|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: No heads on the reels
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 03-05-2008 04:04 AM
Since I have very little experience with first run commercial exhibition, let me ask this: isn't in the film company's best interest to make sure the exhibitor who is going to return 90% of each ticket sale to them actually gets to put their picture up on the screen? Doesn't that give the exhibitor some powerful leverage in a case like this?
After getting a runaround from Technicolor, why not go the other route? Call Paramount and tell them you are getting no satisfaction from Technicolor and that the print you have is unacceptable. Tell them you won't play it until they get an acceptable print to you. Every day the exhibitor doesn't put that picture on the screen, that's a day where the studio gets 00% for that title. Can't the exhibitor also say, if the distrib can't get him a play-able print by such and such a date, he's going to pulling the picture entirely. If even a few theatres did or even threatened this, the studios would have to sit up and take notice and put pressure on Technicolor to do their job....at least one would think.
I just don't understand why the equation is so lop-sided. The exhibitor seems not to get any say in the deal. Has NATO or even a single chain ever made a studio sign THEIR master contract if they wanted their picture to play on their screens? Or has any exhibitor even amended or added a rider to the studio's master contract? We do live shows and that's the way contracts are finalized. The act sends a contract to us, we cross out stuff we will not agree to, add riders for stuff we want, then we send it back to them. They make notes and send it back to us until at some point both parties come to a contract they both can live with. That's negotiating and how contracts in other segments of the industry are arrived at. I don't see why exhibition doesn't engage in the same kind of hard-nose give and take rather than the NATO approach of grabbing both ankles and biting down on a towel.
How bout a clause something like, "prints have to arrive scratch-free and ready for projection, leaders in tact and attached, or the theatre has a right of refusal without it being construed as breach of contract"? The theatre would then have the choice of playing the title only if and when an acceptable print arrives, or if the distributor couldn't supply an acceptable print, the theatre could cancel the booking altogether, again without penalty.
Naturally a theatre is not going to refuse prints on a whim because it's in its best interest to play first run titles, but I think it should also have the ability to refuse a booking if the distrib can't supply a reasonably acceptable product.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brad Allen
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 688
From: Evansville, IN, USA
Registered: May 2000
|
posted 03-05-2008 09:54 PM
quote: Frank Angel
Since I have very little experience with first run commercial exhibition, let me ask this: isn't in the film company's best interest to make sure the exhibitor who is going to return 90% of each ticket sale to them actually gets to put their picture up on the screen? Doesn't that give the exhibitor some powerful leverage in a case like this?
After getting a runaround from Technicolor, why not go the other route? Call Paramount and tell them you are getting no satisfaction from Technicolor and that the print you have is unacceptable. Tell them you won't play it until they get an acceptable print to you. Every day the exhibitor doesn't put that picture on the screen, that's a day where the studio gets 00% for that title. Can't the exhibitor also say, if the distrib can't get him a play-able print by such and such a date, he's going to pulling the picture entirely. If even a few theatres did or even threatened this, the studios would have to sit up and take notice and put pressure on Technicolor to do their job....at least one would think.
I just don't understand why the equation is so lop-sided. The exhibitor seems not to get any say in the deal. Has NATO or even a single chain ever made a studio sign THEIR master contract if they wanted their picture to play on their screens? Or has any exhibitor even amended or added a rider to the studio's master contract? We do live shows and that's the way contracts are finalized. The act sends a contract to us, we cross out stuff we will not agree to, add riders for stuff we want, then we send it back to them. They make notes and send it back to us until at some point both parties come to a contract they both can live with. That's negotiating and how contracts in other segments of the industry are arrived at. I don't see why exhibition doesn't engage in the same kind of hard-nose give and take rather than the NATO approach of grabbing both ankles and biting down on a towel.
How bout a clause something like, "prints have to arrive scratch-free and ready for projection, leaders in tact and attached, or the theatre has a right of refusal without it being construed as breach of contract"? The theatre would then have the choice of playing the title only if and when an acceptable print arrives, or if the distributor couldn't supply an acceptable print, the theatre could cancel the booking altogether, again without penalty.
Naturally a theatre is not going to refuse prints on a whim because it's in its best interest to play first run titles, but I think it should also have the ability to refuse a booking if the distrib can't supply a reasonably acceptable product.
Frank I also agree with your points, but the truth is the film co's really don't seem to care at all these days. Once upon a time a "miss-out" was a huge big deal, they don't even blink an eye today. We are the bottom of the feeding chain behind video, ppv, and such. (A miss-out is when a print doesn't arrive in time for the first performance of the first day of the run).
Heck Warner Bros for the past couple of years doesn't even care if they book a print at all in another theatre after the first run is finished.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
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
Printer-friendly view of this topic