I know this is a somewhat older thread, but can someone explain to me what is the obsession with having a digitally-created movie on 35MM? For older titles that were shot on film, I totally get it, but if it was digital to begin with, why the need to recreate the film feel, if that was never the intent in the first place? The Blu-Ray does a great job of showing the film as it was originally created, the only reason it was ever printed onto film for theaters back in 2004 was because of necessity. I’m not trying to down this project or anything, I’m just genuinely curious about why it matters so much.
It was never the intent to show The SpongeBob Movie on film in a theater? Pretty sure that’s why they made The SpongeBob Movie in the first place buddy
No, he means that presenting the movie with the visual trademarks and imperfections typical of the 35mm format was not the filmmakers’ original intent, but it was the only theatrical delivery format available at the time. Had digital projection caught on just a few years earlier, I guarantee that The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie would have been presented that way.
Ok? That’s a moot point tho
No, it’s not. gmarsh1996 is trying to understand why users in this community go through the trouble of reapplying a 35mm color palette and grainy texture— byproducts of the only available delivery format available in 2004– to a digitally sourced movie that was never intended to be visually presented that way. You thought his point was that the filmmakers never intended to show the movie on analog film in theaters, which is not what he said.
He’s questioning the altering of the movie’s visual quality because, as I stated in the last post, had digital projection been available at the time of the film’s release, it absolutely would have been presented that way since slightly altered colors and a dip in sharpness and resolve are anomalies the filmmakers would have preferred sidestepping altogether. Hope that clears things up.