Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Star Wars Prequels Media Movies

Star Wars Theater Rules 105

Posted by CmdrTaco from the you-play-by-the-rules dept.
Alex Bischoff writes "This article gives a good bulleted summary of all the rules theatres have to follow in order to show Star Wars Episode 1. My personal favorite: "Theaters can begin playing the two-hour, 11-minute film at 12:01 a.m. on May 19."" Thats 12:01 GMT, right?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Star Wars Theater Rules More

Star Wars Theater Rules

Comments Filter:

  • Deconstruction of restrictions... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Interlocking is a method for sharing one print across two screens. The reason this is prohibited is that it damages the print, and it also makes each individual screening not as good.
    I don't understand why everyone is complaining about this. The fact is that a lot of theatres provide very poor quality and a poor experience. They have incompetent people running the projector, and they get the prints messed up, the audio messed up, etc. This may not seem like a bad thing, but this often can result in the colors being washed out, etc.
    All Lucas is doing here is trying to make sure that theatres that want to show this movie actually put some effort into giving a good experience.
    The main people complaining have been the theatre owners, who don't like the idea of having to go to any extra effort than they are used to.
  • I thought that it was moved from the 21st to the 19th, to tell you the truth.

    Use www.starwars.com [starwars.com], Luuke!

  • OK, I've been anticipating the new crop of Star Wars movies just as much as anybody (Empire Strikes Back is one of my favorite movies, etc., etc.), but I'm beginning to lose my faith in Lucas and the beast that he's creating.

    Take a look at that Ron Howard quote at the top of the linked page, and you'll see what I mean.

    "the most humorous Star Wars film yet"

    That just sounds like it has so many possibilities...most of which involve a lot of smiling, aww'ing, and general un-Star Wars-manlike behavior. Add to that the adorable child actor (aww, isn't he cute?) and you have a sickening combination raring to go.

    Let's review the Star Wars humor track record with one of the most notable examples: Ewoks. Sure, some people liked the Ewoks, but I think that it's safe to say that most of the people didn't. The Ewok ending was cut out of the special edition of Jedi, and the Ewok movie (the made for TV one) was a dismal failure.

    Combine this with all of this strict rules -n- regulations that ensure that Lucas will turn a profit no matter what (think Godzilla and it's very strict rules), and I think that we have several signs of a bad movie.

    Hopefully not.

  • I think you are missing the point. Almost every single rule was created to benefit the movie goer. Lucas expects large lines, overcrowding, etc... so he wants to make sure that everyone who sees his movie is given the best experience.

    Lucas is an artist, what do you expect?

    --
  • Well, you'd probably be the only person not watching the movie, but a one-person boycott is better than no boycott isn't it?
  • Posted by Othello:

    Lucas Arrogant? Please... Lucas is just doing what any excellent (and I do mean excellent) movie producer dreams of... Creating an environment in which the greatest saga of all time can be enjoyed to the fullest. By setting these regulations Lucas can ensure that what the audience experiences is how it was meant to be experienced. It is the ultimate dream of millions upon millions of dedicated followers, and has been for 22 years. Without his "arrogant" regulations the movie could, and would not be experienced as it was concieved and birthed. If you cannot handle this don't go and see the greatest motion picture ever to grace the planet. If you can I welcome you to join us (fellow star wars enthusiasts) in line the night before (may 18th) and cherish modern mythology at its best.
  • Posted by The Mongolian Barbecue:

    He is still being very arrogant. It doesn't matter that most people are so addicted to that franchise that they don't care.

    Oh well. Guess I'll go play X-Wing v. Tie Fighter for a bit. Then I'll go read star wars comics in the coffeehouse. Maybe later I'll install my wookie scented toilet paper in the bathroom.
  • Posted by The Mongolian Barbecue:

    He may make great films, but talk about arrogance.

    Anyone remember the digitally remastered "The Original, One Last Time"(SM) series? The one they released 2 months before adding the exciting 2 minutes of additional footage and selling the new copy to everyone all over again?

  • Somewhat off topic, but at the end of the article it mentions Voltron as the leading syndicated cartoon.

    Congradualtions to Voltron the Third dimention...

    I had no idea they were doing another Voltron. Does anyone know anything about it? My favorite is was always Vehicle Voltron.
    ^~~^~^^~~^~^~^~^^~^^~^~^~~^^^~^^~~^~~~^~ ~^~
  • Lucas, schmucas. Star Wars is limp anyway. Jeez.

    If you want to do us a favor, eliminate all trailers and advertising. Have free popcorn. Or maybe little Jedi pencil sharpeners.

    Take a leap, dude.

  • LOL! :)

    Just kidding - S/W isn't that bad.

  • s/Arthur/Alfred/;
    --
    Man is most nearly himself when he achieves the seriousness of a child at play.
  • NO damn stupid robot THX intro animation.
    I am so sick of that thing over the years.
    Anything else!

    Taken to chanting *not the robot.... not the robot ... not the robot...* at the beginnings of previews.
  • ...and how much will a ticket cost?

    I expect ticket prices in Seattle to move toward New York and LA prices. Cinplexx Odeon recently increased from $7 to $7.50 and Pacific Place started at $8. I guess Cinerama will be $12.

    My question is: who are all these rich fuckers in Seattle and where did they get their money? If I see one more luxury SUV I will barf. Wait, Microsoft is near Seattle (cue scene of disgruntled me loading shotgun). If I see another Microsoft idiot thinking they are God's gift at the Catwalk...Was this trip really neccessary?

  • I thought that it was moved from the 21st to the 19th, to tell you the truth.

    You are correct sir!
  • ... except every screen it's shown on on opening night it has to be shown on for the next 8 weeks. This is specifically to prevent the big chains from taking all customers away from the little guys. ALSO, this prevents you from getting stuck seeing it on their screens the size of TVs. I doubt you'll see more then 3-4 screens per theater.

    --Dan

  • Interlocking, which allows theaters to use one print to present a film on two screens, is prohibited; What is interlocking? Why would he want only 1 film shown per 1 reel? Are there quality issues he doesn't want to mar his masterpiece? From what I understand, this means you daisy chain the film from one projector to a another, so you use one copy of the film to show it on multiple screens at nearly the same time. (offset by a few minutes) The projection rooms at the big theaters have all kinds of complicated feeds to send the film around the projection room to do this.
  • It may be Lucas's film, but there are limits to what people will take.

    It might be a case that everyone goes to see TMP and leave thinking well that wasn't worth all the hype (or even "that was pretty useless".
    Then decide to not bother going to see 2 and 3 when they come out.

    Also after TMP leaves the cinema's, depending on how badly stung the theatres are they may decide not to bother taking 2 or 3.
    A lot of cinema's make extra money off advance ticket sales and they won't like loosing out on that.

    Rob
  • You really do have to wonder what Lucas and Fox are up to. To release a movie with all of those rules suggests that they don't have a lot of faith in it. For instance to state that its minimum run will be 8 or 12 weeks. Unless I am mistaken Theaters have to rent the reels for that time period so no matter what Fox/Lucas get their money. Plus of course whatever percentage of profits they have dole over. The sucess of Star Wars originally was, from what I understand, pretty spontainious and that was part of what made it all quite special. This time they are trying to orchastrate it and it is beginning to feel wrong. Rob (yes even at 22 I can't spell :) )
  • The film must run in the largest auditorium in the complex and cannot move to a smaller room for the minimum length of the run without permission from Fox;

    Is this to ensure that Star Wars always gets the spotlight? Arrogance, or is he trying to ensure that the audience always enjoys the best screens the theatre may have? It seems like he's abusing his power just a bit in order for the viewers to have a good show...

    Historical Perspective: George Lucas lives and works in Marin County, where I grew up. Over 20 years ago, when Star Wars was first released, it played in Marin's Northgate Theater, which was part of the Northgate Mall in Terra Linda. This was, without question, the crappiest theater in the whole county, if not the whole SF Bay area. It seated maybe 300 people, and the screen was incredibly tiny and had a very strong curve to its surface. No matter where you sat, you were sure to get a distorted picture, and poor sound.

    And it was in this amazingly cheesy excuse for a theater that Star Wars stayed for the entirety of its run (six months?). I kept hoping they'd move it to the Cinema in Corte Madera, the best theater in Marin at that time, but noooo. I was quite jubilant when they finally gutted that place as part of the mall's remodeling. ("Empire" and "Jedi" did, however, premiere in the Cinema.)

    I'd like to think that George remembers this, and wants to make certain that nothing like it ever happens again. I'd like to think that...

    Schwab

  • Hmm... this'll be even better than I thought. I get back home from school on the 16th, hopefully one of my friends who works at the 24 theater complex (I'll bet they'll show it on 4 screens or more) can score a few of us some tickets sometime around then, and we'll all get there just before midnight :) Nice way to kick off summer vacation.
  • The film must run in the largest auditorium in the complex and cannot move to a smaller room for the minimum length of the run without permission from Fox;

    HA! That's the "I have to be bigger than everyone else" complex. Pretty funny.

    -- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?

  • Although I can understand the Lucas is very demanding in the movies he makes, his demands are completly ludicrous. Small movie theaters are having a hard enough time trying to compete with the huge movie theater corporations, Lucas is sure not helping them. His restrictions can only help him set records for first week attendance. They will have no affect on how many total people will see the movie. No passes for the first 8 weeks. Arrogance is abound. F**k Lucas, I'm boycotting.
    --Ivan, weenie NT4 user, Jon Katz hater: bite me!
  • The Coordinated Universal Time [nist.gov] (UTC) is preferred over the use of GMT. At least Lucas specified 12:01am instead of 12:00am, which is ambiguous [nist.gov].
    ~afniv
    "Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
  • ...for a film producer to run your theater business? I can agree maybe with Lucas' reasoning for the limitations, but theaters need to make money too. So why can't they "cash in"?

    So a theater has 30minutes of trailers in front of the film. People will either ask for their money back or go to another theater. The theater needs to make money after all, so the theater will do what the market will bear. This is a free market for gosh sakes.

    Let's not get into the Microsoft way of doing things, just because you can.
    ~afniv
    "Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
  • Or it could be the last minute, which make it ambiguous. So if you see 12am today, does that mean 12am this morning, or is it 12am tonight?

    In other words, you could possibly watch the Star Wars movie 24 hours later than you thought.

    See the FAQ [nist.gov] I listed before. I personally stick with the 24-hour clock. Then it's brainless.
    ~afniv
    "Man könnte froh sein, wenn die Luft so rein wäre wie das Bier"
  • 2001 was NOT filmed using the special Cinerama process.

    One of the few non-schlock films I know of that was FILMED using the process is the western epic 'How The West Was Won'. The Cinerama process actually involved using special cameras that (I believe) ran the light path down onto three matched reels of film. True Cinerama flicks are projected onto 3 matched screens, and it looks seamless.

    2001 was shot on 70mm. I have no doubt that it looks great in a Cinerama theater, simply because that's one of the few places that has true widescreen capability with the correct aspect ratios. Today's multiplexes that use pimply 16 yr olds as combination 'projectionists' and popcorn slingers (not to mention ratty screens and improperly lit projectors) don't have a clue what to do with a good 70mm print, let alone a Cinerama flick.

  • Since someone here already brought up Cinerama, I thought I'd post a link to a story that's local to me about some of the films, the process, etc.

    The story [cybertheater.com] is interesting, and goes into some detail about how the process works, and films done in the process.

    The guy the article talks about lives in a town close to where I live, and there are pictures of a local theater that uses his equipment to show Cinerama flicks a couple of weekends a month. Just a little something for the movie buffs out there...

  • Paul was the only M$oftie in the early days who even knew halfway what he was doing. M$ only started getting a terminal case of rectal cranial inversion after he left. He had to go on medical leave for Hodgkin's disease, which has been in remission since a year or two after he left M$, I believe.

    He might benefit a lot from M$'s stock valuations, but at least he doesn't work there anymore. Also, while not all his ideas since have been winners, at least he tries to ACTUALLY INNOVATE.

    Personally, I doubt that /. has an axe to grind against Paul... although, if they volunteers with chainsaws and ball peen hammers to help 'adjust attitudes' for Billy G. and Stevie Ballmer, I'm there.
  • I hope some theaters do take up Lucasfilm on doing a show at 12:01 AM on the 19th. Actually, I have planned to do just that, and take my kids, if a midnight show is available.

    I have great memories of going to see 'Empire Strikes Back' at 'first show' midnight showing that same way back in '80.
  • ...You are morons. (Read subject line to get full effect.)

    Anyways, can't you see that these rules have been made to help the consumer (aka the geeks who have been sitting in line for a month out in L.A. and everywhere else).

    Now we all know how long we have to ensure our spot in a theater and we know that with patience, we'll get in. Plus Lucas can make these demands because he does have the economic advantage in this situation.

    Supply = the movie theater owners playing the film who are trying to get the most out of this publicity stunt which will be the closest they get to a circus similar to the O.J. trial, Monica Blew-him-sky, and every other media madhouse this decade rolled into one.

    Demand = loads of geeks frothing at the mouth to see his movie.

    Lucas = removal of evil suppliers who try to shirk the hordes of demanding geeks by laying down rules.

    Imagine running a theater right now. There is a lot of money in this (Matrix set a new record for opening weekends at 27.2M right? What do you think the theater owners are doing right now? My guess is probably looking for their own little island in the polynesian area.) I truly imagine that this also sets up some theaters to run only Star Wars for 2-3 months (how fantastic!)

    So be happy that Lucas is using his Force (which is arguably the third type of Force in the galaxy: the elusive Ambiguous Side of the Force) to meet his standard for quality.

  • I don't know if these practices are standard, but it seems pretty arrogant to redefine a theatre's means of operation for the honor of showing a Lucasfilm movie. I hope someone organizes a protest, or at least an organized complaint to Lucas.

    -lx
  • Not only are they not allowing passes for customers....but they are also not allowing them for employees or managers. There was also talk at my friends theater that the only one who can see it for previews is the manager. And previews are used to check if the film is put together correctly! They won't even let a projectionist who is not a manager watch it without paying for it.......Not that it will be that enforcable...
  • The Mechanics of Interlocking

    One projector hold the movie on it's platters and feeds through it then feeds the film to another projector pointing usually in the same direction. The film must be threaded thru 2 large 'W's used to keep tension on it's way back to the original projector. This takes roughly 75-100 extra feet of film to bridge the distance and to fill the rollers of one 'W'.

    The bad part of using the Interlocking is that invariably part of the film in some projectors will end up getting abrasions on the floor if the tension changed suddenly or may get ripped out of a roller. Mostly all of the extra rollers (the usual amount x4-x5 or so ) cause more chances for scratches.

    Other potential problems are incorrect tension management and the ever popular 'Brain Wrap' (read catastrophic foobar) which happens far more often when using interlocks.

  • Since one of the restrictions prevents theatres from showing those insipid Coke/Sprite/US Marine Corps ads at the beginning of the film, I'm all for 'em.

    I wonder if the restrictions only apply in the US, since paid advertisements are shown before every movie here in Central Europe.

    Gergo
  • Boycott to your heart's content. I'll buy your ticket. And eat your popcorn :)
  • Yes, but the flip side of that is, if the market does not like these restrictions, the movie will fail because no one will be willing to show it. I don't think that will happen, do you?
  • Theaters will still put in all 8 minutes though :(

    *Note to self: Watch knee-jerk reactions*
  • Yeah, I came to see the trailers preceeding Star Wars, not the movie itself!

    EIGHT MINUTES of trailers? That's ludicrous.

    Come to think of it, so are most of the other regulations -- obviously contrived so LucasFilm makes even more money. The "minimum run" and "You must pay us within a week" ones especially hurt. The only good one is the 12:01 first showtime. I wonder how many theaters will actually have a special showing then.

    PLEASE tell me there's other reasons for these special restrictions. Otherwise I might start to think that the movie went way over budget and Lucas is worried that it won't necessarily be enough of a blockbuster to make a profit.

  • Rob you hit it directly on the head. When I hear LucasFilm now, I picture in my head "Big Spontaneous Popular Picture Company, Inc." and their marketing talking heads trying to figure out how to re-orchestrate something that happened naturally a long time ago.

    I admit that Lucas is / was very skilled and will even conscede that the first three were no flukes, but on the other hand... come on! It's only a movie, it's not life.

    The Lucas/Fox theatre rules remind me of that anal radio station head in "Good Morning, Vietnam." What were the final words his CO told him, "You're just mean. It's only radio." I think Lucas needs a good slap from Andy Sipewitz about now.
  • Humor has always played a part in the Star Wars saga, but it's always been situational, and based on the reality of the characters. Han's "what a marvelous smell you've discovered", the recurring "It's not my fault" in Jedi, and the constant interplay between C3PO and R2D2 leap to mind; I'm sure I could come up with other examples if I really thought about it.

    In just about every situation, there's likely to be a person who's making wise-ass remarks, either to blow off steam, relieve the stress, or just out of their own nervousness. I've played this part myself for most of my life. If this is the sort of humor Howard is referring to, it just adds another level a realism to the movie. If, on the other hand, he's referring to slapstick, contrived or forced humor that's not true to the characters or distracts from the story, then I would agree that Lucas may have made a serious mistake.

    - Bob
  • If you really want to get a jump on this, convince your local theater to set their clocks by Fiji time. GMT+12 hours....
  • "F**k Lucas, I'm boycotting. "

    Your loss... heehee heehee heeeeeeeeeee!!!!!

  • It's on the 19th.

    Not only that, but I recall reading somewhere else (not on this page though, so it may be misinformation) that theater-rentings were to be explicitly forbidden.
    --
    - Sean
  • There are still Cinerama theatres around? What good is it if SW:TPM isn't filmed in Cinerama?

    I saw "2001: A Space Odyssey" in a Cinerama theatre. Awsome. But I think that was the last movie filmed using the technology.
  • It's fairly common in Europe for movies to
    have ads before them --- what we have here
    pales in comparison to the endless cigarette
    ads in a German theatre.
  • Or Tonga or one of those GMT +13 island in the south Pacific

  • DOH (Score:1)

    by JosefK ( 21477 )
    Very likely. But if there weren't a limit, I guarantee you there'd be a lot more than that. Probably something like 5 trailers, two commercials, then the 5-minute long bit with the dancing popcorn box who gets tied up in the film reel and then tells everyone to shut up.
  • The clause says *no more than* eight minutes. In other words, theaters can't take advantage of the hardcore fans to load in tons of trailers.
  • I was aware of the cliche'd status of the phrase while writing the post, but I was in a hurry and wasn't overly concerned with style. I'll save that for the writing that pays my salary.

    And at least I didn't write "This is A Good Thing(tm)(c)(r)" etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum and ad nauseum. But even a priori arguments are better than ad hominems, and a posteriori is even better than that.

    Cheese, the things people choose to complain about these days. As though people who don't qualify as "nerds" can't abuse the English language either...

    baa

    baaa

    Oh, bah humbug.
  • Do you get the ones for the US Marine Corps? Wouldn't that be ironic! : )
  • Since one of the restrictions prevents theatres from showing those insipid Coke/Sprite/US Marine Corps ads at the beginning of the film, I'm all for 'em. Do you REALLY think that the theatres are going to lose money by complying with these rules? What's wrong with LucasFilm making more money? If you don't want them to make more money, don't go see the movie.

    Lucas payed for the movie out of his pocket. That doesn't sound like behaviour I'd normally associate with a person who's concerned about nothing but profit, but I could certainly be wrong.
  • I especially like the note that if there is competition in the area, they have to show it on at least three screens. That should help alleviate the ticket crush in some areas.

    Accually though the wording sounds odd, I believe this means that 3 seperate theators must carry it, before any one is allowed to. This is to help the little guy. I remember on the re-release of the the first 3 the major theator in my town didn't even get it at all, because they where destroying competition, and whoever makes these decisions decided to give the other guys a chance.
  • (wow I should start previewing before I post :)

    I especially like the note that if there is competition in the area, they have to show it on at least three screens. That should help alleviate the ticket crush in some areas.

    Accually although the wording sounds odd, I believe this means that 3 seperate theaters must carry it per area. This is to help the little guy. I remember on the re-release of the first 3, the major theator in my town didn't even get it at all. This was due to the fact that they were destroying competition, and whoever makes these decisions decided to give the other guys a chance.
  • Good one less person in line in front of me! See if you can spread this boycot far and wide, try to concentrate on the Chicagoland area if you could. Thanks.
  • Could you explain to me how this works? The options you suggest are either:
    (a) ask for your money back.
    I wait in line for 2 hours, get a seat, and sit and sit and sit. Movie starts (ooops, I mean trailers). 30 minutes later, the movie starts. Do I ask for my money back now? Or after the movie. I think after all that time waiting the psychology is that you will sit through 45 minutes of trailers. After the movie, who's going to give you your money back?
    (b) Go to another theater
    When would someone find out that the theater has 30 minutes (or more!) of trailers or ads (commercials--the newest features of movies)? Maybe after a few days, but the big rush (and big demand for 30 minutes of trailers) will be in the first few days?

    John
  • While I don't know exactly how things work in the US I have shown many commercial films for a student film society and been given tours of a number of commercial cinemas so I speak from a position of some knowledge.

    A movie is normally distributed as a number of approximately 2000 foot sections (approx 20 minutes). The start and end of these sections normally coincide with scene changes and thus they can vary in length.

    When a film arrives at a cinema the projectionist has to splice all these reels together into one continuous length of film (anything up to 5km long).

    All multiplex cinemas I have seen use a platter system for holding the film. A platter system is basically three large discs arranged on top of each other which hold anything up to four hours of film each. When a film is shown the end at the centre of one platter is lifted out, fed through the projector and then ends up on a different platter, filling it from the outside in.

    This means that once a film has been shown is is ready almost immediately to be shown again (all that needs to be done is the film needs to be re-laced through the projector).

    Interlocking refers to the practice of having a film play from the platter system for projector A, through projector A, across the projection box to projector B, through projector B and ending on on the platter system for projector B. This means only one print is needed to show the same film on screen A and screen B and they have almsot simultaneous start times.

    The big problem with this (other than the obvious one that if the film breaks it stops in both cinemas) is the fact that film tends to attract dirt and get scratched and if it is running for 20+ metres across a projection box there is far more chance of this happening.

    I would be extremely surprised if any commercial cinema of significant size still uses a reel to reel system (such as sklib describes above). Here each screen requires two separate projectors which are linked together such that opening the dowser on one automatically closes the dowser on the other. The other problem with showing such a film on two screens simultaneously is that once one reel has been shown it will have to be rewound before it can be shown on another.

    Kithran

  • No Ads!!!

    I've been pissed at the appearance of ads before movies for a long time now. I'm *paying* to see the movie, often paying a high price, and I have to watch an ad for the post office first??? I don't know when this started but it will be a welcome relief to see it disappear.

    I encourage anybody else with clout in the movie-making business to restrict ads before movies. Please! I'm paying to see your art, don't let the theatres spoil it with ads!

  • Lucas is in a very good position to make these sorts of demands. Star Wars Episode I is the most anticipated movie of all time, according to many sources, and theatres would be foolish to not show it if they can. If they don't show it, they'll loose money, and their competitors will be making millions. I especially like the note that if there is competition in the area, they have to show it on at least three screens. That should help alleviate the ticket crush in some areas.

    Now, as for a 12:01 AM showing... I may just camp out to see it, if it looks possible. It depends on how the ticket situation is looking around here, and whether I can get a day off work. :)
    --
    Matthew Walker
    My DNA is Y2K compliant
  • I think the way interlocking works is that the movie actually comes on sevral reels that are contiguous frame to frame, with each one circa 15 minutes in length. Thereby, every quarter of an hour, they can start a new showing. If this is accurate, then these 'complicated feeds' are nothing more than high-school students taking a box from one projector and plugging it into the next one.
  • Any cinema that doesn't convert ALL their screens
    to show Star Wars will be burned to the ground! Can you imagine how many PISSED people will be standing around trying to cram into TWO or THREE
    screens for this movie? Sure, it's standard for big films, but this movie, is literally, LARGER THAN LIFE. You know it, I know it, and the Cinemas
    know it. Someone slug Lucas over the head with a cluebat.

    I can see why he is doing it, so Cinemas dont lock out the competetion. BIG NEWS: NOTHING IS COMING OUT EXCEPT A SAPPY LOVE MOVIE FOR _3 WEEKS_ AFTER PHANTOM MENACE IS RELEASED. Hello?

    Darrrr!
  • Personally, I'm planning to wait a week to see it. (And I'm not going to read anything here that week. Just to be safe.)

    Same here. Nothing ruins a movie more for me than having a theater full of rowdy die-hards making noise and spilling their drink on me every time something cool happens. In my opinion the ultimate movie experience is where I forget about the theater and my surroundings and get lost in the movie. That just won't happen with the typical crowds I expect will be seeing the movie the first few days and probably beyond. I'm hoping it will die down enough that I'll be able to catch an early matinee on my lunch break the middle of the following week and see the movie with no distractions, in all its glory.

  • Theatres only get 10% or so of the first weekend of proceed from film sales last I heard. Each successive week they get a larger and larger % of proceeds.

    This was the reasoning on why an old 2000 seat theatre in town ( from the old style movie houses ) can't show new movies.
  • Rules governing the conditions under which a movie can be shown are not something that George Lucas has come up with. This has been done before. I suppose one of the most famous examples would be the rule that Alfred Hitchcock imposed on showings of Psycho; namely, that once the movie had begin, nobody else would be allowed into the theater. Show up a minute late? Tough luck. You either saw it from the beginning, or you didn't see it at all. Paramount even went so far as to station Pinkerton guards outside of theaters to make sure that the rule was enforced.

    Hitchcock and Lucas, having achieved a fair amount of notoriety, come up with rules like these simply because they can. What are theater owners going to say? "No?"
  • Its probably the cost not the effort. The effort is done by grunts. The theater owners have to lease more spools and pay Lucas more. I want the best picture possible so I like this clause anyway.
  • Who ever told you that life is fair?
  • I, like many of you, go to movies like this one to be taken to a new world for a few hours. The moment the film stops because it has snapped of has snapped before but was badly spliced OR the sound kicks in and out, I am p*ssed. With films like this, I am there (as much as one can be) in that world and when I look over at a friend I may be with or even a stranger, I want to see them in that place with me. Not pulled away with shock when the theater figures that "We got their money, so what the flic is messed up." I avoid theater that does not fell the way I do about the Movie Experience. I strongly think that Lucas wants the viewers to see his work in the best possible conditions. Most artist feel this way and since he is where he is, he can make these kinds of demands. (I am glad that they are one I agree with. Since he has power to make demands) I will only see a film such as this in a Big movie house. Being in L.A. I have that option (many actully) to do that. If I did not, if able, I would go where I could. I am glad he is putting his foot down. Some things are just that Grand. In the Ten Commandments (the second C.B. Dmills ver.)the parting of the Red Sea can give one goosebumps, belivers of the faith or not. And it only works if you see it on a big screen in the kind of movie house that can properly show it. (or you seen it on the big screen but now watch it on TV or Video). Face it people, we all have been to see a movie of a simular scale and left feeling you we short changed beause the sound went out or the print was not as advertised etc. If this ensures that I will have the best possible trip, so be it.
  • Theoretically, the first people in North America to see The Phantom Menace are in Newfoundland,Canada (GMT-3:30), sneak previews excepted...

    So... how much is airfare to St-John's,NF ? ;-)
  • Good god. This is why I ain't going back to work for the theater when I get home for the summer.

    Navaash

  • Have we all become so horribly cynical that we can't believe even for a SECOND that maybe, just maybe, Lucas is doing this for us, his fans? I for one am ECSTATIC about all the restrictions that have been placed on it.
    I went to see The Matrix this past weekend (great flick, by the way), and some moron left the lights on the screen (you know, the ones that actually light up the curtains when they are closed), and I had to watch the SW trailer with these bright lights on the screen (it was about like watching a dark movie at noon in a living room with lots of glass doors). I almost cried. It was so frustrating. Of course I'd seen the trailer on our pathetic excuse for a 15 inch monitor, but this was the first time I had a chance to see it in theatres, and it was TOTALLY spoiled by some idiot being asleep at the projector. Luckily they turned the lights off before The Matrix started.

    I wouldn't want something like this to happen to anyone who saw ANY movie, but for one so intensely reliant on special fx, it would be unthinkable.
    As for the Interlocking, wouldn't that just be another way for Cinemas to surreptitiously run it on 8 screens for the first 2 weeks and then drop down to 4? I think Lucas is just trying to make this the best all-around viewing experience for everyone who goes to see it.
    Keeping it in the theatres for so long allows everyone to see it too. Did you know that there are toy stores who purposefully bend the boxes on some of the action figures so that the collectors will pass them up and children will be able to buy them to play with? Well, what about kids who want to see the movie? Obviously you don't want to take your 8 year old to wait in a 4 hour line, but does that mean that he should see it in the little theater that doesn't have a good sound system yet, because after 4 weeks the movie got downgraded? How's that for "Is It Fair?"
    And for those of you attacking George Lucas as a person, you obviously know nothing at all about him or his lifestyle.
    One post actually says,
    "What an annoying, greedy, obnoxious fellow."
    Yep, that's him alright. So greedy and obnoxious that he has 2 adopted children. Betcha didn't know that. Of course, I'm sure he only adopted them so that he could get more money from the state. I mean, because that's what he's all about. He didn't create these movies because he believes in them, he did it for the money. These restrictions are so that he can make more money, because he won't get enough anyway. They have nothing to do with him just wanting to protect his vision, make his dream a reality for EVERYONE who wants to see it.
    It's a shame that a movie like this, intended to promote intelligence, understanding, and maybe even a little fun, can be ruined by a bunch of cynics making faulty assumptions.
    I will be at my local theater on May 19 to see a great movie. I'm sure I will not be alone.
    May The Force Be With You...
    Bug

  • After almost 40 straight hours of working to recover/rebuild a *blech* a WinNT 3.51 server (why? I'm not sure), I may be slightly out of it.

    However, I thought they'd changed the release date back several days to the 15th? Have they re-changed their minds again? I was planning on getting some friends together, and renting out a theatre for a private showing - for my best friend who's getting married that Saturday (22nd). Does this mean the plans are out?

    *sighs* if all those rules apply, there's no way I'll be able to afford it - the largest auditorium? y'know how much those cost to get, even for one movie's worth?

    stupid....

    -Nato.
  • Sorry, but I just HAVE to say that I submitted this piece two weeks ago. What, am I blacklisted or something?

    2nd, this type of theatre control is not a first. When A. Hitchcock's Psycho first played back in the 60's, they made it a rule that once the film started, no later comers would be permitted access to the theatre as Arthur felt that it would distract the viewers, and he didn't want them to miss a thing.


    PDG--"I don't like the Prozac, the Prozac likes me"
  • What? Aren't you supposed to hope for an 11:53 PM on the 18th showing so the movie start promptly at 12:01? :-)

    Personally, I'm planning to wait a week to see it. (And I'm not going to read anything here that week. Just to be safe.)
  • Lucas sucks! Boycott it! Refuse to see it during opening weekend! Tell your friends and family, and make sure they don't go! Friends don't let friends see Star Wars!

    With any luck, a boycott would increase my chances of getting a ticket from its current state of being approximately equal to the chances of a baseball quantum-mechanically tunneling through my bedroom wall to being approximately equal to the chances of the sun exploding tomorrow. There's hope yet!
  • Interlocking, which allows theaters to use one print to present a film on two screens, is prohibited;

    What is interlocking? Why would he want only 1 film shown per 1 reel? Are there quality issues he doesn't want to mar his masterpiece?

    I'm sure his intentions are not so noble. The theater has to rent (or buy, I'm not sure) each print, so he's making sure he gets all possible money.

    Theaters are not to honor passes for the first eight weeks;

    It sounds like he doesn't want people buying passes to circumnavigate standing in line and getting a Star Wars ticket, probably to guarantee that everyone who bought a Star Wars ticket will be able to see the show... Similar to his reasoning on not allowing pre-sales and to prevent scalping?

    I believe that he was talking about using free passes for access to the film. You know, you're watching a movie and all of a sudden the projector breaks, so the theater gives you a free pass? Well, Lucas says you can't use it to watch his movie.

    It's restrictions like these that have jacked up movie prices so much. A friend of mine, a film fanatic, told me that basically the ticket goes to cover the cost that the theater pays the studio for rental of the movie. They don't make much on ticket sales. The theater makes most of its money on the popcorn and soda (who wouldn't, charging $4 for a coke that costs $0.89 at any 7-11?). By placing these childish restrictions on the theaters, he's giving them impetus to raise prices once again. $8.50 in my home town right now. Ridiculous. If a guy takes his wife and 2 kids, that's $34 in ticket sales. For that much money, get the video (or better, dvd).

    I swear, I'll wait for the video. Lucas always seemed to have a reputation for arrogance, but now he just seems like a whiny baby. Whether you see it opening day or two weeks later, is it going to matter? I guess for the hardcore StarWars fans. Wouldn't it be great if the world staged a huge protest and made Georgey-boy cry? I could see it now: "George Lucas sobbed uncontrollably at the premiere of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace when nobody showed up." God, that would be great. What an annoying, greedy, obnoxious fellow.


    -Begin Evan's Dumb Signature.....

  • In regards to Hitchcock's rules about banning latecomers, I have to agree. I wish lucas had this rule for TPM and I wish is was theater law for every other movie.

    I am so sick of getting settled in, sitting at just the right height, everything comfortable, the picture starting and I am either blinded by the light of some jerk opening the door to the theater, or some a-wipe who decides that coming 5 mins late into the movie and then wanting a seat in the middle of the theater and causing everyone to stand up as he moves across. Of course the worse has to be the family unit that comes in late dragging their brats up and down the aisles while whispering and trying to find a seat.

    Personally I don't see the point in watching a movie when you have missed even a min of the intro, having worked in the movie industry, I know how important the scene of a movie is to dictate the audiences opinion of it. Of course what ticks me off even more is people who jump up out of their seats and start leaving the theater even before the first credit has run, whats up with that ? Would it really kill you to sit through the credits and not disturb other people and pay respect to all the names of people who put hard work and creativity into the film ? Sheesh...

    My little rant....
  • ... listen up. Let's look at these requirements:

    The film must run in the largest auditorium in the complex and cannot move to a smaller room for the minimum length of the run without permission from Fox;

    This is good for the viewer - you get to see the film in the best environment the theater can provide.

    Minimum runs are eight or 12 weeks--depending on the market--for theaters that open the film on its May 19 release date. A four-week run is available for theaters that start playing the film five weekends later, on June 18.

    If an exhibitor commits to playing the film on two or three screens in a multiplex, the film must stay on those screens for the minimum run as well;

    The first may sound draconian, but it would be interesting to see what minimum runs for other large films are. Combined with the second, however, these policies prevent large multiplexes from eliminating their smaller competition in the first two weeks of the run by showing the film on all their screens for the first week or so.

    In competitive zones--where more than one exhibitor has theaters--the film must play on at least three screens.

    This is a bit ambiguous, but it makes the most sense if "at least three screens" means that at least three exhibitors get the film. Large theater chains often lock up exclusive exhibition contracts on big films, leaving smaller chains and independents with last month's releases. This clause provides for the money to be spread around and ensure that it doesn't all end up in, say, Edwards' Theaters' pockets.

    Interlocking, which allows theaters to use one print to present a film on two screens, is prohibited;

    I'd be surprised if this weren't a standard clause in most exhibitor contracts, but if it's not, it is intended here to (a) maximize rentals and (b) prevent screwups that could occur when reels get mixed up in transit from screen to screen. While (a) is open to accusations of money-grubbing, (b) is commendable from the consumer's perspective.

    Exhibitors may not deduct additional security expenses from the film rental fees they charge Fox;

    Not necessarily reprehensible (though I think this is worded incorrectly). Why should Fox or Lucasfilm pay for extra theater security?

    Theaters are not to honor passes for the first eight weeks;

    Eight weeks may be a little long, but this is fairly standard for most big films.

    Payment is to be made within seven days (30-60 days is typical) for the first several weeks;

    This is the most obvious example of money-grubbing. It could be argued, however, that as it's Fox's and Lucas' split of the money, they deserve to make the interest on it.

    Paid on-screen advertising is prohibited for the first two weeks;

    This is a good thing for the viewer.

    No more than eight minutes of trailers are to run before the film. (Fox has attached 2-1/2 minutes of trailers to the beginning of the picture.);

    This is another good thing.

    Theaters can begin playing the two-hour, 11-minute film at 12:01 a.m. on May 19.

    This is also a good thing, for both viewers and theater-owners: more showings!

    Most of the rules here that don't seem to be standard exhibitor clauses are primarily geared towards optimising the viewer experience and ensuring that as many theaters as possible can get the film. If you live in or near a big city, then you may know the experience of checking your paper to see where the latest big picture is playing and finding out that it's only playing at theaters belonging to one chain, the nearest of which may be a nice 30 minute drive away.

    Lucas has frequently stated that he doesn't expect this film to do that well, though it could be argued that he's trying to convince himself of that just in case it doesn't, though in his heart he knows it'll be huge. I think he also knows that there's a strong possibility of a big cultural backlash against Star Wars as a result of too much hype (which is currently being created primarily by the fan base, however).

  • Deconstruction of restrictions... (Score:3)

    by Anonymous Shepherd ( 17338 ) on Wednesday April 14, 1999 @11:39AM (#1934166) Homepage
    The film must run in the largest auditorium in the complex and cannot move to a smaller room for the minimum length of the run without permission from Fox;

    Is this to ensure that Star Wars always gets the spotlight? Arrogance, or is he trying to ensure that the audience always enjoys the best screens the theatre may have? It seems like he's abusing his power just a bit in order for the viewers to have a good show...

    Minimum runs are eight or 12 weeks--depending on the market--for theaters that open the film on its May 19 release date. A four-week run is available for theaters that start playing the film five weekends later, on June 18;

    It seems he doesn't want a theatre to show Episode I for only 3 weeks to cash in on opening weekend fever, and to have it available for the length he expects it to run well; 8 weeks in smaller regions, 12 weeks in larger ones. Again, using his power to guarantee *everyone* can see and enjoy it? Very arrogant; perhaps its justified. Any alternative interpretations?

    If an exhibitor commits to playing the film on two or three screens in a multiplex, the film must stay on those screens for the minimum run as well;

    Is Lucas trying to prevent theatres from planning for a huge opening weekend and then scaling back the showing in the following weeks? I don't know if that's what he intends, or if it's good that he doesn't want it to happen.

    In competitive zones--where more than one exhibitor has theaters--the film must play on at least three screens.

    In a region big enough to support several theatres, is Lucas rationalizing that there is also a big enough population to force the showing on three screens? Is it 3 per chain, or 3 total in the area?

    Interlocking, which allows theaters to use one print to present a film on two screens, is prohibited;

    What is interlocking? Why would he want only 1 film shown per 1 reel? Are there quality issues he doesn't want to mar his masterpiece?

    Exhibitors may not deduct additional security expenses from the film rental fees they charge Fox;

    I guess he doesn't want theatres to justify paying less by arguing they had to provide more security or something... Perhaps this is a big problem? I have no clue.

    Theaters are not to honor passes for the first eight weeks;

    It sounds like he doesn't want people buying passes to circumnavigate standing in line and getting a Star Wars ticket, probably to guarantee that everyone who bought a Star Wars ticket will be able to see the show... Similar to his reasoning on not allowing pre-sales and to prevent scalping?

    Payment is to be made within seven days (30-60 days is typical) for the first several weeks;

    I wonder why one week refresh updates is so critical to Lucas; good demographic data? To prevent skimming of profits?

    Paid on-screen advertising is prohibited for the first two weeks;

    Evidently he doesn't want people to cash in and take advantage of the expected crowds for the movies, in the first two weeks. I think I like and agree with this at least.

    No more than eight minutes of trailers are to run before the film. (Fox has attached 2-1/2 minutes of trailers to the beginning of the picture.);

    Again, I guess he wants to limit the time wasted, so viewers can enjoy the picture. This would also limit trailers to only those with the biggest budgets, but I guess he doesn't want 15 minutes of trailers in front of his movies, cashing in on it's expected popularity. I guess.

    Theaters can begin playing the two-hour, 11-minute film at 12:01 a.m. on May 19

    I guess he doesn't want to cheat any of his audience by allowing theatres to show the film at earlier, more expensive, pre-release screenings or something. I'm sure quite a bit of people would pay higher to be the first, and to see it the day before everyone else!

    AS

Slashdot Top Deals

According to the latest official figures, 43% of all statistics are totally worthless.

Close