Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Projectionist Blamed For Cutting Sex Scene At Sundance

This is topic Projectionist Blamed For Cutting Sex Scene At Sundance 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=004527

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 03-01-2006, 11:52 AM:

Fox News

WASHINGTON — Jason Reitman says a projection error — not Tom Cruise — was responsible when a Katie Holmes' sex scene was missing during a screening of her upcoming movie, "Thank You for Smoking," at the Sundance Film Festival.

"I was sitting there in the theater, the scene was missing, and my immediate thought was, 'Oh my God, FOX cut the scene out of my movie,"' Reitman told AP Radio in an interview. "And then I realized, 'No, if it's at the end of the reel, the projector probably just accidentally cut it out."'

Some blamed Cruise, Holmes' fiance, speculating that he had pressured Reitman, son of "Ghost Busters" director Ivan Reitman, to remove the scene.

"That's a fun story. I'd read that story. The problem is that it's not true," Reitman said. "The problem with 'projection error' is that it's the truth but it sounds like a lie. It sounds an awful lot like 'wardrobe malfunction."'

Holmes, 27, and Cruise, 43, have been engaged since June. They announced her pregnancy in October.

Aaron Eckhart stars with Holmes, Maria Bello, William H. Macy and Sam Elliott in "Thank You for Smoking," adapted from Christopher Buckley's satiric novel about a tobacco-industry spin doctor.

Reitman said more people probably know about his movie because the scene went missing. "The most likely reason that they would have heard of it is because of the sex scene," he said.

The filmmaker also said Holmes' sex scene is as tame as anything you'd see on the Disney Channel.

"Thank You for Smoking" — with the sex scene — is slated for limited release March 17.

*****************************************************************

I think, while not impossible, but highly unlikely that the projectionist chopped off a complete sex scene at the end of a reel.

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 03-01-2006, 12:30 PM:

If he/she knew of the scene in question & had enough of a bizzare attraction to Holmes, I'd believe it. Or, perhaps the scene opened to black?

Posted by John Eickhof (Member # 323) on 03-01-2006, 03:21 PM:

considering the locale and previous accounts of 'film editing' by theatres and projectionists in Utah, I would tend to believe it indeed could have been 'edited' by the operator if he felt religious or other motivations to do so. It certainly would not be the first time!! The most well known issue simular to this was a few years ago when prints of Titanic were 'edited' by certain theatre personnel in Utah. Go figure! I think the producer and director should find out and proscute the person(s) responsible! As far as I know they usually run 12-14 K reels on transports, so the chance of cutting a changeover short are pretty slim! just my $.02 worth...

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-01-2006, 03:56 PM:

quote: Fox News, quoted by Mitchell Dvoskin
The filmmaker also said Holmes' sex scene is as tame as anything you'd see on the Disney Channel.

What... does she shag Mickey Mouse? That should have the 'moral majority' up in arms; not to mention the animal rights lobby!

If the scene was accidentally cut by an early changeover, she can't have been shagging anything for very long.

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 03-01-2006, 04:43 PM:

And who'd have guessed that "Holmes' sex scene" would refer to someone other than John Holmes? [Razz]

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 03-01-2006, 05:50 PM:

Haven't we had stories in threads recently here of a projectionist mishaps? I seem to recall something similar how a scene was cut out of Brokeback Mountain. Seems entirely possible. Or, it could simply be the director trumping up business for his film, in that he cut it out before handing the print over or something like that.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-01-2006, 06:41 PM:

quote: John Eickhof
The most well known issue simular to this was a few years ago when prints of Titanic were 'edited' by certain theatre personnel in Utah. Go figure! I think the producer and director should find out and proscute the person(s) responsible! As far as I know they usually run 12-14 K reels on transports, so the chance of cutting a changeover short are pretty slim! just my $.02 worth...

The worst for that sort of thing was the Varsity Theatre at BYU in Provo. I serviced that theatre a few times over the years... its gone now. They were cut off by all the majors for cutting the films up. All they could book in the end was Disney so thats all they ran.

While there are many PROGRESSIVE Mormons I'd personally love to start a movement in Utah to get the Mormons to realize that its just a piece of plastic running through a projector... just a story. If its not for you in whole then don't try to make it so by altering it and insulting the folks that put it together.

Many mormons raise their kids in "vacuum bottles" continously shielding them from such (supposedly) evil things.... even the checkout stands at the supermarkets have covers over the gossip rags so the kids are guarded [Roll Eyes]

. Sadly many of these kids then grow up not kowing what the real world is about or like and have a VERY difficult time fitting in with the rest of modern society whey they are finally exposed to it.

Mark

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 03-01-2006, 07:22 PM:

..Just like when I ran "Titanic" in Boise: got blitzed out by my friends who saw it and I just told them bascically the same: "I'm just an operator who runs the movies. I can't edit the prints for individual taste. If you want to complain, complain to the movie makers, not to the theatre".

Then I tell them to go home and rent Disney movies.

And yet, there have been some more raunchier movies shown at Sundance with more themework than this one.

I can almost see this a bit since one time, when putting a movie together (used print) that the joined splice was far ahead of the end of where the cue marks and end leader are supposed to be. What happened was the obvious: a light scene changed to a massive dark scene and that operator took that light scene as the end of the reel and cut it there. There were a good three minutes left on the reel after that cut.

Posted by Will Kutler (Member # 770) on 03-01-2006, 09:21 PM:

A funny story that occured at the last theatre I worked.

A very talanted kid working concession was always in the booth wanting to be a projectionist. This kid was very smart and really cought on...not to mention ENTHUSIASTIC!

Unfortunately, the kid was Mormon, and had religious issues about being in a booth running "R" films. So, if religious issues were in question, what business did the kid have working in a theatre, then?

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 03-02-2006, 01:44 AM:

quote: Mike Heenan
I seem to recall something similar

yeah, here

Posted by Ron Keillor (Member # 1790) on 03-03-2006, 03:33 PM:

I would have thought a festival projectionist would have too many films to build up and screen that there wouldn't be time to also preview and edit them.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-03-2006, 07:07 PM:

quote: Ron Keillor

I would have thought a festival projectionist would have too many films to build up and screen that there wouldn't be time to also preview and edit them.

Actually at there are one or two people just in charge of all the print build up. These prints which are on 48" reels are then delivered to their perspective locations and that locations assigned projectionist then runs the print. I guess those in charge will have to do a more thorough screening of who is running what before projectionists are assigned locations.

Mark

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 03-05-2006, 08:16 AM:

If the culprit was identified would there be repercussion such as his not working the festival again, fired, or aT least an ass chewing?

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 03-05-2006, 09:38 AM:

As mentioned in this topic and also in the Sundance topic in the Film Handler's Forum, all Sundance prints are inspected and mounted onto a single large reel at Print Revision. The projectionist at each venue runs a single reel of the completely built print.

I don't know what happened. I doubt this is the responsibility of one individual projectionist.

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 03-05-2006, 10:59 AM:

I am working for a client during the Miami International Film Festival now in progress. They are using Goldberg Show Shipper reels to distribute mounted prints...very hard for projectionists to tamper. Bill Hill, who works Sundance is supervising.

Posted by Peter Kerchinsky (Member # 1098) on 03-07-2006, 03:07 PM:

I got this version of the story from a projectionist who worked Sundance this year.
The person who was building that print "Thank You For Smoking" came to what he/she thought was the end of the reel because it went to black. That's where they made their splice onto the next reel. Unfortunately there apparently was another two minutes of film or so on the shipping reel and they did not notice. When the film was screened the director jumped up in the theatre and yelled "they cut my film" several times. Most thought it was a publicity stunt. He never heard what happened to that person who built the print.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 03-07-2006, 03:47 PM:

The missing sex scene only runs 30 feet. (Not 2 minutes) And the lab change-over cues are also printed during this footage.
I've been running this film many times since October 2005.

Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 03-10-2006, 09:48 AM:

So, was this a problem with the first Sundance showing only?

This should have been fixed for all subsequent screenings.

Posted by Floyd Justin Newton (Member # 1316) on 03-10-2006, 07:15 PM:

In UTAH....No Way.
[Confused]