Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Austin Powers 2 print stolen

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Austin Powers 2 print stolen

Author

Topic: Austin Powers 2 print stolen

Ken Layton
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1452
From: Olympia, Wash. USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 06-14-1999 09:01 PM

Sometime between closing time on Sunday evening and opening time on Monday (June 14th) persons unknown broke into the Stanwood Cinemas (a suburb 60 miles north of Seattle. The prints of Austin Powers 2 AND Star Wars Phantom Menace were both stolen right off the platters.
Police say that 3 restaurants located in the same cinema complex were also burglarized. KING-TV interviewed the theater manager, Ms. Storm Weatherholt, who showed an example of a film being taken from a platter with print moving clamps. It it believed the thieves did not use a print mover.
Police and FBI are investigating.

| IP: Logged

Ky Boyd
Hey I'm #23

Posts: 314
From: Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-14-1999 09:40 PM

Oh good, lets show people on tv how its done. That'll help discourage the practice of stealing prints. Jeez. How clueless can people get.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 06-14-1999 10:18 PM

Well if your name was "Storm Weatherholt", you'd be pretty clueless, too! I wonder what goes through the minds of people who steal prints? They can't run them. Who are they going to try to sell them to? Nobody would buy them in that condition (not on cores or reels). Next thing you know these people will be trying to take prints while the show is running!
We have a newfangled device on all of our booth doors that can help prevent this sort of thing from happening. It's design is ingenious and is already available on the market! This strange device is called a "lock". People should be trained on how to use it and who not to loan the keys to.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 06-14-1999 10:19 PM

What is the deal here??? What is that 4 or 5 Phantom Menace prints stolen now?

I saw a report on tv last night about video bootlegging and one street seller openly admitted he had sold about a thousand tapes of Phantom Menace for $10/each! Stupid! Stupid! Stupid!

I wonder if these stolen prints are where the tapes are originating from.

| IP: Logged

Christopher Seo
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 530
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-15-1999 12:00 AM

Stealing prints just for the fun of must be worthwhile to some people. I mean, if I were to start collecting 35mm, with no projector to run it on, I'd be content enough just to stare at the film sitting on my desk.

I can definitely see stealing "Austin Powers 2", but "Phantom Menace"?-- no sense bothering.

Was that street seller in the U.S.?

If you're wondering who the bootleggers actually are, a newspaper article told me they're projectionists sitting in the booth with video cameras. I have been really tempted to see if that method actually produces something remotely watchable.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 06-15-1999 12:17 AM

It is not watchable. Too much flicker due to the mismatch of video and film speeds. But pirates don't care about that, and I'm sure they don't tell that to the buyers of the tape..not to mention crappy sound!

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 06-15-1999 04:19 PM

The tapes I've seen on news reports don't have a flicker, yet they were obviously shot right off of the screen.

This is odd. Film runs at 24fps with a 2 bladed shutter equaling 48 flashes on the screen per second. Video runs at 30fps with 2 fields per frame equaling 60 frames per second. Any way you slice it...24 does not mathematically go into 30, thus a flicker on the videotape. It would take a 5 bladed shutter for a 24fps film (120 flashes a second) to divide into 30fps video. 120 divided by 30 comes out to a nice even "4" and no flicker. However, due to the slow nature of the intermittent pulldown, this is not feasible on typical theater equipment and would be murder for the onscreen light output.

I believe these pirates are getting European "PAL" videocameras and then digitally converting them to US "NTSC" video standards for duping on the street. The PAL system runs at 25fps...which is close enough to cover up a flicker.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 06-15-1999 05:36 PM

Perhaps these copies are coming from Hong Kong. They have everything over there! If you have a DSL connection, you can easilly download MPEG versions of any current movie quickly. They usually fit on 2 CDs. Once that is done, copying to videotape is seamless and easy... no flicker! Stereo, too! Those Chinese have developed special equipment for this (they often use telecine converters) and even their camcorder grabs are pretty good. Any way you slice it, getting good pirated copies of any move you want is pretty easy. But I just can't see some stupid teenager or young man trying to tape it with a normal camcorder and selling the result. Yuck!

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-15-1999 08:23 PM

I've tried using a consumer video camera pointed at the screen out of curiousity (with 16mm films at home...no, I'm not a video pirate), and the result is nearly unwatchable. One method which would be relatively inexpensive and would work fairly well would be to run the film on a recent-model KEM or Steenbeck editing table with "flickerless" picture head. These machines don't have a shutter, but rather use a rotating prism which quickly dissolves each frame into the next. The resulting picture has no flicker, and can be recorded with any type of film or video camera. The older Steenbecks have some flicker and are not usable for this purpose (and the picture quality is godawful, but good enough for editing purposes), though.

| IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-22-1999 11:08 AM

It is possible to make copies of films by at least one of two ways that I know of...

1) Take out & replace the shutter drive gear and replace it with one to move the shutter half speed. Then attach a glass disk on the shutter shaft in front of the lens with sectors blacked out. (Can you say 'silly'?)

2) Get a professional model video cam, like TV studios use... Some can be set for "Underscan" (Lower frame rate).

Finally, I heard that many films have invisible, infrared codes/serial numbers printed on them. They need a special filter or something to view them. The FBI can just look at the codes and track down where the print has been. I think this is just one of those 'urban ledgend / F.O.A.F.' stories but I wouldn't be willing to risk it, serial numbers or NOT!

K.Y.S.O.T.I.

Randy

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 06-22-1999 01:01 PM

While I am NOT a supporter of bootlegging, that urban legend of "coding" the film is bs.

Even if they did code the prints it wouldn't matter as the depot guys grab the nearest box and slap their OWN number on it. That number is what remains with the print throughout the rest of it's life. Also the cost of "coding" each and every film would be next to impossible.

But for those who just want to have fun anyways, you can always take one reel from each of your 5 prints and move reels around before you build them! Talk about confusing.

| IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-23-1999 09:28 AM

A.K.A. -- Movie Roulette!

------------------
K.Y.S.O.T.I.
Randy

| IP: Logged

Greg Mueller
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1687
From: Port Gamble, WA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-23-1999 09:38 AM

When I was a kid, a friend of mine and I went to see "A Hard Days Night" with our 8mm cameras. Between the two of us we captured the whole "Can't Buy Me Love" Segment and it turned out!!! We used Tri-X film. There was not a sign of flicker etc. Of course we were shooting at 24 fps but I was still amazed that it worked. We had a blast showing the film to ourselves, all we had to do is play the record and we had a stereo sound track.

| IP: Logged

Christopher Seo
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 530
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-23-1999 08:01 PM

Wow! What ASA was that film? Was the bootlegged image bright enough?

| IP: Logged

Greg Mueller
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1687
From: Port Gamble, WA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-23-1999 11:19 PM

I think Tri-x is 400 asa. We tried filmimg once at the drive-in (same segment) but it didn't come out. Not enough watts on the screen I guess. The bits we filmed at The Everett Theater were pretty close to the original in brightness, but who can really tell with 8mm. At that age we were happy with what we got.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.