Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Decoy Titles

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Decoy Titles (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Decoy Titles

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000

posted 11-11-2002 11:11 AM

I have no idea what good, if any, the use of decoy titles on film cans does but I'm willing to give the studios the benefit of the doubt on this and suggest that the specifics not be discussed in an open forum (e.g. F-T Feature Info & Trailer Attachments).

| IP: Logged

Bill Gabel
Film God

Posts: 3873
From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 11-11-2002 11:43 AM

I'm with you Steve. I get films with decoy titles. I will only post the real title. The studio's and labs use it for security. A few years
back at Deluxe in Hollywood they were missing a million feet of film
a month. It's used for security in shipping of titles.

| IP: Logged

John Hawkinson
Film God

Posts: 2273
From: Cambridge, MA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 11-11-2002 11:45 AM

It seems reasonable to release the information once the film opens (isn't it?).

But recent examples of releasing them before movies open are probably bad idea.

--jhawk

| IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 11-11-2002 12:03 PM

Of course for such a 'decoy title' system to be effective the distributor or depot needs to use it all the time: I remember both my SW:Ep1 and LOTR cans having labels with BOTH the decoy and real titles on them!

FWIW, I have no problem with disclosing the decoy title within 24 hrs of opening day, as the print will usually already be at its destination, built up, and have its real title on the leaders anyways.(LOTR and SW:EpII being rare exceptions)...

-Aaron

| IP: Logged

John Hawkinson
Film God

Posts: 2273
From: Cambridge, MA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 11-11-2002 12:08 PM

Aaron,

I believe the decoy titles are only relevent prior to the film openning, and perhaps even stages of the process before the film gets to the exchange. So by the time you see it (unless it is a preview screening), it doesn't matter anymore, hence the double-labelling.

--jhawk

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 11-11-2002 03:40 PM

For projectionists, I must say that decoy titles are stupid on some titles. With TES prints, the decoy title is printed on the cans with no hint of what is really in the cans. Fine, I've no problem with that other than general Valenti paranoia annoyance. (We all know most of the bootlegs these days are coming from studio tapes.) However, any print coming out of an ETS depot always has both the fake AND the real title on the cans, which is moronic. Anyone listing data on a print out of ETS should definitely list the decoy title, but should probably wait until the day before to post it.

| IP: Logged

Ken McFall
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 615
From: Haringey, London.
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 11-11-2002 04:01 PM

I recall a few years back an Odeon cinema lost a show of a BIG opening film. The print was in their film dump with a decoy name on it and no one told them. This was a multi screen so they often got prints in they did'nt need due to hold overs etc which is why apparently no one checked it out! Quite funny in hindsight but not at the time I'm sure.

Our two prints of Harry potter Chamber Of Secrets arrived labeld Harry Potter Chamber Of Secrets, yet we got three pages of security instructions etc. A consistent policy would be helpful for everyone.

| IP: Logged

Robert E. Allen
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1078
From: Checotah, Oklahoma
Registered: Jul 2002

posted 11-11-2002 04:20 PM

Back in the "old days" (before some of you were born) we didn't have this kind of a problem. The prints were picked up at the "exchanges" by a "film delivery company" and delivered to the theatres. But apparently the film delivery companies are no longer in business, the exchanges (which inspected the prints) are apparently gone and the film passes through many hands (freight companies, package delivery companies, bus lines, etc.) and are vulnerable to theft. I agree with what you are saying about such a "security system". Seems kinda dumb to me. Are we talking about selective theft here? I get the impression from other threads that apparently no one is inspecting prints when they move from house to house. Right? I also get the impression that there are a lot of "film handlers" out there that don't give a rip about how they handle the film.

------------------
Bob
The Old Showman

| IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 11-11-2002 04:56 PM

I did a special screening of 'A Bugs Life' about a month before it hit theatres (the screening was arranged by a Pixar employee for a co-worker's kid's birthday, IIRC). Two prints were shipped to us from TES with PADLOCKS on them, and Kent Peterson from Disney had the only set of keys.

with that kind of security there wouldn't be any need for 'decoy' titles at all

-Aaron

| IP: Logged

John Hawkinson
Film God

Posts: 2273
From: Cambridge, MA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 11-11-2002 05:04 PM

That's a mixed bag. We (well, not one of our movies, really) had a Nepalese film show up padlocked in a suitcase a few weeks ago, but no one showed up with the keys, so of course we had to cut the lock off...

--jhawk

| IP: Logged

Bill Gabel
Film God

Posts: 3873
From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 11-11-2002 05:07 PM

The padlock thing, I get a lot of on the big Warner and New Line titles that are just finishing post-production. A few years back Disney lost a 70mm back-up print, because of a bad projectionist. So at that theatre you had to have a manager, sign off on a sheet when you opened and closed the booth.

| IP: Logged

Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Film God

Posts: 3977
From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from)
Registered: Jun 2002

posted 11-11-2002 05:21 PM

quote:
Two prints were shipped to us from TES with PADLOCKS on them...

Now if I were going to steal a print, I'd like something to carry it in, like the cans. Cutting the lock off at home wouldn't be too much of a hassle. Although if I was a lazy print stealer, I might look for an unlocked print before I stole the locked one.

TWO prints?! That's one heck of a birthday party if you need two prints to fit everybody into the theatre.

| IP: Logged

Darren Briggs
Master Film Handler

Posts: 371
From: York, UK
Registered: Dec 2001

posted 11-11-2002 05:24 PM

My print of Harry Potter II was just dumped in the foyer clearly labeled, all this after the three page memo faxed by warner bros abouthe film!
Obviously they didnt fax securicor!

| IP: Logged

Jacob Huber
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 172
From: Evansville, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 11-11-2002 08:23 PM

I notice that even though the cans have a decoy title, most prints still mantain the true title. The only exception I've seen since I've been in the booth was SW Ep.2, with the leaders printed with the decoy title. Recently, I've noticed that most decoy titles only carry the decoy title on the can, as if it were the title (as opposed to LOTR, with different titles on either side.

Funny story: The night before Fellowship of the Rings was opening, one of the managers got the cans with the decoy and was infuriated. He got on the phone with the depot (TES?) and started yelling about "We're not supposed to be getting Changing Seasons! Lord of the Rings opens up tomorrow and we need the prints!"

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 11-11-2002 08:37 PM

I think the decoy for the second Lord of the Rings movie needs to be "Changing Seasons II".

Robert, I couldn't agree with you more regarding the superior way things used to be done with the depots. Unfortunately I don't ever see things going back to the way they used to be. Also, I may be wrong here, but I think the biggest issue right now with print security is video bootlegging. If a print disappears, the pirates have all the time in the world to dupe it to video (as opposed to going into a theater after hours opening night).

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

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.