Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: What Are Rep. House Film Rental Rates These Days?

This is topic What Are Rep. House Film Rental Rates These Days? 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=000624

Posted by Tom Holland (Member # 1254) on 09-18-2002, 06:21 PM:

Could someone please advise what a reperatory theater might pay for the rental of an older "classic" film... say WB's REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE, or maybe a Paramount Elvis picture? If a theater ran the film, say, once a night on Friday, Saturday and Sunday night, would it then be a multiple of 3x the base rental? Or is it a minimum plus percentage of box office? Any examples would sure help with a business plan I'm drafting. Thanks!

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 09-18-2002, 08:50 PM:

the supply of runnable 35mm rep prints is drying up in a very big hurry. Only a handful of titles are still around, and those are usually in deplorable condition, and/or have faded completely to red by now (IB and LPP prints excepted of course) With the demise of Kit Parker's 35mm library all that's left (besides what limited numbers if any are in the regular distributors' exchanges)is Swank and Criterion...but as I said, most of the prints are in total crap condition.

Usually its a flat rate for older titles, some others take a flat rate plus 17.5% of the boxoffice.

-Aaron

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 09-18-2002, 09:03 PM:

A few years ago, a friend ran a few films from MGM at a theatre in
Hollywood. MGM wanted 500 a week plus a percentage of the Box office.
The titles were from the 60's & 70's. He did OK with them. But remember, you can not get every film in 35mm. The studios have prints on most of their film for special screenings. At UCLA they have a great collection of 35mm film. But they will not let the prints out to
platter theatres. If you book a film from them and platter it you
will loss your large deposit for damaging the print. Some of these
prints are prints that have been playing Rep houses around the US.
Some are in good condition and some are not.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-18-2002, 10:29 PM:

Personally I have nothing but good things to say about Warner Classics. Every print that I have received from them has been in very good (or better) condition, and they appear to be serious about charging theatres which damage their prints (as they should).

Other distributors are a mixed bag and tend to be inconsistent, with mint prints of some titles and trashed prints of others, and no easy way to tell which is which before it's too late.

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 09-19-2002, 12:53 AM:

Fox & Warner's have been cranking out new prints of a lot of classics, & the Academy has a program of trying to get all the Best Picture winners printed in 35mm.

The problem is that if you're a non-profit or educational institution, you must go through a company called Swank, which is by reputation the hellish offspring of Satan & Zippy the Pinhead. Swank has been licensed to handle distribution & exhibition rights for 35mm, 16mm & video to non-profit groups for most of the studios. Swank's prints are of varying, often crappy quality. It's been pointed out that if a venue's got good connections, they can get a good print from some other source without having to worry about what kind of print Swank will serve up to them, but Swank must still be paid for the exhibition rights in whatever weird &/or exorbitant &/or incorrectly surcharged &/or surprise additional amounts added after the show manner Swank dictates.

If you're a commercial, for-profit theater, you deal with the studios' rep divisions & their prints.

I really think that non-profit PAC's, in order not to deal with Swank, need to set up for rep showings a for-profit company to promote & produce the shows just so they can get good prints, & then the company would deal with the theater like any other rental. Another reason to have the show put on by a for-profit entity is that Swank for the lower non-profit & educational rates *prohibits* advertising the show. If it decides afterwards that you have advertised the show, or that you're not really education or non-profit, they'll bill you for the higher commercial rate which includes a percentage of admissions. This will be after you've closed the books on the show, which may have had film rental budgeted to be covered by a sponsor, & the whole thing becomes an immediate nightmare bill. If it was a series, you see how it can Run Into Money.

The horror stories about Swank are numerous & ghastly. Swank has also claimed to handle the rights & demand to be paid for titles it *doesn't* control, & to tell someone who asked about he availability of a title that it was unavailable in the US, when actually it was known by them to be distributed by another company. Swank's rep of course helpfully suggested other titles which Swank *did* handle.

As far as I can tell, the only thing Swank works for & is good for is something like college student "cheap date" films & videos shown in the Student Union.

Outside of major US studio titles, there are companies which distribute foreign titles in the US & things like silent films; companies like Kino & Douris. They do not deal through Swank, they handle their own distribution to commercial & non-profit theaters. The studios just sort of slung it all off to Swank for non-profits, & apparently neither know nor care how Swank operates.

Posted by Jeff Taylor (Member # 443) on 09-19-2002, 10:12 AM:

We do a monthly promotional event in the form of a 1:00 pm matinee featuring a classic title, popcorn, and a coke for $1. It's tremendously popular with seniors. We've been able to get pretty decent prints for good prices. If memory serves we paid $175 for Affair to Remember from Criterion and it was a nice LPP print. Other titles we've been lucky on were Paris Holiday, Funny Face, Sabrina, Shane, and Daddy Long Legs. All were flat rate bookings.

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 09-19-2002, 12:24 PM:

Out school's Student Activities Cinema Committee goes through Swank, but they only book videotapes. If the condition of their prints is anything like some of the videos we've received, I would be very afraid. Dropouts, sound fluctuations, occasional jump, and we're sometimes even treated to the message: "This videocassette has been licensed for public performance" every 20-30 minutes. Almost makes you want to get the rights from Swank and then go rent a "clean" copy from the local video store.

=TMP=

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-19-2002, 12:41 PM:

Just for the record, here's the link:
http://www.swank.com/

As well as others:
http://www.cinemaweb.com/
http://www.kino.com/
http://webdev.archive.org/movies/movies.php

------------------
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

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 09-19-2002, 07:48 PM:

This has been discussed before, so do a search.

No, Thomas, Swank is generally not that bad for 35mm. For 90% of the cases, you don't get a "Swank print," you get whatever TES or ETS sends you, and you're in the same boat as the rest of the universe. For a few rare cases there are "Swank prints" or films (generally for some WB titles...), and then you may get a print that's been at the mercy of Swank's Film Done Wrong(tm) customers...

That said, I certainly don't like them and they do seem to serve the function of "middleman who makes no one happy."

--jhawk

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 09-20-2002, 02:40 AM:

I'll have to disagree. If you get a good print from Swank, it likely means they didn't have a print, got it from the studios' rep division, & made it your very lucky day.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-20-2002, 08:42 AM:

Swank's 16mm prints are generally very good for recent titles. I've had some with scratches and one that didn't have cue marks on one reel, but otherwise have no major issues with their newer 16mm prints (other than the lack of availability of new scope prints). Their older 16mm prints vary greatly in quality; some are great and some are, well, not so great.

I've only run one 35mm print from Swank (at a military theatre) and it had obviously been run before, but was basically mint, with leaders not cut. It was shipped from TES, but labelled "Swank" with a single-digit print number, and thus appears to have come from a different inventory from the normal 35mm theatrical prints. In some ways I guess this makes sense, as Swank prints are likely to end up in the hands of poorly trained operators (at colleges, etc.) at some point, though. On the other hand, there are plenty of poorly trained operators at the gigaplexes, too, and plenty of caring people involved in college film societies.

I do agree, though, that the company serves mostly as an annoying middleman who has exclusive rights to certain types of programming and certain markets and tends to be overpriced and difficult to deal with. The other nontheatrical distributors I have dealt with (New Yorker Films, Criterion Pictures, Biograph, KPF [RIP], and a few others) seemed to be less expensive and offered better customer service.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 09-20-2002, 09:23 AM:

William,

I'm not sure what your experience here is with Swank. We book about about 40 titles a year from Swank, in 35mm. And less than 10% of them are Swank prints (probably more like 5%? I'd have to go total up stats). Swank does not maintain their own inventory of 35mm prints.

The only way that Swank gets a 35mm print that's seperate from the studio's inventory is when the studio sets aside some prints for their usage, which only happens in extremely limitted instances (less than 10%), and only with specific studios (e.g. WB); and also when a Swank customer pays Swank to arrange for a studio to strike a new print, though that's even more rare. Furthermore, even for the so-called "Swank prints," they are actually handled by TES (even for ETS studios, like WB), and not shipped by Swank.

Now, 16mm is an entirely different ballgame, and I won't address it [could that be what you were referring to?].

Anyhow, on the face of it, your statement "If you get a good print from Swank, it likely means they didn't have a print, got it from the studio's rep division, & made it your very luck day" is extremely misleading. It is the normal case for Swank to direct studios to send their own prints. It is the extreme exception for Swank to stock a print. Now, the likelyhood of a "Swank print" goes up some with "popular rep titles," but it's definitely not in the "very lucky" area.

How statistically significant is your dataset?

--jhawk

Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 09-20-2002, 09:50 AM:

jhawk said: "Swank does not maintain their own inventory of 35mm prints."

This is definitely true. Swank has a huge library of 16mm prints though. They are somewhat hit or miss, but I haven't seen many terrible 16mm prints come from them.

jhawk, myself and some others had a rather lengthy discussion about this and other aspects of Swank's business in a couple of threads. A search might provide some interesting info.

To swing this thread back on track, I have a question for Tom Holland: Is your potential business plan for a non-profit entity or a for profit business? That would certainly determine who you would need to deal with and what sort of costs would be involved.

Posted by Tom Holland (Member # 1254) on 09-20-2002, 10:29 AM:

Joe --

This new theater concept will (hopefully) be a for-profit entity! It will run only retro/classic 35mm prints, which is the cause for concern. Swank's 35mm availability list on the web (link in earlier message) was very impressive but now I hear from my esteemed collegues that it is hit or miss. However, I suspect that the big audience pullers (like the Casablanca or Hitchcock pictures, for instance) are generally around.

I do have two questions though:

1. If the studios do not have a 35mm print available... say, Elvis' BLUE HAWAII for instance, which is not on the Swank list... but a collector print is available, what are the chances they would allow me to pay them the rental and screen my own print?

2. Is there a low cost theater video projection system around that is not in the price range of the new DLP systems? I'm thinking about using such a system to run public domain shorts and trailers prior to a 35mm feature. Quality would not be an ultra-critical issue here as the preprint materials would be mostly B&W. If I do this I wonder what the video source would have to be to get a decent picture... Betacam, Digi-Beta, a High Def transfer played off a hard drive?

Thanks to all who have so kindly helped me. --Tom Holland

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-20-2002, 12:44 PM:

The quality of the image you need to put on your screen depends in large part on how close your audience is sitting. Even NTSC video can look pretty good sitting six or more screen heights away from the screen (as you might at home), but it will look very poor at the close viewing distances now found in most theatres. As a guideline, standard SMPTE 196M specifies a preferred viewing distance of 2 to 4 screen heights for "review rooms". Many modern theatre designs put seats much closer, requiring much higher quality than SD video.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 09-20-2002, 02:51 PM:

One problem with collector's prints. Is some collectors are afraid
of damage to their print. Some collector prints have never been cut
to run on a platter. So two projector operation is a better way to go. Then the grey area of print ownership. If the studio says OK, but
later comes to take the print.

Question: What if you book a 16mm print for the type of showing you
are going to do? You get the public showing rights. But you run a 35mm print, from another source?
Would that work???

On video, what would the size of the room be? Because then you can see what type video projection equipment would work in that room.
We use NEC equipment but we had to upgrade the lens package on the
projector. Our projector uses a 1kw xenon bulb that in High Bright mode puts out 4500 ANSI Lumens at 210V. My throw is 42 feet from
booth to screen. Using a DVD as your source would work. But using
High-End tape formats. The studios do not make those formats availible
because that would be a master tape. When I get Digi-Beta, D5, DvCam,
Beta-SP tapes for screenings they are locked in my desk for safety.
If the studios sent High-End tapes out, all you would have to do is
connect a VHS or other and press the record button. (D5 decks run around $70,000 each or around $1650 a day on rental).

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-20-2002, 03:45 PM:

Bill Gabel wrote: "...High-End tape formats. The studios do not make those formats availible because that would be a master tape. When I get Digi-Beta, D5, DvCam, Beta-SP tapes for screenings they are locked in my desk for safety. If the studios sent High-End tapes out, all you would have to do is connect a VHS or other and press the record button. "

An "in the clear" digital format is an open invitation to movie piracy, and would NOT normally be sent to a theatre unless security was assured.

Here is what the MPAA says in the document "Goals for Digital Cinema":
http://www.mpaa.org/dcinema/DigCinemaGoals.doc

"9.SECURE CONTENT PROTECTION – The system must include a highly secure, end-to-end, conditional access content protection system, including digital rights management and content watermarking, because of the serious harm associated with the theft of digital content at this stage of its distribution life cycle. Playback devices must use on-line authentication with the decrypted content files never accessible in the clear."

Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 09-20-2002, 04:04 PM:

I think that most collectors would be wary of allowing their prints to be used in any case where the studio or distributor knows that a collector print may be used. Especially since some would argue that it is illegal for the collector to own what could be deemed studio/distributor property. What I have seen done in the past is that the exhibitor rented the print (and had it shipped) as per normal, but then used the collector print that was in better condition. That way, the studio is still unaware of the existence of the print in the collector's possesion, but the exhibitor was able to show the best print possible. It's a lot of hassle, but the collectors I know would be quite reluctant to loan out any of their films for a public screening without knowing their print will be returned unscathed and returned, period (meaning not confiscated or stolen). If you know collectors that are willing to take that risk, then it shouldn't be a problem to pay for the rights without actually renting a film. That is essentially what is supposed to be done in the case of a public screening of a dvd, for example.

As far as your video projector options are concerned, I have some questions: How much money would you be willing to spend? (i.e. are you thinking $2000, or would you be willing to spend$20,000) How far is your throw and how big is the screen? (If you know about the potential space of your theater)

Posted by Tom Holland (Member # 1254) on 09-20-2002, 05:15 PM:

Bill --

I'm planning on having a dual 35mm projector set-up, but one machine will have a platter to be used for certain showings. Any collector print I might ever project would certainly use the changeover system.

Regarding the occasional use of collector prints, I surely would not want any studio claiming rights to them as you suggest could happen. If I try this route for some showings I intend to get the distrib's permission first. Whether they grant this or not is the question.

Regarding video projection and master tapes, and without disclosing business confidences, I may produce my own video made up of clear public domain materials. I have no plans to ever show a contemporary studio-produced film, which is why I don't need/want DLP. If I do this, my question was what video source would be best. I suspect that mastering in Hi Def onto a computer's hard drive is the way to go.

Joe --

As far as video projection is concerned I'm looking at a good long throw... maybe as much as 70-80 feet. I'm factoring in construction costs now and I can't imagine spending less than $20,000 for any kind of video projection. I was thinking more like $50,000. Doesn't Barco make something I could use? Would it accept a Hi-Def input?

Thanks, Tom.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 09-20-2002, 05:29 PM:

Our NEC came in at around $45,000 plus the upgrade on the lens package
(add $6,000 more) and SDI card. The input compatibility is: NTSC, PAL,
SECAM, HDTV (1080i, 720p, 480p), VGA, SVGA, XGA, SXGA, MAC .

All that and it weighs 95 lbs.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 09-20-2002, 05:54 PM:

I've lent my own prints for theatrical exhibition when the "official" prints were known to be in poor condition. When I have done this, I have made sure that the theatre owner properly booked the title from its distributor (I've asked that the paperwork be faxed to me for confirmation) and the exhibitor would take delivery of both my print and the "official" print. The "official" print stayed in the cans and they ran my print. In general, there's no reason for the distributor to know that a collector's print is being run, although they would have to be told if the copyright owner doesn't actually have a print (unless they have a 16mm print and the collector's print is 35mm or something like that). I don't know the exact legal issues here, but I can't imagine that anyone would have a problem with running a different print from the one owned by the distributor, as long as all of the exhibition rights issues have been taken care of.

As for print condition: I wouldn't normally want my prints run on a platter (certainly not for a one-off show) unless I personally knew and trusted the projectionist. Two machines plus platter would be an ideal setup, though you might not even want the platter if you don't plan on keeping films for more than a few days at a time.

Running collector prints can be a very grey area for titles that aren't public domain, but it's common enough that there shouldn't be any problems as long as the theatre owner doesn't do something stupid like run a print without paying the rightsholder. Also, it's probably a bad idea to pay cash to the collector for the use of the print. In the past, I've traded the use of the print for small items like a current poster or trailer, but I'd never accept cash or large trades.

Posted by Tony Ratcliff (Member # 1196) on 09-23-2002, 12:38 PM:

I run several classics each year, esp around the holidays, for a week at a time.

Rental is wide ranging. The lowest is $150 flat.
The bigger films, such as "It's A Wonderful Life" or "White Christmas" are $350 vs 35%.

The worst part of the deal is paying for shipping, which has run me as much a $120 each way! And they don't give you a choice on how or with who it ships.

I get local businesses to sponsor all the rental and shipping costs and then make the admission FREE. It works great, cause I clean up on the concession sales. Since I am a mid-run theatre, I can do better over-all with a free classic in December than trying to compete with the big holiday releases playing at the first run in town. Classics pull a different crowd of people.

Tony Ratcliff
Ohio Theatre
Madison, Indiana

Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 09-23-2002, 04:34 PM:

What type of crowd do the classic bring in... I like this idea

------------------
Barry Floyd
Floyd Entertainment Group
Lebanon, Tennessee

Stardust Drive-In Theatre
Watertown, Tennessee

Posted by Jeff Taylor (Member # 443) on 09-24-2002, 01:59 PM:

From my experience, film buffs and seniors. We run one classic (single showing) a month and it's grown from the smallest house to our biggest (500+), and now we're interlocking to open a second house. You couldn't live off it, but it sure is popular.

Posted by Tony Ratcliff (Member # 1196) on 09-24-2002, 02:16 PM:

I get mostly older folks for classic films. But they are becoming more popular with the kids from the college in town.

The best is when a parent ( or grandparent ) drags a teenager to a classic movie and they both come out raving about it and discussing it - bridging that generation gap.

Tony