn’t occur unless one is overseeing special occasion.
So some of the questions that should arise for a “non special occasion” might be these:
Should the operator or projectionist open the 13 cases of film and inspect the print on a bench before attempting to screen it? Replacement reels are available if a problem is found in time, and the studio is extremely professional in handling these situations. They want to screening to be as perfect as possible.
Should one time the lights and curtain cues to the film before running the print before the public?
Should prices be lowered for classic films double the length of a normal film? I can answer that one.
“No.”
If one takes into consideration a nominal discount for students and / or the elderly, the ticket price for a 70mm presentation twice the normal length of a normal film should not be less than $20 or thereabouts.
And at that price, one can afford to bring in the necessary techs to see to potential problems beforehand and make the screening special.
Proper projection is not brain surgery, but a certain number of things need to be done in advance to make certain that the show goes on in the style befitting a theatre like the Ziegfeld.
I would have been nice if all this went off without a Hitch, but certain things need to be set in motion in advance.
I placed calls to Craig O'Connor toward the end of February and never received a response.
RAH