Hobbit - cinemas can't show it

Technocentral

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

At this point, it's an exercise in futility wishing the widespread return of 35mm - the cost is too prohibitive compared to digital. There is likely to be a niche (and welcome) resurgence of analogue projection - similar to vinyl's current popularity - but digital ain't going anywhere.

While good digital projection can be a more than servicable substitute for traditional projection - Laurence of Arabia in the IFI recently proved that, to pick just one of many examples - the tech is still undeniably rough, which leads to problems like this. I've heard it happening a lot at festivals particularly. But like the way 35mm projectors were likely to catch fire back in the early days, consider the current flaws growing pains, although we obviously can't forgive a ludicrous misstep such as this.

I only jokingly say that about 35, it's all about economics of course and video projection is so much cheaper than real film projection, but for me going to the cinema was always about doing something that was impossible at home ie seeing celluloid projected, now I look at cinemas as giant tv sets ie a bigger, but essentially the same, version of my blu ray and big screen tv the magic isn't there anymore

aN.Droid

Omniplex in Limerick didnt have it for the 1pm showing or 4:30 showing. Said it would almost certainly have the 8:30 showing.

krudler

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

At this point, it's an exercise in futility wishing the widespread return of 35mm - the cost is too prohibitive compared to digital. There is likely to be a niche (and welcome) resurgence of analogue projection - similar to vinyl's current popularity - but digital ain't going anywhere.

While good digital projection can be a more than servicable substitute for traditional projection - Laurence of Arabia in the IFI recently proved that, to pick just one of many examples - the tech is still undeniably rough, which leads to problems like this. I've heard it happening a lot at festivals particularly. But like the way 35mm projectors were likely to catch fire back in the early days, consider the current flaws growing pains, although we obviously can't forgive a ludicrous misstep such as this.

I miss 35mm tbh, I used to work in a cinemas yonks ago and spent far more time than I should have had hanging around in the projection room watching how the films were spliced together, seeing a new film arrive in cans was cool. Yeah prints deteriorated after a few weeks and the pops and burns in the print were there but dammit it had soul.

Kiith

Can i ask what is so good about 35mm? I keep hearing people mention it, but i don't get it. The LotR marathon last weekend was in 35mm apparently, and it wasn't the best quality. Definitely not as good as digital screenings i've seen.

Antar Bolaeisk

Kiith wrote: »

Can i ask what is so good about 35mm? I keep hearing people mention it, but i don't get it. The LotR marathon last weekend was in 35mm apparently, and it wasn't the best quality. Definitely not as good as digital screenings i've seen.

I was helping out with a digital installation in the local cinema and I was surprised at just how much of an improvement in picture quality there was and that was from the trailers alone.

e_e

Kiith wrote: »

Can i ask what is so good about 35mm? I keep hearing people mention it, but i don't get it. The LotR marathon last weekend was in 35mm apparently, and it wasn't the best quality. Definitely not as good as digital screenings i've seen.

There's a crispness, clarity and warmth to it that beats out digital, which happens to be a lot sharper on the eyes and often less immersive for me. 35MM makes for a more tactile experience too, there's something inexplicably cool to me about how individual pieces of film are cut, spliced together and fed through a projector at a certain frame rate (other than simple pressing an "on" button). It is something of an art form and is more pure cinema to me, as opposed to y'know just watching a giant television.

It's not too dissimilar to the CD vs Vinyl debate in that there is grain in the latter but that can be part of the charm as opposed to the hardness and "perfection" of the former.

johnny_ultimate

Clarity isn't the be all and all. There is indeed a 'look' to 35mm (and, even better, 70mm) projection - something, for lack of a better word, cinematic. It's the film grain, the way it projects colour and light (Looper was a film recently whose moody, noir-influenced visuals really benefited from 35mm)... yeah, many audience members won't notice or even care, but there's undoubtedly something about traditional film rolling through a projector that continues to woo many audiences. Again, this only really matters if the film in question was shot by a crew that can take advantage of the distinctive look of film. In the hands of talented artists, digital can look absolutely wonderful too.

Another problem is that many digital projectors just aren't calibrated properly due to the fact they're basically run by computers. I was in Odeon Stillorgan recently, and the the digital image looked really awful - too bright and even not fully utilising the correct screen space. If there's one thing to mourn more than anything, its the death of the projectionist. Cineworld, for example, let all their projectionists go a year or two ago, and the human touch is undeniably lost as multiplexes become more clinical and removed. They now only have a 'technician'. There's something to be said for the fact that you know the film you are watching was painstakingly cut together by someone, and there's someone in the projection booth keeping an eye on the screen to make sure it looks as good as it possibly can. Digital also undeniably leads to more cock-ups like this Hobbit one.

An increasing majority of films shot these days are made digitally - even vocally anti-digital cinematographer Roger Deakins (Skyfall most recently) has conceded the battle as a result of the much liked Arri Alexa camera (which is able to ape the look of analogue film remarkably well). But again film fans and niche theatres are likely going to continue supporting anlogue film. I'd be a defender of digital filming & projection, but seeing Baraka and The Master in 70mm (an ultra high resolution film stock, that is of course prohibitively expensive but absolutely gorgeous to look at) there is something about the way the image looks that digital, for all its benefits, is simply unable to replicate at the moment. While many have been calling The Master the last hurrah for film stock, we can only hope that there continues to be enough support that it doesn't die out completely.

RaoulDukeHST

Went to see it in IMC yesterday. They could not get 48FPS working. Great customer service as got refund and comp tickets. Anyone seen this in 48FPS in Dublin yet?

johnny_ultimate

Yeah Cineworld definitely have it in 48 FPS. Saw it there earlier in the week.

Going by some of the comments on the main Hobbit thread, Dundrum are advertising screenings in HFR but people aren't noticing any difference. There must be a problem there too at least for some screenings, even if Dundrum haven't noticed or acknowledged it. I think the cinemas themselves might be getting a bit confused about what HFR actually is!

mewso

I suppose the good news then is that with digital being cheaper than 35mm that cinema ticket prices will of course come down in line with that....:pac:

RaoulDukeHST

I would think the difference would be immediately apparent. Then again most don't seem to notice when they have all that awful sped up motion on their panels at home...

johnny_ultimate

RaoulDukeHST wrote: »

I would think the difference would be immediately apparent. Then again most don't seem to notice when they have all that awful sped up motion on their panels at home...

Yeah, I couldn't get over it for a good hour it was so weird. And even after that I never fully acclimatised to it. Pretty much everyone I've heard from has experienced the same level of disorientation (to varying degrees anyway), so I have to admit I'm a little suspicious about Dundrum cinema's claims considering how many people in Dundrum specifically didn't notice it!

Son0vagun

The odeon in blanch has it in HPF, does anyone know if its working there?

RaoulDukeHST

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Yeah, I couldn't get over it for a good hour it was so weird. And even after that I never fully acclimatised to it. Pretty much everyone I've heard from has experienced the same level of disorientation (to varying degrees anyway), so I have to admit I'm a little suspicious about Dundrum cinema's claims considering how many people in Dundrum specifically didn't notice it!

I would be suspicious also, given that I imagine its as jarring as a badly setup plasma\LCD\LED.. I am looking forward to trying HFR though, Trumbull pioneered this with Showscan at 60FPS, and has evangelized it since, must be something to that. Not sure I am convinced myself with what I have seen, I still like the motion\beauty of 24FPS.. I wonder what way it will be released on 2D Blu-Ray..

Sad Professor

Blu-ray doesn't support 48p, though they might release a 50 or 60p version. It would mean showing frames twice or speed-up which would kind of defeat the point.