Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Transformers prints delivery info ??

This is topic Transformers prints delivery info ?? 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=008776

Posted by Jake Lafree (Member # 3656) on 06-16-2007, 11:37 PM:

Anyone have any specific information as to when Paramount will release prints for Transformers?

Offical opening is Tuesday July 3, but we have shows on Monday night in the 8pm hour. My guess is a late Saturday night delivery, as I can't see our normal Paramount courier coming in on a Sunday....

Posted by Kamil Jackson-Chaka (Member # 4316) on 06-17-2007, 02:26 PM:

My normal carrier doesn't deliver on Saturdays, Sundays, and I'm pretty sure they won't be open that Monday. Pretty much, if we don't get it the Friday before, we can't show the movie. I've already started talking to my booker about this, but he still hasn't told me when the prints would be released from the depots.

Posted by Timothy Eiler (Member # 383) on 06-18-2007, 09:50 PM:

I was told I could pick up my print on Friday But that one of the cans would have a lock on it and I would get on call on Monday with the combination to open it.

Posted by Jake Lafree (Member # 3656) on 06-18-2007, 10:16 PM:

Combination lock? Interesting. Not surprised to see this type of security for this movie though.

Like a lock would stop me from opening that sucker......

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 06-18-2007, 11:34 PM:

I can see you with the blow torch now Jake. [evil]

My prediction is Friday at some point. Weirdest delivery I ever remember was the Saturday delivery of The Passion. It showed up just in time to be watched on the Sabbath.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 06-19-2007, 01:44 AM:

It seems since the 'Life Aquatic' fiasco a few years back they've been more careful about delivering prints early. Hopefully the film prints will be delievered early enough for proper build/pre-screening. I'm sure our digital drive will be here Wednesday or Thursday, though who knows whent he key will be good for.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 06-19-2007, 12:23 PM:

Does Fed/Ex deliver on Saturday? paramount has been known to use them for film pick ups I wonder if they use them for delivery of new prints in these situations.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-19-2007, 01:29 PM:

quote: Kamil Jackson-Chaka
I'm pretty sure they won't be open that Monday.

Why wouldn't a carrier be open on Monday if the holiday is on Wednesday? Just specify UPS or FedEx.

Posted by Kamil Jackson-Chaka (Member # 4316) on 06-20-2007, 09:57 AM:

who delivers it is out of my control, side effect of working for a giant corporate entity. My delivery service seems to close down every chance they get. The earliest they would deliver would 2pm and we have 8pm shows. That leaves 6 hrs for building and pre-screening of somewhere between 4 and 6 prints. I'm not that fast.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 06-20-2007, 10:31 AM:

Even in corporate groups delivery isn't always done by the same company.

Like we've gotten replacement reels sent to us through UPS before when the print itself was sent through groups like DHL or whoever. And if you're worried about getting the print, how about sending an email to whoever is in charge of your company's booking dept?

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 06-21-2007, 01:23 AM:

Although we are opening this digitally we got a fax detailing the plans for 35mm delivery-its confirmed, COMBINATION LOCKS!! [Roll Eyes]

Apparantly the combination for the second can will not be available until Monday. That should make getting replacement reels for the 8pm show real easy, eh? Morons.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-21-2007, 01:33 AM:

Don't forget everyone needs to cancel a couple of their SHREK 3 public shows in order to be able to properly screen their Transformers prints on Monday afternoon before they are exhibited to the public.

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 06-26-2007, 08:59 PM:

I'm betting the horse will be out of the barn long before we get the combinations to those locks, and bootleggers will be selling copies before the weekend is over.

In the meantime, the rest of us will all do a barn dance to get those prints ready for 8PM Monday, provided of course we get the correct combinations! Somewhere along the line, someone will be [sex]

Posted by Dave Ritchie (Member # 4030) on 06-26-2007, 09:23 PM:

We start with this at 11am tomorrow morning, we originally thought that the print was going to turn up tonight but have just been informed that it wont be sent till first think tomorrow morning- There goes the first session.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 06-26-2007, 10:55 PM:

quote: Jake Lafree
Like a lock would stop me from opening that sucker......

Obviously it won't be impossible to open but....from the fax:

quote:
The locks, once opened MUST be returned with the feature print as they will be inventoried and verified that they have not been tampered with. Please place them loose into the film cans upon return.
Any locks not returned or altered in any way will be documented and given to the appropriate authorities for piracy investigation.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 06-27-2007, 12:12 AM:

quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr
In the meantime, the rest of us will all do a barn dance to get those prints ready for 8PM Monday, provided of course we get the correct combinations! Somewhere along the line, someone will be

Like when I had a trade Screening of Ratatouille one of the locks would not open with any of the combinations that Technicolor provided. We finally had to go out and get some bolt cutters to cut the lock off.

quote: Dave Ritchie
We start with this at 11am tomorrow morning, we originally thought that the print was going to turn up tonight but have just been informed that it wont be sent till first think tomorrow morning- There goes the first session.

If they are opening the film already over seas then why bother with the locks. The bootleg copies will be over here and on sale before the first U.S. showing

Posted by Dave Ritchie (Member # 4030) on 06-27-2007, 01:11 AM:

I been wondering that one myself

Posted by Jake Lafree (Member # 3656) on 06-27-2007, 02:11 AM:

Yes Lyle, I know the locks have to be returned. I typed that post that you quoted before we got the fax from Paramount regarding the locks, etc.

Its not the locks that are that annoying, just the fact that Paramount leaves us NO TIME to screen them.

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 06-27-2007, 02:36 AM:

As I was reading the fax from DFS I couldn't help but think that someone will simply drill out the hinge rivets and replace them before sending the cans back.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 06-27-2007, 05:25 PM:

I've had a few locked cans in the past that had crappy back hinges (the split rectangle steel rod variety) that allowed me to open the cans that way.

Posted by Dave Ritchie (Member # 4030) on 06-27-2007, 07:20 PM:

Our print turned up this morning just before show time so managed to get it on the screen about 30 min late but the customers were more then happy to wait.

I'm guessing that we are not much of a piracy risk down in this part of the world as the print turned up in a cardboard box same as always

Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 06-28-2007, 07:38 PM:

Email sent out by Paramount about Transformers and locks.

Please be aware of the following information regarding the resolution of potential problems with the Master locks that are on the 2nd can of the TRANSFORMERS prints…

The locks that DFS has purchased were top of the line Master locks that **** brought to **** for approval. Out of approx. 6500 locks that DFS has set in preparation for Transformers on 7/3, we encountered 37 (less than 1%) that have malfunctioned one way or another. DFS home office employees did double check each and every lock before we allocated them out to our depots to be attached to the second half of all release prints. In the event that a theatre does have a problem unlocking the print from the can, we have put together a "troubleshooting" guide that our call center will follow to assist the theatres.

If a theatre does contact you with a lock issue, please refer them to our call center at 1-800-734-3969.

End email:

Doesn't it make you all warm and fuzzy that top of the line Master Locks were used on those rusted, dented, broken hasp shipping cans. [Big Grin]

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 06-28-2007, 07:56 PM:

I wonder if "chuck the film can off the top of your roof" is on the troubleshooting list?

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 06-28-2007, 09:41 PM:

Honestly, every theatre should have a pair of bolt cutters in your toolbox. If something goes wrong, locks come off.

And enterprising theatres might have a pair of Master 175 locks:

and a pair of Master 179 locks:

just in case you wish you had a set to put back on [Smile]

--jhawk

Posted by Jon P. Inghram (Member # 4125) on 06-29-2007, 12:36 AM:

Our print came in those square plastic "cans" (not Fox boxes) and had a Lewis N. Clark TSA24 lock, not a Master Lock.

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 06-29-2007, 05:13 AM:

How is this comabatting piracy when it's being released in Australia on June 29? I presume other countries might have it early, as well. Are they implying that only American theater employees are thieves?

Posted by Marc Jensen (Member # 3561) on 06-29-2007, 07:47 AM:

Transformers International Release Dates from IMDB.

Combat piracy? Refer to the 'pre-release' of Hostel II for assumptions as to what my thoughts on that might be.

Anyway, just for reference sake I'm in about the same boat as Dave. New Zealand releases came in the usual cardboard boxes that films always come in, probably with the highly secure protection of a codename labeled on the outside (Can't remember - Stopping to read names on boxes is hardly worth the hassle anymore). It released here on the 28th and the print for my cinema arrived on the 27th.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 06-29-2007, 03:17 PM:

We had six prints of the Village for a sneak screening, all padlocked up (12 padlocks), and they all had the same combination.

I wonder if all locks in this case have the same combination, or if they went through the trouble of making them all different. What a logistical nightmare that would be.

Posted by Jon P. Inghram (Member # 4125) on 06-29-2007, 03:39 PM:

I thought the combinations weren't going to be released until Monday?

Doh, missed the sneak part. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 06-30-2007, 12:04 AM:

We received three prints for our 15 screener. They arrived yesterday and - sure enough - three of the six cases have combination locks on them. We'll have about six hours to make up those three and screen them for eight o'clock show that evening. Good grief! There's one theatre in Medford, Oregon - ours - and we don't have a piracy problem here.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 06-30-2007, 12:41 AM:

The latest I've heard is that the combinations locks aren't being done completely as an anti-piracy measure. Since they knew the prints were going to get delivered on Friday, Paramount didn't want unlimited unauthorised screenings all weekend.

At least the un-locked cans are the first reels in order so you can at least make up half the print ahead of time. They could have really played games and mixed the reels up so this wasn't the case.

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 06-30-2007, 01:40 AM:

Built up the first 3 reels and trailer pack and screened it last night. So far no problems. To be continued Monday morning.

Posted by Keith Peticolas (Member # 971) on 06-30-2007, 01:42 AM:

^Now that's a little more sensible excuse for the locks. Seeing how the movie is already playing somewhere else on Earth. They could of just asked us not the play the movie till Sunday night or so. By the way my copy has the cheapest looking little lock on it. A wet noodle would kill it.

Posted by Ryan Navaroli (Member # 3477) on 06-30-2007, 04:31 PM:

theres only like 10,000 combos... we figured out ours and both prints had the same combo

Posted by Jon P. Inghram (Member # 4125) on 06-30-2007, 04:39 PM:

If you go to the website shown on the sheet included with the movie it just has a "XXXX" placeholder, no forms to enter your theater or anything like that, I bet all the locks have the same number.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-30-2007, 04:55 PM:

If the studio simply wanted to prevent pre-screenings until Sunday night (for technical checks), then they would be releasing the code on Sunday. That isn't the case though. They don't want all of the horrible reviews to hit the internet before they have a chance to make a buck!

(They could've at LEAST only locked the last reel. Dealing with 20 minutes per print on Monday wouldn't be that big of an issue. The last HALF was totally unnecessary.)

Posted by Blaine Young (Member # 3992) on 06-30-2007, 11:06 PM:

Our 4 prints all had the same combination - as well as several other prints received by theaters across town. It took us about 25 minutes to figure out the combination.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 06-30-2007, 11:54 PM:

Our two prints had two different combinations. I guess one of our locks was in the 1% that were "defective". Good thing we figured it out ahead of time. That could have really sucked.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 07-01-2007, 01:23 AM:

Ummm... Maybe this is like a Republican discussing politics with a Democrat, but...

Considering Paramount wanted their prints secured until Monday, was it so out of the question to honor their security efforts and leave the locks alone? This kind of stuff only supports their already skeptical attitude about exhibitors. Next time, we might not get our prints at all until the day they hit the screen.

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 07-01-2007, 01:35 AM:

Its probably not a good idea to announce it on a public forum either. Better hope it doesn't violate the licensing agreement. [uhoh]

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 07-01-2007, 01:53 AM:

Effectively, we don't have our prints until Monday. We can't pre-screen them to make sure everything is okay, so they should have saved themselves a bunch of money and just shipped them to arrive on Monday, or not gone to all the trouble of padlocking them .

Posted by Blaine Young (Member # 3992) on 07-01-2007, 02:15 AM:

I suspect the security measures are more to protect the prints from possible seizure and tampering in transit to the venue, not preventing exhibitors from pre-screening.

Given the number of bad reels we have had this summer on nearly every major release, it only makes good sense to pre-screen a feature that is going to have so many release prints.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 07-01-2007, 02:25 AM:

quote: Blaine Young
I suspect the security measures are more to protect the prints from possible seizure and tampering in transit to the venue, not preventing exhibitors from pre-screening.

I think you may have missed the boat on that assumption. That lock is not going to keep anyone out of the can if they steal it off the truck.

Posted by Michael Hossen (Member # 4274) on 07-01-2007, 03:09 AM:

Our print came in cardboard boxes with no padlocks(obviously), as all of the prints we receive do. It was delivered on Thursday, the first screening date.

Posted by Marc Jensen (Member # 3561) on 07-01-2007, 03:40 AM:

quote: Brad Miller
If the studio simply wanted to prevent pre-screenings until Sunday night (for technical checks), then they would be releasing the code on Sunday. That isn't the case though. They don't want all of the horrible reviews to hit the internet before they have a chance to make a buck!

The 'horrible' reviews currently at 82% on Rotten Tomatoes? [Big Grin]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-01-2007, 04:27 AM:

Well I picked up 7 prints of this retarded film only to find out that I received 7 used prints! (Gosh, thanks DFS for intentionally doing that! No way did I just HAPPEN to receive 7 used prints when I doubt there were more than 10 used prints in the Dallas depot from trade and press screenings. This was clearly the work of an immature asshole at the depot who must've thought it would be funny to give the one set of theaters that are picky about quality and who always return prints in pristine condition the worst prints in the depot. [fu]

)

One of the prints has severe edge damage on reels 1 and 3, but 2 is fine and it had heavy oil on the heads and tails (this is starting to look like a changeover print with one bad Simplex projector) and the other prints are DIRTY and were poorly handled with scratches at the reel changes. EVERY SINGLE DAMN ONE of these prints (except the presumed "changeover" print) used masking tape to "splice" the leaders with and one had leaders mixed and matched on the wrong reels. All of them had damage to the attached trailer, which of course went promptly in the trash. I can't wait to see what other breakdown problems and print damage are lurking in the other cans because Dreamworks is being so nice to give us enough time to deal with it. [Roll Eyes]

Seriously, what the hell is wrong with people these days? It's not like these prints had more than one or MAYBE two passes through a projector!!! This just further proves my point that in this day and age of concession stand projectionists that once a print has been played ONE TIME, the outstanding odds are that it is damaged in some form or another.

I so wish prints had a "checkout" card like the library so you could see where it played. One print had shipping stickers from Cinemark in El Paso, but I have no idea where the other 6 prints came from. Regardless this goes out to the Cinemark in El Paso...YOU SUCK!

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 07-01-2007, 05:37 AM:

I'll bet DFS would be thrilled to see you at their dock with 7 prints to be replaced.

I'd have to agree. It's hard to believe you'd get that many bad prints by accident... unless of course, DFS routed all their used screener prints to Texas! Either that, or they know you'll clean them up?

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 07-01-2007, 10:04 AM:

Just sitting here thinking about Brad's problem above, and all the other comments being made about this release.

All of this is indicative of the state of the industry today. It's no longer run by theater people, but by corporate suits who havn't a clue about how film is made up for presentation, or for that matter, the presentation itself. They don't care about other people's problems, or even the fact that the people on this forum take pride in their work.

We all know this latest adventure in combating piracy has already failed- one of our projectionists told me late this past week that there were three internet sites where the film was available for download on what he referred to as "digital quality".

So, now it's left to the rest of us to get these prints ready for presentation tomorrow. I know in my case, as in many others, that the first run-through will be before a live audience. The suits are counting on the fact that there will be only a few problems (After all, they deal in percentages)and they will probably not hear about them anyway, let alone have to deal with them. They also count on the fact that all the exhibitors will bust their asses to be ready for the public come 8PM.

So let the exhibitors worry about it. They are the ones who have to deal with irate customers when something goes wrong. They are the ones who have to call for replacement reels and prints. They are the ones whose bottom line is affected when people stop going to their theater. They are the ones who have to pay the high percentage of the gross.

It's times like these that I'm glad I'm not a theater owner. It doesn't make me glad, however, to see this industry going to hell in a handbasket.

And as far as Brad's problem goes, that smells like "set-up" all the way.

Posted by Tony Monje (Member # 2775) on 07-01-2007, 12:50 PM:

My projectionist did figure out the lock code, and I do feel that this is the same code used on all prints. I, like many other managers and projectionists was having to deal with the extra stress at this busy time of the year. I have no interest or desire in pirating films, but over the years it seems that theater owners, managers and projectionists are targeted as "people of interest" when dealing with the piracy issue. At one time, I can remember attending ShoWest and being preached to by executives from several studios that we were "partners in exhibition". Now, I see less support by the studios who even bother to attend ShoWest, along with getting blamed for a bad year (2005) because our cinemas are either sub-par, or our concession prices are too high, and threatened by certain studios execs that maybe a simultaneous release theatrically and on dvd or pay-per view is a good idea. If I attend a screening, I cannot have a camera phone on me, I am wanded, and often there is a guy with infrared goggles watching us. After 19 years in the business, it really makes all the hard work I have put in feel worth it when I cannot be trusted with either not showing early screenings, or attempting to pirate the film we are exhibiting. I, like most others, simply want to make sure the film has no problems, is all there, and will run without incident and be a great ride for our customers. I want to make sure it will be perfect for the paying customers at 8:00 Monday. Just wait until all cinemas go digital, this is when the studios will really try to control how we run our business.

Posted by Blaine Young (Member # 3992) on 07-01-2007, 02:00 PM:

It's often been said that locks only keep honest people out. With that in mind, the entire idea of padlocking these prints with these cheap locks and setting the combination to the exact same code on every print seems to be an incredible waste of time and money.

I for one am justified in my pre-screening of our prints. While I didn't have Brad's problems, we did have at least one bad reel - with one print left to build and screen tonight.

We're not supposed to have access to these prints until tomorrow, but if I wait until 9am when we're supposed to get the lock combination, I'll never get a replacement reel in time for the 8pm showings.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 07-01-2007, 02:03 PM:

just out of curiosity what was wrong with the reel? Would the audiance have noticed and would ithave kept you off screen?

Posted by Blaine Young (Member # 3992) on 07-01-2007, 02:16 PM:

It is absolutely noticeable. It has a WHITE scratch at center right on the screen which starts out almost unnoticed at the beginning of Reel 5, but by about 10 minutes in, it is very noticible. By the end of the reel, it is like there is simply no emulsion at all, but only at that one spot on the print.

When I went back and rechecked the Head/Tail of the reel, I could not see anything with any light source in the booth, other than when projected. That kind of defect, similar to water spots we had on a reel of Zodiac, is almost impossible to see on the bench.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 07-01-2007, 02:23 PM:

Negative scratch. The negative they were using to process that reel was worn out or had a problem during that process. You will have to wait till Monday morning anyway to get a replacement since no one is going to be at a lab or in the depot to get you one. There is a good chance that the depot will not have a reel to get you anyway and one would have to come straight from the lab. You may be stuck playing it till you get one.

Posted by Jon P. Inghram (Member # 4125) on 07-01-2007, 02:31 PM:

One reel in the open can of our print was also messed up. It looks like white dust concentrated in a vertical band near the middle of the screen, so I assume it happened while printing.

Just saw Darryl's post, so that makes sense. Ours isn't bad enough to worry about as it's pretty faint, but being picky I was annoyed that it was there at all.

Posted by Jarryd Beard (Member # 2543) on 07-01-2007, 02:54 PM:

We're showing this in digital. The key isn't active until 8:00 tomorrow morning. If it's any consolation, we're basically in the same situation as everyone with film (if there's a problem). Our hard drive arrived on Wednesday and was promptly ingested. I'm in the process of transferring to the Doremis right now. I do want to watch the film, just not at 8:00 in the morning!

Posted by Kamil Jackson-Chaka (Member # 4316) on 07-01-2007, 03:44 PM:

you're better off then I am. my Digital Key won't let me play the movie until noon. As for the locks, one of our prints came without one, and they sent someone out with a lock and another can to lock the reels up for us.

any excitement I had for this movie is gone, now I'm just mad.

Posted by Sam King (Member # 4029) on 07-01-2007, 11:10 PM:

SO what's the code? O:-) I'd rather get my builds done tonight!

Posted by Frank Dubrois (Member # 3042) on 07-02-2007, 12:30 AM:

This whole combo lock on the print is rediculous. So if we had cut the lock, our info would be given to the appropriate authorities for piracy investigation. So? we don't want to pirate the damn movie, just build it and let it sit on the platter..nothing more. If we don't even watch it, then what will the piracy investigation show? Nothin. I'll drop $4 in each can for a new lock.

screw em [fu]

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 07-02-2007, 12:59 AM:

quote: Kamil Jackson-Chaka
you're better off then I am. my Digital Key won't let me play the movie until noon. As for the locks, one of our prints came without one, and they sent someone out with a lock and another can to lock the reels up for us.

Actually if the key says 12:00 it will work at 8:00 am. It is weird but it will work. The server that the movie is on will read the key at your local time. The key itself is set up on a different time zone.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 07-02-2007, 12:59 AM:

And obviously if I want to pirate a movie I also want to do it in such a way that I leave no direct evidence that I did anything wrong. For instance, having a broken lock sitting around...

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 07-02-2007, 08:53 AM:

So, I checked the website transformerslockcode.bydeluxe.com and it was up and running by 8 am. All it showed was the Deluxe logo and the 4 digit code.

Figured I would try it since they have to push the address to all the DNS servers in the world and that would take some time. I know that the addy could have been populated before, but then why have the website active with the correct information before the mandated 9 am local time. (Uggh!)

Also, the date/time stamp in the Digital key is actually GMT. Just offset by your timezone to know when it activates.

Posted by Chris Mosel (Member # 1451) on 07-02-2007, 09:46 AM:

First print...lock opens on first try. Second Print...no luck, call Deluxe, try other combinations, still no luck!!! I am then given permission from Deluxe to cut lock(after giving print # and other info), go to Lowes and buy bolt cutters, lock open!!!

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 07-02-2007, 09:59 AM:

Chris,

Will someone be reimbursing the theater for the cost of the bolt cutters? They should be.

[ 07-02-2007, 08:50 PM: Message edited by: Mark J. Marshall ]

Posted by Chris Mosel (Member # 1451) on 07-02-2007, 10:43 AM:

Bolt cutters worked great. Plan is to be reimbursed but thats up to corporate folks.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 07-02-2007, 03:26 PM:

Seriously, how fucked is this industry now? [thumbsdown]

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 07-02-2007, 04:35 PM:

Anyone know how to reprogram the code on the locks? Nothing would make me happier than to return the prints "secured" with a combination only I know. I'll then release the code to Deluxe 5 days later on a website. [evil]

Posted by Jon P. Inghram (Member # 4125) on 07-02-2007, 07:06 PM:

http://www.travelsentry.org/faqs.asp , at the bottom of the page.

I wonder what a "piracy investigation" involves? When I first saw that I thought it'd be cool if every theater "tampered" with their locks. I wonder how much it'd cost them to investigate every theater in the country? [evil]

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 07-02-2007, 08:52 PM:

I will be returning my padlocks on the cans exactly the way I found them. One with the correct combination, and one with the incorrect combination. I figured it out. Maybe they can too. If not, I guess they can buy some bolt cutters to get it off.

Posted by Chad M Calpito (Member # 3736) on 07-02-2007, 10:11 PM:

I'll returing the Padlocks as they came, but, in the Film Cans. I got my codes this morning when I reported in for work and started building up the prints. A strange thing though, a manager from the Town Square Stadium 14 called and said the codes they got didn't even work. What kind of BS is that?

It's funny that DFS would make things inconvenient for all of us projectionists by pulling a Padlock Stunt like this. That makes me upset.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 07-03-2007, 02:27 AM:

DFS has nothing to do with the padlocks themselves and it is uncertain how much responsibility they have for the incorrect combinations. The entire padlock scheme was a Paramount brainchild. If DFS doesn't do what Paramount tells them too then there is always Tecchnicolor.

I find the whole thing imensely stupid. Off the shelf re-programable locks aren't going to stop any theif.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-03-2007, 03:18 AM:

quote: Dustin Mitchell
I find the whole thing imensely stupid. Off the shelf re-programable locks aren't going to stop any theif.

Precisely! How much do those things cost? $10, 15? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to come to the realization that he can cut the locks off, pre-build and test screen the print, then replace it with one from the store that he sets to the same combination.

Why would anyone go to the trouble? Simple. It's because $10 or 15 is CHEAPER THAN CANCELLING SHOWS ON MONDAY AFTERNOON TO CHECK SCREEN THE PRINT!!!

I certainly do hope everyone was smart enough to cancel Shrek the Turd all day long to enable the check screenings. Anyone who had to cancel other movies were unfairly taking money from their pockets for Paramount/Dreamwork's bonehead idea. (But hey, we have to do what we have to do.)

Posted by Jake Lafree (Member # 3656) on 07-03-2007, 04:19 AM:

Why cancel Shrek showings when you have expert code-guessing fellow projectionists at your side? We cracked the code in under an hour when our prints came in and screened it Thursday night. Can anyone else in the US beat that? [Big Grin]

Also, did anyone else notice the code is in the movie at least twice? The first time is in Reel 1. Also ironic that the code is my birthday!

Seriously, Paramount, cheap locks on ancient cans with the same combo on all 4,000+ prints? And when you get the prints so early like we did, suddenly 10,000 possible combinations sounds VERY realistic (especially when you work CONSTANT doubles like myself and have hundreds of little 5 min breaks between starts). If Paramount is stuck on the 'lock' idea for security, why not have a 9 digit code and get the most heavy duty locks out there? Of course this would only work 'better' if the cans that the locks were on were made this century.

If you really are that concerned with the security, then for god's sake just release the prints the night before the first showings or something (granted there will be problems with some prints).

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 07-03-2007, 04:27 AM:

quote: Mike Olpin
Anyone know how to reprogram the code on the locks? Nothing would make me happier than to return the prints "secured" with a combination only I know. I'll then release the code to Deluxe 5 days later on a website.

Damn, Mike, I really like the way you think!

You know, it's not only the studios who are at fault here, yah, the head of Paramount security came up with halfwit idea so he could get a gold star stuck on his ass and make it look like there is a reason for the company to pay his salary, but it's just as much the corporate hacks who run the chains who are just as much at fault. If THEY were interested in their own theatres and how they are run and ultimately how they look in front of the public, they should give enough of a damn to realize that a fieasco like this lock thing causes them real operational problems to say nothing of making it potentially necessary to cancel shows so that at the local theatre level the late prints can be properly pre-screened (do they even know their theatres pre-screen?).

IF THE CHAIN HACKS HAD ANY BALLS, they wouldn't stand for it this kind of nonsense by the studios. Chains have enough clout that they can tell Paramount, listen, you assholes, next time you send us prints with half-ass combination locks on them we are going to cancel your opening night. It only would take one or two chains to start dictating THEIR rules instead of cowering like wusses and swallowing any wad the studios pump out. What would Paramount do if even one big chain closed out 800-1000 screens on opening weekend? What would THAT do to TRANSFORMERS' opening hype on all the TV and newspapers top ten weekend movie lists?

Trouble is, just like the studio execs who couldn't give a crap about what happens outside of the LA theatres where they go with all their botox-injected sicophant friends, the chain execs are pretty much just as isolated. The fact that they don't yell and scream when studios pull these stunts and the fact that they have no clue that not having enough time to build and pre-screen prints could ruin their own theatre's rep and drive patrons away to say nothing of totally stressing out the poor guys/gals who have to work their booths, only goes to show they really don't care about their end product -- presentation.

How come they can't see that they wield a good deal of power themselves. There is no reason why NATO can't go as a unified force to Paramount and say, "look, this is the way it is going to be; we need a full 72 hours to properly prep and prescreen a print. And we won't play any title that comes in later than that. Period." It's that simple. All it would take would be that one, single shot heard round the world, when NATO steps up and says, Any studio wants to play its pictures in our member theatres has to sign OUR Master Contract. How is it that there is a contract that only one side authored; how is it that those terms were never negotiated. NATO doesn't seem to know the meaning of give and take negotiation.

And certainly pulling this padlock thing without first asking exhibition (NATO) if, gee you guys, will this screw up your operation?

A NATO spokesperson should be holding a press conference today telling the media that many people might not be able to see TRANSFORMERS in it's opening weekend because Paramount unilaterally decided to lock all the prints, implying that theartre personnel are dishonest theives and might steal them. Display outrage, make it clear that much of the piracy comes from studio insiders and it is an insult to all honest theatre workers as well as a serious impediment to the theatre technical staff being able to get the picture on the screen in a timely manner." The NATO spokesperson should have an appropriate mix of contrite and hurt and nobility. In the meantime, Furthian should be banging on Parmount's corporate door snarling like a bulldog warning them that any studio pulls something like that again without prior warning and without inquiring if it will negatively impede booth work-flow, and that turd of a movie doesn't go up on any NATO screen.

Let's see how the studio stockholders like it when it's announced that the big blockbuster which they were pinning their dividends had a $2m opening weekend!

Like I said, NATO just lays back and spreads its collective legs and says, "Oh Baby, Baby, Oh Baby....screw away."

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 07-03-2007, 06:35 AM:

quote:
Also, did anyone else notice the code is in the movie at least twice? The first time is in Reel 1. Also ironic that the code is my birthday!

"Are you ladiesman217?"

quote: Frank Angel
Display outrage, make it clear that much of the piracy comes from studio insiders and it is an insult to all honest theatre workers as well as a serious impediment to the theatre technical staff being able to get the picture on the screen in a timely manner.

Piracy comes from everywhere. You prove that much of it comes from studio insiders. It's simply not true, from what I have seen. It might be easier for you to accept that, but everything I have ever seen that was pirated (save for one movie, some 12 years ago) has come from a camcording of a theater screen. This doesn't mean it's employees of the theater's that are doing it, but it's just dishonest to blame dvd screeners or insided jobs based on anything I have ever seen. I disliked the padlocks as much as anyone, and I don't understand the point, nor the expense. But let's not point fingers at another party that doesn't really deserve the blame for piracy, either. Just because it makes more sense to dupe a copy from a DVD screener doesn't mean it is the pirate's method of choice...

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 07-03-2007, 08:33 AM:

quote: Jake Lafree
Can anyone else in the US beat that?

The first one took me about ten minutes. The second one had a different combination, but took about fifteen minutes.

Posted by Chad M Calpito (Member # 3736) on 07-03-2007, 09:31 AM:

I wish we had cancelled a show to screen Transformers, but, nothing was cancelled. [Mad]

I'm the kind of person in which I like to pre-screen everything that I build.

Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 07-03-2007, 11:59 AM:

Very well said Frank.
NATO isn't worth the paper it's charter is written on. They've proven it time and time again.

Lets throw Disneys new sliding billing policy out there as another example of NATO setting around and doing nothing.

It's rather obvious from going into a chain theatre that most theatre chain suits do not understand that the product they are selling is presentation......not food.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 07-03-2007, 12:47 PM:

All the talk of standing up to the studios would have worked great in 1982 but the reality is that now they could just as easily say f-you to the theaters and start going day and date to dvd or pay per view. Sure it might cut into their business and force them to do lower budget movies but it would destroy the theater business. Unfortunately the theaters need the studios more than vice versa.

Forget Disney's sliding scale, wait until you see Warner's new per capita program.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-03-2007, 01:10 PM:

quote: Brad Allen
NATO isn't worth the paper it's charter is written on. They've proven it time and time again.

So why aren't you guys writing to NATO and expressing your concerns? Posting your thoughts on a message board that nobody from NATO may even know about is one thing -- telling it to them directly might actually get some action. Here you go: natodc@nato.com (This is a public email address and is on the NATO website, so it shouldn't be a problem posting it here.)

quote: Brad Allen
Lets throw Disneys new sliding billing policy out there as another example of NATO setting around and doing nothing.

I don't think NATO ever gets involved in film rental term negotiations. That's up to the individual exhibition companies. Why don't the chains get after the film companies themselves over this? If they don't like it, why put up with it? If they don't like it, don't play the product. NATO doesn't have to get involved. If just a couple of the large chains said, "Sorry, we are not paying over 60% for the opening weekend of any movie and if you don't like that, we won't play any of your movies," the problem would disappear.

quote: Brad Allen
It's rather obvious from going into a chain theatre that most theatre chain suits do not understand that the product they are selling is presentation......not food.

I fully agree with that. But as long as they're making the most money from food, that's where the focus will be.

quote:
All the talk of standing up to the studios would have worked great in 1982 but the reality is that now they could just as easily say f-you to the theaters and start going day and date to dvd or pay per view....(snip)...Unfortunately the theaters need the studios more than vice versa.

They both need each other. Without the theatre business, the studios would just become glorified TV production companies, and neither they nor their overpaid stars and directors want that.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 07-03-2007, 01:23 PM:

As stupid as I think this is (4-digit combination locks won't stop piracy), I'm not sure exactly what the complaint is. So what if the prints aren't (in theory) available to the exhibitors until the opening day? This happens all the time at festivals and second-run and repertory houses. I'm not suggesting that this is an ideal situation, but rather that it isn't terribly uncommon and I'm not sure why this film is any different from any other release that has arrived in locked cans.

I sympathize with those who have multiple prints of this title, but I still don't really see any major issues. I might feel differently if _every_ release were handled in this way, but, thankfully, that isn't (yet?) the case.

For those who really need their prints earlier, boltcutters and/or flat-blade screwdrivers (for popping can rivets) are useful tools to have around. "Accidents" in the workplace are a terrible thing.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 07-03-2007, 04:15 PM:

Scott, I have never worked or attended a festival so forgive me if I'm wrong, but many times these very same festival prints are in less than optimal condition. Even if they were recieved early, though, there wouldn't be much you could do about it as replacement prints aren't exactly easy to come by in that situation. What festival people have to deal with is situational and there's not much that can be done about it. With a major wide release expected to be one of the summer's top grossers there is NO exccuse for anything less than perfect presentation. There is no reason that issues such as lab defects, bad used prints, or even missing/duplicate reels (I'm sure I'm not the only one who's gotten two of the same reel in a can before) should not be taken care of before the first public showing. Even if you had opened the second can at exactly 9am it would have been very difficutl, if not impossible depending on geographic location, to get a replacement reel in time for the 9pm show.

Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 07-04-2007, 01:45 AM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
So why aren't you guys writing to NATO and expressing your concerns? Posting your thoughts on a message board that nobody from NATO may even know about is one thing -- telling it to them directly might actually get some action.

Why? For the same reason I dumped my membership with them 10 years ago. They no more listen to or care about a small theatre owner like me than the man in the moon.....I'll leave it at that.....and get off my soap box while the gettn's good. [uhoh]

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 07-05-2007, 07:56 AM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
I don't think NATO ever gets involved in film rental term negotiations. That's up to the individual exhibition companies.

Why not? Isn't that what NATO is....the ASSOCIATION of THEATRE OWNERS? Just like the studios are represented by the MPAA.

quote: Anslem Rayburn
Piracy comes from everywhere. You prove that much of it comes from studio insiders. It's simply not true, from what I have seen. It might be easier for you to accept that, but everything I have ever seen that was pirated (save for one movie, some 12 years ago)

The key phrase here being from what you've seen. Trouble is, you don't see where the big-time, significant piracy is happening. It's not the piddly crap that is sold on street corners -- that doesn't even show up on the radar. The REAL piracy is when a perfect DVD copy gets into the hands of the Chinese and or Russian duplicating plants and millions upon millions of them are sold as regular DVDs in those nation's video retail stores.

And on occasion you even hear of video stores right here in the USA who are caught buying illegit but perfect copies and shuffle them in with real product. It's pretty easy to buy one legitimate DVD for every two perfect knockoffs at half price -- they are all sold at list price. This stuff is indistinguishable from the real thing and it certainly doesn't come from cam dupes. THAT's where those billions of dollars the studios claim they are loosing happens, not from street corner peddlers hawking cam copies for $3.

Sure, in your limited experience of what you may have seen on street corners, you are right, that kind of stuff comes from off the screen copies, and even there I can tell you that you are either not checking out enough street vendors to get a good feel, or the ones in your area are just not well connected because here in Brooklyn, right in front of the famous Juniors restaurant, the peddler with all his DVDs layed out on the sidewalk will tell you which ones are "cams" and which ones are "labs" as he calls them. And I can tell you that at least one third of them are lab; he even has price differentials -- cams are $3, labs are $5. AND, when he told me that a title was a cam, he quickly added that I should come back in a few days and he would have a lab copy!

But again, even THAT is not what the studios are afraid of because it doesn't amount to a fraction of a fraction of what they loose in the foreign markets where they have no control. And you can be sure that those markets are no less descrimintate that we are; they are not going to accept cam copies when they pay full price for a store-bought DVD at a retail outlet.

quote: Anslem Rayburn
Just because it makes more sense to dupe a copy from a DVD screener doesn't mean it is the pirate's method of choice

?? Of course it is. He can't mass product DVDs that are going to be passed off to retail outlets as the real thing if they are cam copies.

quote: Anslem Rayburn
but it's just dishonest to blame dvd screeners or insided jobs based on anything I have ever seen.

Well, you haven't seen enough, or listened to the MPAA itself which admitted that screener copies were a huge problem; it was even toying with the idea of stopping the whole screener DVD system because they themselves know how enormous the damage can be when only a single copy gets into the wrong hands.

quote: Anslem Rayburn
But let's not point fingers at another party that doesn't really deserve the blame for piracy

Every time you hear spokespersons from the studio side of the industry giving out press releases or giving interviews, they talk about piracy as if it is ONLY done by theatre personnel directly or at least caused by the negligence of the exhibitor who allow it to be done off their screens. I have never EVER heard anyone from the studios saying, "AND in addition to cam copies, we have the Academy screener copies as a source of piracy being duplicated by the millions in China and Russia and even in places in the US like Blockbuster -- perfect copies (the blessing of digital), indistinguishable from legitimate copies." So excuse me if I point a finger where they always conveniently neglect to point one. That's not dishonest -- it's just shining a little light where they don't.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 07-05-2007, 10:08 AM:

Frank, I asked you about this in a recent thread in Yak or the Ground Level. Can you give supporting evidence that internal studio sources are a more significant source of pirated films than camera captures in theatres? If not, please stop asserting that they are.

It is clear that both kinds of piracy exist and are a problem.

My assessment is that in fact camera captures are more prevalent, based on casual glances at pirate content verification sites (but I don't download this stuff, and I don't do regular surveys, so my results are certainly not definitive). Contrast this with the guys on your streetcorner -- none of these measurements is representative. I think at best we can only assume that both kinds of piracy are out there in roughly equal proportion.

Everyone likes to think they are not the problem. So of course, projectionists and theatre managers like to think that the problem is not in theatres. But there is no evidence to support such claims, and there is evidence to the contrary.

Fundamentally, though, it doesn't really matter which is "more prevalent." The studios need to wage the battles on both fronts.

--jhawk

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 07-05-2007, 07:58 PM:

quote: Frank Angel
Well, you haven't seen enough, or listened to the MPAA itself which admitted that screener copies were a huge problem

quote: Frank Angel
I have never EVER heard anyone from the studios saying, "AND in addition to cam copies, we have the Academy screener copies as a source of piracy

The pirated movies I have seen include a few torrents, a locally purchased DVD (which the police don't seem to care about), and a friends boyfriend who came back from Iraq with a hefty collection of bootlegs. All of them, except for a VHS tape in high school, were taken off screen. I didn't actually watch any of the bootlegs brough back from Iraq, but I am told they were all, and I mean every one of them, taken off screen via camcorder. I understand that screeners get copied, too. I just think that if it were as prevalent as you would have me believe, I would have seen at least one in the last 12 years.

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 07-05-2007, 09:43 PM:

quote: Anslem Rayburn
I just think that if it were as prevalent as you would have me believe, I would have seen at least one in the last 12 years.

Maybe you have and just didn't realize it since they are meant to be indistinguishable from a legit copy. [Razz]

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 07-06-2007, 12:23 AM:

I don't want to get into this argument, since I don't have any evidence, either... but where did that copy of Star Wars Episode ? come from?... the one with the time code on it? Seems safe to say that one probably didn't get copied off some theatre screen.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 07-06-2007, 12:29 AM:

OK John, I guess if you want empirical evidence and exact numbers count, then no, of course I and probably the MPAA itself can't give you that. In that respect you are correct. But it's like the tobacco companies saying unless someone can give empirical proof that cigarette smoking causes cancer, then it doesn't. I am just deducing from my experience and according to the MPAA own claims, they always claim that they loose billions of dollars to piracy. They also say that one of the biggest problems is the foreign market where copies are sold INSTEAD of legit copies in retail outlets.

It also seems obvious to me that there aren't enough street level peddlers across the country selling that many cam copies to rack up that kind of loss, because that would be one army of street peddlers and that would have to be one huge number of street corners all across the country. How many peddlers do you see in your city? Here in Brooklyn, a city of over 3 million, I can count on one hand how many of these guys I can find. I travel quite a bit and in smaller towns (I was just all over Kentucky for two weeks just last month) and I didn't see a one. So it seems unlikely that all this money is being lost to such a limited street operation, and even there, as I point out previously, the peddler I encountered have about 1/3rd lab DVDs.

I contend that it is the mass produced product that is the place where big money is lost. Can some of this be from cam copies, maybe -- I certainly am not privy to the demands of the marketplace in China or Russia, but I can tell you that some of the Russian students that are in the US who I know quite well talk about this all the time and tell me that they can easily get pristine copies in retail stores in their country that are bootlegged. I ask them if these are off-the-screen copies? They laugh. Who would by such junk?, they ask in return. It's a mistake to assume that foreigners are less descriminating or that retailers who want to pass counterfit product will buy obbvious dupes; they are going to want product that is indistinguishable from the real thing that can "pass" and which they can indeed sell as the real thing. Cams copies simply won't cut the mustard.

So it seems pretty logical, at least to me, that screener copies ARE a big problem; there is enough anecdotal evidence for me, the Iraq information not withstanding.

Besides, you seem to be missing my point -- the jist of my post was to point out that the studios are always curiously mum about that inside source of the pirating problem while very vocal about the connection between theatres and projectionists being the source of their billions in loss. They are never vocal about pointing the finger to any of the hundreds of people on the studio side of the fence who handle this material. And quite frankly, that irks me big-time. They seem to have a culture that thrives on making exhibition out to be the bad guy -- every thing from those stupid on-screen anti-piracy spots (and to add insult to injury -- playing them on the exhibitors' own screens and on the exhibitors' own time) to having security guards wand people who come into my theatre (not only the theatres are suspect, but the people who actually came and paid for a ticket are indirectly accused of being potential thieves), to having a guard follow me up to the booth to "watch" the print. And then this last bit of nonsense being a perfect example -- locking the film cans. WTF? Could there BE anything any more stupid and childish?

All I am saying is, if they are going to lament DVD piracy, then admit that there are significant problems in both areas of the isle. The are always quick to make public those FBI stings in which warehouses full of DVD of titles barely opened in the theatres (some not even) are uncovered. How about revealing where the origin of those DVD are tracked back to. If there are cap codes, then that should be as easy as reading an address on an envelope. It there are NO cap codes, then those came from someplace inside the belly of the beast. Let's hear about THAT.

Look, I don't travel in circles where I would have a lot of inside information about who has access to lab material or how it all even works or their security protocols, but even in my small circle of friends who do work in post production, I know they happen to be VERY lax about letting people carry around entire unreleased films on DVDs and on their laptops. At a social gathering one night with techies and friends, one of our friends who had flown in from the West coast let everyone watch a film that was yet to be released which he was working on and which he had on his laptop. It's done all the time and it seems Hollywood doesn't think it's any big deal; at least not until gets into the wrong hands. And believe me, there was no combination master lock on his laptop (and no password, either, I observed.)

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 07-06-2007, 07:45 AM:

Dustin--I agree completely that the circumstances are different and I wasn't meaning to suggest that the situation was acceptable. It just seemed that some of the comments here were pretty whiny and I wanted to point out that there is no reason why prints made available at noon couldn't be on screen that night. Pre screenings are a good idea, but lab and depot errors are pretty rare, making them largely unnecessary. And, yes, you're right that festival prints range from new to beat-to-hell and that there is almost never a replacement available.

As a side note, I finally did convince someone to pay for a pre-screening before a film opening, but that was pretty rare. I've not seen it happen in corporate theatres, where screenings only get done if someone wants to watch the feature.

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 07-06-2007, 08:53 AM:

quote: Frank Angel
In that respect you are correct. But it's like the tobacco companies saying unless someone can give empirical proof that cigarette smoking causes cancer, then it doesn't.

The tobacco companies denied allegations when there were studies and evidence that they were wrong. And people died based on their lies.

YOU are making an allegation, and supporting it with nothing. You have apparently seen one film before it's release on a friend's laptop, and take that to mean that the main source of piracy is from within the studio, well before the product gets into the hands of theaters.

Screeners get duped, and DVDs get made from them.

Theaters allow films to get recorded, or even do it themselves.

I have never pirated a movie. I'm sure you have never pirated a movie. It doesn't mean that SOME theater employees haven't pirated movies.

[ 07-06-2007, 06:56 PM: Message edited by: Anslem Rayburn ]

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 07-06-2007, 12:01 PM:

I have never seen a cam corded movie. I'm sure I've seen "pirated" films....just as good as the real dvd.

Maybe I just don't know where to look down here in Kentucky. Or maybe I'm buying pirated copies at the store and they are so good, I just can't tell that they are illegal. Louis

[ 07-08-2007, 09:42 AM: Message edited by: Louis Bornwasser ]

Posted by Mark Strube (Member # 4190) on 07-16-2007, 03:11 PM:

I've been meaning to ask this... has anyone noticed evidence that Paramount played musical chairs with the reels? (I'm guessing after promo screenings at theaters, and they got the reels back.) After built up, one of our prints had a few black scratches through the first few reels, and then clean... and then a later reel was just full of dirt. Nothing bad enough that the audience noticed (the black lines were very close to the left edge), but I'm just curious if anyone else has noticed this as well.

Posted by Bret Abel (Member # 3398) on 07-16-2007, 03:41 PM:

Our theater got three prints of Transformers. The first reel from all three prints had a light vertical black scratch directly in the center. The problem was noticeable enough that we ended up ordering three replacement Reel 1s. Unfortunately, we weren't able to replace the reels on all three prints in time for the Monday night sneak... thanks in no small part to the padlocks [Mad]

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 07-16-2007, 05:07 PM:

Weren't the padlocks only on the second half of the movie? The first can on each print containing reels 1, 2, and 3 should have been open.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 07-25-2007, 09:27 PM:

I got to cut my first lock off of a Deluxe print tonight. [thumbsup]