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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Paranormal Activity and theatrical windows (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Paranormal Activity and theatrical windows Martin McCaffery Film God Posts: 2481 From: Montgomery, AL Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-12-2009 09:32 PM                        Frank, it sounds like you're talking UNION there, and we know how NATO feels about unions I recently got a new Master Contract from a distributor whose name sounds like Bony. One of the clauses in the contract is we are not allowed to reveal the existence of said contract.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-13-2009 02:54 AM                        Martin, no I wasn't thinking union, just business with like interests setting guidlines. And I don't see how it would be any different than the MPAA members getting together and authoring parameters underwhich they rent their pictures. It's no coincidence that Master Contracts have the very similar conditions and that is not collusion. Steve, if the NATO members agreed on a guideling which said they will not play any engagement where the slip was higher than say 50/50, it would not be an anti-trust issue or a restraint of trade if it is applied to ALL the studios equally. It would only become illegal if it applied that to Disney (heh heh the rodents head would explode) but played Sony titles with a rate more favorable to that studio. But you are right -- if a few greedy members break the guideline, then it falls apart. I wonder if any big exhibitor ever refused to play a title because it just didn't agree to the terms, or do they all pretty much accept whatever any studio wants just to get the picture. I heard the exhibs refused to play THE PIRATES OF PENZANCE because Universal, I believe it was, said they were going to release it simultaniously to cable PPV. I can't think of any other time that I've heard of where exhibition en masse refused to play a piture for unacceptable terms. Wait, now I remember that I think it was Loews who walked out of negotiations for STAR WARS I when Lucas & Fox demanded a cut of the concessions grosses. But I only heard that in hearsay and not from any concrete source.  |  IP: Logged Jeremy Weigel Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1062 From: Edmond, OK, USA Registered: Mar 2007 posted 11-13-2009 10:44 AM                     I seem to remember that Regal refused and didn't play "The Prince of Egypt" on the break due to failed terms negotiations.  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 11-13-2009 05:26 PM                        quote: Jeremy Weigel I seem to remember that Regal refused and didn't play "The Prince of Egypt" on the break due to failed terms negotiations. I also remember that... don't recall it being "Prince of Egypt", though. Some time back, the company that became "Act III", then part of Regal got into a spat with Paramount. The result was that they didn't book "Crocodile Dundee" or "Star Trek TNG". As the company owned all of the first-run outlets in our area at the time, it was a short-termed bonanza for a local sub-runner.  |  IP: Logged David Stambaugh Film God Posts: 4021 From: Eugene, Oregon Registered: Jan 2002 posted 11-13-2009 05:55 PM                        Didn't Regal have some kind of spat with New Line over one of the Rush Hour movies? Also Paramount and Tomb Raider?  |  IP: Logged Mark Ogden Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 943 From: Little Falls, N.J. Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-13-2009 07:41 PM                     quote: Frank Angel Wait, now I remember that I think it was Loews who walked out of negotiations for STAR WARS I when Lucas & Fox demanded a cut of the concessions grosses. But I only heard that in hearsay and not from any concrete source. It wasn't really a cut of concession profits that they wanted, they wanted a minimum floor for The Phantom Menace that Loews wouldn't give. For years, Loews was pure split only for all its NYC houses: 90/10 and whatnot, but NO minimums. Fox demanded a unprecedented (for NYC at least) floor deal, and Loews walked out. Irony is, they had been going like hell to get the Kips Bay 15 ready for the release, they built the #11 auditorium there to have the largest screen in town (which it still has) with Star Wars in mind. Ooops!  |  IP: Logged Eric Hooper Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 532 From: Fort Worth, TX, USA Registered: May 2003 posted 11-18-2009 11:56 AM                     The "shelf life" of movies today aren't what they used to be....  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

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.