bluetoast

Let's use this thread to talk about 70 mm projections that we see this year. There are still a number of venues around the country that can project 70 mm, so it would be nice to share thoughts and experiences of particular movies.

In the D.C. area the only thing on the horizon is a blow up of Starman, coming in March. Never seen it, so I hope to check that out.

Giles

I'll be there -

so does the IMAX version of 'Interstellar' count since Nolan shot some of the movie in 65mm? In my mind, he's one of the few director's other than Paul Thomas Anderson (2012's 'The Master') who could have possibly made Warners let him shoot the entire movie in 65mm.

hanshotfirst1138

You could include 35mm at this point, it's getting to be just as rare. As regards Interstellar, apparently IMAX will soon be phasing out the last of their 15/70 projectors, so Nolan will probably be at the gates of celluloid's last stand, if any places do still project it that way by the time it comes out. I'm kind of supposed PTA had the clout for 70mm, he's hardly known for commercial blockbusters, at least Nolan has enough huge hits under his belt to allow him to throw his weight around. And apparently The Master didn't even make it's budget back, which isn't surprising. It was one of the least accessible films I've seen in a while, I'm surprised they greenlit the 70mm on the basis of that movie. I saw a DCP of it at my local AMC, I was surprised it got a multiplex release even for a bit. Are there any websites which log 35mm and 70mm screenings these days?

bluetoast

Sure, let's count IMAX, especially since we don't have a lot of either format these days.

Apparently it's being shot with both 35 mm and IMAX stock. I'd bet Nolan now has the clout to film the whole thing in 65 mm, but he has said before that the IMAX cameras are loud, and there isn't a solution for using them in scenes with dialogue. But then I wonder why not use "traditional" 65/70 mm stock for the rest of the movie? Cost is probably a factor.

Han, sad but true that we'll soon be counting 35 mm projection like this. Paramount has stopped distributing altogether and The Wolf of Wall Street was the first digital only release from them. That just feels weird especially considering the Scorsese connection, but he switched over during Hugo.

I don't know about a listing for theaters showing 35 mm (although it's already been overtaken, I guess it's still not rare enough to warrant that kind of site). There are at least two theaters in the D.C. area that primarily project 35 mm. Area specific info, spoilered so as not to bore:



List of 70 mm capable theaters (past and present):

http://www.redballoon.net/current70mmus.html

This site has showtimes for 70 mm as well as other news:

http://www.in70mm.com/index.htm

Giles

the redballon listing is not really up to date though.

another theater in the DC area that still plays 35mm on 9 of it's 10 screens is the Kentland's Stadium 10 over in Gaithersburg Maryland. Unfortunately I'm not sure how they are going to get around not being able to book Paramount films in the near future since it sounds like the studio is kicking 35mm out the door permanently:

Paramount reportedly abandoning 35mm film for US movie theaters

I hope the rumoured IMAX film from Terrence Malick 'Voyage of Time' (that is supposed to get released this year - fingers crossed) also is released in 15/70 before the transition to laser projection.

bluetoast

It's been reported that Interstellar will be an exception to Paramount's digital only distribution, and will be released as both a film print and DCP. I'm assuming this means in addition to IMAX prints.

Supermallet

Uh, isn't Interstellar WB?

Why So Blu?

Paramount.

Supermallet

Is WB releasing it overseas or something? They're listed as a production company on IMDB, along with Paramount and Legendary.

Edit: Looks like WB is responsible for France and Japan.

The Black

I thought this was going to be about a sequel to 8MM.

Giles

starring Nicolas Cage of course [good actor? bad actor? discuss ]

hanshotfirst1138

One of the midnight movies in a local college town actually let you pick between Face/Off and Raising Arizona. They called it the "Cage match," because they're clever that way.

Brack

I love Community.

hanshotfirst1138

Apparently 15/70 theaters for IMAX are getting increasingly rare and will be all-but abandoned after Interstellar. It honestly sounds like Interstellar will be celluloid's last stand.

The studio probably aren't chomping at the bit to have him shoot film at all, I'm sure they wouldn't be real inclined to splurge on 70mm.


I always thought if anyone would be a holdout, Scorsese would, but apparently not. Paramount are probably only the first to make an unpopular decision. 35mm seems to be rarer than hen's teeth these days anyway, and as has often been mentioned, it's crippling many smaller theaters.

Damn, I have to start using my vacation days and getting a little traveling done.

A local college town art-house is doing a Hitchcock season, they are kind enough to list on their website whether it's a DCP, DVD, or 35mm print, but so far, they've only been able to secure one film print. I think for the new generation of film fans, seeing many classic (or current) films in 35mm is going to becoming an increasingly difficult if not sometimes impossible thing.

I actually attended a film-capable theater recently to see Lawrence of Arabia, and they straight-out said that in spite of their best efforts, they simply couldn't get a film print of it.

I'm curious how they've managed to stay around this long, to be honest. Studios refusal to make prints must pretty much cripple theaters who can't or won't go digital, my understanding is that the projectionist job is all but dead too.

It partially depends on the director's clout, but I'd be surprised if Malick has it. Nolan has made some of the highest grossing films of all time, so he might have the weight, Malick has considerable heft within the filmmaking and critical community, but I wonder if his art-house audience will be enough to convince the studio to splurge on real prints. When do IMAX roll out the laser stuff? Is there a list IMAXes which still do 15\70? I had assumed it was most of their bigger non-multiplex locations, but it sounds like even most of those are digital now. As AC/DC would say, come on, come on, listen to the money talk.

I wonder where it'll play in 35mm? I kind of wonder too if it would be better to see in digital IMAX because of the IMAX footage than regular 35mm in this case? Like I said, it sounds like Interstellar is primed to be celluloid's last stand.

danstheday

I actually attended a film-capable theater recently to see Lawrence of Arabia, and they straight-out said that in spite of their best efforts, they simply couldn't get a film print of it.



I'm curious how they've managed to stay around this long, to be honest. Studios refusal to make prints must pretty much cripple theaters who can't or won't go digital, my understanding is that the projectionist job is all but dead too.



It partially depends on the director's clout, but I'd be surprised if Malick has it. Nolan has made some of the highest grossing films of all time, so he might have the weight, Malick has considerable heft within the filmmaking and critical community, but I wonder if his art-house audience will be enough to convince the studio to splurge on real prints. When do IMAX roll out the laser stuff? Is there a list IMAXes which still do 15\70? I had assumed it was most of their bigger non-multiplex locations, but it sounds like even most of those are digital now. As AC/DC would say, come on, come on, listen to the money talk.



I wonder where it'll play in 35mm? I kind of wonder too if it would be better to see in digital IMAX because of the IMAX footage than regular 35mm in this case? Like I said, it sounds like Interstellar is primed to be celluloid's last stand.[/QUOTE]



The only reason the AMC Shirlington still has film projectors is because they were waiting to see what happened with there lease which was very very near its end. Word was that AMC was thinking of closing the theatre and played with the idea of showing the art house films over at the HOFFMAN 22 down the street which they do during non summer and holiday periods. The owner and amc resigned a new lease and AMC is in the planning stages of remodeling the theatre. I really like the theatre and they have about 3 theatres there that have wide screens. We all thought the owner would want to put a tall building on that land...but guess not. I'm a huge film fan and I prefer Digital over film for new movies

Giles

okay just some random thoughts here, since some of you botched some the above "quotes"

'Lawrence' - there's a 70mm print roaming around the US - the AFI Silver always shows it. Seattle's Cinerama theater is showing it in the near future as well.

I don't think we'll see laser DLP and/or IMAX-D 'laser' til maybe summer - again, Seattle Cinerama was slated for this year - February was rumoured as a vague time slot - but DLP and Christie aren't quite ready - and if that's the case, I would suffice to say IMAX-D won't happen til the latter end of 2014/early 2015 at the earliest.

Hoffman 22 is technically 'not down the road' - two competing Regal's at Kingstowne and Potomac Yards are between the two - but do not book foreign/indie films. The Shirlington theater is a prime location for Virginian's who don't want to wander into town to go see the same films at E. Street Even though parking can be a tad bad crazy on weekend's since the Signature Theater is there and there's quite a few restaurants - someone deciding not to retain the theaters, as it's already an entertainment destination, would be a foolish move.