Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Pearl Harbor intermission

This is topic Pearl Harbor intermission 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=002288

Posted by Malcolm Gerard (Member # 546) on 05-19-2001, 07:36 AM:

The intermission in Pearl Harbor (for those theatres having one) is at the end of reel 4. Could anyone please provide the correct running time of the first four reels of this film so that I can do an accurate timesheet? It would be much appreciated. Incidentally, I'm told the total running time is 183 minutes (without attachments).

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 05-19-2001, 09:02 AM:

I'm surprised there is even the ablity to have an intermission. I like intermissions, but (at least in the USA) no one has them anymore. Strange how, at 2h 30m(?), "2001" had an intermission, but "Titanic" at 3h 15m didn't. Today, some theaters really push it to get in as many shows per day as they can.

Posted by Bill Langfield (Member # 818) on 05-19-2001, 01:48 PM:

John, every theatre owner/corp prefers an
INTERMISSION thats where the cash is made.
With film studio's increasing their % cut, it
only makes sense to to bring back INTERVAL.
Get ppl back in the foyer to the candy bar
so we have the cash to replace xenons before 4000hrs.

Cameron loved th fact that Dances With Wolves brought back the 3hr+ movie and did so well. I just wish Kevin put an interval in there. So what did James do? The same thing. He made a fortune, did cinema's ??

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 05-19-2001, 03:16 PM:

actually cinemas shoulkd have benafited well from this release of Titanic. Since the film company did not go into the release with the intentions that the film was going to make so much money. They were hoping it would make back the extreem cost of the film. So when it kept on generating revenue cinemas should have been getting a better percentage as the weeks went by. That sort of bothers me because you have Disney sittting there going pearl harbor is going to be huge yet could be less than expected. My feeling is it will be a big success as far as how big depends on how many times you see it.

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 05-19-2001, 07:56 PM:

I'm gonna say right now that I think the film will be a very good movie, with the whole war genre & love story throw in, howeverm I do NOT see this film getting repeat business like, say, Titanic. I'd guess that this would be a 2001 version of Saving Private Ryan, which drew considerable crossover appeal, at least in my area, yet it won't have the legs to go the distance of 4 week sellouts.
Think about the contract/booking agreements you had to agree to to get the film in the first place. Multi prints release after 2 weeks.... that lends me to believe the distributor feels the same way... hmmmm?

Anyone else?

------------------
The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese!

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 05-19-2001, 10:02 PM:

Another thing that Titanic had in its favor was that it was a Christmas release and had very few other films going against it at the time (Tomorrow Never Dies and As Good As It Gets, etc) and there wasn't a new 'blockbuster' coming out every week as usually happens during the summer season...

The boss here thinks the same, He thinks 'Pearl' will have one REAL strong record-shattering opening week, and then drop sharply, as other similarly hyped films (Tomb Raider, Evolution, Scary Movie II, etc.) take their share of the box-office thunder...

Aaron

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-19-2001, 10:15 PM:

Is anyone doing any special promotions for WWII vets? Most are approaching their 80's or even 90's. Maybe some tie-in with local VFW or American Legion posts? Could get some local press coverage by inviting PH survivors to see the movie and talk about their memories.

------------------
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 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 Minge (Member # 574) on 05-20-2001, 01:33 AM:

I would LOVE to ask my fellow Vets to see the movie and talk about old times...but have been told NO passes, NO reduced price groups shows etc. Full price or nothing. If I can't help, then why ask. As for the repeat business, depends on the romantic side of the movie..I haven't seen it. With Titanic, alot of the ladies dragged there husbands, other halves... into the movie on their 2nd or third time. With this seeming to be more of a guy movie, will the guys tell their wives to go if they think it has a good romantic plot?? Just ramblin' I am not an expert...or am I? Expert> ex=has been. Spurt=drip under pressure. Hmmmmm.

Posted by Greg Anderson (Member # 235) on 05-20-2001, 02:41 AM:

I realize that there are those on this forum who've seen this movie already and I admit that I have not. So, having made that confession, let me say that I don't expect this movie to be very good.

First, this is the same producer/director team which brought us that horrible movie Armageddon three summers ago. If Pearl Harbor is half as loud, sloppily-edited and in-my-face then I'd rather pass it up.

Second, there seems to have been an effort to model this movie after Titanic. But think about how well (or, rather, how badly) Titanic has held up over the years. The clunky love story is only held in high regard by the kind of teenage girls who clamor for the music of "boy bands" and nobody can stomache that "Heart Will Go On" song anymore.

So... I have low hopes for this movie, although I'm sure it'll make lots of money whether it's good or not.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 05-20-2001, 03:04 AM:

Brukhiemer has done some good movies, Crimson Tide comes to mind.

As far as the whole love story thing, yeah, give me a break. But I think it will increase business. But consider this, from what I hear, the main battle seen lasts 45 minutes, that's 25% of the movie right there. That's enough to keep me interested.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 05-20-2001, 03:24 AM:

What would you do if the battle scene only lasts 30 minutes, and it's not 100% battle for that entire 30 minutes? Be prepared for overexaggeration from the hype machine.

Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 05-20-2001, 03:29 AM:

I dont know about how big this movie will be, nor do i care.

What I do know is, this movie will lose credibility with me if it is less about Pearl Harbor and more about some love story. I actually heard that there wasn't enought love story in this movie, which seems promising, but I dont know how reliable this information is.

TITANIC could have been a really good movie if it was actually about the Titanic and there was more than that one love affair going on.

Posted by Mike Judge (Member # 558) on 05-20-2001, 03:30 AM:

We've invited the Survivors of Pearl Harbor to come to our lobby. They'll be in the lobby to share their stories with other patrons, setting up displays and just chatting with people. They're quite excited for the event and call about every day to see if it's possible to do this or that. We're also letting them and their families to be our guests and come and see the movie free of charge, not during the weekends though!

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 05-20-2001, 08:35 AM:

The WWII veterans idea might not be the hassle-free PR exercise that it would seem. A couple of workplaces ago we did a gala screening of that masterpiece 'The Land Girls'

to which 50 ex-land girls were invited.

We did the bar and foyer up with WWII stuff - air raid sirens, Anderson shelters and all the staff dressed in 1940s costumes. The press and local TV were there, and when the land girls turned up they all got blind drunk (Plymouth Gin had sponsored the event and probably ended up wishing they hadn't, as every last drop went) and most didn't even bother seeing the film. One local reporter told me he simply could not find one of them who had actually seen the film and was sober enough to provide a response to it!

The jazz band which was hired in to give the event a 1940s feel also drank themselves stupid. They didn't play very much and by the end of the evening one of them was vomiting into his trombone.

I won't even mention the nightmare that was cleaning the place up afterwards!

As for 'Titanic', they should burn that Celine Dion song into the EPROMs of all theatre fire alarm announcement systems. As soon as she started howling away the speed at which a theatre full of people ran for the exits had to be seen to be believed!

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 05-20-2001, 10:30 AM:

Wow, Leo, next time you guys do something like that.. tell us! I wanna be there!

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 05-20-2001, 05:37 PM:

Someone mentioned that there are those here who may have already seen the film..

Has anyone actually SEEN the film? From what I was told, they only offered screenings of 20 minutes at ShoWest. I wasn't there myself, so I have no validity of the comment.

It would seem strange, however, that they would add in 28 minutes of footage ONE WEEK prior to playdate. Makes me think again that it just won't have strong multiple returns from viewers.

To John P: Thanks for the awesome suggestion of having PH survivors or WW-II vets in the lobbies to "relive" the truth.

------------------
The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese!

Posted by Tal Marks (Member # 175) on 05-20-2001, 06:59 PM:

I saw this movie four times in a 24 hour period. the quick rundown:
1 am - print arrives
3 am - print is plattered & started
6:02:55 am - show ends (this was just the initial run-through)
10:30 am - advanced press screening #1
2 pm - special show for a dozen vets
7 pm - advanced press screening #2

I enjoyed the movie... the first time.
If I see it again... take cover.

I think this flick will do good especially here in NYC, people might feel like they finally got they're 10 bucks worth with a
3+ hour movie. I was personally satisfied with the main battle scene. Mixed for 8 channels, this is the first time at my theatre I was impressed by the SDDS (after it was tweaked for over an hour).

We have booked to open it on 5 screens (we're just a 12-plex) plus another few shows on our IMAX screen @ night.

Posted by Christopher Seo (Member # 7) on 05-20-2001, 10:57 PM:

Disney's world press junkets have just finished at my theatre (Waikiki Theatres). We ran a show for a small group of bombing survivors and Doolittle raiders, and there was some anxiety in getting it right for them. The very realistic special effects and 40-minute bombing sequence would be overwhelming to anyone, let alone someone who had lived through it. I heard they did cry, but liked it.

Since I haven't seen the movie proper (in the auditorium, uninterrupted) I won't really comment on it, but from the booth I got the sense it was actually two separate stories, a love story and a trademark Bay action flick. I can't complain about the gorgeous EK print, however. Still, dye transfer would have been better, but wasn't ready, and furthermore I am told the analog tracks on those will be silverless and therefore incompatible with tungsten readers.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-20-2001, 11:32 PM:

Back on the subject of intermissions, I can think of one modern movie that did have an intermission: "Gettysburg." But that film ran over 4 hours, required many theaters to build it up on two platters and the places showing it in DTS had to swap out discs during the intermission.

I personally like a programmed intermission, such as the ones in "Lawrence of Arabia" or "Spartacus". Not only is it going to give the theater a chance to make some extra money at the concession stand, it will also give me a chance to get to the bathroom without missing any of the show. Kind of a seventh inning stretch so to speak. I thought my bladder was going to burst during "Dances With Wolves"! I had to get up and miss part of a scene. The movie be damned. When I gotta pee, I gotta go pee.

Posted by Rick Long (Member # 213) on 05-21-2001, 12:43 AM:

Interesting you should mention that Bobby. I watched a trade screening of "Pearl Harbor" last week,after a T.A.P alignment. Although I have no credentials as a film critic, I will admit that I too suffered through "full bladder syndrome", waiting for the credits to roll, and judging from the line-up outside the washroom, I was not the only victim.

Later in the week, I discussed the movie with a manager of another theatre. The conversation drifted to a comparison of a similar movie made in the 70's, "Tora Tora Tora". He mentioned that it cost more to make that movie than it did for the Japaneese to launch the attack against Pearl.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-21-2001, 06:50 AM:

Christopher said: "...I am told the analog tracks on those (dye transfer prints) will be silverless and therefore incompatible with tungsten readers."

That would be news! Normally, the soundtracks are printed on the B&W emulsion of the "receiver" and processed to yield silver tracks for all four sound formats. To have a dye track, the dye would have to be transferred from a matrice, much like the pictures. If anyone gets an IB print, verify whether the tracks are silver or dye.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 05-21-2001, 06:49 PM:

As for recent films with intermissions, let's not forget "Hamlet," which had intermissions in both the 35mm and 70mm prints. Unfortunately, the intermission was about 2:40 into the film...

Gotta love the 5-minute reels in there, too. I never ran Hamlet and am quite glad that I didn't have to deal with it on a changeover setup. I did enjoy the film, though.

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 05-21-2001, 11:53 PM:

If this thing turns out to be another sorry assed love story with Pearl Harbor as an incidental it will deserve to fail, more than a few bitched about it in Titanic. I'm waiting to see and hoping for the best. With a single screen and the length of this film we'll need an intermission since it won't be practical to do more than one showing per evening, this only looks like the movie business, it's really about junk food.

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 05-22-2001, 01:32 AM:

quote:
If this thing turns out to be another sorry assed love story with Pear Harbor as an incidental

Like "From Here To Eternity"? They bombed Pearl Harbor in the last reel. That was a nightmare show when I ran it a few years ago. A very nice new print, but the shipping case had apparently popped open en route, the reels fell out, the evil black plastic shipping reel shattered, & whoever dropped it just jammed it - broken plastic reel pieces, film, & all - back into the case.

The sharp broken reel fragments & jamming did a number on the spooled print. The last reel had at least TWO breaks in the edge per layer around the reel for about 90% of its length. No perforation/edge-fixing tape, & 18 hours until the show, one show only, & it had to run on a platter. I spent forever sticking a little piece of splicing tape over the edge at each crack, & perforating it in the splicer.

When the last reel all ran through the projector without breaking going around a corner, I felt like I was ready for a drink & tranquilizer dart.

There is a real nice print of "From Here To Eternity" out there somewhere, with a bazillion little bits of splicing tape along its edges. I guess if I'd used a CineBug, I would have needed 2,000 ft. of tape.

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 05-22-2001, 04:41 AM:

Someone made a comment about multiples being released after 2 weeks. According to my booker, the reason for this is that Disney wants full auditoriums. They would rather have you selling out a 300-seater than just putting 100 bodies each in 3 different auditoriums.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 05-22-2001, 10:08 AM:

quote:
They would rather have you selling out a 300-seater than just putting 100 bodies each in 3 different auditoriums.

What?! Can't be possible. That would involve Disney doing something that makes sense and that benefits both the theater and themselves.

The end of the world is at hand!

Posted by Bernard Tonks (Member # 809) on 05-23-2001, 09:25 AM:

I remember showing in the days when carbon arcs and changeovers were still around, the Russian version of "War And Peace" which had a running time of over 8 hours. There were three Intermissions, of which the manager allowed 30 minutes for on the second break. A Russian print in Sovcolour! There was also a 70mm print which had a West End run at the Curzon Mayfair.

William's mention of "From Here To Eternity" reminds me of Columbia's re-release in 1955 of a vertical scan to Anamorphic 2.35:1 - they called it MegaScope. I did see this on a 40 foot screen, a widescreen novelty at that time best forgotten especially in B+W. Also best
forgotten is a budget video I have of the same film which must have been taken from the most clapped out copy found, last shown down a coal mine by the look of it.

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

Posted by Scott Madsen (Member # 167) on 05-23-2001, 05:26 PM:

This picture will sure be on lots of screens. I hope "film done right" happens
so great presentations are given and customers leave happy. (plus a great movie would not hurt)

Posted by Will Morrow (Member # 792) on 05-24-2001, 12:26 PM:

DON'T INTERMISSION THIS MOVIE!

It runs smooth and fast, even at three hours.
I did, however, find that there is definately a strong love story theme. I guess character development depended on it. The only "TRUE" soldier character, from what I have heard, is Cuba Gooding Jr.'s. He is based on a real person, that was the first black man to recieve a silver star, I believe.
Unfortunately on Jay Leno about two weeks ago, they showed the whole boxing scene that he is in, get this, INCLUDING THE ENDING. Pissed me off. Anyway, the movie is good, not great. "If you promote it, they will come." Should be able to fill the seats, for a couple weeks, hopefully. Thats my guess, I hope our patrons prove me wrong.

-Will

Posted by Joe Smith (Member # 190) on 05-25-2001, 06:40 PM:

In my small corner of the world (at National Amusements in Centerville, Va.) Pearl opened on 4 screens starting at about 1115 with advance advertising of extra showtimes. The first 4 shows may have only 75 cars for all 4 shows total. The second set of 4 shows starting at 2:45 had about the same. I don't think there was more than 50 people in any show. The set of shows starting at 6:00 had more but they couldn't have been more than 30% full in any theatre. It ran just short of 3 hours, at 170 minutes with no intermission. There were no lines at the two open ticket booths at 2:45 and only 2 or 3 people at the snack bar at any time. There were 6 open ticket booths at 6:00pm but no lines, nobody at the snack bar and the cashiers looked very bored (and this is a 12-plex). If it doesn't do better tonight and tomorrow it'll propably be in 2nd run houses within 2 weeks....

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 05-26-2001, 12:15 AM:

Well, we're running "Pearl Harbor" without any intermission. Attendence was OK, but we didn't sell out (we have it on two of our eight screens.) So many theaters have it on mutiple screens... I smell a "hit and run" type tactic. I don't know if this thing is going to make it.

Our prints do look good, though.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 05-26-2001, 01:31 AM:

I haven't seen the whole movie yet but from what I've seen this one I think it should be doing more business than it is.

You just have to remember that even though this weekend is supposed to be the "opener" for the summer movie season, it is still Memorial Day weekend. There is a pretty fair number of people who are on vacation for the three-day weekend. To top it all off, the weather has been relatively nice. These people won't be seeing any movies this weekend.

The people who see the movie this weekend will hopefully pass the word on to those who haven't. I'm hoping that the bulk of the business will be comming in the next one or two weeks.

C'mon! I guy can hope, can't he?

Finally, one of my theatres is having intermissions because they have Christie Mini-Winds for platters. They just can't fit 9+ reels. The people at this theatre didn't seem to mind. In fact I got the impression that they liked it. It might have something to do with the fact that they are used to seening intermissions, though. I CAN say that the concession stand's receipt's aren't hurting, though!

Posted by Malcolm Gerard (Member # 546) on 05-26-2001, 05:18 AM:

My original simple question seems to have sparked of a long and interesting, if tangental, discussion. However, my question has still not been answered. Now that the film is running all over the US, could somebody please give me an accurate timing/length for the first four reels?! I'd be very grateful. Pearl Harbor opens here in the UK on Thursday 31st May.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-26-2001, 07:01 AM:

Malcolm,

I didn't put a stopwatch to it, but the film is 9 reels long and each reel is pretty much equally full (give or take 50 feet or so). You can basically bet that reels 1-4 will therefore run approximately 80 minutes (give or take a couple). The entire feature is 3 hours 3 minutes.