Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum   » Operations   » Ground Level   » NY Times Articles on Theatre Quality and Widescreen Movies

   
Author Topic: NY Times Articles on Theatre Quality and Widescreen Movies
Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 900
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2002


 - posted 08-09-2003 04:38 PM      Profile for Martin Brooks   Author's Homepage   Email Martin Brooks   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Tomorrow's NY Times (Aug 10) has two articles of note in the Arts section (section 2). The articles don't seem to be online as yet. I suppose they'll be up tomorrow.

One is about the Angelica, "the house filmgoers love to hate." It talks about how the art house has "long lines, small screens, muddy sound and squeezed seats" as well as noise from the subway. The article talks about art-house alternatives, such as the recently opened Sunshine a few blocks away, the theatres at the Brooklyn Academy of Music (but notes how BAM has problems getting films since it's not in Manhattan) and the soon to be renovated Waverly, which is being taken over by IFC.

The other article, "Why It's A Wide Wide Wide Wide Screen" talks about how with the advent of television, the aspect ratio of movies increased and therefore, old (1.33) movies look better on traditional TV than more recent films. But the article gets a lot wrong. It implies that all anamorphic films are 2.66:1 (the original CinemaScope ratio) and it never even mentions 1.85:1. The article was written to coincide with two widescreen film festivals, one at the Museum of the Moving Image and another at Lincoln Center's Walter Reade Theater.

 |  IP: Logged

Josh Jones
Redhat

Posts: 1207
From: Plano, TX
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 08-09-2003 09:31 PM      Profile for Josh Jones   Author's Homepage   Email Josh Jones   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It seems to me you can count on the media for two things: getting it wrong and bias.

Just my two cents.....

Josh

 |  IP: Logged

Gerard S. Cohen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 975
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: Sep 2001


 - posted 08-10-2003 10:34 AM      Profile for Gerard S. Cohen   Email Gerard S. Cohen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Martin's Links:

"The House Filmgoers Love to Hate [Angelica Film Center]"
by Jesse McKinley:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/10/movies/10MCKI.html

"Why It's a Wide Wide Wide Wide Screen"
by A. O. Scott
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/10/movies/10SCOT.html

 |  IP: Logged

Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 08-10-2003 12:50 PM      Profile for Charles Everett   Email Charles Everett   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
As is typical with the NY Times they didn't check their facts before writing the story.

The Angelika upgraded to digital sound in order to open The Matrix Reloaded. Also, the Angelika has to share product with the UA Union Square and (on occasion) the Loews Village VII. UA just opened Le Divorce while Loews opened The Magdalene Sisters.

When the BAM Rose Cinemas opened in 1998 City Cinemas tried to keep BAM from playing films that were in the Angelika. BAM sued and won, correctly stating that Brooklyn was outside the Angelika's booking zone. BAM now has no trouble getting product -- it opened Seabiscuit day-and-date with mainstream theaters.

Has the NY Times reported on City Cinemas' lawsuit against Regal and Loews? Because of that lawsuit, Fox and Universal have taken City Cinemas off service AFAIK.

[ 08-13-2003, 01:18 PM: Message edited by: Charles Everett ]

 |  IP: Logged

Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 900
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2002


 - posted 08-10-2003 07:30 PM      Profile for Martin Brooks   Author's Homepage   Email Martin Brooks   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If you read the entire article, you'll see that it does state that the Angelica upgraded the sound. It states that complaints triggered a $1 million renovation last year that included new seats, better sound equipment, improved bathrooms and air conditioning.

Although I haven't been there since the renovation, the noise from the subway alone makes it suck and there are still other problems with the place.

The thrust of the article is that the Angelica faces increased competition from the Sunshine and the forthcoming IFC theater (replacing the Waverly) as well as the Film Forum, Lincoln Plaza and Walter Reade.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)  
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.