Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Noted at ShoWest: Film could be gone in 5 to 8 years

This is topic Noted at ShoWest: Film could be gone in 5 to 8 years 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=010393

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-21-2010, 08:58 PM:

Here's a quote from a Screen Daily article which we got via email:

quote:
“There’s no question that some film theatres aren’t going to make it,” the National Association Of Theater Owner’s president John Fithian said. “It’s a real concern and we’ve established initiatives that specifically target smaller operations. The Cinema Buying Group has been set up to address the real problems they face in terms of financing. They’re meeting on the last day to debate the roll-out. We expect 260 members and it will be the biggest meeting during the conference.”

Fithian estimated that in five to eight years distributors will stop making 35mm prints. Pacific Theaters’ (Jerry) Foreman, citing such factors as production logistics, maintenance and inevitable modifications, believed that time is more likely at least ten years away. Regardless, it’s close enough for those affected to feel the pressure of conversion or death.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 03-21-2010, 09:12 PM:

Boogedy-boogedy-boogedy!

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 03-21-2010, 10:06 PM:

Weren't they saying the same thing five to eight years ago? [Shrug]

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 03-21-2010, 10:27 PM:

Heck, I'm still waiting for my flying car...

Posted by Mike Frese (Member # 4361) on 03-21-2010, 10:28 PM:

IMHO, if you are a comfortable full-time first run you are fine for 5 years with just film. If you are a move-over without any competition, you are fine as well.

What I fail to see, is why the studios will be kind and gracious to help out financing the small theaters. Would we if we were in their shoes?

In the KC district full-time first runs account for more than 90% (sometimes 95%) of a movie's gross. (This data from Rentrak).

Keep in mind that 2 years ago, the CBG plan for helping seasonal first-run and discount houses would be help them get hand-me-down equipment when the bigger theaters replace their equipment. Who wants 5 year chain equipment?

For me, I believe the deadline is 3 years away. Which one reason why I believe I am going to take the Tech 3d route.

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 03-21-2010, 10:28 PM:

Heck, I'm still waiting for one of those flying cars we were all promised by now...

Posted by Bernie Anderson Jr (Member # 410) on 03-21-2010, 11:01 PM:

hahahaha! yeah right! I remember hearing that crap when episode 1 came out in 1999.

Posted by Elise Brandt (Member # 5552) on 03-21-2010, 11:49 PM:

I do believe about 10 years is all it takes, but I'm already on the "dark side". Only one 35mm left.

It makes sense for the studios to finance the rollout on their part, the deal will only be just as expensive as things are now, ten years from now and then they're off the hook and getting things done cheap. Isn't every VPF deal negotiated now 10 years long? Maintaining almost all the theaters and cutting their own costs (even if in a few years' time) is a very attractive prospect.

I fully expect some small theaters will fall. But will they fall because they can't make the transition, or because they didn't try?

Posted by Eric Robinson (Member # 2966) on 03-21-2010, 11:56 PM:

Here you go Paul

This is actually a flying saucer style car

Now ... its time to switch to digital.

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 03-22-2010, 01:25 AM:

How much of a kickback is Fithian getting for blowing the Digital horn?

quote:
Fithian estimated that in five to eight years distributors will stop making 35mm prints.

Prints will cease being made when there are no 35mm screens to show them, otherwise he's talking through his arse. Additionally, I wonder if he will be trumpeting the Digital horn when, in his "5 to 8 years time", by which time exhibitors will be forced to update their digital projectors AGAIN.

This guy is supposed to be supporting exhibitors, not forcing some to the wall due to being unable to afford the conversion. Making the small guy feel like he's lost the race already really sucks and if I was one of the small guys with a NATO membership, they would be told where to stick it in no uncertain terms.

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 03-22-2010, 02:55 AM:

Hey Guys, I grew up in this business and started professionally in 1950. I've been through the last 3D craze, Smell-o-vision, VistaVision, CinemaScope, PanaVision, 70mm, electronically controlled theatre seats (I forgot what that was called) and every techno-gadget they can throw at us. Some came and went and some have resurfaced again. But I think the only thing that will last is surround sound, the wide screen processes (assuming digital can duplicate them) and digital projection. But it will be around much longer that the so-called experts are predicting. None of the studios want to face a class action suit by the small town exhibitors for forcing them out of business.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-22-2010, 05:01 AM:

Ian has it exactly!

Fithian predicted the "last day for film was Dec 2008." I was physically present in the room when he said this from the podium. He was wrong. Louis

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-22-2010, 09:31 AM:

quote: Ian Parfrey
Prints will cease being made when there are no 35mm screens to show them, otherwise he's talking through his arse.

Actually if you stop to analyze this situation the Screen Daily Article Is Correct!

Sony is building about 400 of their projectors a week. It will take about three years for Regal and AMC to complete their conversion. 4K DLP will be available this time next year according to people from Christie and BARCO I talked to at the show. That means another two years and Cinemark will be all DLP. That are the only screens in this country that actually matter. Once regal and AMC are done converting 6000 less film prints will be struck, drop another 2700 prints off what is still left being made when Cinemark is done converting and the per film print cost will sky rocket to above 5K per print!. What will ultimately happen is that the studios will balk at striking prints for marginal locations because those prints will now be way more expensive and they may not recover the print costs from some locations. Hence some theaters will not be able to get film any longer and will be forced into digital or to shut down. So yes, I believe they are 100% correct although I believe it will happen quicker than the time period they say... the economy is getting better which is going to speed it up and the generation 2 projectors are here and available now.

Louis... You forgot "Moore's Law"... which happens to pertain to this technology big time!

Mark

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-22-2010, 10:48 AM:

quote: Robert E. Allen
a class action suit by the small town exhibitors for forcing them out of business

I doubt that'd happen...if we can't save up for digital, we certainly can't afford a high-priced lawyer!

I fully expect to convert to digital here. The small question is "when," but the big question for me is 3-D. If we had 2 screens it'd be a no brainer, but I fear "turning off" that portion of the audience who doesn't like 3-D and/or isn't willing to pay $12 or more for a ticket, and not being able to offer the 2-D alternative.

Posted by Bernie Anderson Jr (Member # 410) on 03-22-2010, 12:19 PM:

Personally,

NATO is nothing more to exhibitors than Congress is to the American People. Everything I see about them does not protect the independent exhibitor.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-22-2010, 01:41 PM:

quote:
I doubt that'd happen...if we can't save up for digital, we certainly can't afford a high-priced lawyer!

Don't worry, class action atty's work for a cut of the award (though all of the court fees and expert fees can get pricy) [Wink]

Regarding Mark's print math, art films right now usually do only 200 or fewer prints, are you suggesting they will be driven out by higher print costs?

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 03-22-2010, 02:19 PM:

quote: Ian Parfrey
Prints will cease being made when there are no 35mm screens to show them

Actually, there is a large infrastructure currently in place that makes the manufacturing and mass distribution of 35mm film viable. As the majority of screens convert to digital video, it will become more and more expensive to manufacture 35mm film, as the components that go into it will not be needed in sufficient quantity to support that infrastructure. Eventually, Kodak and other manufacturers will get out of the film business, either by selling the division, or by shutting it down, as they have done with other shrinking product lines.

The result of above will be that it will become more and more expensive to release 35mm print, a cost that obviously will be passed on to those theatres still running them, until they become uncompetitive. I can't say when this will finally happen, but I believe it is now inevitable.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-22-2010, 03:04 PM:

Thanks, NATO! I will put this on my calendar.

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 03-22-2010, 09:45 PM:

Will we see VPF in the future when the next wave of expensive upgrades come? Will theaters just have to absorb those future costs alone?
If 3d starts to wane will we all be forced to continue watching movies on hot spotting silver screens?

Will Sony give full support to all those SXRD theaters when the projectors start to lose shows because Sony made them? [puke]

All this digital stuff costs a fortune to buy and maintain ,is it really worth the money when it could be spent on improving film presentation across the entire industry instead?

The film stuff lasts, the digital stuff needs constant replacement in comparison.
Has the whole world turned stupid?

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-23-2010, 02:45 AM:

Yes, Victor....yes it has.

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 03-23-2010, 03:50 AM:

Frank.

Got it in one.
[thumbsup]

Trouble is the studios will get very bloody-minded about this and continue to strong arm the exhibitors into so-called "upgrading" to digital...unless there is a solid backlash and a resolute adherence to 35mm.

That won't be a bad thing either as 35/70 has, and still is, proving to be an incredibly adaptive format- something that digital cannot claim to be without MAJOR (and expensive) hardware alterations.

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 03-23-2010, 08:39 AM:

Fithian thinks film will be gone in 5-8 Years? HE should do NATO and the independents a favor and be gone in less time than that.

Posted by Tim OBrien (Member # 5605) on 03-23-2010, 10:31 AM:

quote: Bernie Anderson Jr
NATO is nothing more to exhibitors than Congress is to the American People. Everything I see about them does not protect the independent exhibitor.

I cancelled my membership in NATO when they became the National Association of Large Theatre Owners, shortly before they became the National Association of Large Digital Theatre Owners.

Posted by James Waite (Member # 4536) on 03-23-2010, 09:58 PM:

From my own experience he's right at least in general. Look at what happened to 16mm. Back in the early 90's I was running the student run movie theatre here in London Canada. We used to run old and new films on 16mm but as video projection became more common the company that made the 16mm prints for the non-theatrical market started ordering fewer and fewer prints and eventually was ordering only certain kinds of films, usually kid's films. We had to either switch to 35mm or video to keep going. Luckily we were able to get the cash to go 35mm.
There is even an equivalent to to the big chains going all digital in this. The Canadian military went to using all video which wiped out a huge portion of the 16mm market. The company (Criterion) loved it though, they still got to charge the same prices for people to get the rights to play a DVD and they didn't have to fork out the dough to make 16 mm prints.

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 03-24-2010, 03:04 PM:

Deleted because I get pissed off at the sound of the word congress and made a very political comment.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-26-2010, 11:35 PM:

I had a long visit with my booker today about all of this. He thinks film will be gone in even less time than Fithian thinks. He said, "This is happening...probably sooner than later."

I was expecting the opposite from him...he usually falls on the conservative side of all these developments.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-27-2010, 06:25 AM:

Logically I feel we will be stuck somewhere in the middle for 10-20 years.

Complicating the conversion is the update cost and planned obsolensence of video and the low cost, paid-for-eternity of film. Just ask Mark; he is keeping some 85 year old projectors alive. It would be hard to guess how many video machines it would take to reach 85 (and you can't sell the old ones.) Louis

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-31-2010, 10:47 AM:

People who make these predictions on how many years before film will be gone are just pulling these numbers out their arses. What calculations are they using? What data to they have that no one else does? They are merely guesses and about as reliable as you or me guessing -- our guesses would be just as valid, except we are usually smart enough not to pull anything out of our asses.

In 1999 Lucas himself was saying with triumphant confidence that film would be gone in 5 year. COMPLETELY gone, as in no film projectors in projection booths at all. So much for silly, uneducated guesses. What does a producer like Lucas know except his narrow, self-centered view of a global industry? What does some booker know about the worldwide ratio of film based screens as opposed to digital based screens or how fast from month to month conversions are taking place and with a long term view of these global trends? It's much more complicated and issue when looked at over the entire planet rather than just domestically or even regionally. What's happening here in the USA is really a very small part of the picture and even if every screen in the US went digital, that would not mean film would be gone, not by a long shot.

The next time anyone tells you how many years before film will be "gone," just ask them by what scientific method did they come to that number. And then snicker.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-31-2010, 11:05 AM:

Well in the interest of making an interesting thread title, I used a bit more "sensational" wording than I might have; if you read my initial quote, it says Fithian estimated that the distributors could stop making 35mm prints in five to eight years. He didn't actually say film would be GONE -- although if they stop (or severely curtail) making film prints of the new movies we need to play, it might as well be.

Posted by Richard Hamilton (Member # 321) on 03-31-2010, 11:15 AM:

Ok Frank....Off topic here but which is it?

quote: Frank Angel
arses

quote: Frank Angel
asses

My ex mother in law always said arses, and I always gave her a WTF look.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-31-2010, 11:34 AM:

Richard:
I think it's the difference between Color and Colour [Wink]

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 03-31-2010, 02:41 PM:

Richard.

By the wonders of the Interweb, I present to you the real deal on ASS... Ass- as defined by the Uncyclopaedia

..and ARSE as defined by Wankapaedia

As you are aware, these sites are undisputed sources of irreputable proof and are totally reliable.

So, enjoy some ass and arse.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 03-31-2010, 08:44 PM:

Whatever period of time (such as it is) film had left, Technicolor 3D just doubled it (at least).

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-31-2010, 10:12 PM:

Yeah! I'm lovin' it! Louis