|
Movies Forum Index » Movie Technology Forum » He's OK, but John Harvey did have a minor stroke on Thursday
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next
|
| Author |
Message |
| Larry Smith |
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2003 8:17 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
FYI
I just got off the phone talking with a weak but stable John
Harvey. Thursday he had a minor stroke and his wife (Donna) took him
to near-by Sycamore Hospital (937) 866-0551. He's able to talk on the
phone and is being treated for high blood pressure. He does not know
when he will be released but is in stable, but watched condition. Not
good news for Christmas but being his friends I thought you would want
to know.
His home address is...
John Harvey
2437 Lehigh Place
Dayton, OH 45439
His home phone number...
is available to friends who will contact me.
Sincerely,
Larry Smith
President
Cinerama Preservation Society, Inc.
and
Nitrate Film Specialist
Library of Congress
Motion Picture Conservation Center
(Here's an article about where I work, and I love it!)
http://www.leonardmaltin.com/02-11-02/nitrateFilm.htm |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Eugene Kim |
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2003 8:17 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Larry Smith wrote:
Quote: FYI
I just got off the phone talking with a weak but stable John
Harvey. Thursday he had a minor stroke and his wife (Donna) took him
to near-by Sycamore Hospital (937) 866-0551. He's able to talk on the
phone and is being treated for high blood pressure. He does not know
when he will be released but is in stable, but watched condition. Not
good news for Christmas but being his friends I thought you would want
to know.
I got to meet both Mr. Smith and Mr. Harvey in Dayton. Both very
friendly, and both perfect gentlemen. Sorry to hear about Mr. Harvey. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Steve Kraus |
Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2003 3:00 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Glad he's on the mend and it wasn't worse. I didn't know he had a wife. I
thought the story was that the wife gave him an ultimatum: Her or Cinerama
and Cinerama won! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Martin Hart |
Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2003 6:12 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <1JEGb.6092$lo3.1855@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
screen@SPAMBLOCKfilmteknik.com says...
Quote: Glad he's on the mend and it wasn't worse. I didn't know he had a wife. I
thought the story was that the wife gave him an ultimatum: Her or Cinerama
and Cinerama won!
John swears that his divorce had nothing to do with Cinerama. Yeah,
sure. John remarried about six years ago to a very attractive young lady
who, obviously, must be quite understanding.
--
Marty
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com
The American WideScreen Museum |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Steve Kraus |
Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2003 1:37 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Martin Hart <see-address@website.listed.below.org> wrote:
Quote: John swears that his divorce had nothing to do with Cinerama. Yeah,
sure. John remarried about six years ago to a very attractive young
lady who, obviously, must be quite understanding.
Another Cinerama legend bites the dust. Next you'll tell me that there was
no 3-panel version of 2001. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Stefan Adler |
Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2003 4:44 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
As you all know, 2001 showed in Technicolor with four mechanicly locked and
synchronized 70mm prints, one cyan, one magenta, one yellow and one
black&white low contrast, with 24 channels of Magnetic Perspecta sound in 37
frps. The eight 70mm projectors, all in the same booth, had individually
optically adjusted prints to compensate for the difference in angle between
the outer and the center projectors. NO 3-panel was ever released ;-)
"Steve Kraus" <screen@SPAMBLOCKfilmteknik.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:2HhHb.8091$lo3.7554@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Quote: Martin Hart <see-address@website.listed.below.org> wrote:
John swears that his divorce had nothing to do with Cinerama. Yeah,
sure. John remarried about six years ago to a very attractive young
lady who, obviously, must be quite understanding.
Another Cinerama legend bites the dust. Next you'll tell me that there
was
no 3-panel version of 2001. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Giovanni Abrate |
Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2003 10:11 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Everyone knows that Cinerama stopped 3-panel productions after Grand
Prix.....
Giovanni
"Steve Kraus" <screen@SPAMBLOCKfilmteknik.com> wrote in message
news:2HhHb.8091$lo3.7554@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Quote: Martin Hart <see-address@website.listed.below.org> wrote:
John swears that his divorce had nothing to do with Cinerama. Yeah,
sure. John remarried about six years ago to a very attractive young
lady who, obviously, must be quite understanding.
Another Cinerama legend bites the dust. Next you'll tell me that there
was
no 3-panel version of 2001. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Daniel P. B. Smith |
Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2003 11:26 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <AcpHb.2558$zC4.2975895@news2.news.adelphia.net>,
"Giovanni Abrate" <tryphon@adelphia.net> wrote:
Quote: Everyone knows that Cinerama stopped 3-panel productions after Grand
Prix.....
....because the Boston Watch and Ward society didn't speak French and
banned the film because they thought it would be displaying a
seventy-foot-long...
--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at world dot ess tee dee dot com
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Giovanni Abrate |
Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2003 2:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
You are thinking of the one that was filmed in 3-D!!!
LOL
G.
"Daniel P. B. Smith" <see-my-sig-please@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:see-my-sig-please-AB05D6.20260627122003@news.fu-berlin.de...
Quote:
...because the Boston Watch and Ward society didn't speak French and
banned the film because they thought it would be displaying a
seventy-foot-long... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Larry Karstens |
Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2003 6:39 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Giovanni Abrate" <tryphon@adelphia.net> wrote in message news:<5SsHb.2624$zC4.3018017@news2.news.adelphia.net>...
Quote: You are thinking of the one that was filmed in 3-D!!!
LOL
G.
Actually there was a 3-D version of Krakatoa - East and West of Java.
When they were unable to locate a screen large enough to show the
eruption full size they optically printed the East version onto 63mm
film and combined the 40 optical soundtracks to 3 magnetic and ran it
on a 16mm projector alongside the main projector. The resulting movie
which was shotened by almost 2 1/2 hours from the original shows what
happens when Alan Smithee gains control of a production. Curent
information is that there is no film version of the production
available due to poor storage conditions and the entire film has
become nitrous oxide. That is fitting since the film from title to
demise was eminently laughable |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jim Nason |
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2003 2:58 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Larry Karstens" <lcinerama@cox.net> wrote in message
news:7f757c87.0312281239.42723831@posting.google.com...
Quote: "Giovanni Abrate" <tryphon@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:<5SsHb.2624$zC4.3018017@news2.news.adelphia.net>...
You are thinking of the one that was filmed in 3-D!!!
LOL
G.
Actually there was a 3-D version of Krakatoa - East and West of Java.
When they were unable to locate a screen large enough to show the
eruption full size they optically printed the East version onto 63mm
film and combined the 40 optical soundtracks to 3 magnetic and ran it
on a 16mm projector alongside the main projector. The resulting movie
which was shotened by almost 2 1/2 hours from the original shows what
happens when Alan Smithee gains control of a production. Curent
information is that there is no film version of the production
available due to poor storage conditions and the entire film has
become nitrous oxide. That is fitting since the film from title to
demise was eminently laughable
I thought that 2001 was the first Cinerama film in four panel, and that was
why it had that annoying join line right in the middle. Also, I thought that
the sound was four track optical phantasound.
Jim Nason |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Theo Gluck |
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2003 3:08 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <CM2dnVuE0Z3ZwG2iRVn-uw@metrocast.net>, "Jim Nason"
<jhnason@metrocast.net> wrote:
Quote: I thought that 2001 was the first Cinerama film in four panel, and that was
why it had that annoying join line right in the middle. Also, I thought that
the sound was four track optical phantasound.
As God is my witness, I knew a girl in college (in graduate film school no
less!) who claimed her father was some film industry genius and they knew
for a fact that Kubrick had his own special 140mm print of 2001.
Honest.
Happy Holidaze -
Theo |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| manitou910 |
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2003 4:27 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Theo Gluck wrote:
Quote: Jim Nason wrote:
I thought that 2001 was the first Cinerama film in four panel, and that was
why it had that annoying join line right in the middle. Also, I thought that
the sound was four track optical phantasound.
As God is my witness, I knew a girl in college (in graduate film school no
less!) who claimed her father was some film industry genius and they knew
for a fact that Kubrick had his own special 140mm print of 2001.
Honest.
Happy Holidaze -
I don't think anyone can know the true meaning (and potential) of the
word 'misinformation' until they've spent time on the net.
Only a few weeks ago at another group someone was claiming disgust that
the 'original 30fps Todd-AO version' of "The Sound Of Music" hadn't been
used for NTSC videos and broadcasts!
BTW people, saw "Cold Mountain" yesterday. Beautiful photography,
though a bit grainy and apparently shot in Super35.
The movie, though, was a huge disappointment IMO, completely lacking in
consistent, decipherable theme and style. One minute we were getting
broad comedy which might have stepped out of "Green Acres" (or a Carol
Burnett parody thereof) -- the next, brutal war scenarios worthy of "War
and Peace" or "Saving Private Ryan".
The main love story lacked impact because the lovers had scarcely met
before being separated for long years (a far cry from "GWTW" where we
know Scarlett had been pining for Ashley from Day One). Most of the
major plot developments (including the ending) could be seen coming like
proverbial freight trains.
The dialog often seemed borrowed from "Titanic" -- long stretches where
all you hear is "NO!!!", "Inman!!!!! etc. Miramax and Sydney Pollack
didn't need to hire Anthony Minghella to write a script like this.
The three main actors (whose salaries comprised almost half the movie's
$80M-plus budget [15 each for Kidman and Zellwegger, 10 for Law]) were
simply wasted.
Anyway, Happy New Year everyone!
Charles |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Steve Kraus |
Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2003 12:17 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Theo Gluck wrote:
Quote: As God is my witness, I knew a girl in college (in graduate film
school no less!) who claimed her father was some film industry genius
and they knew for a fact that Kubrick had his own special 140mm print
of 2001.
Yes but was she hott? It's all that really matters in this sort of thing.
I'm thinking she was which is why you didn't call her an idiot.
I knew an editor who said his dad had been prez of Technicolor back in the
seventies. I looked it up. By gum his dad really had been running Tech
when they shut down IB (the first time). Eeek! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Kevin Willoughby |
Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2003 1:31 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <Dm_Hb.156735$2We1.19630
@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, manitou910@rogers.com says...
Quote: BTW people, saw "Cold Mountain" yesterday.
I saw it the day before.
Quote: Beautiful photography,
though a bit grainy and apparently shot in Super35.
To my taste, a lot of it was soft and fuzzy. Since the close-ups on the
same reel were sharp, I can't blame the multiplex, it had to have been
the film.
Quote: The three main actors (whose salaries comprised almost half the movie's
$80M-plus budget [15 each for Kidman and Zellwegger, 10 for Law]) were
simply wasted.
Zellwegger earned her pay. In fact, her acting was significantly better
than Kidman's.
Kidman's acting consisted mostly of looking pretty. Even when mucking
out the barn, she looked really pretty. Now, I like Kidman as an actor.
I *really* like Kidman as a female body. I really, really liked her role
in Eyes Wide Shut. In Cold Mountain, however, the most disposable scene,
the scene that could have been cut without making the movie any better
or any worse, was the (barely) nude scene where Kidman flashed her
stuff.
--
Kevin Willoughby kevinwilloughby@acm.orgNoSpam.invalid
Imagine that, a FROG ON-OFF switch, hardly the work
for test pilots. -- Mike Collins |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |