quote: Lyle Romer

---

My wife and friends wanted to see this so I went along....

---

Yeah. Sure.
 

---

Posted by Patrick Dunn (Member # 3333) on 05-31-2008, 10:16 AM:
 
If my girlfriend wants to see this one, she can have fun without me! I hate even doing theater checks for this movie.

Although that may be going overboard, I just hope I don't do it during that one scene Lyle mentioned.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 05-31-2008, 10:19 AM:
 
I don't know about the movie, but here in San Francisco the crowd probably put on a better show.

I'd say 98% of the people at all of the sold-out shows yesterday were women, 2% were men dressed as women (SF, you know!) and 1% were actually men who wound up being there for whatever reason.

The theater is in a very upscale neighborhood which has a large number of bars-per-square-foot on the adjoining blocks and it's obvious that this is where most of the crowd spent their time before coming to watch the movie.

Most of the women coming to see the movie were well behaved, but totally sloshed.

3 of the local TV news stations were camped out in front of the theater to do live shots for their afternoon and early evening newscasts. I don't have to tell you what the presence of TV cameras can do to an already alchohol and estrogen fueled crowd.
Think "throwing gasoline on a fire", if that helps you visualize.

Even though the theater has one of the larger and better women's rest rooms that I've seen (not that I spend a lot of time in women's rest rooms! ) at one point the women just wound up taking over all the stalls in the mens room too. Once it started, we couldn't stop them. They'd just barge right in and.....

There was at least one cat-fight over a seating dispute that we had to get the police to come and break up.

Every show was was sold out. When the show began and the lights would start to dim, the women would let out a high-pitched scream that probably woke dogs in several adjoining states.

I got the 'best one-liner-of-the-evening' award from the staff when after pushing the button that starts the show I quipped: "I've never made so many women scream using just my finger".
(Oh, come on; - it was a long fustrating day and it was very funny at the time)

Today is another day.

The bars open early.

It's too bad I don't drink.....
 

---

Posted by Chad M Calpito (Member # 3736) on 05-31-2008, 10:59 AM:
 
Though I haven't seen this movie, Auditoriums #1, #7 and #15 were all sold out shows last night. And, the majority of the audience were women. For our 9:55pm show, which started late to get all of the people in, a fight almost broke out due to a seating dispute, but, was quickly ended before things got out of hand.

We also had a local TV News Crew there as well. And, of course, my theatre is in the middle of plenty of Bars and Nightclubs in the Gaslamp Quarter.

So, in essence, I think our crowds put on a pretty neat show since pretty much all of the guests were well behaved and were all smiles.
 

---

Posted by Patrick Dunn (Member # 3333) on 05-31-2008, 12:43 PM:
 

quote: Jim Cassedy

---

"I've never made so many women scream using just my finger"

---

That is the best thing I've heard!
 

---

Posted by Allison Parsons (Member # 2728) on 05-31-2008, 01:34 PM:
 
I find no joy on wasting 2 hours of my life by watching 40-something year old women be whores and talk about fashion.

However, if there was ever to be a Absolutely Fabulous movie, I'd be the first in line.
 

---

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 05-31-2008, 06:33 PM:
 
2 and-a-half hours.

...and Jim, that's the best post I've read here for ages.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-01-2008, 12:03 AM:
 

quote: Jim Cassedy

---

I'd say 98% of the people at all of the sold-out shows yesterday were women, 2% were men dressed as women (SF, you know!) and 1% were actually men who wound up being there for whatever reason.

---

So you had a 101% capacity crowd?
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-01-2008, 01:31 AM:
 
So you think you had it bad Jim? Try running this movie on 4-6 auditoriums in a theater with a full bar! Every show interlocked on at least 2 screens. Every show sold out. Every seat had multiple glasses from the bar. There were drunk hens everywhere!

BTW, I had to do some searching over at imdb to figure out who this was. This lady looks like she should be married to E.T. because that neck of hers is creepy long.


 

---

Posted by Phil Blake (Member # 2012) on 06-01-2008, 05:56 AM:
 
We open on Thursday with it, phone has been running hot for the past week with massive group bookings from the local gals, yep , its going to be bigger than Ben Hur . From Brads post I hope the gals don't rock in too drunk, my all time cinema epic puke was created by a drunk woman and I cleaned It up, amazing the hiding places staff can find in a hurry !
 

---

Posted by Jaime Tuzzio (Member # 4760) on 06-01-2008, 06:04 AM:
 
You know, each and every time I see Cynthia Nixon I still think of her in Amadeus: "I'm frightened! I'm very, very frightened!!"

I'm a big fan of the show and I admit I really liked the movie, though it was too long (I wanted the Fashion Week segment cut the second it started). I'm not thrilled about Carrie's <spoiler> Big Happy Ending </spoiler> but it was all stupid, silly, fun, which is exactly what I expected and wanted.

I built it and screened it, so the presentation was awesome. And I didn't have to deal with intoxicated women. Not that night, anyhow.
 

---

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 06-01-2008, 10:01 AM:
 

quote: Joe Redifer

---

So you had a 101% capacity crowd?

---

quote: Brad Miller

---

Try running this movie on 4-6 auditoriums in a theater with a full bar

---

OMG! You've topped me there! I'd forgotten there are theaters with liquor licesnces out there.

I am happy to report that all the 'crazy' women here in SF apparantly got "S-A-T-C" out of their systems on opening day.
(at least at the theater I'm at)

The women attending the shows yesterday were all great. Many of them came in groups with their women friends, some were dressed in great outfits, and they all seemed to be having a really good time and enjoying the movie with their friends.

I was even able to turn the volume back down to 'normal' level.

Occasionally we'd find one of 'the guys' who had obviously been dragged into seeing S-A-T-C by their date/wife/other sneaking out and into the other auditorium to watch 'Iron Man'
We didn't try to stop them.
We understood.
 

---

Posted by Louis Belloisy (Member # 3836) on 06-01-2008, 11:53 AM:
 
Well this has been one of the busiest (I did not say best) movies that we have had recently. We have it in 5 theaters and its been mostly sold out by women of all ages. Many mothers are bringing their young daughters in to see it and we questioned a few of them, they said that they wanted to introduce their offsprings to the big ladies world.

In the evening shows, many of the women are tipsy and rowdy. They are showing up in their Sunday-go-to-meetings dresses with the high heels. we also have a lot of men dressing up as women coming to the shows. We had a good time watching one guy walk down the corridor to the theater in high heels and stockings with seams. Of course the seams were crooked and he did not shave his legs. Maybe his wife (?) would not understand the shaved legs.

All in all, for me and the rest of the male staff...

Louis
 

---

Posted by Chad M Calpito (Member # 3736) on 06-01-2008, 11:55 AM:
 
Last night, while running booth, I would take a peak into the auditoriums and saw like wine bottles, beer cans, mini-wine bottles, even Martini Glasses. I'm amazed there wasn't a big mess (puke-wise). Oh well, people are having a good time and are enjoying the shows.
 

---

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 06-01-2008, 04:26 PM:
 
Luckily, I only have one print, but even that has been doing poorly. A couple sellouts for the whole weekend, and no rowdiness. The Strangers has been busier, and those are the people being escorted off the premises by the cops. Perhaps my competitor down the street has done better by it, since they have a liquor license, and looks like they have it on three screens. Canton is not really a drunk-friendly town, you can't get anywhere without driving, so it would be optimal to get liquored up at the theater, rather than having to commute.
 

---

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 06-01-2008, 11:03 PM:
 
CINEMA: Regal Cinemas Kansas City 18, Kansas City, MO
AUDITORIUM: 5
PRESENTATION: 35mm/Dolby Digital
PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: None
RATING: Two and one half stars (out of four)

WARNING: "Women come to New York for the two L's...Labels, and Spoilers."

THE PLOT: Big screws up. Wackiness ensues.

I actually watched the show in its original run for a couple of seasons before the novelty wore off. I did catch up on the DVD's later in a whirlwind weeklong marathon. (What...they were on sale at Costco.)

The show is so special to women because it taught the Lite FM crowd how to think with their dicks, so to speak. It was a revolutionary fantasy world to the women who today still support Rick Springfield tours, yet think of themselves as being just as glamorous or clever as Sex and the City's fabulous foursome.

The movie plays out like a completely written season with the filler cut down to make it more like five episodes long. It IS the TV show. Exactly the TV show. There's nothing special done to it to dress it up for the big screen unless you count gastric noises, which is more like dressing down. But the women in this audience laughed hardest at that scene.

It seems to be exactly what the hard core fan base had hoped for, and it did $55 million, so I'd say it came out just fine.
 

---

Posted by Allison Parsons (Member # 2728) on 06-02-2008, 01:16 AM:
 
There were reports that you could see the boom mics in a lot of the scenes. Anyone notice that? I just figured maybe whomever was running the film had the wrong lens on the projector.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-02-2008, 02:22 AM:
 
Check the random news links thread or whatever it is called for the boom mic story. They had it out of frame because it was run by retards.
 

---

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 06-02-2008, 03:08 AM:
 
My guess is that the boom mics were close to the frame line, but I screened this thing and didn't see any at all.
 

---

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 06-02-2008, 08:09 AM:
 
I didn't notice any.
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 06-02-2008, 11:54 AM:
 
Looks like lots of so-called projectionists still don't get the concept of framing a 1.85 picture that's been printed open matte.

But then again these people are most likely the same ones that HAVE to rack the framing on EVERY start since they don't even know to set the intermittent BEFORE threading up.

What Joe said.
 

---

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 06-02-2008, 02:08 PM:
 
I haven't seen the mics, but there was either a notice in the cans or an "urgent fax" stating that the film was "to be projected at an aspect ratio of 1.85:1" and that "when properly projected, no booms will be visible" on screen. Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure it was a fax, as my GM and I had a good chuckle about it when it came in.
 

---

Posted by Louis Belloisy (Member # 3836) on 06-02-2008, 05:12 PM:
 
We have had the boom mikes showing, usually by a young person who does not know how to properly frame the movie, kudos to management for sending the kids up from the floor.

i am sure you remember "disturbia" it was known as the "mike movie", the microphones and booms were below the heads of the actors, especially in the bedroom scene.

we received a fax from paramount to the effect "if the booms or mikes show, its the fault of the projectionist". i found the email of the post production manager at paramount and sent him a lengthy email, asking how a mess such as this was released. we eventually talked by phone and he explained that there was limited room in the bedroom and consequently the equipment was seen. he did apologize for the fax and sent out a follow up email to everyone who complained about the fax.

no matter how we framed that movie, the booms were visible. he actually offered to send someone up from Manhattan to ensure proper display. by that time it had been moved to a smaller theater. so much for quality control.

Louis
 

---

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 06-03-2008, 07:40 PM:
 
I got a follow-up fax today from WB which absolutely appalled me. I would post it up, but I don't have a scanner, so I will paraphrase the most egregious portions of the solid block of text. If someone else has this fax and can post it up, it is pretty fantastically condescending.

Points 1, 2, 3, 4 all suggest that I and all other projectionists don't know what aperture plate and lens to use, or how to frame. Also, perhaps some of us run around swapping plates between projectors with no regard for differing screen sizes. "Different sized screens have slightly different sized aperture plates." No shit, thanks for telling me something I learned in my first week.

Point 5 says to check the framing, then goes on to give some great recommendations on just how to do this, including this gem: "If you still can't verify your framing, check by looking into the front of the lens (with a small amount of light coming in from the xenon bulb) to make sure that the number on your leader or other frame information is centered in the square." In all fairness, it does provide a warning to limit the amount of light hitting the film, etc.

Points 6 and 7 pretty much say to turn the framing knob until you can't see the boom mikes. Thanks.

So, from my perspective, this is pretty much their fault. How many chances did they have to keep this out of the release print? They could have not shot it in the first place, they could have just deleted it in the digital intermediate, or hard matted it out at the lab, at the very least. Thank you WB, for screwing up royally at your job and then getting condescending to the hardworking projectionist. For the record, I haven't even seen this mike, but I still am insulted by the assumption that we are idiots.
 

---

Posted by Allison Parsons (Member # 2728) on 06-03-2008, 08:10 PM:
 
um....is it normal to film boom mics anyway???

I remember watching a trailer for The Break-up and noticing the boom mics. Then I realized that I was *that* dumb projectionist and forgot to change the lens. Luckly I was screening whatever movie the trailer was one and fixed it.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-03-2008, 10:43 PM:
 
With everyone using digital intermediates these days, there really is no excuse not to hard matte the entire film.

Furthermore, each print should have a thick black hard matte edge, with thick CLEAR framelines. The black hard matte edge is to compensate for a poorly overcut aperture plate and the CLEAR fat framelines is to guarantee idiots can't run the show out of frame.
 

---

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 06-04-2008, 12:45 AM:
 
I am strictly speaking as an audience member here, not as a projectionist. While the points Brad makes are obviously good ones here as to twhyat the studio could/should have done, there ARE still some incompetent operatios out there that would still screw it up. There was a UA theatre locally that always projected out of frame for flat films and operators refused to accept this, even though all the rating bands would be way off center and the preview credit cards would be massively cut off. One time I went to the usher and pointed out the obvious. His answer? "It don't matter." He did this twice to me. I even wrote corporate suggesting that they hard matte their feature presentation snipe to act as a guide. Whether or not they were responding to me, the new snipes a couple of months later had gthe hard mattes, and they STILL weren't used to properly frame. And the hard matted flat films (few as there are) would STILL show huge black bars at the bottom of the screen. And still no one at the theatre woiuld believe me. (Even more jaw-dropping, at a grindhouse downtown, I pointed out that a scope movie was being shown through a flat lens. The actual "projectionist" peeked in and couldnt understand what I was talking about. It took TWENTY MINUTES of me complaining before something was done about it. The girl at the snack bar had to explain it to him and even commented, "he obviously doesn't know what he is doing." No shit!

So it is unfortunate that the true professsionals at this site have to be seen as guilty by association, but I have seen too many obviously bad framing issues (among other operator problems)to not think that this letter sent out isn't needed. (This doesn't excuse the sloppiness of the filmmakers for allowing boom mikes in the first place, though).
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-04-2008, 03:26 AM:
 
I've seen boom scenes in Scope movies also.. The classic boom/pencil mic shot was in "Grease" - where Sandy and Danny are by the jukebox in the soda shop.

As they were talking back and forth together, one can see the pencil mic swing back and forth in the reflective plastic dome of that jukebox to each other's conversations.
 

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 06-04-2008, 05:07 AM:
 
Paul, with clear frame lines, it would be pretty damn hard to run it out of frame. If the studios really wanted to ensure their movies were run in frame, they could print "the manager is now giving away 10 free passes for pointing out to him that this movie is running out of frame" in that clear area.
 

---

Posted by Jaime Tuzzio (Member # 4760) on 06-04-2008, 05:11 AM:
 
Oh, I really like that one.

Except, of course, that it would be lost revenue for the studios so it would never happen.
 

---

Posted by Shane Cooper (Member # 2510) on 06-05-2008, 02:53 AM:
 
In the words of Stewie Griffith:

I am not interested in seeing a movie about three hookers and their mom!
 

---

Posted by John Koutsoumis (Member # 1855) on 06-07-2008, 12:08 AM:
 
For me this one blows but I have not heard so many patrons cheer, howl and clap all the way through a film.
The main thing is nearly everyone seems to like it and we are doing quite well with it. This one was my first interlock too.

Should have been filmed in VistaVision considering the subject. Would have looked amazing.
 

---

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 06-10-2008, 08:43 AM:
 

quote: John Koutsoumis

---

Should have been filmed in VistaVision considering the subject.

---

?? They shouldn't have wasted ANY negative stock on this sleeze. They could have shot it with a video camera and all the sloshed female audiences would have had just as much male-bashing fun.
 

---

Posted by John Koutsoumis (Member # 1855) on 06-10-2008, 05:00 PM:
 
Well at least they could look better on screen.
Apart from 1 or 2 exceptions I think most of the films originated in 65mm back in the day fare no better than this.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-10-2008, 09:56 PM:
 
This movie will have legs even if it doesn't have legs.
 

---

Posted by Jaime Tuzzio (Member # 4760) on 06-12-2008, 04:37 AM:
 

quote: Frank Angel

---

and all the sloshed female audiences would have had just as much male-bashing fun.

---

quote: Mike Blakesley

---

This movie will have legs even if it doesn't have legs.

---

Fa-nar...fa-nar...
 

---

Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 06-13-2008, 10:18 PM:
 
Well done film.
3.5 out of 5.
 

---

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 4255) on 06-14-2008, 10:49 PM:
 
Yeah, I thought it was pretty good, apart from the disgusting lab splice we were lucky enough to get.
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 06-19-2008, 10:42 PM:
 
I had a rash of trouble calls last week - every single one of them in houses playing this picture!
 

---