This is topic What is the most moronic beef you have with this industry? 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=001894

---

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-15-2003, 05:50 PM:
 
This curiosity came from this thread.

What do you think is the most moronic thing we have to deal with in this industry? Is it the bone chilling thought that someone in the general public might gain access to a low resolution ID frame image? Perhaps it is the constant shipping back and forth of prints for screenings that ensures by the time your theater opens the movie that you get a worn print? Pre-show "entertainment" ads? Cyan dye tracks? Dolby tone loops that are not accurate? Opaque splicing tape? Pepsi instead of Coke?
 

---

Posted by Michael West (Member # 428) on 03-15-2003, 06:12 PM:
 
public apathy, the dumbing up of the projectionists trade by corporations, the false perception that every thing digital is better, ads - have i said to much?
 

---

Posted by Ray Brown (Member # 1449) on 03-15-2003, 06:15 PM:
 
Technicolor's Thursday delivery is my biggest pet peeve. I like it when ETS delivers on Wednesday. The bootleg excuse is a bunch of .

I'm not a opaque splicing tape fan either. That don't peel off of the film at all and looks horible on the screen. Neumade clear tape rules.

It would be nice to have access to the reference frames online. I don't see a need for a secure server for this.
 

---

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 03-15-2003, 06:20 PM:
 
shouldnt this be in yak? (Just Kidding )

My biggest beef is when Technicolor wont let you circuit a print to a theatre 5 minutes away.
 

---

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 03-15-2003, 06:25 PM:
 
Pre-show ads are reaching the point of absurdity. Recent visits to Regal have been dragged down with 6 or 7 pre-show ads. Many of the ads are blow-ups from that look like . Some of them are even for shows (now THAT makes sense: Advertise competitive entertainment and then try to figure out why your theatre is empty during the week). The PSAs are often annoyingly heavy-handed with their messages. Then Regal follows the ads with too many previews, also numbering around 6 lately. Enough is enough already. But I'm sure that when CineMedia rolls out here, the barrage of ads will get even worse.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-15-2003, 06:38 PM:
 
At the most basic level, I'm upset by the fact that very few people in this industry (on both the production and exhibition side) seem to understand that the general moviegoing population simply desires quality entertainment at a reasonable price. Instead, "the industry" (in the broadest sense) seems to assume that moviegoers are morons who visit theatres from time to time in order to buy popcorn. Long lines, poor service, dirty theatres, crappy projection and sound quality, bad movies, high ticket prices, and shipping nonsense are all symptoms of this attitude.

(Not that there aren't exceptions to this. Obviously there are plenty of genuinely good films [though many are poorly marketed]. There are manufacturers who make great equipment and excellent service technicians to install it and keep it running. There are good theatre managers and projectionists, too. Unfortunately, all of these are relatively rare in this business.)

Another, more specific, issue is the relatively short release cycle of most films and the way in which a typical "wide" release is booked in order to completely saturate the market (e.g. four prints of the same damn feature in a medium-sized multiplex), with a very short release window and most of the boxoffice dollars being collected in the first week or two of release. Part of this is a problem with too few films that have "legs" and part is just poor booking practice. I'd much rather see longer release windows with fewer prints and more opportunity for small towns and second-run houses to play more titles. I'd also like to see a longer delay before the video release of most titles and--crazy as this may sound--I'd like to see some well-known director refuse to release his films on any video format (including TV) and insist that theatrical exhibition is the _only_ proper way to see his films. I can dream, can't I?

A related issue is the fact that most distributors only seem to care about their current first-run releases, while they allow second-run and repertory venues to suffer through lack of advertising materials and good prints. It can be difficult to get a good 35mm print of many films which may have been initially released only a few years ago. And getting posters and trailers for titles released only a few months ago can also be problematic. Again, there are some exceptions (e.g. Warner Bros. Classics, which has plenty of great prints of older titles), but the poster/trailer issue is a big deal for smaller towns and repertory houses, many of which end up having to get these items from collectors or other theatres rather than distributors.
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 03-15-2003, 06:45 PM:
 
As a patron, the thing that bothers me the most is the use of theatre personal running most shows today instead of qualified professional projectionists in order to cut costs.. When I saw "SIGNS" at the Waikiki #2 shortly before they closed, the surrounds was not working when the SDDS sound trailer was shown. I complained and Alan Sakaida was called to check out the problem. The surrounds was once again working towards the end of the film. The reason for the problem? It was a usher who started the show and did not realize something was wrong.

Do you suppose it was a theatre staff in the booth when the lights was not turned on during the intermission of "GODS AND GENERALS"?

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Matthew Nock (Member # 1575) on 03-15-2003, 06:47 PM:
 

quote:

---

I'd also like to see a longer delay before the video release of most titles and--crazy as this may sound--I'd like to see some well-known director refuse to release his films on any video format (including TV) and insist that theatrical exhibition is the _only_ proper way to see his films. I can dream, can't I?

---

Didnt Mr Spielberg do this? I was under the impression that that was the only reason that ET was not released on video/dvd for SOOOO long - was because he beleived that it can only be truly experienced in a cinema!
 

---

Posted by Matthew Nock (Member # 1575) on 03-15-2003, 06:50 PM:
 
Oh yes, and another beef I have ....

working in a cinema complex with people who really dont give a damn or care about film.

I was taught to show film by people who showed film cause they loved it - and that is why i show film - that is why I take pride in my onscreen, and off-screen preparation.
 

---

Posted by John Westlund (Member # 913) on 03-15-2003, 06:58 PM:
 
Number 1 on my list is crappy splicing tape. When I get prints used 80% of the time I have to deal with this garbage that wont come off since I am not one to cut frames to save time.\

Number 2 is having an empty auditorium 5 minutes til showtime and when everyone finally shows up and is seated having 80. They must think that all movies start late or something.
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-15-2003, 07:09 PM:
 
people who don't understand the concept of the raw corn goes in the kettle first then the oil. It reads plain and simple on the popper. Raw corn first oil second.

The same people who don't understand how to dump a kettle of popped corn before it burns.

The same people who don't understand when to turn off the heating element in the kettle when popping the last batch.

Of course those same people just started a print of an R rated film for fifty kids waiting to see a G rated feature.
 

---

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 03-15-2003, 07:12 PM:
 
If a film is very good, it will have a very long theatrical run and make a lot of money for everyone. A classic example is "MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING". It made tons of money for the producers and brought in the crowds to theatres. Now that it had a long life in theatres, patrons like myself can once again enjoy the film in the comfort of my home theatre from the DVD. "GODS AND GENERALS" which had a very short life in theatres should do much better on home video and I just cannot wait for the film to be released on DVD. Films that has 'legs' will be highly profitable during it's theatrical run like "STAR WARS", the"LORD OF THE RING" trilogy, the Harry Potter films and the first"SPIDERMAN" film. Films such as "WINDTALKER" and "GODS AND GENERALS" at least have a chance of recouping their production cost and even make a profit from home video.

-Claude
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-15-2003, 08:34 PM:
 
The film co's know that the very best advertising vehicle is TRAILERS and yet they don't make enough to go around. Why can't each theatre (even the small ones like us) sign up to an automatic mailing for all trailers? That would make a lot more sense than thousands of them sitting in multiplexes, unused.
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-15-2003, 09:20 PM:
 

quote:

---

people who don't understand the concept of the raw corn goes in the kettle first then the oil. It reads plain and simple on the popper. Raw corn first oil second.

---

I absolutely hate popcorn that is made 'raw corn first'. I find it way too dry. I've got a Twin Citation popper that says 'oil first, corn second'. Then again, I also prefer Pepsi.
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 03-15-2003, 09:24 PM:
 
Acording to the old manleys aristocrat machine(the only real popper in my books) oil is placed in the kettle and when it starts to smoke seasoning and corn are added
result
good corn
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-15-2003, 10:00 PM:
 
problem is all that had to be changed because of flash fires.
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-15-2003, 10:07 PM:
 

quote:

---

problem is all that had to be changed because of flash fires

---

quote:

---

I've got a Twin Citation popper that says 'oil first, corn second'.

---

Agreed. I've never seen it any other way, the oil heats, then you put in the corn. The oil is everything to flavor and complete popping.


 

---

Posted by Barry Martin (Member # 1376) on 03-15-2003, 11:56 PM:
 
Michael West said:

quote:

---

public apathy, the dumbing up of the projectionists trade by corporations,

---

Here, here. If you think about it, this is one of the main roots to all "evil" in the industry. If there were competent, caring, professionals in every theater across the country (even the world) then NOBODY would be cutting a foot of ID frames, using masking tape and opaque splice tape, dragging films across the floor and scratching because of poorly maintained/cleaned equipment. Also, if the customer would stand up for what they paid for and start a shit-storm whenever they were treated to truly poor presentations/service and getting their money back all the time perhaps the corporate offices would get the hint.
 

---

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 03-16-2003, 12:13 AM:
 
I agree, oil 1st then the corn.

While I do not have theatre type of popper, I use that method in my West Bend "Stir Crazy" popper! It's GREAT!

>>> Phil
 

---

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 03-16-2003, 12:24 AM:
 
I hate the concept of "Theater Checkers" or "Secret Shoppers"
Well, maybe it would be a better concept if they weren't told to look for THESE DUMB THINGS:

1. Concessionist must upsell/suggestive sell -- Does the company even realize how many people get annoyed by this? For every one person that spends the extra $0.25 on the Large, there's ten that tell themselves they won't visit the stand again because they hate being hassled as if a pack of snowcaps is a used car.

2. Usher must "Walk" the auditorium at least twice -- Yeah, and be sure to make noise and walk in front of the screen and sign the little booklet/sheet/clipboard/whatever or they won't see you. And make sure you distract 30-40 customers from the movie in the process.

3. Concession stand must be "well stocked" -- What does this mean, exactly? We can't be out of anything? All the candy cases must be absolutely full? There must be at least three batches of popcorn made? There has to be at least 245,642 pieces of ice in the bin?? How does someone check this?

Not to mention the myriad of other nonsense they have to look for. But for the "Film Presentation" section, all they write is, "The sound and picture was good." Excuse me, but isn't that the whole damn reason you came to this establishment in the first place? If all of our customers cared more about whether they were offered a larger size instead of if the picture had gobs of dirt all over it, then why do we bother to show movies?

Unfortunately, this "fear of the checkers" works on the management as all they care about is the floor. What good is cleaning an auditorium if the people entering are going to watch a dirty print?

=TMP=
 

---

Posted by George Roher (Member # 91) on 03-16-2003, 12:46 AM:
 
My main beef with this industry is the lack of interest in showmanship. But I have a more recent "moronic" beef: A theatre chain refusing to purchase Xenon lamps that a theatre desperately needs, and then giving the operators a hard time when lamps fail during shows and telling them they need to make more of an effort to get old lamps changed out (with new lamps that don't exist because the company won't pay for them) ...and simultaneously chastising the operators for ordering too many lamps. Does that make any sense? I didn't think so.
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-16-2003, 12:50 AM:
 
Projectionists should pay for at least half of the booth equipment & supplies out of their own pocket. Didn't you know that?
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 03-16-2003, 01:09 AM:
 
My beef is manufacturers who are not willing to improve their products to make them more user friendly.
 

---

Posted by Nicholas Roznovsky (Member # 861) on 03-16-2003, 01:51 AM:
 
Although my rants against Technicolor probably account for 75% of my posts so far, I'd have to say my biggest problem with the whole exhibition thingee is the way the industry has spent the past few years cannibalizing itself.

I mean, really. I've got a fairly new, very nice (all-digital, all-stadium, some THX) twelve-screen just down the road from me. Where did the same company build their new sixteen screen? Right across the street of course!

Is there another decent theater in Lakewood, CO (a city of over 100,000)? No, they're both sitting across the street from each other on the extreme north end of town. To find another decent theater, I've got to drive down to the next super-suburb town and visit some of our fine Film-Tech friends at Bowles Crossing (A very quality operation, btw - keep up the good work )

It's the same thing all over America. When our chain decided to build a 16-screen in Amarillo (a town previously serviced by just eight decrepid screens), two other companies also announced plans weeks later to build 16-screens right down the road.

I've seen it in Texas, Colorado, Virginia, Florida, and just about everywhere else I've been in the past few years. Stop building megaplexes right next to each other! My god, even 7-11 has the common sense to space out their 14 bizillion stores every few blocks.

[ 03-17-2003, 12:46 PM: Message edited by: Nicholas Roznovsky ]
 

---

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 03-16-2003, 02:23 AM:
 
I've got a billion of them, but the best one I can think of now is the people in charge caring more about the projection booths being clean than how the shows look and sound in the auditoriums (yes, it's important to keep the booth clean, but you shouldn't make newly-trained people nervous about that while they're already trying to keep 16 shows onscreen!)
 

---

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 03-16-2003, 02:39 AM:
 

quote:

---

My god, even 7-11 has the common sense to space out their 14 bizillion stores every few blocks.

---

I know where there are two 7-Eleven stores approximately 100 yards apart from each other...

Back to the topic at hand:

Trailers and posters with dates on them. Why not just a generic 'coming soon'?!? This really sucks in subrun, when you are running trailers that say 'This Christmas' for a movie you are just now getting in March.

-Aaron
 

---

Posted by Jeff Skallan (Member # 891) on 03-16-2003, 03:18 AM:
 
Nicholas,

Thanks for your kind words about our "quality operation." I too was perplexed over the idea of building a 16 giga-plex location across the street from the UA/Regal Denver West 12. I can only imagine what a nightmare it will be for the delivery couriers!

My beef is simply how outrageous it is that millions and millions of dollars are spent on building theatre locations which are then staffed with unskilled, inexperienced operators who are often paid barely above minimum wage. It's a shame that at most theatres, the actual film operations have become such low priority with respect to showmanship, that it is almost an afterthought to theatre owners.

It's not too often that we receive used prints, but I can easily say that at least 85% of them in the last few years had some kind of film damage. Even prints that have played once at other locations arrive in less than optimal conditions.
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-16-2003, 04:12 AM:
 
I wonder if a print moves between UA/Regal's Denver West 12 to the UA/Regal 16 screen across the street (forget what it is called, hard for me to care) if TES will make them break it down, have Sky Courier come pick it up and deliver to the next theater and then have them build it up again. I'd just move the print myself and load up the cans with bricks or whatnot. I doubt the 2 theaters even have compatible automation. Denver West has the UA "Gary Stanley" automation (as we've grown to call it) and the new theater probably has, well definitely has somehting else incompatible.

My beef is that projection is not considered a priority anymore.
 

---

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 03-16-2003, 06:48 AM:
 
The multiplex madness has also struck here.
In the late 90s, there was a multiplex building boom. But instead of nicely dividing up the market, the big companies had to build competing multiplexes right under each other`s noses. They all thought they would become "market leaders" and put their competitors out of business. Now they are all in big trouble.

Maybe the only winners were Kinoton and Ernemann, they got to sell their equipment in large numbers.
But even they are not very happy anymore, because now the exhibitors have no money left to pay for technical services.

And of course, the overall quality of presentation sucks astronomic ass.
Because they have overinvested, all the companies now let their theaters virtually fall apart again.
There are still quite a few very good theaters, but they all depend on the initiative of their operators to keep up the standards.
Since the work doesn`t pay off however, it is only a matter of time until these give up too.
 

---

Posted by Don Sneed (Member # 955) on 03-16-2003, 10:23 AM:
 
Scott N.,Claude A.,& Jesse.....Thank you, you guys hit the nail on the head.....my beef is the people in charge of the projection booth, do not care about the equipment, only cleaning (sometime) & changing bulbs....I seen in many..Many booths where the simple repairs or fix could be perform without a service tech, you tried to teach the person how to do the simple things, it goes into 1-ear & out the other...Now I know this is my job to reair the equipment, but there are things booth people can do for themselves to (1.)save me a trip, (2.)save a show, (3)Just the satifaction of fixing the machine....so my beef is booth people in charge of equipment but don't want or have the time to learn about their craft & the equipment....
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-16-2003, 10:36 AM:
 
Vendors that go around dealers and make the sale themselves. They should be forced to live in Iraq!

Don, You shoulda been in the Chicago area 15 years ago!!! Pathetic to say the least.
Mark
 

---

Posted by Michael Cunningham (Member # 210) on 03-16-2003, 10:58 AM:
 
My biggest beef has got to be with the "standardized" business model in use today between the studios and the theatre chains. What other industry in existence has its prices driven UP by competition?!?

To clarify : Multiplex #1 has tickets priced at $7.00 while Multiplex #2 (just down the road in the same competitive zone) has tickets for sale at $8.00. The studios, seeing this discrepency, realize that their 90% take of box office receipts will be larger on an $8.00 ticket than it will be on a $7.00 ticket. They proceed to send all of their "latest, greatest" films to M2 so that they can rake in the larger take. Because these two theatres are in the same zone they may not play the same product and this forces patrons to choose the more expensive theatre to see the movies they wish to. Further, once M1 sees that it is losing all its access to prime product and realizes why, it will boost its ticket prices to match those of M2 and restore a bit of balance in film distribution between the two. Of course, once M2 realizes that it is losing out on films it would have gotten, it will once again boost its own ticket prices to make it more "attractive" to the studios. I have seen this horrible cycle happen in a few places and there is no reasonable way out of the situation.

Secondly, what other industry realizes such negligible profit from its main product?!? The current standard of flooding the multiplexes with a given title and collecting all the sales within the first couple of weeks means that no title sticks around long enough for the ticket percentage to drop. Theatres can expect to take no more than 15% of box office receipts, at the very best. More often, they take something in the 5% to 10% range. No wonder film quality is ignored and the concessions is of utmost importance! Customers complain about the high ticket prices and we employees bemoan our low salaries while all the cash flowing through the box office goes somewhere else. This is just rediculous?!?

- Mike
 

---

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 03-16-2003, 11:14 AM:
 

quote:

---

Stop builing megaplexes right next to each other!

---

YES!!! This has been a nightmare especially in Orlando, FL. Regal had a small, but nice little 7-screen across from the college. So they go and build a 22-screen inside of a new mall about 8 miles down the road. Fair enough. BUT NO! Then they go ahead and build ANOTHER 20-screen about 2 miles from the 7-screen. (Doing the math, that's about 10 miles from the just-built 22) And they keep the 7-screen a First-Run, with first-run prices, and wonder why they only sell FIVE tickets on a weekend!!! (The 7-screen has been closed for about a year now)

Not to mention, Regal also had an 11-screen in Winter Park, FL. It was decent, had 70mm capability, digital sound... so let's build ANOTHER 20-screen down the road! Uh-oh! No one is coming to the 11 anymore! (The 11-screen changed hands several times since then, turning into a move-over, then a dollar house, then briefly an art house only showing 8 or 9 movies on a shortened schedule. I think it's closed now.)

What a waste!

=TMP=
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 03-16-2003, 11:36 AM:
 
This happened in the Hampton, VA. area in the mid-late '90s.

AMC had a 7-plex mall theatre in Newport News and a 4-plex and (I think) a 6-plex in Hampton, which is a few miles away. Circa 1996, Regal built a 14-plex in Newport News just down from the AMC mall theatre. In 1998 or so, AMC built a 24-plex in Hampton (again, just a few miles away) and closed their 4-plex and 6-plex at the same time. Then, Regal went and expanded their 14-plex to a 20-plex. So, for a while, there was a 20-plex, a 24-plex, and a 7-plex all within a few miles of each other. The 7-plex eventually became a discount house and closed. I believe that the AMC 24-plex and the Regal 20-plex are still around, however. Oh, and there was an indepedent 3-plex dollar house nearby that also closed.

This building frenzy was, of course, crazy, as there was no significant population increase during this time and I'm willing to bet that the total number of tickets sold per year hasn't changed significantly in response to the new construction. The end result of all of this spending on construction, of course, is that the same pie ends up getting split up among more screens.
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-16-2003, 11:39 AM:
 

quote:

---

To clarify : Multiplex #1 has tickets priced at $7.00 while Multiplex #2 (just down the road in the same competitive zone) has tickets for sale at $8.00. The studios, seeing this discrepency, realize that their 90% take of box office receipts will be larger on an $8.00 ticket than it will be on a $7.00 ticket. They proceed to send all of their "latest, greatest" films to M2 so that they can rake in the larger take. Because these two theatres are in the same zone they may not play the same product and this forces patrons to choose the more expensive theatre to see the movies they wish to. Further, once M1 sees that it is losing all its access to prime product and realizes why, it will boost its ticket prices to match those of M2 and restore a bit of balance in film distribution between the two. Of course, once M2 realizes that it is losing out on films it would have gotten, it will once again boost its own ticket prices to make it more "attractive" to the studios. I have seen this horrible cycle happen in a few places and there is no reasonable way out of the situation.

Secondly, what other industry realizes such negligible profit from its main product?!? The current standard of flooding the multiplexes with a given title and collecting all the sales within the first couple of weeks means that no title sticks around long enough for the ticket percentage to drop. Theatres can expect to take no more than 15% of box office receipts, at the very best. More often, they take something in the 5% to 10% range. No wonder film quality is ignored and the concessions is of utmost importance! Customers complain about the high ticket prices and we employees bemoan our low salaries while all the cash flowing through the box office goes somewhere else. This is just rediculous?!?

---

If there is this real problem with getting films based on ticket prices then the M1 theater needs to raise their prices to the same level as M2 and let the film companies know that the prices are the same. Does the M1 theater offer stadium seating? Does it offer the same things that the M2 theater does? Is the M2 theater a newer theater with stadium seating and all the glitz that is going to attract the young demographic?
 

---

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-16-2003, 11:54 AM:
 
UA had a 12 plex in a good location. So they go and open a brand new 6 plex a few miles away in a boring but ritzy new mall. Then they decide to open yet another 12 plex across the street from the 6 plex. The 6 plex then closed down. It was barely open for even three years before we were hauling equipment outta there!
 

---

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 03-16-2003, 12:29 PM:
 
Scott indirectly touched on the point I want to make -- megaplexes that handle upmarket/art titles more or less as programmers.

The Pianist and The Quiet American are "Oscar Bait", yet the AMC Hamilton didn't pick up those 2 films until after I saw them at the Regal Warrington Crossing. Far from Heaven played only 3 weeks at the AMC Hamilton when that picture could have easily played 4-5 weeks. There's more than one megaplex that ran Auto Focus (flop) instead of Bowling for Columbine (arthouse hit). Only one New Jersey megaplex ran El Crimen del Padro Amaro even though New Jersey is one-third Catholic and increasingly Latino.

Part of it is bad booking practice as Scott said. Part of it also is bookers not researching the overall market carefully.
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 03-16-2003, 12:45 PM:
 
Oil first and then the corn? BAH!

1. Flash fire is definately possible.
2. Cold oil on a hot kettle can bust the kettle. (seen it)
3. Hot oil splash in the face is not a pleasent thing.
4. Thermal shock of cold oil in hot kettle will break down oil, just like if you poured motor oil on a hot manifold.
5. Airheads running the popcorn machine can't keep track of their own ass sometimes, let alone operate dangerous equipment.
5. The lid should never be open when the oil is injected. But most people are just too damned lazy to close the lid, inject the oil, raise the lid, dump in the corn, and close the lid again.

In the last 14 years, I have seen 5 major kettle fires that all but destroyed the popcorn machine. If a kettle fire happens, it appears that some people will open the lid and try to douse it with water. Luckly nobody was hurt, but one theatre we had to evacuate because the fire got a "little out of hand." Quick thinking of the manager is what saved that day - and the theatre.

So again:


Oil first and corn last eventually will catch you with your pants down. Some of the Gold Medal poppers say oil first and corn second. All Cretors I have seen say corn first, and then the oil.

I have to totally agree Darryl. Procedure change to corn first and then the oil was basically for safety reasons and oil breakdown when it hits the hot kettle. I think the Cretors manual points that out. Furthermore, if one of your kids was severly burned while not using the manufacturer's specific instructions, you could be held liable. Is it worth it? If you are safety concious of your workers, you would and should insist that instructions are followed to the letter. If your old Gold Medal machine has the "old way" of doing things, you better get an update from that company and post it on your machine.

Sorry about the ramble, but all of us know that most accidents happen because someone violated the operating instructions.

Edited because I said 4 years....it should have read 14 years.

[ 03-16-2003, 01:58 PM: Message edited by: Paul G. Thompson ]
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-16-2003, 01:44 PM:
 
Mr. Humbug, I don't think anyone is suggesting letting the kettle heat for 15 minutes and then dump oil into it. But you are right, it IS assuming there is a competent operator in charge of the machine.

5 fires in 4 years is an awful lot, sounds like a training problem to me! I've only heard of one or two kettle fires in the theatres I've worked in, in nearly 30 years.
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 03-16-2003, 01:55 PM:
 
Tim, I agree. Thankfully, I am not the one who trains them.

I said 4 years. That was incorrect. It should have been 14 years.

I just fix the crap when they burn it up. I don't run it.
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-16-2003, 02:08 PM:
 

quote:

---

Secondly, what other industry realizes such negligible profit from its main product?!? The current standard of flooding the multiplexes with a given title and collecting all the sales within the first couple of weeks means that no title sticks around long enough for the ticket percentage to drop. Theatres can expect to take no more than 15% of box office receipts, at the very best. More often, they take something in the 5% to 10% range. No wonder film quality is ignored and the concessions is of utmost importance! Customers complain about the high ticket prices and we employees bemoan our low salaries while all the cash flowing through the box office goes somewhere else. This is just rediculous?!?

---

quote:

---

Mr. Humbug, I don't think anyone is suggesting letting the kettle heat for 15 minutes and then dump oil into it. [[Smile]]

---

quote:

---

NO!!

When is this fallacy going to end? How is it that so many intellegent people think that theatres only make 10% off of ticket sales?
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/l/r/rgc.html
Revenue from ticket sales, fiscal year ended December 26: $1.45 bilion
Expense from film AND advertising, fiscal year ended December 26: $790 million

I couldn't find any other sources online in a short search, but I can tell you Carmike has a similar percentage breakdown and I'm sure the other chains do too.

Have the exhibitors lost ground to the studios in the ticket share battle? Sure, and we better not lose anymore ground. But to say that theatres don't make any money off of admissions is just ridiculous.

---

I remember when our company was having a problem with Dreamworks wanting to take 80% of the boxoffice instead of the 75% that they were originally giving. That means that the big chains are getting around 20 to 25 percent of the boxoffice take. What they have to pay with that percentage I am not totally sure of but you do have many factors from utilities to payroll to consider.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-16-2003, 04:04 PM:
 
"Thermal shock of cold oil in hot kettle will break down oil, just like if you poured motor oil on a hot manifold."
_______________________________________________________________
You're not unsing synthetic oil in your engine....and kettle?? Whats wrong with yous guys????
Mark
 

---

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-16-2003, 04:19 PM:
 
Synthetic coconuts are the best.
 

---

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 03-16-2003, 05:03 PM:
 

quote:

---

That means that the big chains are getting around 20 to 25 percent of the boxoffice take.

---

During the first couple of weeks, maybe.
 

---

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 03-16-2003, 07:42 PM:
 
Paul, are you raising sheep now as a sideline?

Both our '98 Cretors kettle replacement and our new Diplomat have the "corn first" label.

Coconut Oil Forever!
Oh... and plenty of seasonings!
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 03-16-2003, 09:58 PM:
 
I think all new machines have that label affixed now.
 

---

Posted by Peter Schoell (Member # 919) on 03-16-2003, 11:25 PM:
 
I have to agree that I think you need to heat the oil first, then add the oil. I've never heard of any other deep frying situation where you would add the food before the oil. I have two older Creators poppers that don't have the "order label" and two newer ones that do have it. I'm sure the label was created by Creators legal department. The legal dept needed to to do something to protect their liability because people seem to be getting dummer each year. When a company can get sued and loses to a guy who hurts himself when he tops his hedge with a lawnmower then any lawsuit is possible. Add to that the fact that for every person who wants to sue, there are 2 lawyers ready to do the hit.

Pet peeves. The fact that Hollywood has convinced the public that if they don't see a movie in the first two weeks when it's at the top of the sales charts, the movie isn't worth seeing.
 

---

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-16-2003, 11:42 PM:
 
There is a little difference between a deep frier and a popcorn kettle. with a deep frier you are putting the food in a basket and lowering it into a vat of hot oil. You still run the risk of the hot oil burning you if you do not lower the food in properly.
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 03-17-2003, 12:07 AM:
 
Peter said:

quote:

---

The legal dept needed to to do something to protect their liability because people seem to be getting dummer each year.

---

Pete, you got that right. Our popcorn salespeople today were born with a computer hanging out of their butts. Unfortunately for many, they don't have any or very little common sense. Too many don't know how to read, write, add, subtract, multiply or divide basic small numbers in their heads. Many don't even know how to count money. They depend on a machine to do that for them.

But they do know how to multiply in a different sense....

It reminds me about a time I had in woodworking class in high school. We had all these beautiful machines to do the work for us, but I could not use them to plane a board straight. The teacher told me he detected my problem. When I asked what the problem was, he put his hands on his hips, looked at me squarely in my eye and said, "You believe too much in push-button age." Then he turned around and walked away. His message was one of inspiration and really made me think.

This was in the year of 1957 at Lincoln High School in Manitowoc, Wisconsin.

He was right. That teacher was Harry Olestad, who later turned out to be a very good friend of mine until he passed away several years ago.

His words still echo in my mind today just as loud as they did when I was 17 in the year of 1957.

Do you see the similarity with today's people, even though it is 46 years ago I was told that? They believe too much in the push-button age.
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-17-2003, 01:46 AM:
 
Darryl said,

quote:

---

You need to remember you may be able to get away with the oil first popcorn second on a cold popper.

---

Not in my experience. I've always seen it oil first... from the first kettle-full to the last.

Sounds like you may have a thermostat problem if it's getting that hot.
 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 03-17-2003, 01:55 AM:
 
Tim, check the specs on the kettle temperature (average) and check the specs on the oil's flash point. I think you will find that they are dangerously close to each other, especially when the thermostat is ready to cycle off.

After you do that, think about the safety of your people who make the popcorn, and the human error margin as well as the mechanical error margin of the thermostat. Thank you.

When it comes to the possibly of human injury, there can be no compromise. Safety first.....there is no other way. I learned that in the United States Navy.

Maybe I am arrogant....but when it comes to the safety and welfare of other people, I am proud of it and I am not going to change my attitude towards that.

Furthermore, if one of your kids was seriously hurt by an oil fire because of operation procedures that were over-written locally to operate equipment instead of actual operating procedures by the equipment manufacturers, you will have to live with that the rest of your life if you dictated that deviation.

I am not willing to do that.

So be it. I stand firm on my convictions, period. End of story. Safety of your personnel first, even though you might think the odds are in your favor.
 

---

Posted by Michael Cunningham (Member # 210) on 03-17-2003, 11:54 PM:
 
Ah, sorry Dustin, I guess when even your General and District Managers tell you things like this for so long you start to believe them without proper scepticism. Thank you for the link to Regal's earnings statement, I suppose I should have done some research work for myself before flying off the handle.

- Mike
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-18-2003, 12:37 AM:
 
No, Paul, not at all. Nothing wrong with being safety-minded. I'm one of the most cautious people out there, it's just that I've never heard of, or experienced, the kind of problems that you guys are talking about. I don't doubt it happens.


 

---

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 03-18-2003, 12:48 AM:
 
Cool.
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-18-2003, 01:20 AM:
 
Michael, no problem. I believed that for a long time, until I saw Carmike's financial statements.
 

---

Posted by John Carpenter (Member # 1488) on 03-18-2003, 01:52 PM:
 
Nothing about corn & oil here...
And leaving out the obvious moronics things with TES...

My "beef" - Having to play trailers for a film you KNOW you are not going to open, even if it is next week!!!

Don't you love competitive markets
 

---

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 03-18-2003, 04:36 PM:
 
LOW IMAGE QUALITY

Most prints are not sharp enough, look unsteady and grainy.
Too many defects from high-speed mass printing done wrong, like color shifts, terrible lab splices. Many US films get ed up beyond recognition in foreign release by low-quality dupe negatives delivered to European labs.
Insufficient photography with high-speed films, shooting wide-open, too much telephoto shooting, incompetent use of Super-35 amount to this:

MOVIES NEVER LOOKED WORSE ON THE BIG SCREEN
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-22-2003, 06:03 PM:
 
If you get a print that has obvious lab problems like safelight fogging or silver soundtrack blotches, or other "upstream" image quality issues, let the distributor know of your dissatisfaction.
 

---

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 03-23-2003, 04:09 PM:
 
John,

you`re right, complaining surely helps. But very often, the problem is in the original photography itself. I bet they had a great time looking at the video assist monitor when shooting a film like FROM HELL, it sure looked fine on the AVID monitor, but when I get a Scope picture with about three inches of depth of field on a 70 ft. screen, I cannot blame the distributor or the lab for this visual torture to my eyes.

The need of doing effects and all kind of image manipulation in 2K resolution has pushed back the art of cinematography about 30 years as far as image quality is concerned.

Kodak (and competitors) never made finer film stock, cameras and lenses are close to perfection, but what ends up on the screen is just an insult to the paying audience. But they do not complain because they haven`t seen it much better for years. The first part of many LOTR prints and the italian-made HARRY POTTER prints were the lowest I`ve seen in 30 years of seeing and showing movies - but they make money, nobody writes about it, so this goes on.

Hm, I didn`t mean to sound that fatalistic, but I see so many old films in vintage prints that I simply cannot adjust to the current level of image quality in the industry...
 

---

Posted by Robert E. Allen (Member # 1351) on 03-23-2003, 05:38 PM:
 
Amen Scott!!

I hope you are, or will soon be, in a position to do something about those things you mentioned.

May you enjoy a long and healthy life in this business.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-26-2003, 04:49 AM:
 

quote:

---

If you get a print that has obvious lab problems like safelight fogging or silver soundtrack blotches, or other "upstream" image quality issues, let the distributor know of your dissatisfaction.

---

quote:

---

What makes me think that this is a mass-production issue is that arthouse and rerelease titles, printed by the smaller labs in runs of 5 to 10 copies maximum, invariably look a hell of a lot better than mass-printed Hollywood blockbusters.

---

quote:

---

The Italian prints Christian mentioned are feared by operators everywhere. They have many quality problems, and often stick like hell.

---

quote:

---

If only 5 or 10 copies are being made, they may be prints made from the original negative. Quality would be better, but at risk for damaging the original negative.

---

For the kind of films I'm thinking of I'd be surprised if they did that. What I had in mind are European films, many of which would have had many tens, if not hundreds of prints distributed in their countries of origin (and so would have been printed through the camera original - fine grain pos - interneg - release print cycle), but only a very few here. For the ones that are printed in British labs I'd guess that they import an interneg and then print that, adding subtitles either by laser if there are very few prints, or onto the interneg if there are slightly more.

That having been said, Bollywood seems to print straight from camera originals. I vaguely remember a query on the AMIA list from an Indian DoP who was trying to rescue a badly worn cut camera negative which had been Scotchguarded and then had several hundred prints contacted off it. I'd always wondered why Indian prints looked so sharp!
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-27-2003, 09:34 AM:
 
In many cases, loss of sharpness and poor steadiness in release prints is caused by continuous contact printing onto short-pitch raw stock. Bell and Howell developed contact printing on the principle that the original would be 0.3 percent shorter than the raw stock, finding that the short-pitch original and long-pitch raw stock wrapped around a 12-inch circumference printing sprocket had minimal slippage.

When printing onto short-pitch raw stock, a pin-registered step printer should be used:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/h1/printing.shtml

http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/support/h1/sizesP.shtml

(See "Optimum Pitch for Printing")

So for optimum steadiness and sharpness, the short pitch BH-1866 perfed camera negative would be wet-contact printed onto long pitch intermediate film perforated DH-1870. After processing, this master positive would be STEP-PRINTED with a PIN-REGISTERED printer onto short pitch intermediate film perforated BH-1866. Finally, the short pitch duplicate negative can be contact printed onto long-pitch print film raw stock, perforated KS-1870, to make the release prints.

As noted, labs are often not given enough time to make multiple duplicate negatives using the preferred (but much slower) pin-registered step printers, and are forced to use continuous contact printing for all stages of duplication, compromising quality.
 

---

Posted by Josh Jones (Member # 447) on 03-27-2003, 08:12 PM:
 
in reference to the comments about the oil first vs. second, I'm sorry gentlemen but I have to side with the oil SECOND. We had a kettle fire here on Sunday, and I dont care how damn good the corn tastes, I'm not going to burn up half the lobby for it. Luckily the lobby was saved by the quick action of a customer and an employee. the only damage done was a burned up popper and some chared trim. They put that label there for a reason, and I'm deathly afraid of fire.

Sincerely,

Josh
 

---

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 03-27-2003, 08:49 PM:
 
Aren't there only a few seconds between putting in the oil and putting in the corn, whichever order you do it? Why do those few seconds make any difference to the taste, and why would a few seconds make a fire more likely?

The old Moyer W. 11th Movieland 6 here had a kettle fire on a very crowded Saturday night. Even though the fire in the kettle was quickly extinguished, they had to evacuate the whole place anyway because of smoke, and also there was no way of knowing whether there was residual fire still burning in the hood exhaust duct system above the popper. Flames had scorched the ceiling, so the Fire Dept. had to assume the ducts were still hot, and they said "Clear the place". Hundreds of rainchecks given out that night.
 

---

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 03-27-2003, 10:54 PM:
 
Also I hope that your concessionest are very good at cleaning out the kettle for those of you who do the oil first. The kids here do the corn first than oil, consquently, the kettle is always very easy to clean at night. I've worked at theater where the staff puts the oil in first and looking at the amount of burnt black oil coating the inside of the kettle, I wouldn't want to eat the popcorn that came out of that kettle.
 

---

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 03-28-2003, 04:48 PM:
 
John, why is contact printing long -> short any different than printing short->long? I understand why short->short or long->long is bad...

--jhawk

[ 03-28-2003, 09:21 PM: Message edited by: John Hawkinson ]
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-28-2003, 06:41 PM:
 

quote:

---

Aren't there only a few seconds between putting in the oil and putting in the corn, whichever order you do it? Why do those few seconds make any difference to the taste, and why would a few seconds make a fire more likely?

---

quote:

---

Should a flash fire occur, no bozo in their right mind will stick his or her hand into the flames to shut the kettle and extinguish the fire.

---

quote:

---

I suspect that those problem prints may not be on Kodak VISION Color Print film. What is the edgeprint ID?

---

John,

since I do not work at a first-run house, I didn`t check the actual print stock. I will find out what stock it was the next time I see inferior print quality.

BTW, GANGS OF NEW YORK was a really lousy print, two local projectionists told me they got numerous complaints from customers about the total lack of sharpness. I retreted to the last rows (about 2 times screen width) and still could not help noticing the bad focus. (Now they tried to focus it better, but the print was just lousy. One of the theatres has been rented to a local mini-chain with just a few months to go, so they will not put pressure upon the distributors.)

After seeing GANGS I`m really glad Conrad Hall got the cinematography Oscar instead of Michael "360 degree" Ballhaus! I suspect that most academy member voters see the movies on DVD/video anyway, and that they are totally unable to perceive the difference between set/costume design and the artistic work of the cinematographer. If it is a period piece and has great sets, it must be epic, and if it`s epic, they assume the camerawork must be great.
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-01-2003, 01:46 PM:
 
AFAIK, many European prints of "Gangs of New York" were NOT printed on Kodak film.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 04-01-2003, 02:06 PM:
 
Why would they change print stock? The US prints are on Eastman 2393 Vision Premier and look terrific.
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 04-01-2003, 02:16 PM:
 
It's not unusual for distributors to print on different print stocks in different territories.
 

---

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 11-23-2003, 05:37 PM:
 
A long, long time ago Scott the "Film God" said:

quote:

---

Obviously there are plenty of genuinely good films [though many are poorly marketed].

---