Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Does Presentation REALLY Matter?

This is topic Does Presentation REALLY Matter? 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=001658

Posted by Jonathan M. Crist (Member # 413) on 11-17-2000, 10:35 PM:

Thought I would share this customer rant which was posted on our local Digital City message board concerning a local shittyplex:
______________________________

From HBGHSY
on Tuesday November 14, 2000 at 12:43 AM:
Once again the Cocoaplex has destroyed my movie going experience. I went to see Little Nicky with my son, and yep you guessed it the movie stopped and melted on the screen. Sat for 25 minutes until it started again. This is the second time recently I have seen a movie there that has had problems with it in under a week. DON'T GO SEE REMEMBER THE TITANS at cocoaplex, IT IS SCRATCHED. Every time you complain about there presentation they have an excuse, it is never there fault, it is always the equipment. I think the management here should be ashamed. I WONT BE BACK, AND I WILL TELL AS MANY PEOPLE AS I CAN ABOUT YOUR HORRIBLE THEATER.

___________________________

Where I was raised, actions speak louder than words. Despite the complaints the fellow went back twice in one week! Now do you really think the quality of presentation is really going to change his viewing habits?

I don't think so......

(At the same time there are marvelous older theatres in our area with maticulous presentations which are closing because of the proliferation of plexs like this one)

Posted by Carl King (Member # 398) on 11-18-2000, 07:58 AM:

A lot of moviegoers complain about the scratches on films. I've had friends ask me why there are so many today. There are 3 cinemas in our area (my 7plex, a twin and a 4 plex) and friends tell me that all of them exhibit scratches on film at one time or another.

I'm convinced that the polyester film is to blame. In my experience it scratches extremely easily. I've been a projectionist for 32 yrs and didn't begin to have scratching problems until the advent of polyester based film.

Carl King

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 11-18-2000, 06:00 PM:

Hmmm....it isn't their fault....it is equipment failure....

Let me see....

Didn't THEY (cocoaplex) buy said equipment? As such, don't THEY maintain it?...Are THEY saying EVERYTHEATRE has all these problems? If not, then why are THEY so victimized?

Not knowing this theatre....I suspect, they bought junk, maintain it as such and is run by either the unknowing/uncaring or has some booth jockey that is stuck with a bad situation.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 11-18-2000, 08:07 PM:

or all of the above

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 11-19-2000, 06:46 PM:

There is certainly some less than great equipment out there but I haven't seen any that scratches without human help. I don't think its polyester film as much as it is the proliferation of stupid people in the booth. We're second run but when I get a scratched print I'm on the phone asap for a
replacement sometimes it takes more than one replacement to get a good one.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-20-2000, 06:19 AM:

AFAIK, "Little Nicky" was NOT printed on Kodak film.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-20-2000, 05:40 PM:

This Cocoaplex. Is it a first run theatre? If not, they may be victims of receiving a scratched print.

This has happenend to us. When I call for replacement, I'm usually told "sorry, all the prints we have are out."

This is one good thing about TES...they usually have replacement reels. But, scratched film SHOULDN'T happen in the first place as we all know!

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 11-21-2001, 01:02 PM:

"Does presentation REALLY matter?" YES!

In a different thread in Ground Level I referred to a screwup a Loews megaplex did with Made. Since that happened that Loews megaplex has not run a single arthouse picture (which Made was). I don't know if anyone in distribution lurks around Film-Tech but I do know that scenario has come to pass. Imagine having to open Ghosts of Mars on 2 screens!

OTOH the AMC megaplex that's an hour from my house is starting to get a good rep on presentation. As a result AMC landed the arthouse titles Loews otherwise would have had: The Deep End, L.I.E., Mulholland Drive, The Man Who Wasn't There, Amelie.

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 11-21-2001, 04:49 PM:

<rant mode>

"It's the equipment's fault." OK. Mabye partially. Flat and/or scratched rollers will scratch film. But it's up to the people to replace them! That is the exact situation I am currently dealing with at my theatre. 99% of our rollers look like . Our tech won't order new ones! Ugh.... So I have to look elsewhere for replacements, which is what I'm doing. Everyone at my theatre blames our scratched and dirty prints on our shitty equipment. The more I work there, the more I like our equipment and the more I am convinced it is not shitty. All it takes is a team of caring operators who know what they are doing and know how to handle film properly.

</rant mode>

Posted by Richard Topping (Member # 871) on 11-25-2001, 01:20 PM:

At the end of the day, if the booth operation is being run correctly, there are no excuses for scrached prints.

a) If it is a second run cinema, they should be getting a replacement before general release (though we all know that is usually impossible)

b) The team should be instilled with good film handling skills, dont let it drop on the floor, triple check your lace up's, dont start from the computer etc etc etc... (AND DONT LET YOUR FLOOR MANAGER ANYWHERE NEAR YOUR BOOTHS!)

The chief/manager should be embarrased showing scratched prints and should be looking at getting it fixed ASAP!

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-25-2001, 02:19 PM:

Film presentation quality at many movie theaters has really seemed to drop off badly. I remember when the AMC Quail Springs 24 in Oklahoma City opened in 1999. It was a pretty good complex then, but lately I've been disappointed by every show I have seen there. And that problem transfers over to the other newer stadium-seated megaplexes there as well. In the same time, the Penn Square Mall 10 theater in OKC closed --and I think with that that state lost its only THX-certifed 70mm equipped movie theater screen.

The only theater I can visit in Oklahoma where I know for sure care is put into presentation quality is the Carmike 8 here in Lawton, but then a friend of mine runs that theater. What is the average movie goer supposed to do?

I'll tell you what they are doing. They are buying up lots of those little $400 home theaters in a box and watching DVDs at home. When movie theater management decides to cut staff back further and further just to please shareholders, to where the same guy running the projectors is having to tear tickets and work the refreshment counter, you just know the quality is going to slip. Cutting all those costs on staffing and letting show quality erode is just going to make a lot more people stay at home and wait for the DVD. If a movie I want to see doesn't play at the Carmike 8, chances are I will wait for it to come out on DVD. I am not wasting $7 on visiting a dump.

People by and large have a negative stereotype of movie theaters. And slipshod presentation does nothing but make the matter worse. The people that it hurts worst of all are the theater workers who actually care about putting on a good quality show.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-25-2001, 06:02 PM:

I think in the near future movie theaters will become synonymous with fast food restaurants. You get the same feeling when you walk into one.... sloppy preperation, rushed service, thawed out product, trash everywhere, no employees over the age of 21 and the fact that nobody seems to know what they are doing, even the managers. Who knows, maybe theaters will just go all the way in that direction and stop hiring people who speak english.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 11-26-2001, 11:00 AM:

quote:
I think in the near future movie theaters will become synonymous with fast food restaurants. You get the same feeling when you walk into one.... sloppy preperation, rushed service, thawed out product, trash everywhere, no employees over the age of 21 and the fact that nobody seems to know what they are doing, even the managers. Who knows, maybe theaters will just go all the way in that direction and stop hiring people who speak english.

I've been pleasantly surprised with most theatres in my area recently. I know that both Regal and Carmike are in bad financial shape, but three of the five theatres in my area have a higher presentation quality rating this year (so far in 2001, using my review system at hsvmovies.com ) than in 1998, 1999, or 2000. I've not seen a significant "drop-off" in presentation quality recently at any theatre here in Huntsville or Decatur, and have data to support that claim.

There is one location that has had truly awful presentation quality, and that is the Carmike 8 in Decatur, AL. The management and staff there have no clue, but the 10 managers before the current one during the past 4 years didn't do all that hot a job, either. If it weren't for the "1.85:1-only" screens at the Regal Hollywood 18 and Regal Madison Square 12 theatres here in Huntsville, that Carmike 8 would have no trouble being the worst theatre. People still flock to it when they have popular movies, though. People still flock to the Hollywood 18 or Madison Square 12, not caring that they may be missing 23 percent of the image. As long as customers don't care, these theatres will continue to get away with having these problems.

As far as the theatre companies and most customers are concerned, presentation does not matter. That's why we're stuck with Cobb syndrome (1.85:1-only) here in Huntsville and crummy Carmike 8 in Decatur.

Those of us that appreciate and notice "Film Done Right" are in the minority. The group here in this forum is not typical of a random sample of the theatre-going population. In fact, we're the opposite, and I feel we're fighting a losing battle.

The group of theatre personnel that participates here and care about the presentation quality in their theatres are also in the minority, unfortunately. If all theatre managers were Film-Tech types, then very few presentation problems would exist in most theatres.

------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 11-26-2001, 11:55 AM:

Evans, are the 3 theatres that have the higher rating this year Regal? Our Booth Certification Program is only a little over a year old right now, and its very purpose is, of course, to improve presention. So that may have something to do with it.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 11-26-2001, 01:48 PM:

quote:
Evans, are the 3 theatres that have the higher rating this year Regal? Our Booth Certification Program is only a little over a year old right now, and its very purpose is, of course, to improve presention. So that may have something to do with it.

Two are Regal and one is Carmike. For those interested, I've listed the year-by-year ratings below. Basically, take the ratings as showing the average number of points taken off per showing due to defects or distractions. A rating of -1.0 would mean that on the average, there is one very small defect per showing (a very good rating), where a rating of -8.0 means that several defects (8 points worth) are present on the average during each show, which is a terrible rating. I put the letter grades beside each rating since the human brain tends to interpret those more easily than pure numbers. For more details and full notes on every presentation attended, go to my WWW site in my signature.

I challenge both Regal and Carmike to try rating their own presentations using a system like mine to see if their results are similar to mine!

Here are the numbers:

Regal River Oaks Cinema 8 (Decatur, AL):

Overall rating: -0.5 [A+] (By far the best of the 5 theatres)
2001 rating (so far): 0.0 [A+] (Perfect score so far this year!!!!)
2000 rating: -0.7 [A+]
1999 rating: -0.7 [A+]
1998 rating: -1.5 [A]

Carmike 10 (Huntsville, AL):

Overall rating: -1.7 [A] (Second best rating of the 5 theatres)
2001 rating (so far): -0.9 [A+] (Outstanding job this year)
2000 rating: -2.5 [A-]
1999 rating: -1.6 [A]
1998 rating: -2.0 [A]

Carmike Century Cinema 8 (Decatur, AL):

This theatre manages to have awful scores even without a facility deduction pulling them down.

overall rating: -8.1 [D+]
2001 rating (so far): -8.4 [D]
2000 rating: -8.1 [D+]
1999 rating: -9.2 [D]
1998 rating: -7.2 [C-]

Regal Hollywood 18 (Huntsville, AL):

Note: 47 percent of the movies released to the market here since July of 2000 have been scope and 53 percent have been flat. The facility deduction (currently between 7.0 and 7.1) is calculated based on the percentage of scope movies and the number of auditoriums that lack adjustable masking, where everything is shown at 1.85:1. Auditoriums 3-8 and 11-16 have this deficiency.

overall rating: -8.8 [D] (-1.8 [A] without facility deduction)
2001 rating (so far): -9.1 [D] (-2.0 [A] without facility deduction)
2000 rating: -8.2 [D+] (-1.1 [A] without facility deduction)
1999 rating: -9.6 [D-] (-2.6 [B+] without facility deduction)
1998 rating: -10.6 [F] (-3.5 [B] without facility deduction)

Regal Madison Square 12 (Huntsville, AL):

See note on Regal Hollywood 18 for facility deduction explanation. Auditoriums 3-6 and 9-12 lack adjustable masking and are 1.85:1 only.

overall rating: -11.6 [F] (-4.5 [B-] without faciity deduction)
2001 rating (so far): -10.6 [F] (-3.5 [B] without facility deduction)
2000 rating: -12.8 [F] (-5.8 [C+] without facility deduction)
1999 rating: -10.9 [F] (-3.8 [B] without facility deduction)
1998 rating: -10.9 [F] (-3.8 [B] without facility deduction)

------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 11-26-2001, 02:14 PM:

HA! Out here, the Booth Certification Program is only to make sure people are following Company Policy (which rarely equals Common Sense or Film Done Right). The Regal Booth Certifier(TM) who came out to where I worked showed some of the other people how to cut corners when making up used film prints (saying Company Policy didn't say they had to do it the way I said they should) and then reported to the district manager that I wasn't having the top/bottom masking change to Flat when showing slides, which is why I finally left. (While he was there he didn't say a word about it to me; I certainly would have explained to him had he asked. He basically pretended to be my friend the whole time he was there and then found enough bad things about me to tell the district manager.) So essentially their Booth Certifier ended up making this theater lose its most experienced Booth Manager; I've concluded they want to have a mediocre presentation anyway and I was just messing that up for them. I hope Regal theaters in other parts of the country aren't run like they are here.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 11-26-2001, 02:27 PM:

quote:
reported to the district manager that I wasn't having the top/bottom masking change to Flat when showing slides, which is why I finally left

If a movie is scope, if top masking is used, the masking should be set for scope before customers are in the auditorium so that they never see the screen get smaller. This has been discussed previously. However, I'm not sure if I would deduct for it in my rating system if it happened.

If making the slides appear larger is more important than showmanship, then it should be clear that presentation quality does not matter. There is one theatre in my area that has top masking on some screens and I've never seen a screen get smaller after I've entered an auditorium, so either this "slides on larger screen" is not a company-wide policy, or there are some managers and booth staff that, in good taste, just refuse to do it.

------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 11-26-2001, 04:53 PM:

Jesse: What you say about your Certifier really bothers me. As a Certifier, and someone who has always truly cared about Film Done Right, it really bothers me when other Certifiers cut corners. That defeats the whole purpose of the program. Heck, I teach things that are not necessarily company policy, but good ideas, when I certify. The only time I would say that "you shouldn't do what your booth manager tells you to," is if it's downright against company policy. As long as it's not hurting the film and it's not contracdicting company policy, fine. I am going to pass this on to the higher-ups.

Evans: I think "return to flat" is a company-wide policy, but I don't think it's strictly enforced. It isn't anywhere in our manual. It's just something they set up when they install theatres. When I opened my last theatre, we were programming the automation (CNA 150), and the corporate trainer told us to set it up to always return to flat at the end of a show. When I asked why (my first thought was about unnecessary wear and tear), he said the reason was to give a good presentation when the customer sees the maskinig open out. Being new to booth at the time, I didn't know that smaller theatres had top masking. If I did, I would have asked about that. I now work at a theatre with, as you call it, "Cobb syndrome," but if I ever go to another theatre that has moveable top masking, I will keep it set in scope if I play a scope print.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 11-26-2001, 06:28 PM:

I agree with one part of Evan Criswell's view about how those of us who care about quality presentation are in the minority. It is true that many people will still go to the same bad theater over and over again even after seeing horrible problems.

However, I don't see the situation as being that those patrons don't care. They are just not informed. They think every theater has the same kind of equipment and same kind of good/bad presentation potential. It is easy to figure that out when my own friends ask me about film-tech related stuff as it concerns home theater. Their eyes glass over in confusion no matter how simple I try to explain something like 5.1 surround or why DVDs are letterboxed. These are difficult concepts for average customers to understand. And I see a lot of crappy theaters taking advantage of that.

But subconsciously all of those people know that there is something wrong when they see/hear bad presentation quality in a movie. They can't put their finger on what is wrong, but they are still disappointed anyway. Instead of doing some asking around, research or whatever, most give up and accept the problems and then eventually do a lot more of their movie watching on home video. I know a lot of people around here who have not visited a commercial movie theater in years. That's just sad.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 11-26-2001, 06:50 PM:

"Film Done Right" is usually a matter of good common sense. If you are being asked to do something that obviously damages film or harms presentation quality, go up the chain of command to get it changed. But be prepared to defend your position with facts.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 11-26-2001, 08:43 PM:

I consider myself fortunate that I live in New York City. Our first run theatres have "Film Done Right". It may be because many of the film excutives live and watch their movies here. It may be that many of the actors and actresses live and watch their movies here. More than that, it may be that the the men and women who prepare and present the shows here in our first run theatres, really care. In order to do "Film Done Right" you must have "Sound Done Right" and presented in an auditorium that has proper sight lines and leg room.It's called "Design Done Right". Most of our auditoriums meet these standards and I am fortunate to be able to see films in these auditoriums.

You, as the person who is presenting this show should not settle for anything but the best. You are the link to the Director and the Producer and if you have any doubt, look at the credits at the end of the film..hundreds of people worked to bring this film to your screen and they are relying on you to do.."Film Done Right" for you and for them.

Does presentation really matter? You bet it does.

Posted by Paul Harnden (Member # 1034) on 11-26-2001, 08:43 PM:

I agree with John, common sense is a good thing. I was glad to have trained under the a very experienced projectionist that knew the projectors that we worked with.
I am very happy to say that the year and a half I was a projectionist, I only saw three scratched prints leave that was our fault. The trick I learned and still use (and especially working with old equipment) is to check your path 3 times before the movie starts. Once after threading, and twice before hitting the start button. This always helped me find problems that I could have missed during thread-up and the first check. It was especially helpful when working with an overhead roller path because a couple of tall managers could have walked in when you were away and knocked the path off with their heads.
With equipment failure and such that leads to damage, it's always good to catch this early so you can fix it. No matter what you'll get an anal customer walk in thinking he's owning the place and wondering why "Space Cowboys" has so much bass or some stupid sutff like that. Even if you can't help it, just say something complicated, it always sends them back to their seats thinking.

Posted by Gary Martin (Member # 1053) on 11-28-2001, 04:40 PM:

when my chief of 40 yrs experience showed me how to put on a show he was sad why because in his days all music was timed to fit in with the amount of time the audience was in the auditorium before the first reel went on screen the music in the intermission was also done this way the lights went down slowly the tabs went back and you entered the world of the movie you were there to watch in darkness presentation has to some extent become sloppy but then so in some circumstances has the cinema experience i agree that it has become somewhat a conveyor belt butmost of the time now it is just for 90 mins six or seven times a day

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 11-29-2001, 10:03 AM:

Well, in Decatur, AL, I guess we're about to find out if presentation really matters. A reporter working for the Decatur Daily is working on a story on the "condition of the theatres in Decatur". Evidentally, some staff at the Decatur Daily have had some bad experiences at the Carmike 8 there, which has generally poor image and sound quality, as well as a poor cosmetic condition. The reporter felt that my WWW site (in my sig) was a good source of unbiased information and on Tuesday, emailed me and asked me for an interview. On Wednesday, November 28, 2001, the interview took place at 11:00 AM at the Decatur Daily.

At this point, I don't really know how long the article will be or what its primary focus will be. I sensed that a major focus will be the general poor condition of Carmike's facility there, although we discussed all of the movie theatres in both Huntsville and Decatur, so I don't know if the "1.85:1-only" lack of adjustable masking problem at Regal Hollywood 18 and Regal Madison Square 12 will get mentioned. (I hope so, just to get the general public more educated).

With this type of article being done, I have a slight fear that some things may not come through properly in the article, since technical details, if not understood well by the writer, can get changed into inaccurate statements easily.

As soon as I see the article (if it runs), I will let y'all know what got written! I'm sure that my site will be mentioned in the article, since there is a lot of data there about the presentation quality at each theatre.

------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 12-02-2001, 02:39 PM:

Well, the reporter that interviewed me first told me the story would run in the Friday newspaper, then later told me it had been moved to the Sunday newspaper, so this morning, I made a special trip over to Decatur to get a copy of the Sunday Decatur Daily and looked through the entire thing twice and didn't see the article. It appears that the story got canceled or postponed again. I've emailed the reporter to find out what happened and haven't heard back.

If the story ever runs, I'll post it here.

I'm not upset that the story didn't run today. While it would have made the general public aware of the conditions at the movie theatres, as well as of my web site, it might have caused some hard feelings between the managers of some of the theatres and I. (Most of them don't seem to be aware of the site or if they do, don't take it seriously, which is actually good).

When I hear the official word about the story, I'll let you know. I suspect that it got canceled.

------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 12-02-2001, 04:52 PM:

Why is it good that they don't take your site seriously? I would think that if they do, they would do everything they could to improve their presentation as much as possible.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 12-03-2001, 10:05 AM:

quote:
Why is it good that they don't take your site seriously? I would think that if they do, they would do everything they could to improve their presentation as much as possible.

If none of the staff at the theatres take my site seriously, then when I go to the theatres, my being there doesn't affect the presentation quality of the movie I'm seeing. They're not as likely to say, "Hey, there's that guy. What did he buy a ticket for? I'll go up and be sure to check and fix anything I can." There are many people who use my site frequently and take my comments much more seriously than anyone at the theatres do. If the theatre people took my site seriously, then I suspect that many of the problems I report would be fixed. That doesn't happen. There has been no change in presentation quality anywhere so far due to my site. The lousy theatres are still lousy and the good ones are still good. The Huntsville Regals still lack adjustable masking in two thirds of the auditoriums and show scope images cropped to 1.85:1 (which may not be mentioned in the article since it will be focused on Decatur, although I wish it would since Regal needs some sort of push or this will probably never get fixed).

Theatre companies seem to be the least concerned about what their customers think of the quality of their services than nearly any other industry I can think of.

The reporter from the Decatur Daily emailed me this morning and said that he didn't know until Sunday afternoon that the story was postponed until he could go to the Carmike 8 in Decatur himself and make some observations. I sent him a list of problem codes and wrote a brief description of each problem and how to look for it, so he (and anyone helping him) will be more aware of what sorts of things to look for. So, at this point, it looks like the article is not canceled, but postponed for a few days.

------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site

Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 12-03-2001, 12:29 PM:

Well I took 'er indoors, 'er indoors mother and myself to see Harry Potter last night. £5 a skull, to get a slightly out of focus picture, which was also way too bright and exhibiting some kind of ghosting or flaring, sound was odd to say the least. No right stage channel that I could hear from my seat ( and when I walked past the stage it was there, but muffled and low in level ) and surroudn channels which were set so high that I was struggling to hear the stage channels when there was anything above a whisper on the surround. We had to wait in the foyer while they 'cleaned' the auditoreum, and when we were let in it I thought they hadn't finished cleaning, but apparently I was wrong! I stumbled on a roll of plastic rubbish bags that had been left on the steps.

It will come as no surprise that I'll never go back to that place again.

I am going to write to the manager and voice my complaints, for all the good it'll do.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 12-05-2001, 10:51 AM:

Here is an update about the article for the Decatur Daily newspaper. The reporter went to Carmike 8 in Decatur last night (2001/12/04) and told me that the image was off-center the entire time and that there was no heat in the auditorium. I wrote back and asked him if he was in auditorium 8, since I had seen Zoolander on September 30 and there was a note saying the air conditioning was out. He said, "Yes, that's the one." Both the reporter and I believe the climate control in that auditorium have been out the entire time.

He told me the article was approximately 30 column-inches and kept getting bumped when there is a lack of space since the article isn't time-sensitive. It was to run today (Wednesday, 2001/12/05), but keeps getting bumped. It will be interesting to see if the bad publicity (if the article runs) affects the way Carmike has let that theatre run down so much in the past few years.

------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Information Site