Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: You MUST run this show with changeovers

This is topic You MUST run this show with changeovers in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=001807

Posted by James R. Hammonds, Jr (Member # 673) on 02-23-2003, 03:11 PM:

I went to see a midnight showing of GHOSTBUSTERS at the Landmark River Oaks here in Houston this past Friday at midnight.

When I got up to use the restroom, I ran into the projectionist outside of the projection bootha nd he let me have a look around.

They were running the movie with reel to reel changeovers, and I was told that the studio would not let them do it any other way.

Does this happen often for repertory films?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 02-23-2003, 03:22 PM:

When there are only a couple of prints in existence, frequently a studio will take an extra uncut print out of their storage vault (or strike a new one) and permit it to be ran with the agreement that the leaders are not cut. The reasoning is not that the cutting damages anything, it's the fact that they know *most* projectionists will do a sloppy job of it and end up cutting off frames which kills continuity.

Think of it like this, theater A starts off with a brand new print and likes to leave a generous supply of ID frames, let's say 6 to be exact. Then the next week theater B gets the print and decides it is easier to cut than peel tape, so they cut over not one, but perhaps two frames just to be sure. Then theater C gets the print the following week where the projectionist is in the midst of eating his fried chicken while he builds the print, also cutting another frame over. By the 4th engagement, those reel ends will look like ass and have a huge jump in continuity. On a film where most engagements only run it one time, this is of extreme importance. It would not be an issue if we didn't have to many lazy [bs]

projectionists out there.

FWIW, I *think* Sony printed a few new copies a couple of years back. There should be a couple of regular prints floating around that have ran on platters/towers/large reels for rent, but the theater you attended probably requested the "vault" print since they had changeover capability and odds are it is in better condition than a cut print which has been built and broken down dozens of times.

On the flip side of the coin though, it never ceases to amaze me that the studios won't add extra head and tail leader to their "vault" print for protection. Only very rarely have I seen a vault print where the reel ends weren't filthy nasty with dirt and cinch scratches from past reel to reel handling. Extra leader would have prevented that damage from happening.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 02-23-2003, 03:50 PM:

I agree with this policy, but there is no point in it if they are going to let these prints out to bad changeover houses. They should only be made available to theatres with a proven record of good film handling, and if any reels are damaged, then they should have to pay for replacements.

What's the point in keeping 'good' prints, and then letting them out to theatres that do not take care of them. This would also be an incentive for theatres to take care of the prints in their care.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-23-2003, 04:33 PM:

I believe that the new prints which were struck for the "WB 75th Fest" in 1998 weren't allowed to be plattered, at least at that time. By the time I ran them (January 1999, in a changeover house), most of the leaders had been cut, presumably for makeup onto large reels.

Agreed with Stephen that there are plenty of crappy changeover houses, though, and that the "no plattering" policy only makes sense if there is also a requirement that the theatres which book these prints have a good record for film handling over time. I wouldn't mind seeing double-inventory for this sort of situation--one set of prints could be run at all theatres and another set could be reserved for reel-to-reel screenings at "trustworthy" theatres (perhaps at a higher rental rate). Obviously this requires more than one print of a given title, which isn't always the case.

Also agreed with Brad's comments about leader length. Many repertory prints that I've seen actually do have longish leaders, but they're usually the annoying ones which have 50 feet of clear leader without framelines at the head, so most people end up just dropping it on the floor (I usually loop it onto the douser handle). Doesn't the SMPTE standard specify something like twelve feet of tail leader per reel? I can't remember the last wide mainstream release that I've seen that had anything close to this. At the very least, there should be extra-long head leaders on R1, R4, and R7 and extra-long tails on R3, R6, and whatever the last reel is. This would improve presentation quality for anyone running large reels or platters. Those running small reels would need to add extra heads and tails to other reels, though.

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 02-23-2003, 05:57 PM:

SMPTE 301 and SMPTE 55 state that the protective section of both the head leader and foot leader is a minimum of 8 feet.