|
|
Author
|
Topic: Wall Street Journal
|
|
|
|
Ky Boyd
Hey I'm #23
Posts: 314
From: Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-17-2001 01:49 PM
The following appeared as an article on www.showbizdata.com STUDIOS MAY HELP EXHIBS CONVERT TO DIGITAL Today's Headlines Executives of four of Hollywood's major studios have held discussions about forming a nonprofit company that would help financially troubled theater chains replace traditional film projectors with digital ones, the Wall Street Journal reported today (Thursday), citing people familiar with the matter. According to the newspaper, Disney, Sony, Warner Bros. and Paramount have been involved in the discussions, with Universal and 20th indicating that they may also participate. "We think the studios need to play a role in accelerating the deployment of digital cinema on favorable terms to theater operators," Phil Barlow, executive vice president of Walt Disney Motion Picture Group told the WSJ. However, the newspaper reported that the chains are worried about giving studios too much control over how films are exhibited. "Whatever structure is developed has to leave the existing players in the same position as they are today, vis-a-vis the relationships on film booking, control of the projector within the theaters and so on," United Artists Theatre Co.'s CEO Kurt Hall told the WSJ. I wonder if this is in conjunction with Technicolor Digital Cinema or in competition with it. Either way it again appears on the surface to be yet another way for studios to exert more control over the exhibs.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lance C. McFetridge
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 135
From: Penn Yan, New York
Registered: Jul 99
|
posted 05-17-2001 02:35 PM
Ky, I agree with your statement about Studio control. The full WSJ article mentions that the Studios "are eager to develop a plan that won't spook financially strapped theatre owners". Yeah right!!! I have an idea, .....lower the damn rentals structure. Personally, If it goes digital, then fine. The quality needs to be better than film, and someone has to pay for all the equipment. If it saves the studio money, then they need to pay for all the equipment, and the maintenance. They also need to reduce the rental, and not charge me per ticket on top to project in a format that they choose, I already bought equipment to exhibit in the format that they chose once, and I continue to upgrade slightly as they suggest to keep my presentation quality at a high standard. OK, Rant mode off. lance
| IP: Logged
|
|
Greg Borr
Film Handler
Posts: 39
From: Watervliet, MI
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 05-18-2001 12:25 PM
Lance, Now you know how software developers feel when dealing with Microsoft, Win 98, Win 98 SE, NT4.0, ME, 2000, now Fall of 2001 XP and then "Whistler" For us it is a nessecary evil.From an exhibitors standpoint, I would not be willing to pay any amount of money to save the studios cash. Maybe the film rental structure for DP should be lower than conventional. If the studios would come up with a film rental structure that would cover the costs of the new equipment and maintenance, in an average payback of two years per auditorium and then the extra savings were additional profit for the theatre, they might be on to something. With this type of agreement both parties would be ahead in the long run. Greg Borr Ready Theatre Systems
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jerry Chase
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1068
From: Margate, FL, USA
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 05-18-2001 02:51 PM
"Now you know how software developers feel when dealing with Microsoft, Win 98, Win 98 SE, NT4.0, ME, 2000, now Fall of 2001 XP and then "Whistler" For us it is a nessecary evil."No it isn't. I won't go into the details of a rant, but the "upgrades" serve more to increase the MS profit line and reduce competition for the MS software than they do to add needed features to the systems. Ticketpro, for example, has used a unix based system and avoided this trap. I've kept my software DOS based for this and other reasons. By following the crowd racing down the Windows path, many software developers are unknowingly on a death march, where the constant drain of having to buy more MS crap and time wasted learning more arcane rules bite into their profit margin and wear down their resolve to compete or keep their software compatible with the latest systems. That glowing gold of the pot at the end of the MS rainbow is largely fool's gold, reached only through many toll gates on the private MS yellow brick road. The fascination that humanity has for ever more needlessly complex systems never ceases to amaze me.
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 05-18-2001 03:34 PM
By comparison, a projector, a lens and a screen are pretty simple, aren't they? One nice thing about film is that most of the technology improvements actually simplify its use, as well as improve quality. ------------------ John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging Eastman Kodak Company Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419 Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243 E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
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.
|