Oppenheimer (21st July 2023) Christoper Nolan / Hoyte Van Hoytema

[Kemalettin Sert]

I have seen this at Irvine yesterday which was IMAX 15/70mm film - 1.43:1

im curious if they had problems with the lenses..It was always on the ear or tip of the nose.Dont they have monitors on set? 

seeing this on a gigantic screen makes you concentrate on focus more sadly.i wish i have seen this on a phone screen where i cant tell where the focus is most of the time.

Edited July 22, 2023 by Kemalettin Sert

[David Mullen ASC]

Focus-pulling by using a video tap on a film camera is problematic, there isn’t enough resolution. Imagine a tiny security camera pointed at a frosted ground glass screen.

[Robin Phillips]

is there a list of locations showing 70mm 5 perf? seems pretty easy to find the list of 15/70 locations but searching for the non imax 70mm version just brings up search results for... the imax 15/70 version

[Kemalettin Sert]

35 minutes ago, Robin Phillips said:

is there a list of locations showing 70mm 5 perf? seems pretty easy to find the list of 15/70 locations but searching for the non imax 70mm version just brings up search results for... the imax 15/70 version

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1gyl-t_K2zyDmudwswu3KK_gnMq26Byc&ll=33.651687400000064%2C-117.74507969999998&z=12

[Dan Hasson]

I went to see the picture yesterday where the local cinema had a 35mm print. It was fantastic, the film, the experience and the print. 

My opinion is, I found the film hard to follow at points, mainly during the b&w sequences. A lot of the dialogue sounded similarly mixed to Tenet (as in the notorious thing of not really being able to hear what people are saying). However, I thought it was not a problem in Oppenheimer like it was with Tenet.

Kemalettin Sert mentioned about the focus. There was a number of times faces in closeups would go soft and the depth of field was razor thin. I can appreciate how tough it must have been to pull focus though, especially when the difference between someones eyes and their glasses is tiny. 

Other than that, technically speaking, the print was great especially the b&w and it sounded amazing on the big screen. Would highly recommend going to see the film no matter what format.

[Robino Jones]

I went Thursday 5pm at the Landmark (old Sunset5) to see it on 70mm and after 4 seconds of during opening logo, the screen went black.. and then 4 seconds later it was orange yellow plastic melting with bubbles..the film literally burned on screen like in Gremlins 2! Never thought I'd see that - especially on 70mm it burned for a long time that a lot of plastic to go through! I left and got a refund. Last night went to Regency in Westwood and watched it on 70mm- I loved it. Will go see it again in Imax 70 at Chinese Theatre when it cools down - every screening for the next week are packed.

Edited July 23, 2023 by Robino Jones

[David Mullen ASC]

Before the 5-perf 70mm screening began at the Howard Hughes Cinemark, they were showing a film trailer, I believe also 70mm but matted to 1.85 and misframed so that the top of 1.85 was the top of the screen, if not slightly past the top of the screen. It was for Alexander Payne's new movie "The Leftovers", which looked like it was shot in film and the trailer had a 70's era title graphic.

Then the movie started and I was worried I was going to have to leave and tell the projectionist to frame up properly but when the movie started and a splice flashed at the bottom edge of the 70mm image, the projectionist lowered the frame correctly.

[Stephen Perera]

All very interesting comments......
I saw the film as a normal digital 2K projection in a nearby cinema in Spain in original English language with Spanish subtitles.....the nearest for a 70mm film projection is Barcelona....I might go up there in September if they still run it

The film.....for me it was a cross between JFK by Oliver Stone in terms of the editing and pace AND The Tree of Life by Terence Mallick with its wide angles on Cillian Murphy along with the representation of the science when they were working to create this bomb....the mix of Eastman Double X with the Vision3 helped the plot along nicely I thought.....I also thought there was enough exposition to make plot and themes less obscure than Tenet for sure! 

I also liked the camera work.....no unnecessary cranes and flying cameras......I don't think this fact can be emphasised enough for this film....gave it more of a human viewpoint from start to finish......the film certainly got stronger and stronger!

Excellent film.....the best cinematography was when they did the first test of the bomb.....the combination of images and sound was fantastic......also of course the Cillian Murphy close up expressions

Edited July 23, 2023 by Stephen Perera

[Ray Lenore]

Where in Barcelona is a 70mm projector? 
As far as I know the only IMAX 70mm film projector in continental Europe is in Prague. 

Barcelona IMAX at diagonal mar is digital and it’s mainly dubbed films all the time. 

[David Mullen ASC]

https://www.in70mm.com/news/2023/oppenheimer_cinema/index.htm

The website says three theaters in Spain are showing it in 5-perf 70mm film (not 15-perf IMAX film), one in Barcelona.

[charles pappas]

On 7/13/2023 at 10:33 AM, charles pappas said:

July 23rd in San Antonio.

Projected Film IMAX, one of the few left.

Drove to San Antonio, taking an extra 20 minutes due to torrential rain. When we arrived at the theater, an employee said that the showing would be in a digital IMax format (can't remember what she called it) because the film projector was broke, having "blown the compressor due to pulling a 600 pound reel of film."  

I said, "Oh darn, we drove all the way from Austin to see the film. Can we get our money back? She said yes,  AMC would be refunding all the money, and she would validate the parking ticket (which she did, $15.00) We were turning to leave when she said, you can still see it go in, the money will still be refunded."

So we decided we might as well see it anyways, and I was glad we did see this very excellent film then, with the regret being not knowing when I'll see an IMax 70mm again. 

I am supposed to get a e-mail notice refund from AMC and I don't really care about the refund per se at all. However, if it doesn't come through I may contact them solely to reinforce their notion of the demand for 70mm IMax showings. 

[Tyler Purcell]

On 7/21/2023 at 5:34 PM, David Mullen ASC said:

If it's true that Nolan shot a lot of this movie in 5-perf 65mm -- his usual reason is that he prefers dialogue scenes to not be looped, which IMAX cameras usually cause to happen -- then perhaps the 5-perf 70mm print was the way to go.

There is probably 20 minutes of IMAX material in the movie. They didn't do a single complete sequence in IMAX, unlike Dunkirk and Tenet, which had a few complete sequences in 15p. It was every disruptive. The fact they're marketing it as an IMAX movie is hilarious. I just watched Tenet last night, just to get some Nolan fix, excellent UHD disc, BTW, but the film has a lot of IMAX scenes, even dialog scenes. 

[Tyler Purcell]

On 7/21/2023 at 11:04 PM, Dan Finlayson said:

also don't think the IMAX presentation is a waste of time, especially if you care about the sound presentation.  But I do agree that 70mm 5-perf is a great way to watch it/wouldn't disappoint by any means.

Yes, the sound was really good on the IMAX show, it's part of the reason we went. At the same time, the 5 perf shots (which are the bulk of the movie) looked like 35mm, they were horrible. The 5 perf presentation is like Dunkirk and Tenet, superb. 

[Tyler Purcell]

On 7/22/2023 at 12:45 PM, Kemalettin Sert said:

im curious if they had problems with the lenses..It was always on the ear or tip of the nose.Dont they have monitors on set? 

They shot fast. Many of the actors have been interviewed and discussed how fast they were working. 

I talked with one of the assistant editors and nobody on the editorial staff was really watching the film dailies, just Nolan. So nobody really knew how soft certain shots were until it was too late. On a 1080p DNX115 Avid timeline, no way you can tell focus. I edited a film not long ago shot on 8k Red, and we started in DNX115 and we did a little relink to original media in 8k and like 30% of the show we cut was out of focus! LOL  

I just don't think there is any way to tell on set, especially with a film camera. 

[Tyler Purcell]

12 hours ago, Robino Jones said:

Will go see it again in Imax 70 at Chinese Theatre when it cools down - every screening for the next week are packed.

Do not go to the Chinese. 100% waste of time. The only real IMAX theater in the area that's "real" is Universal City. 

The projection is god awful. First off, they built a projection booth in the theater, with no ventilation. So there is no deionized air, meaning the film running at 330 feet per minute, acting like a van de graaff generator attracting every single particle of dust on the film. We saw it 2nd screening at the theater, first public screening and the print looked like it had been playing for 3 weeks straight. Second off, the lamp reflector wasn't centered on the image. I don't know how this works on IMAX projectors, but with standard projectors, you need to calibrate this and anyone with a few minutes can do this task. The IMAX team either ran out of time, or they didn't bother. So the far left sliver of screen was proper, the rest was yellow and much less bright. Finally, the lens was the wrong lens. I get why this would have been a problem, they just did the math wrong, but Jesus guys, its wasn't even centered properly! Honestly, they were rushed, I'm sure they will fix it, but at the same time, it left a horribly bad taste in my mouth. Also... the film has 20 minutes of IMAX shots in it at most, so you're actually watching 5 perf 65mm, to 5 perf IP blown up to 15 perf IN, then cut into the 15 perf camera negative string, then 15 perf IP and 15 perf IN then 15 perf print. So the 5 perf shots are what, 3 generations behind the 15 perf shots, which are 3 generations behind the negative? The 5 perf string of the film, is going to be MUCH higher quality. 

[Tyler Purcell]

4 hours ago, charles pappas said:

Drove to San Antonio, taking an extra 20 minutes due to torrential rain. When we arrived at the theater, an employee said that the showing would be in a digital IMax format (can't remember what she called it) because the film projector was broke, having "blown the compressor due to pulling a 600 pound reel of film."  

https://in70mm.com/news/2023/oppenheimer_cinema/index.htm

There are plenty of theaters in Texas playing it on 5 perf. Do not watch it on 15 perf. Total waste of time. 

 

[Scott Pickering]

So being a big fan of true IMAX using 70mm film prints, I had to see this release in 70mm when it came available in my area once again. I saw Dunkirk in this same theater in 70mm IMAX 6 years ago. This was one of the few theaters left that still kept their 70mm projection system. I have been watching real IMAX since 1986, when it first became available in Vancouver BC at Expo 86. That theater has since shut down the IMAX films, so Langley was the only one left. Im not sure if the OMNIMAX at the Science World still offers film projection. The Langley theater has had its IMAX venue since the late 90s I believe. I saw quite a few true IMAX films in this theater over time, with quite a few of them being Nolan films. Why is Nolan the ONLY director that will still insist on 70mm prints for his films? I wish more of them would. I was also happy to see this release with the B&W portions shot on real B&W film, as I too myself wished I could make a film that way at one time. Nolan is the guy who could get that done though. Now on to this new release.

 

I got my tickets a month in advance and it slowly sold out each showing the closer it go to release. I got my ticket the first day it was available. My ticket was for the 2PM show on Saturday the 22^nd. Once I knew Langley was once again showing a 70mm print, I was waiting to get my ticket. The day we got there, the theater was of course sold out. People were wandering all over trying to find their seats. The ushers came in to help. There were people from all over in our viewing. I sat next to a couple guys who came all the way up from Seattle to see this here. They no longer have 70mm options in their city to see it this way. I heard some other people flew in just to see this show. Before it started, one of the theater staff introduced the show and talked a little bit about this presentation. I missed out on getting the handout film print clip of IMAX. They ran out. So the movie began and it was how I remembered film prints being.

 

This print did weave a little at times, you could clearly see the flicker on the screen, and the image was not quite rock steady. There was dust on the print a couple times too. So this was obviously a film print I was watching. You get so used to the clean stable digital presentations, that seeing film once again is a little unusual. I loved what I was looking at. Being one of the 31 theaters showing in IMAX, I felt privileged and very lucky. The presentation didn’t have any mechanical issues like some other venues in Canada have had this last week. I hope they get their problems sorted out.

 

The 70mm 5 perf sections on the print looked very good. Better that Dunkirk did on its print. I could still see a bit of a contrast difference between the IMAX and 5 perf sections though. The 5 perf stuff held up very well on the IMAX print. The B&W portions showed the grain, even in 70mm. The B&W IMAX sections were noticeably less grainy, and that surprised me, since 5 perf isn’t that much of a blow up if at all. I didn’t really see much of a tint in the B&W segments, as some others have reported showing green tints. I still think it would have looked better if a B&W print was an option. Duping B&W to color print stock never looks as good. But it was a real treat to see B&W in 70mm. I wish this would be an option again for future film makers. Fotokem said they would consider doing it again if the right amount of stock was sent to them. But their lab manager says no to that. The color segments of the film looked softer than I remembered IMAX being. A softer look is a film trait, even in 70mm. I certainly don’t see how IMAX can be 18K rez, after view IMAX film again today. I think 8K would give it a run for its money. But needless to say Im a tried and true film nut. I love using film myself for photography. I really have to admire for Nolan sticking to his guns using film for his movies. He and I would make many of the same decisions if I was making films myself. Old school just looks better.

 

The movie itself was good. I need another viewing just to try and make sense of some of it. I wouldn’t say this was Nolan’s best work, as its different to me than some of his other movies. But I have to admire what he was able to achieve.

 

I hope there are more opportunities to see 70mm IMAX here in BC. But Im concerned at some point they may give it up, especially if Nolan stops making films.

 

Scott Pickering- BC Canada

[Tyler Purcell]

12 minutes ago, Scott Pickering said:

Why is Nolan the ONLY director that will still insist on 70mm prints for his films? I wish more of them would. 

Simple, it's too expensive. 

When I mean too expensive, I don't mean like $1.50 cents a foot. I mean like $200 dollars a foot. 

Remember, there are only a hand full of CRT recorders left. Once those tubes go, that's it! No more IMAX record out's. So anyone doing a DI finish is... well, finished. 

Fotokem is in such a horrible position because they want the work obviously and they want to do GOOD work clearly, but their hands are tied by the tech they have. IMAX records everything 15p internally, but Fotokem does the rest. So since most films are DI workflow, the cost just doesn't make any sense. It's super frustrating when you see films like NOPE shot with 15P and not a single IMAX print made. Nobody has seen what the 15P looks like but the crew. 

Of course a photochemical timing job is probably cheaper, but who is going to do that? Fotokem's timers are retired guys they bring back, when they decide not to come back, who will it be? Hoyte is talented, he knows what he wants, he knows how to get it, but he doesn't have time to consult on everyone else's movie. 

12 minutes ago, Scott Pickering said:

This print did weave a little at times, you could clearly see the flicker on the screen, and the image was not quite rock steady.

It's probably an older projector in the theater. 

IMAX flicker a lot of times is caused by a dying lamp. Many theaters aren't doing the maintenance they should be, hence the gate weave. FYI, our absolutely abhorred presentation on 15P was rock stable and very little flicker. 

12 minutes ago, Scott Pickering said:

The 70mm 5 perf sections on the print looked very good. Better that Dunkirk did on its print.

Dunkirk was horrible. 

Our 15P print (which I assume was the same source) the 5 perf shots were atrocious. Not only was the timing all over the place, sometimes shot to shot, but the B&W was of course green. When one of the super rare 15P shots would get up on screen, the timing was flawless and the image was remarkably crisper. 

I have a feeling, your projector was soft in general. 

12 minutes ago, Scott Pickering said:

I hope there are more opportunities to see 70mm IMAX here in BC. But Im concerned at some point they may give it up, especially if Nolan stops making films.

15P is going to come back because they are making 4 brand new sync sound (quiet) cameras that will be out next year. These will allow filmmakers to shoot in 15p without changing to other formats for dialog scenes. So hang tight, I have a feeling this roll out will be like Hateful Eight and the projectors will stay put in many of the houses, just pushed into the corner. 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Tyler Purcell

[Tyler Purcell]

On 7/22/2023 at 12:37 PM, Ole Alstrup said:

How much? Do you have any official references? Thanks. 

Welcome to the forum! 

Umm, not sure exact numbers. I doubt IMAX or Nolan want people to know because it would undercut their "profit" venture, of over-charging people for IMAX shows. 

I would guesstimate around 20 minutes of the 3hr movie are IMAX. There are NO and I mean ZERO complete scenes in 15P IMAX. Unlike Dunkirk and Tenet, which have entire 5 minute segments entirely in 15P. Oppenheimer uses 15P for the master wide and then cuts to 5 perf 65mm. It was annoying actually, VERY annoying, because you'd start a scene in a lush, crystal clear, full screen IMAX frame and suddenly the moment someone started to talk, you'd dump into a grainy, matted (with huge bars at the top and bottom) 5 perf shot that looked nothing like the IMAX opening wide. 

Had it been my movie, I wouldn't have even bothered with IMAX. I would have shot the entire film in 5 perf 65mm. I would have done it with the 1.90:1 aspect ratio in mind. Made a big stink about it being an IMAX show, but formatted for IMAX laser. Then focus on the 5 perf screenings. Not only would that save a boat load of money, but also deliver the same quality image for the vast majority of screens. The sparse 15P shots, were not worth the experience of seeing 5 perf shots (the bulk of the film) looking like crap compared. 

[Dan Finlayson]

2 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

At the same time, the 5 perf shots (which are the bulk of the movie) looked like 35mm, they were horrible.

Just not the case with the print at the Chinese theater at least.  The only shots that felt extra grainy were the 5-perf double-x shots.  It's just double-x!

[Giray Izcan]

I wish Nolan cared more about the content rather than the format and style. It comes off as very self indulgent.. I wish he wasn't so obsessed with his no cgi stance, i mean remember Dunkirk beach scenes with 100 soldiers standing around on the beach?... I haven't seen the movie yet but, in consensus, from most reviews, apparently  the explosion segment did not look like atom bomb explosion but just a gas explosion. Imagine how much more powerful it could be if he enhanced the practical effects with some cgi. I will be the judge myself after seeing it for myself but I don't have high hopes unfortunately. 

[Gautam Valluri]

On 7/22/2023 at 2:34 AM, David Mullen ASC said:

I saw this today in 5-perf 70mm film, which I suspect was an optical reduction of the IMAX shots, not a D.I. The print was superb, you forget how much better the blacks are in a non-D.I. film print, even if there is a loss of shadow detail from the contrast -- we've gotten used to the flatter shadow detail of digital movies.  Occasionally in day scenes, it gets a bit harsh-looking but always rich, dramatic.

You could get a sense of where the IMAX shots come in, despite everything being the same 2.20 : 1 framing -- either there is a drop in depth of field to the point of extreme shallowness, or there is a lot of corner fall-off and the shots feel "big" in background scale, like when Oppenheimer climbs the ladder at Trinity.

I thought it was a good movie, exploring all the contradictions of Oppenheimer, and I thought Cillian Murphy did a great job, to me he clearly goes through the emotional wringer even while internalizing his pain. The sound mix was rather oppressive.

If it's true that Nolan shot a lot of this movie in 5-perf 65mm -- his usual reason is that he prefers dialogue scenes to not be looped, which IMAX cameras usually cause to happen -- then perhaps the 5-perf 70mm print was the way to go.

David, I also saw it in 5/70mm and really enjoyed it. Going back to see it again this evening.

I've been trying to guess the workflow for this. Could it be that their "master negative" was a 15/65mm + IN of the 5/65mm parts optical blow up and then reduce everything optically to a 5/65mm and 4/35mm anamorphic INs?

Or seeing that more than 50% of the film is shot in 5/65mm, is the "master negative" actually a 5/65mm + IN of the 15/65mm parts optically reduced to 5/65 and then that gets blown-up to 15/70 and reduced to 4/35 anamorphic?

Also did they optically print the Double-X sequences onto a Colour IP and then make an IN for cutting the master negative? Or did they splice the Double-X parts inside the colour negative?

So many questions! I'm very impressed by Nolan and co's committment.

[Stephen Perera]

11 hours ago, Ray Lenore said:

Where in Barcelona is a 70mm projector? 
As far as I know the only IMAX 70mm film projector in continental Europe is in Prague. 

Barcelona IMAX at diagonal mar is digital and it’s mainly dubbed films all the time. 

Phenomena cinema are showing it in 70mm film projection!

https://www.phenomena-experience.com/programacion-mensual/todo.html

Información y taquillas

info@phenomena-experience.com

93 830 77 55 · Taquilla abierta según programación, 20 minutos antes de cada sesión.

C/ Sant Antoni Maria Claret, 168 · 08025 Barcelona

Edited July 24, 2023 by Stephen Perera

[Dan Hasson]

3 hours ago, Giray Izcan said:

I wish Nolan cared more about the content rather than the format and style. It comes off as very self indulgent.. I wish he wasn't so obsessed with his no cgi stance, i mean remember Dunkirk beach scenes with 100 soldiers standing around on the beach?... I haven't seen the movie yet but, in consensus, from most reviews, apparently  the explosion segment did not look like atom bomb explosion but just a gas explosion. Imagine how much more powerful it could be if he enhanced the practical effects with some cgi. I will be the judge myself after seeing it for myself but I don't have high hopes unfortunately. 

I thought the explosion was amazing. I'm unsure how an atom bomb explosion technically should look apart from the obvious mushroom cloud imagery in my head. 

Personally, the scene was so gripping with all the elements combined, performance, sound, image, editing etc that whether it technically could have looked more 'real' with CGI, did not matter at all.

I think Nolan's commitment to no CGI (or as little as possible) is a selling point / marketing material but fair enough, it's cool to have the money and ability he does to hire amazing crew to make it work.

It does not mean it's right for every file, as CGI has of course created amazing things in films. This is all just my opinion though and definitely would like to know your thoughts when you see it.

 

[Stephen Perera]

totally agree...the way they did the 'test' explosion to prove the theory was the best part of the film technically for filmmakers to appreciate I think