|  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

Although there is much co-mingling of production/distribution and exhibition with today's media giants, AFAIK, Sony no longer has a stake in US Exhibition. There are some current links between telcoms, internet providers, distribution, exhibition, etc. For example Disney/ABC, AOL/Time Warner, Anschultz/Regal, etc.

Some links:
http://www.anschutzinvestments.com/group/group.html
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/apr2002/nf20020429_6456.htm
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/sep2000/nf2000098_069.htm
http://www.media-alliance.org/mediafile/20-3/dmlp.html

Here's a link to "tongue in cheek" humor that is closer to reality than you may think:
http://www.flash.net/~pieper/features/pieper5.html

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Thanks for that VERY funny piece. The thing that makes it so hysterical is that as you read it, you can almost believe it is true!

 |  IP: Logged

If all those theatres were owned and operated by the studios, this wouldn't even be a debate -- they would figure the bottom line and simply reinvest in digtal projection because it will save them money (or so everyone seems to keep saying). Unfortunately for TI and Huges, they don't own the theatres. The exhibitors who do will not save money by reinvesting but instead loose megabucks worth of the obsoleted 35mm hardware that they already own. It's an economic model that simply makes no sense and it will not work unless it is radically changed, but has anyone heard ANY discussion from the studios that THEY would invest in D-C? Has George Lucas told exhibitors that, hey, buy a DLP for my next 3 SW Episodes the percentage for your DLP screens will open at 30/70 instead of 90/10 and scale down from there with the 35mm screens getting the usual straight 90/10?. They all clammor about how much they want D-C, but no one is stepping up to the plate to absorb the cost. To think exhibition will do this out of the generosity of its heart for a technology that is not backward compatible and does not protect their existing hardware investment is, well, as ludicrous as it sounds and even a high school kid taking Economics 101 can see it is an unworkable model.

This debate has nothing to do with the quality of the digtal image -- we who are concerned about presentation have debated that long and fierce, but as Disney's Phil Barlow said, digital, even at this stage is "good enough" for him. So forget about whether it looks as good as film or not -- that's not what has stopped this technology in its tracks; it is the economics -- as they say, follow the money trail.

Yesterday, August 20, Front Page: Vivendi seeks to unload its Universal unit

...And Today, August 21: Cable chief makes plans for Universal

You'd think Dreamworks would be the first to jump on it...
=TMP=

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

Well a recent article in Boxoffice belies this. The article interviewed several smaller independent exhibitors, myself included. One of the topics was film terms. All of the exhibitors agreed that we would play more films on the break if the play time wasn't so extensive (4 or more weeks minimum for popular films). That's just too long for a small town, especially one with a single screen. We can go two weeks, or three with a blockbuster, but that's it. We only have 5,000 people to draw from, and half of those live 35 miles away.

The studio's explanation is that they want to maintain screen count during the critical first weeks, which is why they insist on those long playtimes.

My argument (which didn't make the article) is that there are several other small theaters within 150 miles of here that would be more than happy to use the film in week 2, 3, and 4 if we were only allowed to circuit. It's easy to get film to another town overnight. The screen count would stay the same. Their reaction is no, they want the same screen locked in for 4 weeks minimum. So we've passed on dozens of films.

The movie industry is already stinking rotten for its product having a very short shelf life. With what they are saying in promoting DLP is essentially a film will just hit a bunch of screens at once and then quickly be gone (in even faster fashion than "Spiderman" or "Episode II"). It all sounds to me like the distributors are regarding theaters as nothing more than a quick pay-per-view venue shortly before the film hits DVD and pay-cable. Just what in the hell are they trying to do anyway?

If they want to force DLP on exhibitors so they can do the theatrical release in extremely fast and temporary fashion, I would have even more reason to just invest in a D-Theater DVHS HDTV deck and watch the movie on a widescreen TV. Hell, I would get a better picture there than I would in DLP! On top of that, if what they seem to intend in their marketing model holds true, I'd have a DVHS or HD-DVD of the film before all the marketing ink was completely dry on the movie theater one sheets!

Josh

=TMP=
NOTE: The woman in the photo montage on that page summarizes what exhibitors will go through in relation to DLP: 1. The technology is so bad it's funny. 2. Oh my gosh! It actually caught on!?! 3. So sad that film is dead to an inferior format.

As I've said before, "Film Done Right" ALREADY offers MUCH better quality than can be achieved in home digital theatres, and IMHO, "Digital Done Right" in theatres must do the same.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion