Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Carmike Files Chapter 11

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Carmike Files Chapter 11 (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Carmike Files Chapter 11

Dave Cutler
Master Film Handler

Posts: 277
From: Centennial, CO
Registered: Jun 2000

posted 08-09-2000 01:22 PM

Joe's explanation is highly probable, but I have another theory.

Fist of all we have production companies that are making MILLIONS of dollars per film, while theatre companies suffer. If the 5 biggest chains got togeather and said, "NO, you will only get x % of boxoffice sales not xx %" things would be better. Decreased film rentals would also help the exhibitors. Production companies make far too much money.

Production companies need to figure it out that if there are no exhibitors left, they have no product, and will make no money. They need to start helping exhibitors not tightening the noose.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 08-09-2000 02:00 PM

Dave,
You have to remember that the average production cost of a negative in the can is far in excess of 75 million dollars these days. You can't blame the production companies for wanting to get their money back out of a release as fast as they can. I think that there are far too many theaters out there these days, and I also think that in many areas the indies will prevail over the chains in the long run. Another problem is the poor quality productions that are being done these days. You can only blame Hollywood for that. For every real good film there are at least a dozen crappy films. Theaters sometimes have to run those crappy films in order to kiss up to the studios to get their big releases. This makes a loose/loose situation for ALL exhibitors. Personally I think that distribution needs some sort of regulation, at least for a while, to bring fairness back in, and get things back under control.
Mark

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 08-09-2000 02:02 PM

IMHO, some exhibitors are doing poorly because of too much focus on "glitz" and expansion, rather than true "Showmanship". Neon lights in the lobby rather than adequate screen luminance. "One size fits all" masking. Huge screens that can't be lit properly. The demise of 70mm on big screens. Fancy walls that have no sound isolation. "Digital Sound" systems without adequate B-Chains to support them. Settling for "good enough" rather than the best. Turning projection and sound into an afterthought, run by "ushers" rather than skilled projectionists (no offence to those "booth ushers" who are trying their best to become skilled). Reducing cost by reducing maintenance. "Burn out" from reduced "head count". Treating theatregoers as a "captive audience".

------------------
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 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

| IP: Logged

Dave Cutler
Master Film Handler

Posts: 277
From: Centennial, CO
Registered: Jun 2000

posted 08-09-2000 02:26 PM

Mark, you're right, production companies need to make money too. I am talking about the tremendous PROFIT they make on many films. They need to pay off costs and all that and make some money to make it worth while, but they also need to look at the whole picture.

It seems to me that the production companies could stand to take a dip in PROFITS in order to help out the exhibitors. Seems like good business to me, on the part of production companies to help the exhibitors.

| IP: Logged

Evans A Criswell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1579
From: Huntsville, AL, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 08-09-2000 03:14 PM

Excellent observation, John! I'd rather have better projection and sound quality in a comfortable auditorium rather than a substandard presentation in uncomfortable chairs in a really attractive building with neon all around. Cobb is one company that seemed to go to the extra length to make their buildings attractive and their lobbies fancy. They even put large neat looking pictures on the side walls of the larger auditriums, and installed 1.85:1 only screens (no adjustable masking) in two thirds of their auditoriums. I'd rather they'd spent the money on the masking mechanisms than on features that make no difference in the quality of the movie projection. Have any of you seen the amount of neon on the Regal Hollywood 27 in Nashville? It' the most ridiculous, wicked looking thing I've ever seen. Think of how much money was spent on that, and how far it would have gone if put into equipment maintenance instead.

At least Carmike never seemed to go overboard with the neon. The fronts of their newer theatres are all similar without neon, although there is some neon in the lobby. But is a moving message sign above the entrance to the hall where the auditoriums are really necessary?

| IP: Logged

Dave Cutler
Master Film Handler

Posts: 277
From: Centennial, CO
Registered: Jun 2000

posted 08-09-2000 03:58 PM

Just to correct myself publicly. Dickinson Theatre Inc, evidently did NOT file for Chapter 11. They did restructure and are doing very well these days. Sorry for the mis information.

| IP: Logged

Dustin Mitchell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1865
From: Mondovi, WI, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 08-09-2000 09:47 PM

In Gabriel Knight voice, leaning over mortally wounded projectionist in a flaming multiplex:

"And with your last breath, you shall bear witness to the End of Film."

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 08-10-2000 02:33 AM

Evans:

You must've never seen the Carmike Wynnsong 10 in Billings, Mt. It must have a thousand feet of blue neon out front. Some of which is burned out, right now. it has even more neon in its lobby. And, one of those moving message showtime boards over its boxoffice windows...it doesn't work; they have a sheet of paper with showtimes filled in taped to the window.

| IP: Logged

Evans A Criswell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1579
From: Huntsville, AL, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 08-10-2000 08:08 AM

Mike: since you mentioned a Wynnsong theatre:

All:

I'm sure that the name "Carmike" is a combination of the names Carl and Michael (Patrick), the two guys that run, or used to run, the company. Why do they use "Wynnsong" as a name for so many of their theatres? It is interesting trivia.

Evans

| IP: Logged

Greg Mueller
Phenomenal Film Handler

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

posted 08-10-2000 09:00 AM

I think theaters could be helped immensely, if they had some good movies to run. With very few exceptions this summer has been a real dog. They need to make some kid films to get those summer vacationing butts in the seats. A few years ago I remember there being 3 or 4 biggies out in the summer and the theaters were packed. What happened?

------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut

| IP: Logged

Paul Rich
Film Handler

Posts: 56
From: Murfreesboro, TN, 37128
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 08-11-2000 12:22 AM

>Why do they use "Wynnsong" as a name for >so many of their theatres? It is >interesting trivia

Isn't it because Michael Patrick's son's name is Wynn?

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 08-11-2000 01:38 AM

Correct. (I wonder where the 'song' part comes from?)

| 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.