Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: "Deaf Sue Movie Giants Over Captions"

This is topic "Deaf Sue Movie Giants Over Captions" 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=000904

Posted by Paul Goulet (Member # 297) on 04-24-2000, 10:07 PM:

I thought this was interesting..

03:44 AM ET 04/21/00

Deaf Sue Movie Giants Over Captions

By KALPANA SRINIVASAN=
Associated Press Writer=
WASHINGTON (AP) _ When Aaron Fudenske wants to see a movie on
the big screen, he almost always catches a foreign film with
subtitles or a high action picture.
For Fudenske, who has been deaf since birth, that's the only way
to ensure he'll follow what's going on.
``It's very frustrating not to equally enjoy movies'' with
others, said Fudenske, a program analyst at the Transportation
Department.
Seeking to make movie theaters more accessible, Fudenske and two
other deaf individuals on Thursday filed suit against Loews
Cineplex Entertainment Corp. and AMC Entertainment, contending the
companies violated federal disabilities law by failing to provide
captioning.
The complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia, argues that theaters are a place of ``public
accommodation'' as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act
and therefore should ensure that deaf people are not denied service
due to their disability.
``We simply cannot enjoy movies without the proper
accessibility,'' said another plaintiff, Washington lawyer John
Stanton.
The companies named in the lawsuit say they already offer some
showings of movies using a system called ``open captioning.'' That
system is similar to movie subtitles without the black background
box. It also uses italics in the corner or icons to describe sounds
and events that a deaf person might miss.
But plaintiffs' lawyer Wayne Cohen said the problem is the
infrequency with which such captioned films are shown in a given
week or month.
``They'll do an occasional viewing from time to time to try to
sugarcoat the issue,'' Cohen said.
The suit wants the theaters to implement captioning at all
screenings within 180 days. There is no monetary request.
Cohen said the theaters can make movies more accessible to deaf
individuals through a number of means without exorbitant costs or
inconvenience to their hearing audiences.
One system, called ``rear window'' captioning, involves
providing deaf attendees with a plexiglass screen they can stick
into the cup holder or seat in front of them. The screen would show
captions for that individual viewer.
Another system involves scrolling captions on the backs of seats
and a third would call for a separate viewing screen altogether
within the theater.
Cohen estimated that adding such technologies would cost about
$8,000 to $15,000 per theater.
But Marc Pascucci, a spokesman for Loews Cineplex, said that the
rear window captioning system is cost-prohibitive to install and
could become obsolete very soon. In the last two years, the company
has been doing special engagements of films with open captions.
``We are making efforts to reach out to the hearing impaired
community,'' he said.
AMC spokeswoman Brenda Nolte said the company has been providing
open captions in some of its theaters for nearly three years and
plans to expand the program.
``It has been well-received,'' AMC spokeswoman Brenda Nolte
said. ``This was the system that we have been advised is the
preference of the hearing impaired community.''

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 04-24-2000, 11:21 PM:

I assume $8,000-15,000 per theater means per screen. In which case it would cost Carmike between 21.3 and 39.9 million dollars for a all screen upgrade. Even if it is per location, and I doubt that, the number seems to low for that, it would cost between 3.7 and 7 million dollars.

We just got a memo a week or two ago saying we can no longer purchase urinal cakes, only one in a series of cost cutting measures. Where exactly is all this money going to come from to do the conversion?

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 04-25-2000, 05:53 PM:

NATO has repeatedly worked in vain with the justice department on ways to ensure that theaters are in code with ADA, without making is so cost prohibitive that the theater would itself shut down. The ADA actually has NO provisions for PRIVATE (let me emphasize PRIVATE) venues. These deaf persons who are making the absurd claim that movie theaters are places of PUBLIC convenience, will have thier arguments fall on deaf ears (excuse the non intended pun). As movie theaters are not public entities, the ADA has no enforcement in several key areas. Movie presentations are private viewings and you must purchase a licence (ticket) to view it. There are no attmepts to trick the deaf into attending a non captioned movie. If they go it is of thier own valition. Forcing theater owners to accomodate them and inconvenience others at a cost that no one can afford, would be rediculous. The courts will never do it. So fear not. Besides, if you were deaf, would you go to a movie that you had to continuously look down to see what was bieng said? No of course you wouldnt. It is just like seeing a foreign film with subtitles. You want them right on the screen so you dont get lost. The deaf community wants it that way too, but most know that it would be wrong to force EVERYONE to read the movie. Might as well make silent films again.

------------------
"If it's not worth doing, I have allready been there and done it"

Posted by Larry Shaw (Member # 388) on 04-26-2000, 04:04 PM:

Info on "Rear Windows" at http://www.blsi.com/ncam.htm . Personally I see this as a one house in a multiplex thing, with some kind of rotation schedule so people would know when a title was gonna be in the RW house. But I'm not a lawyer.

-Larry

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-26-2000, 07:45 PM:

So, what's next? Are blind people going to start suing movie theatres because no one has figured out a way to show movies in braille yet?

This kind of lawsuit is really pretty silly, if you ask me, since the cost of installing the "rear window" system or renting English-subtitled prints would likely far outweigh the additional revenue that it would generate. Note that I have nothing against deaf people; I'm just pointing out that it's rather ludicrous to expect theatre owners in most markets to even consider something like this.

Posted by Larry Shaw (Member # 388) on 04-27-2000, 04:17 PM:

And what about those unfortunates both blind and deaf? Could some sort of probe be fitted to the seat.....?

Posted by Randy Rock (Member # 454) on 04-28-2000, 02:31 PM:

We have a "Rear Window" system at the Seattle Cinerama theater. Two additional DTS playback chassis, giant LED message board. Works quite well. But, thus far *only* feature that we received Rear Window "message" discs for was Star Wars Episode Two if I remember correctly.

We also have what amounts to "Descriptive Video Service", a second assistive listening channel that describes action on screen. Audio is sourced from Rear Window DTS. Also works very well. But, again, only software was Star Wars.

As noted in posts, equipment is quite expensive. And, if the studios don't produce software, what good is the equipment?

I've removed more than one or two 35 mag sound systems in my day.

Posted by Mike Colley (Member # 327) on 04-28-2000, 09:58 PM:

I'm afraid a precedent may have been set in the public versus private venue argument. Theatres have already been complying with the ADA on the issue of wheelchair access. As an employee of a major chain, I will also be interested to see how these suggested accommodations will be financed when we have been forced to cut payroll so much as to only staff two floor employees on a weeknight to run a 24 screen theatre.

------------------
Mike Colley
Regal Cinemas
Hollywood 24
Atlanta, GA