Cinerama Dome and ArcLight Hollywood

6360 Sunset Boulevard,
Los Angeles, CA 90028

Unfavorite 127 people favorited this theater

Showing 1 - 25 of 1,248 comments

RogerA
RogerA on July 28, 2017 at 7:51 pm

It is still there

RussM
RussM on July 28, 2017 at 3:42 pm

Does the Dome still have the equipment to show 3-strip Cinerama, or did they remove that ?

RogerA
RogerA on July 24, 2017 at 3:16 pm

Yes they used the full screen

RobertAlex
RobertAlex on July 24, 2017 at 2:47 pm

Did they at least use the full screen, like was there any notable difference from this showing vs. their laser image? When I saw Interstellar there, they did not lift up the masking on the bottom corners as they do now, it was the last time I noticed that at the DOME.

The Universal IMAX presentation was awesome on Saturday.

RogerA
RogerA on July 24, 2017 at 11:54 am

Richie I was at the same show on Sunday and yes there was a small hair in the gate that showed up on the bottom center. It was joined by another hair as the movie progressed. It wasn’t worth complaining about and I wonder if the projectionist could even deal with it. There should be a bottle of CO2 next to the projector to blow the gate. That is one of the problems with film dirt.

There weren’t suppose to be trailers. When I got the tickets they made it a point to say there were no trailers. Im glad there were only two. The studio must have scrambled to get 70mm trailers printed and sent out to the theaters. That show might have the first one to run those trailers. I can dispute the out of frame claim. The projectionist adjusted the framing a little for I am thinking the first trailer. I noticed when he adjusted but it was a letterboxed trailer so there was a black matt top and bottom. He should have just left it centered.

And yes the deep curve of the screen causes some distortion but it didn’t look that noticeable. I wonder if it was an optically corrected print.

There are a lot of 70mm prints out there go see it again in IMAX film at Universal. They can get dirt in the gate too.

Richie_T
Richie_T on July 24, 2017 at 9:38 am

Saw Dunkirk 70mm inside the dome on Sunday July 23rd at 2:30pm. There were two major issues with the presentation. The framing was off during the trailers, ok, no big deal. There were hairs or fabric or something blowing on the lense that were so distracting on the bottom of the screen. Also, is it me or does the curved screen slightly distort the image? Hate to be negative but I really wish I had went to Universal and seen the 70mm IMAX presentation.

RogerA
RogerA on July 9, 2017 at 5:25 pm

Does anyone know if there is gonna be film IMAX copies. I know Universal and the Chinese are digital but both still have the film projectors. I don’t care I’m just gonna see the 70 five perf at the Dome.

moviebuff82
moviebuff82 on July 8, 2017 at 9:41 am

also Imax digital will show it in 1.9 for the imax scenes and 2.20 for the non imax shots. digital will be 2.20 with proper masking for the entire movie.

RogerA
RogerA on July 8, 2017 at 1:51 am

Well the IMAX negative has lots of area so a reduction print should look good. The 70mm print will have to be cropped from IMAX negative.

silver
silver on July 7, 2017 at 10:31 pm

re Dunkirk in the Dome: will the 70mm version actually be using the full screen?

Nolan shot 75% of Dunkirk using IMAX (including handheld cameras for the 1st time). So if IMAX film (1.43) is his preferred aspect ratio here, I wonder what the 70mm formats aspect ratios will be and how much of the picture will Nolan crop?

Per Wikipedia there are 3 release formats: IMAX, 70mm & 35mm.

RogerA
RogerA on July 7, 2017 at 6:51 pm

If it does well it may be there longer

RogerA
RogerA on July 7, 2017 at 6:42 pm

You better hurry and get you tickets it will only be at the Dome for four days.

RobertAlex
RobertAlex on July 7, 2017 at 6:38 pm

Well, I never thought we would have this chance again. Dunkirk is playing in the DOME in 70mm! The last time that happened i think it was for Interstellar.

Of course, I just got my tickets to see it at Universal IMAX . Guess I will be seeing this one twice….70mm in the DOME, using the full 86' screen would be awesome!

RogerA
RogerA on June 16, 2017 at 2:23 am

I went to see it (70mm Wonder Woman) in theater six got a great seat its like a screening room. It would be nice they ran it in the Dome for a couple of shows. I am okay with 70mm in the smaller theater I just sit closer to the screen

RobertAlex
RobertAlex on June 12, 2017 at 3:53 pm

grumpy old man rant Arclight is driving me nuts. It is great to see new releases in 70 mm this year. However, I just got over them not presenting those 70mm films in the DOME, but instead the huge auditorium #3 instead. I was ok with that when I saw BVS.

I went to see Wonder Woman in 70mm last weekend, (opening weekend), and the 70mm shows are now in auditorium 6! I mean, I understand not using the DOME since they have a crappy laser projector in there now. However, to move the 70 mm machines into the medium size houses is the last straw. The showing was sold out. Why do they not care about film?

On another note about how Arclight has gone to crap, They still have not fixed the DOME image, adjusting for the curve by messing with the masking at the bottom corners of the screen. Whenever you see a movie there it looks like the screen is smiling at you, not to mention they are only using 65 feet of the 86 feet screen. What a mess.

Coate
Coate on June 11, 2017 at 6:16 pm

Steven Spielberg’s “E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial,” the movie industry’s box office champ for over a decade, opened 35 years ago today. In Los Angeles, it opened here at the Cinerama Dome where it played for five weeks as an L.A. County exclusive before expanding city- and county-wide. (It opened in Orange County day and date with the Dome, but all Dome first-run bookings at the time were L.A. exclusives.) And since the Dome played one of the coveted 70m prints made for the release, passing on the link to this “E.T.” tech history article seems appropriate.

StanMalone
StanMalone on January 10, 2017 at 1:02 pm

Theater owners who were used to getting three, four, five, and even as much as six thousand hours from a xenon bulb in the film days are having a hard time facing the fact that with at least some of the digital projectors, the light starts to degrade after only a thousand hours and needs to be replaced at the two thousand hour mark.

I am speaking from a very narrow experience with digital projectors but they also require more than the once or twice a year visit from a booth tech to maintain good picture quality.

I guess that after decades of trying to get rid of us pesky projectionists, some owners are having trouble facing the fact that now that it has happened they still have to pay at least some money to make the booth run right.

stevenj
stevenj on January 10, 2017 at 12:29 pm

I emailed the manager of my local neighborhood surviving movie palace (in another Calif. city up north) last month asking what was up with the dismal presentation of the 4K “restoration” of The Thin Red Line (last summer) and then 2 other films I’d seen recently in late fall. In all cases I asked why the projectors were not projecting bright and sharp. His answer – “We are not responsible for the digital files sent to us”. Oh.

I had seen Star Wars in 3D digital in early Jan 2016 at a different (large screen) theater. Their presentation (sound and picture quality) of it was extraordinary – they used a Sony 4K dual projection system.

Either customers are going to have to start complaining or will just stop going – or – dim projection is going to be the new normal.

RogerA
RogerA on January 9, 2017 at 8:22 pm

I just went to see La La Land in cinema 10 at the Arclight. After one hour I couldn’t stand it any more and left. It might have been enjoyable if the quality of the picture wasn’t so poor. Poor is an understatement it was unwatchable. The big joke at the beginning was the CinemaScope logo! A CinemaScope picture was bright and sharp. Not dim and fuzzy. Digital just looks like $hit. I know you people don’t get it. Maybe your vision isn’t what it used to be. Maybe you just don’t remember. The fact is when you blow up a low quality video it looks bad unless you are sitting in the back row of the theater. And at this point I don’t care if it is 2k 4k or 8k. 24FPS 48FPS 60FPS 120FPS (anything over 60 is a waste by the way). It doesn’t seem to matter. Digital looks great on my small screen. Looks great on a large screen TV. But when digital it is projected on a large screen it just looks bad. The bigger the screen the worse it looks. I walked out of Star Wars at an AMC because the presentation was horrid. Management apologized and refunded my money. So Chris “the days of film are over” well if that is true then most of the theaters will soon follow. The real sin is they had two film projectors in Cinema 10 and supposedly this was shot on film. But of course they probably went to digital to do the edit so there goes all the goodness of film.

Chris Utley
Chris Utley on December 9, 2016 at 12:35 pm

Answering Roger’s question: When Star Wars: The Force Awakens opened in December 2015, The Dome touted their new laser projection system…thereby putting the nail in the coffin in regards to film. They DO have a 70MM equipped auditorium in the regular ArcLight complex. But the days of film in The Dome look to be over.

So…no. They don’t care. They have followed the wave of change and new technology. I’ll be leaving LA for good in 2017 but I’m thankful that I was able to see The Dome utilized in its full and complete glory. I’ve seen 70MM, 3 strip Cinerama and the recent 120 FPS experiment that was “Billy Flynn’s Long Halftime Walk” here. I will always cherish my memories of this theatre.

Flix70
Flix70 on December 8, 2016 at 11:37 am

Hey, I’d prefer to see Cinerama in three-strip projection, too, but, I’m not going to completely write off the format because they’re exhibiting it digitally.

Cinerama’s too important historically to just be swept under the rug completely (I’ve been a film journalist for over 25 years, so I know a little about it, too). These films still deserve to bee seen on the largest screen possible. Granted, three-strip projection is ideal, but we, unfortunately, have to take what we can get it this digital age, whether we like it or not.

I can tell you I’d sure prefer to see them on the Dome’s concave screen, in any format, in their “old-style seats,” instead of in my living room.

Sure, Seattle Cinerama and Aero get the significance of film over digital, they’re not a corporation like Decurion, which owns Pacific & Arclight. But as long as palaces like the Dome still stand, I’ll take whatever they exhibit for as long as I can. Because one day they’ll be gone and all we’ll be left with is our living room.

RogerA
RogerA on December 6, 2016 at 1:02 pm

Well adapt to the fact that film is the new vinyl!

I am a IMDB listed Director of photography so I do know a little about this.

For ten years Cinerama ran films that were just well done home movies. Boring. The three camera movies are only worth watching in the three projector format. The Seattle Cinerama does it. Some people just don’t get it film, when done right, looks better than digital! The resolution of film is much higher than digital. As for presentation; Star Wars at the Chinese in 70mm on Norelcos with 13.6 carbon arcs was brighter and sharper than the laser projection they have now. Three projector Cinerama was super sharp and super bright. I saw a a three projector presentation of How the West Was Won at the Dome. I sat in the Cinerama Zone. I was impressed. Yea there were the lines but it was clear and bright. It was also interesting to see the resolution drop when 65mm ultra-panavision footage was used. It was the first time I noticed grain. But the three camera footage show on three projectors is stunning.

The Dome management has a history of just not quite getting the point. Years ago they did a 25 year re-premier of It’s a Mad Mad Mad Mad World. The only print they could find was a 35mm anamorphic with optical sound that belonged to an archive and a pan and scan print used for television broadcast. They ran the archive print for the re-premier and the pan and scan print for a week. There were so many complaints and pissed off people the manager locked himself in the office and gave orders to refund anyone who complained. If the cheap bastards had just had the lab make a new print they could have run that for weeks with no complaints. Even now a 70mm print of Mad World continues to run in theaters.

I was even asked by someone while at the re-premier if these old negatives were even worth saving. Some people just don’t get it. Like that young executive that trashed years of old video instead of saving it.

If I am going to sit in a theater with old style seats it has to something special. I would have paid a few bucks to see that short film that was shot in three strip Cinerama. I can watch video at home or in a small theater with lounge chairs and drink service. Why haven’t they run a good Ultra Panavision print of The Hateful Eight at the Dome? Are they afraid it will look better than the video? Or have they just given up on film?

The people who run the Aero get it.

Flix70
Flix70 on December 6, 2016 at 11:16 am

Instead of dissing the projection method, let’s be happy Cinerama is still being exhibited at all, in any format. Technology changes, we adapt and move on.

stevenj
stevenj on December 5, 2016 at 7:37 pm

Hi bigjoe59 – Perhaps this is it? Listed as Fox Criterion:

Fox Criterion

RogerA
RogerA on December 5, 2016 at 4:56 pm

Cinerama Extravaganza what a laugh both of those showings are digital not Cinerama; unless they are using three digital projectors.