Indy 4 and Digital Projection

[Guest Stephen Murphy]

I read a few months back an article about Indy4 where Spielberg mentioned there would be no digital prints made of Indy 4. Lo and behold i notice today that the Odeon in Liecester square (london) is projecting the movie digitaly.

Now obviously he could have changed his mind but im wondering do the distributors have the option of creating their own digital prints to suit their cinema chains if none were provided by the filmmakers?

[Max Jacoby]

I find that hard to believe. But films have to get scanned anyway, for the later Blue-Ray HD release, so making a DCI master is probably not that big of an issue.

[Michael Lehnert]

Lo and behold i notice today that the Odeon in Liecester square (london) is projecting the movie digitaly.

 

Stephen, may I inquire where you got that info from? I assumed cine-prints as well based on Spielberg's comments, but a friend told me without having a source (hear-say) that Odeon would screen it digitally. I am just trying to get down to where the info originated. Personally, I am unsure to what extend even Odeon has the financial ability or bargaining to insist on choosing the projection medium vis-à-vis Paramount/Lucasfilms.

[Guest Stephen Murphy]

Stephen, may I inquire where you got that info from? I assumed cine-prints as well based on Spielberg's comments, but a friend told me without having a source (hear-say) that Odeon would screen it digitally. I am just trying to get down to where the info originated. Personally, I am unsure to what extend even Odeon has the financial ability or bargaining to insist on choosing the projection medium vis-à-vis Paramount/Lucasfilms.

 

Michael,

Got my tickets from the odeon LS this morning and their website says its a digital projection. guess we'll find out soon enough.

[Max Jacoby]

Michael,

Got my tickets from the odeon LS this morning and their website says its a digital projection. guess we'll find out soon enough.

So you're attending London's most expensive cinema ;) I haven't been there since I can't get student discounts anymore. I was never too keen of the layout anyway: if you're sitting on the ground floor, you can sit the correct distance to the screen, but it is slightly angled. If you're sitting on the balcony, the screen is at the right angle, but you're too far away...

[Guest Stephen Murphy]

So you're attending London's most expensive cinema ;) .

 

Every cinema here is expensive:) It was a real wake up call because in Dublin the screens i was used to were generally of a higher standard and half the price.

[Freya Black]

Every cinema here is expensive:) It was a real wake up call because in Dublin the screens i was used to were generally of a higher standard and half the price.

 

http://www.princecharlescinema.com/

 

It used to be cheaper but it's still super cheap if you are a member and I expect it is still cheaper than a lot of cinemas in London.

 

Tickets are only £1.50 if you can make the matinees and you are a member!

 

Hope that helps! :)

 

love

 

Freya

[Michael Lehnert]

Oops, thanks for the Odeon LS website hint - bad research stamina from my side made obvious :) .

 

But gosh, Stephen, you already got your Indy IV tickets?!? I thought to give it some more time, but I guess "beating the hype" isn't a good idea if you want to pick and choose your exact seat (without appearing to geeky, but I guess most of us here have a prefered number in respective theatres.. or is it just me :unsure: ?)

 

I guess I will get myself into motion to get my tickets. What a shame about the projection. It would have been nice to see the much-discussed Spielberg chain 'til the end...

 

As there was a whiff of good British moaning detectable in this thread, let me happily join in: What annoys me mostly today is the drink-&-popcorn-munching atmo in some bigger screenplaces, part. Odeon.

Occassionally, one could feel like being in a food outlet. Nothing against a snack, but sometimes, it seems to be more about the food than the film - or this is sentiment just me again?! :rolleyes:

[Guest Stephen Murphy]

Hi Freya,

Ive been to the PC once and although teh projection was fine i wasnt crazy about the inverse sloped seating it was cheap though.

Michael,

What can i say - im a spielberg fan and a big indy fan although the trailer isnt doing much for me at the moment. Id rather see a movie as soon as it gets released so i can avoid too many reviews/spoilers and while the prints are still good.

[A. Whitehouse]

Hi Stephen,

 

How much is it to see a film in London? And whats the DCI standard in the UK, 2K - 4k? Here in Australia its still being discussed but perhaps Dominic Case could chime in there. Projection standard is so low in Melbourne that Ill be lucky to see it in focus with all the speakers working (I'm that guy that goes and complains at the counter in the middle of the film). Considering it was finished photochemically weren't you tempted to see a print?

I liked the first teaser trailer...

 

Sasha

[Guest Stephen Murphy]

Hi Stephen,

 

How much is it to see a film in London? And whats the DCI standard in the UK, 2K - 4k? Here in Australia its still being discussed but perhaps Dominic Case could chime in there. Projection standard is so low in Melbourne that Ill be lucky to see it in focus with all the speakers working (I'm that guy that goes and complains at the counter in the middle of the film). Considering it was finished photochemically weren't you tempted to see a print?

I liked the first teaser trailer...

 

Sasha

 

Hi Sasha,

Well 2 x seats for Indy in the "flagship" cinema in LS cost me £38 - which is stupid money - im only paying that for it because its a spielberg movie and i like the theatre's presentation - i dont go there very often. I'm actually a fan of Digital projection even though im very in favour of film origination. Ive seen a number of digital prints over the last year and they've all looked superb. In the case of Indy 4 id be quite happy to view a digital print provided its been created under the supervision of the original filmmakers regardless of wether or not the film went through a DI.

Keep on complaining about the projection standards!

S

[Michael Lehnert]

I think the low quality (or rather no quality) of print projection today makes it increasingly easy to appreciate digital projection - but that change has less to do with technological advancement but rather with the abandonment of training projectionists properly and maintaining the equipment.

 

On the other hand, some cinemas in Zürich think that "digital projection" means projecting the consumer DVD - as they did with "Barry Lyndon" and "Shining" during the Kubrick retrospective there :blink: !

 

As an Indy-fan myself and someone on the quest to re-experience that sens of wonder that films in theatres once gave you, particularly Spielberg (I know, I know: "À la recherche du temps perdu" syndrome), I am really looking forward to Indy IV.

 

But since Stephen's info, I am really torn now between shelling out and go to the Odeon - which was my original plan as I assumed to see a Spielbergian projection print. Or skip that and go for a 2K digital projection in the more intimate and less pricey (£12-15 pp) surroundings of the Everyman in Hampstead Village across the corner from my place... gosh, why did I read this thread?! It was all settled already in my mind :wacko: :)

 

By the way: one of the Crystal Skulls can be found at the British Museum, rather hidden in the left-hand corner in the first gallery that one enters at the northern end of the Great Court... it's not in a crate, but it almost takes a little adventure search to track it down. The BM's lack of capitalising on the film by pushing that exhibit into the limelight really astonished me... - maybe they have, however, moved it to a more prominent spot by now... I tracked it down with my partner (yeah, it took two humans to find it) in late March...

[Guest Stephen Murphy]

But since Stephen's info, I am really torn now between shelling out and go to the Odeon - which was my original plan as I assumed to see a Spielbergian projection print. Or skip that and go for a 2K digital projection in the more intimate and less pricey (£12-15 pp) surroundings of the Everyman in Hampstead Village across the corner from my place... gosh, why did I read this thread?! It was all settled already in my mind :wacko: :)

 

Michael,

It is quite possible that the odeon have made a mistake on their website and are assuming they will have a digital print when they might in fact be showing a 35mm print. Im sure closer to the day they might be able to confirm what they're projecting.

S

[K Borowski]

I wouldn't want to see a digital projection of a film that didn't go through a DI, because that probably entails them scanning the master positive rather than the OCN, and paying less attention to the fidelity of the scan than they would in DI.

 

I agree that a poorly-projected film print sucks, but that is all the more reason to go and try to find good projection in theatres and reward those theatres by giving them business and not giving business to those that abuse their prints.

 

Just my two cents.

[John Holland]

According to IMDB its shot Anamorphic and has been screwed up in a DI !! I know that site gets so much wrong and really hope this time they have got it very wrong ,one can only hope .

[K Borowski]

According to IMDB its shot Anamorphic and has been screwed up in a DI !! I know that site gets so much wrong and really hope this time they have got it very wrong ,one can only hope .

 

Well John, Spielburg has up 'til now resisted doing a DI to an entire movie (the non-FX shots), but obviously all of the special effects shots these days have to go through some sort of DI since all of the model makers are dead :ph34r:

[Sam Wells]

Well John, Spielburg has up 'til now resisted doing a DI to an entire movie (the non-FX shots), but obviously all of the special effects shots these days have to go through some sort of DI since all of the model makers are dead :ph34r:

 

And the insurance costs with using real dinosaurs have become prohibitive :blink:

 

-Sam

[Ignacio Aguilar]

I believe "The Terminal" went through a DI for the entire movie, but "War of the Worlds" and "Munich" (both came after "The Terminal") were finished photochemically. "Munich" might even be the last optical blow-up from a Super-35 negative that I have seen at the theater, at least for medium-to-big budget productions.

[K Borowski]

And the insurance costs with using real dinosaurs have become prohibitive :blink:

 

-Sam

 

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

[John Holland]

Karl its a joke !!! Jurassic Park . get it ?

[Michael Lehnert]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Oh my word! That was a hilarious exchange!! I am killing myself here!!!

What a perfect end to a good day... :lol:

[K Borowski]

I got the Jurassic Park part, as obviously Spielburg couldn't have used dinosaurs for that. What's with the blinkey eyes though?

 

As for the digital dinosaurs, they were actually scanned from real models, as there wasn't enough experience/sophistication at the time to build them from scratch in a digital environment.

 

What is especially bothersome is that there seems to be no support at all anymore for anything but model plate photography, no optical compositing, no master matte painters, etc.

 

Can you even get optical TITLES anymore??? I'm talking about the letters on a camera stand that they film and overlay opticallly onto the finished cut negative.

 

It's incredibly frustrating to find that digital is the only choice unless you want to go to graveyards at night to try to dig people up and reincarnate them. . .

[Michel Hafner]

I wouldn't want to see a digital projection of a film that didn't go through a DI, because that probably entails them scanning the master positive rather than the OCN, and paying less attention to the fidelity of the scan than they would in DI.

Nonetheless you see second generation that way while from prints you see fourth generation. Wanna bet which is closer to the 'original'? Actually the IP is the original master source in that case. The OCN is not the finished film. Watching the negative is a luxury only digital technology makes possible.

[John Holland]

Only true if the anamorphic OCN hasnt been degraded by a 2K DI. Should really be a 10/12K to match a chemical finish .

[K Borowski]

Nonetheless you see second generation that way while from prints you see fourth generation. Wanna bet which is closer to the 'original'? Actually the IP is the original master source in that case. The OCN is not the finished film. Watching the negative is a luxury only digital technology makes possible.

 

Umm, no offense, but I'd rather see three added generations from the OCN as long as they are analog generations than a single digital generation.

 

I wish TV shows still finished on film, as I am a huge fan of the look of "Murder She Wrote".

 

There are HD transfers made from master positives all the time that look great.

 

And when you consider that the film is probably only DI in parts, when you view a digital projection you're running into two plus two generations for all the DI parts of the film since it's scanned again from the master positive and it was lasered onto neg film after being scanned from the OCN and then digitally manipulated.

 

If I want to see "digital projection", I may as well just wait until it's out in HD, then I can watch it on my HD TV. What's the point of paying $8.50 at the theatre or more when you can watch it for free on TV when it comes out on Starz HD? THere's honestly no point in seeing a 2K print if you're a patient type. Now with actual finished films I saw "There Will Be Blood" for $1.50 the day before it came out on disc, because it was worth seeing an actual print because it wasn't a 2K.

 

I doubt anyone has similar thinking except maybe John, but I don't see the point of the theatre experience if seeing a higher-quality product isn't one of the positive aspects, especially considering $4/US Gal gas and all of the NEGATIVE aspects of entering a theatre.

Edited May 19, 2008 by Karl Borowski