Dear BOXOFFICE:

I have a great deal of respect for John F. Allen (no relation) and his assessment of the sound problems in today’s theatres and what to do about it. But I would like to respond to a statement he made in his July article. Regarding the difference in sound levels between trailers and the feature, he stated a projectionist’s ability to be there to ride the fader is sometimes “impossible.”
First, I would like to say that probably the only place you will find qualified and trained projectionists is New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, and other large metro areas where IATSE still has a foothold. If it is truly “impossible” for these operators to be there to adjust the sound levels because they have to be in another booth, then it is because management has totally lost sight of the fact that the booth and its screen performance are the most important aspect of their operation and have failed to hire sufficient staff.
Secondly, elsewhere in the country moviegoers are subjected to a presentation initiated by a minimum-wage employee who has been given just enough training to know how to thread the machine and press the auto-start button. Although some circuits have “Chief Projectionists” to oversee these operators, they have so much territory to cover that their visits are infrequent and they are unable to correct day-by-day errors committed by these amateurs.
I have visited many multiplexes owned by the large and not-so-large circuits and have been constantly subjected to unreasonable sound levels, out-of-focus and underlit pictures, fuzzy edges (because the projector is out of alignment), performances that start out of frame and images that jump because the machine has either intermittent or pressure shoe problems. And when I leave some of these auditoriums (as the last credits are scrolling) I’m surprised that they were able to get a picture through the port glass at all, as it appears to have not been cleaned since the place was built.
So, while John has a lot of excellent advice to offer theatre owners, until they put screen performance back on top of their list, it’s falling on deaf ears and they will continue to receive complaints (and lose customers).
R. E. (Bob) Allen
Retired Theatre Owner/Operator
Gold Beach, Oregon.

 

(AND THEY ARE NOT IN A UNION...........)

------------------
"Running through life at 24 frames per second"
 

As I understand the letter, the author is basically complaining about the inability or unwillingness of theatre owners to make any effort to improve presentation quality, particularly if it costs money. If they hired good people and payed them enough to care (and enough to keep them from taking a higher-paying job at McDonald's), then presentation quality would improve. I agree with this sentiment wholehartedly.
 

Peter, I know Joe pretty well and he is not bashing unions. However there is a general attitude in one direction from people (usually managers) that say unions are not needed and they can do things on their own. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. The attitude coming from the other direction is from union workers, who feel that non-union operators simply have no training and that they can never equal the level of presentation that a union booth can. Joe is just pointing out that (I will use different words) for every properly trained professional union operator, there is a properly trained professional non-union operator. Or in other words, you don't HAVE to be in a union to put on a flawless show.

So what's the answer? I'm not sure I can really say, or how such a thing would be determined. However I have personally worked all sides (union booths as a union operator, non-union booths as a non-union operator and management) and generally around town the union booths were the best, some of them being nothing short of perfect (anyone been to the Northpark 1&2?). This was from the Dallas Local 249 which I can vouch for was a first rate local who were very presentation minded. I say "was" because it is no more. Nowadays all the corporate people care about is the bottom line and how can they save another buck. That being said though, I have seen and worked in non-union booths that did put on a better show than other union booths. In the end the final variable related to a quality presentation is the personnel themselves. The pay rate and benefits are a different issue (feel free to open up a different thread...it would be an interesting discussion!!!)

I have found that nothing can be management's desire to have a first rate show. If quality is instilled in employees, union or not, the results will be better than a repressive atmosphere

However...my general test for judging things like this (union vs non-union) is kinda like looking at fungable goods....discard the best in both categories (cuz both have their exceptionally talented) and discard the worst (every group has it's moron population) and look at the murky middle...on the whole, the union group will be a better choice.

However, the situation Brad describes about a local that was once very good falling victim to corporate mentality that just doesn't value projection/presentation is a common one that has pretty much devistated most of the once good locals.

I claim it still comes back to management (and I mean beyond the individual location...but at corporate)...if they want good people and long-term quality they will get it.

If it is left up to just the caring individuals at the theatre level...then you will have a few good places and the rest crap.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
 

:-)

------------------
"Running through life at 24 frames per second"
 

quote:

---

"(union workers are) paid a salary which would permit you to ,buy a home, send your children to school and be a functioning member of the community."

---

Dennis, since "well paid" is relative, perhaps this is a better way to answer the question without giving out a number. Does the above quote fit what the lowest paid projectionist makes in your theater? I'm not picking on you specifically, but *most* of the time I hear that a company pays their projectionists properly, it is not enough to provide the benefits from the quote above. The typical to above average non-union projectionist's salary will be struggling damned hard to even be able to put food on the table if they have even just one kid. I applaud you and your company if you are able to honestly answer that question "yes they are paid enough for that kind of life."

The truth of the matter is - here is Las Vegas, Nevada - we pay our employees (floor staff and projection) more than any other theatre in town. We have benefits to offer to our full-time employees also.

------------------
"Running through life at 24 frames per second"
 

Bob
The Old Showman
 

That having been said, let me add a bit of an editorial. Your signoff is "Bob, the Old Showman." Showmanship was the stuff that theatres were made before the cracker-box multiplex era began. The projectionist was the "showman" of his day. His artistic handling, without benefit of automation or computers, of house lights, curtains and curtain lights, tasteful non-synch music (to fill the intermission void now addressed by advertizing slides), and indeed his very "riding" of the fader and just "being there" made the movie going experience a joy, and spawned much repeat business.

There are few "showmen" left, Bob. Be proud of what you were and what you will likely continue to be in your new ventures!

I wish you the very best.
 

I have no problem with your posting my letter. In fact Kim Williamson, editor of box office called me and asked if he could print it. I believe showmanship is the one big thing missing from the theatre today. Most managers (or corporate brass) don't seem to know how to promote a film. They seem to let the distributor promote what he wants and then the theatres battle with each other to get the film for which the distributor has fostered an appetite. Look in the page of any metro newspaper. Most theatre ads require a magnifying glass and that is about the extent of their promotion. This leaves many films from around the world unseen. "Hollywood" isn't the only place films are made.

I noticed in your pic your have some Peerless lamps behind you. Are you working a changeover booth (as they call it these days) or have they been converted. I still believe carbons put out a better light. It tends to be warmer where xenon is blue and cold (if the theatre even uses one strong enough to properly light the screen). However, carbons cost about $3,000 a year and a xenon will run about $550.

I agree with you about who the showman was (and should be) in a theatre. FYI for 20 years I was a member of IA Local 577 San Bernardino. Thanks for your good wishes.

Bob
The Old Showman

I guess I'm an "old showman" too, as that photo dates from 1972. I opted to use it because it was more "booth relevant" than a head shot, and the background a bit more interesting than a platter. I agree that carbon arc is superior in many ways to Xenon, and a carbon arc lamphouse, properly adjusted, tuned and maintained, is a joy to operate, as is a changeover booth. I'll e-mail you directly with some additional background.

A prolific contributor to these forums, who is wise well beyond his years,closes his posts with the observation, "Carbon Arc -- the light that's bright, the light's that right!" Amen.

-Gordon

------------------
"Asleep at the switch? I wasn't asleep, I was drunk!" - Homer Simpson
 

Bob
The Old Showman
 

Horay for old showmen! There are still some of us left. I too, have worked both sides of the fence (union & non) and agree with Brad and others who point out that it's the individual who takes pride in his/her show who makes the difference.

And... horay for young showmen. This site proves that we have them. Yes, we do make a difference because we all care. We can't change some of the corporate stupidity that goes on out there, but at least we can educate and fight for what we know is "film done right."

I am extremely fortunate to be working in a plex that believes in presentation. Some of our equipment isn't new, some of it is. We do the very best we can with what we have, and get damned few complaints. We try to do a better job than our competition in a highly competitive area, and our numbers are starting to show that. We will upgrade our equipment as monies permit.

I think that's pretty much the story with all the people here on this site. That's what makes it such a pleasure to read the many excellent posts. Let's all continue to spread the word. As our numbers grow, so will the excellence we all strive for.
 

Bob
The Old Showman

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Bob
The Old Showman
 

Hi I'm Steve...

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"
 

We run a booth with both the ability to run changeovers and off a platter. It is nice to be able to have both since if a xenon goes we can get back on screen in less than 5 minutes. Also, if a print happens to come 20 minutes before showtime we can still run it on c/o (but havent had to do that in 10 years). Its still a nice thing to have and your customers will appreciate the fact that if there is a problem 99.9% of the time you can get back on screen very quickly.

------------------
Adam Fraser
www.pinestheatre.com
 

Bob
The Old Showman
 

Bob
The Old Showman