The reason I participate in Cinema Treasures and Cinema Sightlines Is their focus on real THEATRES, and the value placed on showmanship. I do not consider ArcLight or most multiplexes to be theatres. Good theatres are special environments that make you feel special, and provide a proper showcase for the film, perhaps like a frame to a painting or a setting to a jewel.
Keeping on topic here, I am not overly fond of ArcLight, because they have made misguided choices to stray from their better potential, and they have absolutely no clue about presentation and showmanship… (the only time you see a hint of it is when someone not on their in house staff is involved) They hold themselves up as the best of the best, with a substantial degree of attitude and arragance, but in most ways they are really just another multiplex. Their level of customer service is not up to their ostensibly high standards. The staff is not in the room through the movie, to look out for talkers, noisemakers and feet on the seats. At their prices, they make it your job to get up, miss the movie, and go look for someone, to report something they often don’t understand is a problem. They don’t understand why feet on the seats is wrong, which is why I have to choose the last row every time.
Having said that, I would absolutely prefer to see a movie there than the Egyptian or Aero. Bland as the ArcLight rooms are, at least they’re somewhat finished – you don’t see the bare walls of the building’s shell. American Cinematheque couldn’t affford an El Capitan calibre restoration, and there was nothing left in there but four walls, so they opted for this overly modern metal box built into the old space. It was purposely desifned to be removable in case anyone found enough cash to do a real restoration. You can pretty clearly see that this is not the intended configuration for the place.
The Egyptian is not remotely a theatre anymore. it’s not even fixed up like a standard multiplex. The metal panels, that slide out to close you off from the original walls, make the seating area feel like a cage. They could have at least fixed up the room’s focal point. Instead all they did was paint the inside of the building shell black. The wall you look at the most is unfinished, not shaped like the front of any theatre or screening room. It looks decidedly makeshift and temporary, like a basement or a warehouse. So yeah, draping off the screen area would have helped… some carpet, a little wall covering… not a lot of money needed for that. The Egyptian, as it is now, is not a pleasant place to watch a movie. Bland as the ArcLight rooms may be, theyre not exposing the bare walls.
PS: I have never heard of any horizon-sag problems on the Cinerama screen in Seattle, which is a deeper curve than the screen at the Cinerama Dome.
Despite the sometimes interesting programming the Cinematheque comes up with, I never really look forward to seeing a movie at the Egyptian or Aero. Even with a 70mm Roadshow print, it’s impossible to impart any degree of theatrical showmanship to their presentation. It’s just like setting up a big screen and watching home movies in the basement. It’s cereal without milk, pizza without cheese…
I hope that was a joke about the Egyptian and Aero making a trip to Seattle unnecessary. Both rooms are the very antithesis of what we look for in a theatre. Yeah they have 70mm, but they have even less character than the ArcLight. The Egyptian feels like a big cage in a basement, and the Aero, well that just looks like a basement.
Seattle Cinerama has more character and theatrical atmosphere than the entire ArcLight complex, including the Cinerama Dome. However someone talked Seattle into not using the Cinerama screen except for “special occasions” – where they have to close for at least a day and pay a crew of stagehands thousands of dollars to dismantle the front screen, unroll the Cinerama screen (they probably still haven’t aligned and anchored the louvers, which makes it just a shredded sheet screen) then they have switch the center section of the curtain track to follow the deeper curve. First time they did that, the curtain got badly ripped and was bring hastily sewn back together as the audience came in for the first show. With the unanchored louvers fluttering in the breeze of the AC blowers, it looked like How The West Was Rained On.
Unfortunately some Pacific Theatres folk were there, and the fluttering louvers apparently scared the hell out of them. That is why the renovated Dome has a low-gain sheet screen instead of louvers, because Pacific didn’t want to pay for what they thought would be the constant maintenance of a louvered screen. Of course all that they would have had to do was make a couple phone calls and a squad of Cinerama expert/enthusiasts would have happily come in, aligned and anchored the louvers in place. Also a simple white scrim hung behind the louvers would prevent black streaks in the pictures in case a louver should ever snap or flutter.
I’ve been longing to make the trip to Seattle to see some movies in the Cinerama. But before those of you who can go get too excited, make sure they are using the curved screen for the 70mm features.
I remember hearing about how ArcLight moves platter footage between the Dome and the plex in a big box… with some kind of magnetic closure… and that it didn’t occur to them that transporting an expensive 70 mag print of Lawrence in that magnetic box wasn’t a good idea. I hear it pretty much ruined the soundtrack.
And remember that the curved screen is not to blame for the horizon sag at the dome, it’s their refusal to put a standard booth in the back of the mezz where a straight-on throw would eliminate the sag and brighten the picture… heaven forbid they give up 39 seats under the main booth that no one wants to sit in anyway… Even with the upstairs booth, 35mm scope looked better there when they had the sense not to try to fill the whole screen. Bring the botttom masking up and the side masking in at least. Oh yeah, andinstead of using a properly anchored louvered screen to avoid cross reflection, they put in a low-gain sheet screen, so the bad picture is a combination of an inferior screen, bad throw angle, and blowing up 35mm far too big to give a bright sharp picture on that screen. 2 or 3 4K digital projectors running together would increase brightness and sharpness, and they could be digitally rectified for the curve.
If you want to make the Dome more of a showplace, get rid of the blue lights, make sure all the ring lights go on and off at the same time, explain to them that the curtain is there to ensure that we never see a blank screen, and schedlue regular “event” screenings so that anyone visiting could see at least one Cinerama and/or 70mm screening whenever they visit. And are you SURE they don’t have at least two reel to reel projectors up there?
Ed, was this schedule change announced anywhere? If they change times without proper notice in papers and online, they should offer passes or at least concession coupons to those who show up and get disappointed. I am always pissed off at wasting a trip to a cinema because of their last-minute changes. I once waited about 20 minutes in line at a boxoffice, only to find they had been sold out for over an hour. When I got the manager and asked why there was no sign put up in the window, she actually walked me in for free.
Bob T, That explains why the curtain warmers are off, but in a theatre where the house lights are focused downward rather than floods (evidenced by the spots in the mezzanine and dark spots in many of the photos) i would imagine the house lights wouldn’t wash out the screen unless the whole house is on the same circuit. I don’t remember seeing lighting shadows in there at all.
Still happy to hear the place is being cared for and kept up overall.
I meant remnants of my self editing, that I do several times before posting. Thus a repeated phrase like “It was explained to me by a top pro to me” Obviously typing and brevity aren’t my strong suits! Not an expert here, just a well informed enthusiast.
Howard, could it be that your camera and experience would produce better shots?
Interesting, William. It would be fun to interview you as well as Mr Endres. I’ve asked at some venues if the curtain can be operated manually if necessary, and if not, shouldn’t it be set up this way for that same reason? I can remember watching the pre-feature cartoons on the second curtain way back when I was a kid. I imagine that’s probably what happened, and someone ran back to open them manually.
I think that is one reason why theatres don’t want curtains… in those cases I’d suggest they make the side masking wide enough to close over the screen.
Hi again, gentlemen. I am glad HBH took so many pictures. Sad however because it looks like the auditorium is not being fully lit anymore. Don’t know why people do this. Used to be only the dingy older places kept lights low so you won’t see the dirt. However the Pantages in LA, even after a big renovation, keeps the lights too low to even read your Playbill, and the recently freshened up Mann Westwood Village keeps the walk-in lights at nearly show level… too dark to even see the theatre… The clue that it’s too dark in the Zieg is that in the mezzanine several spots are really dark.
About digital sound: As a VIP tour guide at Paramount, I often worked the employee screenings in their big theatre, and made friends with the projectonist. A Seasoned pro named Ron England (sp?) We talked presentation and tech all the time. I often took my tours in there for a little “Projection 101.” I’d hold up a piece of film, show each of the soundtracks and explain how they worked…
Then came the big explanation to “why movies are so loud.” It was explained to me by a top pro to me: the film is mixed that way. Huh? I elaborated for my tours that it was akin to vinal records and CDs… Old vinyl was mastered with a limited range of volume, so you could put on a record, and once you set the volume, be pretty sure it would all play at about that level. Digital, having a much broader range of volume, means one of your CDs may be louder than the others, and one song can be louder than others on the same disc. Now Digital FILM soundtracks have an even broader range, from a pin drop to a deafening speaker blowout.
Why are trailers so loud? for the same reason TV commercials are. Most TV programming is mixed to play at a mid level, saving the top volume range for effects. Commercials are mixed to play at the higher level throughout, because they figure you’re probably out of the room… Film trailers want to get your attention over the popcorn crunching and settling in of the crowd.
Why are FEATURES so loud? OK, remembering that going back to the old rock and roll days, when they started making things so loud your ears literally can’t fully hear the full fidelity, people began turning things up much louder than they need to be. Try falling asleep to the TV. You can keep turning down the volume and still be attuned to the dialogue. These days, extreme bass has become popular, as the kids want to FEEL it instead of just listening to it. That’s why we have bass enhancement on nearly every playback device, and why living in an apartment near these people is a bitch. They hear their music, but bass travels farther, and the neighbors FEEL a dull repetitive thumping.
Bringing this mentality to films has been happening for a while, and we now have what some like to call the “Bruckheimer Mix” – where the soundtrack is mixed with all the dialogue at the lowest level, and the loud violence, car chases, explosions, etc are all at the top of the range. This gives the projectionist 3 choices: 1) to make the explosions less alarming, turn down the volume below 5 and the audience has to read the actor’s lips. 2) turn it above 5 for the extremists and blow out all your speakers. 3) play it right at 5, as the director intended, so the dialogue is normal and the rest is, well, often Too Damn Loud.
Regarding digital projection: Automated film projection requires only a small piece of silver mylar tape on the film, to trigger the curtains, lights, and even the preshow music. I’m sure the pros here will attest that these can be cued individually or in a certain sequence. Can’t the advanced technology of Digital Cinema be programmed for this as well?
Could it be that the days the curtain and sound aren’t handled as well are a different projectionist less attuned to showmanship? or was there no operator in the booth for those shows at all? It’s not uncommon for a projectionist to come in, set up, than leave, because he is required to handle several theatres.
LenK: Sound of Music never had an overture. I agree the presentation was awkward, as if the operators had no idea what an intermission was, and just ran it like any other reel change, maybe from a platter. Again someone whould have told them, either actually have an intermission break or just changeover from the actone fadeout to the act 2 fade in.
The last real roadshow I paid to see was Fiddler on the Roof at NYC’s Rivoli in 72. They had 3 shows that day (prob a Sat) 2-5-8. I was at the 5… At the end of Act I the picture faded out, then the fade in to Act II came on imediately. It was done quite smoothly but even as a kid, I knew they skipped the intermission to allow more walk-in time for the 8pm show. Having that in mind, the professional union projectionist most likely threaded the second act reel past the blank entr'acte, and did an early changeover before the intermission title.
from much personal experience with them, I doubt there are any management staff at the ArcLignt who know what a roadshow or intermission is.
Since we were talking about how a print looks to a viewer, that’s what I meant about the cue marks.
The Dome used to cover 2/3 to ¾ of the screen for 35mm, and wisely reserved the full screen size for 70mm.
Since ArcLight now insists on using the full size of the Dome’s screen for every format, 35mm will look dim, and grainy or soft. 70mm will be a much brighter and sharper image.
In other words, 70mm would look much better, so you would probably see the difference.
One would think with an organization such as AFI, care would have been taken to either present the intermission properly or cue a changeover before the title came on. Someone should have known better… I wonder if the same thing didn’t happen with the other roadshow feature they were running…
Just had a nice talk with the owner, who seems to be interested in taking care of the place, and has made an effort to match the character of the original design with the alterations. Some of my guesses were correct, others were not. I’m told all the seats are new, which is a great improvement. I’ve learned elsewhere that the theatre is now capable of running 70mm on the main screen, in the rare event a print was available. Back when I worked there it was all 35mm and there were no dimmers or stereo sound, so obviously some upgrades were made. It is nice to know someone has spent some money on fixing up the place. I am working on setting up a photo shoot for sometime soon. Considering the fate of the Genesee, we’re all lucky this owner has a definite interest in keeping a nice theatre.
No it’s been done already years ago. Randal Kleiser was asked to shoot a demo film in the new format. I heard it refered to privately as “digital cinerama” but of course it was not related to the actual Cinerama format in any way. Who knows what it would officially be called. I don’t know if it has been developed enough to work on a big screen, but the idea has already been worked on to a substantial degree.
Thanks very much, BH, for posting the text of that article. Makes me miss the Ziegfeld even more, and increases the interest in interviewing Robert Endres for a feature on Showmanship.
HBH, Exhibitors may follow the martket, but they have also cheapened the market. They stripped everything memorable away from the moviegoing experience then shot themselves in the foot by overbuilding.
I wasn’t suggesting any kind of formula for showing “classics” – just saying that when I wanted to book some digital files of older pictures, I found the cost to handle the digital media to be prohibitive for a just a couple of days/showings. I’m sure for current films, the cost of handling the digital files is absorbed elsewhere.
I should mention that one of the factors for any film, especially a “previously released” title, not doing well in today’s market is the fact that most cinemas are not worth paying for in the first place. If Godfather, or even SIngin' in the Rain, are exhibited in a great theatre with top notch presentation – in a way they could never be seen at home – more people might come out to see them. I believe a combination of exceptional showmanship, presentation and theatre quality can make any film more appealing. As for profitable, well, it would take some special handling and scheduling… I actually paid to see Encino Man at the glorious El Capitan, and didn’t regret it.
Ed S: There have already been experiments with wraparound panoramic digital photography, a sort of “Digital Cinerama” – in SoCal. Years ago, in fact. I don’t know what came of it, but I know a Hollywood director was engaged to do a test film in the process.
I would imagiine that the team who digitally line up the three YCM matrices for Warners (with great precision) could probably do the same with the three strips of Cinerama, if they haven’t already. Warner Homevid is already working on a new special edition of HOW THE WEST WAS WON from the Cinerama negs.
A big problem that prohibits digital presentation of classics is the huge charge required for the 3rd party company to come download and upload the feature to a theatre’s server. Unless you’ve got sold-out houses for a week, who'se going to spend that kind of money?
The reason I participate in Cinema Treasures and Cinema Sightlines Is their focus on real THEATRES, and the value placed on showmanship. I do not consider ArcLight or most multiplexes to be theatres. Good theatres are special environments that make you feel special, and provide a proper showcase for the film, perhaps like a frame to a painting or a setting to a jewel.
Keeping on topic here, I am not overly fond of ArcLight, because they have made misguided choices to stray from their better potential, and they have absolutely no clue about presentation and showmanship… (the only time you see a hint of it is when someone not on their in house staff is involved) They hold themselves up as the best of the best, with a substantial degree of attitude and arragance, but in most ways they are really just another multiplex. Their level of customer service is not up to their ostensibly high standards. The staff is not in the room through the movie, to look out for talkers, noisemakers and feet on the seats. At their prices, they make it your job to get up, miss the movie, and go look for someone, to report something they often don’t understand is a problem. They don’t understand why feet on the seats is wrong, which is why I have to choose the last row every time.
Having said that, I would absolutely prefer to see a movie there than the Egyptian or Aero. Bland as the ArcLight rooms are, at least they’re somewhat finished – you don’t see the bare walls of the building’s shell. American Cinematheque couldn’t affford an El Capitan calibre restoration, and there was nothing left in there but four walls, so they opted for this overly modern metal box built into the old space. It was purposely desifned to be removable in case anyone found enough cash to do a real restoration. You can pretty clearly see that this is not the intended configuration for the place.
The Egyptian is not remotely a theatre anymore. it’s not even fixed up like a standard multiplex. The metal panels, that slide out to close you off from the original walls, make the seating area feel like a cage. They could have at least fixed up the room’s focal point. Instead all they did was paint the inside of the building shell black. The wall you look at the most is unfinished, not shaped like the front of any theatre or screening room. It looks decidedly makeshift and temporary, like a basement or a warehouse. So yeah, draping off the screen area would have helped… some carpet, a little wall covering… not a lot of money needed for that. The Egyptian, as it is now, is not a pleasant place to watch a movie. Bland as the ArcLight rooms may be, theyre not exposing the bare walls.
Damn! Another typo: bring = being.
PS: I have never heard of any horizon-sag problems on the Cinerama screen in Seattle, which is a deeper curve than the screen at the Cinerama Dome.
Despite the sometimes interesting programming the Cinematheque comes up with, I never really look forward to seeing a movie at the Egyptian or Aero. Even with a 70mm Roadshow print, it’s impossible to impart any degree of theatrical showmanship to their presentation. It’s just like setting up a big screen and watching home movies in the basement. It’s cereal without milk, pizza without cheese…
I hope that was a joke about the Egyptian and Aero making a trip to Seattle unnecessary. Both rooms are the very antithesis of what we look for in a theatre. Yeah they have 70mm, but they have even less character than the ArcLight. The Egyptian feels like a big cage in a basement, and the Aero, well that just looks like a basement.
Seattle Cinerama has more character and theatrical atmosphere than the entire ArcLight complex, including the Cinerama Dome. However someone talked Seattle into not using the Cinerama screen except for “special occasions” – where they have to close for at least a day and pay a crew of stagehands thousands of dollars to dismantle the front screen, unroll the Cinerama screen (they probably still haven’t aligned and anchored the louvers, which makes it just a shredded sheet screen) then they have switch the center section of the curtain track to follow the deeper curve. First time they did that, the curtain got badly ripped and was bring hastily sewn back together as the audience came in for the first show. With the unanchored louvers fluttering in the breeze of the AC blowers, it looked like How The West Was Rained On.
Unfortunately some Pacific Theatres folk were there, and the fluttering louvers apparently scared the hell out of them. That is why the renovated Dome has a low-gain sheet screen instead of louvers, because Pacific didn’t want to pay for what they thought would be the constant maintenance of a louvered screen. Of course all that they would have had to do was make a couple phone calls and a squad of Cinerama expert/enthusiasts would have happily come in, aligned and anchored the louvers in place. Also a simple white scrim hung behind the louvers would prevent black streaks in the pictures in case a louver should ever snap or flutter.
I’ve been longing to make the trip to Seattle to see some movies in the Cinerama. But before those of you who can go get too excited, make sure they are using the curved screen for the 70mm features.
I remember hearing about how ArcLight moves platter footage between the Dome and the plex in a big box… with some kind of magnetic closure… and that it didn’t occur to them that transporting an expensive 70 mag print of Lawrence in that magnetic box wasn’t a good idea. I hear it pretty much ruined the soundtrack.
And remember that the curved screen is not to blame for the horizon sag at the dome, it’s their refusal to put a standard booth in the back of the mezz where a straight-on throw would eliminate the sag and brighten the picture… heaven forbid they give up 39 seats under the main booth that no one wants to sit in anyway… Even with the upstairs booth, 35mm scope looked better there when they had the sense not to try to fill the whole screen. Bring the botttom masking up and the side masking in at least. Oh yeah, andinstead of using a properly anchored louvered screen to avoid cross reflection, they put in a low-gain sheet screen, so the bad picture is a combination of an inferior screen, bad throw angle, and blowing up 35mm far too big to give a bright sharp picture on that screen. 2 or 3 4K digital projectors running together would increase brightness and sharpness, and they could be digitally rectified for the curve.
If you want to make the Dome more of a showplace, get rid of the blue lights, make sure all the ring lights go on and off at the same time, explain to them that the curtain is there to ensure that we never see a blank screen, and schedlue regular “event” screenings so that anyone visiting could see at least one Cinerama and/or 70mm screening whenever they visit. And are you SURE they don’t have at least two reel to reel projectors up there?
Ed, was this schedule change announced anywhere? If they change times without proper notice in papers and online, they should offer passes or at least concession coupons to those who show up and get disappointed. I am always pissed off at wasting a trip to a cinema because of their last-minute changes. I once waited about 20 minutes in line at a boxoffice, only to find they had been sold out for over an hour. When I got the manager and asked why there was no sign put up in the window, she actually walked me in for free.
I heartily agree, Chris, but seeing the way ArcLight operates, I have little hope for it.
And what happened to all the Cinerama merchandise? Certainly it sold better than all the ArcLight stuff.
I wonder if Craig from Clearview is the same guy who was a manager for Walter Reade back in the late 70s-early 80s…
Okay Vito, Al, William, and REndres, and any other old-school pros, can you please email about an interview on presentation?
Bob T, That explains why the curtain warmers are off, but in a theatre where the house lights are focused downward rather than floods (evidenced by the spots in the mezzanine and dark spots in many of the photos) i would imagine the house lights wouldn’t wash out the screen unless the whole house is on the same circuit. I don’t remember seeing lighting shadows in there at all.
Still happy to hear the place is being cared for and kept up overall.
AL: ROTFLMAO! So true, So well put… you’re another one I’d like to interview.
I meant remnants of my self editing, that I do several times before posting. Thus a repeated phrase like “It was explained to me by a top pro to me” Obviously typing and brevity aren’t my strong suits! Not an expert here, just a well informed enthusiast.
Howard, could it be that your camera and experience would produce better shots?
And IS it really that dark in there?
Interesting, William. It would be fun to interview you as well as Mr Endres. I’ve asked at some venues if the curtain can be operated manually if necessary, and if not, shouldn’t it be set up this way for that same reason? I can remember watching the pre-feature cartoons on the second curtain way back when I was a kid. I imagine that’s probably what happened, and someone ran back to open them manually.
I think that is one reason why theatres don’t want curtains… in those cases I’d suggest they make the side masking wide enough to close over the screen.
l wish I could go back and correct typos & editing remnants!
Hi again, gentlemen. I am glad HBH took so many pictures. Sad however because it looks like the auditorium is not being fully lit anymore. Don’t know why people do this. Used to be only the dingy older places kept lights low so you won’t see the dirt. However the Pantages in LA, even after a big renovation, keeps the lights too low to even read your Playbill, and the recently freshened up Mann Westwood Village keeps the walk-in lights at nearly show level… too dark to even see the theatre… The clue that it’s too dark in the Zieg is that in the mezzanine several spots are really dark.
About digital sound: As a VIP tour guide at Paramount, I often worked the employee screenings in their big theatre, and made friends with the projectonist. A Seasoned pro named Ron England (sp?) We talked presentation and tech all the time. I often took my tours in there for a little “Projection 101.” I’d hold up a piece of film, show each of the soundtracks and explain how they worked…
Then came the big explanation to “why movies are so loud.” It was explained to me by a top pro to me: the film is mixed that way. Huh? I elaborated for my tours that it was akin to vinal records and CDs… Old vinyl was mastered with a limited range of volume, so you could put on a record, and once you set the volume, be pretty sure it would all play at about that level. Digital, having a much broader range of volume, means one of your CDs may be louder than the others, and one song can be louder than others on the same disc. Now Digital FILM soundtracks have an even broader range, from a pin drop to a deafening speaker blowout.
Why are trailers so loud? for the same reason TV commercials are. Most TV programming is mixed to play at a mid level, saving the top volume range for effects. Commercials are mixed to play at the higher level throughout, because they figure you’re probably out of the room… Film trailers want to get your attention over the popcorn crunching and settling in of the crowd.
Why are FEATURES so loud? OK, remembering that going back to the old rock and roll days, when they started making things so loud your ears literally can’t fully hear the full fidelity, people began turning things up much louder than they need to be. Try falling asleep to the TV. You can keep turning down the volume and still be attuned to the dialogue. These days, extreme bass has become popular, as the kids want to FEEL it instead of just listening to it. That’s why we have bass enhancement on nearly every playback device, and why living in an apartment near these people is a bitch. They hear their music, but bass travels farther, and the neighbors FEEL a dull repetitive thumping.
Bringing this mentality to films has been happening for a while, and we now have what some like to call the “Bruckheimer Mix” – where the soundtrack is mixed with all the dialogue at the lowest level, and the loud violence, car chases, explosions, etc are all at the top of the range. This gives the projectionist 3 choices: 1) to make the explosions less alarming, turn down the volume below 5 and the audience has to read the actor’s lips. 2) turn it above 5 for the extremists and blow out all your speakers. 3) play it right at 5, as the director intended, so the dialogue is normal and the rest is, well, often Too Damn Loud.
Regarding digital projection: Automated film projection requires only a small piece of silver mylar tape on the film, to trigger the curtains, lights, and even the preshow music. I’m sure the pros here will attest that these can be cued individually or in a certain sequence. Can’t the advanced technology of Digital Cinema be programmed for this as well?
Could it be that the days the curtain and sound aren’t handled as well are a different projectionist less attuned to showmanship? or was there no operator in the booth for those shows at all? It’s not uncommon for a projectionist to come in, set up, than leave, because he is required to handle several theatres.
LenK: Sound of Music never had an overture. I agree the presentation was awkward, as if the operators had no idea what an intermission was, and just ran it like any other reel change, maybe from a platter. Again someone whould have told them, either actually have an intermission break or just changeover from the actone fadeout to the act 2 fade in.
The last real roadshow I paid to see was Fiddler on the Roof at NYC’s Rivoli in 72. They had 3 shows that day (prob a Sat) 2-5-8. I was at the 5… At the end of Act I the picture faded out, then the fade in to Act II came on imediately. It was done quite smoothly but even as a kid, I knew they skipped the intermission to allow more walk-in time for the 8pm show. Having that in mind, the professional union projectionist most likely threaded the second act reel past the blank entr'acte, and did an early changeover before the intermission title.
from much personal experience with them, I doubt there are any management staff at the ArcLignt who know what a roadshow or intermission is.
Since we were talking about how a print looks to a viewer, that’s what I meant about the cue marks.
The Dome used to cover 2/3 to ¾ of the screen for 35mm, and wisely reserved the full screen size for 70mm.
Since ArcLight now insists on using the full size of the Dome’s screen for every format, 35mm will look dim, and grainy or soft. 70mm will be a much brighter and sharper image.
In other words, 70mm would look much better, so you would probably see the difference.
You can tell if it’s a 70 print by the shape of the changeover cue marks.
One would think with an organization such as AFI, care would have been taken to either present the intermission properly or cue a changeover before the title came on. Someone should have known better… I wonder if the same thing didn’t happen with the other roadshow feature they were running…
Just had a nice talk with the owner, who seems to be interested in taking care of the place, and has made an effort to match the character of the original design with the alterations. Some of my guesses were correct, others were not. I’m told all the seats are new, which is a great improvement. I’ve learned elsewhere that the theatre is now capable of running 70mm on the main screen, in the rare event a print was available. Back when I worked there it was all 35mm and there were no dimmers or stereo sound, so obviously some upgrades were made. It is nice to know someone has spent some money on fixing up the place. I am working on setting up a photo shoot for sometime soon. Considering the fate of the Genesee, we’re all lucky this owner has a definite interest in keeping a nice theatre.
No it’s been done already years ago. Randal Kleiser was asked to shoot a demo film in the new format. I heard it refered to privately as “digital cinerama” but of course it was not related to the actual Cinerama format in any way. Who knows what it would officially be called. I don’t know if it has been developed enough to work on a big screen, but the idea has already been worked on to a substantial degree.
Thanks very much, BH, for posting the text of that article. Makes me miss the Ziegfeld even more, and increases the interest in interviewing Robert Endres for a feature on Showmanship.
HBH, Exhibitors may follow the martket, but they have also cheapened the market. They stripped everything memorable away from the moviegoing experience then shot themselves in the foot by overbuilding.
I wasn’t suggesting any kind of formula for showing “classics” – just saying that when I wanted to book some digital files of older pictures, I found the cost to handle the digital media to be prohibitive for a just a couple of days/showings. I’m sure for current films, the cost of handling the digital files is absorbed elsewhere.
I should mention that one of the factors for any film, especially a “previously released” title, not doing well in today’s market is the fact that most cinemas are not worth paying for in the first place. If Godfather, or even SIngin' in the Rain, are exhibited in a great theatre with top notch presentation – in a way they could never be seen at home – more people might come out to see them. I believe a combination of exceptional showmanship, presentation and theatre quality can make any film more appealing. As for profitable, well, it would take some special handling and scheduling… I actually paid to see Encino Man at the glorious El Capitan, and didn’t regret it.
Ed S: There have already been experiments with wraparound panoramic digital photography, a sort of “Digital Cinerama” – in SoCal. Years ago, in fact. I don’t know what came of it, but I know a Hollywood director was engaged to do a test film in the process.
I would imagiine that the team who digitally line up the three YCM matrices for Warners (with great precision) could probably do the same with the three strips of Cinerama, if they haven’t already. Warner Homevid is already working on a new special edition of HOW THE WEST WAS WON from the Cinerama negs.
A big problem that prohibits digital presentation of classics is the huge charge required for the 3rd party company to come download and upload the feature to a theatre’s server. Unless you’ve got sold-out houses for a week, who'se going to spend that kind of money?