Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Carmike's DCinema Installs stopped?

This is topic Carmike's DCinema Installs stopped? in forum Digital Cinema 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=16;t=000196

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 05-10-2007, 10:27 AM:

Any Carmikers out there know the scoop on this one? Word has come to me that suddenly, the digital installations have come to an apprupt halt (as in pack your things; leave the site).

Has this digital madness driven them towards bankruptcy (and they were getting it about as cheap as possible!)...how does this affect the whole Christie/AIX thing, if true.

Anyway...anyone out there to confrim or deny?

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 05-10-2007, 01:37 PM:

Carmike is publicly-traded so unless they're flagrantly cooking the books Enron-style, their financials have actually improved over last year...

Carmike Theaters Chip At Loss (May 8th 2007)

Theater owner and operator Carmike Cinemas Inc. cut its first-quarter loss by about 40 percent and the company is optimistic summer releases will improve the financial situation even more.

Columbus, Ga.-based Carmike (NASDAQ: CKEC), which runs several movie theaters in the Birmingham area, had a net loss of $3.7 million on $110.6 million in revenue, compared with a net loss of $6.2 million on $111.6 million in revenue in the first quarter of 2006. Loss per share was 30 cents, compared with a loss per share of 50 cents in the first quarter of 2006.

"While the film product did not perform well in our markets in January and February of the first quarter, we remain very optimistic about the release schedule this summer," said Michael W. Patrick, Carmike chairman, president and CEO. "We are pleased with our progress in improving theater operations, having successfully implemented a number of cost control measures in our theaters while being sensitive to the customer experience. We believe that the improvements to our theater operations, combined with the opportunities provided by our digital rollout and a strong anticipated movie slate will improve cash flow as we progress through the year."

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 05-10-2007, 02:55 PM:

Carmike had a huge weekend with Spider-man 3 too. Obviously a good deal of that money will go back to Sony but not until settlement time, so for now cashflow certainly isn't a problem.

I am personally not aware of any stoppage in digital installs. If it did happen (and I really don't know either way) it would be quite sudden as the last newsletter for my division talked about plans for installs in smaller theatres (less than 5 screens) and how they would be handled. Is it possible whatever locaion (is it just one?) that had the install crew pulled is about to close? It wouldn't surprise if the manager didn't know his theatre was about to close, they typically don't find out until the day of.

It just doesn't make much sense to pull the install crew mid job. As stated in its public releases Carmike is paying $800 per screen to have digital installed. This is on top of the additional electrical/exhaust work that is typically needed (and is Carmike's responsibility). Even if Carmike was going to stop its digital conversion (and they're 2/3 to 3/4 done now anyway) you'd think they'd at least let the current installs finish seeing as how the majority of the expense to Carmike (electrical/exhaust) has already been incurred.

Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 05-10-2007, 03:54 PM:

quote: Dustin Mitchell
Carmike is paying $800 per screen to have digital installed.

$800.00 ?? Sign me up! I'll probably have another $1,600.00 by the time the weekends over... just send them over to my drive-in. Make sure you tell'em to bring the big bulbs [Big Grin]

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 05-10-2007, 04:11 PM:

Two caveats (sp?):

1) Carmike doesn't own the projectors, AccessIT does. I believe Carmike has the option to buy the projectors in 7 years at whatever the then current market price is. Some people would call this a bad deal because they'll be 'obsolete' by then. I'm not so sure about that myself, but that's another discussion.

2) I'm not sure if its required as part of the deal by Christie is doing the service for the digital projectors (and supposedly the remaining 35mm projectors) at $2,250/screen (info published in the annual report). I do not know service rates but I do believe this is a bit high.

Besides that you still pay for bulbs. You wouldn't pay for parts, however, unless of course the damage was done due to negligence on the part of you or your staff (I presume). This is all assuming you could get the same deal Carmike got.

So yeah, a serious response to probably a not so serious post [Smile]

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 05-10-2007, 04:55 PM:

The stoppage, as I have heard it was company wide...not just one site but it was something like during a lunch break that the word came down.

Other sources speculate that the stoppage was more of a means to halt changing out equipment during the more profitable summer months and things should resume for fall.

Hence my desire to hear from someone within Carmike to know if something is up or mere policy...I could certainly understand not shutting screens down during peak periods...even if it is only for a day or two.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 05-10-2007, 05:48 PM:

The peak periods thing sounds very likely. There has been some concern expressed about that as of late.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-10-2007, 05:51 PM:

There was some speculation amongst several largish manufacturers at Showeast that they might not be able to make the 2+ million dollar service contract payment to Christie on time... they were also back then 2 financial reports behind in filing. There IS also a big warehouse full of film/sound gear that was pulled out for digital installs .... this equipment was just..... sitting...... waiting.....

Mark

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 05-10-2007, 06:12 PM:

quote: Steve Guttag
Other sources speculate that the stoppage was more of a means to halt changing out equipment during the more profitable summer months and things should resume for fall.

Given the lead time probably required by Christie etc. for building large quantities of new projectors, it seems like someone would be left standing there holding a big bag of something warm and brown if Carmike just shuts off the upgrades all of a sudden.

Posted by Marc Hansen (Member # 705) on 05-10-2007, 11:43 PM:

Dustin-
Is that $2250 per month or per year?

Marc

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-11-2007, 12:13 AM:

I have been monitoring the progress on Carmike's D-Cinema install program. The program has not stopped -at least it didn't up until the beginning of May. The number of installs between January and May have been pretty numerous. Just in my neighborhood I was surprised to see a small 6-plex over in Duncan, OK get outfitted with 6 D-Cinema systems (just a couple weeks ago). I was surprised to see it happen that quickly.

Any Carmike location that has digital projectors now has them on all screens. For the better part of a year quite a few prominent Carmike locations had half their screens equipped with digital projectors and the other half equipped with film projectors.

Every Carmike location in Arkansas has D-Cinema (all 68 screens in the state). At the beginning of the year only one location in AR had D-Cinema -and that installation in Fort Smith was a partial install. That's 61 new installs in that state alone since January.

In the same time Georgia has had 53 new systems installed in Carmike locations. Florida has had 35 systems installed. Montana has had 43 systems go into Carmike locations. 48 in North Carolina. 79 in Tennessee. Most states with Carmike locations have seen significant D-Cinema installation activity.

If there's anything that will slow down the progress of the D-Cinema program Christie/AIX is doing with Carmike it will be in all the older, smaller theaters that remain to be converted. Just about every new to good Carmike location has been converted to D-Cinema. Mostly the smaller theaters in smaller markets remain to be converted. Many of those didn't even have digital surround sound, which complicates the situation. A number of older locations have been closed in recent months.

I was kind of hoping the 2-screen twin in my hometown in New Mexico would have been upgraded by now. They have a pretty cool looking neon vertical "blade" sign and marquee, not to mention DTS on both screens.

It's going to take considerably more work to bring the more obsolescent/obsolete theaters up to the levels of being able to deliver digital cinema. In that regard I can see it making some prudent sense to hold off trying to convert those locations until later in the fall. Some older locations may also be awaiting closure for new replacement locations. I know that's happening in Ardmore, OK where a new Carmike site is to be built.

I'm going to post another circuit wide update in the original Carmike D-Cinema thread, likely Friday. I would have posted the update last week in line with Spiderman III, but I was also wanting to see what kind of extra push happened with the upcoming Pirates sequel. This news kind of forces the issue.

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 05-11-2007, 12:45 AM:

I'd be surprised if the Carmike installs come to a complete halt. Just a week ago while putting together the "Spider-Man 3" list I spoke to managers of three different Carmike theatres who each indicated they were scheduled within a week or two to have their digital projection systems installed (in time for "Shrek 3" and/or "Pirates...").

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 05-11-2007, 01:40 AM:

Marc- $2250/year/screen

Mark- Shows what rumors are worth. Carmike filed its 4th Quarter/Year End reports on March 16th-in the middle of showest I believe. The first quarter reports for this year were filed on May 7th.

Posted by Tony L. Hernandez (Member # 3524) on 05-11-2007, 01:48 AM:

I know my local Carmikes...the Carmike 5 in Greeley, CO and Carmike 10 in Fort Collins, CO have already converted to D-Cinema but still have the 35mm projectors standing by for obvious reasons. Is this what most theaters that convert do or do they tear the 35mm out most the time? I have yet to be inside a digital booth but next time I'm at Carmike, I will request to see theirs....

As a response to the subject, I hope for the love of God they do stop while they still have some 35mm screens. D-Cinema is a ridiculous little trend that will be dead soon, hopefully. Come on, film has been around for over 100 years and has served us wonderfully all this time; let's not fix what isn't broken. A better solution to the problem would be to get real projectionists back in to the booth and stop having armatures damaging prints and putting on lousy shows. But I guess until the big boys learn this, we must put up with D-Cinema; an image,sound and technology that is a pile of [bs]

Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 05-11-2007, 09:12 AM:

quote: Dustin Mitchell
$2250/year/screen

That's NOT a bad price, if fact well under the amount I've been hearing from the rumor mill. However, it's still about 8-10 times the amount I pay for maintenance on my existing machines.

quote: Dustin Mitchell
Besides that you still pay for bulbs. You wouldn't pay for parts, however, unless of course the damage was done due to negligence on the part of you or your staff (I presume). This is all assuming you could get the same deal Carmike got.

Yeah, I guess that's were the benefit of having multiple locations with multiple screens makes a huge difference.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-11-2007, 11:11 AM:

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
I know my local Carmikes...the Carmike 5 in Greeley, CO and Carmike 10 in Fort Collins, CO have already converted to D-Cinema but still have the 35mm projectors standing by for obvious reasons. Is this what most theaters that convert do or do they tear the 35mm out most the time?

The 35mm film projectors removed from service often stay up in the booth, just stored out of the way as much as possible. Carmike could round up all those projectors and store them in a centralized location. But it would cost a good amount of money to gather up those projectors and ship them. And does Carmike even have any kind of big warehouse anywhere to stash that stuff?

I figure a lot of that gear is going to stay in various projection booths perhaps until it is sold, scrapped or something. I don't know.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
As a response to the subject, I hope for the love of God they do stop while they still have some 35mm screens.

Carmike isn't getting rid of all its film projectors. Most locations are keeping at least 2 or more 35mm projectors intact. For screens running both 35mm & digital, the Chrisite CP2000 is installed alongside the film projector. A new port is installed and the keystone correction feature is used get the image as straight as possible.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
As a response to the subject, I hope for the love of God they do stop while they still have some 35mm screens. D-Cinema is a ridiculous little trend that will be dead soon, hopefully. Come on, film has been around for over 100 years and has served us wonderfully all this time; let's not fix what isn't broken.

As much of a film fan as I am (particularly of large format film), I have to insist that many of these theaters getting new Christie digital projectors are getting a noticeable improvement in quality over what the 35mm equipment they were using previously.

Not all 35mm systems are created equally. And in Carmike's case they have had a broad smorgasbord of different projectors varying wildly in quality. 2K projection is indeed a step down from the image quality seen from a high quality projector with high quality lenses that is also very well maintained. Such booths that deliver that are too few and far between.

I see a lot better image quality at my local Carmike playing the movie in digital than I do in seeing the same film at the Central Mall 12-plex in 35mm. That's mainly because the mall theater's gear is crap.

Add to that the problem of most movies using 2K resolution digital intermediate techniques in post production. What's the point in watching the movie in "film done right" when the source image's resolution was already reduced down to 2K in post?

For 35mm to beat digital projection, the source image would have to be entirely film based (no digital anywhere) or it would have to feature a higher resolution workflow, such as doing everything in 4K. Currently 4K is hardly used at all. Sony seems to be the only one doing it and only doing so on some key projects.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
A better solution to the problem would be to get real projectionists back in to the booth and stop having armatures damaging prints and putting on lousy shows.

I'm not very optimistic that can happen under the current business climate. The major movie distributors keep eating into movie theater profit margins. The theater companies themselves often care far more about quarterly report differences than delivering a product with high quality. Finally, audiences deserve a great deal of blame for being doofus idiots. Many don't even notice poor quality presentation when they see it, or it just doesn't bother them. Many of those who are bothered by it just keep going to the same crappy theaters anyway. There's not enough market incentive out there to force movie theaters and movie distributors to deliver a better quality experience.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-11-2007, 01:12 PM:

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
As a response to the subject, I hope for the love of God they do stop while they still have some 35mm screens.

Maybe that's what all the equipment is sitting in the warehouse for.

In Billilngs MT they have converted all screens to digital, but one screen in the Wynnsong 10 there is still playing Wild Hogs on film. Once a movie is out, is it impossible to get more digital "prints?" That film has got to be shredded by now.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
D-Cinema is a ridiculous little trend that will be dead soon, hopefully. Come on, film has been around for over 100 years and has served us wonderfully all this time; let's not fix what isn't broken.

That's kinda shortsighted. Less than 100 years ago, people thought horses were just fine for transportation and that the newfangled "automobile" was a passing fad.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-11-2007, 03:56 PM:

Is that $2250 per month or per year?

That !$ 2250.00 per screen per year. I believe as per the contract it includes all parts EXCEPT for lamps. Also as part of the contract Christie HAS to buy back so many projectors over the course of the job... but at a very cheap price. I don't know if they've nbeen doing that though. The entire contract with Christie was on the Carmike web site with only several points in it blotted out, its pretty interesting. They would have still been ahead by leasing the stuff.... they wouldn't be stuck with it for 10 years...
When all 2600 screens are running thats 6,500,000 a year for service... a little on the ludicrous side!

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
As a response to the subject, I hope for the love of God they do stop while they still have some 35mm screens.

My god man... Digital is a god send for a chain like Carmike... that is unless you enjoy watching scratched and dirty prints after just the first showning of a brand new print.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
But I guess until the big boys learn this, we must put up with D-Cinema; an image,sound and technology that is a pile of

So Tony,

What makes it so bad... ok rolling titles are difficult for the systems still...? Is it bad because its not film, Don't you watch TV too? You for one don't have a clue about any of it, you've never even seen one operating nor studied how it works. Go to some seminars on the equipment and learn what its all about before you jump the gun. For most average size screens a 2K print generally looks better than its equivelent film print that is sometimes 4 or 5 generations off the camera neg. Many digital releases are scanned right off the camera neg after it is conformed unless alot of special effects are involved. Some Digital Presentations literally look spectaculuar on a 40 foot screen... some still are lacking here and there but considering that this stuff is in its infancy its actually pretty damed good. And then there's the Sony 4K if anyone ever takes them seriously after the SDDS debacle.

Mark

Posted by Jarryd Beard (Member # 2543) on 05-11-2007, 07:27 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
Mostly the smaller theaters in smaller markets remain to be converted.

The two Carmikes here in State College (Cinema 5 and Cinema 6) were converted back in early November 2006. Both of these theatres upgraded three screens each from mono sound to the 5.1 systems needed for digital. One of the screens at Cinema 6 was a mono-surround setup. In this auditorium, even the old surrounds were scrapped for new speakers. Upgrading the sound, electrical, and exhaust systems certainly was a lot more involved than installing the actual digital projectors. Although, a lot of networking work was done by Christie's contractors/employees as well.

Posted by Tony L. Hernandez (Member # 3524) on 05-11-2007, 11:32 PM:

To those wondering about my objection to D-Cinema: I have attended many D-Cinema presentations so I feel I can speak in am educated manner both a a customer who has experienced D-Cinema and a long time projectionist and as an individual who has been in all ends of the movie theater business for most of my life. Northern Colorado is dominated by Carmike and Cinemark. I always attend Carmike Theaters when I choose to view a movie as a customer (was treated rudely one too many times by the Cinemark 16 in Fort Collins, CO to ever set foot in a Cinemark Theater again). To me, D-Cinema reminds me of sitting in front of a huge TV set. There is no way I can put my finger on the exact difference; I don't think anyone can. To try my best to put it in to words, film has a certain "life" and "constant motion" to it that D-Cinema does not. D-Cinema does fine presenting the picture and sound information, but lacks the life and excitement of film. I know there is a Christian Missionary service that teaches isolated tribes about Jesus via film presentations that they take to the jungles and show to the tribes. I'm sure many of you have heard of them. They still insist on continuing 16mm presentations citing that the audience pays more attention to film than DVD presentations. There are also several K-12 school districts and universities that maintain and even occasionally add to there 16mm film libraries for the same reason; the students pay more attention to film that other digital sources. One of these school districts is in Golden, Colorado. Could this be because film just has more life to it?
I have a large National Park Service movie collection, primarily on DVD and VHS with several titles I have on both DVD and 16mm film. I still prefer to break out the old Elmo projector and watch the film print when I am not too lazy or busy to do so.

I do have an interesting and unique story to tell. One booth that I regularly work in did a showing of a classic horror film just last week. I believe it was "Daughter of Horror" but don't quote me on that. Anyway, only 4 reels of the 6 reel film were sent to us, so we showed the first for reels, had an intermission and then had a DVD cued up to play "reel" 5-6. Keep in mind, all the equipment in this booth is the best quality available and in theory, no one should have noticed the difference. After the show, a gentleman came in to the booth and asked me why the last half of the show looked so poor. That's what an audience thinks of a side by side comparison of 35mm print and digital projection.

I do realize that nothing in life is black or white. I know D-Cinema has many wonderful features and advantages to it but when you compare them with the bad, it just does not make the cut. I think the industry needs to focus on correcting film presentations. If you can't hire a projectionist, properly train the managers. Come on, guys, you know this is not impossible. Aside from the fact that I have been doing it for years, it really is not hard at all for me. When in the booth, I just employ my knowledge and training, triple check everything I do, and care deep in my heart about the show I am putting on. I have been in the booth since I was so young I had to stand on a stool to thread the projector (age 8 or 9). It also did not hurt that the 2 men who did the majority or my training were ex union guys who had worked in the business since the '50s. And I have yet to so much as scratch a print...
Although it is not ideal, it is possible for a manager to put on a proper show. At one of my theaters, we are a small family operation that does not have one person devoted to projection. The "projectionist" is also in charge of selling tickets/concessions, cleaning the theater, etc. But we still have a wonderful presentation and take good care of our prints. BTW, we have platters there.

And I do watch TV, Mark, but I would never pay $7.50 a show to view it. I have seen around 20 films in D-Cinema so I feel I can voice my opinion from a customer stand point. When I saw my first D-Cinema film back last September, I was very excited to see this new technology and unbiased. I have formed my opinions over the past 9 months. Although I do not know anything about the D-Cinema booth or its operation, I know what I think as a customer. I am young, slightly under 20, and although I am inclined to embrace new technology and ideas with my youth, I just cant be sold on this one. I do,however, plan on attending seminars and want to recieve training in D-cinema as I plan on spending the rest of my natural life in this business. While it will be a godsend for AMC, Cinemark, Carmike,etc, it will be the final nail in the coffin of small town single screen theaters and drive-ins. Most of these theaters are run by older people who keep them open as a hobby or for the sake of posterity, and hitting their financially failing business with the large bill required to convert to D-Cinema would be impossible. Withdrawing the availability of 35mm prints from small theaters and drive-ins would be like taking an emphysema patient's oxygen away...it will kill it. I know if my family's theater ever is forced to switch to D-Cinema, it will put us out of business so fast we wouldn't know what hit us. I cringe just thinking of how many hundreds of theater and drive-ins D-Cinema will permanently shut down.

And besides all the practical views of it, wouldn't you all miss threading up a projector, building up a print, making changeovers, etc? I know I would!

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-12-2007, 12:17 AM:

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
There is no way I can put my finger on the exact difference; I don't think anyone can. To try my best to put it in to words, film has a certain "life" and "constant motion" to it that D-Cinema does not. D-Cinema does fine presenting the picture and sound information, but lacks the life and excitement of film.

Digital cinema can indeed seem a little video-ish at times. It would really look like 100% video if certain movies that were shot on video retained their video look. For some movies I don't think that would be a bad thing. I think Collateral probably would have had a more raw and immediate feel to it if Michael Mann had simply left the video looking like video. The image quality would have been better as well.

I think a lot of people are just used to seeing film done wrong. Problems like picketing, side weave, dirt, scratches, wavering focus due to film breathing back and forth in the gate and more add to what many associate with watching movies on film -at least it does for those who know they're watching film. A lot of viewers have thought the movies were already playing on tape or disc for years.

Film done right can be absolutely rock steady, have razor sharp focus, be evenly bright across the frame and lack any dirt or scratches. That level of presentation quality can seem a little video-ish too for the lack of flaws. It takes a good booth operator and very good equipment to deliver that.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
Anyway, only 4 reels of the 6 reel film were sent to us, so we showed the first for reels, had an intermission and then had a DVD cued up to play "reel" 5-6. Keep in mind, all the equipment in this booth is the best quality available and in theory, no one should have noticed the difference. After the show, a gentleman came in to the booth and asked me why the last half of the show looked so poor. That's what an audience thinks of a side by side comparison of 35mm print and digital projection.

That is an inaccurate analogy.

A standard DVD Video holds NTSC format imagery in a mere 720 X 480 non-square pixels at a maximum bit rate of 10 million bits per second. It's nowhere near HDTV levels, certainly not anywhere near 1080p format.

2K digital cinema has 6.4 times the pixel count of DVD video and 25 times the maximum data bit rate. Any suggestion the two different formats are on the same level with each other is ridiculous.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
I think the industry needs to focus on correcting film presentations. If you can't hire a projectionist, properly train the managers. Come on, guys, you know this is not impossible.

Sadly, it is all but impossible in today's business climate. Good luck on convincing various corporate board members to invest in great quality personnel and equipment. Many see film done right as a negotiable, variable kind of thing. They're given further incentive to cut corners by movie distributors who constantly try to eat further into a theater's dwindling profit margins.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 05-12-2007, 12:46 AM:

quote:
And besides all the practical views of it, wouldn't you all miss threading up a projector, building up a print, making changeovers, etc? I know I would!

That is the problem and that is why you feel the way you do about digital projection. You enjoy working with film and knowing that when film is done right you have a feeling of accomplishment. We all have that feeling to some degree. But unfortunately that is not going to change the course of the future in regards to digital projection. Just sit back and enjoy film while it lasts and plan your future accordingly.

Using DVD as a comparison to digital or film projected images is a poor comparison because they have a lower resolution than both film and digital. I have done side by side comparisons while running Spider-man 3. I have a digital screen and the rest are film. I see things that happen on digital that don't happen on film like jerky motion in the character when they move across the screen at a rapid pace, and what I mean by jerky is it doesn't appear smooth in movement. The digital is slightly brighter than the film, the digital runs a 4.5k and the unit running the film was a 4k. But I know when it is time to change the 4k the digital image will still be brighter. The things I like about digital is the fact that the image is rock steady so long as the projector is not picking up vibrations. The biggest thing is that I don't have to worry about someone screwing up the print because they forget to check something during threading or because something in the equipment failed and caused the scratching.

The thing I don't like about digital is the assumption that it is going to be the cure all for the industry and that it will put more butts in the seats. Once it becomes widely used it won't matter. Habits are habits and people stick with that.

There are other pros and cons that have been discussed on this site.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 05-12-2007, 01:07 AM:

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
There is no way I can put my finger on the exact difference; I don't think anyone can. To try my best to put it in to words, film has a certain "life" and "constant motion" to it that D-Cinema does not.

Yes the standard 35mm shake, When I was young the major difference between 35mm and 70mm, was the rock steady image that 70mm had. (this was the era of 35mm blow ups). The few digital demos I have seen its the steadiness of the image that impresses me.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
had an intermission and then had a DVD cued up to play "reel" 5-6.

mmm NTSC verses 35mm, even a 4 year old would notice. If you have the best equipment, does it at least play progressive scan, or upconvert to HD?

quote: Bobby Henderson
Film done right can be absolutely rock steady

For me the Kinoton electronic movements are rock steady, but no others I have seen remind me of the quality of the 70mm image!
I'm sure that the labs could be partly to blame for this?

Yes I too will miss film. But there are too many booth monkeys out there ruining film presentations. Digital is a big step forward for many audiences unfortunately.

Posted by Tony L. Hernandez (Member # 3524) on 05-12-2007, 04:51 AM:

Bobby, I never intended my story of what happened last week (the half-35mm,half DVD presentation) to be an exact analogy from the time I wrote my post and I realize that it wasn't. But you must admit it is not at all out of the ballpark of what we are talking about. It was a general comparison of a random film image to a random digital image. One was film and the other was digital. It was a simple comparison of the two general formats.

I cannot understand why everyone is jumping down my throat over my sentiments towards the 35mm format that has served us well for over 100 years as though I have said some horribly rude and offensive thing. I am not trying to change anyone's mind here...simply expressing my personal findings and opinions. In truth, your pro-D-Cinema views and my pro-35mm views really do not matter in the scheme of things; they will not change a thing. We all must sit back and see weather D-Cinema will take over the entire industry at some point or fizzle out eventually. It is all just speculation at this point. I'm not trying to tick anyone off or make enemies.

Darryl suggested that film lovers just want to see the format live because we enjoy playing with it. Although he/she was 25% true guessing how I feel, the other 75% of my feelings lie with what I feel is best for the industry.

I see nobody as of yet has been willing to tackle my lengthy statement about the moral concerns of what this switch will do to mom and pop theaters and drive-ins across the USA...many of which are historic. Truth is, the film companies do not really care weather the above places live or die. Not enough money comes from them. But everything is not about the almighty buck. People need to learn this fast.

Cameron: Yes, the system does upconvert to HD. It's a very nice system and would have been just fine had we not run the first half of the picture on 35mm. That was one of the most unique situations I have ever had to deal with.

Bobby: your talking about film done wrong brought back an amusing memory of about a month ago: I was at a little mom and pop theater in the middle of nowhere here in Colorado where for the first 8 minutes or so of the feature, the film was being run without the plate. WHOOPS...pretty much topped all the bad film done wrong mistakes I have seen in my life. The rest of the show was excellent with good chageovers,etc.

On a lighter note, one of my co-workers recently quipped that he could not see why the film company that produced "Grindhouse" wasted time,money and effort into making the film look worn, dirty and damaged. He said they should have just sent all the prints to the Carmike Theaters for a week and they would have had all the damage they wanted with no cost or effort!

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-12-2007, 09:55 AM:

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
But everything is not about the almighty buck. People need to learn this fast.

Tony - since you're not 20 yet, you probably have not learned this, but in the business world, everything IS about the almighty buck. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you will understand the way things are going (and will go).

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-12-2007, 10:48 AM:

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
Bobby, I never intended my story of what happened last week (the half-35mm,half DVD presentation) to be an exact analogy from the time I wrote my post and I realize that it wasn't. But you must admit it is not at all out of the ballpark of what we are talking about. It was a general comparison of a random film image to a random digital image.

Yes, the comparison is indeed "way out of the ballpark."

For DVD video, being "digital" is besides the point. The fact remains that it has a far lower level of image resolution than 35mm film, 2K DC and HDTV.

Just from watching the imagery on a HDTV alone, the quality differences between regular DVD and formats like Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are staggering. That even goes for DVD players with HDMI and upconversion filters. The native HD discs still look a LOT better. There is no substitute for high native image resolution. A low res image is just only low res. Interpolating more pixels just makes for a soft and blurry low res image.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
I cannot understand why everyone is jumping down my throat over my sentiments towards the 35mm format that has served us well for over 100 years as though I have said some horribly rude and offensive thing.

I'm not jumping down your throat. I'm just speaking bluntly about the current situation in the movie theater business and speaking bluntly about the technical facts behind film and digital.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
In truth, your pro-D-Cinema views and my pro-35mm views really do not matter in the scheme of things; they will not change a thing.

If you have read a good number of the posts I have made about digital cinema you would know better than to simply say my views are "pro-D-Cinema."

It's a sad truth many movie theaters are not run well. The shows are not well projected. Many don't have good sound systems. Many of the ones with good sound systems don't have them properly adjusted. This has been true for a lot of Carmike locations. Many of those locations are getting a major upgrade by going digital.

The downside I see with going digital, at least in terms of the 2K variety, is that it doesn't have a high enough quality difference between it and HDTV. Sure, the bitrates are 7 times higher than any HD movie disc. The bit depth is deeper on color and the audio is high bit rate and uncompressed. But in terms of actual pixel count, there isn't much difference at all between 1080p HDTV and 2K digital cinema. That's scary from a marketing perspective. That's why I think everything needs to be going 4K as soon as it can. For the time being we're stuck with 2K, even at the production level. A 4K projector won't mean squat if it is being fed material originated in 2K.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
I see nobody as of yet has been willing to tackle my lengthy statement about the moral concerns of what this switch will do to mom and pop theaters and drive-ins across the USA...many of which are historic.

That subject has been covered in lots of other threads. We have been talking about that issue and many others regarding digital cinema for several years.

quote:
On a lighter note, one of my co-workers recently quipped that he could not see why the film company that produced "Grindhouse" wasted time,money and effort into making the film look worn, dirty and damaged. He said they should have just sent all the prints to the Carmike Theaters for a week and they would have had all the damage they wanted with no cost or effort!

Regardless of movie chain brand, every major theater chain and most of the small circuits all have at least a few low quality, poorly operated locations. I've had bad experiences at theaters run by AMC, Cinemark, Loews, United Artists, Regal and a number of others.

Lumping the blame of bad presentation on Carmike alone is a bunch of ignorant bullshit. Unlike the other majors, Carmike is at least taking some bold steps to do something about it. You don't like it that they're going the route of digital projection. Unfortunately, that's what most garden variety movie theaters are going to have to do to fix the situation. The movie theater chains don't want to spend extra for top of the line Kinoton projectors and Schneider lenses along with paying what it takes to have a truly qualified projectionist running the booth.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 05-12-2007, 11:30 AM:

quote: Darryl Spicer
That is the problem and that is why you feel the way you do about digital projection. You enjoy working with film and knowing that when film is done right you have a feeling of accomplishment. We all have that feeling to some degree. But unfortunately that is not going to change the course of the future in regards to digital projection. Just sit back and enjoy film while it lasts and plan your future accordingly.

I made the above statement based on 23 years of working with film. Now that I have a digital projector sitting in my booth I must form opinions about that based on what I currently know. On a personal level I have a better feeling about the product but I know I will have major withdraws when film is gone. That is why I made the statement "Enjoy it while it lasts"

Please don't read into the words and statements of opinions as being a ram it down your throat or an attack. That is the major problem with forums because you are missing the direct emotions one would give if you were talking face to face about the same subject.

I don't think in a sense of disappearing that film will go away. I think the studios understand enough that they still need to provide for those who can not afford the new technology.

Posted by Tony L. Hernandez (Member # 3524) on 05-12-2007, 12:53 PM:

Well, Mike, I do not appreciate you're criticizing my age or knowledge. I don't know how things are done up in Montana, but we try out best to be considerate of other's in our business practices down here in Colorado. We realize that money is important...very important but also don't go around screwing others to get that buck. And money ISNT everything, I'd much rather sleep at night than know I got where I was financially by immoral practices. I have these beliefs, my parents have these beliefs and my grandparents and great-grandparents had them and we are all relatively well off, thank you.

Sorry you couldn't appreciate my Carmike joke, Bobby. That's what it was; a thing called a joke. Not something to be taken seriously...they are customarily laughed at. Not analyzed to death. And I will be sure to visit my local priest tommorow morning and beg forgiveness for comparing DVD to D-Cinema.

I'm not even gonna bother reading this thread anymore. I cannot believe the particular level of immaturity and nit picking that is going on. It seems anyone who wants to offer a new opinion or idea on these forums better be ready to have WWIII on their hands to fight. Its happened before and now its happening again here.

D-Cinema is wonderful! I Love it! I hope and pray it takes over the entire industry! Happy now?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 05-12-2007, 01:19 PM:

quote: Jarryd Beard
Both of these theatres upgraded three screens each from mono sound to the 5.1 systems needed for digital.

Why would

"need" multichannel sound any more than film does? Just because they're doing other upgrades (which is a good thing) along with the [dlp]

installation doesn't mean that those upgrades aren't available for 35mm, too. (Though, admittedly, sound quality will be better from an uncompressed digital source vs. the lossy compression used in all the 35mm digital formats.)

Posted by Jarryd Beard (Member # 2543) on 05-12-2007, 01:39 PM:

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
I'm not even gonna bother reading this thread anymore. I cannot believe the particular level of immaturity and nit picking that is going on.

To me, it looked more like a relatively civil conversation. Who's really the immature one? You can't win every argument. You don't have to lose either (Although it appears you've conceded now). Almost every opinion expressed on these forums has one to counter. Get used to it. I've learned a great deal on these forums. I'd like to think that, even though I work for a large chain, the knowledge I've gained through discussion at Film-Tech sets my theater's operations and presentation apart.

Digital Cinema may not be for all theatres. However, it has had a very positive impact at the one I work for. We still run the occasional 35mm film, and I'm glad we do. However, for the most part, the digital has been a perfect fit. We're cutting costs and providing a far superior presentation when compared to our old setup and even the two competing stadium theatres in the area. I can quickly swap out ads and remove trailers as needed. Digital allowed us to sellout ALL 5 screens of Spiderman 3 last Thursday at midnight. There would've been no way to interlock 35mm on all five screens (converted from a late 1960's twin). I've seen properly run 35mm; I realize the benefits. I've seen several films at the recently reopened State Theatre running Kinoton changeovers... installed by Steve Guttag. These presentation were truly impressive. However, in a reality where 20+ screen multiplexes are becoming more and more prevalent, digital seems to be the way to go for the multiplex venue.

Oh, and 35mm vs. DVD, terrible comparison. [Big Grin]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-12-2007, 05:38 PM:

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
Well, Mike, I do not appreciate you're criticizing my age or knowledge. I don't know how things are done up in Montana, but we try out best to be considerate of other's in our business practices down here in Colorado. We realize that money is important...very important but also don't go around screwing others to get that buck. And money ISNT everything, I'd much rather sleep at night than know I got where I was financially by immoral practices. I have these beliefs, my parents have these beliefs and my grandparents and great-grandparents had them and we are all relatively well off, thank you.

Tony, there's no point in getting into a fight over this. You're obviously a smart guy who knows what he likes and doesn't like, but at age 20 you are just naive about the world of big business and understandably so.

First of all, I didn't say anything about screwing people to make a buck, immoral practices or anything of the sort. I don't agree with that any more than you do. My comment about everything being about money was not about individual guys like you and me...it was about corporations like the big theatre chains. If you think for a minute that any large company does anything because "it's just the right thing to do," then you're delusional.

Big companies have to answer to stockholders, who get itchy if the company doesn't make a profit and show growth from year to year. To maximize profits, you have to do what's going to bring in the most money. Any "feel-good" thing they do is done with an attitude of "this will help the bottom line" at its core, whether you want to believe it or not. This does not necessarily entail anyone getting screwed. It's just business.

When I got in the movie business nearly 30 years ago, I used to think that if my li'l movie theatre had excellent sound, new seats and a great presentation, and paid its bills on time, the film companies would line up to give us movies faster than the less-nice theatre down the road. WRONG...it's all about gross potential. They are a bigger town, so they get first preference every time. But no hard feelings from me....that's just the way it is.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 05-12-2007, 06:31 PM:

quote:
Why would [dlp] "need" multichannel sound any more than film does? Just because they're doing other upgrades (which is a good thing) along with the [dlp] installation doesn't mean that those upgrades aren't available for 35mm, too. (Though, admittedly, sound quality will be better from an uncompressed digital source vs. the lossy compression used in all the 35mm digital formats.)

You can run a stereo optical print on an old mono system and get reasonable mono sound. Probably better to install one of the old Dolby mono noise reduction units and equalisers, but you can get away without even doing that. Put in a digital system and you're going to have four AES ditital pairs; ok, probably only three of them in use, for six channels, but how are you going to feed them into your old mono amplifier? You're going to have to convert to analogue, but then what do you do with the six, or eight, discrete analogue clannels? You'd then have to create a reasonable mono mix from these, and install some sort of mixer to do it. With a 35mm analogue matrix-encoded track all you have to do is not put it through a decoder, and not upgrade your projectors to stereo cells; in other words you don't have to do anything.

While I suppose you could, in theory, install the equipment to mix digital down to mono, it would be better to upgrade to a stereo sound system. We're running digital with only a single surround channel at the moment, but It's due to be upgraded soon. I'm not sure exactly how it's been set up; I'll have to look next time I'm there.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-12-2007, 09:18 PM:

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
Sorry you couldn't appreciate my Carmike joke, Bobby. That's what it was; a thing called a joke. Not something to be taken seriously...they are customarily laughed at.

I'll reserve my first amendment right to not find it funny. The pointed jabs at Carmike have grown very old. There's plenty of other theaters goofing up shows but they don't draw nearly as many jokes or gripes. Carmike has been do a lot to improve nearly the entire movie theater chain. I feel like I am one of very few who are willing to acknowledge that.

When I gripe about theaters, I generally try to gripe about something specific that one theater location is doing wrong with showing their movies. If it's something company wide, I still remain specific -such as the policy of using common width screens or positioning projector ports in really bad locations because it's just "good enough." Y'know, stuff like that. Those sorts of things have a better chance of being changed. Just joking about or outright insulting an entire company does little to solve anything.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
And I will be sure to visit my local priest tommorow morning and beg forgiveness for comparing DVD to D-Cinema.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 05-12-2007, 09:46 PM:

Stephen...actually, Carmike has and will continue to have DCinema installed in MONO theatres without changing their sound system. They take the six channels and mix em down to mono...just like Drive-Ins did for 70mm once upon a time. Its cheaper and you can STILL advertise DCinema with DLP technology. Who advertises "Presented in Dolby Stereo" anymore?

Posted by Tristan Lane (Member # 1169) on 05-13-2007, 12:48 AM:

[scream]

My apologies.

quote: Tony L. Hernandez
Anyway, only 4 reels of the 6 reel film were sent to us, so we showed the first for reels, had an intermission and then had a DVD cued up to play "reel" 5-6. Keep in mind, all the equipment in this booth is the best quality available and in theory, no one should have noticed the difference.

I refuse to believe that DVD didn't look as good as film. That just isn't possible!!!! DVD is the same as D-cinema, isn't it???

It's unfortunate that he is no longer viewing this thread. He contributed so much accurate information for other people to take into consideration when making an opinion.]

Edit: Steve, on your comment above: They could also advertise the movies as being presented in "DIGITAL SOUND" as well!

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 05-13-2007, 12:55 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
Who advertises "Presented in Dolby Stereo" anymore?

I do if I can fit it into the 32 seconds I have on the telephone recording. Then again, at a drive-in, people seem to be surprised when they find out the radio sound doesn't sound like total crap.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-13-2007, 02:34 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
Carmike has and will continue to have DCinema installed in MONO theatres without changing their sound system. They take the six channels and mix em down to mono...just like Drive-Ins did for 70mm once upon a time.

If that is taking place, it must be happening in a limited number of locations. Many of the mono or stereo-optical equipped theaters Carmike has upgraded to d-cinema have had new sound systems installed. Carmike has also closed a good number of theaters where 5.1 surround sound just wouldn't work. Their 6-plex in Duncan, OK (not too far from where I live) previously had only 1 DTS equipped screen with the rest being stereo or mono. Now all 6 houses have 5.1 audio.

Carmike already had a lot of 5.1 equipped theater screens, with quite a few locations having 5.1 in every house (most of it DTS, but a growing number of Dolby Digital installs in recent years). Naturally, those were among the first theaters upgraded to d-cinema.

With 80% of the 2300 d-cinema systems installed, the remaining locations in the program will be increasingly difficult to upgrade. In that respect, I wouldn't be surprised to see at least some of them have nothing done to upgrade the sound systems.

Around 100 of Carmike's 2400 screens will not be upgraded to d-cinema. I assume their limited number of 2nd run locations will fall within that group.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 05-13-2007, 04:32 PM:

quote: Steve Guttag
Who advertises "Presented in Dolby Stereo" anymore?

I do, too. I'm probably the only person in the world who is still running the "Temple" SR trailer. I'm all for advertising anything that actually contributes to improved picture and sound quality.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 05-13-2007, 10:38 PM:

No, no...I mean in print ads or even on the Marquee to entice people to the theatre...not to tell people that have already shelled out the dough what they are seeing/hearing.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-14-2007, 12:42 AM:

Lots of newspaper ads have gone to plain listings with little or no technical information at all. The individual movie stack ads are this way for most papers across the nation now. Theater directory ads vary from one city to the next. Some are good about showing technical info while others just state the title, MPAA rating and show times.

I don't see very many theater marquees using the Dolby icons anymore. The few places where they are used you never know whether the icon is advertising Dolby Digital or optical Dolby Stereo. Companies like Wagner and Gemini still make the Zip Change and Pronto icons for Dolby, DTS, SDDS, THX and MPAA ratings icons. Most theaters don't even buy the ratings icons. They just use regular letters.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 05-14-2007, 12:46 AM:

Thats my point...who is to know it is MONO inside?

Posted by Patrick de Groot (Member # 858) on 05-14-2007, 02:46 AM:

I think it would be really stupid to maintain a mono system with a DC projector. People will notice the lack of quality sound. I guess speakers get changed too. I don't think mono is really being used after a DC projector is setup.

Why is anyone even still using mono? That surprises me. You mean no left, right, sub and surround channel? Don't have money to buy a sound system that supports Dolby SR?

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-14-2007, 10:01 AM:

Although it doesn't seem that way anymore, 5.1 digital surround sound is still a relatively new thing.

Mono audio was very common for a lot of movie theater auditoriums well on into the 1990s. A lot of new movie theaters built throughout the 1990s had digital surround sound systems installed in only a few screens of a typical multiplex. In the early to mid 1990s it was rare to find any theater with 5.1 systems in every house. In the late 1990s it became more common. It's only been within the last 5 years that most new movie theaters would be expected to have 5.1 audio in every house.

Looking at Carmike's situation, they still have a good number of old movie theater buildings. Some of these buildings date back to the early 1980s, 1970s or even older than that. Some of those theaters just don't have walls thick enough to properly contain 5.1 audio and keep it from bleeding over into adjacent auditoriums. You also have various structural issues that make it more difficult to install a new sound system.

Carmike has difficult choices to make with some of those older, smaller theaters. They have already closed around 10 or more old locations within the last 12 months. I know they don't want to install digital cinema systems without having 5.1 surround sound as part of the package. Most audiences are simply going to expect that kind of audio as a part of "digital cinema." 5.1 audio is really not a luxury item for commercial movie theaters anymore.

Carmike doesn't seem to be working on many new theater builds or stadium seating conversions on existing locations right now. The new 10-plex in Ardmore, OK is the only one I know they're working on at all currently. Once all the d-cinema systems are installed Carmike could start building new theaters in markets that need it most. I'll certainly put in my vote for a new multiplex in Wichita Falls, TX. For the kind of business Carmike gets from the mall in that town, a new build ranging from 14 to 20 screens would be a good investment.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-14-2007, 10:33 AM:

Well I saw my first digital presentation at a Carmike cinema Saturday night. What follows are my observations about the experience. This is NOT meant to be a general Carmike bash, but an objective account of what I experienced. (I'm not reviewing the movie we saw, so that's why I didn't put this in the reviews section.)

I fail to understand why Carmike is really good in some areas of the country and bad in others, to the point of being a national joke. I can only assume that the bad areas must outweigh the good, from the comments on here. You'd think they'd have a quality control guy who made surprise visits to their facilities.

At any rate, we were at the Carmike 7 in Billings, MT, a 25+ year old facility. The digital install is less than two months old. We were in screen 5, one of the mid-sized auditoriums.

I was surprised at the total lack of anything promoting "digital cinema" in the theatre. No signs outside, not even the letters "DLP" on the marquee. Nothing whatsoever inside, not even in the boxoffice windows. The only indication that this was a digital presentation was the clips that played on screen when the movie started.

We were about 30 minutes early for our movie so we sat in the lobby for awhile, watching the appetizing sight of a concession kid cleaning out a popcorn machine with a large broom.

The atmosphere at the theatre was, for lack of a better word, kind of creepy. There was no music of any kind playing in the lobby or the auditorium before the show. Despite a wide variety of movies being shown, the entire place seemed to be populated by nothing but teenagers. The auditorium was downright weird...every surface in there was red. Carpet, seatcovers, floor, curtains, ceiling. The only non-red items were the black surround speakers.

The pre-show slides (non-digital) were from Coca Cola, so they were mostly red too. They were in focus, but off centered on the screen. The seats were uncomfortable -- sunken cushions, and no cupholders. The overflowing trash can next to our screen's entrance was still overflowing at the end of the show.

The picture looked fine, but the surrounds didn't work, and there was a distinct "hum" in the sound. This hum was only noticable during the silent bits like the "green bands" on the trailers, so once the feature started it wasn't a bother. Since we were watching a mostly dialogue movie ("Georgia Rule") I didn't feel it was worth griping about the surrounds either, although I did mention both problems to a concession kid on the way out and he said he'd inform the manager. And since Spider-Man 3 was playing next door, it sounded like there was thunder in the background throughout our movie.

It wasn't all bad though. The audience was well-behaved -- I didn't spot one cellphone interruption during the whole movie. The staff didn't walk through every 3 minutes looking for contraband drink cups. There was an acceptable amount of pre-feature stuff (4 ads, 1 Carmike snipe, and 4 trailers). The picture was beautiful.

So, everything considered, Carmike lived up to its bad reputation in Montana. How the same guy (Donald Bristor) has kept his job as district manager in this state all these years will be an eternal mystery to me. He must be really good at getting his paperwork in on time, or something.

One question for you d-cinema operators: Is it possible to separate the "attached" trailer from the feature, so you can put your "welcome to the movies" clip in right before the feature begins? At our show, the Carmike "welcome to the movies" clip played, followed by the "attached" trailer.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 05-14-2007, 01:55 PM:

Yes, the attached trailer comes as a seperate file. The manager at that theatre must be confused about Carmike's policy as it clearly states on 35mm presentations to not remove the attached trailer but on digital presenetations since it is already a seperate file to build the show in the manner you suggest.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 05-14-2007, 02:11 PM:

Why would there be a policy to not remove the attached trailer with 35mm?

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-14-2007, 03:02 PM:

I see theaters remove attached trailers all the time -to place their own "feature presentation" snipe in front of the movie. AMC does it. Harkins does that as well. That's actually what I prefer.

My argument for that: hearing members of the audience groan in disgust when they see more movie trailers placed after the theater's own policy snipes. They've already sat through 15-20 minutes of trailers and TV commercials thinking the movie is about to start. Once the theater chain logo is done, guess what? Another green band! More movie trailers! Yay! It really wears on the patience of more than a few audience members.

If I had my own movie theater chain to run I would copy the same routine General Cinemas used:
1. Projector start, Welcome/Visit Concessions snipe.
2. Run any TV commercial spots.
3. Coming Attractions snipe (if available).
4. Movie trailers.
5. Feature Presentation snipe.
6. THX trailer (if applicable), other format trailers.
7. Feature

I liked the audio/visual format trailers being placed directly before the feature's beginning since they work pretty well to pump up the audience right at the start of the movie. It's also a good minute's worth of buffer time to allow the audience to get over having had to watch 20-30 minutes worth of freaking movie trailers and be a little more "emotionally fresh" when the movie actually starts.

It's a bit of a judgment call on what order to play those format trailers. With 35mm, running THX first and then the sound format trailer seemed to work well. With digital cinema, I'd probably play those snipes (DLP, Christie, Dolby Digital Cinema) first and then put the THX logo directly ahead of the movie.

quote: Mike Blakesley
At any rate, we were at the Carmike 7 in Billings, MT, a 25+ year old facility.

A multiplex theater more than 25 years old explains a lot of the problem. The newer Carmike theaters (anything built within about the last 10 years) are quite a bit better. The Carmike 8 here in Lawton was built in 1994, but is still in good shape (with a great deal of credit for that going to its manager).

Billings, Montana is a city of over 100,000 people. That's a big enough market to warrant Carmike doing something to protect it. If Carmike sits back and does nothing another company like Cinemark or someone else will come in and build opposing theaters.

That's what happened in Wichita Falls, TX. Cinemark has a new 14-plex there now - and they got Spiderman III instead of the Carmike location at Sikes Senter Mall.

Cinemark grabbed a lot of business from Carmike in the Colorado Springs market with the two new theaters they built within the last several years (one of which includes an IMAX-3D theater). Carmike needs to replace its old Chapel Hills Mall theater with a new flagship-class stand-alone build with 20 or more screens to get back some of the business they lost.

One other problem I see with the Billings, MT situation is that it is very far away from Carmike's headquarters in Columbus, GA. That situation is probably not on their "radar" like so many other locations closer to their home base.

When I lived in Albany, GA I griped pretty loud in a newspaper editorial about how bad the quality was in the Carmike theater in the center of town. Carmike did some upgrades on another theater they could upgrade on the town's east side, but eventually shut down both locations and replaced them with an all new 16 screen complex.

Depending on the population draw to Billings, it sounds like Carmike should do the same thing there and do it sometime soon before Cinemark beats them to the punch.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 05-14-2007, 04:04 PM:

Because believe it or not the studios can be very picky about their trailers getting played with their movies removing the attached trailer from the print and inserting a policy snipe is fine 99.9% of the time because even if you do get a trailer checker they're only instructed to check to make sure certain trailers are playing, not in what order they're playing. Those who remove attached trailers due to booking conflicts/whatever do so at their own risk. There was a Carmike theatre that did not play the attached trailer and had the bad luck of having a trailer checker or studio rep show up. That theatre did not play that studios product for 6 months. Hence the policy. If it isn't cut its going to play.

Posted by Jarryd Beard (Member # 2543) on 05-14-2007, 05:39 PM:

The only exception the policy Dustin pointed out was with Disney animated films. As I'm sure many were aware, Disney required all theatres booked with Meet the Robinsons to show the attached trailer uninterrupted with the cartoon short and the feature.

Mike, your encounter just goes to show that the manager can make all the difference. If the manager did his/her job, all the problems you mention should have never occurred... well, except for the interior design. I work at a theatre that is forty years old this year. We have none of these problems. If we did, a call to Christie has the problem solved in a day or two if not hours. Incompetence, on the other hand, isn't so easily fixed.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 05-14-2007, 07:13 PM:

In the case of Meet The Robinsons you have the situation where the theater is having to play specialized content -well, provided if the theater is showing the movie in RealD.

I'm trying to remember which Disney movie it was that featured an attached trailer for the live action version of 101 Dalmatians. Was that The Hunchback of Notre Dame? I can't remember. I only remember the dalmatians trailer being something like 3 or 4 minutes long -a bit big to clip off the front of a feature.

With d-cinema, it's quite a bit easier to arrange movie trailers on a computerized play list (and not leave out trailers a checker will want to see). But that will work only so long as the "attached" digital movie trailer isn't encoded within the actual movie file itself.

Posted by Jarryd Beard (Member # 2543) on 05-14-2007, 09:43 PM:

This was the case for the 2-D Meet the Robinsons as well. That's the version we played; the instructions were "in the can" (meaning with the hard drive in this case). Last year, we received the same set of instructions with Cars in 35mm. I can't remember back to Chicken Little, but it may have been the same then. In the most recent case, it had nothing to do with 2-D or 3-D. The enclosed document basically stated (in both cases) that by booking the film, individual and corporate theatres agreed to run the attached trailer(s) uninterrupted with the feature.

I agree that this confuses patrons and feels odd to watch. Patrons seem consistently annoyed when we do this with 35mm programs. However, in these aforementioned cases, it was by Disney's request.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-14-2007, 10:42 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
They've already sat through 15-20 minutes of trailers and TV commercials thinking the movie is about to start. Once the theater chain logo is done, guess what? Another green band! More movie trailers! Yay! It really wears on the patience of more than a few audience members.

This is precisely why I ALWAYS follow the practice of cutting the attached trailer and inserting the theater's policy in between the attached trailer and the feature. It completely screws up the pacing if you don't and inevitably brings about the groans.

As far as playing or not playing the attached trailer, I always play it...I just separate it from the feature for two specific reasons:

#1 If it is a Deluxe lab print, I have to insert a black slug. Deluxe doesn't understand anything at all about pacing, and instead is only worried about saving those couple of feet of film stock. I then place the cue at the beginning of the black slug (with the policy either directly before or after the slug, depending on the way the theater wants the lights and such to run).

#2 The Technicolor labs understand the need for a quick pause and provide several feet of black leader. In the Technicolor situation, I simply cut the film at the first negative splice after the attached trailer, then resplice it directly back together or add in the theater policy, placing the feature cue appropriately. This way whenever the movie that the attached trailer is promoting is released, the trailer is effortlessly removed.

Either way the attached trailer always runs, unless I received a used print and there are marks on it...then it's trash time without question. Damaged film is damaged film.