Do I understand that there is a showing of How the West Was Won in three projector Cinerama this Sunday 15 april 15http://www.tcm.com/festival/schedule.html?day=sunday or did I get that wrong. But they do not sell separate tickets for this screening. So 300 bucks to see a movie in Cinerama?
The Screen at the Charles was not huge by any standards. After Ben Sack lost control and Sack theaters was being run by a whole different management team things changed in Boston. The new management did not like to run 70mm except when they were forced to by the studios. I watched “Star Wars” the opening week and the presentation was so bad I called 20th century fox to complain. Shorty after that the Charles started to run a 70mm print and they had to install a Dolby CP100 to do it. Days of Heaven ran there in 70mm and again Sack had to upgrade the system and change out the left extra and right extra speakers. Sack management hated doing anything that cost extra. The only other Sack theater’s that could run 70mm were the Beacon Hill and the 57. The screen at the 57 was so small they put the left and right channel speakers over the exits.
Like a complete version of A Star is Born the full roadshow version of Mad World may be lost forever. The Ultra Panavision 70(anamorphic) print that is available now is not the full roadshow version. The sound mix does not have the left extra and right extra track so the sound mix is only three front channels and a surround channel.
They spent all that money and installed those fake Todd-AO machines. What a waste of time and money. They need to install some real 2 motor Todd-AO machines. There is a theater in Somerville Mass that was able to get a pair.
I also attended the series mentioned above (Broadway comes to Broadway) I was working my way through film school as a projectionist in Boston. My union card got me into the both projection booths. They ran Oklahoma in the upstairs theater because that booth had the Todd-AO projectors and were able to run 30fps. They had to replace a couple of projector motors and some amplifiers to do it. They later found that they could run the century projectors in the downstairs booth at 30fps but that was too late for Oklahoma. The print of South Pacific was okay but the movie isn’t that good. The most impressive show was the print of My Fair Lady, it was incredible. Camelot was so grainy that some scenes looked like golf balls and it was bad if you were sitting close to the screen (like in the first 20 rows this was a huge theater). It looked okay if you sat in the back row of the theater. Of course Camelot was a blow up. The films that used 65mm negative were clear and sharp. The blow ups were grainy some more than others Camelot being the worse of the series. There is no question that the downstairs theater had a huge screen. The projection booth for downstairs had two century jj’s and 13.6 mm carbons running at over 180 amps so there was a nice bright picture.
The 70mm print they ran at the Egyptian was pretty bad. Is there a new print? Is the 65mm negative in any condition to be able to get a good print off it. The negative for The Sound of Music was in bad shape when it was restored in the 90’s, but even after restoration it was showing wear and tear.
There were a few shots that looked like some of the Todd-AO lenses were used. I doubt Todd-AO lenses were used for the special effects shots. The whole film (2001) was shot on 65mm negative. Close Encounters used 65mm negative for the special effects. Some special effects people used 65mm some used VistaVision.
Todd-AO was special because of the lens used on both the camera and the projector. More so the camera than the projector. There was one very wide angle camera lens that was a bug eye lens. This lens was used for one scene in Oklahoma. This lens had an incredible field of view. Cleopatra was filmed using the Todd-AO lenses and the barrel distortion can be seen throughout the film. They may have needed some very wide angle lenses to film some of the scenes in 2001 so it is possible Todd-AO lenses were used. The Hilton in space scene looks like there was distortion that would be consistent with a Todd-AO lens. The important fact was the use of a 65mm negative. The original presentation was stunning but as there are no original prints, that have not faded, and the negative is questionable; I am not sure a great 70mm print exists. Still, I doubt a 2K digital copy would do this film justice.
There were very few 70mm houses in Boston with large screens. One of course was the Boston Cinerama. The others were the Astor and The Wang Center (originally the Metropolitan then later the Music Hall). Then later the New Beacon Hill. The Orpheum had 35 CinemaScope with mag sound. The Todd-AO projectors at the Gary and the Saxon were moved to the 57 when it opened and the irony being many 70mm films were run at the 57. A long bowling alley of a theater with a screen so small they had to put the left and right speakers over the exits to hear stereo beyond the tenth row. The Walter Reade had a large screen but as soon as Sack took over they reduced the size as the new Sack management, who had taken over the company from Ben Sack, wanted smaller screens.
Grauman’s Chinese has a 90 foot screen holder. How much of that screen is exposed depends on how wide the masking is opened. Mann management did not make a practice of using the whole screen because there was a problem getting the light levels required. Take the tour of the theater and bring your own tape measure. The screen at Grauman’s is bigger than the screen at the Cinerama Dome.
Chris Utley posted that the screen at the chinese was 60 feet and suggested they go with a larger screen. the current screen at the Chinese is 90 feet. There was a 120 foot screen installed at one time. the problem is getting enough light to fill a large screen. With 70mm and carbon arcs it was easy to do but with digital and xenon short arcs it isnt easy to fill a huge screen.
The Dome has 5 screen channels and multi channel surronds so at least that auditorium should be able to play 7.1 but there are so few films if any with a 7.1 sound track
Film gauge is measured in millimeters 16mm 35mm 65mm (camera use) and 70mm. Digital projection is rated by resolution the current popular resolution is 2K or 2,000 lines of resolution (it is in reality a little less). There are some 4K digital projectors out there and that is the next generation of digital projectors but most digital product is still 2K. The majority of movies made now are either shot using video or if the project is shot on film it is transferred to video for editing. So even if you see a film presentation of a recently made film that film was made from a digital master. The current plan is for all theaters to be digital by the year 2013. AMC has converted most of their theaters and has sent many of the film projectors to the scrap yard. Other theaters are doing the same http://in70mm.com/news/2011/1640/index.htm While a very few theaters will have dual capability the Dome looks like it will be one of those theaters but film will only be used for special presentations.
AMC has committed to going all digital and they are sending most of their film projectors to the scrap pile. There were some 3D presentations using film but that was years ago and that equipment is no longer available. So digital is required for modern 3D presentations. The trend is digital film is being used less and less.
Since most film prints are made from video (most films are edited on video these days so most film prints are made from the video) the difference between the video presentation and the film presentation is not that obvious to most. Of course those of us with an eye for it notice the dirt and splices in the film version (no matter how much care someone takes there is always a little dirt). Focus in a film presentation is also more critical as the focus on most film projectors tends to shift more then their digital counterparts. Of course nothing yet beats something that was filmed in 65mm then printed and shown in 70mm.
Yes, that’s it just chatter away, while the greatest icon in movie theater history becomes just that, history! Well, I guess the great Chinese Theater will serve just as well as a night club.
To set the record straight the Astor had a modified Todd-AO screen it wasn’t a deep curve like the early Todd-AO screens. It was one of the biggest screens in the greater Boston area as the stage and dressing rooms to the right of the stage were removed to make room for the screen. There was movable top and side masking and it was one of the few theaters where the 70mm picture was wider and taller than any other format. The screen was never opened to its full size when running 35mm. There was a curtain but it was not used during the last few years the theater was open. So aside from the Cinerama theater and the Wang center (Music Hall) the Astor had one of the biggest screens in Boston. It was also one of the first theaters in Boston to use a an electric motor to drive the projectors.
The details are not known the rumors are they will use the Chinese as a different type of venue. Mann sold the theater years ago. They just lease the site. I’m not sure when their lease is up. Mann has been getting rid of its losers like the theaters in Westwood, it looks the Chinese is next. After all it hasn’t made money in years. The overhead is too high.
They would need to install a second digital projector the run Avatar in 3D or at least to run it right because the screen is so big. They installed a two projector set up at the Cinerama Dome. Of course it would be nice to see Avatar at the Chinese.
Do I understand that there is a showing of How the West Was Won in three projector Cinerama this Sunday 15 april 15http://www.tcm.com/festival/schedule.html?day=sunday or did I get that wrong. But they do not sell separate tickets for this screening. So 300 bucks to see a movie in Cinerama?
The Screen at the Charles was not huge by any standards. After Ben Sack lost control and Sack theaters was being run by a whole different management team things changed in Boston. The new management did not like to run 70mm except when they were forced to by the studios. I watched “Star Wars” the opening week and the presentation was so bad I called 20th century fox to complain. Shorty after that the Charles started to run a 70mm print and they had to install a Dolby CP100 to do it. Days of Heaven ran there in 70mm and again Sack had to upgrade the system and change out the left extra and right extra speakers. Sack management hated doing anything that cost extra. The only other Sack theater’s that could run 70mm were the Beacon Hill and the 57. The screen at the 57 was so small they put the left and right channel speakers over the exits.
I understand more than you think and what does that all have to do with the Cinerama Dome? Yea guidelines “Stay on topic”
Well DEFG you sure can write a lot about nothing
Like a complete version of A Star is Born the full roadshow version of Mad World may be lost forever. The Ultra Panavision 70(anamorphic) print that is available now is not the full roadshow version. The sound mix does not have the left extra and right extra track so the sound mix is only three front channels and a surround channel.
They spent all that money and installed those fake Todd-AO machines. What a waste of time and money. They need to install some real 2 motor Todd-AO machines. There is a theater in Somerville Mass that was able to get a pair.
I also attended the series mentioned above (Broadway comes to Broadway) I was working my way through film school as a projectionist in Boston. My union card got me into the both projection booths. They ran Oklahoma in the upstairs theater because that booth had the Todd-AO projectors and were able to run 30fps. They had to replace a couple of projector motors and some amplifiers to do it. They later found that they could run the century projectors in the downstairs booth at 30fps but that was too late for Oklahoma. The print of South Pacific was okay but the movie isn’t that good. The most impressive show was the print of My Fair Lady, it was incredible. Camelot was so grainy that some scenes looked like golf balls and it was bad if you were sitting close to the screen (like in the first 20 rows this was a huge theater). It looked okay if you sat in the back row of the theater. Of course Camelot was a blow up. The films that used 65mm negative were clear and sharp. The blow ups were grainy some more than others Camelot being the worse of the series. There is no question that the downstairs theater had a huge screen. The projection booth for downstairs had two century jj’s and 13.6 mm carbons running at over 180 amps so there was a nice bright picture.
The 70mm print they ran at the Egyptian was pretty bad. Is there a new print? Is the 65mm negative in any condition to be able to get a good print off it. The negative for The Sound of Music was in bad shape when it was restored in the 90’s, but even after restoration it was showing wear and tear.
There were a few shots that looked like some of the Todd-AO lenses were used. I doubt Todd-AO lenses were used for the special effects shots. The whole film (2001) was shot on 65mm negative. Close Encounters used 65mm negative for the special effects. Some special effects people used 65mm some used VistaVision.
Todd-AO was special because of the lens used on both the camera and the projector. More so the camera than the projector. There was one very wide angle camera lens that was a bug eye lens. This lens was used for one scene in Oklahoma. This lens had an incredible field of view. Cleopatra was filmed using the Todd-AO lenses and the barrel distortion can be seen throughout the film. They may have needed some very wide angle lenses to film some of the scenes in 2001 so it is possible Todd-AO lenses were used. The Hilton in space scene looks like there was distortion that would be consistent with a Todd-AO lens. The important fact was the use of a 65mm negative. The original presentation was stunning but as there are no original prints, that have not faded, and the negative is questionable; I am not sure a great 70mm print exists. Still, I doubt a 2K digital copy would do this film justice.
There were very few 70mm houses in Boston with large screens. One of course was the Boston Cinerama. The others were the Astor and The Wang Center (originally the Metropolitan then later the Music Hall). Then later the New Beacon Hill. The Orpheum had 35 CinemaScope with mag sound. The Todd-AO projectors at the Gary and the Saxon were moved to the 57 when it opened and the irony being many 70mm films were run at the 57. A long bowling alley of a theater with a screen so small they had to put the left and right speakers over the exits to hear stereo beyond the tenth row. The Walter Reade had a large screen but as soon as Sack took over they reduced the size as the new Sack management, who had taken over the company from Ben Sack, wanted smaller screens.
Well they don’t seem to be showing movies here any more.
Grauman’s Chinese has a 90 foot screen holder. How much of that screen is exposed depends on how wide the masking is opened. Mann management did not make a practice of using the whole screen because there was a problem getting the light levels required. Take the tour of the theater and bring your own tape measure. The screen at Grauman’s is bigger than the screen at the Cinerama Dome.
Chris Utley posted that the screen at the chinese was 60 feet and suggested they go with a larger screen. the current screen at the Chinese is 90 feet. There was a 120 foot screen installed at one time. the problem is getting enough light to fill a large screen. With 70mm and carbon arcs it was easy to do but with digital and xenon short arcs it isnt easy to fill a huge screen.
The Dome has 5 screen channels and multi channel surronds so at least that auditorium should be able to play 7.1 but there are so few films if any with a 7.1 sound track
Film gauge is measured in millimeters 16mm 35mm 65mm (camera use) and 70mm. Digital projection is rated by resolution the current popular resolution is 2K or 2,000 lines of resolution (it is in reality a little less). There are some 4K digital projectors out there and that is the next generation of digital projectors but most digital product is still 2K. The majority of movies made now are either shot using video or if the project is shot on film it is transferred to video for editing. So even if you see a film presentation of a recently made film that film was made from a digital master. The current plan is for all theaters to be digital by the year 2013. AMC has converted most of their theaters and has sent many of the film projectors to the scrap yard. Other theaters are doing the same http://in70mm.com/news/2011/1640/index.htm While a very few theaters will have dual capability the Dome looks like it will be one of those theaters but film will only be used for special presentations.
AMC has committed to going all digital and they are sending most of their film projectors to the scrap pile. There were some 3D presentations using film but that was years ago and that equipment is no longer available. So digital is required for modern 3D presentations. The trend is digital film is being used less and less.
Since most film prints are made from video (most films are edited on video these days so most film prints are made from the video) the difference between the video presentation and the film presentation is not that obvious to most. Of course those of us with an eye for it notice the dirt and splices in the film version (no matter how much care someone takes there is always a little dirt). Focus in a film presentation is also more critical as the focus on most film projectors tends to shift more then their digital counterparts. Of course nothing yet beats something that was filmed in 65mm then printed and shown in 70mm.
Yes, that’s it just chatter away, while the greatest icon in movie theater history becomes just that, history! Well, I guess the great Chinese Theater will serve just as well as a night club.
The Arcade theater was a road show house until it fell on hard times. It had a huge screen 70mm projectors and a full six channel sound system.
To set the record straight the Astor had a modified Todd-AO screen it wasn’t a deep curve like the early Todd-AO screens. It was one of the biggest screens in the greater Boston area as the stage and dressing rooms to the right of the stage were removed to make room for the screen. There was movable top and side masking and it was one of the few theaters where the 70mm picture was wider and taller than any other format. The screen was never opened to its full size when running 35mm. There was a curtain but it was not used during the last few years the theater was open. So aside from the Cinerama theater and the Wang center (Music Hall) the Astor had one of the biggest screens in Boston. It was also one of the first theaters in Boston to use a an electric motor to drive the projectors.
Big theaters just don’t make money any more Disney is quietly trying to dump the El Capitan too.
The details are not known the rumors are they will use the Chinese as a different type of venue. Mann sold the theater years ago. They just lease the site. I’m not sure when their lease is up. Mann has been getting rid of its losers like the theaters in Westwood, it looks the Chinese is next. After all it hasn’t made money in years. The overhead is too high.
the latest rumor is that the Chinese is going to be closed as a theater so enjoy it as a movie theater as it wont be a movie theater much longer
They would need to install a second digital projector the run Avatar in 3D or at least to run it right because the screen is so big. They installed a two projector set up at the Cinerama Dome. Of course it would be nice to see Avatar at the Chinese.