This is topic Does anyone think this is a good idea? in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000334
Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 10-26-1999, 09:44 PM:
I was wondering if it would be a good idea to have one place to make up shows for several theaters.
All the prints would be shipped to, say, one theater. That one theater would be equipped with a few rewind tables, a bunch of splicers, what ever.
My thought was that usually each theater that is getting at least one new print has a person to do make up. If you have 8 locations, that's 8 people. Some of them may only be making up one show. But (I was wondering) it might be better to have 4 good operators meet at one location. They would be people you know will do a good job. The prints could be wound onto those inclosed 'doughnuts' then transported to the place they are to open in. They could be inspected where they were made up or where they open.
Of course, I'm glossing over some details, but maybe it could work under some conditions?
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-26-1999, 10:04 PM:
An interesting idea indeed. The best part about it would be on those hard to splice changeovers. Once the correct frame was determined as to where to cut, the other prints would assemble together easily.I understand Goldberg makes a monster sized split reel where the core is a center ring. That would be ideal!
Here in Dallas, each theater pays around $200 a month just to have a guy deliver prints regardless of how many he brings! Problem is it takes the fellow all night to make his rounds, and frequently the print gets to the theater at midnight or later. (Fortunately, ETS ships for Wed delivery.) Seems to me it would make more sense to hire a courier to do that job. I think it would save money in the long run and the print would be at the theater immediately. But this is another story.
Back to the topic...I'd say the problems would be the initial expense of having to purchase such large split reels. Also, with trailers all coming directly into the individual theaters, how difficult would it then be to make sure they all got to the central buildup theater in time for print assembly? Also, would Technicolor ship to one central location? How bad would everyone's fingers get cut up (or marked up) from inspecting all those tens of thousands of feet of film every Thursday?
Something tells me it just wouldn't be feasible.
Posted by Scott Ribbens (Member # 180) on 10-27-1999, 12:04 AM:
I happen to agree with Brad's last thought on this subject. Add to the the list of problems, Cues. What if the central location gets twenty prints of the next big blockbuster, and the 8 theatres that they build-up for all have different cues, they better have the right prints inot the right theatres! Speaking of the right theatres, they better make sure that the right print number (film AND cans) go to the the theatre that they are supposed to go to. Can you just see the studio charging theatre 'A' for a wetgate or EK print that got damaged at theatre 'B'.
The answer dose not lie in having fewer people being able to do a good job at building up prints, but in holding everyone up to a high standard. After all, how do you get better at doing something - do it over and over and over. 
----------
Scott
Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 10-27-1999, 10:13 AM:
I understand that Landmark Theatres in Denver usually builds up all of their prints at one theatre, The Mayan. They do this because they have a union projectionist there and they screen all the films to the press there. Landmark has three theatres with a total of 8 screens in Denver.
Posted by Jim Ziegler (Member # 86) on 10-27-1999, 02:43 PM:
Of course, what do you do when sister theatres don't like each other?