| Message/Author |
|
|
|
|
Warner Bros. Pictures' Superman Returns to Become World's First Live-action Hollywood feature to be Converted into IMAX(R) 3D
Bryan Singer Film Makes History with IMAX's Proprietary 2D to 3D
Conversion Technology
LOS ANGELES, CA, March 30 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ - IMAX Corporation and Warner Bros. Pictures today announced that Superman Returns, directed by Bryan Singer, will become the world's first live-action Hollywood feature to be converted from 2D to IMAX(R) 3D. IMAX Corporation will use its proprietary 2D to 3D conversion technology to convert approximately 20 minutes of the film into An IMAX 3D Experience(R), the most immersive cinematic 3D in the world.
"Releasing select sequences of Superman Returns in IMAX 3D marks a groundbreaking moment in movies," said Dan Fellman, President of Domestic Distribution at Warner Bros. Pictures. "This film is going to give fans an opportunity to be immersed in a major live-action motion picture like never before."
The epic action-adventure directed by Bryan Singer (X-Men, The Usual Suspects), will be transformed into the unparalleled image and sound quality of The IMAX Experience(R) through IMAX DMR(R) (Digital Re-Mastering) technology. The film will be simultaneously released to IMAX(R) and conventional theatres on June 30, 2006. Warner Bros. Pictures will be the exclusive distributor of the film to the growing IMAX theatre network worldwide.
"The test scenes that have been converted into IMAX 3D look, sound and feel absolutely amazing," added Bryan Singer, Director of Superman Returns. "The magic of IMAX 3D will envelop audiences in this story, enabling them to feel the emotion, drama and suspense in a completely new and unique way."
During select sequences of the film, a visual cue designed by Singer will indicate when audiences should put on and remove their IMAX 3D glasses.
"We are delighted to partner with pioneering visionaries Bryan Singer and Warner Bros. Pictures to transform part of this highly anticipated release into An IMAX 3D Experience," said IMAX Co-Chairmen and Co-CEOs Richard L. Gelfond and Bradley J. Wechsler. "Today's announcement is a culmination of a great film, a great filmmaker, a great studio, and great technology - all working together to produce the most powerful and immersive cinematic experience available to moviegoers worldwide."
"Five out of the seven films in our 2006 line up now feature IMAX 3D," said Greg Foster, Chairman and President of IMAX Filmed Entertainment. "We are thrilled that moviegoers will be able to experience Bryan Singer's unique and exhilarating vision. Through the magic of IMAX 3D, they will feel as if they are actually flying alongside the man of steel, weaving in and out of Metropolis."
Following a mysterious absence of several years, the Man of Steel comes back to Earth in the epic action-adventure Superman Returns, a soaring new chapter in the saga of one of the world's most beloved superheroes. While an old enemy plots to render him powerless once and for all, Superman faces the heartbreaking realization that the woman he loves, Lois Lane, has moved on with her life. Or has she? Superman's bittersweet return challenges him to bridge the distance between them while finding a place in a society that has learned to survive without him. In an attempt to protect the world he loves from cataclysmic destruction, Superman embarks on an epic journey of redemption that takes him from the depths of the ocean to the far reaches of outer space.
Warner Bros. Pictures presents Superman Returns, directed by Bryan Singer and starring Brandon Routh (Clark Kent/Superman), Kevin Spacey, Kate Bosworth, James Marsden, Hugh Laurie, Sam Huntington and Eva Marie Saint. Written by Dan Harris and Mike Dougherty. Produced by Gilbert Adler, Jon Peters and Bryan Singer; co-produced by Stephen Jones; and executive produced by Chris Lee. Superman Returns is based on the DC Comic Book Superman. |
|
|
|
|
I don't know if I like this or not.
The 3D parts will be cool but things like
I never liked BLack Eyes.
Letting people play with glasses for 2 hours while not wearing them and the damage that entails.
Losing brightness due to Polarizer being in the whole time.
Platter moves and whatnots |
|
|
|
|
Oops, hit the post button before I proofread/was finished.
Anyway, I think I am an "All or Nothing" type of person when it comes to this and now I am a bit dissappointed, I was kind of looking forward to seeing this movie. |
|
|
 Anonymous posted on Thursday, March 30, 2006 - 03:34 pm
|
|
|
| Is Valerie Perrine in this one? Would like to see her scenes in 3D! |
|
|
|
|
Only 20 min is going to be 3D?
That's a lot of black film! |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, March 30, 2006 - 03:46 pm
|
|
|
Also: "The World's First Live-action Hollywood feature to be Converted into IMAX(R) 3D" is entirely misleading, if in fact only 20 minutes are going to be converted.
Good try. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, March 30, 2006 - 04:13 pm
|
|
|
At least 90 minutes of black film stock
At least 90 minutes of people fiddling with 3D glasses, dropping them, spilling concessions on them, etc.
This will be interesting. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, March 30, 2006 - 05:34 pm
|
|
|
"During select sequences of the film, a visual cue designed by Singer will indicate when audiences should put on and remove their IMAX 3D glasses."
This is assanine, even for Imax. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, March 30, 2006 - 05:39 pm
|
|
|
What a waste of lamp hours!
Hope they send the black w/ frame lines! |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, March 30, 2006 - 05:43 pm
|
|
|
| You mean you're not going to slide the polarizer back and forth between the 2D and 3D scenes! |
|
|
|
|
"Cues" eh? I can see it now:
Superman icon = take your glasses off
Clark Kent icon = put your glasses on
Wouldn't the constant anticipation for the next "cue" and the fidgeting with glasses only detract from the experience? Seems kinda "gimmicky" to me...but what do I know. |
|
|
| Dan Suomi posted on Thursday, March 30, 2006 - 11:41 pm
|
|
|
| I'd prefer if it was all in 3D. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, March 31, 2006 - 07:02 am
|
|
|
Anon of 3:43pm: some theaters don't have a sliding polarizer, and instead have one you have to screw on to the front of the hood. You can only get the polarizer in and out if the projector is pulled back or if you try to shove it on from the side (which is quite visible in the audience).
For those theaters with SR projectors, can you start and stop the 3D portion of the film just as if you were moving from Part 1 of a DMR to Part 2 of a DMR? If so, then you won't have to run black film for an hour: I assume you'd run Part 1, and when you switch to Part 2 you'd then mount the "Part 2 3D" reel on the reel unit and thread up in anticipation of the 3D section. (I assume this would also involve a reprogramming of the PLC. No idea if MPX can handle this or not.) The only people who would have to run black film are the 3DGT theaters. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, March 31, 2006 - 07:54 am
|
|
|
| Actually, This film is perfect for MPX. The second rotor can be programmed to start and stop whenever you want. In MPX you can show 2D trailers then start the feature in 3D, No black film required. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, March 31, 2006 - 07:59 am
|
|
|
| Oh yeah and in MPX, the polarizers will move into place on cue and the lamp will start up whenever required. MPX is really an amazing system. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, March 31, 2006 - 09:23 am
|
|
|
| Anyone know how many of the 50 or 60 theaters showing Superman are MPX? |
|
|
| Jim DiDio posted on Friday, March 31, 2006 - 09:23 am
|
|
|
For the 3DGT projectors, they could probably modify the front of the hood by attaching two channels, allowing you to slide the polarizer in from above in the middle of the film. This would cause only a momentary blink in the theater, but would allow the non-3D portion of the film to be brighter.
Also, the PLC could probably be reprogrammed for 3DGT to allow you to only strike the L or R lamp for "partial 3D". Both vacuums and both rotor air supplies could be activated, but only one lamp struck. (Technically, you can do this right now by simply turning off one rectifier and ignoring the annoying alarm beep all show.) This would allow you to strike the other lamp a few minutes before the 3D section. The large benefit to that? You'd be able to run scrap film instead of black film. I'd think there are plenty of library films that will never be used again but are in decent shape for running through the projector. Also, that stock would already have frame lines on it. A black slug could be inserted right at the point where the other lamp is turned on, and then you'd only have to run a few minutes of black film until the 3D portion instead of running 70 minutes of black film (as that would be much more expensive than the cheaper alternative of repurposing old film sctock). Just an idea. |
|
|
|
|
As for polarizers, ours do slide in and out but the projectors are positioned such that you can't take them in and out while in show position. I guess we will have to figure out some modification for that now.
I hear it is between 90 and 95 reels so it is long and is a whole lot of black film.
The lamp hours will add up quickly but the strikes are more damaging so I don't see us turning the lamp on and off during the show. Say they break it up in 4-5 minute bursts of 3D, then you have to turn the lamp on 10 minutes before each 3D part starts, there is an hour of lamp time plus the 4 strikes. No thanks.
"For those theaters with SR projectors, can you start and stop the 3D portion of the film just as if you were moving from Part 1 of a DMR to Part 2 of a DMR?"
When we ran 2D extended play, you couldn't move either projector while film was running on the other. That would have been nice but you had to thread up everything before hand, then wait til the end to unthread. Maybe that has changed but I haven't heard about it.
I do like the Icon ideas Erik. Will we have to provide phonebooths? |
|
|
|
|
As far as I know, I used to run SR's, we would have to run the whole film as complete. When F2K came out for the SR, I tried to see what would happen if you opened the hood on the first part after it had stopped running and while the rest of the show was running and it immediately stopped. Lesson learned. The only thing we were able to do was to move the projector back to it's load position.
Tim is more up-to-date than I am, as it's been awhile since I've been on SR's, so unless there has been some re-programming on the PLC, it hasn't changed any.
The only group who might be able to pull this off is the theatre at Jordan's Furniture in Natick. They had their PLC re-programmed in such a way that they could run 3D trailers at the beginning of a 2D feature, and then were able to unthread the projector once the 2D feature started, or so I was told.
As far as the polarizers are concerned, on the SR's they slide in from the top. You can remove them, without the audience seeing it happen, the problem is, is at some point along the way the projectionist will remove them and then either be tied up in some way or other and won't get them in in time or if being rushed put them in the wrong sides, instant headache anyone? or let's turn the glasses upside down.
It sounds a great idea, gimmicky yes, time and energy consuming, oh boy!!! The audience is going to be a bit ticked, thinking that whole flick should be 3D. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Saturday, April 01, 2006 - 11:32 pm
|
|
|
| This has to be the dumbest thing; I have seen Imax do yet. If you have a GT 3-D Projector. Who cares about the polarized, window I would not be setting there every day playing this game. As for the needed black film better make sure with this much stock it has frame lines on it. Because if you have a mangled film break that is so bad you don’t know where to sync up the right and left eye. You are going to be down a long time trying to find out where the frames should line up? |
|
|
|
|
I called IMAX to ask about how these prints are going to be done. They told me that the whole thing is being worked on right now to figure out how to best do it. The most popular notion is that there will be two identical length prints, one for each eye, with one eye being mostly black.
Anybody else heard of anything different than that yet? |
|
|
| Jim DiDio posted on Monday, April 03, 2006 - 05:15 pm
|
|
|
I still think scrap film would be a better idea than black (if you can get one lamp off). It's cheaper, and it has frame lines. That's what we used to do in Boston way way way waaaaay back--heck, Dean, way back when you were our service tech, LOL--in the late 80's. We had a two-minute preshow (2:21, if I recall) with lights and effects, and the sound was hard-wired into the show sound (since it was on the mag dubber--the only thing available back then) so we had to run scrap film through the projector with the dowser closed and the lamp on standby.
It actually resulted in a funny occurrence. At the end of the preshow, there was a spot where they simulated a rainstorm ("One Omnistorm, coming up!") and there was a loud crash of thunder. We used to use that cue to hit the field lens a couple of times and clean it in preparation for opening the dowser. One time, the projectionist hit what he thought was the field lens button and heard laughter from over the headphones: turns out he'd accidentally opened and closed the dowser quickly instead, and in a weird coincidence the piece of scrap going through the projector just happened to have some sort of explosion or fire on it, so it worked perfectly with the thunder sound. :o) |
|
|
|
|
| Scrap could work, but the lamp strikes would kill the lamps in a matter of weeks (I'm imagining that there would be anywhere from 8-10 instannces where we'll be switching from 2D to 3D and back, but that's just a guess). Not to mention, anyone with a weak igniter will be sure to have a few problems. I'm not sure I'd want to strike a lamp with the douser open anyway, that just doesn't seem like a sound idea. Too bad Imax never followed through with our split-douser...that'd have worked perfect in this situation. |
|
|
|
|
| To Jim DiDio. Get real. Here at Tempe we have a GT with a single Dowser, Scap film is a bad idea. For one thing we would have to run into the other room to turn off the rectifer. It would look real bad if you missed your Q. Also not good to keep turning the Lamp on and off many times while this show is here. They need to use black film with frame lines in case of a crash. But I know they wont do that, to costly. So good luck with this show. Also I dont see me trying to slide the plorizer back and forth many times while showing this film. |
|
|
|
|
Ah yes, Jim, the gold old days of using scrap film in the projector to make the sound play.
Back when I started IMAX projection work we had to do every single thing related to the show manually. Turn lights up and down. Start and stop and fade music. Put the sync frame in the gate manually. Start and stop the projector and open and close the dowser. No fancy shmancy automation at all.
That split dowser sure would come in handy for you GT guys and gals for Superman.
I think IMAX is probably smart enough not to require the lamp for one eye to be ignited and extinguished numerous times during one show.
The polarizer issue is the one I'm most interested in seeing resolved for sure. They'll come up with something. |
|
|
|
|
It seems like a lot of people are skipping over the best solution in my opinion, albeit if costs more there rest assured it won't be used. Instead of using 120 mins of black (the thought of having to play the entire 2.5 hour movie to make sure the 3D is in sync makes me shutter) how about have the single film printed onto both eyes so that the audience uses the glasses throughout and only in some scenes will they see 3D.
Hence we have no fiddling with glasses, no unframed black film nonsense, no sliding polarizer issues, and no lamp strike BS. The factor here will be if printing the film twice drastically outweighs the cost/benefit of using the black film, and since it will be the projectionists, not the decision makers, who will have to deal with the problems, I’m sure we have our answer.
Interestingly, Natick and Reading, Mass are made for this already. They've been showing 3D trailers on 2D movies for years, Tom's GT has a retrofit to allow individual control of each dowser (so he can use scrap film), the audience is cued when to put on and remove their glasses with no headaches. As was mentioned before, Natick's SR is programmed for this as well. Ask the boys out their however, they go through lots and LOTS of glasses - not uncommon for school groups to obliterate them during a 2D show.
Unfortunately these complex problems only really present themselves with the GTs (a single rotor). SRs have a much simpler solution and as for MPX – this very idea is built for it – coincidence? |
|
|
|
|
/too obscure? |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Tuesday, April 04, 2006 - 01:39 am
|
|
|
Hey Zach, If WB doesn't mind shelling out the additional 75K for the print, I'm down!  |
|
|
| Jim DiDio posted on Tuesday, April 04, 2006 - 07:30 am
|
|
|
I was under the impression that the 8 to 10 minutes of 3D was all in one scene. If it comes and goes throughout the movie, then, yeah, it really has to be black film throughout with the other lamp on and the polarizer in place.
I do like the idea of running two 2D prints, though. That would eliminate any synch problems in case of a film break. It would also make the 2D image a LOT brighter since you'd have both lamps passing light through image. The only question is the cost of a finished print vs. the cost of a DMR-sized roll of black film. I don't know the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if a finished film isn't the same price; last time I checked, black stock with frame lines wasn't cheap. And with two prints, if disaster struck one deck of your QTRU you could still run the other eye as a straight 2D print until you got replacement film in. It would also allow the crowd to keep the glasses on all show if they want without any major problems (which means fewer broken glasses).
As for the single-dowser GT issue: I have a modified GT with a split dowser. I was under the assumption that, when they did this mod back in 2000, they were doing the mod all over the place. Am I wrong on this? Are the majority of GT projectors still single-dowser? Am I extremely lucky? :o) I love my split dowser. |
|
|
| Jim DiDio posted on Tuesday, April 04, 2006 - 07:39 am
|
|
|
| Oops... That should read "it would allow the crowd to keep the glasses on all show", without the "if they want" part. Two 2D images would not perfectly overlap on screen, so you'd HAVE to keep the glasses on for the whole show. (Even if they managed to produce the film so that both prints had the image at a similar distance which made them overlap, there is enough of a difference in the two mechanisms that the prints would move just a tiny bit, and the result would be that it would look like everything was slightly vibrating in place.) |
|
|
| Jim DiDio posted on Tuesday, April 04, 2006 - 07:44 am
|
|
|
Hey, Dean... you wrote, "Back when I started IMAX projection work we had to do every single thing related to the show manually. Turn lights up and down. Start and stop and fade music. Put the sync frame in the gate manually. Start and stop the projector and open and close the dowser. No fancy shmancy automation at all."
Well, since (as you know) I came from the same era, I STILL do it that way, LOL. I do let the console stop and start the projector and open and close the dowser, but I make sure I'm right at the console anyway watching the time count down to zero. I still fade music and lights manually, and sync the start mark and sound manually. Why fit it if it ain't broke? :o) |
|
|
|
|
That's an interesting idea...print a duplicate of the one eye for the entire length of the film (except the 3D scenes) so people keep their glasses on, polarizers can stay in place, and there are no concerns about stopping and starting rotors at various points, etc.
If you have to print a lot of film to keep the two eyes in sync anyway, you'd might as well print images on there. And then you've got 3D prints that you can later separate into two 2D prints if you want.
One negative thing to this would be having to keep your 3D glasses on for all of the 2D as you wouldn't want to look at the possibly-not-perfectly-aligned duplicate images on the screen.
It seems to me that when you put two 2D prints on the screen in sync in 3D mode, you get a pseudo 3D effect anyway, right? So it might make the whole film seem to have more depth to the image, not just the 3D scenes. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Tuesday, April 04, 2006 - 11:38 am
|
|
|
WOW, They're still going ahead with this!  |
|
|
|
|
| Printing pictures rather than opaque film with framelines will use up less developer when the film is processed, so if both "eyes" need to go through a printer and be processed anyway, it would be a slight advantage. |
|
|
|
|
| This Film may be a mute point anyway for Tempe's GT. What is the run time on Superman. If it is much more then PEX. We could not run it in 3-D with out an upgrade to decks 2 and 3. We only had our decks 4 and 5 up grade to handel the 150 inch. platters? |
|
|
|
|
| Latest word from Warner Bros. is that Superman Returns is going to come in at 120 minutes or so... |
|
|
|
|
| Sorry...that's supposed to be 150 minutes -- two and half hours. |
|
|
|
|
| Reliable sources have just told me that IMAX is working on an automated polarizer upgrade for Superman Returns, and that one eye of the prints will be mostly black film. I sure hope they put those frame lines on the "black eye" to help in the event of film breaks... |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Tuesday, April 04, 2006 - 07:36 pm
|
|
|
| Automatic polarizer upgrade? Do they plan on releasing many more of these "2-and-a-half-D" films? :spit: |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Tuesday, April 04, 2006 - 07:40 pm
|
|
|
| Automatic polarizer upgrade? Do they plan on releasing many more of these "2-and-a-half-D" films? :spit: |
|
|
| Jim DiDio posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 07:15 am
|
|
|
Dean: you wrote, "It seems to me that when you put two 2D prints on the screen in sync in 3D mode, you get a pseudo 3D effect anyway, right? So it might make the whole film seem to have more depth to the image, not just the 3D scenes."
I'm not sure about that. I think it depends on where you put the focal plane of the 2D overlap. In other words, I think it might be possible to make the action look like it's happening a little off the screen instead of on it, but the whole thing should still look "flat" (2D).
I've only tried this once, when I had two copies of a 2D trailer and put them on a 3D film because I didn't have measured black. The overlap was almost perfect, but just a bit "off" (mostly due ot the slight variances in image shake). If people didn't have their glasses on, I doubt they would've really noticed it, but it's one thing to run a one-minute trailer like that as opposed to a 150-minute film. With two 2D prints, the image would definitely be brighter, but you'd need glasses on all the time. |
|
|
|
|
Jim:
No debate that two 2D prints shown in sync in 3D mode still look mostly "flat." The pseudo 3D effect is not very pronounced and nothing to write home, but there would still be some advantages to doing Superman this way.
If the audience has to keep their glasses on, they're less likely to fiddle around with them and break them. And then the director doesn't have to invent a "put your glasses on now" symbol to cue the audience, which helps keep them more into the film and less into the mechanics of making the show work. And finally, imagine the dramatic impact that could be achieved if the flat picture which the audience has been watching for a long time, and which they are completely used to, suddenly explodes into real 3D with no warning! |
|
|
|
|
We have been running trailers for upcoming 2-D features on 3-D shows for many years...the effect is not really the same as 3-D but it beats heck out of using blank film and since we alway run a 3-D intro, it starts and stays 3-D throughout, with the audience having their glasses on "when the dowser opens". (In order to run two 2-D prints, they need to be loaded the same as a 3-D feature and it IS necessary to use the glasses to view a clear on-screen image).
If Imax isn't going to convert the entire feature to 3-D, I agree it would be preferrable to have a full prnt for each eye. And I also feel the impact of the 3-D scenes will be much greater if they are experieed without a warning.
Also,what happens if, as speculated here, there is a problem and the remainder of the feature needs to be run in 2-D only (which should be a rare occurence-we are, after all, professionals & we should make sure we never lose a show...but **it happens!)
One other thought to support two prints: Is IMAX going to pay for special prints to send to 2-D only venues (e.g. dome theatres) that don't include the prompt for 3-D? Or will they simply let the 2-D audiences wonder what the signal meant? Just speculation but, IMHO it would be better NOT to call attention to the fact that the audience may be "missing" something. |
|
|
|
|
So if i could barrow from the last active 1570 thread:
 |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 01:53 pm
|
|
|
| Hay! I have an Idea. Instead of all the Yeack te Yeack every day about how the print of Superman should be done. Why don’t you take all your great ideas to IMAX or DKP that is doing the film. Instead of just talking back and forth to other Projectionist that cant do anything to help the project! |
|
|
|
|
| Good idea! I just wrote to David and Patricia Keighley about it. I'll let you know if I get an answer. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 09:09 pm
|
|
|
| Me thinks that this is way cool and I am happy to do whatever it takes to make this work. No sence bitching about it.I bet you guys won't be complaining once the money starts rolling in. It's better than not doing it at all and just letting the stupid 3D digital theaters do it, which by the way the 3D effect sucks. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 07:27 am
|
|
|
"...won't be complaining once the money starts rolling in"
OK, all you projectionists who get a cut of the ticket sales- raise your hand.
We get the same pay whether we're working a 2D show to 1 person or a 3D show to 400.
Now that you mention it though, maybe it's time for a raise. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 08:40 am
|
|
|
| Maybe if your theatre makes money from running the film in 3D rather than looses money from not running the film you would get that raise. What else do you have to do besides sitting on your butt all day? At least it gives me something different to do. If you don't like it there is one thing you can do , Quit. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 09:21 am
|
|
|
| Regardless of how they end up doing it, we'll still have something like 90 reels to assemble. Get ready for some long nights guys. I got a Red Bull fridge, lots of junk food, and an army cot. |
|
|
| Dan Suomi posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 10:24 am
|
|
|
| When do you guys usually get your prints that you have to work overnight? |
|
|
|
|
| Dan, my "V for Vendetta" print arrived DAY BEFORE it opened. No lie! It was supposed to be delivered one day sooner, but the shipping company sat on it for a day...still, that's way too close. |
|
|
|
|
Anon Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 11:53 am:
They call it a "Communication Center" b/c you can communicate to others your thoughts, feelings, or expertise on matters pertaining to our business. And who is to say that we haven't talked to the powers that be on this subject, posting simply means you put your thoughts up on here, it doesn't entail that you have done or not done anything else outside of this forum.
Anon Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 07:09 pm: and
Anon Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 06:40 am:
Wow, why so much hostility?
BTW, as for the money, both your arguments stem from an all or nothing concept. Either partial 3D (make money) or Not running it (lose money). To make a money argument you have to compare two things that in this case are virtually incomparable, $ in 2D and $ in partial 3D. Whose to say that we would make less money if we just ran it in 2D?
Oh, and I don't just sit on my butt ALL day, there is like two hours of good old fashioned work mixed in there, too. Have a nice day!!
PS. Sorry, I had to say something, it is impolite to ignore people. |
|
|
| Dan Suomi posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 02:57 pm
|
|
|
| Holy Cow that is close, I guess I am lucky to get mine the Friday or Saturday before. |
|
|
| Ron Bartsch posted on Thursday, April 06, 2006 - 04:34 pm
|
|
|
| Anyone have any ideas of how we can effectively advertise this movie to the public, so that they arrive at the theater KNOWING that only 20 minutes of the movie is in 3D (not the entire film) BEFORE they buy their tickets? My concern is that people are seeing the title sticking out at them as 'Superman Returns: an IMAX 3D Experience' WITHOUT bothering to read the fine print indicating that just 20 minutes of the film is 3D. Suggestions anyone? |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 07:10 am
|
|
|
I picked up on that too, Tim. He's very disgruntled, but I question whether he's an IMAX projectionist. He would know none of us sit on our butt all day. Some schedules are easier than others,sure.
And based on past performance, box would be outstanding even if Superman were in 2d. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 10:17 am
|
|
|
Dan, Our print of Mag Des arrived 14 hours before it premiered. It then ended up tanking.
One more nail in the coffin... |
|
|
| Dan Suomi posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 10:38 am
|
|
|
| How about advertising it as "Superman Returns in partial IMAX 3D"? That way the customers will ask what do they mean by partial, then the box office people could tell them. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, April 07, 2006 - 12:51 pm
|
|
|
Why don’t you let your Theatre Director or House Manager worry about the Ticket Sales
part of the Theatre. Don’t you have enough to deal with in the projection room? |
|
|
|
|
A couple of the radio stations in Toronto were pushing the film and telling their listening audience that 3 sections of the film was in 3D. I'm sure the print ads and posters in the theatres will have that written up in someway.
I too can't understand the hostility here. No offence, but if you don't like the job, leave. I would be happy to get back into the industry. For those who know me, I've been in and out of it, off and on for the past few years. Currently I work for UPS Canada, which is a far cry from IMAX! and I miss it tremendously. |
|
|
|
|
Anon: April 07, 2006 - 10:51 am
Ron is the Theatre Manager (in addition to being the CP). |
|
|
|
|
Dear anonymous 10.51am
It's sad to see people take such an isolated view of their role in a theatre.
the success of a theatre is dependent on everyone being concerned about the overall operation.
Often some of the best ideas come from the most unexpected places.
And you should worry about ticket sales.In it's simplest form no ticket sales no job. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Saturday, April 08, 2006 - 01:20 am
|
|
|
Dick
to true mate, i wish all i had to worry about was just the Booth
must be hard just having one room to look after |
|
|
| Ron Bartsch posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 02:27 pm
|
|
|
Thanks Erik! And well said, Dick.
Just heard from IMAX that an automatic polarizer upgrade is in the works for those theatres who will be showing Superman Returns in partial 3D. It will most likely attach to the projector hood (or projection port - depending on your set up), and will operate in the same manner as the dowsers, controlled via time code coming from an automation out on DTAC (or foil sensor on TAC systems). For DTAC theatres, the preset time codes for controlling the polarizers will be determined by IMAX. The running time for the movie will be right at the max for the 72" platters, so most of us will not be running any trailers before the movie. SPP techs will probably be installing their own polarizer upgrades. I've been told that it's going to be an easy upgrade to perform. I'm glad that IMAX is doing this - now we don't have to worry about manually manipulating the polarizers during each show. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Saturday, April 15, 2006 - 04:38 pm
|
|
|
| Dean, Did you hear anything from the Keighley’s? |
|
|
|
|
| No. I wrote them an email, but got no response. |
|
|
|
|
| So, I hear Superman is 2hrs 35minutes long. Of course, Poseidon was initially 2hrs 10min but I now hear 1hr 40min, so maybe 2:35 will change. Any chance they condense the credits on Superman to, ummm say, 30 seconds? I know 30 seconds won't happen but anything would be better than the 7-10 minutes that the other DMR's have been, at least the ones I have run. Maybe we could turn into a 24HR IMAX, it is only two extra shows or so. 7-11, Harris Teeter(Grocery store), Wal-Mart, maybe it would work for IMAX. |
|
|
| Bob Brown posted on Friday, April 21, 2006 - 12:50 pm
|
|
|
| I hear ya Tim. What bothers me is why IMAX didn’t give us more room on the 72" platters. I mean really!! Would it have been such a big deal to give us 4 more inches on the 72's when they were designing them? This way we would have the room to run a 150 min feature with room to use our standard clamps. But who am I, to question the wisdom of the IMAX engineering dept. |
|
|
| Bob Brown posted on Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 09:03 am
|
|
|
| Along with the other unforeseen hassles with this film. I.e. advertising, polarizer upgrade, up to 100 reel build, how are you all planning on handling the glasses issues. I know that IMAX put out an email reference "glasses lanyards" but we have investigated this, and the cost seems to outweigh the advantages. Any one have any ideas? Or are we setting ourselves up for a large amount on damaged glasses from the guests only handling the glasses foe about 20 minutes our of a 2.5 hour film..... |
|
|
|
|
The perfect solution -- flip-up polarized glasses.  |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 03:48 am
|
|
|
Even better,leave Superman in 2D  |
|
|
|
|
| Has there been any evaluation of how well printing an the same image for both eyes in the non-3D sections would work, so the glasses could be worn for the entire movie? The the scenes that have 3D would just be seen as 3D without the distraction of having to put on the glasses in the middle of the film. As I mentioned before, printing pictures rather than black on the second eye would actually save some money by using up less developer chemistry. The other advantage is that either eye's print could be used in theatres that don't show 3D. |
|
|
|
|
John:
Not that I know of. Someone somewhere decided that "this is the way it's going to be be" and there has been no discussion other than that. And none welcomed either inside or outside of IMAX.
At least some of the theatres are also going to have to spend a couple of thousand dollars for an automated polarizer switcher that puts in place and then takes away the polarizer as the movie switches modes between 2D, 3D, and 2D several times.
I think all of this is silly. Did someone at IMAX put Rube Goldberg's ghost on the payroll? Or am I missing something really obvious here? |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 - 06:58 am
|
|
|
What worries me is the feeling this won't be the last we see of this semi 3D thing. They wouldn't be spending all this money for one film. And I hope the chillers can handle 2 hour 3d's.
When they were designed and installed, 45 minutes was the norm. |
|
|
| Bob Brown posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 02:48 pm
|
|
|
Just got word today, that the release date has been move up to WEDNESDAY June 28. Also, final runtime has NOT yet been determined. Makes me wonder how long before the opening we will get our hands on this monster.....
Also, the release date for ANT BULLY has also been moved up to JULY 28 from SEPT 4th. Can we say PLATTER MOVES!!! |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 03:12 pm
|
|
|
Really. We were told that Superman opens on the 14th july. We are getting our upgrade soon. Hope its in time for the new release date?  |
|
|
| Bob Brown posted on Wednesday, May 31, 2006 - 05:32 pm
|
|
|
| Maybe for your theatre you may be opening on that date, I was referencing the day-and-date theatres. |
|
|
| Ron Bartsch posted on Thursday, June 01, 2006 - 01:06 pm
|
|
|
Bob is correct. Superman Returns' launch date is now June 28th (a Wednesday).
We got our automatic polarizer upgrade kit, and QTRU battery pack. (The QTRU battery pack is for those theatres that will be running both eyes of Superman using decks 2-5 on a single QTRU reel unit. The pack provides an extra boost of power to the reel unit upon film start-up, as needed due to the extreme weight of this film).
GT SPP techs: For those of you whose projector uses hood-mounted polarizers, did you encounter any problems when installing your upgrade kit? I will be doing my install soon, and was just wondering how it went for those of you who may have already completed the upgrade installation.
Thanks, Ron |
|
|
|
|
Ron-This is the first I am hearing about a QTRU battery pack. 1 QT, running Superman, sounds like we fit into that category. Is it an easy install. Plug and Play. COuldn't be, right?
I did get our polarizer upgrade though. I haven't put it in yet, well installed it would be the right word. We put it on to see if we were going to have to clean up glass from the Port Window out of the last row of the theatre. Yes, yes we will or would. Now the fun begins. SR guy here, I wasn't answering for GT SPP's. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, June 01, 2006 - 01:33 pm
|
|
|
| Oh dear.We have a GT projector and our polarizer is mounted infront of the hood. We have about a 1/2 inch gap between the port hole and polarizer! Guess we are goinng to have some trouble with this. ( NO SPACE ) is the new ones BIG???? |
|
|
| Ron Bartsch posted on Thursday, June 01, 2006 - 02:36 pm
|
|
|
We also have that problem, and it is a simple fix: simply adjust the transporter limit switch actuator and hard stop slightly back - just enough to allow ample clearance of the automatic polarizer. You'll also probably need to re-adjust your focus memory settings accordingly.
Tim, I'm not sure if the SR systems are or will be getting the QTRU battery packs. By the way, did you receive our T-REX print? |
|
|
|
|
AS far as I know the QTRU power pack isn't required for SR systems but a tweak of the voltage/current setings on the EPS may be needed on v. early systems.
Bob I presume you mean August 4 for Ant Bully not September. And 14 July is day and date for Superman in the UK. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, June 01, 2006 - 03:28 pm
|
|
|
| Dick, Who in the UK is getting it? Are you going to be showing it?How is Poseidon doing over there in the UK? |
|
|
|
|
I have just been told to hold off on the install until I get a new procedure. It's an SR thing so I guess I won't think about this again until Monday. Cool, I can sleep this weekend.
I am going to assume the battery packs are not for the SR, that could bite me later but that is my plan for now. The GT's must pull harder, I don't understand the differences but will nod and say ok.
Ron, Yeah we got T-Rex. It ran well and looked even better. We just had it in for a preview screening to see if we wanted to get it. That is still up in the air, it wasn't as good as I had hoped though. Oh, I did have a question about that. The stickers, are they just for telling the two eyes apart or are they used in setup/starting/stopping the movie? The little round ones, that is. I just assumed that it is a GT/SR difference but was curious. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, June 02, 2006 - 01:52 pm
|
|
|
| T-Rex will make money. I had people coming back 5 & 6 times. The kids love it and there is actually more on screen time for T-Rex than in Jurasic Park. Of course that doesn't mean there is all that much of t-rex there anyway. |
|
|
|
|
| Only theatre definitely getting Superman is London BFI. Poseidon only opened yesterday so don't have any figures yet |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, June 02, 2006 - 02:46 pm
|
|
|
| Did anyone else receive 16 of those single-post clamps (or "bolts") from IMAX, presumably to use with Superman? Does this mean that there's not gonna be enough room at the edge of the platter for the orange screw-down clamps to be used? Those skimpy-looking bolts serving as platter clamps scare me. I've never used them, and would be afraid to use them. I'd rather leave off the last reel or two of credits before I would resort to using those bolts and risk damaging an entire print. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, June 02, 2006 - 03:29 pm
|
|
|
| i agree.They are a wasted of time.They take forever to screw in and out.you waste about 5 min just doing that. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, June 02, 2006 - 04:47 pm
|
|
|
| The threaded platter clamps are a hell of a lot stronger than the two-pin quick release clamps. Forget using hand tools, just get a ratchet/Exlite set that fits the screw, stick it in a cordless drill and go in like a NASCAR pit crew member. As far as removing reels of film from a Hollywood feature, have a good lawyer on hand-you'll need him if you're caught. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Friday, June 02, 2006 - 05:52 pm
|
|
|
| I did not say that I wouldn't use the threaded platter clamps - I hope to use those in fact. I said that I would not use those threaded single-post clamps, (or "bolts") even if it means leaving off a reel of credits to allow enough room for the threaded clamps to be used. After all, who is the poor slob that has to worry about the entire film flopping onto the floor? Not Hollywood, and certainly not a lawyer. Furthermore, installing any type of clamp with the speed of a NASCAR pit crew member constitutes rushing. This is not a race, and haste makes waste in an IMAX projection booth. We will have enough time in between shows to allow for projection tasks to be done quickly and precisely - without the need to rush, resulting in the possibility of some important task being overlooked. And we all know what happens to a show when something is overlooked. It either does not run at all, or it runs incorrectly, usually resulting in film and/or equipment damage. |
|
|
|
|
| Looks like the exact running time for Superman Returns is 153 minutes, or 2 hours & 33 minutes. This figure includes the movie credits, but of course does NOT include any trailers, pre-shows, or intro speeches. That 153 minute figure comes directly from WB. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Saturday, June 03, 2006 - 04:02 am
|
|
|
153 min  So that means no trailers for other movies before hand!!!! We only have 150min plates!!! That means we have to use the screw in bolts then!!! What a pain.... |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Saturday, June 03, 2006 - 04:02 am
|
|
|
| 153 min So that means no trailers for other movies before hand!!!! We only have 150min plates!!! That means we have to use the screw in bolts then!!! What a pain.... |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Saturday, June 03, 2006 - 04:40 am
|
|
|
| How are you guys selling this film? Are you selling it as a 3D film or normal DMR with 20 min 3D? I think if we sell it as 3D people would complain as they would be thinking the whole film is in 3D!!! What do you think???? |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Monday, June 05, 2006 - 07:06 am
|
|
|
| I'd be very carefull using a power tool screwing those bolts in. Cross thread just once, and you have a nice little problem on your hand. I could see using a power drive to remove the bolts though. The bolts aren't that long, and with practice, good manual technique will work almost as fast as a power drive. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Monday, June 12, 2006 - 04:17 pm
|
|
|
Latest news about the print-we are due to receive it on 6/26/06-IMAX stated it would require 20 hours to assemble. This has pretty much forced cancellation of the 10pm premiere originally scheduled for 6/27 and, I am told, may delay the actual opening day to 6/29. Since polarizer cues are to be applied to the right eye print (mostly blank) per instructions provided, we are going to need at least one test screening to make sure we won't be handing out a stream of refunds! Most of you have already received your QT upgrade and polarizer mod kits, so you know this modifies the existing polarizer on a GT and will only be for the left eye.
So, since we are dumping the E3D headsets with the premiere of "SR", all WE have to do is have a service call to install the polarizer and QT upgrades, do scheduled maintenance on the whole system, install a new GCM , including water-softener and hot-water heater, perform a lamp change in the GT before "SR" opens and assemble a 2hr30min 3-D feature using a new system for presentation.
It's going to be a busy two weeks. Good luck to all of us!!
PS: Early reports are the 3D segments(four, lasting 5-minutes each )are spectacular; mind-blowing. Critics will not be allowed to review the film in 3D because their reaction may discourage attendance at conventional 2D venues. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 11:15 am
|
|
|
| http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/archives/2006/06/i_saw_superman.php |
|
|
| Jim Walker posted on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 03:09 pm
|
|
|
I tend to think of it as approximately 15 minutes per reel (or about 6 hours assembly for a regular, 45-minute, 15-reel film). Superman Returns is supposed to be 100 reels, so I calculate 40 hours assembly. And, that doesn't take into account all of the platter juggling that will have to take place to build up a 2hr 35min film.
Should be fun... |
|
|
| Heath Poe posted on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 04:34 pm
|
|
|
Superman is only 90 reels with 2 minutes of credits. So that calculates out to roughly 12 minutes per reel for assembly. The real fun is going to be running both Superman and Ant Bully!
The new polarizer upgrade is pretty cool, we installed it last night. It will be interesting to see exactly how it looks used during the movie. |
|
|
| Heath Poe posted on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 04:36 pm
|
|
|
| Oh yeah and the plan is for three 3D trailers, all WB, to be played before the movie. Should be interesting to see if they give us an announcement or a tag to put on after the trailer pack to take off your glasses for the 2D beginning of the movie. |
|
|
| Bob Brown posted on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 10:13 pm
|
|
|
Huummmm... I guess I need to start keeping track of my build times. Interesting. I never thought about build time per reel.. But I have to agree with Heath, it should take around the 12 min mark, so it looks like a 18-20 hour build, that is if ALL GOES WELL. I do hope this film does GREAT $$$ so other film companies will look at IMAX, there is a lot of good films out there that would do great on the big screen. But it looks like WB has the rest of the year all locked up.
TO all; HAVE A GREAT, ERROR FREE RUN!!! . |
|
|
|
|
Two minutes of credits, thats it? I know they stacked some to make room for the 3 minutes of trailers but 5 minutes total to start with is a really low number for DMR credits. I took the over on an OVER-UNDER bet of 6 minutes of credits after the stacking process. I guesss I lose.
1 of the trailers is Open Season, I hear, which is a Sony Pictures release, and they may even get the trailers here early to get a jump on it, we'll see. It will be interesting to see if they thought through this enough to realize that somebody has to tell them when to take the glasses off after the trailers.
Let the fun begin, or RETURN, or whatever. Is this fun we are having? Just making sure. |
|
|
| James Hyder posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 10:01 am
|
|
|
Maybe they split the credits between the eyes to fit them into two minutes!  |
|
|
| Bob Brown posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 01:49 pm
|
|
|
| Just received my Open Season trailers today... |
|
|
| Dan Suomi posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 01:50 pm
|
|
|
| First 5 minutes of the film itself will be in 3D. |
|
|
|
|
Final Runtime
149 MINUTES including credits.
NOT including trailers. |
|
|
|
|
They were right, someone IS always watching.
http://www.slashfilm.com/article.php?story=20060613151800644&query=Superman |
|
|
| Heath Poe posted on Monday, June 19, 2006 - 07:20 pm
|
|
|
So who all is still running a 10PM on Tuesday. I know we are.
Also, who all is planning on running Superman and Ant Bully? |
|
|
| Dan Suomi posted on Monday, June 19, 2006 - 07:47 pm
|
|
|
I am running a midnight. I have an event prior at 8:30. I will be running both Superman and Ant Bully, that is if WB lets us.. I doubt it will take 40 hours to put this thing togther,I think 20 is more like it.
I wonder if they asked Jim if they could quote him in that article? I don't know how ethical it is to use quotes without permission. How about using stuff off this board? |
|
|
| Jim DiDio posted on Tuesday, June 20, 2006 - 07:12 am
|
|
|
| I'm not a lawyer, Dan (and I don't play one on the Internet, LOL), but I'm pretty sure that if you write something non-fictional on a public website it's pretty much up for grabs. (Something fictional, however, or a photograph or drawing, has inherent copyright laws even if you don't do it officially. For example, if you post a personal picture here of your booth, a magazine cannot take that picture and reprint it without your permission.) |
|
|
|
|
One of my workers found that article and told me about it. He gets Google Alerts for the word IMAX. So when any article that says IMAX in it is posted on the net, Google sends him a link (once a day, not a bunch of different e-mails). It is kind of cool and I have added the feature to mine as well. Just thought it was interesting.
We are also running a 10 pm Superman show as well as Superman and Ant Bully at the same time. I didn't say that we were necessarilly looking forward to it but we are running them together. |
|
|
| James Hyder posted on Tuesday, June 20, 2006 - 09:46 am
|
|
|
Jim DiDio said:
"I'm pretty sure that if you write something non-fictional on a public website it's pretty much up for grabs. (Something fictional, however, or a photograph or drawing, has inherent copyright laws even if you don't do it officially. For example, if you post a personal picture here of your booth, a magazine cannot take that picture and reprint it without your permission.)"
With all due respect, Jim, I just wanted to clarify the copyright situation.
Anything you create, fiction, non-fiction, photograph, sculpture, whatever, is copyrighted the moment you create it. However, if you want to be able sue somebody for using it without permission, you have to register it within 90 days with the Copyright Office of the Library of Congress (for a US copyright). If you don't do that, you still hold the copyright, but you won't be able to collect the statutory damages (up to $150,000 per incident) that would make filing a lawsuit worth anyone's time.
However, in the case at hand, where a reporter based an article on a forum thread and quoted a few posters, there is no copyright violation. That is covered under the principle of "Fair Use" which allows for limited re-use of copyrighted material without permission. (More about Fair Use here: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107)
It would have been considerate of the reporter to ask permission, and for the sake of thoroughness, it would have been wise to take some steps to be sure that you guys really are who you say you are, and that you know what you're talking about. But the reporter cites his sources, including a link to here, so his readers can judge for themselves how credible you guys are.
So there was certainly nothing illegal or even unethical about using the thread as the basis for a news story, IMHO. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Tuesday, June 20, 2006 - 11:00 am
|
|
|
| Personally, I think it's a little creepy that general public types hang out here in the first place to eavsdrop. These interlopers are just scaveging for dirt to spread in the world outside our booths. |
|
|
| James Hyder posted on Tuesday, June 20, 2006 - 01:49 pm
|
|
|
| Come now, anon. You can hardly call reading something on a publicly available Web site "eavesdropping" or "scavenging for dirt." If you want to keep something a secret, don't post it on the Web. |
|
|
| Heath Poe posted on Friday, June 23, 2006 - 06:48 pm
|
|
|
So who is lucky enough to get your print on Sunday?
I am scheduled for Monday delivery. I have my fingers crossed for an early delivery like my last several DMR prints. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Saturday, June 24, 2006 - 08:03 am
|
|
|
You'll have to wait until Monday for your answer, Heath. How can people tell you if they got their print on Sunday, until they actually get their print on Sunday?  |
|
|
|
|
| I'll be working Sunday, and I will have internet access to post on this forum...if we get the print, I'll let you all know. |
|
|
| Heath Poe posted on Sunday, June 25, 2006 - 10:25 am
|
|
|
Anon you obviously don't stay in contact with your distibutors.
DKP called me about 2 weeks ago to let me know when trailers were shipping to me and at that point when I could expect delivery of my print which was tentative seeing as Singer was still tweaking the movie. Then when I posted my question, I just had received confirmation of my Monday delivery and Sunday delivery for some of our other theatres.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who knows when their prints are scheduled for delivery. |
|
|
|
|
| The delivery dates for prints can move around quite a bit. I was promised my Poseidon print on a Monday during normal business hours, but due to shipper snafus, it didn't actually arrive until two days later, on Wednesday, at 9:30 p.m. I ended up staying up for most of the night getting it ready. |
|
|
|
|
Our print arrived this evening.
88 reels, 44 per eye in 15 cartons, 945 pounds. There were an extra two boxes in the "mixed" carton. One had the instructions for placing the foil cues on the right eye to move the polarizer in and out of posistion, plus the continuity cd.
(The soundtrack was supposed to be delivered yesterday, but FedEx had a brainfart, so we'll get it tomorrow.)
The 90th box in our shipment was from David Keighley, who, in my estimation, must be the single-most dedicated executive of any corporation in North America, if not the world. Having spoken to him three times today. He personally responded to the message I left DKP to confirm our print's delivery. (He called on a previous occasion, also on Sunday, to check the quality of the Charlie & the Chocolate Factory print we had received.) He impresses me as a totally involved, hands-on individual whose work ethic is evident by the outstanding product consistently deliverd by his company!
More to follow. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Sunday, June 25, 2006 - 10:23 pm
|
|
|
| What was in the 90th box? |
|
|
|
|
| Two Polo Shirts embossed with "Superman Returns An Imax 3D Experience June 28,2006". |
|
|
|
|
The great things that can happen when a print shipper drops the ball...
Showplace cancels IMAX preview of "Superman Returns"
Rich Davis, Courier & Press staff writer
Originally published 11:56 a.m., June 27, 2006
Updated 11:56 a.m., June 27, 2006
Superman got laid over in Atlanta Tuesday, or at least the IMAX version of his new movie, "Superman Returns."
What that means for Superman fans is that tonight's scheduled 10 p.m. "sneak preview" at the IMAX at Showplace East on Morgan Avenue had to be canceled. Theater owner Paul Stieler said the IMAX version should be ready for airing beginning Wednesday at 9:30 a.m., with other IMAX showings at 12:30 p.m., 3:45 p.m., 6:50 p.m. and 10 p.m.
The good news — for those who couldn't care less about wearing 3-D glasses — is that Showplace East still will have a sneak preview of the 35mm-version at 10 tonight. Stieler expects at least two of the three auditoriums to be sold out.
There also is a 10 p.m. sneak preview at Kerasotes' Stadium 16 on the West Side.
Starting Wednesday, "Superman Returns" will show more than 30 times a day in local cinemas.
According to Stieler, the 2-1/2-hour blockbuster is expected to be the summer's second-biggest film, after the much-anticipated "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest," which will have a sneak preview at 12:01 a.m. July 7 at Showplace East. |
|
|
| Jim DiDio posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 08:00 pm
|
|
|
| I had the good fortune of seeing "Superman Returns" last night (well, technically, very early this morning, LOL). As a film, it looks great both cinematically and technically (color-wise, print quality, etc.,.). As a piece of cinema, I thought it was great; it hearkens back to the Christopher Reeve versions, and I think it's a great start to a new life for the franchise (much like I hope "Batman Begins" was for that one). The 3D cues were very discreet, and the 3D portions looked great. :o) |
|
|
|
|
A Sold Out Theatre, High concessions sales, and an Uneventful Run, I hope everyone else had the same luck that we did on Pre-Opening Opening Night.
A little more sleep the nights before is the only thing I might have added in but I can deal with the trade off.
I agree, the film looks very good and the story has more legs than I expected. The few people I talked to really liked the 3D scenes with little complaint about the amount that was in 3D. My only issue with the 3D was that the Left Eye Glass opens up before the cue to take your glasses off and before the Right Eye goes Black on a few of the sequences. So you get that 1 Polarizer in 1 Out Diagonal BLack lines look for a second or so, but I put the cues where they wanted them so I guess I will leave it like that.
BTW, was I the only one who had trouble putting in the first time cue for the polarizer? It took me a minute or two of seeing the "That is Not a SMPTE Time Code" error message and then I stopped to actually think about it. Then I realized 0:17:06.5 is actually 0:17:06.05 not .50. As my old boss Charlie would say, "Of all the things I've lost, it is my mind I miss the most!"
My hope now is that the sequel will be in full 3D and will be a worthy sequel, which doesn't always happen. I will be all right with Partial 3D if it is a decent sequel. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 01:58 pm
|
|
|
Tim: what kind of theater are you at? If you're triggering the polarizers numerically, I'd just add a frame or two every show until it opens and closes just where you like. If you're triggering with foil tape, I don't think I'd go so far as to wind into the film to find the foil tape and move it. That's too much work!  |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 12:20 pm
|
|
|
| One thing I can't figure out, though. Why did Superman return to Earth naked and encased in a giant crystal snowflake? I mean, it looked good on-screen but I wasn't sure of the point. I guess Singer was trying to tie it into a "rebirth" of some sort by making it similar to Superman's arrival as a baby in the first film, but it was kind of weird. I suppose it was more dramatic than having him simply fly down and land at the farm and say, "Hi, Mom... I'm home." |
|
|
| James Hyder posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 12:28 pm
|
|
|
Is there anyone here from the Lincoln Square theater in New York? I have tickets for tomorrow afternoon at 3:30, and I want to know if I need to get there really early to get in line. Have there been long lines for afternoon shows yesterday and today?
Thanks. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 02:24 pm
|
|
|
What is everyone using for clamps on Superman Returns and how do you accomodate for the small gap at the edge of the film? Posts, Velcro, Regular adjustable clamps w/ one pin in the platter etc.
This is the first time we have used the 72" platters so I'm curious. |
|
|
| Heath Poe posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 04:43 pm
|
|
|
Anon: Superman wasn't naked, he had a flight suit on. You can see the figure based on his return in last Sunday's Toys'r'us ad.
I don't know about everyone else, but I am using the small 2 inch wide screw in clamps that came with multiple velcro spacers to take care of the gap. Right now I have 4 spacers between the gap and the velcro band around the film. I prefer these clamps over the bolts any day. |
|
|
| Ron Bartsch posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 04:55 pm
|
|
|
| I am using a hybrid of both the adjustable clamps and the orange screw-down clamps. I drilled 2 holes in each of my screw-down clamps, to which I attached only the banana section of the adjustable clamps. This method serves 2 purposes: 1 - it makes the screw-down clamp wider, and 2 - it makes it thicker, thus filling in some of that gap to which you are referring. Forget those bolt posts. They are no good. And don't use the adjustable clamps with only one pin in the platter either. The best thing to do is to fill any remaining gap with additional tail film scrap so that you've got the screw hole in the clamp aligned with the mounting hole in the platter. Be sure to use eight clamps on both the L and R prints of Superman. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 11:01 pm
|
|
|
To Anon 12:20:
Obviously, you're not a fan of the comic book or familiar with the mythology-the key to the explanation is in the title of the film as shipped: "Red Sun". If we can speculate that Kal-el found remnants of Krypton and went searching for survivors, it means he probably traveled to a galaxy that was near his home planet which was destroyed by its red sun when it died...visualized in the opening scene. In all likelihood,wherever he wound up, he must have been under a red sun which rendered him a normal being with no "super powers", which then necessitated his return to Earth by a more conventional, but scientifically feasible method...a starship, if you will. He would travel while asleep due to the length of the journey and it would not be until he re-entered our galaxy that the yellow sun that is the center of our solar system restored his powers and allowed him to re-emerge as Superman.
I saw a question posted somewhere on the web as to why he was gone for five years, if he can travel faster that a speeding bullet and travel to distant galaxies without a spaceship. The explanation is as stated and also because of Einstein's theory about time and space-he closer you are to travelling at the speed of light, the voyager's time passes slower than on Earth...so HIS journey may have only lasted a week or two, but on Earth, five years had elapsed. All of these "facts" are stated in numerous other classic science-fiction films, most notably "Contact" and Close Encounter...". |
|
|
|
|
| Tim operates an SR system, although I can't remember the screen size, although it was maxed out to almost the largest the projector was able to handle before distortion would occur. Seating is around 350 if I remember correctly. And Tim, although I haven't seen Charlie since September 2001, I wouldn't say he was that old! |
|
|
|
|
Sorry I hadn't responded but this has been a week; Superman, getting ready for a trip up North, and an impressivly broken arm by my 84 year old Grandmother, on her birthday no less. Now I am in Canada so things are settling down a bit, at least until tomorrow.
We do have an SR, 53' x 70' screen with 267 seats, 270 with the 3 extra chairs allowed by the fire marshall. I wouldn't say Charlie is old either, bald, but not old. The fact that he is no longer with our company does make him my old boss though. Maybe I should use former.
I did think about changing the times for the polarizer to get rid of that effect. That has to count for something, I thought about it. But then I thought, this is how they wanted it to run, I would think they would have checked it out, who am I to change it. Are other people seeing the effect,or is it just me? I gotta stop thinking, it is starting to hurt.
Did others theatres change the times?
The other question is, what is everyone using for turnaround times?
And one more, Any interesting uses, or things made out of, the bolts that they gave us with the red sleeves on them? |
|
|
|
|
There were a few frustrating and agita-inducing moments from receipt of the print up until the 10pm premiere for us...but now that we know what to expect of the process they use and the polarizer modification, we should be ready for any future "hybrids". So far, everything has worked smoothly...but it did require an adjustment of the lower (polarizer out) sensor because the cues were placed according tothe instructions...we figured out early on that placement for moving the polarizer was solely dependent upon the start and end of the 3D segments and NOT the position of the splice at the "superblack" film!
Is anyone using the DTAC to cue the polarizer?
All shows since Tuesday night have been sold out, as is the 1st show tomorrow. I expect more will sellout by July 4th...it's supposed to rain here.
We are using the Johnson Posts on both platters...we got an additionl 16 so we have one in every hole. According to techs at Imax, the weight of the print should eliminate movement on the platter and we try not to stop the projector once the movie is running (which the battery pack should handle in the event of an E-stop). We also have a band of leader AND the velcro band around each print...so far so good. |
|
|
|
|
We are using a DTAC to cue the polarizer.
Are the Johnson Posts the bolts that they sent with the upgrade or the orange ones that you screw in but are nonadjustable? Who is this Johnson character? I guess the closest I am getting to having posts named after me is on here. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Monday, July 03, 2006 - 07:17 am
|
|
|
From CNN.com...
'Superman' flies over box office
Weekend brings in $52.15 mil; film up to $84.2 mil
Monday, July 3, 2006; Posted: 8:02 a.m. EDT (12:02 GMT)
1. "Superman Returns," $52.15 million.
2. "The Devil Wears Prada," $27 million.
3. "Click," $19.4 million.
4. "Cars," $14 million.
5. "Nacho Libre," $6.2 million.
6. "The Lake House," $4.5 million.
7. "The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift," $4.4 million.
8. "Waist Deep," $3.3 million.
9. "The Break-Up," $2.8 million.
10. "The Da Vinci Code," $2.3 million.
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- Superman may not be the world's greatest superhero at the box office, but the Man of Steel still flies high.
"Superman Returns" took in $52.15 million over opening weekend, lifting its five-day total since its debut Wednesday to $84.2 million, according to studio estimates Sunday.
That puts the Warner Bros. film ahead of the premiere of last year's "Batman Begins," another Warner superhero revival, which took in $48.7 million over its opening weekend and $72.9 million in its first five days. But "Superman Returns" finished far behind Sony's "Spider-Man 2," the record-holder for best five-day openings, with $152.4 million over Fourth of July weekend in 2004.
The weekend's other new wide release, 20th Century Fox's "The Devil Wears Prada," debuted far stronger than expected to come in second with $27 million. Industry analysts had expected the movie, starring Meryl Streep and Anne Hathaway, to debut at less than $20 million.
The previous weekend's No. 1 movie, Sony's Adam Sandler comedy "Click," fell to third place with $19.4 million, raising its 10-day total to $77.9 million.
Hollywood's overall revenues rose for the seventh straight weekend. The top 12 movies took in $140.1 million, up 5 percent from Fourth of July weekend last year. If estimates hold, it would be the second-best Fourth of July weekend ever, behind the $158.4 million haul in 2004, according to Paul Dergarabedian, president of box-office tracker Exhibitor Relations.
The movie should hit $110 million by Tuesday, Fellman said.
"Superman Returns" had big returns in 76 huge-screen IMAX theaters, most of which ran the movie incorporating 3-D footage in many action sequences. About $5 million of the film's grosses came from IMAX theaters. |
|
|
|
|
Tim,
The packing slip referred to the item as a Johnson Post...it is the red screw-in post that can be hand-tightened or used with a hex key. I was told they have been around for five years, but we only found out about them when they came with the upgrade. The have cut our turnaround time down significantly and, as I said, so far, so good.
Re: Anon's post this morning 7:17am-with every show sold out through the 7:30 pm show tomorrow, it's not hard to see why the Imax gross was $5 million-that's a per screen average of $65,700...despite missing expecatations overall, we may have another Polar Express situation, where Imax puts them in the black. |
|
|
|
|
Apparently in Manila, Philipines all there shows are sold out for the next 3 weeks!! |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Wednesday, July 05, 2006 - 05:07 am
|
|
|
just heard that a certain IMAX executive has been complaining about how long some theaters are taking to assemble prints of Superman Returns.Apparently he says certain projectionists have assembled the whole thing in 8 hours |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Wednesday, July 05, 2006 - 06:57 am
|
|
|
| You don't think that Imax "executives" would openly pass judgement on jobs they have limited knowledge about, do you? |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Wednesday, July 05, 2006 - 08:30 am
|
|
|
| If you're assembling from your MUT onto your QT, once there's some weight on the QT the platter turns pretty slow. If you're assembling using other reel units, then it probably involves either rewinding each reel or rewinding whole sections. I don't see how anyone could get it assembled in 8 hours. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Wednesday, July 05, 2006 - 09:21 am
|
|
|
| ...and those "certain projectionists" probably did a slop-job assembly! So out with it: who is that "certain" IMAX executive who is complaining? 8 hours? NO WAY! |
|
|
|
|
Tim:
Did Charlie return to Rochester? Or is he still living "down south"? Still working as a projectionist?
I knew Charlie when he worked at the Cinemark Tinseltown in Rochester. Also knew his Dad from when I first moved to Rochester. |
|
|
| Dan Suomi posted on Wednesday, July 05, 2006 - 12:43 pm
|
|
|
| That's B.S. There is now way you could get that done in 8 hours. It took me and another person 24 hours to get it done. |
|
|
|
|
John, No, Charlie is still living in Raleigh although he visits Rochester once a month or so. I believe his nephew is now running that theater, although I may be mistaken. It is a family occupation with the Cobbs, and they are all great at it, and even better people.
8 hours, Laughable!!!! This sounds like someone just trying to stir something up on the board.
I always thought it would work, and thought about doing it, but I didn't know that building movies using the Reel Unit was a common practice. |
|
|
| Anonymous posted on Wednesday, July 05, 2006 - 05:31 pm
|
|
|
I've heard of one theatre that had a close deadline and payed out the reels from the non-motorized side of the MUT. I do not know all of the details, but from what I am imagining, they let it tail out each time on the MUT since it goes MUCH faster but you can not slow down. I think it would put a lot of strain on the QTRU to do this for 88 reels, plus the risk of film damage when building at those speeds. Under 8 hours is probably possible with this method, but definitely not recommended.
Anyone else heard of this? |
|
|
| Heath Poe posted on Wednesday, July 05, 2006 - 07:09 pm
|
|
|
Actually you could have two people building up seperate eyes.You could use the Palm controls for a deck on the QTRU and build up on the MUT at the same time. 8 hours is do able. I haven't tried this method but know it's possible.
I built up just to 70 minute decks and breakin each eye into two parts then rewound the second part from the QTRU back onto a 70 on the MUT and then attached it to the first part and wound part two back on. I shaved about a few hours off IMAX's 18 hours doing it this way. |
|
|
| Heath Poe posted on Wednesday, July 05, 2006 - 07:11 pm
|
|
|
| Oh, all my reels were put together just on the MUT, no QTRU involved until I put the 2 parts together. |
|
|
| Back to top |
