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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Boxoffice Magazine rant (Page 10)

This topic comprises 16 pages: 1  2  3  ...  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16

Author Topic: Boxoffice Magazine rant Peter Cane Film Handler Posts: 12 From: San Francisco, CA, USA Registered: Mar 2008 posted 12-26-2008 06:41 PM                     Thanks for the kind words, Monte. We have some more good news. The archive is online. If you go to www.boxoffice.com/archive you'll be able to search more than 80 years of the magazine. There are still some minor search glitches to be ironed out, so we're not doing a public launch. But I thought the film-tech.com gang (especially Tim Reed) would want a sneak peek. Happy holidays and thanks again to all for your interest in Boxoffice. Peter  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-26-2008 10:01 PM                     Peter, That is way cool... Great job! I can't wait to see more of them. That 1938 issue has 200 pages... albeit 150 pages of "best wishes". Now... how do we order back issues? Mark  |  IP: Logged Martin McCaffery Film God Posts: 2481 From: Montgomery, AL Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-28-2008 04:33 PM                        I look forward to delving though them. As it is beta, I thought you'd like to know that the Jan 12, 1953 issues returns as Publication Not Found Really like the ability to search, and it appears we can do Regex searches (I will have to brush up on my regex skills)  |  IP: Logged Robert E. Allen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1078 From: Checotah, Oklahoma Registered: Jul 2002 posted 12-29-2008 03:06 AM                     Hey guys! Told ya I was in the magazine. Go to the link above and type in Bob White Theatre. It'll bring up an article about the theatre when I had it. The article was published on page 30 in the August 21, 1967 edition. Also, a couple of weeks ago I had the pleasure of recommending one of my former bosses for one of the new awards. Any of you made a recommendation?  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-29-2008 09:31 AM                        Never made a recommendation, but I've been in B.O. a few times. I used to print a "comment" on my ballot card for the Blue Ribbon Awards - those comments almost always got published. Then a few years ago they did an interview with several small town guys about the problems faced by small independents - my wife and I appeared in that article in a photo, plus a couple comments.  |  IP: Logged Galen Murphy-Fahlgren Master Film Handler Posts: 405 From: Canton, MI, USA Registered: Oct 2007 posted 12-29-2008 10:01 PM                     I know this is a pet peeve of many members here, and I just started to read the Fithian article. Here's a tip: stop giving him column inches. The claim that off-screen camcorder rips cost the industry $700m is both extremely ludicrous and insulting to the intelligence of your readers. If we're losing 10% of our business to crappy screen rips, then the movies and the presentation are unspeakably bad. It just isn't plausible.  |  IP: Logged Scott D. Neff Theatre Dork Posts: 919 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Oct 1999 posted 12-29-2008 10:08 PM                        There is too much to absorb in the archives... arrgh!! I could spend YEARS sifting through this info.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 12-30-2008 03:05 AM                     quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren I just started to read the Fithian article Sorry, when BO wanted NATO to be represented in BO whereas before NATO's InFocus and BO publications were two separate magazines representing the theatre industry, he now has the right to post whatever he chooses...  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-30-2008 06:14 PM                        I haven't seen the January issue yet, but I did renew my subscription as a result of the positive changes that have been discussed in this thread. I have been in touch with both Mr. Cane and the editor (Amy Nicholson) and I believe that both are committed to improving the publication and making it a useful and interesting source of information for exhibitors. (Shameless plug: check out my article on successful independent theatres in the February issue.)  |  IP: Logged Martin Brooks Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 900 From: Forest Hills, NY, USA Registered: May 2002 posted 12-30-2008 08:35 PM                        The problem with lawyers and the like is that they consider any illegal use of their content to be a "loss". But just because someone downloads or views an unauthorized version of something doesn't mean they would have purchased it had the unauthorized version not been available. That's like saying if you stop car thieves there would be more car sales. I remember attending presentations in the 1970s when lawyers would scream about people who taped songs onto reel-to-reel or audiocassettes. From their point of view, every song taped was a lost sale, which was ludicrous. Every study ever done demonstrated that those who taped the most also bought the most records. That's not to say that I think the industry shouldn't try to stop people from "stealing" their product. But if I were an industry exec, the thing I'd be least concerned about is someone who videotapes in a theatre. I'd be much more concerned about copies of screeners being made or bootlegging at the lab or production house level. The same execs who cry about some jerk who videotapes a movie (something I have NEVER seen done in the four years I worked as a presentation evaluator) are also pushing towards common release dates for all formats. If you release on DVD or on cable or on download the same day you release in theatres, it's all over anyway.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-30-2008 08:36 PM                        quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren The claim that off-screen camcorder rips cost the industry $700m is both extremely ludicrous and insulting Well...they take the number of bootlegs and multiply by the average ticket price and that is apparently the result. It doesn't really matter that many (most?) of those bootleg viewers wouldn't have bought a ticket...what matters is they saw the content for free, therefore they got $ dollars "worth of" content without paying for it. The lack of quality is not the issue; if I was the movie's maker or owner I would feel ripped off for that dollar amount. (Sorry for going off topic, but since Boxoffice talks quite alot about movie theft, I guess it's not that far off.) Question for Mr. Cane: Are the archives going to be updated monthly with the current issue? quote: Martin Brooks That's like saying if you stop car thieves there would be more car sales. Maybe if a person wants a car but doesn't want to pay for it, we should just allow them to steal it!  |  IP: Logged Peter Cane Film Handler Posts: 12 From: San Francisco, CA, USA Registered: Mar 2008 posted 12-30-2008 11:09 PM                     I'm glad you're all enjoying the archive as much as the staff at Boxoffice has. There were lots of project hours spent getting lost in those pages. To Mark G. - Sorry to say that we cannot offer hard copy back issues. The close to 3,000 issues that we scanned are bound into leather volumes, unfortunately. To Mike B. - we add each new issue to the archive as it comes off the press and will do so for the next several issues, but that may be changing in the near future. Happy New Year to you all, Peter  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 01-15-2009 08:50 PM                       quote: Peter Cane I thought the film-tech.com gang (especially Tim Reed) would want a sneak peek. OH, Yes!!! THANK YOU! Fantastic! quote: Scott Norwood check out my article on successful independent theatres in the February issue Congratulations, Scott! I will definitely check it out. Good man.  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 01-18-2009 03:22 AM                     Excellent article there, "Mr. Scott" -Monte  |  IP: Logged Kenneth James Bacon Film Handler Posts: 5 From: Mill Creek, WA USA Registered: Jan 2009 posted 01-21-2009 12:24 PM                        Hello: If you read Boxoffice - and I know that you do - you've seen my name. This month, my monthly column Timecode is titled Screen Test and challenges our readers to identify the titles of 15 films from their one-sheets from which the titles have been surgically removed. Give it a try. Send me your answers (ken@boxoffice.com). Perfect entries will be touted and heralded in next month's issue. Thanks for reading. cheers, KJB  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 16 pages: 1  2  3  ...  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16

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.