|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Hey you, you suck! (AKA: Outing bad film handlers)
|
Monte L Fullmer
Film God
Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted 01-08-2005 03:36 AM
You know what's sad about all of this: Events leading to the demise and destruction of the motion picture theatre presentations.
Big circuits (REG, AMC, Century, LCE, and others) making policies of absolute, absolute perfect presentations and film handling, yet why aren't these polices followed?
Policies pertaining to careful handling of each print that arrives to the theatre. Long lists of policies that must be checked off at each stage in the film handling area.
Policies pertaining to corporate punishments to the management personnel if film damage is evident during presentations.
Here's a little story to make some think a little:
John and Mary comes to a theatre. They see the boxoffice attendant, wearing the proper uniform, greeting the customer with the proper welcome, takes their money and says "enjoy the show."
John and Mary enters in the lobby area. They attend the snakbar, and being greeted by the concessions attendant. This attendant, wearing the proper uniform, greeting the two with the proper welcome, selling them the best items from the snakbar and also say "enjoy the show."
John and Mary meets the doorman, who is wearing the proper uniform, greeting the two with a proper welcome, takes their ticket and also say "enjoy the show."
John and Mary meets the usher, who is wearing the proper uniform to find them the most confortable seating arrangements in the auditorium, finds their seats and also say "enjoy the show."
John and Mary DIDN't come to see the ticket attendant.
John and Mary DIDN't come to see the concessions attendant.
John and Mary DIDN't come to see the doorman.
John and Mary DIDN't come to see the usher.
John and Mary came to see a movie. .... which you're presenting.
Little do we realize, and unfortunate that we are NEVER given any sort of credit due...
....is that WE are ACTUALLY running the theatre.
...for We are presenting what the customers REALLY come for.
thx-Monte
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 01-08-2005 05:14 AM
Agreed with the sentiment, but I'm not sure that policies are the answer. Hire people who know (or can be trained) how to handle film properly and who care about presentation quality. Then, the policies become irrelevant and unnecessary, since the employees care enough to put on a good show without needing long and annoying checklists full of items like "check picture and sound format, check that all reels are heads/tails out, etc."
Personally, I would take it as an insult if I were handed a policy checklist that specified anything more than just the items specific to the theatre (trailer placement, house light settings, etc.). If employees are treated like professionals instead of trained monkeys, everyone will be happier.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Monte L Fullmer
Film God
Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted 01-08-2005 05:21 AM
Thank you... I was told this "John and Mary" story when I was in the projection field back in 1970 at a theatre, and the district manager of the circuit that I was working at noticed that I was having some small presentation/changeover problems and he helped me out greatly with this story. This story woke me up that of my importance in the big movie palace that I was working at the time.
quote: Scott Norwood
Personally, I would take it as an insult if I were handed a policy checklist that specified anything more than just the items specific to the theatre (trailer placement, house light settings, etc.). If employees are treated like professionals instead of trained monkeys, everyone will be happier
I do agree as well-not liking it and being offended if such a note comes to my booth telling me on how to do my "art and craft" (Michaelangelo would have been 'ticked' if he was told how to do the the statue of David..LOL) as a "seasoned projectionist."
But once again, this generation of mega cinemas doesn't want to 'pay out and give decent credit due' for professional help, when they can get "monkeys" to do the work for "bananas" instead of "gold", thus the "monkeys" doesn't care, even if they were properly trained.
I've been there and done that, and this is one area that I'm fighting to this day as an company engineer with this small circuit that I work with. "Monkeys!" (or, should we say the more truer word...robots...- just being shown what to do and do it and not ask questions...)
- thx Monte
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Chris Hipp
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1462
From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas)
Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted 01-08-2005 06:43 PM
quote: Monte L Fullmer
Big circuits (REG, AMC, Century, LCE, and others) making policies of absolute, absolute perfect presentations and film handling, yet why aren't these polices followed?
I think the actual policy is absolute perfect presentations as long as it does not cost us any money.
I used to work for AMC and I cannot speak for any other chain but AMC corporate WILL let the theaters put money into their booth, but the people at the theater have to care enough to lose a little of their bonus for it. The film buyer used to thank me for replacing reels and rejecting bad prints as meticulously as I did, wishing that all the other theaters were like that. So, I think it is more the individual theaters rather than the whole company.
If you ask me, I think that a major part of the manager's bonus should be based on the on-screen presentation, I promise that would fix the problem.
Also, you can run a good booth operation with minimum wage workers, but it is not easy.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 01-09-2005 06:52 AM
They are digging their own graves. Loews is in financial trouble. What do they do? They go to one of their 70mm houses that is known for its high presentation standards and they put in a platter so they can cut back on the hours a real projectionist is in the booth and substitute a TAPS (Thread And Push Start) guy from concessions. How long will the quality on that screen last with this kind corner cutting operation? They think they are saving money, and they probably are because soon enough the very thing that drew audiences to that particular theatre will be gone and they will probabaly wind up closing this screen -- how's THAT for saving money? Or at the very least, the theatre will be making less profit than they did before.
My boss came into my office the other day all excited about some article he read about all the new, incredible stuff that is happening with home HD displays and projection and screens that now can give the theatre size experience at home. After gushing about all this newer, higher image quality equipement which is costing less and less, he put the question to me, "So, if people can get the new HD-DVDs and stunning looking images relative to size of a theatre multiplex screen, why would anyone go to a movie theatre -- just so he can see a movie a month earlier than someone who sees it at the theatre? I normally never get to the theatre to see a movie at the front end of the release anyway."
I was taken back because he is usually not a big fan of new technology. But he seemed to be all fired up about the new HD-DVDs and the much larger DV screens that are going to be available at affordable prices.
And that's the bottom line, isn't it -- why would anyone choose to stand waiting in lines, pay through the nose for consessions, and then go into a theatre that may or may NOT be comfortable or particularly clean and listen to the soundtrack mixed with the sound of strangers talking, giggling on their cell phones or with each other and see a presentation of film with all the aberations detailed on this thread, when instead, if the consumer technology progresses as it has, he can stay home and get image and sound that may not just be acceptable, but rival what he sees at the mulitplex, AND when he can buy his entertainment outright on HD-DVD (to own forever) for the price of two theatre tickets, AND watch it in the comfort of his own living room with his family and friends AND where he can throw anyone who opens a cell phone out on their asses?
Unless theatre owners see and understand this and clean up their act -- and all they need do is read this thread to see all the things they need to do to clean up -- they might as well close up shop and go home because their business is going to die right before their eyes. If they can't offer and experience BETTER in every way to home theatre, their cinemas will become museum pieces.
So go ahead Mr. I-Can't-Afford-A-Qualified-Projectionist Theatre Owner, Enjoy the Freakin Show!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 01-10-2005 07:45 PM
quote: Brian Guckian
One argument in favour of the cinema experience is the "social" nature of the event but this seems to be increasingly "anti-social".
Yah, the social component seems to have gone the way of single screens. You are right; these days the social element seems to be a negative, not a positive. Patrons being beaten up in the theatres while 12 cops can't quele a riot in the lobby, and on Christmas day no less. When I was a kid, everyone loved going to the movies. I never ever heard anyone saying they hated going to the movies; I hear that all the time today -- people saying they hate going to the mulitplex. I never heard of a riot in a theatre either. Using a ![[dlp]](graemlins/dlp.gif) -projector, even at 4K, so you don't see any dirt or jitter may not be enough to woo those disenfranchized, ex-movie goers back. After all, it's not dirt specks or a film image that is not "rock steady" that makes people say they hate going to the movies. Actually if you dig a little deeper, it's not that they hate going to the movies, it's that they hate going to movie THEATRES.
Yes, over the years theatres did play catch-up, but when they did, they did great, spectacular leaps over the home experience. When they gave the public Cinerama and then CinemaScope, and multi-channel surround sound, these were "oooh and ahhh" leaps. None of these could be duplicated at home. They were obvious BEFORE and AFTER changes that were immediately tangible to the public and they were excited by them. Before CinemaScope.....after CinemaScope; those changes were pretty hard to miss.
What ohhhh and ahhhh leap will the public will see with -cinema? Not much. They might even miss it altogether. Couple with that the fact that theatres are no longer phsyically impressive -- sure, huge gleaming stainless steel and sparkling glass concessions malls, but walk past all that shinny and you walk into to small, non-descript, character-less, hole-in-the-wall rooms -- utlitarian at best, repellent at worst. And unfortunately, many times those very rooms are populated by rude, roudy and disruptive individuals who you would never want to spend 2 hours with; they certainly wouldn't be invited guests in your home theatre.
quote: Monte L Fullmer
John and Mary DIDN't come to see the ticket attendant.
John and Mary DIDN't come to see the concessions attendant.
John and Mary DIDN't come to see the doorman.
John and Mary DIDN't come to see the usher.
John and Mary came to see a movie. .... which you're presenting.
This may be true, but all those elements do make up the total experience. If they don't all come together to make the 2 hrs enjoyable, it will impact a patron's decision to go out to the movies in the future. To think all you need is great presentation is like saying all you need to lure people to a restaurant is just having great food. Sure it's the food they come for, but see how long that restaurant stays open if it has an unappealing and dingy decor and sports slovenly dressed waiters, soiled table cloths and dirty bathrooms.
In the Golden Era of Movie Palaces, those incredible houses were super-experiences for patrons, something they could never get at home. They walked out of reality of the streets and became prince and princesses in their own palace....and that was before any image was projected on the screen.
Any technician will tell you that those cavernous cinemas were actually not the best for presentation, but you know what? That never made anyone say, "I hate going to the movies" back then the way they do today. If you think the public can't tell the difference between a beautiful, impressively designed theatre as opposed to a box painted black the size of a closet, is like saying the public can't distinguish between a room at the Plaza and one at Motel 6.
So until theatre owners begin to learn what elements of the whole experience motivate the public to become patrons and then they enhance those elements and reverse that negative perception the public now has, home video may very well surpass the way the public chooses to see movies. We shall see.
[ 01-11-2005, 06:41 PM: Message edited by: Frank Angel ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Home
Topic Closed
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[fu]](graemlins/fu.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic