This is topic Technicolor Speaks At U.D.I.T.O.A Conference in forum Ground Level 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=5;t=000444
Posted by Tim Sherman (Member # 569) on 02-07-2002, 03:29 PM:
As some of you may know the United Drive-In Theater Owners Association had its annual conference this week. At the conference one of the guest speakers was Brad Carroll, who is the Manager of Exhibitor Relations with Technicolor Entertainment. We found out some information regarding some of the problems we all encounter with TES. First off I would like to say thank you to Brad Carroll for coming and we really enjoyed having him. We were also able to find out the reason why Technicolor never became a member of Film-Tech. Brad told me that he comes to the site often and reads the posts, and really would like to join and reply. But the problem is Technicolor’s lawyers will not allow him to join. The reason being that there would be documentation on the site to prove what he said. Understand what I mean? We were able to ask him about many things, such as, reels and the integrity inspection process. First off they are now working on making new reels. The first type of old reels are the black ones that always broke very easily, then the next type they came out with were the ones that were of the almost clear plastic, that really didn’t break but warped very easily. The new reels they are trying to make are supposed to be a happy medium, where the reels will not break very easily and will not warp. So kind of mixing the two reels together to form a new consistency of plastic. We also mentioned the problems we are having with the cores, that we have to drill a hole through the shaft for the drive pin on the rewind bench. We had also found out about the integrity inspections. From what I gathered TES basicly has two types of integrity inspections, The very thorough inspection where the entire print is inspected, and the other type of inspection is just them making sure all the reels are there, then unrolling about 15 feet of film from each reel and checking the print for scratches. The type of inspection is determined by the film company. These are just a couple of the things that were discussed and I’m sure that other people at the convention will be adding more to this thread and I will do the same.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-07-2002, 04:00 PM:
Brad Carroll can do his little pep talks around the country about how *wonderful* their services are, but not addressing the issues right here where the projection industry gathers as a whole is as good as admitting the problems TES has and unwillingness to improve, plain and simple. If I was a lawyer for Technicolor I would be afraid of what he might leak out too. I also have no doubt that if he ever registers and posts here on the forum that he would be bombarded for about 3 weeks solid answering questions from the very people TES is supposed to be servicing, but once the initial question/answer/solution process was taken care of, assuming TES really *does* care about improving their practices, those Technicolor lawyers would have nothing to worry about.I understand Universal is going to pull out of TES and switch over to ETS because of their horrible service. Perhaps he would care to comment on that at his next social gathering? I don't think so. It will be all fluff, like always.
Oh and since the odds of Mr.Carroll reading this is pretty good, STOP USING THAT DAMNED IMAGEGUARD SHIT ON YOUR OSCAR REISSUE PRINTS!!! I know TES spent a lot of money on their ImageGuard machines and they make a tidy profit from "rejuvenating" the print with it, but ASK the theaters if they want that crap on their prints before you send out the prints. Rewashing is great, but that other junk has go to go! (Remember how TES had to change out 7 prints in a row of Saving Private Ryan for me on the Oscar reissue because I refused to run that film with the ImageGuard on it? It's going to happen again this year if I get another one like that. I'll take a dark screen any day over a print that has ImageGuard on it!)
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-07-2002, 05:11 PM:
TES needs to fire their lawyers and get new, better ones. The current ones seem to fear work. Every company should be able to discuss issues with their customers on a public forum. If the lawyers are afraid of what might be documented, then TES has some really dark secrets that they don't want to come out. That is obvious. What also seems obvious is that they know our issues are valid and also know that they are doing very little to nothing to address them. Why else would they fear the documentation of a public forum? Well actually it's a private forum, but the public can view it.I don't feel like retyping my TES review here, so I won't. But check it out for those of you who have not read it yet (click "Reviews" over on the left). All I do want to say again is that I remember specifically calling up TES well BEFORE my print of American Beauty was shipped and requesting an "unrejuvenated" print, one without Imageguard or Photoguard. Of course they sent me the Imageguarded print anyway.
Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 02-07-2002, 08:45 PM:
Yes, what are they so afraid of? Are they afraid of all those people who have been injured by the "reels from hell" (myself included!). Maybe we should all file a class action lawsuit against them?
Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 4594) on 02-07-2002, 10:59 PM:
When I contacted technicolor about my mishap with the reel flying at my face I didn't even get as much as a "sorry"...What customer service???------------------
Brad, you're pretty darn Chipper yourself!!!
Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 02-07-2002, 11:41 PM:
Oh, they really care alright, don't they? 
Rachel had a serious injury with her Technicolor reel. My incident involved the top half of the reel flying off and bouncing off my hand (and cutting it) like an air hockey puck before turning into a frisbee and flying across the room.
Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 02-08-2002, 09:34 AM:
Rachel, I'm sure their lawyers would not allow them to apologize, much less make any sort of reparations. If I was running a business and hired legal representation that prevented me from doing business ethically and responsibly, I think I would be looking for new lawyers immediately.
Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 02-08-2002, 01:26 PM:
In Brad Carrol's defense (and note, not in TECHNICOLOR'S defense) if he were to come on here and apologize to Rachel, or even just email her an apology, he would in effect be admitting Technicolor's responsibility. Well, everyone here is saying 'DUH!' right now, but think about this. In a courtroom it could be argued that Rachel was running the make-up table to fast, or even that she herself mishandled the reel and broke it. We all know this is not true, but that doesn't matter to the lawyers, they could still argue it. If an official representitive of TES admitted wrongdoing-which is what an apology is-it would be an open and shut lawsuit. How long do you think Mr. Carrol would be working for TES after that? One can't do a very good job at trying to improve a companies customer service record if one is no longer working for them.So, long story short, yeah, TES sucks, but don't verbally abuse Brad Carrol for wanting to keep his job. At least he's reading our comments and attempting to respond to them-if not here then at conventions, etc. Thats more than can be said for the film labs and Hollywood studios who we complain about just as much.
Posted by Dave Bird (Member # 490) on 02-08-2002, 03:25 PM:
>>>In Brad Carrol's defense (and note, not in TECHNICOLOR'S defense) if he were to come on here and apologize to Rachel, or even just email her an apology, he would in effect be admitting Technicolor's responsibility.
>>>...and that's the problem with this weasel-lawyer-driven society it's becoming. They ought to make it illegal to sue someone solely on the grounds that that person (or company) acted politely or mannerly.
You ought to at least be able to say sorry, someone's been hurt, how many lawsuits do you think go to court simply BECAUSE nobody will say sorry???
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-08-2002, 05:07 PM:
Dustin, that's a load of crap.Mr. Carroll could have said:
"I am very sorry to hear of your accident".
Note that is not saying:
"I am very sorry the company I work for does not give a flip about you or your safety by sending out cheap, broken reels which are dangerous."
See the difference?
And Rachel, you really should have sued that company for every dime your lawyers could've sucked out of them. As it stands, I am STILL receiving reels that obviously never "clipped" together at the depot and are still broken with dangerous sharp edges. I'll bet if we were to do a Film-Tech survey that well over 90% of the members here would acknowledge that the problem is just as bad as it ever was. A company that big that let's it's lawyers run the business will never learn until someone sticks it to them.
Oh the day I get cut badly on a TES reel...now THAT will be a lesson!
Posted by Paul Harnden (Member # 1034) on 02-08-2002, 07:11 PM:
Brad, If possible, try out a survey on people who have had to deal with this crap. I've personally had three reels up and break on me while running on the table, and even a couple more that I was lucky to catch as they broke when I took them out of the can. And when done with this survey, post it up on the site so Mr. Carrol can take a mighty good look at it.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-08-2002, 07:31 PM:
Is it just me or has the quality of reels from _all_ depots been declining lately? A few years ago, when I first started working at theatres, the reels were mostly good. Now it seems that at least 50% of the reels that I'm seeing are complete trash. The scene in the latest training video--where a reel disintegrates during the "inspection" process--is all too common...at least the part about the reel falling apart on the bench... (Unlike Joe, I don't eat greasy food when I inspect prints.)It's been at least six months since I've seen a print arrive with all reels intact. I can't remember the last time it happened, actually. It's not just Technicolor, either, but they seem to have more problems than anyone else. Worse, they don't seem to care about fixing these problems.
(I'm sure that there are people at Technicolor who _do_ care. These rants aren't directed at them. They are directed at whoever is responsible for the attitude that the company publicly displays, which is, essentially, "we don't care, we don't have to." If they really cared, they would allow their employees to post here and work with theatre owners and projectionists to improve their service. Since they aren't doing this, it appears that the company as a whole is uninterested in improving anything except perhaps its bottom line.)
Posted by Paul Turner (Member # 832) on 02-09-2002, 12:25 AM:
Good comments, Brad. Last Friday I got three stitches from a reel sent by Reel Easy. Then again, I only have about 20 years experience building film, so I'm sure it was my fault. . . . As little as I think of TES, I think the shitty reel problem is becoming more universal. Then were back to: would these reels be made if TES, ETS, Reel Easy were not using them? TES knows their product has hurt people. They weigh the cost of a pay-off against the cost of changing policies and products. So, we lose. Their lawyers are crouching, ready to spring as soon as the law suit is filed. Until then, they just tell everybody to shut up. If this Carrol guy is anything more than an apologist for TES, then he'd grow a pair, quit, or tell the people he's supposed to be servicing what is really going on. Instead he hides behind his legal counsel and keeps collecting check from his company. What's this fearing "documentation for what he said" shit? What good is ANYBODY if they don't stand behind what they say? Asked and answered . . . .
Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 02-09-2002, 01:37 AM:
I don't appreciate being talked down to like that Brad. I have the common courtesy to make polite arguments and don't need to be verbaly abused back. Yes, when you put it like that, I agree, Mr. Carrol could have sent her an email with such a phrase. He could have even passed it by their legal department and it probably would have passed. You don't need to tell me what I've said is 'a load of crap' though to get your point across.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-09-2002, 01:58 AM:
Dustin, that comment was far from "talking down to you" and was also not "verbal abuse". While I do not mean this, saying something like "Dustin, you are a fucking idiot who needs to learn a little bit about the law" would constitute "talking down to you", "verbal abuse" and would be completely uncalled for. See the difference?Next time you have a problem with anything you read on the site regardless of who wrote it, contact me offline and I'll do what I can to remedy it. I'd say about once a week I am requested via private email to intervene with something said on the site between two people and have always been able to make things right. However, I don't put too much concern into comments made publicly like this.
Posted by Tom Fermanian (Member # 1094) on 02-09-2002, 07:50 PM:
Whoa! In Canada we still get most of our prints in vintage 1950's (or older)Metal casses with the old recycled metal reels!! Market being smaller here, Victoria Shipping Services handle I would say 80% of major shippings throughout Canada doing a very good job at it for the past 40 or so years!, well the old metal crap sounds better than lot of the plastic stuff that you guy's & gals seem to be getting in the US? 
------------------
Posted by Wes Hughes (Member # 981) on 02-10-2002, 03:21 PM:
I think that your disagreements and arguments SHOULD be out in the open...why the secrecy of private email...so no one gets embarrassed???? ( I think) most of the people here are grown-ups. 
Does anyone take the reel flanges off? Most times the first thing I do when I get a print is strip it to the cores and assemble it with a large flange or split reel. Your dangerous reel problems are then over.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-10-2002, 03:30 PM:
Wes, if someone comes onto a thread and makes a stink about something someone said, there's not much of anything I can do about it. If the offended party contacts me privately via email, I can contact the author of the original post and 99% of the time the author is happy to modify their post once they realize the way it was written was taken the wrong way. However, once someone brings this out into the open, my policy is not to alter anything and whatever was said will stay. The reason? Once a public argument starts, if things are changed I am the one who is suddenly to blame for censorship, even if the original author suddenly realizes that the wording of their post does not "read right".So it's simple, anyone who contacts me offline gets any assistance I can provide. Anyone who takes it public is on their own and I'm not going to do anything about it (except to ban a member in a serious case). Since this is my site and I am the moderator, I find it insulting when I am not brought into the loop privately and given the chance to take care of things first. Would I have modified my own post in this thread and apologized personally if a professional email had been sent? Sure, even though I do not feel I was out of line, I would have been happy to. Will I now? Nope.
This is the way I have been running the site for a long time now and it has resulted in the least amount of problems overall.
Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 02-11-2002, 10:43 AM:
I too, got the opportunity to meet Mr. Carrol last week at the U.D.I.T.O.A. conference. I was very pleased by the fact that he took the time to meet with us, even though we (as a group) only represented a fraction of the U.S. exhibition marketplace. He answered the questions fairly and openly, and was generally reseptive to all of our comments and concerns. One question someone in the group mentioned was the use of "reference frames" to build prints with, and asked if they could be "scanned and posted" on the Technicolor website for use by projectionists. He was taking notes, so it's possible that a system like that could happen.
The week-long conference in Orlando/Kissimee was very helpful to our endeavours as we continue with our plans to open our theatre.
------------------
Barry Floyd
Floyd Entertainment Group
Nashville, Tennessee
(Drive-In Theatre - Start-Up)