Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Exhibition in 2018

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » Exhibition in 2018 (Page 4)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Author

Topic: Exhibition in 2018

Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 12-18-2013 05:48 PM

Bobby, the thing to remember about RealD is there is not upfront cost, you just pay them $0.50 per ticket. Other systems, like MasterImage, require that you purchase the equipment. Which is more cost effective depends on your market and how many 3D tickets you're going to sell.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 12-18-2013 06:55 PM

And how long you're likely going to continue selling them.

| IP: Logged

Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012

posted 12-18-2013 10:15 PM

So it looks like masking will become a thing of the past. I was disgusted to see that Cineplex installed a new wall to wall screen in one of their non AVX theatres today. The original screen apparently needed replacing and they just supersized it and left it without any moveable masking.

It really is sad how the modern cimema experience is changing.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 12-19-2013 12:03 AM

quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
It really is sad how the modern cimema experience is changing.

What I think you meant to say was it is really sad how the modern cinema experience is turning to shit.

quote: Justin Hamaker
Bobby, the thing to remember about RealD is there is not upfront cost, you just pay them $0.50 per ticket. Other systems, like MasterImage, require that you purchase the equipment. Which is more cost effective depends on your market and how many 3D tickets you're going to sell.

And that's why art houses should use RealD and regular theaters should use MasterImage.

quote: Mike Blakesley
If NATO wants to do something productive, they should work on getting a mandatory intermission built into any movie over, say, 130 minutes. Make it optional so the theaters who don't want to stop the film don't have to. It would be a simple matter of splitting the DCP into two parts, and creating a simple "Intermission" tag. Can't be any more difficult than making 127 different versions of movies the way they're doing now.

It doesn't even need a fancy fade out and fade in. Just 2 separate feature clips and one un-encrypted "intermission" clip (tagged however, I really don't care). For theaters that don't want the intermission, just butt feature part 1 right next to feature part 2. Bonus points for working it at a quick fade out/in though. Still, it's super easy to automate an intermission, complete with intermission tag in a 3 hour single DCP. Been there, done that.

quote: Scott Norwood
So, what happens to on-screen advertising in 2018?

I'd guess that it either goes away completely (as too few people will be going to movies to make it worthwhile) or it becomes totally omnipresent, to the point of interrupting the feature.

I've yet to see the theater chain's "bug" in the bottom right corner of the image, or a ticker-tape across the bottom informing of popcorn combo specials...but give it time. Some ass-hat WILL do it.

quote: Mike Blakesley
Coke Freestyle machines will be ubiquitous in some chain cinemas, but will all still produce shitty drinks.

That's cheating. Obviously some big chain theater will jump on that retarded bandwagon of Freestyle thinking they are "giving more options to the customers", but mainly switching over because they don't care about quality and are doing it for marketing reasons (to try and seem better than their competition). Plus we already know Freestyle machines pour out shitty drinks.

| IP: Logged

Paul Gordon
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 580
From: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Aug 2005

posted 12-19-2013 05:59 AM

2018 - It will be the same as it ever was. Really what has really changed in the last 30 years? not much. Yes we have DCP's instead of film big deal.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 12-19-2013 10:11 AM

quote: Justin Hamaker
Bobby, the thing to remember about RealD is there is not upfront cost, you just pay them $0.50 per ticket. Other systems, like MasterImage, require that you purchase the equipment.

I guess the thing that amazes me is this 3-screen theater in Carnegie, OK (population 1,721) was able to convert its screens to digital projection in the first place and then have a $4 admission price for 2D shows. Contrast that with the Vaska, the oldest theater still in operation in Lawton (population around 100,000). I'm pessimistic about that theater's future.

quote: Brad Miller
I've yet to see the theater chain's "bug" in the bottom right corner of the image, or a ticker-tape across the bottom informing of popcorn combo specials...but give it time. Some ass-hat WILL do it.

It's horrifying that anyone would even mention such a thing. We're taking the chance some executive at one of the parent media companies that own major movie studios or an executive at one of the movie theater chains will think that's a great idea and run with it. Too many TV channels are already polluted with that ticker & bug crap. I could see studios baking company logos into the bottom of the movie frame for theatrical releases and maybe using some different ones for the home video versions. I'll be reading a lot more books if that shit happens.

| IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 12-19-2013 10:34 AM

quote: Bobby Henderson
It's horrifying that anyone would even mention such a thing.

We've already had trailers with social media hash tags in the corner all the way through, and every pre-release screening seems to have demands of a social media clip on-screen before the show to make sure folks have their phones on and tweeting the whole time. [Mad]

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-19-2013 12:12 PM

quote: Bobby Henderson
I could see studios baking company logos into the bottom of the movie frame for theatrical releases and maybe using some different ones for the home video versions.

I don't think we really need to worry about this. The network "bug" has a purpose -- it's to remind you what network that show is on, so when you want to watch the next episode you'll hopefully remember what channel it was on. There's no reason to market a movie by the name of its studio, except in the case of Disney, maybe...and even then people search out the title they want in the theater they prefer, they don't care what studio is involved.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 12-19-2013 12:30 PM

quote: Brad Miller
What I think you meant to say was it is really sad how the modern cinema experience is turning to shit.

And boothless operations can be added with no mercy for the one who has to take care of the units.

| IP: Logged

Jesse Skeen
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1517
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Aug 2000

posted 12-23-2013 03:50 PM

quote: Mike Blakesley
The network "bug" has a purpose -- it's to remind you what network that show is on, so when you want to watch the next episode you'll hopefully remember what channel it was on.

Well, for me it's always reminded me what networks NOT to watch anymore. I seriously hope the people who started that and currently advocate it have something REALLY bad happen to them. I STILL haven't seen any concrete evidence of anything that's been GAINED by anyone by using those, but if ratings haven't dramatically dropped since they first appeared that just shows how stupid a lot of people are.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-23-2013 06:45 PM

Well if I like a TV show (which I don't, most of them) I wouldn't stop watching it just because of the stupid little graphic in the corner. A little bothersome? Yes, especially when the graphic is covering something important, such as the legs of a Price Is Right model. But not enough to make me stop watching something I like.

| IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 12-23-2013 07:38 PM

This weekend I went to watch an advance screening of The Secret Life of Walter Mitty at a local multiplex, or let's call it movie exhibition factory, because with a total of roughly 8100 seats it feels more like that... I've been avoiding that place like the plague, but I've wanted to see that movie for quite some time.

During the commercials, they were now actively promoting the use of your mobile phone, with some stupid movie quiz app, that will interactively ask you questions during the pre-show (commercials, commercials and yet even more commercials) and movie... And if you answer those questions correctly, after leaving your name, address, date of birth and probably your social security number, you're entitled to rebates on tickets and their supermarket-style and supermarket-sized concession stand...

Around here we already witnessed a Dutch movie called App, that offered a "second screen experience" via a downloadable app on your smartphone or tablet.

So, besides the somewhat general prediction of the "average cinema experience is going to shit", I want to add some more specifics to how this mess will probably unfold: I expect this "second screen experience" to become more of a trend. Alongside with probably the first* "real interactive movie experience", where yet another piece of digital equipment offers the moviegoer an "interactive experience" like: the most votes decide how the next scene is going to unfold...

* I vaguely remember that this has been done several times before on a limited scale. Actually, I still remember an attraction at Epcot called Horizons, where you could choose the ending of the ride, back in the late 80s.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-23-2013 09:38 PM

Epcot recently did a remodel of the Spaceship Earth ride (the one in the big ball) wherein you have your picture taken at the beginning, and you answer a few questions about yourself. This data is then used to generate the "ending" of the ride for you (which is presented in a small screen on your ride vehicle). It's uber-cheesy. The fun part is to make a weird face when it takes your picture, then watch your weird self on the cheesy video.

I don't really see the whole "second screen" concept catching much fire except maybe in teen-oriented novelty movies.

The idea of multiple endings has never really worked before (remember "Clue?") and would just jack up the production budget. Can you imagine the heads that would roll if Ending #4, which cost $15 million to shoot, never got chosen by moviegoers because the word got around that it was "stupid?" And then what would happen with the video....you'd have to pick your ending before the show started? How is that fun?

| IP: Logged

Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012

posted 01-24-2014 02:13 PM

Cineplex Odeon is now leaving off the masking whenever they do upgrades or renovations to an existing theatre.

It is sad and unfortunate but for 2018 I think all new builds will come without masking.

| IP: Logged

Jesse Skeen
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1517
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Aug 2000

posted 01-24-2014 08:33 PM

Just came back from my first time seeing a scope movie projected digitally on a screen with proper side-masking, and am not at all pleased. I haven't played with digital equipment up-close so I don't know much about how they work, but it appears there's really no point shooting movies in scope anymore as they're still 'letterboxed' on the digital projector, rather than unsqueezed as they are with film. Here it looked like the picture was at the top of the 1.85 frame, which was zoomed to fill the screen with the stray light underneath projected onto the area under the screen. Admittedly the presentation otherwise didn't look as bad as the inexcusably awful film presentation this theater used to have, but this is still too stupid for me to support in good conscience. If this the norm for digital projection, I'll just watch movies at home from now on.

This theater (UA Arden/Market Square, Sacramento) usually had a tradition of projecting the tail end of the film, and it appears that tradition now continues as a Windows taskbar appeared after the movie ended and the lens was zooming-out to show the next round of pre-show crap in 1.85.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.