|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Two Cannes screenings affected by projection problems
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 05-20-2017 01:08 AM
quote: deadline.com (my emphasis)
‘Okja’ One Of Two Films Marred By Fest Tech Problems Today: Cannes Controversy
After the global press suffered long lines and an even slower metal-detector check yesterday morning at Todd Haynes’ Wonderstruck, two movies today experienced major technical issues: Netflix’s Okja in competition, and the Chinese film Goddesses In The Flames of War, a market title.
The Cannes Film Festival promptly issued a statement this morning, taking full responsibility for the Okja snafu (see below). The Bong Joon Ho-directed movie has been much subject of controversy here given it’s the first time a streaming service has been included in competition.
At its press screening today, the movie was delayed by a further 15 minutes after its aspect ratio was off with a portion of the image on the ceiling. Both times Okja began to screen, it was met with loud booing from what is led to be the French contingent in the audience, because of the technical disruptions.
One observer said, “You can’t guarantee that the booing will occur at the premiere tonight.” Cannes press screenings have a history of drawing notoriously vocal crowds.
The Netflix logo was met largely with cheers when it first hit the screen, but the problems taxed the audience that got up early only to have the experience disrupted. The crowd seemed more forgiving by the end credits, as boos turned to cheers for the film about a girl who protects a rare animal.
Meanwhile, a Goddesses In The Flames of War screening was canceled due to technical issues, leading some to wonder — what’s going on here at Cannes? This is clearly an embarrassment for the festival, particularly Okja since it’s so high profile.
Netflix also has Noah Baumbach’s The Meyerowitz Stories in competition. Both Okja and Meyerowitz Stories aren’t receiving a theatrical release, and that’s hard for some here at the fest to swallow: At the jury press conference, Pedro Almodovar and Will Smith were divided over the future of cinema, particularly on a small screen.
After booking Okja and Meyerowitz Stories, Cannes made a new rule that its competition films must have a traditional theatrical release in France after the French Cinema Federation (FNCF) objected to the inclusion of two Netflix films in the fest’s official lineup. Netflix CEO Reed Hastings responded on Facebook, saying: “The establishment closing ranks against us.”
Even though Amazon Studios is known to be a streaming service — they were here last year with Cafe Society and Neon Demon, and here again this year with Wonderstruck and You Were Never Really Here — the fact is the label is a loyal practitioner of theatrical windows. Said Haynes yesterday at the Wonderstruck press conference: “The film division at Amazon is made up of true cineastes who love movies and really want to try and provide opportunity for independent film visions to find their footing in a vastly shifting market.”
Here’s Cannes’ response to the Okja misfire this morning:
“A technical incident disrupted the beginning of the screening of Bong Joon ho’s film, Okja, which was shown this morning at a press screening at the Lumičre Auditorium. The session was interrupted for a few minutes but was then able to carry on as normal.
This incident was entirely the responsibility of the Festival’s technical service, which offers its apologies to the director, his teams, the producers and the audience at the showing.”
I'm guessing a KDM problem for the canceled show, possibly resulting from time zone confusion. As for the image on the ceiling, as simple as pressing the wrong preset button?
Still, I feel sorry for the techs involved. To have that happen at arguably the world's best known film fest can't have been fun.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Jim Cassedy
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1661
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Dec 2006
|
posted 05-20-2017 09:07 AM
quote: Mike Schulz
I even have experience with running many different Netflix screenings
Same here Mike, but I have had several screenings where the
Netflix logo is actually a different aspect ratio than the
feature. As you know almost all Netflix stuff is 1:77/Flat,
but I've had a few shows where it looked like the Netflix
logo was FC,and so it DID overshoot the maskings. But it
was only the logo, which lasts, what..maybe 4 or 5 seconds?
I even recall warning one of the publicity reps about it
before one screening so that she wouldn't "freak-out".
I'll try to get a picture next time I get a drive like that.
(I may even have one in the booth still)
I'm not speculating what the problem at Cannes was or
that it had any connection whatsoever to an off-ratio logo.
If it was a simple 'wrong aspect ratio' problem, it should
have been correctable in about 10sec, and not 10min as
we all know.
As far as working there, this is what I always tell people:
"If you want to see films in France, go to Cannes; but
if you want to see films in cans, come to my house! ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 05-21-2017 12:57 PM
quote: Jim Cassedy
As you know almost all Netflix stuff is 1:77/Flat, but I've had a few shows where it looked like the Netflix logo was FC,and so it DID overshoot the maskings. But it was only the logo, which lasts, what..maybe 4 or 5 seconds?
In that case it shouldn't have been a problem, because they should have had a 1.77 screen file set up that masks off all the other pixels. That's what I've done at our theaters: I've set up presets with separate screen and lens files for 1.19, 1.33, 1.37, 1.66, 1.77, full container (all with the F frame height pixel count), and 2.20 Todd-AO, 2.39, 2.55 and 2.79 (S). For 1.77, the "open" pixels are 1920x1080 (2K - same principle applies to 4K, just with bigger numbers), and all the others are set to black in the screen file. So if I did play a DCP that had a 2048x1080 logo, followed by a 1920x1080 feature, the extra pixels would not be projected, just like if I played a 1.37 print through a 1.85 aperture plate.
And besides, the difference between C (2048x1080) and F-177 (1920x1080) is extra width, not height. So I can't see any way in which this would explain anything being projected onto the ceiling.
What could explain it is if (a) there were no screen files set up at all in that projector - the entire light engine was wide open, and the only difference between flat and scope was a lens zoom - and (b) they started the show in scope by mistake. There is a height difference between flat (1080 pixels) and scope (858). So if the screen is common height, and you start to play a flat DCP with a scope setting that only zooms the lens - no masking of unused pixels - then 858 pixels will be magnified to fill the screen, and the remaining pixels will be projected with 111 above and 111 below the screen.
All you would then need is a DCP with an incorrect aspect ratio tag in the CPL (happens all the time at fests - I reckon that about 10-15% of the festival DCPs I receive have either the aspect ratio tag wrong, the audio channels tag wrong, or both) and a KDM that only opened a few minutes before showtime, after the walkin is underway, and you have a recipe for the glitch described.
With this in mind, this worried me a little:
quote: Article
This incident was entirely the responsibility of the Festival’s technical service, which offers its apologies...
Unless the festival organizers know for a cast iron, beyond a reasonable doubt fact that this happened because of a completely avoidable error by one of the projectionists or techs involved, this strikes me as being a little too willing to throw them under the bus. Maybe they do know that, because they didn't issue a similar apology about the other show (the one that had to be completely canceled).
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
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.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic