Classic Films Belong on the Biggest Screens

[Geoff Jones]

Incidentally, starting tomorrow, Harkins has booked their premium screens with showtimes alternating between two new releases: Old (Universal) and Snake Eyes (Paramount). They are doing this at many, but not all of their locations.

That's outstanding. They're offering options to see more titles in a way that no home theater can come close to replicating.

Did Paramount and Universal authorize that, I wonder?

[Leo Enticknap]

One thing often over looked is that Three Strip Technicolor productions up till the switch to Eastman negative camera stock suffered from color fringing because of deficiency's in the three strip camera that could not be overcome.

The problem was very rarely in the camera. You were supposed to align the prism and calibrate it by shooting a few feet of test pattern at regular intervals. There was never going to be an alignment problem between red and blue, because these strips were orthochromatic negative stock that both went through the same gate:

3-stripprism.jpg
The green strip was panchromatic (ortho is only sensitive to red and blue light), and went through a separate gate.

The test pattern footage showed you if the green image was aligned correctly relative to the red and blue.

The alignment problems mostly happened at the final printing stage, when the dyes went through the matrices onto the print stock in three or four (early variants of the process had an additional black "key image" matrix) separate passes. The situation was even worse during WWII, because film base shortages (the wood pulp used as the base for nitrocellulose was a strategic war material) meant that prints that failed quality control could not be rejected or junked: they had to be used. In Britain they were nicknamed "north of Watford prints" (Watford is a suburb on the northern edge of London, so the implication is that these prints went to places out in the boonies where audiences paid lower admission prices and didn't care as much about picture quality). I was once shown a reel of one, from a print of the 1942 Jungle Book - the color fringing was so bad as to be pretty much unwatchable.

[Geoff Jones]

The Westminster Drafthouse has been playing the May 2021 Netflix title Bo Burnham: Inside on their premium 245-seat screen for a few time slots this weekend instead of Old. I haven't been following ticket sales closely, but this afternoon's show is well on its way toward possibly selling 20 tickets...

Starting tomorrow, Old moves off the big screen and Snake Eyes takes its place, which is great because it provides more options for moviegoers, but really makes me doubt all the squawking about how "they can't play classics on the largest screen because studio contracts require them to play a new release exclusively on the biggest screen."

Meanwhile, a couple of classics will be showing on small screens. Perhaps Snake Eyes will blow the doors off the box office and this will prove to be a smart decision!

[NARRATOR] It won't.

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

The problem was very rarely in the camera. You were supposed to align the prism and calibrate it by shooting a few feet of test pattern at regular intervals. There was never going to be an alignment problem between red and blue, because these strips were orthochromatic negative stock that both went through the same gate:

3-stripprism.jpg
The green strip was panchromatic (ortho is only sensitive to red and blue light), and went through a separate gate.

The test pattern footage showed you if the green image was aligned correctly relative to the red and blue.

The alignment problems mostly happened at the final printing stage, when the dyes went through the matrices onto the print stock in three or four (early variants of the process had an additional black "key image" matrix) separate passes. The situation was even worse during WWII, because film base shortages (the wood pulp used as the base for nitrocellulose was a strategic war material) meant that prints that failed quality control could not be rejected or junked: they had to be used. In Britain they were nicknamed "north of Watford prints" (Watford is a suburb on the northern edge of London, so the implication is that these prints went to places out in the boonies where audiences paid lower admission prices and didn't care as much about picture quality). I was once shown a reel of one, from a print of the 1942 Jungle Book - the color fringing was so bad as to be pretty much unwatchable.

I would have to pull the book out and read that stuff again to be 100% accurate. But ultimately it was the sum of all steps involved that created the color fringing. No doubt the matrices grew and shrunk too, because they were also nitrate . But at every step starting with the camera through to the release print there were ever so slight misregistrations and dye migration no matter how close they could get everything. Thats why Technicolor liked to have the projected width limited. Once Eastman, and safety film entered into the formula many of those problems went away and they claimed a much wider projectable width. Although I can't remember what that was, I believe it was 45 or 50 feet wide before color fringing from dye migration became visible.

[Leo Enticknap]

I read somewhere that before the war, the QC rejection rate for dye transfer prints (at both the Hollywood and London labs) was in the region of 40-50%. Towards the end of my time at the Egyptian I projected an original, 1948 nitrate release print of Black Narcissus struck in London. Chemically, it was still in near perfect condition, with no significant shrinkage. The reels varied enormously, ranging from absolutely stunning to a blurry sh!t show. I'd guess that the screen was around 35ft across in 1.37. The reel of The Jungle Book I saw while in film archiving school was in a tiny preview theater, projected on a halogen-illuminated FP23. Even on a screen that can't have been more than 8-10ft across, it was still a blurry sh!t show!

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

I never knew they had that high of a reject rate. Thats pretty amazing. But it also explains why they projected every reel of film at 2X speed right at the end of the line. They had very high standards and did not want the junk leaving the plant. I have a friend that was a QC inspector there for the last two years, and he had a big button that would stop that line so the bad film could be removed. The film going to the projectors came from a large accumulator...

[Geoff Jones]

Here are two more examples of missed opportunities to please movie lovers and make more money at the same time.

(These images were captured about 3 hours before showtime. Both films may have sold more tickets after that.)

JAWS v Old.png



Meanwhile, in Westminster, three different films from three different studios have played on the large screen over the past two days, but not JAWS.

(These images were captured just under 5 hours before showtime. Both films may have sold a few more seats after that.)

JAWS v Snake Eyes.png



Meanwhile, JAWS played on the biggest screens at both Drafthouse locations in the D.C. area and drew large crowds.

[Marcel Birgelen]

Did they edit M. Night Shyamalan into Jaws or does he simply Zoom in at the beginning of the movie?

"You're gonna need a better twist!"

Meanwhile, did you ask them yet? Or maybe we should start a public investigation... you think we can run a YouTube channel on this? The "Movie booking conspiracy...", akin why McDonald's ice cream machines are always defective?

[Geoff Jones]

Classic movies can do well on the biggest screens in a theater complex. But that sales potential is only going to there in certain markets. It will not work just anywhere. I know for certain such an effort would fail miserably here in Lawton.

I don't know about Lawton, but in Oklahoma City, here's how it looked at the Harkins Bricktown tonight.

Carrie Free Guy Bricktown.png

[Marcel Birgelen]

I see a whole lot of rockers. Can rockers bring their bike with them on Tuesday Classic Nights?

Sorry, I'm trying to be funny again...

But really: If you want to change this, you probably need to take this to a broader public. I promise, I'll cheer on you while you try.

[Geoff Jones]

Sometimes, when things feel truly dire and dark, knowing that Marcel is cheering you on is enough to keep you going.

Last night, The Wizard of Oz outperformed Free Guy at the Westminster Drafthouse. I didn't manage to get screen captures right at at showtime, but as of 6:22, the 6:30 showing of The Wizard of Oz had sold 34 seats in a tiny auditorium, while the 7:00 Free Guy had sold 19 seats in their large Big Show auditorium. I don't know what to say about Alamo. Showing classics is a cornerstone of their brand, and they continue to show classics on their premium screens in other markets. I have raised this with them on social media, customer feedback surveys, email, etc, and haven't gotten anywhere.


I'm slightly more hopeful about Harkins. I submitted the following letter (and images) through their website and snail-mailed copies to their CEO, President, CFO, VP of Content, Head Film Buyer, and Brand Manager:

Please show classic films on your largest screens. If a classic film is on a small screen, the experience isn’t significantly better than a good home theater, where fans can watch them whenever they want.

If you run classic showings on your largest screens, especially the Cine-Capri and Cine1 screens, you will provide fans with an experience that will blow them away. They will seek out more classics at Harkins Theaters.

I love movies and want to revisit my favorites with my family on the biggest screens possible. But forget about me - please look at this from a business perspective.

Classic regularly sell more tickets than the new release playing on the largest screen at the same time. When fans see that classic showings are full, or the screen looks small, they stay home. This is lost revenue.

Please compare your ticket sales for the August 17 showings of CARRIE with the sales for the ~7pm showings of FREE GUY on the largest screen at each of your locations.

In almost every case, CARRIE outperformed on a percentage-sold basis and in many cases, CARRIE sold more total tickets than the concurrent showing of FREE GUY on the largest screen. Enclosed graphics demonstrate this for five locations.

This is not an exception. This is typical.

But don’t rely on my word, go back through your data. You will find similar results for a variety of classics. (In many cases, the results will be far more extreme. CARRIE, while great, doesn’t have the large following of some other titles.)

Next, please review the data of your Tuesday Night Classics showings in 2019, when you did sometimes play classics on your largest screens. Those showings were extremely successful.

You’ll most likely see similar results for your upcoming HARRY POTTER series. (If HARRY POTTER was playing on your largest screens, you might have gotten an uptick over the course of the series, as fans told friends how much more epic it was compared to watching at home.)

I understand that studio contracts sometimes specify that new releases should play exclusively on certain screens for a certain duration. However, I also know that there is wiggle room around this subject. As I mentioned, you ran several TNC showings on your largest screens in 2019. More recently, on the weekend of 7/23/21, you alternated OLD (Uni) and SNAKE EYES (Par) on your premium screens at many locations. You also sometimes show a family-friendly title on your premium screens during the day and then switch to a more adult title at night.

I want to see classics on the biggest screens, but I also want Harkins to succeed financially, because Harkins offers a consistently better cinematic presentation than other exhibitors.

If you show classic films on your largest screens, you will sell more tickets. More and more moviegoers will discover that watching movies at home doesn’t begin to compare with watching them at Harkins, and they will come back for more.

Thank you for hearing me out, and again, please review your company’s data.

Carrie Free Guy Arizona Mills.png
Carrie Free Guy Bricktown.png

Carrie Free Guy Estrella.pngCarrie Free Guy Mountain Grove.png
Carrie Free Guy Santan.png

[Geoff Jones]

Harkins Theaters' "Wizarding Weeks" Harry Potter showings outperformed the premium screen showings of Candyman last night on a per-screen basis. (HP also outperformed at the one location that still had Free Guy on the premium screen.) Candyman drew solid crowds (it was opening night, after all), but at several of the HP showings, there really weren't any decent seats left.

[Gordon McLeod]

Geoff I think the point you are missing a first run multiplex has very little if any control over what screen a movie plays on. Most first run booking contracts are explicit as to the screen and exclusive use of it for the number of weeks the title is booked

[Geoff Jones]

Geoff I think the point you are missing a first run multiplex has very little if any control over what screen a movie plays on. Most first run booking contracts are explicit as to the screen and exclusive use of it for the number of weeks the title is booked

Hi Gordon,

Please help me understand.

• When the Alamo theaters in D.C. bump first-run titles from their largest screen to show classic films (as they do week after week), do they have special booking contracts with each studio that allows this?
  • What would it take for the Alamo theaters in Colorado to have similar contracts?
• When Harkins Theaters bumped their first-run titles from their largest screens for their "Tuesday Night Classics" in 2019, did they have special booking contracts with each studio that allowed them to do that?
  • What would it take to make that happen again?
• When Harkins Theaters alternated showings of Old and Snake Eyes on their premium screens on those titles' opening weekend, did they have a special booking contract between Paramount and Universal that allowed these competing films to be swapped in and out of those screens?
  • What would it take to negotiate a similar contract that allowed a classic film to be swapped occasionally for a new release (perhaps even one from the same studio)?
• When AMC, REGAL, CINEMARK and other big chains run family-friendly new release titles from one studio on their premium screens during the day and swap them out for more adult new release titles from another studio in the evening (as they seem to do a few times each year), do they have special booking contracts that allow them to do that?
  • What would it take to negotiate a similar contract that allowed a classic film to be swapped occasionally for a new release (perhaps even one from the same studio)?

Thanks,
Geoff

[Martin McCaffery]

Are any of the first run films being bumped still in the first two weeks of the run? That makes a big difference. And yes, it is very likely the big chains negotiate exceptions for regularly scheduled classics.