|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Author
|
Topic: Money Talks the Language of Stupidity even with 70mm....
|
David Miller
Film Handler
Posts: 18
From: Kent, WA, USA
Registered: Apr 2000
|
posted 02-15-2001 05:37 AM
Typically I do not rant and very rarely complain about anything that has to do with theater operations here at the Cinerama. I can usually put up with the mountain of red tape and corporate politics it takes to get anything done here. And it is twice as much as usual because GC runs the theater, but a private party owns the theater. But this is the last straw!!!!With special thanks to Gordon McLeod, I managed to track down a set of 70mm "Indian Jones Trilogy" prints in Canada. Except for a little fading on "Raiders" these prints look and sound brand new. If anyone keeps track they are all over ten years old. This little endeavour started out as three weekends of midnight movies on Friday and Saturday nights, it has turned into a three week run. And quite a bit of money has been put into shipping the prints here and a bunch of extra advertising. I have a union contract for a guaranteed 32 hours/week, the rest of the time the managers run the booth during their shifts. The managers do an excellent job at threading up and pushing the start button, but for the most part this is the end of their knowledge. The head manager who has been here for close to a year just found out last week what the two boxes on the wall of the office were for. They are the remote boxes for the projectors and the CP500. Perhaps, this is a separate training issue on my part, but that is beside the point I am about to make. So of course, knowing that the managers have never run 70mm before and I am only one person I called on another trusted projectionist to come help me run the booth. Earlier this week I found out that General Cinemas is only going to allow one week of a fulltime projectionist on duty. During this one week we are supposed to train the managers on how to run 70mm. Yeah right. Sure. No problem. Just two weeks ago we had a week long run of "The Matrix" and it left with scratches in it because one of the managers threaded the platter wrong, pushed the start button, and came back two hours later to thread up for the next show. This is not to talk down the managers abilities to do their jobs, because that rarely happens. However, about 5% of their job is to run the booth. The other 95% of their job is to keep the downstairs up and running. The projection booth is the last thing on their mind. Scratching a 35mm print of "The Matrix" is one thing, but damaging a 70mm print of Indiana Jones is a whole new ball game. Especially, when I spent a half an hour on the phone with the guy at the Paramount Film office in Toronto discussing the apalling treatment of 70mm prints in general. Then, I gave the guy my word that we would be careful with the prints and he would get them back in the condition that he sent them to us. With two midnight screenings of each print this was no problem. If General Cinemas wanted to commit to a week long run of each print then they should have figured on spending the money to atleast have a fulltime projectionist for the three weeks. I don't know maybe I am just out of touch with the whole budgetting process and shouldn't even be worried. But it seems like a lot of preparation and money has already went into this and then to skimp on show quality is a little backwards. The managers can get away with pushing the start button and running back downstairs in a world where replacement reels are readily available, but doing this when there are some very rare 70mm prints being run is definitely not alright in my book. Plus the whole process of running 70mm and mag sound takes a little more babysitting, especially when we are expecting a huge turn out for this. Although I doubt there is any solution to this problem because I have no say in the matter, I felt I at least needed to post this ridiculous situation here for everyone to be aware of. Oddly enough even the managers here at the Cinerama were shocked when they heard the news of this. Since my reputation and the Cinerama's relationship with Paramount is at stake I will probably end up coming in to work for free on my off hours because I am not letting anything happen to those prints, at least not while they are here at my theater.
------------------ David Miller millerdk@plu.edu Projectionist, Seattle Cinerama
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Walsh
Film God
Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999
|
posted 02-15-2001 11:08 AM
Yes, it's sad... too many people think that 70mm is just like 35mm- only bigger.Ranting is very much justified in this case(I think, anyway.) It's typical that one of the workers cares more about the prints than the upper managment. And it's common for upper managment types to "forget" that untrained people are being made to work the booth, and blame the operators for any screw-ups. I purposely disconnected the start button at a theater I worked at for the exact reason Dave described. It is not needed at theaters with only a few screens, and in fact causes more trouble than it's worth. I suggest you cut the wire to the start button.. the shit you might get for that will be less than for trashing a 70mm print. No wonder no one wants 70mm prints.... It sucks you have to go in on your days off, but it is the right thing to do (for yourself, not for them.)
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 02-15-2001 05:27 PM
I hit my head against a similar brick wall last week. With 'Shadow of the Vampire' about to be released, we've had lots of enquiries about a screening of the original 'Nosferatu'. They were duly passed on to the rep programmer at head office. Thinking that we would certainly be showing it, I got three-bladed shutters for our screen 1 machines, cut plates to show full-gate silent with our scope backing lenses, worked out a way of offsetting them for the optical centre of the full-gate frame and added an extra intake fan to the lamphouses in order to cope with a bit of extra current (this being to compensate for the light loss from the shutters). Several hours of blood, sweat and tears later we had a perfect, 16 foot lambert, totally flicker-free picture running at 16fps. Then I found out that programmer had not been quick enough in booking the only print that's available for general distribution over here. So I called a contact at the National Film and Television Archive and she agreed to loan us their hand-tinted print of the 1998 Munich Film Museum restoration. Normally they would never let that print go anywhere besides the National Film Theatre in London, but my contact knows that I'll look after it, and agreed to let me have it. I rang HO again to let them know what I thought they would regard as very good news - and got brushed off with excuses about how it would be difficult to publicise the show at short notice blah blah blah. Not only would it have been a chance to have about the only screening of this tinted print outside London, but I did all the work for them, and even provided contacts for musicians to provide the soundtrack. But it seems they're just not willing to follow it up. Oh well, back to four shows a day of 'Almost Famous'...
|
|
|
Rick Green
Film Handler
Posts: 12
From: Sacramento, CA, USA
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 02-15-2001 09:31 PM
David, my hat's off to you! This makes me furious. Once upon a time GC wouldn't have even thought of operating like this. Now, they're just like all the other circuits, maybe even worse. I'm a 25 year member of the union here in Sacramento, and I saw 70mm go away once UA & Century got rid of us. They flat couldn't run it. Oh, they tried- but there was quite a trail of destroyed prints. As a matter of fact, there was a near riot at a Century theater here in 1982 during a 70mm run of "E.T." Management couldn't keep it on the screen, but wouldn't give refunds either. Actually made the local papers. So this is nothing new, just very frustrating to all of us. Brad's right, Paramount will find out about this. Maybe a whopping bill for print replacement might open GC's (and others) eyes a little.
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 02-16-2001 05:26 AM
The other upsetting thing here that no one else seems to have mentioned yet is that if the print gets trashed, the chances are pretty good that Paramount won't strike a replacement print and send GCC the bill, which is what they should do. They'll probably just say "sorry, no more 70mm prints" instead.
Sadly, this sounds like a lose-lose situation for someone (like Dave) who genuinely cares about both presentation quality and print condition. If he works for free, then the audiences are happy and the print stays in good shape, but the corporate types don't learn their lesson. If he lets the managers run it, the print probably gets damaged, audiences get upset when problems occur, yet Paramount probably won't strike a new print and send a bill, so the corporate people still don't learn their lesson.
I can't believe that anyone would consider allowing inexperienced operators to handle the only existing 70mm print of something. Personally, I've been pretty nervous when running 35mm prints that are either one-of-a-kind or one-of-a-handful...I never damaged one, but I certainly wouldn't consider letting one run in an unattended booth or with any type of automation.
As for film being a nuisence to managers--of course it is a nuisence, because running film isn't their job, and having to deal with film reduces their ability to interact with customers and do other tasks which are more in line with the job description of "theatre manager."
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|