Just about all of the mainstream and chain movie theaters in town have already switched over to digital projection—something I wrote about back in May—but Portland’s smaller and independent theaters are still juggling awkward mixes of 35mm, digital projection, Blu-ray and DVD, and shadow puppets as they try to figure out how, exactly, to adjust to the changing times. One of Portland’s most popular second-run theaters, though, is making the switch to digital in all of its auditoriums—and soon.
“All four theaters are going digital,” says Prescott Allen, owner of the Laurelhurst Theater. “They should be done before Christmas, and we’re pretty excited about it.”
When I last spoke to Allen about the possibility of the Laurelhurst going digital, back in May, he didn’t know if it’d be “five years, 10 years, [or] 15 years” before they converted, though he saw the writing on the wall. “Yes,” Allen said when I emailed him yesterday about the switchover. “It has happened sooner than we thought it would.”
“There were a number of reasons that we decided to go digital now rather than wait,” Allen adds. “It’s been on the horizon for a number of years and it became apparent over the summer that the studios were making a big push to change film distribution from 35mm to digital. For one, film distribution centers were closing and consolidating in a reaction to studio and filmmakers’ preferences for digital over 35mm for cost savings.”
“Secondly,” Allen continues, “we talked with studios, booking agents, and other theater owners, and everyone is in agreement that digital is here to stay [and] that the changeover was happening really quickly.
“Thirdly, we owe it to our customers to keep up with technology and to be able to show films that they want to see. The Laurelhurst Theater has been here since 1923 and we’re going to continue its success as long as possible.
“By going digital we are able to ensure that they will not have to miss out on titles because we don’t have the technology to show it. Right now, any new film that we want is on digital, and that is not necessarily the case for 35mm.”
The Laurelhurst will retain the ability to play 35mm, though actually doing so will be the exception rather than the rule. That’s mostly because it’s harder and harder for a theater like the Laurelhurst—or any theater—to get 35mm prints. There simply aren’t that many physical prints being struck for new films, and studios are increasingly reluctant to lend out their prints of older films. Allen sees 35mm at the Laurelhurst being used primarily “for the repertory titles that we play. That’s not to say that all repertory titles will be in 35mm. Some will certainly be digital. [But] by keeping one 35mm [projector], we are going to be able to provide the most choices of films to show.”
Speaking of choices, the digital projectors will also give the Laurelhurst the ability to play 3D films, though they haven’t yet decided if they will. Allen says they’ll decide shortly about 3D, noting that if they do, “we need to make sure we’re selective in the 3D films we offer.”
Allen also says that the “conversion will also include a complete sound system upgrade. New processors, surrounds, left, right, centers, subs, you name it. It’s pretty cool getting pallets of speakers delivered.” And despite the spendy conversion, the Laurelhurst’s prices—currently $4 a ticket—won’t go up. “Going digital is not going to be an excuse for us to raise prices,” Allen says. “We survive because we offer an affordable movie venue in a fun environment without many of the distractions of a first-run [theater]. Plus there’s good food, good local beer, and friendly people. With our digital and sound upgrade we will also offer comparable image and sound quality as a first-run theater, except three people can be admitted here for the cost of a first-run ticket somewhere else. With any luck, the only change our customers will notice is that the image on screen is brighter and that the new sound system helps capture their senses and takes them to the theater experience they want to be in.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31g0YE61PLQ
Sonuvabitch.
Whatever. I just love that place.
I love the Laurelhurst too but their programming hasn’t been as good as it used to be, not as many good revivals. What’s coming in December? Elf? Pffft.
I guess I spend more time at the Hollywood these days.
What Graham posted. Even though I dont live in “that neighborhood”.
How about the Academy? I pretty much stopped going to the Laurelhurst when the Academy opened.
+1 to everything cat & beard said.
@C+B +1, too.
One of the problems with getting good revivals is that there just aren’t as many 35mm reels around as there were a decade ago, and the studios are increasingly hesitant to loan them out. That’s a well that’s only going keep getting drier as time goes on.
For the second-run films, digital is fine. I still prefer actual film for older material, but it’s hard to deny the advantages of the digital medium.
I love film/analogue over digital just as much as any other film buff, and from my experience working at movie theaters the last 15 years I offer a few thoughts:
◊ The chemicals, waste, pollution involved in making and transporting film is ridiculous compared to digital. The film industry should really mention the environment when proclaiming this switch.
◊ The reason why older films looks so great on film is because they were also shot on film. Most new films are shot digitally, and then transferred to film.
◊ Anyone who has a operated a 35mm projectors will tell you those things are HEAVY & forget about it if you have more than one theater operated from a cramped space.
◊ Digital projection is better than ever, and in many cases, just as good or even better than 35mm – depending on quality of film, projector and theater, of course.
I remember an article from the 90’s on the “Digital Revolution” as the first digital theaters debuted in LA & NYC – it’s talked about a potential bright future where theaters could become a place for people to come together and watch TV- instead of at home.
I’ve always viewed Laurelhurst in this way. We can watch this stuff at home, in some cases for free. But it always feels so rad when they play something like “Gremlins” or “There Will Be Blood” and you take your friend who has never seen it, and so has everyone else. You can feel the excitement, the respect for film, and the love of going to the movies.
For some of us, digital never looks as good as film, period. Nevermind better. Even at the theaters with the highest end arrangement, I can usually tell through at least 33% of the film that I am looking at digital, and it’s not because I’m blown away. I feel like I’m watching a TV, and it is usually apparent in the brighter scenes. Films shot on digital do not look better projected digitally vs on film, they are instead twice compromised instead of just once. Again, this only affects those of us who can tell the difference. But it’s still the case. And it’s particularly glaring.
I’m glad the Laurelhurst is excited. I hope that’s true, for their sake. (Maybe at least now they will matte the image, and put some duct tape over the back of that one exit sign that pointlessly fills a third of the screen with a green glow during darker scenes.) I hope they are still able to get 35mm prints for older stuff, and say so on the website when it is…
Well, that sucks. Really really really sucks.
“One of the problems with getting good revivals is that there just aren’t as many 35mm reels around as there were a decade ago, and the studios are increasingly hesitant to loan them out. That’s a well that’s only going keep getting drier as time goes on.”
And it’s a problem that’s not going to get fixed now. Studios aren’t exactly making 2k scans of their deep catalog titles. Only Warner seems to be making a concerted effort.
Expect the revival titles to only get worse, and… god… I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these places start projecting Blu-rays.
I don’t notice a significant difference between film and digital. The differences that I do notice, however, seem to me to be like those lighting differences from when you move from a dark room into one that is better lit – in time, your sight will adjust to the changes, and you won’t mind the difference.
I wonder if any of the people who commented above would be kind enough to articulate their distaste for this change rationally, or at least in some way that isn’t an obvious example of object fetishism?
@14: http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/ce…
All I know about this is that I think the digital projections at the Living Room theaters look like shit. Maybe the grainy, pixelated image is unique to that theater, but I’m skeptical.
@anawn: Yeah, the Living Room Theaters’ presentations can vary pretty greatly—sometimes they look fine, and sometimes they’re pretty bad. To see how good digital can look, I’d recommend seeing something out at the Roseway on NE Sandy; of all the digital and digital-enabled theaters in Portland (so far), I think they’ve got the best setup.
@anawn and @Erik Henriksen: I would welcome either of you to come down to Living Room Theaters where I can walk you through the digital systems we have in place. The quality of presentation is limited by what is supplied by the distributor for a master. We constantly strive to get the best materials available, and even when our ideal requirements are not met, we treat the image/sound in the best way possible.
Of our six screens, 3 are Christie CP-2000M DCI-compliant 2K projectors and the other 3 are DPI Titan 700 1080p projectors. Both projectors are capable of delivering ample light and resolution to the screens for a fantastic presentation.
I would be very interested to know what movies you’ve had objections about so that we can address them specifically.
Regards,
Steve Herring (Living Room Theaters)
I’m late to learn this, and I was planning to go to Laurelhurst tonight — specifically to catch a movie on film, assuming, naively, that it would screen in a 35mm print. Now I don’t know if I’ll bother.
I guess I’ll just keep going to the NWFC’s screenings at PAM’s Whitsell. They, at least, screen genuine film.
God. This sucks. I don’t whether to scream or cry. Or relapse.
Damn.