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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Is There Any "Showmanship" Left? (Page 3)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Is There Any "Showmanship" Left? Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-31-2008 06:54 PM                        quote: Frank Angel the exihibitor's product isn't the movie that's up on the marquee....that's the product of the studio; the product that Interstate Theatres is offering the patron is the quality and comfort of the environment in which a patrons sees that movie. This is very true; I am a big fan of "environment" and making the experience special. BUT, at the end of the day the one thing most people care about is the movie itself. That's the mindset of these corporate suits -- the ones who think they care about presentation. As long as the movie is on the screen and looks good, they think they've done well enough. The current generation of people feels the same way, probably. If the movie is loud enough (but not too loud), starts on time, is in focus and in frame, and the theatre is clean, and the popcorn is fresh and the drinks fizzy, they feel they're getting good value for their money. In the last 25 years I have never had one single patron say to me, "I would really enjoy this place a lot more if you had curtains." But I still want curtains!  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 07-31-2008 07:12 PM                     We've heard both sides of the curtain issue....many have said they sure are glad to see a theatre with a curtain and more than a few have asked why we have it. It is a holdover from live theatre where it conceals set changes, etc. and in cinema is an anachronism I think it also protects the screen from the dust and crap stirred during cleaning.  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 07-31-2008 07:58 PM                        Mike... great points! You can have the most comfortable theatre in the world, but it won't bring any more people in to see "Meet Dave", or it's notorious predecessor (and one of my all-time favs), "Pluto Nash"! I'd do waterfall curtains in an instant. I also resisted plastering my screen with pre-show advertising. On the other hand, when I had my indoor quad, not one person came up to me and said, "we go to your theatre because you don't run advertising". So.... maybe I was shooting myself in the foot.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 07-31-2008 08:26 PM                        Jack: Your presentation is pure class! Class starts with the top dog; remember "the fish stinks from the head!" Many times (in cinema and in broadcast) I have been the highest ranking person who cared. This is not a good position, since those above you resent your obvious superiority. Louis  |  IP: Logged Geoff Jones Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 579 From: Broomfield, CO, USA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 07-31-2008 09:34 PM                        quote: Bill Enos I think it also protects the screen from the dust and crap stirred during cleaning. And crap thrown at the screen between shows when the auditorium is empty except for a few teenagers. quote: Jack Ondracek On the other hand, when I had my indoor quad, not one person came up to me and said, "we go to your theatre because you don't run advertising". So.... maybe I was shooting myself in the foot. The absence of something is a lot harder to notice than the presence of something. Did you make a big deal about the lack of ads? Was it noted on the marquee, the box office, the newspaper listings, the website? Geoff  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 08-01-2008 11:16 AM                        I may have put it on the web site, Geoff, but it's been awhile now, and I don't remember. Back then, there was more vocal outcry about the non-stop on-screen advertising... much more so than I hear today. Regal was getting pounded about the practice, and basically told everyone (in the trades) to get used to it. I don't hear the complaining now. Guess the public has either gotten used to it, or has figured out how to avoid it.  |  IP: Logged Jim Spohn Film Handler Posts: 95 From: Bakersfield, CA, USA Registered: Jan 2003 posted 08-01-2008 12:48 PM                     At the Granada Theatre in Bakersfield, where we do specialty shows. I have the houselights, aisle lights, stage lights and curtain on an automation system that mimics my showmanship at the push of a button. I light the arc on projector #1 and start the projector with 400 feet of black leader, I go down to the front of the theatre and play the Overture on the Mighty Wurlitzer pipe organ (about 4 1/2 minutes). When a cue dot appears on the screen I push a button on the organ that starts the automation system with the lights and curtain. I try to play in the same key and same music as the opening music on the film so that I can disolve in to the movie soundtrack. Once we are in to the movie I quietly go up to the booth and wait for the first changeover. Near the end of the film I go back to the organ where I press a button that kills the arc, closes the electric dowser and sound and shuts off the motor while the automation is taking care of the curtain and lights while I take over the show on the organ. It makes me a busy projectionist but I wouldn't trade it for the world. That's entertainment. (and yes if my carbon feeds aren't just right I would be screwed) Jim Spohn  |  IP: Logged Brian Guckian Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 594 From: Dublin, Ireland Registered: Apr 2003 posted 08-02-2008 09:36 AM                     Sounds fantastic Jim, and I think the (current) multiplex cinema model mitigates against the kind of superb presentation you describe at your theatre. If you think about it, today's "cookie-cutter" megaplex format generates huge overheads that simply cannot be adequately supported by the marginal returns from the business on offer to the exhibitor (note use of the word "adequately"...i.e. to the standard everyone aspires to). Cue an unhealthy and ultimately self-destructive cycle of continual cost-cutting via low-cost labour, "no frills" presentation, inadequate staffing, less-than-adequate maintenance and upkeep, and so on. It's the economics that are all wrong rather than the multi-screen format itself. A creative new approach to exhibition economics is required. You cannot properly run a high-cost facility on a low income; the numbers simply don't add up. The theatrical experience could be so much better IF the economics were changed. The question is how? Any ideas?  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-02-2008 10:47 AM                        On the surface it might seem like very few appreciate all those extras, but my experience tells me that is a misconception. I have a folder full of letters and emails from people have taken the time to write telling me that they LOVE coming to our theatre and they DO notice the difference. Just listen to patrons in our lobby and you hear the enthusiasm. Our ushers take so much pride in our operation that they have become almost snobish about the other asembly-line or as Brian rightly calls them, "cookie cutter" cinemas. They know the difference. I am not naive, I know that in our economy, assembly-line is necessary in the majority of cases, but when you find the odd-ball, the unique, the theatre that offers those amenities that may seem anacronistic, patrons ARE impressed and the effort definately is appreciated. I guarantee that when Jim goes through that herculian effort, giving his patrons came a value-added experience in addition to the movie they came to see, it is noticed. Hey, the fact that so many multiplexs DON'T offer anything more than their boring sameness, is great -- it makes the unique theatres stand out that much more. Sure, you can watch a movie perfectly well without a curtain....you don't NEED to have a curtain or cloud projections on the cieling or a live organ concert preshow (freakin INCREDIBLE, Jim), but then you don't NEED table cloths in a restaurant either. But it's the difference between class and ordinary. There is a reason people seek out theatres like the legendary Ziegfeld in NYC -- sure it has excellent presentation, but it also has an atmosphere and showmanship that add up to a major cut above the rest....it has class that utilitarian, bare bones theatres down the block don't. Just ask any movie-goer what he thinks of the Ziegfeld and you won't hear that "I HATE going to the movies" line that you hear when you ask people what they think of going to the multiplex. People know the difference; people appreciate the showmanship. It's the difference between eating at the Four Seasons and eating at McDonalds; people will always eat at McDonalds and no doubt in greater numbers; but they sure do appreciate it when the get to eat at a five-star. People will always go to the multiplexes, but I guarantee they are in absolute awe when they experience Jim's operation. I think as avowed movie-lovers who have theatre in our blood, we should applaude those kinds of operations that break the mold, not minimize it by saying the ordinary is just as good. The greasy spoon isn't as good as Peter Lugar's....it just isn't.  |  IP: Logged Brian Guckian Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 594 From: Dublin, Ireland Registered: Apr 2003 posted 08-04-2008 07:13 PM                     Excellent points Frank, but what do you make of the oft-touted claim that single screen theatres are "difficult to run viably" and that people want "choice"...hence the "inevitability" of the multiplex model? Also, what if you live in an area that doesn't have any unique theatres? My thinking was along the lines of somehow changing the current (flawed) economic exhibition model that yields large complexes basically run on a shoestring (and thus with zero showmanship - this all being very much on topic). Maybe one angle could be for the studios to somehow "pay" for the "showcasing" effect that cinemas provide for their product, thus freeing up more funds for the exhibitor, perhaps via some kind of rebate mechanism (stay with me on this...blue sky thinking here). They would take their percentage as normal but would "rebate" funds that would somehow be ringfenced to ensure that staff are properly paid, equipment maintained, and so on. Obviously this is all pretty wacky stuff but it's good to query the status quo. Certainly megaplexes run by low-paid, transient staff, with poor standards of presentation and a total lack of atmosphere or "magic", do NOT constitute a "showcase" for the studios' output. This is a truth that could make the possibility of future structural change in the industry less way out than it might otherwise seem.  |  IP: Logged Bill Gabel Film God Posts: 3873 From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 08-04-2008 07:43 PM                     In the last few years at the Ziegfeld Theatre, they have done a few special showcase runs before the regular release date. They started with "The Producers" and later "Dreamgirls" and this last spring with "Kit Kittredge: An American Girl Mystery". They tried to turn these into Mini-Roadshow engagements with admissions around $20.00-$25.00 on the first two pictures and did well. (But that's New York for you) On "Kit Kittredge.." they charged $20.00 for all seats and people got a T-shirt with admission.  |  IP: Logged Brian Guckian Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 594 From: Dublin, Ireland Registered: Apr 2003 posted 08-06-2008 07:31 AM                     Question: is the Zeigfeld a stand-alone theatre or owned by a larger concern? The "Showcase / Mini-Roadshow" concept is interesting!  |  IP: Logged Bill Gabel Film God Posts: 3873 From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 08-06-2008 09:01 AM                     The Ziegfeld Theatre is owned by Clearview Cinemas which is owned by the people that operate the Madison Square Garden and operate Radio City Music Hall. It's a 1100 seat single screen in Mid-Town Manhattan. The studios do Showcase or Exclusive Engagement releases from time to time in large market cities. They are trying to make it into an Event, but the booking is most of the time 2-3 weeks before regular release of the picture. And then the admission prices dip back to standard admission of $11-12 dollars from the $20 admission. But people here pay it. In a city where Broadway tickets run $100-$110 a seat for a show.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-06-2008 09:16 AM                        quote: Maybe one angle could be for the studios to somehow "pay" for the "showcasing" effect that cinemas provide for their product, When we first bought our DTS unit, we were only the 3rd theatre in Montana to install digital sound - ahead of all the bigger cities and their chains, I might add. (The first two were indies over 500 miles from us.) I thought maybe the studios would consider the fact that we had digital sound, and give us prints sooner or maybe give us preference on bookings. NAH! It made not one bit of difference.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-06-2008 09:59 AM                        Didn't Disney make it a point to say that, in no uncertain terms, the fact that you put in digital projection didn't make one iota of difference in terms of booking Disney product. In other words, if you were on the bottom of their totem pole when you were showing film, you'd still be on the bottom of their totem pole after you spent umpteen thousands of dollars putting in that spanking new DLP system to save them print cost money. BURN!  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.