• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The fight for 35mm

doubleohfive

doubleohfive

Fleet Admiral
Cinephiles, purists, and general moviegoers everywhere:

In Los Angeles, one of the treats of living in this great city is the opportunity to see screenings of classic, foreign, contemporary, independent and grindhouse films (Just last weekend I attended a spectacular showing of Gone With The Wind in a packed house at the Egyptian).

Apparently, now, the studios in their infinite wisdom are seeking to discontinue the distribution of these 35mm prints for these screenings due to rising costs.

There is an inherent magic and quality to seeing a film projected in its 35mm glory, the like of which is impossible to fully recreate digitally; Its not only a part of our cultural awareness but part of the very creative allure filmmaking has had on countless individuals over the years who have tried their hand at the craft and also of people like you and me who just plain love going to the movies.

Please take the time to read the page I've linked to and consider signing the petition.

Link.
 
Yes. In addition to this, I would like to finally see some dvd movies released in their 35mm framing. Too often the widescreen dvd release is the 70mm version, and I am unable to watch the exact same version of the movie I saw in the theater.
 
^^ Probably just the nature or level of the technology. Resolution is one thing, but there are a lot of other elements to photography, including the way light reacts physically with film, that are hard to reproduce-- assuming the developers of the technology even want to reproduce them. For digital filmmakers there are a lot of tools and filters available to mimic the look of different types of film and the film of different eras, but it's still just mimicking.

Anyways, I'll sign the petition-- I like purists who want to preserve artistic history.
 
I can understand why the studios wouldn't have much enthusiasm for maintaining a more expensive, if better format. The era of high-fidelity is over. Just look at music. Much of it is consumed though smartphones and those crappy Apple earbuds... and somehow people are content with this.

Personally though, I'd love to see a revival of 70mm film in the shooting and screening movies. Digital isn't going to touch 70mm for a long time.
 
Mr. B said:
Personally though, I'd love to see a revival of 70mm film in the shooting and screening movies.
Click to expand...

Me too. Ever seen Baraka? Supposedly that was the first 70mm film shot in over 20 years (and that itself was 20 years ago!). Definitely the first 70mm Todd-AO done in that time (I don't know the difference, is there 70mm that is NOT Todd-AO?)
 
4k or higher digital resolution is the future of "film". Nothing is going to save physical film at this point. It's just too expensive to use now.
 
DVDs and Blu-ray work just fine. Their quality is amazing. No need for film anymore.

Mr Awe
 
RJDiogenes said:
^^ Probably just the nature or level of the technology. Resolution is one thing, but there are a lot of other elements to photography, including the way light reacts physically with film, that are hard to reproduce-- assuming the developers of the technology even want to reproduce them. For digital filmmakers there are a lot of tools and filters available to mimic the look of different types of film and the film of different eras, but it's still just mimicking.

Anyways, I'll sign the petition-- I like purists who want to preserve artistic history.
Click to expand...

It's kind of like listening to a song on a record rather than an MP3. It's just cooler.

Anyway, it's had to imagine that it's so difficult to make 35mm versions for limited releases since there's obviously a niche following still interested in this. I hope for the best that this petition will work out.
 
^^ Right. And vinyl has made a comeback. Newbury Comics has a section for vinyl. :bolian:
 
Mr Awe said:
DVDs and Blu-ray work just fine. Their quality is amazing. No need for film anymore.
Click to expand...
This attitude is part of the problem. Blu-Ray resolution is 1920x1080 pixels. How big is each dot when you project that on a proper movie screen? Exactly.
 
Jinglebell JaRock said:
RJDiogenes said:
^^ Probably just the nature or level of the technology. Resolution is one thing, but there are a lot of other elements to photography, including the way light reacts physically with film, that are hard to reproduce-- assuming the developers of the technology even want to reproduce them. For digital filmmakers there are a lot of tools and filters available to mimic the look of different types of film and the film of different eras, but it's still just mimicking.

Anyways, I'll sign the petition-- I like purists who want to preserve artistic history.
Click to expand...

It's kind of like listening to a song on a record rather than an MP3. It's just cooler.
Click to expand...

That's all psychological. I know an audiophile and I dared him to tell the difference between an LP and a CD that I made from the LP (to preserve the hiss and pops). So, same album both the original LP and then digitized onto a CD (not a compressed MP3 because I wanted to avoid compression issues). Played on the same audio system. But, he couldn't see which source I was playing it from.

He could not tell the difference. I played different songs from the album. Sometimes the LP first and sometimes the CD first. And, then switch. He couldn't tell the difference!! He only got it right about 50% of the time. He was shocked! It was awesome.

Mr Awe
 
So, based on this one example of one person not being able to tell the difference between two disparate audio formats, we should just throw in the towel on 35mm film screenings.

If only the rest of the world operated with such assured efficiency.
 
^^ Ahhh, nope. I was responding to a comment about LPs being cooler than MP3s. Well, I guess depending on the compression used, I suppose that could be true. And, perhaps from a retro perspect, it could be true that way as well.

But, my point was more in response to the audiophiles who think LPs are better than CDs. My own 2 cents, if you will.

Anyway, I gave you my thoughts on film earlier on.

Mr Awe
 
Personally, I can't tell the difference-- my shell-like ears aren't that sensitive. But I always appreciate a purist who wants to preserve history; I'm one of those in my own areas of interest.
 
Mr Awe said:
^^ Ahhh, nope. I was responding to a comment about LPs being cooler than MP3s. Well, I guess depending on the compression used, I suppose that could be true. And, perhaps from a retro perspect, it could be true that way as well.

But, my point was more in response to the audiophiles who think LPs are better than CDs. My own 2 cents, if you will.

Anyway, I gave you my thoughts on film earlier on.

Mr Awe
Click to expand...

None of this addresses whether it is cooler or not. Plus, you have mp3 of a vinyl record and a vinyl record to figure out if they sound different. You could not be farther from the point.
 
I signed this a couple of weeks ago. I've really enjoyed the chance to see (as well as program) 35mm prints in the past year and change I've spent in Los Angeles. Digital projection just isn't the same.

Mr. Laser Beam said:
Mr. B said:
I own the Blu-ray... best looking home video release of all time.
Click to expand...

Here's hoping the sequel (Samsara) manages to reach the screen sometime in our current lifetimes...
Click to expand...

A quick Google search says it had its premiere in Toronto in October.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top