Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Hey you, you suck! (AKA: Outing bad film handlers)

Topic Closed

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Hey you, you suck! (AKA: Outing bad film handlers) (Page 26)

This topic comprises 100 pages: 1 2 3 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... 98 99 100

Author

Topic: Hey you, you suck! (AKA: Outing bad film handlers)

John Pytlak
Film God

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

posted 11-01-2003 05:52 PM

quote:
When they moved Titanic to a smaller auditorium the manager tried to move it himself. He managed to drop the print down the stairs to the booth, of course the clamps came off and the whole thing unwound at the bottom of the stairs. They got the mess untangled and used the print for more showings. I can only imagine how badly scratched it was.

As I've said before, trying to move a large print by yourself is like Russian Roulette. Most of the time you get away with it, but one time you'll have a bloody mess on the floor. [Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

Dan Lyons
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 698
From: Seal Beach, CA
Registered: Sep 2002

posted 11-05-2003 11:47 PM

Edwards University 6, Irvine CA.
Film: Elephant, Aud 2, 7:20 pm tonight.

Saw this at Edwards University in Irvine, known as "Orange County's best arthouse". HA! [puke]

Framing was slightly off, tops of heads lopped off, I doubt they even have a loop of RP-40. Focus was also soft, I informed the manager, got an eye roll then he ran upstairs to do very little, still bad after that.

I could also still see the speakers behind the screen during bright scenes, as they used speakers with SILVER on them! [fu]

I informed them about this problem a year ago! Buy some freaking matte black paint and fix it!

They also need to learn to bloop splices; loud pops between trailers.

Danny

| IP: Logged

Carl Martin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1424
From: Oakland, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 11-06-2003 02:27 AM

danny, did they show it 1.85? it's supposed to be 1.37. unfortunately warners won't let us take mystic river off our main screen over the weekend so we have to open elephant in 1.66. [Mad]

carl

| IP: Logged

Dan Lyons
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 698
From: Seal Beach, CA
Registered: Sep 2002

posted 11-08-2003 04:06 AM

1.37!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!???

Now I'm infuriated! Last time I went to this damn theatre they butchered an Academy print by showing it in widescreen, and now you're saying they've done it again!???

It looked more like 2:1... i don't think they have movable masking. This theatre needs to be shut down!

Shame on you EDWARDS Theatres!! [fu]

Danny

| IP: Logged

Aileen D'Esposito
Film Handler

Posts: 11
From: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Registered: Oct 2003

posted 11-08-2003 09:13 AM

for the past couple years working in a non-theatrical campus theater that runs 5 different films a week+, believe me, i've run into every problem i've read on here (sorry, i didn't make it through all 26 pages, but you get the point.) and then some. I get angry, and shout and scream and carry on, and teach my little underlings how to make a print not make me want to lose my cool, proceeded by as much clean up of a print as i can manage. I do my best.

In all the prints i have come across, though, only once have i had to stop and say, quite frankly, "how the fuck did that happen? There is not a damn thing i can do" Earlier this semester, we got a print of "Anger Management" After pulling out reel 1, we go to make sure it is heads out. One of the ways checked was to look for opening credits, a way of telling that it is in fact the beginning of the film. They never come though. We did a test run, only to find that they weren't there anywhere. No opening credits. I kept expecting them to show up randomly somewhere else in the film (not like i've never seen mislabeled reels before) Having never seen the entire film, I can only guess that someone simply absconded with the entire opening credits sequence. Not enough seemed to be gone to be missing an entire reel, but it would have been reel 1 missing anyway, and there was most definitely a reel labeled 1 (and so on.) So where did it go? That was a couple of months ago, but i still find it a mystery. Anybody have any ideas?

| IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

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

posted 11-08-2003 11:20 AM

No but if anyone has a Reel 1 of "Gods & Generals" I'd love to have it. No, not to complete a print with a missing reel but simply because I thought the opening credits with the flags was the best part of the movie.

As for Elephant, don't you wish they had printed it down to 1.33-within-1.85? Video shmideo after all; it's not going to gain anything from the big frame.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 11-08-2003 01:05 PM

Aileen, someone probably ran that print without trailers and had some kind of major disaster when they tried to start it. I've seen it happen before. Trailers aren't just for advertising...they work wonders in protecting the feature.

This is also why on an older 6 reel movie it is so frequent to find the head of reel 4 is spliced and butchered up from changeover houses trying to get reel 4 on screen.

| IP: Logged

Carl Martin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1424
From: Oakland, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 11-08-2003 04:21 PM

steve, elephant was shot on 35mm, according to imdb. yeah, sometimes they're wrong but when i watched it nothing suggested to me that it was video. great movie, btw.

carl

edit: now i notice the imdb claims it's 1.85. that's contrary to what we were told (don't know if there was a note in the can or anything), and i'm sure it's an error. it looked good in 1.37.

edit 2: no note, but the label on the can said "SR Dolby/1.33 Ratio", which is another half-truth, since the print has dolby digital.

[ 11-10-2003, 03:36 AM: Message edited by: Carl Martin ]

| IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

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

posted 11-08-2003 11:08 PM

You're right; the official website does assert that it was shot on 35mm film. Doing a little online research apparently alot of folks are presuming DV because of the look (and the non widescreen format). I don't remember if there was anything on the print to give things away like colorbars or EFilm's logo in the leader etc. Or a transfer credit. So perhaps not video shmideo...just shmideo. A powerful film though.

| IP: Logged

William Hooper
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1879
From: Mobile, AL USA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-10-2003 12:54 AM

quote:
Having never seen the entire film, I can only guess that someone simply absconded with the entire opening credits sequence

Or run a title from the 70s, looked at the last reel, decided it just had one of those 70s endings of just ending cold, with no credits...and finding that the last reel wasn't included. (Hmm, I thought they just caved in the side of the 2nd can to hold 3 reels because they had no more 3-reel cans...)

| IP: Logged

Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001

posted 11-13-2003 04:47 PM

Let's throw in the AMC Clifton Commons for the way it built its print of In the Cut, which I saw on 11/8:

Not enough black leader on the head. The "Coming Attractions" snipe comes on screen in progress.
Attached trailer (Something's Gotta Give) spliced late at the end. Got to hear a false start of the Screen Gems logo.
A flat "Silence is Golden" snipe followed by a scope "Feature Presentation" snipe. In the Cut is in flat ratio.
Cues missing or not working properly. Lights stayed up halfway through R3 and went down only at the start of R4. At the end the booth had to bring the lights up full.

Fortunately this film leaves tomorrow.

| IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

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

posted 12-01-2003 06:20 PM

Someone remind me again what the logic is of reattaching head leaders with a proper splice but leaving the tails masking taped on. I mean if someone is a lazy doofus then why not be a lazy doofus at both ends? [Confused]

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

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

posted 12-01-2003 07:17 PM

It's an intentional practice to fool the depots and be super, super cheap by trying to save a few inches of splicing tape. Since the depots don't actually wind from head to tail, they will never know.

Honestly, I would *almost* prefer those buttheads masking tape both ends. At least that way if you are unrolling the reel (or projecting directly) you aren't surprised as you end up jamming the end of it in your projector or slicing your hand open as you watch the floor collect your blood. The reason I say *almost* is because most of the time when people masking tape leaders on, there is nasty residue and folds in the edges of the film which kills the digital tracks.

| IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 12-01-2003 07:19 PM

quote:
Fortunately this film leaves tomorrow.

Unfortunately, the problems probably won't leave with the film.

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

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

posted 12-02-2003 07:39 AM

A well-made tape splice is not that hard to make or peel off. [Roll Eyes]

Saving a few pennies or seconds isn't worth the print damage or aggravation a poor "splice" will cause. [Frown]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 100 pages: 1 2 3 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ... 98 99 100

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.