8mm Forum: Tarantino on 16mm

»	8mm Forum » 16mm Forum » Tarantino on 16mm

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

Author

Topic: Tarantino on 16mm

Steven J Kirk
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 873
From: Southern England
Registered: Apr 2008

posted September 11, 2018 08:17 AM

Surprised to see this one listed...

Even more surprised at the price, a level which I would never go to myself for a film print...

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/16mm-Feature-Film-PULP-FICTION-1994-LPP-Flat-Print-/232916162392?nordt=true&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.m43663.l10137

£3200!!!

[ September 11, 2018, 10:12 PM: Message edited by: Steven J Kirk ]

--------------------
VistaVision
Motion Picture High-Fidelity

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted September 12, 2018 01:59 PM

There has been a bit of talk about this particular one elsewhere.
As much as i would like to have a copy, anything over 200 (and thats really pushing it) is OTT for us.
While it is a film i like, it isn't exactly a big screen action packed drama or classic.
Personally i think i would prefer my Dances with Wolves and Robin prince of thieves. Of course, its each to there own and at the end of the day, the seller started it very very low, like 0.01p. I got a bit suspicious when the bid jumped from £680 straight to 2000.00 with nothing in between. I've not seen that happen before.
Even if you viewed this movie every week for a year the cost of each viewing would amount to almost £62 per viewing!!!!!
Not hat im counting [Big Grin]

| IP: Logged

Steven J Kirk
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 873
From: Southern England
Registered: Apr 2008

posted September 13, 2018 10:12 AM

£3200 is more than my hobby budget for a year or more. Some collectors must just be in another financial bracket. There was a 16mm print of Apocalypse Now a little while back and that is one of my favourites but even at around £1000 - which is what it went for - too much. There are a lot of great 16mm titles around £100 or so. Much more like it...

--------------------
VistaVision
Motion Picture High-Fidelity

| IP: Logged

Nigel Higgins
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 543
From: Saffron walden.united kingdom
Registered: Jun 2014

posted September 13, 2018 01:48 PM

Plain crazy i wonder if this is a modern day record for most paid for 1 16mm feature .makes the derann star wars meek and mild.

| IP: Logged

Robert Crewdson
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1031
From: UK
Registered: Jun 2013

posted September 13, 2018 02:19 PM

Maybe I'm missing something, it says theatrical print, then says it's flat. Wouldn't it be in scope?

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted September 13, 2018 02:28 PM

I dont think this film was in scope to start with.
I wonder if it got paid as the buyer had zero feedback. If he did then the seller did very well indeed.

Where do these films come from? I would have thought this sort of stuff would have to be returned to the distributors. How does this stuff actually get out?

| IP: Logged

Maurice Leakey
Film God

Posts: 5895
From: Bristol. United Kingdom
Registered: Oct 2007

posted September 13, 2018 02:58 PM

The Internet Movie Database says the ratio is 2.39:1 which is 'scope, however, they are not always correct!

I still have visions of showing it on 35mm using Christie platters, some ten minutes from the end of the film the overhead ventilation blew the remaining film onto the floor causing an auto shut down and leaving me to sort out probably about 1000 feet of film. The film ran 2hr 34 mins, plus ads and trailers, so was on the extreme edge of the platter. (Note the feed is from the centre with the end of the film on the outwards edge.)

It was an Odeon 5-screen multiplex and I was working single manning. In the importance of keeping the remaining four screens going, it took some time to unravel and return to the platter. We lost the next showing of it.

The manager was not pleased.

--------------------
Maurice

| IP: Logged

Mark Todd
Film God

Posts: 3846
From: UK
Registered: Aug 2003

posted September 13, 2018 03:15 PM

Its pain bonkers, I have it on dvd which is really good and looks close to decent Blu Ray.

Looks very filmie 10 feet wide on LCD as well.

I have the trailer in scope on 16mm LPP.

Maybe should list it !!!

Best Mark.

| IP: Logged

David Guest
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1704
From: Lancashire, UK
Registered: Oct 2011

posted September 13, 2018 04:04 PM

same guy won both a new bidder with 0 feedback

| IP: Logged

Joe Taffis
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1592
From: United States
Registered: Jun 2003

posted September 14, 2018 07:51 AM

This print loses a lot by being a flat print! So much of the picture area is lost! Just compare a pan & scan DVD of this and others to their full widescreen versions. Not worth it [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
Joe Taffis

| IP: Logged

Tom Photiou
Film God

Posts: 4837
From: Plymouth U.K
Registered: Dec 2003

posted September 14, 2018 12:02 PM

I cant think of a film worth over 500 let alone 3200 [Wink]

| IP: Logged

Joe Taffis
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1592
From: United States
Registered: Jun 2003

posted September 14, 2018 12:57 PM

Right Tom, maybe the seller is hoping that Tarantino himself will buy it. He is a 16mm collector
[Big Grin]

--------------------
Joe Taffis

| IP: Logged

Can Sanalan
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 130
From: London, United Kingdom
Registered: Jul 2017

posted September 20, 2018 03:12 PM

I also noticed the buyer had 0 feedback and instantly I assumed it was a time waster. Making the price jump up that high and not pay for it.
I would of loved to have won the 16mm print of Return of the Living Dead.

I purchased the Mission Impossible episode that was sold by the same seller.
When I messaged him in regards to his user name, “ucicinemas”, he said he was a manager at one of the branches. Perhaps when they closed down he was given the films! Don’t know.
Happy with my purchase though.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 525
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted November 25, 2018 08:31 PM

Pulp Fiction was indeed a scope movie. This one might be "flat letterboxed", or of course it could be pan-and-scan.

Still though, 3x 1600 reels would mean 2 hours of run time unless my math is off. The movie is about 2 hours and 30 minutes.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

Printer-friendly view of this topic

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2