Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Children shown "Insidious 3" instead of "Inside Out"

This is topic Children shown "Insidious 3" instead of "Inside Out" 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=002913

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 06-25-2015, 07:13 AM:

First-Run, independent theater Danbarry Cinemas in Middleton Ohio apparently played "Insidious 3" In place of "Inside Out"

The website advertises Sony 4K projection:

http://www.danbarry.com/middletown

Additionally, it does not appear that the two features split an auditorium. Granted, these are today's times, but if anything, they would've had a more full schedule yesterday:

News story:

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2015/06/24/ohio-movie-theater-accidentally-shows-kids-horror-film-instead-inside-out/

quote:
Parents and children settled into their seats for a new animated Disney film got a quick jolt when a horror movie came on the southwest Ohio screen instead.

The Hamilton-Middletown Journal-News reports that a projectionist accidentally played "Insidious: Chapter 3" instead of "Inside Out."

Jazmyn Moore wrote about the incident on the newspaper's Facebook page, saying she brought five children to see the kids flick and they were scared when images of children being tied up and killed took over the big screen. Moore said she and other adults scooped up their kids and left.

The Hamilton-Middletown Journal-News reports that a manager, who declined to be identified, says the parents got an apology and an upgrade pass to see the Disney Pixar movie in 3-D.

“I got our money back but the damage is already done … my children are terrified and keep asking questions,” Moore wrote on Facebook.

A telephone message was left Wednesday at the Danbarry Cinema in Middletown.

The cinema's site calls the Insidious movie "a chilling prequel" with violence and frightening images.

"Inside Out" is a colorful film about how a young girl handles her emotions as her family moves.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Digital doesn't fix everything!

P.S.-

quote:
“I got our money back but the damage is already done … my children are terrified and keep asking questions,”

OH GOD NO, NOT QUESTIONS!!

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 06-25-2015, 07:59 AM:

Questions like-"When can we see the rest of it?"

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 06-25-2015, 08:14 AM:

Local article:

http://www.journal-news.com/news/news/mix-up-at-middletown-movie-theatre-has-children-wa/nmjjN/

quote:
Mix-up at Middletown movie theater has children watching horror film

Mix-up at Middletown movie theater has children watching horror film
Danbarry Cinemas in Middletown on June 27, 2007.

Mix-up at Middletown movie theater has children watching horror film photo
This is the movie poster for Pixar’s “Inside Out.” (Pixar)

Mix-up at Middletown movie theater has children watching horror film photo
Lin Shaye reprises her role of Elise Rainie in Focus Features’ “Insidious: Chapter 3,” written and directed by series co-creator Leigh Whannell. (Matt Kennedy/Focus Features/TNS)
By Ed Richter
Staff Writer
MIDDLETOWN — A local woman is upset after a mix-up at a Middletown movie theater resulted in a theatre full of children seeing a horror film instead of an animated Disney film.
Jazmyn Moore posted to the Journal-News Facebook page that she took five children to the Danbarry Cinema in Middletown last week to see the new Disney movie “Inside Out.”
After getting snacks and sitting through previews, the theater’s lights dimmed, but what appeared on the screen was not the PG-rated animation.
Moore said images of children being tied up and murdered appeared on the screen, and the children with her became terrified at the sights and sounds.
She said that she and other adults in the theater scooped up their children and rushed out of the theatre.
An employee in the theatre’s projection booth accidentally played the PG-13 rated movie “Insidious: Chapter 3” instead of “Inside Out,” according to a manager at Danbarry Cinema, who spoke with the Journal-News.
The manager, who declined to give their name, said the manager on duty at the time of the mix-up apologized for the accident and that everyone received a pass as well as an upgrade to watch the Disney movie in 3-D. She said Danbarry has not received any other complaints since the mix-up.
“I got our money back but the damage is already done … my children are terrified and keep asking questions,” Moore said in her Facebook post.
“Inside Out” is a Disney Pixar release about a young girl who is uprooted from her Midwest life and moved to San Francisco. “Her emotions — Joy, Fear, Anger, Disgust and Sadness — conflict on how best to navigate a new city, house and school,” according to IMDb, a movie website and database.
“Insidious: Chapter 3” is “a prequel set before the haunting of the Lambert family that reveals how gifted psychic Elise Rainier reluctantly agrees to use her ability to contact the dead in order to help a teenage girl who has been targeted by a dangerous supernatural entity,” according to IMDb.

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 06-25-2015, 09:22 AM:

quote:
The Hamilton-Middletown Journal-News reports that a projectionist accidentally played "Insidious: Chapter 3" instead of "Inside Out."

Oh, sure,- - blame the projectionist, assuming they even have one.

The last two times I've had to deal with a situation like this, it was because the
box-office bozos programmed their ticket computer terminals wrong, and were
sending people to the wrong auditoriums. It had nothing to do with 'projection'

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-25-2015, 10:12 AM:

quote:
Digital doesn't fix everything!

These kinds of goof-ups have happened with film, but it usually takes a brain fart on the order of having two or more movies doubled up on a projector's platter system and manually threading up the wrong one in the projector. The amount of time and effort it takes to thread the wrong movie is at least giving the popcorn jockey some window of time to realize he is making a serious mistake before starting the show. With digital, you're only a couple clicks away from showing an R-rated movie or R-rated Red Band trailer to a G-rated audience.

quote: Martin McCaffery
Questions like-"When can we see the rest of it?"

Which brings up the Janet Jackson "wardrobe malfunction" Super Bowl joke. The NFL pretended to apologize to those who pretended to be offended.

The violent content in Insidious 3 probably isn't any worse that stuff most or all of these kids have been exposed to via TV at home (movies on cable, Netflix, news programs, video games, Internet content, etc.). But as long as it is just violence, who cares? Let little Timmy watch an explicit beheading video on Facebook. The important thing is to keep little Timmy protected from hearing curse words and seeing exposed woman nipples.

It really is absurd what Americans find offensive. The country has a giant stick up its ass about all sorts of things. Unfortunately violence isn't one of them. It doesn't matter if it is emotional violence or physical violence. As long as no one is cursing or saying anything sexually explicit the content can be broadcast. IMHO, if our society focused more of its moral outrage on violence, seeing it for the destructive, repulsive thing it really is we might have less violence happening in real life here in the US. We won't do that unfortunately. We'll try to ban the use of certain tools and ban the sight of titty nipples instead.

This movie theater goof-up is not really a big story. The audience isn't as "innocent" as they might sell themselves to be to the mass media.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-25-2015, 11:09 AM:

I fail to see why it keeps making headlines when something like this happens. IT'S JUST A STUPID MISTAKE, it's NOT A BIG DEAL.

#1. It should be immediately obvious within the first 30 seconds that the wrong movie is on the screen, and I haven't seen Insidious 3 but I'm sure the movie doesn't open up with "images of children being tied up and killed." More likely it opens up on a big title card saying "INSIDIOUS 3" which should have given the audience a clue.

#2. If kids are "asking questions," the adult in charge should say "The moviehouse has a lot of different movies. They played a grown-up movie by accident. It is nothing to be scared of. Even movie theaters make mistakes sometimes. Forget it and let's go watch a Disney movie!" If accompanied by a big hug, this should end the problem.

I guess these kinds of things are a big deal in a big city. Apparently people aren't allowed to make mistakes. Here, everyone seems to realize that we're only human and goofs can happen, and nobody gets too excited. One time I accidentally programmed a red-band trailer on a PG-13 movie which happened to have a lot of kids in attendance. The trailer played about a minute before I heard the language in it, raced upstairs and fast-forwarded it to the next trailer. Not one person came out to complain, there were no traumatized kids, and nobody called the media.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-25-2015, 01:39 PM:

Interestingly, here is a comment on the town newspaper's Facebook post about the incident.

quote:
Actually, I too was there that night, and I remember it happening quite differently.

For one, Insidious never started. The managers caught on to what was happening, and turned the film off right after the opening credits cut off, before any of the actual film played. There are no children murdered anywhere within the entire hour and a half of Insidious, so it is pretty clear that this was a gross exaggeration.

What they must have been talking about is the trailer for Sinister 2, which did play, and does feature the deaths of children. That trailer plays everywhere though - including on television. Holding a movie theater accountable for showing a movie trailer that plays on all stations other than family-specific stations is a tad bit silly.

And as a customer that was there at that time, I have to say that the children were all calm and fine until a couple of parents started screaming at the tops of their lungs, scaring everyone far more than the unfortunate mix-up did.

Also, you forgot to mention that the staff was entirely apologetic, gave free movie passes to all 50+ people, upgraded everyone to 3D for free, and restarted another showing of Inside Out for everyone without question.

The other commenters have similar thoughts to mine in my previous post above. NOBODY is blaming the movie theater at all, which is refreshing. It's just one overbearing mom causing all the ruckus.

Posted by Buck Wilson (Member # 5885) on 06-25-2015, 05:25 PM:

[thumbsup]

Posted by Martin Murray (Member # 162) on 06-25-2015, 06:47 PM:

Why is this even news?

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 06-25-2015, 07:53 PM:

quote: Jim Cassedy
The last two times I've had to deal with a situation like this, it was because the
box-office bozos programmed their ticket computer terminals wrong, and were
sending people to the wrong auditoriums. It had nothing to do with 'projection'

At my theatre our the web site, LMS, and theatre sign systems all receive their information from the ticketing system. It is virtually impossible to have something in the wrong auditorium. In the digital age, there is almost no excuse for things to not be totally automated to avoid these kinds of mistakes.

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 06-25-2015, 08:16 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
It really is absurd what Americans find offensive.

As a foreigner, I find it quite amusing.

I've just signed up to Netflix, and, exploring, chose to watch Weeds, the first episode thereof. Pretty much the last word of dialogue is the "C" word, which I know to be on the list of the seven deadly sins or whatever its called. I nearly fell off my chair wondering how the heck that got shown on American TV...?

Here in NZ we're a little more relaxed about language on TV, here on YouTube is a well known primt time advert from some years ago...

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-25-2015, 09:18 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
I fail to see why it keeps making headlines when something like this happens. IT'S JUST A STUPID MISTAKE, it's NOT A BIG DEAL.

No kidding! Imagine if we had headlines every time some asshole threaded the wrong print.

"Movie theater runs Lawrence of Arabia in 70mm Celluloid instead of Interstellar"

"I went to see me some outer space but I saw some bastard on a camel instead. The damage is already done and my mental well-being is permanently altered. I think about $50,000 oughta fix it, though."

"It's just a mishap!" the claims theater owner. "Ben runs the celluloid when we have it and he's more used to stocking the tampon dispensary I suppose. That's his main job."

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-25-2015, 09:35 PM:

Ben prefers the tampon dispenser job, as opposed to stocking the condom machine, because he thinks he'll get with the ladies that way (and see their naked woman nipples). It might be a better strategy to put the condom machine in the ladies room though. Just sayin'. Sexist statement: any woman buying condoms automatically has to be a slut right?

quote: David Buckley
I've just signed up to Netflix, and, exploring, chose to watch Weeds, the first episode thereof. Pretty much the last word of dialogue is the "C" word, which I know to be on the list of the seven deadly sins or whatever its called. I nearly fell off my chair wondering how the heck that got shown on American TV...?

Weeds was originally broadcast on the Shotime premium cable network. Just about anything goes on those channels, except for on-camera genitals in genitals or genitals in mouth action. There's plenty of stuff shown on Cinemax, Starz, Shotime and even HBO that would get a NC-17 rating if shown in a commercial movie theater.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 06-25-2015, 10:46 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
There's plenty of stuff shown on Cinemax, Starz, Shotime and even HBO that would get a NC-17 rating if shown in a commercial movie theater.

And without the stigma of being softcore porn like when a movie gets an NC-17.

This used to be one of Roger Ebert's favorite rants. How the MPAA ratings needed to have a workable adult rating which didn't prevent adult oriented films from being shown in most cinemas.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-26-2015, 12:30 AM:

Ebert's axe he had available to grind on that topic needs to be ground very loudly right now.

The MPAA ratings system is grossly outdated and is actually putting traditional Hollywood movies into a competitive disadvantage with far more edgy and inventive premium cable TV series.

The MPAA ratings system is Puritanical about sex when it no longer has any business of doing so. Any idiot can tell the difference between something that is performed porn versus something that is just acted out (fake) in a movie. It is a physical difference, not an artistic or subjective difference. In porn people are really, truly having sex on camera. There is no doubt about it. The camera is positioned at angles to show that it is explicitly (using the term "explicit" correctly for once) actually happening. Dramatic movies only simulate people having sex. They can try to make the simulation look as convincing as possible, but we never actually see any penis in the vagina or mouth on genitals proof, and certainly no money shots either.

It would be exceedingly EASY to have two separate adult movie ratings, one for porn and another for stuff that people under 17 shouldn't be watching. But that would get in the way of the larger goal of preventing people who aren't in a traditional marriage from having sex. That's as if movies in commercial theaters were the only outlet for people to see any sexual oriented content. That's why we don't have the separate "A" for Adult and "X" for porn movie ratings. It's all because of people trying foolishly to legislate morality. Fake morality really.

How about another no one under 17 admitted thing for violence? It has been a long time since a movie ran afoul of the MPAA over violent content. The original cut of Robocop and Man Bites Dog are the last movies I know of that got threats of an X-rating over violence.

Violence is a far worse problem in the United States than sex. But we continue to allow our popular culture to revel in both emotional and physical violence. We give each new generation of latch-key kids the message that life's problems can be solved through violence. Don't like someone? Beat his ass. Someone cuts you off in traffic? Beat his ass. Don't like how he looks or who he is dating? Beat his ass. Girl dumps you? Terrorize her with online bullying, threats and revenge porn. Thankfully the vast majority of Americans are still decent and reasonably smart people who know better than to actually act out violence. I think some of our dumber people need help with that in some way, if only to get a more clear message that beating anyone's ass just because you want to do so isn't okay.

This nation is currently in a furor about the mass murder that took place in Charleston, SC. Racism is indeed at the core of that hate crime. But so is America's tradition of championing violence. I consider some forms of violence on screen to be absolutely no different in nature than hardcore sexual porn. In some ways I consider it to be much worse.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 06-26-2015, 01:05 AM:

Bobby, I more or less agree with what you're saying. Unfortunately there are still large swaths of the country where nudity and sexuality are still frowned upon. Having sat in on several MPAA ratings compliance meetings, I have a better understanding of why nothing changes.

First, the MPAA doesn't believe anything needs to change. Despite the fact that social norms are changing on many things that get an R rating - especially language, they remain firm that no change is needed. And part of this is because the ratings board is made up of parents from various parts of the country who go by ideology rather than reality. Plus they often have clergy consult on their ratings discussions.

The second reason is politics. You have numerous different theatre companies from different parts of the country, all with different opinions. As a result, very little gets done.

I sat in on a meeting about 5 years ago where there was discussion about a yellow band for trailers to identify those intended for PG-13 movies and up. However, this ideas was largely tabled for a variety of reasons, including the potential of liability for some theatre getting it wrong. Instead they wound up going with a subtle language change on green band trailers "Approved for appropriate audiences" and "Approved for all audiences". With the latter identifying trailers intended for PG-13 and R rated movies.

I have said before in other forums that the US has become much too large and diverse to effectively govern in a way that serves everyone well. The MPAA ratings are just an example of how a one-size-fits-all system really winds up being a less than ideal system for most, but is still better than nothing.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-26-2015, 02:11 AM:

Yeah we'd probably get along better if we were divided into about five separate countries. Trouble is, each section needs things the other section(s) have. Like if you sawed off California from the rest of the country, they would still need billions of gallons of water from points further east. Or Montana, we are such a large state but we have a small population so we get more federal money for highway maintenance per person than many other states might.

Bottom line, if we tried to change the system much at all, civil war would probably result. We're probably pretty much stuck with what we've got, at least until we're completely bankrupt and China forecloses on us.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 06-26-2015, 06:15 AM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
We're probably pretty much stuck with what we've got, at least until we're completely bankrupt and China forecloses on us.

I heard an analyst once explain that this can't happen. He said that since our national debt is in dollars, if China (or any other creditor) called in the debt, we could just print dollars to pay them.

That would cause other issues like historically high inflation and devaluation of the dollar. His point was that it is impossible for the US to go bankrupt because our debt is in our own currency.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-26-2015, 09:26 AM:

quote: Justin Hamaker
Bobby, I more or less agree with what you're saying. Unfortunately there are still large swaths of the country where nudity and sexuality are still frowned upon. Having sat in on several MPAA ratings compliance meetings, I have a better understanding of why nothing changes.

I think nudity and sexuality is still frowned upon across nearly all of the country. Some regions are more Puritanical about it than others. I think I live in one of those regions. The funny thing is hypocrisy abounds in all of this. It has become a pop culture cliché for the minister or politician preaching against homosexuality and extramarital sex to get busted for indulging in one or both. Here in my town two civic leaders the past couple of years were busted for having hardcore porn on their work computers; one even had child porn and was trying to arrange meetings with minors (he's fixing to go on trial). It seems like the more fiercely political and religious leaders try to legislate morality the more it creates a seedy underground. The more society leaders try to control and forbid sex the more the public wants it.

The United States' culture is suffering from a pretty strange Madonna/Whore complex. George Carlin has written pretty funny comedy routines about this nonsense.

quote: Justin Hamaker
The second reason is politics. You have numerous different theatre companies from different parts of the country, all with different opinions. As a result, very little gets done.

The MPAA is funded by the handful of major movie distributors in Hollywood. Politics does indeed affect the MPAA's ratings on moral grounds. But there are other questionable things going on in how independent movie distributors are treated in the process. A movie production going through a major distributor will get very specific suggestions on what to change to avoid the dreaded & useless NC-17 rating. An independent production won't get those suggestions. They'll just have to keep guessing and cutting their content until it gets an R-rating. Matt Stone and Trey Parker saw both sides of this with the movies they've made.

While the MPAA may think they have a lot of power in this, they're really only helping premium cable channels and Internet streaming services become more compelling outlets of content.

An indie company can release a pretty tame R-rated cut of a movie in a few theaters and then release the more intense unrated cut on Netflix. Even major studios are indulging in this marketing scheme to their own detriment. Some of it is bullshit though -like the "unrated" cut of Dodgeball that only added a few extra curse words; at worst it would have went from a PG-13 to a very mild R-rating.

quote: Justin Hamaker
I have said before in other forums that the US has become much too large and diverse to effectively govern in a way that serves everyone well. The MPAA ratings are just an example of how a one-size-fits-all system really winds up being a less than ideal system for most, but is still better than nothing.

quote: Mike Blakesley
Yeah we'd probably get along better if we were divided into about five separate countries.

I agree the United States has become very diverse. But the differences in viewpoint aren't divided neatly among various regions. Americans move from one part of the country to another more frequently now. We're a lot more connected and exposed to different viewpoints via the Internet. If anything, our leaders in politics, business and religion need to learn how to lead better starting with broadening their own perspective. Doing things the same old way isn't necessarily the smartest way.

Posted by Allan Young (Member # 6332) on 06-26-2015, 09:33 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
It has been a long time since a movie ran afoul of the MPAA over violent content. The original cut of Robocop and Man Bites Dog are the last movies I know of that got threats of an X-rating over violence.

Natural Born Killers springs to mind, but that was still over twenty years ago.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 06-26-2015, 12:51 PM:

quote: Justin Hamaker
Plus they often have clergy consult on their ratings discussions.

They ought to get our pastor on their board! In last week's sermon, he quoted one of Schwarzenegger's lines from Conan the Barbarian (as an example of unchristian behavior - seeking revenge rather than turning the other cheek). He prefaced it by commenting that, "I've a feeling that many of you won't be familiar with this picture...". Of the around 2,000 Seventh-day Adventists he was addressing, about half giggled and the other half didn't react at all: I suspect because not only were they not familiar with the movie, but they hadn't even heard of it and therefore didn't get the joke.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 06-26-2015, 02:09 PM:

(Don't let Jerry Springer invite any of the patrons on his show, for that would really blow things out of proportion.)

But, something went wrong and the media grabbed on to it knowing it would gather attention real quick - how they make money.