Unless more theaters sign up, this will be a very limited release. Doing a quick search on Moviefone, it won't be shown anywhere in the East Coast. Not even NYC.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...130369203.html

2K and 5.1?

I saw a 35mm print in stereo a few years ago with a sold out crowd and it was a blast! Based upon that PR release, it specifically states that 500 plus theaters will be playing the film.

I wouldnt expect theater listings until the end of the month/beginning of October.

I thought the hidef transfer on the Ghostbusters bluray looked like shit - a lot of grain, very very distracting - the only case where I wish DNR had been applied [ducks]

2K? this is Sony, why isn't it 4K ?

5.1 ?? - child boo! the original 70mm prints were in 5.1 - that's not entirely new.

Ghostbuster was filmed with a grainy stock. It's supposed to look grainy. It gives the film an urban look.

whatever the intent - it looks terrible and in hidef it just magnifies it.

It looks fine. Some people like that look. Here's a screencap of the BluRay from DVDBeaver. Doesn't look remotely terrible to me.

Bump. This plays for the next 3 Thursdays starting tomorrow.

http://www.facebook.com/Ghostbusters lists the cities & theaters.

Can't believe I missed this... it's playing at a local theater tomorrow night.

I have my pick of 3 theaters within a 30 minute drive tomorrow. I can't believe it. I thought for sure it would be a very limited release.

Come to think of it, I haven't heard or seen any advertisements for this playing. Had I not been a member of this forum, I bet I wouldn't have even known.

This is playing at the Cinemark theater by me! Ghostbusters/The Thing double feature perhaps

why AMC can't book this for the Uptown theater in DC is beyond me - it's got a DLP unit and it's a single screen that could benefit from alternate programming - show it goddamn it

Playing here and town. I'm sure I'll catch one of the showings

Got my ticket for tomorrow from fandango, 7p. Saw part 2 in theaters when I was a kid but not the first.

Mass-market digital prints are always 2K to minimize storage space and copying/ingestion time.

I thought this was going to be new 35mm prints. According to this article it was:

so I wonder why Taxi Driver got the 4K treatment then

as well as these:

Digital Cinema 4K Movie Releases

I think it's because some of the theaters that are presenting Ghostbusters might be projecting it from 2K DLP units and not Sony's brand of projectors.

Yeah, I have a theater right here in town showing it and I would have never known except for this thread. Strange. Won't be able to get to it tonight, but I might try to see it on the big screen before it's gone again.

Taxi Driver had just been remastered for the Blu-ray release.

Understand that just because some specialized theatres may show a 4K digital print, theatres in the mass market get 2K versions. Ghostbusters is 2K, as are any of the other digital prints we've ever received at any of the locations I've overseen.

This could be why, although if it's an AMC with a digital screen, most likely it's a 4K Sony. Up until last year, the current theatre I work at, which we had just taken over from a defunct company, still had a 1K digital projector!

Personally, I wish we had Christies, because while the Sony 4Ks are fine from an exhibitor standpoint, I can't stand how dark they are.


Someone writing an article on the internet was wrong? Stop the presses!

and TD was fucking gorgeous on BD.

So we're half an hour into the first show. Forty people - not a bad turnout for a weeknight. I hope this means more films get brought back.

Taxi Driver is a catalog title that got remastered as such, yes, but even the new films are technically 4K - there's no reason to derez it to 2K.

mass release of 2K is because most of the digital projector systems on the market and in the theater currently are that, Sony's 4K and the newer DLP systems are 4K upgradeable.

and yes, Sony 4K systems are dark, depending on the screen - the larger the screen the darkness flaw becomes more and more apparent. I saw 'How to Train Your Dragon 3D' on the third largest screen at my neighborhood AMC and the opening scene was set way too dark. Saw the film again, on another system, a Barco and the brightness level was boosted to the required light output for a 3D feature - guess which was superior? Thankfully AMC is coming to it's senses and realizing that the Sony systems don't work on the larger screens and are adding Christie DLP units instead - I wonder how they worked around the Sony deal to go with another brand.

Stop using the internet on your phone and let other people enjoy the movie.

Amen! Even if you completely silence your phone and use it shielding the screen as much as possible, everyone behind or next to you can see the light, distracting them from the film.

If I was King, first offenders would be banned from movie theaters for life.

They're enjoying the movie because I'm playing it for them. Don't jump to conclusions, it makes you look foolish.

Giles, the Sony deal wasn't exclusive, thankfully. I have a Christie on the largest non-IMAX screen because the Sony's throw is pretty poor. Even in the smaller houses, however, I find the light output from the Sony is inferior to the 35mm next door.

Not to knock Sony's output completely. I'm sure they look fine in people's houses.

You're right. I don't like kicking people out for any reason really (it distracts the other moviegoers), but I still get a tinge of happiness whenever I eject someone for phone use. The world smiles a little more.

Sadly, any banning only goes so far as how much I can remember pretty identical-looking morons and whether or not I'm working that night. Not like we can paste mugshots up in Box Office.

Again, 4K digital prints take up more storage space, which means having to send out more expensive hard drives, as well as longer ingestion time. Moviegoers with trained eyes and appreciation would certainly prefer the difference, but the fact is the amount of moviegoers that would notice the difference is negligible.

Sorry, it seemed like the most logical conculsion based on the text of your post, but that doesn't make it correct. Please accept my apologies.