|
Post by Dirty Epic on Nov 22, 2019 22:15:30 GMT
I cant seem to remember the last film I saw at the cinema ? I know I saw that Tom Cruise film there, where he played the officer who tried to assassinate Hitler with a bomb in a briefcase, that wasn't too bad. I was visiting Berlin at the time they were filming it and some of the roads were blocked off. That must be about ten years ago now.. Think that film was Valkyrie wasn't it Charles? Not a bad one but not essential.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Bronson on Nov 22, 2019 23:56:53 GMT
Thats the title Dirty couldn't think of it. You're right also in your estimation of the film. One of my favourite war films, American that is was 'Patton' with George C. Scott. Charles.
|
|
Sparky
Producer
Status? Would that be Credit or in Society?
Posts: 2,784
Online Status:
|
Post by Sparky on Nov 23, 2019 8:19:40 GMT
I took a trip to the Cinema last year - for the first time in 13 years. (There simply isn't anything I'd consider paying to see).
I was quite shocked - given, Cinema had "gone digital" - and the picture quality was f*****g dreadful. The picture was too 'soft' - even white captions on a black background (which should be pin sharp) were slightly blurred and hard to read. The colours looked a little washed and every scene too dark.
I complained to the Cinema manager - who asked me if I knew what I was talking about. Came and looked at the picture - and claimed that there was nothing wrong with it and assumed I was pulling a fast one to get a complimentary ticket. My youngest son complained that the picture was also too soft - so not just my eyesight!
A vast difference to 35mm film, with a 2kw Xenon Arc lamp behind it.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Bronson on Nov 23, 2019 8:50:29 GMT
Come to think of it, I've noticed some of the picture quality of the trailers wasn't terrific on my recent visit. When you consider how good the quality can be on some HD films on modern TV sets you would think cinemas would have fantastic picture quality?
I noticed the advertisements were more annoying than they used to be though.
|
|
Del Boy
Moderator
Posts: 9,899
Online Status:
|
Post by Del Boy on Nov 23, 2019 9:02:28 GMT
I paid to see Star Wars a few years ago in an IMAX. Total waste of money.
|
|
Three Litre
Producer
Oscar 24
Posts: 3,418
Online Status:
|
Post by Three Litre on Nov 23, 2019 9:31:06 GMT
Thats the title Dirty couldn't think of it. You're right also in your estimation of the film. One of my favourite war films, American that is was 'Patton' with George C. Scott. Charles. Patton is an excellent film, Scott refused an award for his performance for some reason.
|
|
Villain
Director
Nine Elms, 1970, looking for the loot...
Posts: 1,297
Online Status:
|
Post by Villain on Nov 23, 2019 10:52:55 GMT
I would say I average 2 a year usually. I'll probably go see the new Star Wars film and I'm contemplating seeing the Ford vs Ferrari film with Matt Damon. He's usually pretty good to be fair. Think i'll swerve bond 25 when that comes out. The last few have had far too much crap CGI for my liking. Looking at the 2001 titles it may have been 'Jurassic Park 3' Oh my Its had a reboot since then Arthur. Reboot is Hollywood for run out of ideas so lets remake stuff It's years since I've been but I'm tempted to go and see 'Le Mans 66'. By all accounts it's a good film with Matt Damon and Christian Bale both giving excellent performances, the downside being the large number of inaccuracies with some of the cars used and the timeline, missing out important stuff (such as the early development of the GT40 with Lola and Lotus involvement) to keep the running time down to less than two and a half hours. Enzo Ferrari is portrayed as being at the race in '66 but he never went there. There's lots of footage of the drivers miraculously finding another gear when already going flat out down the Mulsanne straight at 200mph, but that's typical of many Hollywood racing films. Still looking forward to seeing it though, the story itself is fascinating and the stills I've seen taken behind the scenes look particularly good. Villain
|
|
Sparky
Producer
Status? Would that be Credit or in Society?
Posts: 2,784
Online Status:
|
Post by Sparky on Nov 23, 2019 11:06:25 GMT
I paid to see Star Wars a few years ago in an IMAX. Total waste of money. I am not entirely sure that the "Imax" they promote in Cinemas these days is the same as the original "Imax".
For a start - original Imax was very expensive to Shoot on, Process and even Project. It even had to be handled slightly differently to normal gauge film.
Imax used a 70mm film (double that width of 35mm) - which ran Horizontally through the Camera and Projector (instead of the usual vertical). This gave a much larger frame width - and when projected correctly (A 5000w arc lamp was used) gave very impressive results. I was lucky enough to the the original Imax when it opened in Bradford in the 1980s - and was totally blown away with the picture quality, combined with 6 channel surround - used sparingly.
They showed a film on Space Exploration and material shot from the Space Shuttle orbiting earth. There was (aparently) a print of Kubriks "2001 Space Odyssey" done in Imax. Even the Auditorium had a much steeper rake than normal cinemas.
So - chances are - the Imax being promoted in mainstream cinemas today is a digital version.
I haven't (yet) visited one of these new Digital Projection suites to see for myself. Though I would quite like to.
|
|
Three Litre
Producer
Oscar 24
Posts: 3,418
Online Status:
|
Post by Three Litre on Nov 23, 2019 11:39:11 GMT
I paid to see Star Wars a few years ago in an IMAX. Total waste of money. I am not entirely sure that the "Imax" they promote in Cinemas these days is the same as the original "Imax".
For a start - original Imax was very expensive to Shoot on, Process and even Project. It even had to be handled slightly differently to normal gauge film.
Imax used a 70mm film (double that width of 35mm) - which ran Horizontally through the Camera and Projector (instead of the usual vertical). This gave a much larger frame width - and when projected correctly (A 5000w arc lamp was used) gave very impressive results. I was lucky enough to the the original Imax when it opened in Bradford in the 1980s - and was totally blown away with the picture quality, combined with 6 channel surround - used sparingly.
They showed a film on Space Exploration and material shot from the Space Shuttle orbiting earth. There was (aparently) a print of Kubriks "2001 Space Odyssey" done in Imax. Even the Auditorium had a much steeper rake than normal cinemas.
So - chances are - the Imax being promoted in mainstream cinemas today is a digital version.
I haven't (yet) visited one of these new Digital Projection suites to see for myself. Though I would quite like to.
I went to that Imax myself at around the same period, I have sister who lives near Keighley. Think I saw some of the same stuff. It's great for documentaries, not sure I could stand it for a 2 hour main feature.
|
|
Cartman
Producer
Posts: 4,018
Online Status:
|
Post by Cartman on Nov 23, 2019 12:47:10 GMT
That Le Mans film does look quite good, which is a bit strange because I'm not a motor sport fan, but I did enjoy the film Rush, about Hunt v Lauda. I remember another film from years ago that I quite liked, I think Paul Newman was in it and it was from the late 60s
|
|