Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Message to Projectionists, etc re Moulin Rouge

This is topic Message to Projectionists, etc re Moulin Rouge 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=002313

Posted by Scott Madsen (Member # 167) on 05-23-2001, 09:42 PM:

BoxOffice.Com

ExhiBrief: A Message to Exhibitors From Baz Luhrmann
5/24/01

Fox is sending out the following note on presentation to exhibitors from Baz Luhrmann, director of the studio's "Moulin Rouge," which played at two New York and L.A. theatres to sold-out crowds over the weekend (grossing $167,540 for an average of $83,770) and which goes wide on June 1:

To the Exhibitor,

Two points that I would like to raise about Moulin Rouge. Firstly the film begins in black before the Fox logo and you hear the sound of the audience murmuring. I mention this so that projectionists are aware of exactly what to expect.

I would like to make another point. As Moulin Rouge is a musical the sound level is very important and we have found that the show has been playing very well in various sized houses at 6.5 (on your sound meter), although in a very big space you may find 7 is appropriate. I know that you will determine the correct level in your particular house and I thank you for taking the time to make this adjustment.

I know that the most important moment in the film's life is in your hands and I pass on these remarks so that we can get the best results for our most precious audience.

Warmest Regards,

Baz Luhrmann
Director of Moulin Rouge

Posted by Rory Burke (Member # 512) on 05-24-2001, 03:56 AM:

That is a refreshing letter...or at least the intent of the best most accurate sound possible......sad part is it will generally be ignored or trumped by some theater manager as to not sway from the typical settings.. oh well what can you do.

Rory

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-24-2001, 05:44 AM:

I've copied the message into the Feature Info and Trailer Attachments forum, under "Moulin Rouge".

------------------
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 John Wilson (Member # 269) on 05-24-2001, 07:14 AM:

Our copy of the letter also states that...

'The opening scenes are out of focus and dirty so as depict an old film. This is intentional. Please do not try to focus on these scenes' or some such thing...

Two points I will (sadly) make to Baz...

1. The multiplex kids don't focus the films anyway and...

2. They'll have the entire print scratched before you know it, so you could have saved your money on those scratchy effects.

Posted by Aldo Baez (Member # 790) on 05-24-2001, 12:09 PM:

I also got another fax with this fax saying that there is about 8 feet? (or 12 seconds) or something to that effect of blank film where music is just playing before the credits/movie starts. It reminds not to cut it off but to keep it on.

Posted by Joe Schmidt (Member # 822) on 05-25-2001, 02:04 AM:

This sounds like a good movie!

I'll make a note on the computer to remind me to catch it when the DVD comes out.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-25-2001, 01:50 PM:

Joe said: "I'll make a note on the computer to remind me to catch it when the DVD comes out."

Cruel.

Joe -- you need to get back into the business and run a theatre that knows how to "Do Film Right".

Posted by Will Morrow (Member # 792) on 05-25-2001, 04:18 PM:

It was mentioned above that kids at the multiplexes do not focus their films. I work for a multiplex, and I focus the film. I am 22, so maybe I am not considered a kid. What jives?

Posted by Tom Evans (Member # 857) on 05-25-2001, 07:16 PM:

I am also 22, I work at a 30 screen megaplex. There is 7 projectionists in the team, about 4 people working through-out each day, running on average 12 screens a piece. Our average age is 24. We all check the start-up of each film, and the start of every feature including focus, framing, fuzzy edges, misframes etc, etc. I believe that this level of consistency lies within a common agreement between the projectionists and the chief. We also have a superb team of ushers and floor staff who keep an eye-out for us. Team-work dedication and communication!!!!

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-25-2001, 08:32 PM:

We all have to start somewhere.

I was 18 when I started working as a projectionist.

Theatres that provide proper training and incentive to learn the needed skills generally have excellent projection and sound. Their projectionists are encouraged to really care about presentation quality and make projection a career. Theatres that treat the projection room as a "revolving door" minimum wage job of threader and button-pusher, or an add-on to a busy manager's schedule, generally get what they pay for -- poor projection.

I agree that AGE has nothing to do with a person having the knowledge, skills, and passion (!!!) to be a good projectionist. A really good projectionist LOVES film (although it usually isn't their only love ).

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 05-26-2001, 03:41 AM:

If you are 22, then no, you are not a kid (However, as you get older you will most likely look back and think you really were

)

I mean the 15 and 16 year olds who don't give a rats arse about what they are doing. They are out there and it is commonly known that they are, with a very few exceptions, not capable of seeing the job as anything more than that...a job. Hence, they do not care about what they are doing and are not attentive to the basics of the booth.

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 142) on 05-27-2001, 12:16 AM:

A further paragraph from the Baz Luhrmann memo reminded all that the film would look its best with 16fl at centre screen.

We ran the premiere here in Melbourne for Baz and Nicole Kidman. The initial tech. screenings were ran at 19fl centre screen. Fox requested some extra oomph so we ran at 21fl for the actual premiere screening. We had show prints and the film dazzled on screen.

As the film was only finished days before, we ran in Dolby Digital as the DTS was not ready.

I can't actually remember the last time a director asked for the SMPTE standard (196M I think)of screen luminence to be provided for his film. Most are so worried about the sound which varies so much from house to house.

I know that screenings of Moulin Rouge at other circuits here ran at around 12fl. Where does all the light go? Assuming the theatre is correctly equiped in the first place, add this up.

Old lamp 15%
Poor alignment 15%
Dirty mirror 10%
Dirty lens 5%
Dirty heat shield 5%
Dirty port glass 5%
Dirty screen 5%

I think you will agree I have understated the actual effect that many of these areas can have in reality, but the loss at this imaginary theatre is a whopping 60%!!!!

Is this your theatre????

Most theatres never guess with sound alignments and have good equipment to test and align. Unfortunately most theatres do just stab in the dark with light.

If you do not have a light meter, you are only guessing and have no hope of delivering to your audience the directors intention.

David Kilderry

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-27-2001, 06:26 AM:

I agree, quality is dramatically better with higher screen luminance. Here are some articles I wrote about proper screen luminance and how to measure and maintain it:
Let There Be Light
Don't Be in the Dark About Measuring Screen Luminance
Shedding Light on Screen Luminance Meters
Conquering Contrast Killers

Posted by Peter Berrett (Member # 672) on 05-27-2001, 07:44 AM:

Speaking of light I just saw 'The Mummy Returns' at the Coburg Drive-in here in Melbourne. I noticed that some parts of the film were quite dark and it was a little difficult to make out what action was taking place. I don't know whether this was a luminescence issue or just the film.

Obviously a poor illuminated film would compound such problems for the theatre going public. Generally Coburg's films are pretty well illuminated so I guess it was the film.

cheers Peter

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 05-27-2001, 03:34 PM:

Peter: See my post in the thread 'They can tell the difference! (when it's done right)' for an account of my experience with 'The Mummy Returns'.

It may be that your print of the movie is printed too dark, but ours absolutely glows! Even the darkest scenes are full of shadow detail and every detail is laid bare.

BTW, there is still not a single mark or speck of dirt on our print of TMR. Just jaw-dropping from start to finish! Drool...

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-27-2001, 09:52 PM:

A drive-in that maintains the SMPTE aim of 16 footlamberts will have a picture that looks just as good as a properly lit indoor theatre.

Unfortunately, most drive-ins are woefully underlit, because of the huge screens and low gain screen surface (usually weathered white paint).

Posted by Kyle Connolly (Member # 827) on 05-28-2001, 12:18 PM:

I take great offense to the comment made by John Wilson earlier in this thread. I am 17 years old (I guess I am a dreaded MEGAPLAX KID), and I had been learning from our head projectionist for about a year and a half BEFORE even being allowed to work in the booth. I care very much about onscreen presentation, and I work very hard to maintain it. I have switched to threading bottom - top even when our head projectionist refuses to, and I religiously follow all of the tips that are posted on this site.

Furthermore, for all of the other MEGAPLEX KIDS who may be on this site, stop stereotyping us. Some of us like our jobs and are very good at what we do. Stereotypes are not needed.

------------------
-@-

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-28-2001, 12:36 PM:

John's comment: "I mean the 15 and 16 year olds who don't give a rats arse about what they are doing. They are out there and it is commonly known that they are, with a very few exceptions, not capable of seeing the job as anything more than that...a job. Hence, they do not care about what they are doing and are not attentive to the basics of the booth."

Kyle, he DID clarify this with "a very few exceptions". Clearly you are such an exception. The next time you visit another theater, look around and see what the other projectionists your age are doing. I think all he was trying to say is that "most" 15 and 16 year olds just want a paycheck. Anyone with your enthusiasm and desire to put on an excellent presentation is a very nice welcome to the profession.

Posted by Bill Langfield (Member # 818) on 05-28-2001, 02:34 PM:

Kyle,
When I read John's comment, I almost
responded with 'what a load of crap. 'However, I must agree with him. When we put out the word that we need to train new projectionist's, we figure out who in the complex has shown interest in projection then ask if they are are interested in moving into it. It does not take long to sort out those who just want to do it for money and those who really want to do it. In my case I have been training Tiana for six months and she is one of the three trainees that truly is one of the few, like yourself has shown a true passion for it.
That said, projectionist's are backup managers, and therefore are supervisors for everyone else in the complex, I think she likes that(part too)!

Bill.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 05-28-2001, 04:47 PM:

People with a "PASSION FOR PROJECTION" are the ones needed for "FILM DONE RIGHT"!!!

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 05-28-2001, 07:10 PM:

Kyle wrote:
>>I take great offense to the comment made by John Wilson earlier in this thread.<<

Kyle, if you had read everything I wrote, you would have then realized that you are one of the few. If you realize that (which you obviously do by your comment) you would then fall into the 'do care about it' rather than the 'don't give a rat's arse about it' catagory and thus have nothing to complain about.

I may not be subtle...but I am accurate.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 05-28-2001, 09:23 PM:

I tend to agree with John you are in the minority.
I somewhere have a tshirt that says film is my life
To many wannabbes and others seem to forget that many people this is a career choice and get very frustrated by tghe fact that many unproffesionals that statistically work out ot being the youngest are slowly destroying this industry because they don't give a rats ass
If the shoe fits wear it if it doesn't then ignore it and just remember it when you see a screw up elsewhere

Posted by Anthony Gilardi (Member # 808) on 06-01-2001, 12:16 AM:

I got my print of Moulin Rouge today and did not touch the attached preview, as stated in the "letters" to the projectionists. When I prescreened the film the lab splice between the preview and the movie was not in frame.
So I sat there watching the movie out of frame for a while wondering if it was one the intentional effects because they sent their assuring letter stating everything would be ok between the trailer and the film.
Needless to say, I was a bit annoyed. If they are going to be so persistent at telling you not to modify their film, they should make sure their splices are correct.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-01-2001, 08:11 AM:

Anthony said: "When I prescreened the film the lab splice between the preview and the movie was not in frame."

That "lab splice" was likely done AFTER the film was processed. The previews may have been added in "positive assembly" or at the film exchange. A raw stock splice made on the film before printing and processing might not be on the frameline, but it will not throw the picture out of frame.

Posted by Joe Grace (Member # 341) on 06-01-2001, 02:50 PM:

I am 18, I supose I could be called the head projectionist at my theater (I do mostly all maintenence, make maintenence schedules, ect). Unfortunatly I have 1 projectionist (2 including one from management) that run projection at my theater that is out of school. I find it hard to get other kids to do anything other then thread and start, which makes geting things done EXTREMELY Hard for me during the weekends while I am there.

There are a lot of kids that dont care, there a few that do, if you do care, push the ones that dont, and try to make it easier for you. If it doesent help atleast you know you tried to do something to help.

Dont be offended by what John Wilson said, because most of what he said is corect, I am not offended because I do care a great deal, and I know I do. If you care about your presentation (and you must if you are here)then you should not be offended either, just acept what he said as a fact because most kids dont give a damn, its the truth.

Joe

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-01-2001, 04:55 PM:

Good on you, Joe.

It's always good to hear from the projectionists in your age group and hear positive stories. You should be proud.

On my earlier post regarding the 16 $5000-a-piece 'show prints' Baz had printed for the premiere and how they were going to the majors due to internal politics and not the independents like us...you may remember I mentioned they would be scratched within a week...

...on one of them it only took four days.

Nice big green emulsion scratches from top to tail. Now...it is un-runnable.

Like I said, I may not be subtle, but I am (sadly in this case) accurate.

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 06-01-2001, 06:43 PM:

That's funny, the print I got had the preview tape-spliced but out of frame too! I undid the splice to put the policy trailer on, but didn't bother checking to see if it was in frame- of course it wasn't, because when I don't check that's when it isn't!
There are also some prints of "Mummy Returns" that have a tape splice after the attacted preview, but the splice is actually a few frames into the start of the movie- you can tell by looking at the analog soundtrack. I made one of these up without checking that and has the first second of music play over the policy trailer, so I had to cut and move those few frames after the trailer. (This is common at some theaters that show policy trailers and the people making them up don't know how to find the right place to cut.)

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-02-2001, 05:23 AM:

The Moulin prints I saw did not have the attached trailer hand spliced on. However, they did suffer from the "Fox attachment disease", where the audio for the feature (in this case the low level crowd murmors) starts in the end of the attached preview!!! Why, oh why must Deluxe do this? Most theaters have a very strict policy that the attached trailer WILL be cut off so a policy or sound logo can be inserted immediately before the feature presentation and printing attached trailers in this manner only aggravates what Baz was trying to do.

Saving every single possible frame, the audience noise cut in, instead of fading up. Sad, so very sad.

Hey Deluxe I have news for you, this tactic does NOT work. People will continue to make a cut after the attached trailer. Give everyone a break and give us a good 5-10 feet of black before the feature starts please. (The Technicolor lab can and does do this.)

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-02-2001, 06:35 AM:

Brad: I'm not sure that this decision is made by the lab. The lab normally receives the cut negative and soundtrack and only adds the leader required for printing.

Here is what the Association of Cinema and Video Laboratories (ACVL) Handbook says:
http://www.acvl.org/3a.htm

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 06-02-2001, 11:36 AM:

The lab prints what they are told to by the client and to there specs
If trailors are attached they are often printed onto the neg for that complete reel.
If the sound continued under the end of the credit it was also on the sound neg as well that means it was a desicion made by the producers early on when the masters were being struck

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 06-02-2001, 02:04 PM:

Our print didn't have the problem Brad mentioned, the audience murmur didn't start until after the trailer.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-02-2001, 03:54 PM:

In light of John and Gordon's last comments, then someone at Fox needs to wake up or be terminated. I see this on most Fox prints. Also, if Fox would print frame lines at the start of their logo, most theaters wouldn't make the cut right on that first visible frame of picture which is way too late to get the opening drums on the Fox fanfare.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 06-02-2001, 06:14 PM:

Brad is so right on this... cutting off the Fox fanfare is a major peeve that I just can't get people to watch for... They can't see the framelines to cut it at a good place, so just cut at the first place they can see them.

Posted by Peter Dougherty (Member # 686) on 06-04-2001, 12:28 AM:

quote:
Our average age is 24. We all check the start-up of each film, and the start of every feature including focus, framing, fuzzy edges, misframes etc, etc.

If that is the only time you check, you're doing your audiences a huge disservice. I firmly believe in checking focus, frame, sound and film path at least once every half hour in every auditorium. I alo believe in standing by machines while trailers are running to ensure flat-to-scope conversions and sound formats are executed properly.

Posted by Matt Elzie (Member # 877) on 06-04-2001, 04:46 AM:

This is weird: apparently the MR print we received was actually missing part of the end of the feature. I was told that, during the finale, the film cut abruptly (and in mid-sentence, no less) to the closing credits. This was not a projectionist error during make-up, either. The situation was eventually remidied when we were sent a replacement for reel 8, the reel on which the error occured. However, since I wasn't there, I may not have all of the correct information. Still, I would like to know if this has happened to anyone else. I'll post again as soon as I know exactly what happened.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-04-2001, 06:26 AM:

With attached previews, it may be that the distributor doesn't want anyone cutting off the preview or having a gap between the preview and feature, so they leave minimal black and they overlap the sound. It's not usually the lab that makes that decision, so don't blame them.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-04-2001, 12:42 PM:

Right, but the studio ordering such a thing is completely stupid because most theaters REQUIRE the cutting of the attached logo so their policy trailer can be inserted. It just damages the beginning of the studio logo and looks bad. Overlapping the audio does absolutely nothing to stop people from making a cut there.

Posted by Bill Langfield (Member # 818) on 06-04-2001, 01:43 PM:

Regarding Moulin Rouge.

The trailer Planet Of The Apes, should
not be removed.
It was printed in there for a reason.
(This is called hardlocked - for A REASON)
Your 'policy' tag should be inserted 3 feet
or less after you see the number 3 on the leader of reel 1.

How some people are mentioning the first few BUMP-BUMP of the Fox fanfare are being cut off, due to no frame lines is beyond belief to me. Ever heard of a frame counter?

However, I know FOX cut short the fanfare
when it is clearly a crap movie.
(The Abyss and Aliens get excused)

At least look at the analouge sound track, the cut foot back towards the leader, taking into account that you dont include the Number 3 'beep'

Bill.

Soon instuctions for every movie will be sent
from the director and studio if simple things
like this are not understood.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-04-2001, 02:08 PM:

Bill,

Geez, give people a little bit of credit, will ya? I know what I am doing and there are plenty more people here that do as well. Every single possible frame of black was saved. The cut was done on the last frame of the attached trailer. The problem here is that Fox is OVERLAPPING the audio into the end of the trailer. This is NOT a projectionist fault.

Also, apparently you did not read my post above thouroughly. Do you remember this line?

"most theaters REQUIRE the cutting of the attached logo so their policy trailer can be inserted."

Yes, theaters REQUIRE the placement of the policy immediately before the feature starts. I am not going to break a theater's policy simply because someone seems to think that overlapping the audio will force everyone to not cut it. The trailer still plays before the feature. Fox should not have a problem with it provided the trailer DOES play.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 06-04-2001, 04:50 PM:

Are there different negatives of Moulin being used? Some people mention the attached trailer being tape spliced on, other mention overlapping audio. Our print had none of that, the audio DID NOT overlap (verified by both listening to it and looking at the analog soundtrack at the start of the black).

John? Anyone?

Posted by Bill Langfield (Member # 818) on 06-05-2001, 05:14 AM:

I agree that the policy tag should the last
thing you see before the feature, as it has the foils to bring the house lights down and do the lens change, and lets eveyone the know main show is about to begin.

However it becomes a difficult for us as our new tag only comes in Widescreen. No matter what we say they won't make a c/s version.
(And I'll bet it's because of the cost)

So we have to put it after the last w/s trailer and before the hardlocked c/s trl.

With the over lapping sound track, I'll have
check that out. If its true, you've got to wonder why they have done that. I don't know.

Bill.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-05-2001, 06:12 AM:

Oh, now that sucks! I know Cinemark always used to have a "dual format" policy trailer. Since it was animated, it actually did look somewhat decent in either format, except that the later ones ended up having hard matte lines at 1.85 that sometimes wandered (and of course had hairs in the printed gate).

Are your flat-only policies animated, graphics or live action? How do they look when ran through an anamorphic?

I'm betting there are at least 3 internegatives of Moulin Rogue all cut/splied differently from the comments here thus far.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-05-2001, 06:49 AM:

Brad said: "I'm betting there are at least 3 internegatives of Moulin Rogue all cut/splied differently from the comments here thus far."

It wouldn't be surprising, as the comments include prints outside the USA. Perhaps the limited pre-release in selected cities was slightly different too.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-06-2001, 08:26 AM:

Bill

I thought they were all scope tags.

Thems peeples is crazy.

If they only come in w/s and they insist you run it, then I wouldn't be running the scope trailer. There is nothing in the film's rental contract that says you MUST run the attached trailer. Besides, Apes isn't until August and there's plenty of titles coming out before that one.

John.

Posted by Tao Yue (Member # 836) on 06-06-2001, 10:17 AM:

Bill,

What did you mean when you stated that Fox cut off the fanfare for _Aliens_ and _The Abyss_? What was missing -- part of the opening drums or the Cinemascope Extension?

Until recently, flat films never had the extended Fox fanfare. The Cinemascope Extension was composed by Alfred Newman specifically to promote Cinemascope films. _Aliens_ is flat and so the shorter original fanfare is expected. In fact, in the seventies and eighties, even anamorphic Fox films, like _Alien_, sometimes used the shorter fanfare.

I suppose it's due to the influence of _Star Wars_, which made the extended fanfare so well-known, that Fox began putting it in all its movies. An example is _Quills_ from Fox Searchlight, which was shot flat, but opened with the Cinemascope Extension to the fanfare.

On a related note, isn't the 50th anniversary of Cinemascope coming up soon? Considering how much of a milestone it was, Fox should do something, perhaps revive the "A Cinemascope Production" tag which goes after the searchlight logo. Go to Martin Hart's http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/ if you've never seen the tag.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 06-06-2001, 04:59 PM:

John, I don't know how it is down under, but here in the States it IS in the contract. This has been made very clear to us by upper management.

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 06-06-2001, 11:41 PM:

>>Until recently, flat films never had the extended Fox fanfare. The Cinemascope Extension was composed by Alfred Newman specifically to promote Cinemascope films. _Aliens_ is flat and so the shorter original fanfare is expected. In fact, in the seventies and eighties, even anamorphic Fox films, like _Alien_, sometimes used the shorter fanfare.<<

AFAIK, Fox went [back] to using the full-length fanfare on all titles shortly after NewsCorp bought the company and they introduced the new-style 'flyover' logo tag.

Aaron

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-08-2001, 03:10 AM:

Dustin,

No, it's not that way here. They sometimes send a nice little note to remind you that it must be returned on the print, but that's it.

Many of the attached trls we end up not even running the feature they advertise anyway, so...

BTW, Aliens had no fanfare at all from memory, just some Alien-y sort of James Horner music.

Posted by Tao Yue (Member # 836) on 06-08-2001, 08:12 AM:

You're probably right. I only saw _Aliens_ once -- not even the original, but the director's cut -- from a changeover booth running 2000-foot reels, as the sixth feature in a 14-hour science-fiction marathon. So I really can't recall whether or not there was a fanfare.

Posted by Bruce McGee (Member # 131) on 06-08-2001, 09:43 AM:

AFAIK, "The Sound Of Music" 35mm prints had a silent Fox logo. I have a few other titles that are silent.

I, too, think that there should be printed frame lines at the start of R1, and any reels that have a fade-in/out. Frame counters are great, but I rarely see one.