This is topic Digital Film Re-issues in forum General Yak at 8mm Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=001943

---

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on September 26, 2011, 05:29 AM:
 
Apparently Hollywood according to last week’s newspapers is struggling to bring us new films/stories for the Cinema and we are now due for a flood of digitally restored previously released movies such as Jurassic Park. Like many of us I am sure we have been to see some of the re-issued material touched up films but I wondered what people make of it all?

We hope to go see Jurassic Park shortly once again having see it in 1993 on screen 1 which was an amazing experience at that time so it will be interesting to see what they have done to it.
 

---

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on September 26, 2011, 05:54 AM:
 
Digitally restored?
I guess it's nothing that hasn't been happening with classic films for years on DVD.
Now that going to "the movies" is only a step above going to watch a DVD, I suppose the capability is there for the studios to use as they will.
 

---

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on September 26, 2011, 09:04 AM:
 
Jurassic Park...Restored?

What on earth happened to it since 1993 that it needs restoration?

When I hear people talk about restoring things that were made when I was already middle aged it makes me feel...old!

You want to restore a film that was made when my parents were in their 30s...OK, I can deal with that!

Seeing films I know very well at the Theater is a really different experience than seeing something for the first time. We went to see "The Wizard of Oz" when it was re-issued and it was great, yet still kind of odd. Every time before that we'd seen it on televsion and it almost seemed out of place at the movies.

(Theater was packed regardless...)
 

---

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on September 26, 2011, 09:40 AM:
 
I'm no expert on such mattters but I suspect that the word 'restored' is sometimes used in a casual and misleading way, to imply that the release represents some sort of expensive and skilled project that will be a great privilege for the paying customers to witness. I've (e.g.) heard claims that the BFI's 2007 restoration of Hammer's 'Dracula' basically involved no restoration, other than replacing the USA title of 'Horror of Dracula' with the UK one (because the US version has a brief shot that was cut from the initial British reelease.

However, re-releases are nothing new - it used to be customary for Disney classics to be re-issued in cinemas now and again - so I would not object to them becoming more frequent again. Sadly, the day may be coming, if it hasn't already, that any such re-release will not involve any new 35mm prints.

Considering that the flood of remakes is now involving films first made as recently as the 1980s, I suppose studios were bound to eventually think: "If we re-release a film, we can save all the money we would spend on remaking it!" At least this might make it less likely that we will see crazy situations such as a remake of 'Halloween' only 5 years after the final sequel to 'Halloween'!
 

---

Posted by Claus Harding (Member # 702) on September 26, 2011, 11:02 AM:
 
With "Jurassic Park" it sounds like it could be the "Star Wars" syndrome: digitally improve the effects, at the expense of the film no longer looking like it did when it came out.

I recall seeing the film on a huge screen and I was impressed at the dinos.

It feels like desperation: either make fake 3-D out of a film, or 'improve' the effects. At that rate, why even make new films any more....

Claus.
 

---

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on September 26, 2011, 11:09 AM:
 
I recall in the late fifties that the Hammer remakes of the classic Universal horror pics were about 25 years after the original event, so the recent remakes from the eighties are pretty much of a tradition. The Maltese Falcon was a remake from 10 years previous.
What does annoy me is where every film of 'an age' is labelled as a 'classic' even if some are far from classic, and best forgotten, and of course everything is now 'digitally remastered' even when it isn't.
 

---

Posted by Steve Klare (Member # 12) on September 26, 2011, 12:06 PM:
 
I could be worse:

Sherwood Schwartz was working on a Feature Length "Gilligan's Island" just before he passed away.

I don't think Western Culture could survive that...
 

---

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on September 26, 2011, 12:55 PM:
 

quote:

---

What does annoy me is where every film of 'an age' is labelled as a 'classic' even if some are far from classic...

---

quote:

---

there are so many films that could be either issued or shown on the box which never see the light of day locked up in a vault.

---

It's not that simple though. There are rights issues with many titles as well as costs in releasing the work.
There are a ton of titles I'd love to see released.
 

---

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on September 27, 2011, 09:01 PM:
 
I really don't have a problem with re-issues, restored or otherwise ...

... as long as they are on celluloid.

I mean, I have a massive projection TV if I want to watch a digital movie. I won't go to a movie theater if it's merely a digital projection. I really don't see the point of it.

Yeah, you hqave "audience participation" and reaction, but most of the time, that just gets in the way of me enjoying a good film.
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on September 27, 2011, 09:25 PM:
 
Sadly, film projection as we know it at the cinema will soon be gone, a couple more years at the most. Cinemas that can afford the digital projection will be the only ones in business. The only film projection left will be your Super8, 16mm etc ie. home movies.

Regarding restoration, I can understand such films as Buster Keaton "The General" or "Metropolis"....but "Jurassic Park" why bother its been out for years on DVD with 5:1 Dolby Digital track. I remember when "ET" 2002 did the rounds at the cinemas a few years ago. It was a flop out here...the reason, everyone had seen it either when it first came out at the cinema or the later video/dvd. I wish them luck with "Jurassic Park"...they will need it.

Graham.
 

---

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on September 28, 2011, 04:26 AM:
 
Well, we went to see Jurassic Park on the big digital screen with the intro programme nice, sharp and bright. Next up was the main feature which as mentioned I went to see in ’93 projected on 35mm film which was amazing but now to the digital screening.

With a grand total of six ready to watch the presentation the first thing noted was that the film had been cropped and looked lacklustre throughout. Around the edges of the titles there was very noticeable loss of definition and even some sort of fringe effect going on. For anyone who had seen a poor conversion of NTSC to PAL it looked a bit like that and not quite what was expected. Thankfully quite a bit of the film is set at night or in dark sets so they just about got away with it after a time, but it was quite a disappointment. Thankfully the sound did not disappoint and the floor shaking was just as it should have been as when viewed in years past.

When first seen on the screen in 1993 at Warners the cinema was packed to capacity and I went along with a group of amateur film makers to watch it. Sadly everyone else that was with me in ’93 has since passed on so it seemed strange sat there looking around at the empty seats. When the movie ended I glanced up to the projection window to watch the projector switch itself off and I guess that just about says what the future holds for Cinema..

The digital conversion was not a good one and I left pleased to know I had seen the film projected on 35mm film in 1993 as it was produced to be shown, sharp, excellent color and feeling we had seen something just a bit special.
 

---

Posted by Ricky Daniels (Member # 95) on September 28, 2011, 08:07 AM:
 
If it was that different to the 35mm experience I'd have asked for a refund. It's also not unknown for a cinema to run a DVD!

I saw this debut DTS film the first time around at the Empire Leicester Square. I was sat with a group of friends in the middle of the stalls. The cinema was full to capacity and the audience was buzzing with excitement and anticipation for what was about to unfold on the screen.

Unfortunately once the film started I noticed the focus was a tad out so after putting up with it for 5mins I clambered out of the auditorium and had a word with the manager. Shortly after that the picture became remarkably sharp and I didn't need to ask for a refund on this occasion!

My advice, if it ain't good enough let the Cinema Management know about it.

[ September 30, 2011, 04:27 AM: Message edited by: Ricky Daniels ]
 

---

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on September 28, 2011, 09:35 AM:
 
My guess is that the new Blu-Ray issue on the 24th Oct 2011 is going to be just as bad..
 

---

Posted by Allan Broadfield (Member # 2298) on September 28, 2011, 01:55 PM:
 
I've always worked in the film industry, and several times in recent years have seen mates made redundant , myself included, and I dislike the idea of digital projection in cinemas as much as any film lover, if not more as I have relied on film for a living. However, 35mm has had an astonishing run for cinema presentation, and the only thing that has saved it in the past is that there hasn't been a viable system that would give comparable results on a big screen. Now, whether we like it or not the film producers are happy to use this system because in the long run it's cheaper. Happily many film makers still like to originate on film, but as soon as it's processed it's digitised at the editing stage with some copies printed on film stock from digitally produced negs. Your 35mm film presentation will most likely have gone through the dreaded digital process anyway.

[ September 30, 2011, 07:45 AM: Message edited by: Allan Broadfield ]
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on September 28, 2011, 02:04 PM:
 
Ricky
There is one other cinema apart from us doing a "David Lean" thing at the moment, they ran "Lawrence of Arabia" on DVD. To be honest I cant think of anything worse, at least we made the effort to run a 35mm print and although not in perfect condition it still looked good. I might be a bit one eyed, but I still believe a good film presentation can knock the socks of any video. Last week we got a call from a film distributor regarding films from the latest film festival run. He asked did we have a hard drive and video projector. I said we can only run 35mm film. So much for the term they used... "Film Festival" as it aint on film. I did hear from someone that they are thinking of inducing some sort of movement into the video image to make it look more like film projection, how stuped is that? what next?

Graham.
 

---

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on October 03, 2011, 04:52 AM:
 
So we went to see another digital presentation and Phantom of the Opera in the Cinema with a live link to the Albert Hall…

The Cinema was full to capacity in another multi screen and we were very excited along with a group of friends from Church and so it started. Unbelievably the live link was screened with matching bold subtitles in German which must have covered at least 1/8th of the vertical screen diameter at times. At the interval we asked if they could be switched off with the answer being that is was being distributed with German subtitles everywhere. Another problem was that the picture was being stretched out so much all the cast looked like they had been squashed by a falling 35mm projector. We mentioned this to the manager as she told the technical team who promptly switched off the projector and only just reinstating power up as the second half started but still with squashed vision mode engaged. If this is the state of things to come from digital projection in the Cinema my visits will be numbered.

Putting all the above to one side the content was amazing with startling performances from the cast with the music and audio quality being absolutely superb. We will be going to another digital presentation before long at third Cinema so lets see what this one is like.

Show 10/10
Digital projection 2/10
Audio 10/10
 

---

Posted by Adrian Winchester (Member # 248) on October 04, 2011, 10:33 PM:
 
Whilst we are clearly heading towards a time when film projection will be rare outside certain specialised cinemas, I have to disagree with Graham that 35mm will be gone within two years. This would represent a staggering speeding up of a process that has been happening for many years. The most recent figure I could find for the proportion of digital installations in European cinema screens was for December 2010, when 29% were digital. Even if that jumped to 40% by the end of this year, there's a long way to go. I recently checked the situation at my local Empire cinema, where they currently have one digital screen and three 35mm. I was told that another will become digital next year but they had no idea when the other two would. Amazingly, I discovered that 75% of the screenings during the London film Festival last October were 35mm!
 

---

Posted by David Michael Leugers (Member # 166) on October 05, 2011, 12:10 AM:
 
I personally dislike remakes, unless the purpose of the remake is to make a much better film due to better actors, budget, effects etc. and then the film has to win me over. So few do. The Maltese Falcon is one of the few films where the remake surpasses the original. During my lifetime, the only film remake that I have seen in a theater that I thought was better than the original is "The Thing" by John Carpenter. One gem among lots of turds. I am in my 52nd year of going to the movies and it may be my last...
 

---

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on October 05, 2011, 01:22 PM:
 
It's just my opinion, but I think that the reason why ET didn't do well was for two reasons upon re-issue ...

1. Sadly, audiences are more jaded today and a lovely simplistic story like ET just doesn't play well. Now, give ET a laser cannon blasting everything on the planet and it would have done well.

2. If I remember correctly, it wasn't the ET we grew up withy. Spielberg, in order to make his film more "family friendly" took out such "horrifying elements" (that is sarcasm there) as the police forces guns and such out of this and that shot. Other subtle changes were made as well.
 

---

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on October 05, 2011, 01:24 PM:
 
It's just my opinion, but I think that the reason why ET didn't do well was for two reasons upon re-issue ...

1. Sadly, audiences are more jaded today and a lovely simplistic story like ET just doesn't play well. Now, give ET a laser cannon blasting everything on the planet and it would have done well.

2. If I remember correctly, it wasn't the ET we grew up withy. Spielberg, in order to make his film more "family friendly" took out such "horrifying elements" (that is sarcasm there) as the police forces guns and such out of this and that shot. Other subtle changes were made as well.

Good heavens, could you imagine just how terrible it would be if Disney re-released "Song of the South" to modern audiences?

They's probably have Whoopie GOldgerg popping up every two or so minutes giving some idiotic speech about "this was a product of the times, don't hate Disney Don't hate Disney!"

Whew, I'm glad I was actually able to find that original version of fantasia on super 8! Black centaurs and all!
 

---

Posted by Nick Field (Member # 2132) on October 05, 2011, 01:25 PM:
 
A friend of mine,his girl friend works at our local odeon cinema,only a single screener,he said that they are now waiting for a new digi projector, I jokingly asked him if they wanted to sell their 35mm, he replied that they are still going to run the 35mm along side the digi as the kids cartoons they show on the weekend mornings are on 35mm.Our town has plans to build a multiplex odeon within two years so the old place will be closed down anyway. I see that there will be also a re-make of total recal,won't be the same without the carolco ident at the start and Arnie with the usual catchfrases,planty of cgi non the less,probably make a 3D version too knowing this silly run of 3D rubbish that's hit us over the past couple of years.
 

---

Posted by Graham Ritchie (Member # 559) on October 05, 2011, 11:14 PM:
 
Adrian
The push to go digital out here is big. A major film distributor has already stated that they will only garantee film prints for another two years, after that, if you have not done the expensive switch to digital then you are on your own. Its not a matter what we want, I would like to see film go on forever, but it aint. A few years ago we talked about digital cinema as if it was in the future, well that future is here. The film companys wanted rid of film long ago, its expensive to produce and I guess to get rid of after the film has done the cinema run, with this green clean world that we live in, I am afraid its gotta go

Graham.
 

---

Posted by Alexander Vandeputte (Member # 1803) on October 06, 2011, 02:11 AM:
 
Same here in Belgium. Some releases already are 'digital only'. And even some wide releases like Cars 2 this summer, only had a handful of 35mm prints. At this rate we expect 35mm to disappear out of commercial theatres within the next 6 months. Sad but true...
 

---

Posted by Lee Mannering (Member # 728) on October 13, 2011, 02:56 AM:
 
Wrote to the Cinema chain which screened Phantom live complete with German subtitles and have now heard back after they investigated it. The Digital Cinema apparently had been supplied with the wrong satellite link via Germany thus the German subtitles on screen for the entire presentation.

Although digitally deflated after our recent Cinema visits we found a small and relatively new independent Cinema who was showing a film we wanted to see. The foyer was like one of the old Cinemas complete with a lady in the little cubicle welcoming us to the 2 screen experience and the evening tickets costing a few pence over £5. Further down the line a young chap also welcomed us to the Cinema as we perused the movie posters and DVD sale area, then he mentioned they were all Digital at which point I thought here we go again. Amazingly the presentation was very good indeed and without a fault throughout and they even had curtains! We left having had a superb experience and thanked the staff for a wonderful evening with a very good presentation. Let’s hope the big chain can soon do as good a job sometime soon.

 

---

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on October 13, 2011, 01:03 PM:
 
On the subject of Film vs Digital, some of you may find this of interest:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2011/oct/10/steven-spielberg-martin-scorsese-celluloid
 

---

Visit www.film-tech.com for free equipment manual downloads. Copyright 2003-2019 Film-Tech Cinema Systems LLC


UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2