Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: The Shining Booking

This is topic The Shining Booking 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=002659

Posted by Michael Putlack (Member # 6523) on 03-01-2013, 03:32 PM:

I was thinking about booking the Shining either the week of or the week before we open Room 237 in May. Does anyone know who does the booking for this title? I know WB made it, but do they have a repertory branch to contact?

Thanks!

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-01-2013, 03:42 PM:

Sue Strauss Senior Sales Assistant Warner Bros. Pictures Domestic Distribution-Atlanta & New Orleans * 818.977.1820 - * Susan.Strauss@warnerbros.com

Not sure who handles your territory, but she can tell you.

Marilee Womack <Marilee.Womack@warnerbros.com> is the lead booker, but she is usually not really quick to respond.

Warners is very stingy with prints, and will probably say it is only available on DVD.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 03-01-2013, 03:47 PM:

The Shining is available as a DCP.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-01-2013, 06:43 PM:

...but they'll probably charge you around $50 to $100 more for a DCP than they would for running a Blu-Ray.

Sad but true...all of our Christmas matinees last year were on Blu-Rays.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-01-2013, 06:51 PM:

What's always burned me on that is when they expect you to go out and buy the bluray. If you are paying licensing, they should ship you a bluray without all of the "home video", forced previews and nonsense on it to play and then return.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-01-2013, 07:13 PM:

The DCP has sync issues and a remixed multichannel soundtrack (the original mix is mono). It has also been heavily de-grained Get the print.

Posted by Michael Putlack (Member # 6523) on 03-02-2013, 09:45 AM:

Thanks everyone. The film-tech community is the best!

Posted by Jack Theakston (Member # 4484) on 03-02-2013, 02:55 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
What's always burned me on that is when they expect you to go out and buy the bluray. If you are paying licensing, they should ship you a bluray without all of the "home video", forced previews and nonsense on it to play and then return.

That's it? How about the fact that they charge a MANDATORY 35%?? It's not even a "vs. 35%" clause. I don't see WB paying for MY advertising... why should I give them a percentage of anything, especially something they made back their money on over thirty years ago?

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 03-02-2013, 10:52 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
What's always burned me on that is when they expect you to go out and buy the bluray. If you are paying licensing, they should ship you a bluray without all of the "home video", forced previews and nonsense on it to play and then return.

You could always rip it to rid yourself of that crap, but something tells me WB would be even MORE upset.

Any person at the studio who allows/forces a cinema to run an off the shelf Blu-ray without being able to skip warning, previews, etc. shouldn't be allowed to run the studio anymore. They should be taken out back and shot.

AJG

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-02-2013, 10:56 PM:

quote: Jack Theakston
why should I give them a percentage of anything, especially something they made back their money on over thirty years ago?

For the same reason you can own a 30-year-old house, which you paid off years ago, but still charge rent on it.

Posted by Edward Havens (Member # 4715) on 03-03-2013, 07:16 AM:

quote: Jack Theakston
Why should I give them a percentage of anything, especially something they made back their money on over thirty years ago?

Because they own the copyright for the movie, and you don't.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-03-2013, 08:45 AM:

What is "mandatory 35%"? The Warner repertory titles that I have been booking recently have been $250-450 vs. 35%, which seems reasonable, although they whack the theatre on shipping (DHL usually charges about $200 per print round trip to the east coast).

What I don't really understand is why late-run current titles from some distributors can be had at flat rates, but they want the boxoffice percentage for repertory titles.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-03-2013, 10:57 AM:

quote: Aaron Garman
Any person at the studio who allows/forces a cinema to run an off the shelf Blu-ray without being able to skip warning, previews, etc. shouldn't be allowed to run the studio anymore. They should be taken out back and shot.

Actually, they specifically tell you to skip all of the warnings,etc and that you are not allowed to use or show the "bonus" features.

Posted by Jack Theakston (Member # 4484) on 03-03-2013, 11:29 AM:

quote: Scott Norwood
What is "mandatory 35%"? The Warner repertory titles that I have been booking recently have been $250-450 vs. 35%, which seems reasonable, although they whack the theatre on shipping (DHL usually charges about $200 per print round trip to the east coast).

She's been charging us PLUS 35%, not VS. Am I being ripped off here? Not that it matters—we're avoiding dealing with them. Which probably won't matter, because they act like they're phasing out repertory, anyway.

quote: Mike Blakesley
For the same reason you can own a 30-year-old house, which you paid off years ago, but still charge rent on it.

Do landlords charge rent PLUS a percentage of what your income is?

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-03-2013, 01:27 PM:

We've always done vs 35%, though looking at a recent confirmation it says 35%-$250, not vs.

And yes, I've known of theatres whose lease was based on yearly gross income. They would start booking known bombs if they were too close to going over the specified amount.

Posted by Jack Theakston (Member # 4484) on 03-03-2013, 04:59 PM:

quote: Martin McCaffery
And yes, I've known of theatres whose lease was based on yearly gross income. They would start booking known bombs if they were too close to going over the specified amount.

Percentage leases are supposed to work in favor of the lessee. The added percentage of the annual is supposed to be leverage for the lessee to LOWER his base pay.

VS. 35% is bad enough. PLUS 35% is highway robbery. That coupled with WB's heinous service is an insult. The bottom line is that they would rather focus on home video, television and their crappy Fathom events than have to deal with the occasional repertory screenings.

Posted by Jock Blakley (Member # 6552) on 03-03-2013, 05:20 PM:

quote: Scott Norwood
The DCP has sync issues and a remixed multichannel soundtrack (the original mix is mono). It has also been heavily de-grained. Get the print.

Oh damn, we've got it booked for a session in June. Anybody know of a print lying around in Australia? [Razz]

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-03-2013, 06:33 PM:

quote: Jack Theakston
Percentage leases are supposed to work in favor of the lessee. The added percentage of the annual is supposed to be leverage for the lessee to LOWER his base pay.

Sometimes the magic works, sometimes it doesn't...

I had no access to the details, and god knows what corporate chains have up their sleeves tax wise.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 03-07-2013, 08:50 PM:

Scott, I'd like to hear more about the sync issues.

Is the entire thing out of sync? Would a global offset fix it, or is it "rubbery"?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-08-2013, 10:39 PM:

Rubbery, to use your terms. I spent some time playing with the sync delay, and finally just gave up on it, as the sync was all over the place.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 03-08-2013, 10:48 PM:

Thanks, Scott.

Maybe everyone who's planning to run "The Shining" should register a concern with the distributor. If they know that we know there are issues, revisions may be forthcoming.

Can anyone say definitively if the prints are free of these same sync issues? I don't think I've ever shown this movie, so I have no idea. It would be unfortunate to end up shipping/inspecting/presenting a worn-out print, only to find that it has the same issues.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-09-2013, 08:27 AM:

There were some higher-ups from Warners at the screening that I did. They saw and heard the sync issue, but pretty much dismissed it as something that ordinary moviegoers would never notice. Perhaps they have fixed it, but I seriously doubt it. Their general attitude about it was depressing.

I have shown this on 35mm and don't remember any sync issues, but cannot officially confirm that they did not exist in the original. I may be playing it in 35mm this fall (Warners needs to respond and confirm the booking) and can possibly report back then.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 03-09-2013, 03:07 PM:

I'm running it in a few weeks. If you could give me one or a few examples, I can pay special attention to those points in my copy and report back.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-09-2013, 07:49 PM:

I can't think of any specific scenes, but I can assure you that the issue will be obvious in the first fifteen minutes of the feature. The entire DCP has issues, unless they have fixed it.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 05-18-2013, 08:38 PM:

Followup: We just had our one and only screening of "The Shining" (DCP) this afternoon. The portions I saw were in sync.