The Master - Spoiler-Free Thread

Started by MacGuffin, December 02, 2009, 10:12:15 PM

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.


^ If you can, for sure! It's still the way PTA intended and you'll be the first one on here to make the official comparison. I'm a wholehearted yes! You need to see it again anyways right?

Then go see it again on both..


It kind of invalidates his opinion when he mentions cigarette burns dating the film.  Cigarette burns are on every *film*.  He should know this.  See it in 70mm if you can.  There is a difference, even if it's subconscious, between that and 4k or any digital projection.  They're two different mediums.



I haven't seen this in 4K, but I'm curious to. I have seen Samsara in 4K, which was shot in 65mm and is eschewing the 70mm prints. While it was flawless and all that, it also lacked an intensity that the 70mm print of Baraka that I saw had, which The Master also has. The flickering of the film, coupled with the sharpness of the image, lends an intense quality to it. It's NOT super smooth.

I saw The Master in 70mm in two different theaters and noticed the flickering both times, in the same way. I have the feeling that this would disappear in the 4K projection. It's why one could say that the 4K is objectively better. However, it also doesn't feel special. I was a little disappointed with that 4K of Samsara that I saw. There is something about the flickering image that makes me want to open my eyes wider and blink less. My eyes become hungrier and want to soak up as much detail as possible.

These things become part of the experience of watching the film. My experience and memory of the film is closely linked with that 70mm quality, flickering and all.

You're only going to get a short window of opportunity to see this in 70mm, so I think you owe it to yourself to see it while you can, at least to see what the fuss is about and to know you're seeing it the way that PTA would prefer. Lots of extra effort was made to bring these 70mm prints out into the world.

Jeremy Blackman

Thanks, it's good to hear all of that. I hadn't read a comparison between 40k and 70mm before, so that really threw me off. I don't particularly have reservations about the flickering etc.

I found out today that a theater near Minneapolis might be showing it in 70mm this coming weekend. If they are, I will go. Not totally sure at the moment, because it's been removed from their website.


We did one of these back in May. According to the dude I talked to it would take roughly between 8k-10k to replicate the quality of 70mm. So 4k is less than half of that information.
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.


Quote from: Pubrick on September 22, 2012, 05:50:33 PM
I've made some changes to the title of this thread and the spoiler one as there seems to be too many fucking idiots who can't tell the difference.

I will ban the next person who posts spoilers here.

Thanks P, I've been avoiding this thread since the first previews so I've been stuck lurking in other threads for too long. Will hopefully (finally) be seeing the fil this weekend. Was holding out hope for a 70mm print to come to the DFW area, but it seems I'm going to have to just take what I can get - that is unless there's a nice convenient list of theatres showing it in 70mm somewhere online?
He held on. The dolphin and all the rest of its pod turned and swam out to sea, and still he held on. This is it, he thought. Then he remembered that they were air-breathers too. It was going to be all right.

Jeremy Blackman

Quote from: modage on September 25, 2012, 07:54:56 AM
We did one of these back in May. According to the dude I talked to it would take roughly between 8k-10k to replicate the quality of 70mm. So 4k is less than half of that information.

Ugh. Well now I'm just depressed. I got this email back from the theatre:

HI...Oh, it is all wrong. We were going to open it in digital format on 9/28, but Weinstein pushed it back a week to 10/5 which then screwed up our schedule so we are not going to play it at all now. But, my hope is that in the next 6 months to get my hands on one of the few 70mm prints they have made (if they have not been trashed by then) and do a limited 70mm run here in the twin cities.



My reply:

Thanks for the info. I will keep an eye on your website for that future screening! I saw the film at the Uptown in 4K but apparently it's just not the same.

His reply:

Well did you think it looked good? I have been digital here for 6 months and I think a lot of it looks pretty darn nice and I am just 2k. The 70 would look great, but since there are so few theaters that show 70 on a regular basis almost all new prints get trashed fairly quickly as no one knows how to handle it properly. The art of film projection truly is dying....Sad but very true.

My reply:

It looked amazing in 4K, but apparently it still doesn't compare to 70mm:

Holding out for that mythical future screening I guess.

This, by the way, is the Heights Theatre, which was talked about as the ideal venue here for 70mm. (They play old 70mm films all the time, and they ran Samsara.)

Fun fact, this is also the place where I saw The Sea That Thinks during a Minneapolis/St. Paul International Film Festival many years ago. (The director was there and I got to say hi.)


How often do you intend to do this? Will you be constantly reposting everything?

You seem to be actually quoting xixax members there, not just the links, so why not include the attribution? You just have to press the quote button and it does it for you.

Why did you randomly start at page 89?

If it's an attempt to aggregate every article associated with the master you're doing a piss poor job, there's a site called cigarettes and red vines that already does that. If you want to compete why don't you start a blog or something where you can just repost every single Google result for "untitled western project PTA," "the master PTA", or simply Paul Thomas Anderson ordered by date going back to 2007?

Have you thought this through at all?
under the paving stones.


It wasn't an attempt at something grand, which I prefaced the post with. It was just a bad idea.  I apologize.
it's not the wrench, it's the plumber.


Great Success!
Looks like Australia will get The Master in 70mm for a Special One Week Engagement! I'd like to thank everyone here who signed, and Modage for featuring it on Cigs & Red Vines.
Tickets will be on sale this weekend here:

You in Pubrick?

Edit: Tickets are already on sale for the first 3 sessions on Sunday the 16th of December
I  bought tickets to the 8:00pm session on that day.



Tickets, flights and accommodation have now been booked. I'm going to the 2 pm session.

Melbourne, shut up and take my money, yet again.
under the paving stones.


Xixax celebrates with you Australia! A well deserved early Christmas gift.


(no spoilers)

Little chit chat with Mihai Malaimare Jr.

Nice details on lens choices and film stock. Looks like they used a few still photography lenses that were adapted for the Panavision cameras.

Also, knowing that they were originally planning on the majority of the film being in 35mm with 20% in 65mm makes it more understandable as to why it was shot 1.85:1, so as to take advantage of the full resolution of 35mm without shooting anamorphic and then cropping the 65mm to match. If it was shot wider, they would have had to crop the 35mm and create a greater resolution discrepancy between the two formats. If I'm understanding correctly.


Quote from: Pubrick on September 27, 2012, 07:33:00 AM

Tickets, flights and accommodation have now been booked. I'm going to the 2 pm session.

Melbourne, shut up and take my money, yet again.

I was about to joke about how Australia is a big ass country and odds of your living near by weren't that good. Lo and behold, I dig the dedication.
the one last hit that spent you...


I watched the new teaser and I really hope it's only deleted scenes, but there are stuff from the review that I saw in it; anyway, it was great. STROOOONG.

EDIT: Okay, I saw it was deleted/alternate. Great.