Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Theatre Sends The 3D Cameras Back

This is topic Theatre Sends The 3D Cameras Back 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=002467

Posted by Jonathan M. Crist (Member # 413) on 01-18-2011, 05:17 PM:

Sending The 3D Cameras Back

DECATUR - Avon Theatre operator Skip Huston made the decision in April to embrace the national trend of 3D movies by installing 3D cameras in the Avon's Twins theaters just in time for the release of "Clash of the Titans." Four 3D releases and seven months later, however, and those cameras have gone back to their supplier, and Huston admits the Avon 3D experiment was a dud.

"I sold the cameras back and told them ‘this is more trouble than it's worth,'" the longtime theater operator said. "I do regret that we ever did it. The Avon is really not the kind of place for 3D movies. The clientele is not the kind of audience for the movies that are usually released in 3D."

Huston credited the theater's "art-house roots" and "upscale commercial crowd" with making it a less than ideal venue to screen bombastic 3D blockbusters like "Clash of the Titans" or "Cats and Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore," two films the theater took significant losses on due to underwhelming crowd response.

"Too many times the audiences would turn up their noses when I said 3D, and we just didn't do good business on the 3D pictures we showed," Huston explained. "We had four 3D movies, but only did good business on ‘Despicable Me,' and I believe it would have done just as well if we had screened it in 2D instead."

The Avon's other 3D screening, "Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole," enjoyed a strong opening weekend on the back of a promotion that brought Illinois Raptor Center owls to the theater, but trailed off quickly in the following weeks, once again leading Huston to believe 3D would not carry its weight at the Avon.

Another significant factor in the problem, however, was an oversight by Huston on the true cost of acquiring 3D movie prints. Choosing not to add a surcharge for 3D films as comparable movie theaters did, The Avon was at an immediate disadvantage due to premiums from distributors on the films themselves.

"That was something we never really thought about back when we brought in the 3D films - the glasses are free, but there are premiums on the 3D prints," Huston said. "The theaters pretty much have to charge a surcharge to make their money back. We didn't realize how much it was costing us until after the summer was over. Here we were all summer long not charging 3D surcharges for our films, and then the big, fat fees hit us."

For the Avon's Technicolor 3D system, there was a $2,000 premium placed on top of the regular price of all 3D films acquired by Huston. This was simply too deep a hole for most films to dig out of.

The ill-fated move to 3D was spurred by a desire to keep up with competition, but Huston has long believed the current wave of 3D popularity will recede in the same way previous incarnations in the 1950s and 1980s did. He fondly recalled 3D gimmick movies of yesteryear such as 1953's "It Came from Outer Space," but will continue to view the medium of 3D film as better suited for a special occasion instead of everyday viewing.

"I think 3D should have been used as an event, and that it loses its special appeal and practicality if all movies are coming out in 3D," he said. "I do believe that there is already evidence of some of the major studios pulling back on 3D a bit, like with the next Harry Potter movie or the next Batman movie. Everybody was looking for the next ‘Avatar,' but there's not going to be a ‘next Avatar' until James Cameron makes another one."

With the sale of its equipment, The Avon will withdraw from future 3D competition and focus on business as usual, as it has under Huston since 1999.

"Having 3D equipment is fine for some theaters," he admitted. "I guess there are still people out there who are forking over the dollars for 3D, but more and more the people I talk to say they don't really care whether a movie is in 3D or 2D. A lot of times you just want to settle back and watch a good movie."

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-18-2011, 05:36 PM:

The fact he refers to them as 'cameras' and also that he hadn't factored in to his costs the $2000 charge leads me to wonder how this 'longtime theater operator' has managed to remain one.

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 01-18-2011, 05:49 PM:

Or that the 'upscale commercial crowd' might not want to watch any of the product produced in 3D.

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 01-18-2011, 09:51 PM:

I thought that the Technicolor 3D system used special lenses on a conventional 35mm projection system? Why do they make it sound like he had to return the whole "Camera"

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-19-2011, 02:13 AM:

He based his decision on three bombs and one hit. "Cats & Dogs 2" could have been in 27-D and still nobody would have seen it.

I'd wager that this theatre doesn't do well with family films in general.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 01-19-2011, 11:58 AM:

If I understand the T3D deal correctly, it's a pay-per-title lease deal. As such, I'm not sure why he would send the "cameras" (lenses) back...he could just hold onto them in case there is a 3D title that he wants to play. He won't gain anything by returning them, and he might miss out on the chance to play something interesting.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-19-2011, 12:13 PM:

Any theatre operator who refers to his projectors (or lenses) as 'cameras' gives me the impression he does not know his business very well.

-Claude

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 01-19-2011, 12:36 PM:

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
Any theatre operator who refers to his projectors (or lenses) as 'cameras' gives me the impression he does not know his business very well.

Very well put, Claude. [thumbsup]

Posted by Mike Frese (Member # 4361) on 01-19-2011, 05:19 PM:

The costs are pretty well spelled out beforehand and pretty easy to understand. $12,000 cap per year. I am expecting to play 11 in my first year. The buyout is $6,000 per year. He has two remaining years. Hmmmmm....

If you go to his website, he pretty much looks to be a hybrid theater that we recently discussed. Rentrak has a 3d calendar that goes out for at least 18 mos. His booker should have advised him as to what is coming out in 3d that would play well to his customers.

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 01-20-2011, 11:04 AM:

I believe the term we are looking for is "grandstanding."

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 01-20-2011, 11:49 AM:

Haven't any of you heard about this new system that filmmakers are using now? Boy, you guys are way behind! Films are now shot using projectors and then played back via cameras. It's all the rage. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 03-20-2011, 05:44 PM:

Was working a shift selling tickets today - had a customer come in a bit late for his film. He ask me if I'd get the "cameraman" to wait for him before starting the film.

Made me chuckle a little to myself once he left. [Smile]

Posted by Ron Funderburg (Member # 4561) on 03-23-2011, 01:19 PM:

Yes I wonder if two or three months is all that long a time to this guy. Let us hope this isn't the operator of the future, film, digital or otherwise.

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 04-05-2011, 03:32 PM:

What I wanna know is why the crap did the writer of the story use the term "camera?" Surely the average Joe is smart enough to know the difference between a camera and a projector, and the idiots referring to projectors as cameras are the underwhelming minority. No?

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 04-05-2011, 05:29 PM:

The frightening thing is that we as professionals do our damnedest to give these people the best show possible as it is them who ultimately dictate what succeeds and what doesn't.

'If you gave a hundred monkeys a typewriter each ....'

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 04-05-2011, 06:53 PM:

These days, perhaps we should have "a million monkeys with typrwriters. . . " louis

Posted by Joe Elliott (Member # 4006) on 04-05-2011, 07:39 PM:

Thanks to pipl.com, if found this, which has a short blurb about this story at the very end.

3D blah blah blah, oh yeah, and 3D 'cameras'

I'll clip and paste only the relevent passage:

quote:
Some small-town exhibitors from the surrounding area were obviously intrigued. They couldn’t afford to convert to digital/3D, but this offered a cheaper option. Nobody mentioned it during the demo, but the other obvious implication seemed to be, if you just rent your equipment, you won’t lose out if the 3D craze fizzles out. The firm anticipated having over 500 systems installed in the U.S. by the end of 2010. (For a case of a theater in Decatur, Illinois that canceled its deal with Technicolor, see here; the management failed to understand that one has to charge higher admission for 3D tickets because the print rental fees and 3D system cost more, and the projectionist keeps referring to the 3D lens as a “camera.” On the whole, one can’t feel that in this case the Technicolor system itself was to blame. The 25 equipped screens out of the 150 in the Bow Tie Cinemas chain in California presumably have fared better.)

[Added later the same day: Skip Huston, who run Huston's Avon Theater 3 in Decatur, tells me that the reporter was the one who called the lens a "camera." (Knowing what it is to be misquoted by a reporter, I can well believe it.) The owners tried to avoid raising ticket prices for their customers, but that just doesn't work with 3D. Mr. Huston's theater is a mom-and-pop establishment competing with two Carmike multiplexes. Those wishing to avoid 3D have the option of 100% 2D at the Avon.]

Oh yeah, and the theater was featured in a book about the country's 6 'most haunted' theaters.

Haunted theater article

Relevent passage only:

quote:
The Avon in Decatur, Illinois, for instance, can't evict its early title holder. Current owner Skip Huston was rummaging through a bin of marquee letters in the abandoned theater several years ago when he heard an odd noise: footsteps. He glanced over his shoulder. Nothing. A few minutes later, he heard it again. And again. The fourth time, he turned toward the sound. There, in the doorway, stood a man, clad in a white shirt and black pants. Huston spoke to him, but the man stepped out of sight. Huston didn't know who he'd glimpsed until he stumbled across the obituary for the Avon's second owner, Gust Constan. Constan reopened the Avon theater with his brothers in 1924. According to local legend, he ran it for most of his life, only to be tossed into the street after the Kerasotes theater chain bought him out. Great story, but not true. Constan died on February 24, 1965. His brothers did not sell the theater to Kerasotes until April 1966, more than a year after Constan's death.

quote:
Ghosts can, in fact, be quite sweet. They've been known to illuminate unplugged lights and even offer advice. When Chris Barnett, projectionist at Decatur's Avon Theatre, was struggling with an ancient projector moments before showtime, he suddenly received a "directive" from the ether about how to operate the equipment. So it's almost understandable why Avon owner Skip Huston is, perhaps, a bit too charmed by his resident spook. "When I die," he says with a chuckle, "I'm moving in."

Posted by Eric Robinson (Member # 2966) on 04-07-2011, 02:52 AM:

quote: Michael Brown
He ask me if I'd get the "cameraman" to wait for him

In direct contrast...theatre managers and employees are always on the look out for cameramen to cash in on their anti-piracy awards.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 04-07-2011, 02:42 PM:

Interesting that he just sent it back because there is a 3 year contract involved in that lens. I bet he still gets a bill for it every year though.

Posted by Ron Funderburg (Member # 4561) on 04-14-2011, 01:45 PM:

3D camera's for projection next we will have 3D projectors for filming.

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 04-15-2011, 03:18 AM:

quote: Joe Elliott
book about the country's 6 'most haunted' theaters.

Isn't Eric Robinson a ghost? His picture... I'm just sayin...

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 04-18-2011, 09:10 AM:

To get off-topic for a second... Bow Tie Cinemas doesn't have a single theatre in California, let alone 150. Wonder where the writer of that article got that extremely wrong factoid.

Posted by Joe Elliott (Member # 4006) on 04-18-2011, 10:31 AM:

California . . . Connecticut
Camera . . . Projector

What you expect this guy to be an english major or something.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 04-18-2011, 02:23 PM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
"a million monkeys with typrwriters. . . "

....working at their respective McJobs ...

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 04-18-2011, 07:17 PM:

Note that I spelled typewriters incorrectly?

And, why yes, I AM an English Major! Louis

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 04-19-2011, 04:46 PM:

Figured that for a typo from the start, Louis, since the r and the e are next to one another.