Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Windowboxing of "Hobbs and Shaw"

This is topic Windowboxing of "Hobbs and Shaw" 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=003761

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 08-05-2019, 03:11 PM:

I attended a 2D showing of "Hobbs and Shaw" at the Marcus Ridge Cinema in New Berlin, Wisconsin yesterday. This was SuperScreen #2, which is one of their two largest screens, equipped with Atmos. The SuperScreen is their mid-tier product (UltraScreens are their top tier, but not present at this location), but advertised as being better than the traditional (and tiny) screens elsewhere in this location.

The previews were all presented with a black border around the entire content, whether it was the movie trailers or the Marcus promo. I decided to track down an employee before the movie started, in the hopes of getting the issue at least looked at, if not fixed.

Found someone in the hallway on her way up to the booth. Described the issue, and she said it was just how the pre-show content was, and that it wouldn't be that way when the movie started. I told her that I would hold her to it, suspecting that it wouldn't change.

Sure enough, the movie started, and there was a black border around the entire scope-shaped image. To my never-been-a-projectionist estimation, someone failed to zoom the lens to fit the screen. The border looked pretty even all around, with perhaps a little more on the sides than on the top and bottom.

After the movie ended, I searched for the person I talked to, but she was gone. Asked for a manager, who then informed me that this was how the movie was formatted.

I had the choice between continuing the debate and leaving, I decided to forgo the inevitable frustration of dealing with someone that was very disinterested in determining whether there really was a problem.

If the pre-show stuff was filling the screen, I would be more inclined to believe her and chalk it up to weirdness with this one title.

I'm hoping I'm sent a feedback survey, as often happens, so I wanted to confirm with people here that there isn't some sort of formatting issue with "Hobbs and Shaw" that makes this display issue intentional.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-05-2019, 05:50 PM:

That movie is a standard "scope" presentation so there's no reason for it to be windowboxed. Maybe a formatting cue was missing in their playlist.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 08-05-2019, 11:20 PM:

I agree with Mike, it's most likely the wrong format cue was selected when the play list was set up. Depending on the projector this would have been as easy as just pressing the correct format button. That's the downside of having no one in the theatre who understands how the projectors are serviced and/or configured.

Seems like the large theatre chains could spring for some projection training as part of the management training. Help them understand the theory behind how the projector works, not just how to push buttons. The added benefit is they could make life so much easier on techs because they would have someone mildly knowledgeable who they can walk through troubleshooting.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-05-2019, 11:55 PM:

quote: Scott Jentsch
Asked for a manager, who then informed me that this was how the movie was formatted.

Wow....this is a manager?! I would have been tempted to say something like "Have you ever even seen a movie in a theater? Can you please explain to me why the director would want there to be four feet of blank screen all the way around the image?" and then enjoy the blank stare.

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-06-2019, 06:30 AM:

If a local managers tells BS, I would, still politely, insist that the format is wrong, and inquire about an administrative contact to escalate. This was a 'premium' screen. Why should they advertise it as premium and demand a premium if the presentation is flawed?

Yes, there is the occasional outlier, but in general, there are only two main feature formats, flat or scope, with the majority of blockbusters being in scope. If you see a frame all around the image, it's 99.9% they are using the wrong format.

- Carsten

Posted by Dave Macaulay (Member # 813) on 08-06-2019, 08:02 AM:

How did they do this?
Only way I can come up with: side movable masking in scope and scope content projected in a flat channel would look that way. Fixing that for one show would take as long as needed to get to the projector plus maybe two seconds. Fixing the playlist (and future shows), a minute or three.
Sad.
We try to educate managers a bit on principles and simple troubleshooting. Some get it, some don't, and some are just afraid of the equipment: they don't get rewarded for fixing simple problems... but boy they get sh!t if they screw it up!

Posted by John Thomas (Member # 6509) on 08-06-2019, 09:13 AM:

If the black border was of equal size around all sides it could just be a failing zoom motor on the lens or the wrong lens was specified for the screen.

Some systems will allow you to go further on the lens motors during alignment but will fail to hit that point again when the macro is actually activated, so it could have just been a hasty alignment.

If the physical masking was in bad shape the technician may have opted to float the image for clean borders until repairs are made.

Posted by Chris Haller (Member # 9206) on 08-06-2019, 05:07 PM:

I saw the film in windowboxed format as well - a quick conversation with the manager of the Cinemark location I saw the film at revealed that the lens couldn't zoom properly due to a failed mechanic, and that they picked window boxing over total compromise. A safe choice, of course. He also told me the new piece is sitting in the office, waiting to be installed.

Awesome.

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-06-2019, 07:07 PM:

True or not, that is by far the better story to tell than 'this is how the movie was formatted'...

- Carsten

Posted by Sam King (Member # 4029) on 08-06-2019, 10:51 PM:

I can recall ONLY ONCE where a director wanted significant black bars on all 4 sides... James Cameron with regards to AVATAR in 15/70mm GT locations, AKA *REAL* IMAX Theatres. He felt to fill would overwhelm the audience in these venues and distract from the film/story. Cameron was presented by DKP (David personally) with several different window sizes and watched them at my location and picked one of the middle ones and that's how the 15/70 prints were struck.

I actually had a supposedly know-it-all guest attempt to explain down to me how we were "zooming incorrectly/zooming out." I attempted to explain the whole thing, but he wouldn't have. I think he just wanted to show off to his girlfriend.

Obviously this was a very rare circumstance, and the OP's situation was indeed another example of how at many or most cinemas, no one under the roof during busy times has any clue how Digital Cinema works, how to solve *simple* issues like this, or even how to properly field a guest concern regarding presentation. Very sad, please write to corporate with an emphasis on ULTA-BASIC projection training for all the duty managers. It's the least than can be done, surely?

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 08-08-2019, 09:22 AM:

So far, no survey, so I'm going to contact them.

It wasn't a big enough deal to miss part of the movie for (thankfully, given the response I got), but to me, the bigger issue is the lack of concern by the staff to verify the problem I was reporting, and then to give a BS response when pressed.

When a person is paying $13 for a matinee ticket (yeah, matinee), they should get better than this.

Unfortunately, there's not enough competition in the area to force change through choosing alternatives. It just reinforces the idea that waiting for the home video release is a better way to go. That doesn't help the industry at all.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 08-08-2019, 09:53 AM:

I can't make any logical sense of theater staff allowing a movie to be shown window-boxed. Normally a crew that gives at least a tinker's damn about presentation quality would take some steps to fix the problem.

Watching a movie in a window-boxed manner is WORSE than watching the movie on TV screen at home. At least the damned retail Blu-ray or legit streaming version is going to be formatted correctly with just one dimension of letter-boxing. The window-boxed crap is like watching a really bad YouTube video on a computer screen. Somebody takes something originally shot in HD, but only has a SD source with the original 16x9 image letter-boxed, then he uploads that in a pillar-boxed HD container. Just utter crap. It seems like the same shit is going on in this theater.

Maybe the staff at this theater is accustomed to watching window-boxed YouTube videos on their notebooks and mobile phones. Maybe that's what passes for normal presentation quality these days.

If I ever want to watch a movie horribly window-boxed in that manner I'll just pop in an old non-anamorphic DVD of True Lies or The Abyss for nails-on-a-chalkboard viewing displeasure. The Abyss turns 30 years old tomorrow, August 9. Yet James Cameron can't take a break from scuba diving or messing with Avatar sequels long enough to The Abyss or True Lies to be viewed on modern TV sets without looking like extremely low quality, poorly uploaded YouTube videos.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 08-08-2019, 10:16 AM:

It doesn't seem to bother exhibitors when their presentations are common width and there are black bars on top and bottom of the image...why would it bother them if there are black bars around the entire perimeter? Clearly screen masking has become somewhat superfluous.

Didn't Disney do something like that with their 3D titles -- have the image smaller than the screen so they could enhance stuff that they wanted to appear in front of the screen, to not touch the screen frame which destroys the 3D illusion?

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-08-2019, 02:50 PM:

Yeah, floating windows in 3D. Not to mention various recent 2.0:1 and 2.2:1 releases that are meant to be played in flat. Well, at least only ONE pair of bars...

By the way - the german DCP of M.I.B. - International was marked straight 'F' for flat - but it had black bars on top and bottom and was in fact something around 1.9 or 2.0:1 - how was that in the US?

I do have 2.0:1 and 2.2:1 presets, but I would prefer at least to see that indicated in the CPL name or accompanying letter...

- Carsten

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 08-08-2019, 06:27 PM:

And this is a huge reason why I haven't gone to theaters much since the advent of digital- the scope format is a joke, working the same way as it does on video. The native frame should have been 2.35, or it should have still used anamorphic lenses like film. This along with the dominance of common-width screens, many without even any masking, has reduced the experience to the same as I can get at home.

I have True Lies on D-VHS by the way [Smile]

Posted by Mark Strube (Member # 4190) on 08-08-2019, 06:58 PM:

Scott - you should've checked it out at the Rosebud in Wauwatosa. (Hobbs bombed for us.) If you're cool with the couches - we pride ourselves on our presentation and well-calibrated sound system.

Posted by Michal Matys (Member # 8614) on 08-09-2019, 05:19 AM:

@Carsten we had the same in Czech i believe, the format was F200. Same format was used on Green Book and another movie recently, which I cant recall.

Michal

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-09-2019, 06:15 AM:

Yes, but Green Book was marked F-200 - while our CPLs of MIB only showed 'F'.

- Carsten

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 08-09-2019, 04:29 PM:

I did get a reply from a manager, who believes she was the one I spoke with, and she said that she misunderstood the issue I was trying to communicate to her, and she apologized for the confusion.

While she didn't come out and say that they found the problem and addressed it, she did offer some "sorry passes" to make up for the issue.

I have received a lot of "sorry passes" from this theater in the past couple of years, and it's not my intent to see a movie for free by complaining about minor issues.

Frankly, I'm not as interested in free passes as I am in having movies presented properly. I'm sure they get a lot of comments from a wide range of people (and probably more than a few cranks), I would have liked if either of the two people that I reported the issue to would have shown enough concern to check it out for themselves.

Since the feedback form and the sorry passes seem to be their preferred method of measuring their performance, I'll respond with my address to receive them, but I will add that my primary wish is for them to excel at their presentations so the sorry passes aren't necessary.

When I spend my money and my time, I just want to get something better than what I can do myself. I don't think that's too much to ask, but that gets to the fundamental element of the moviegoing experience that it seems some theaters are willing to ignore.

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 08-09-2019, 06:44 PM:

Scott, never stop complaining. It will make some difference. Of course, it is important to complain as educated and as well behaved as possible (assuming you certainly did), so one is taken serious. But it will make a difference.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 08-10-2019, 04:27 PM:

I agree, Carsten, especially given that Scott will make his point intelligently and with emphasis that he is not complaining to get sorry passes but because his interest is that movies be presented properly...good for patrons, good for their business (which is their business).

But then, doesn't that again go to Jesse's point, why should the movie-goer who paid for his ticket, need to school the exhibitor on how to run his business? When exhibition is so close to the brink of being the last choice of where the public chooses to get their movie entertainment, what with all the hassles -- time to get to the cinema, putting up with the idiots around you, putting up with bad presentation -- why should that movie-goer who did make the choice to go to the theatre then have to 1) seek out a manager or ANYONE who might know how to deal with a presentation issue and 2) take the time to write an essay to corporate about the importance of decent presentation and all the things they didn't do right at his screening?

I would venture to say that more and more film releases are being seen on platforms other than in movie theatres, and that trend will continue to grow. Other than the occasional big blockbuster "event" movies, seeing film releases in movie theatres is a dead entertainment platform walking.

Posted by Jarod Reddig (Member # 6363) on 08-13-2019, 11:51 AM:

I complained for "years", yes YEARS at my local cinema and gave up. Some companies just don't care. The local cinema in question is now owned by AMC and it gets regular EQs at least. Before that EVERY complaint fell on deaf ears.

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 08-17-2019, 12:07 AM:

I've got a few "sorry" passes that I haven't even used in a few years- that's how little the "theatrical experience" means to me now. It used to be I'd go to any movie for free, and I did watch everything at the theaters I worked at.

The last movie I went to was January 2018, and the picture was ridiculously dark (in addition to being letterboxed with no masking). I filled out a comment form on their website and got an Error message. I then posted about it on Yelp saying "If they had sent me passes, I probably wouldn't have even bothered using them." Since then I've seen SEVERAL other comments about the picture being dark at that same theater.

Posted by Jarod Reddig (Member # 6363) on 08-17-2019, 04:13 PM:

And i would honestly rather they fix the mistake then hand out a free pass to me.

Posted by Robert Harris (Member # 1712) on 08-24-2019, 04:40 PM:

Aeons ago, I went to a screening of Jaws at a local theater.

Film opened out of frame, and I waited a couple of minutes for someone to catch it, and correct. Mind you, this wasn’t a bit of errant frame line, encroaching the image. It was the entire frame line, and part of the adjoining frame,

Finally got an usher, and pointed out the problem. He went to the booth, and returned with the following explanation.

I was told that movies are a long strip of film, literally hundreds of still images, that appear to move by some magic.

And that between each of these images, was a frame line, separating the two.

And that’s what I was seeing.

My reply was simple, and frustrated.

“I know there are framelines between the images. We’re just not supposed to see them.”

I surmised that little Buffy, the candy girl was in the booth that day, hadn’t centered the framing knob, and was stuck.

But the entire audience learned about framelines that day, so I suppose something good came out of it.

I didn’t stay.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-24-2019, 10:22 PM:

Didn't some "exhibitors" used to lock the framing knobs to avoid accidental adjustments?

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 08-25-2019, 05:04 AM:

Well, I remember a presentation, not so long ago, a digital one, where part of the image dropped off the bottom and part of it ended on the ceiling. The screen was an unmasked affair, close to scope aspect ratio.

The movie was clearly flat, so I guess they inadvertently put a scope macro in there or forgot to reset it from scope to flat after the previous presentation.

A rather minor issue any competent projectionist or trained booth monkey should be able to solve in seconds.

I told the one lost soul left in the lobby, he went with me to the room and he right out claimed to me that this was normal. Some movies had "extra picture" for "extra large screens" and I was seeing that "extra picture".

Most foreign language movies here are subtitled, so was this movie. I asked him if subtitles were also considered "extra picture".

His brain dead argument was that you could still (sort off) read them and that was sufficient...

He also could not adjust anything on the projector, that was all remote controlled. When I asked him if I could get my money back his answer was, it was impossible, because the boss was not in...

I simply never visited that place again.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 08-25-2019, 10:45 AM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
Didn't some "exhibitors" used to lock the framing knobs to avoid accidental adjustments?

Yes, they did!

I experienced this in a small number of Seattle-area theatres, back in the '70s and '80s.

One reason was because of the constant twisting of the framing knob, used to compensate for lazy threading. More often than not, the framing ended up high or low. Once the knob was taken off, the "operators" learned how to properly thread the projector. I don't think it stayed that way for long, once the point was made.

I also ran into this modification at a couple of theatres with those awesome Ballantyne Pro-35 projectors. Seems frequent adjusting of the framing would wear some threads in there, making the picture jump around more than it usually did anyway.

quote: Scott Jentsch
I have received a lot of "sorry passes"

Yah... and a couple times a year, we'll get someone who'll manufacture some outlandish complaint, specifically looking for those passes, because it doesn't take much to get other managers to dispense them.