There’s a good-sized “Blade Runner” ad in today’s Times. It’s good to see WB putting their money behind it. It’s also good to see ANY ad for an exclusive engagement at the Ziegfeld – reminds me of the good old days.
Thanks, Robert. I’ve always wanted to see that Cinerama documentary. There’s a rumor that it’s going to be included as an extra on the upcoming Warner DVD of “How the West Was Won”. It’ll feature a new Technicolor print presented in Smilebox (simulated Cinerama) format. Release is scheduled for sometime in 2008. I’ll most likely go to the Museum, though – who wants to wait till 2008?
Warren, I’m sure you’re right about the holiday. I keep forgetting it’s Columbus Day because I’m still at work. I’ll check for an ad in tomorrow’s paper.
Vito: as always, you are the voice of wisdom and experience.
I think people who’d complain about the volume being too loud should just stay out of the Ziegfeld. A place like that was built to play stuff loud. I’m reminded of last year’s showing of “Doctor Zhivago”: a thrillingly loud, powerful first half, then, after someone in the audience complained, a pleasant volume like Movieguy described, but one which almost drained all the life out of the movie. “Zhivago” should never be played at a lower volume than the last time you played it at home on DVD, not at the Ziegfeld.
There’s a nice big ad for “Blade Runner” at the Ziegfeld in today’s New York Times, the first time I’ve seen an ad in there for any of the Classics showings. I hope that translates into lots of tickets sold tonight.
Tickets are $11 for adults, $7.50 for seniors and children. “Blade Runner” shows are at 1 PM, 4 PM, 7 PM and 10 PM Friday thru Sunday, and 2 PM, 5:30 PM and 8:30 PM Monday thru Thursday.
Ed: the ex-Cinerama Clairidge Theater in Montclair NJ is reportedly still intact. The multiplex that goes by that name now is enclosed in a metal box which fits inside the shell of the original theater. Boy, if I only had a couple of million dollars.
Ed: I saw “The Wall” there also, probably projected by Robert. I wasn’t crazy about the movie that night, but it grew on me over the years and now I think it’s excellent. And I can still recall how spectacularly it sounded at the Ziegfeld, especially right after “Tear Down the Wall!”
August 24, 1982
PROJECTIONIST TROUBLED BY NEW TECHNONLGY
By JANET MASLIN
Those who attend movies frequently are bound to find themselves thinking the occasional rude thought about projectionists. Is the projectionist hard of hearing? Doesn’t he know that the sound is inaudible, or that it’s ear-splitting? Can’t he see that the film is out of focus, or that the actors' heads are being lopped off above the Adam’s apple? Doesn’t he know the audience is hooting, whistling and stomping for him to fix the frame?
If there’s any group unhappier over these problems than the ticketbuying public, it’s the projectionists themselves. Without denying that the blame for such trespasses can sometimes be laid to individual operators, projectionists contend that increasing automation has made their work more problematic and less satisfying.
When a single projectionist is in charge of several screens, which is more and more often the case, he isn’t always on hand to oversee difficulties. And a lot can go wrong.
‘'Automation can be nice if it’s done properly,’‘ said George Gordon, a representative of the Moving Picture Machine Operators Union, Local 306 of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees. ’‘But when it’s done sloppily, the showmanship is gone and the public is being cheated.’'
Local 306 is presently negotiating with the United Artists theater chain over a variety of automation-related issues, among them ‘'sharing’‘ – the use of one projectionist to run screens in more than one building simultaneously. The present contract expires next Tuesday.
A spokesman for United Artists Theaters confirmed that talks were under way but did not wish to discuss the details. Mr. Gordon had agreed to conduct a guided tour of various midtown theaters and to explain their projection systems and the problems inherent therein. The theaters ranged all the way from tiny, shoebox-shaped multiple theaters like the four in the basement of the Criterion Center to the lavish roomy facilities at the Ziegfeld.
The Criterion now operates almost as two separate theaters. While one projectionist runs the four small screens in the basement, another is in charge of the two larger theaters upstairs.
It was in one of these larger theaters that the first show of ‘'Blade Runner’‘ proceeded – or rather didn’t proceed – a few weeks ago. The show stopped several times and there were long delays with each breakdown. The 12:30 P.M. show was never concluded, and the second show was postponed until 5 o'clock that afternoon.
The two upstairs Criterion theaters, like most midtown multiple theaters, show film that is stored on platters instead of on the smaller, old-fashioned reels. The platter, which revolves horizontally instead of vertically and is almost five feet wide, allows the entire film to be contained on a single reel.
This development became possible when the xenon lamp was developed in the early 1960’s to replace the carbon-arc lamp. The carbon-arc lamps burned so quickly and grew so hot that they had to be changed every 20 minutes, but a xenon lamp can burn during an entire show.
When the necessity for changing lamps was eliminated there was no longer any reason to keep the film on small, 20-minute reels. So the one-reel platter evolved.
The platter system means the projectionist is ostensibly free to do something else, like run another film on another screen.
At the Criterion, the same projectionist is in charge of both upstairs theaters, which are several flights of stairs apart. A warning system in each projection booth indicates whether the film in the other booth is still running. But the warning system doesn’t indicate anything more -whether the film is in focus, whether the sound is right, whether there are problems in the audience.
Down in the basement, the projectionist is even busier, running four theaters out of two cramped projection rooms. The theaters are so close together that it’s possible, if a film is a big enough hit, to run it simultaneously on two different screens by stringing it through two different projectors and across the length of a projection booth, almost as if it were clothesline.
Charles Moss, head of the B.S. Moss Organization, which owns the Criterion, makes no great arguments for this arrangement. ‘'I knew those theaters weren’t going to be knockouts when we built them,’‘ he explained. ’‘But they give us a chance to show films in Midtown that the public wouldn’t otherwise be able to see. Nowadays, if a film takes in $10,000 or $15,000 in a midtown theater, that’s not enough to maintain it in a larger house, and so the film closes. We can keep something longer because our operating costs are low.’'
At the Criterion the ‘'Blade Runner’‘ fiasco occurred because this was the first 70-millimeter film to play on the theater’s upstairs platter, and the adjusting of the platter for the weight of the heavier-than-35-millimeter reel had been done incorrectly. The projectionist was elsewhere and didn’t spot the problem until minutes later.
Similarly, when a recent performance of ‘'The Sword and the Sorcerer’‘ at the Cinerama was interrupted by several minutes of trailers for other films the projectionist was away. A bit of sensing tape on the Cinerama’s platter automatically triggered the platter to stop and turned on the theater’s auxiliary projector, which was loaded with the trailers.
That this equipment works great until anything goes wrong was the unanimous opinion of the various projectionists visited. But, they agreed, if problems develop the show is lost. The platters can’t be repaired as quickly or easily as more old-fashioned equipment can, and if their speed isn’t perfectly adjusted the film may tear.
Nevertheless, automated projection is becoming more and more prevalent. ‘'A certain level of competence is required to run this equipment,’‘ Mr. Moss said, ’‘but it isn’t so demanding that 5, 6, 7 or 10 of them can’t be run simultaneously. That doesn’t have to mean a loss of quality. There’s always been a degree of featherbedding here, and what you’re seeing is the number of employees reaching a more realistic level.’'
At some point, the realistic level is liable to be exceeded. There are now theater complexes with eight screens operating out of a single projection booth ‘'that looks like a bowling alley,’‘ according to one projectionist who has seen the setup.
In places such as northern California and eastern Long Island, theaters use a ‘'sharing’‘ policy, which means one projectionist shuttles between screens that are not even in the same building and that may be miles apart. There are even ’‘usher-projectionists’‘ and ’‘manager-projectionists’‘ in some regions, although in New York Local 306 continues to resist such ideas.
‘'If you think you see bad projection and get irritated at us,’‘ said Robert Endres, who works at the Ziegfeld, ’‘just imagine what your usher can do.’'
The Ziegfeld’s performance of ‘'The Wall’‘ was ready to begin. On the screen, instead of the inexpensive ’‘kaleidescope’‘ image that has replaced curtains at many small, new theaters, the Ziegfeld’s two sets of curtains were ready to open.
With everything in perfect working order, Mr. Endres opened the dark outer curtain, then the transparent inner one, and showed a trailer. He closed the inner curtain again, dimmed the house lights, and turned up the sound to ‘'show level.’'
The equipment – three projectors, none with platters – was immaculate, and appeared to be in perfect working order. As ‘'The Wall’‘ began without a hitch, both Mr. Endres and Mr. Gordon looked pleased. The Dolby sound was delicately adjusted, and the image was big, bright and clean. The movie was terrible. But that wasn’t the projectionists’ problem.
Here is a 1963 ad for “How the West Was Won” in 3-strip Cinerama at the Route 59. Notice the date at the top. Most likely this big premiere never took place that night.
Did anyone go to last night’s show? I was interested to know how big the audience was, and whether or not they fixed the surrounds. I almost went back again myself, but decided not to at the last minute.
Thanks, Warren. That was a very fitting tribute to Mr. DeMille, who died earlier that year on January 21st. I sure would’ve loved to have seen “Spartacus” in there …
Foster Hirsch said Sam Goldwyn practically blackmailed Sidney into taking the role after Harry Belafonte turned it down, which may be one reason he’s never liked the film. But Al A. is right – he never let that show in his performance for a second.
As for Dorothy Dandridge, I couldn’t take my eyes off her whenever she was on screen. Knowing how unhappy her real life was and how tragically it ended made her performance that much more touching.
Vito and Roadshow talked about the “West Side Story” overture image. Thanks to Martin Hart’s Widescreen Museum, here is a shot of that image actually being created:
Linwood C. Dunn, photographic effects icon for decades, and his associate Cecil Love, photograph the colorful overture/title sequence to Robert Wise-Jerome Robbins' West Side Story in 1960. Dunn’s 65mm work was done with a Mitchell FC, fitted with appropriate lenses for Super Panavision/Todd-AO or Ultra Panavision. Love was Dunn’s optics expert. The film’s main credits, appearing at the end, were created by Saul Bass.
Photo courtesy of William Luca
There’s a good-sized “Blade Runner” ad in today’s Times. It’s good to see WB putting their money behind it. It’s also good to see ANY ad for an exclusive engagement at the Ziegfeld – reminds me of the good old days.
Thanks, Robert. I’ve always wanted to see that Cinerama documentary. There’s a rumor that it’s going to be included as an extra on the upcoming Warner DVD of “How the West Was Won”. It’ll feature a new Technicolor print presented in Smilebox (simulated Cinerama) format. Release is scheduled for sometime in 2008. I’ll most likely go to the Museum, though – who wants to wait till 2008?
Warren, I’m sure you’re right about the holiday. I keep forgetting it’s Columbus Day because I’m still at work. I’ll check for an ad in tomorrow’s paper.
Vito: as always, you are the voice of wisdom and experience.
There’s even an ad in today’s Times for “Blade Runner” – a weekday! That’s why the shows are doing so well, I’m sure. It pays to advertise.
I meant 150 ft., of course … sorry.
Wow – that screen was 15o ft. wide, and curved for Cinerama:
http://cinerama.topcities.com/france.htm
Thanks, Movieguy. Maybe I should try what you did when I go see it on Friday night.
I think people who’d complain about the volume being too loud should just stay out of the Ziegfeld. A place like that was built to play stuff loud. I’m reminded of last year’s showing of “Doctor Zhivago”: a thrillingly loud, powerful first half, then, after someone in the audience complained, a pleasant volume like Movieguy described, but one which almost drained all the life out of the movie. “Zhivago” should never be played at a lower volume than the last time you played it at home on DVD, not at the Ziegfeld.
70mm: perfectly round marks in upper right corner of the screen
35mm: oval marks
Is that right?
Scan of the Times ad:
View link
There’s a nice big ad for “Blade Runner” at the Ziegfeld in today’s New York Times, the first time I’ve seen an ad in there for any of the Classics showings. I hope that translates into lots of tickets sold tonight.
Chris: Did Kirk have anything to say, nice or otherwise, about Stanley Kubrick?
Thanks so much, Chris. It does sound like a night to remember and I’m really glad you shared your memories of it with us.
Tickets are $11 for adults, $7.50 for seniors and children. “Blade Runner” shows are at 1 PM, 4 PM, 7 PM and 10 PM Friday thru Sunday, and 2 PM, 5:30 PM and 8:30 PM Monday thru Thursday.
Ed: the ex-Cinerama Clairidge Theater in Montclair NJ is reportedly still intact. The multiplex that goes by that name now is enclosed in a metal box which fits inside the shell of the original theater. Boy, if I only had a couple of million dollars.
/theaters/6348/
Thanks to Clearview, $2.00 off all “Blade Runner” tickets with this coupon:
http://www.bladezone.com/ticket.jpg
You’re welcome, Roadshow. I hadn’t really decided to go to
“Blade Runner” but now, thanks to Mr. Endres' recommendation, I’ll definitely check it out.
Ed: I saw “The Wall” there also, probably projected by Robert. I wasn’t crazy about the movie that night, but it grew on me over the years and now I think it’s excellent. And I can still recall how spectacularly it sounded at the Ziegfeld, especially right after “Tear Down the Wall!”
Here is the text of the article:
August 24, 1982
PROJECTIONIST TROUBLED BY NEW TECHNONLGY
By JANET MASLIN
Those who attend movies frequently are bound to find themselves thinking the occasional rude thought about projectionists. Is the projectionist hard of hearing? Doesn’t he know that the sound is inaudible, or that it’s ear-splitting? Can’t he see that the film is out of focus, or that the actors' heads are being lopped off above the Adam’s apple? Doesn’t he know the audience is hooting, whistling and stomping for him to fix the frame?
If there’s any group unhappier over these problems than the ticketbuying public, it’s the projectionists themselves. Without denying that the blame for such trespasses can sometimes be laid to individual operators, projectionists contend that increasing automation has made their work more problematic and less satisfying.
When a single projectionist is in charge of several screens, which is more and more often the case, he isn’t always on hand to oversee difficulties. And a lot can go wrong.
‘'Automation can be nice if it’s done properly,’‘ said George Gordon, a representative of the Moving Picture Machine Operators Union, Local 306 of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees. ’‘But when it’s done sloppily, the showmanship is gone and the public is being cheated.’'
Local 306 is presently negotiating with the United Artists theater chain over a variety of automation-related issues, among them ‘'sharing’‘ – the use of one projectionist to run screens in more than one building simultaneously. The present contract expires next Tuesday.
A spokesman for United Artists Theaters confirmed that talks were under way but did not wish to discuss the details. Mr. Gordon had agreed to conduct a guided tour of various midtown theaters and to explain their projection systems and the problems inherent therein. The theaters ranged all the way from tiny, shoebox-shaped multiple theaters like the four in the basement of the Criterion Center to the lavish roomy facilities at the Ziegfeld.
The Criterion now operates almost as two separate theaters. While one projectionist runs the four small screens in the basement, another is in charge of the two larger theaters upstairs.
It was in one of these larger theaters that the first show of ‘'Blade Runner’‘ proceeded – or rather didn’t proceed – a few weeks ago. The show stopped several times and there were long delays with each breakdown. The 12:30 P.M. show was never concluded, and the second show was postponed until 5 o'clock that afternoon.
The two upstairs Criterion theaters, like most midtown multiple theaters, show film that is stored on platters instead of on the smaller, old-fashioned reels. The platter, which revolves horizontally instead of vertically and is almost five feet wide, allows the entire film to be contained on a single reel.
This development became possible when the xenon lamp was developed in the early 1960’s to replace the carbon-arc lamp. The carbon-arc lamps burned so quickly and grew so hot that they had to be changed every 20 minutes, but a xenon lamp can burn during an entire show.
When the necessity for changing lamps was eliminated there was no longer any reason to keep the film on small, 20-minute reels. So the one-reel platter evolved.
The platter system means the projectionist is ostensibly free to do something else, like run another film on another screen.
At the Criterion, the same projectionist is in charge of both upstairs theaters, which are several flights of stairs apart. A warning system in each projection booth indicates whether the film in the other booth is still running. But the warning system doesn’t indicate anything more -whether the film is in focus, whether the sound is right, whether there are problems in the audience.
Down in the basement, the projectionist is even busier, running four theaters out of two cramped projection rooms. The theaters are so close together that it’s possible, if a film is a big enough hit, to run it simultaneously on two different screens by stringing it through two different projectors and across the length of a projection booth, almost as if it were clothesline.
Charles Moss, head of the B.S. Moss Organization, which owns the Criterion, makes no great arguments for this arrangement. ‘'I knew those theaters weren’t going to be knockouts when we built them,’‘ he explained. ’‘But they give us a chance to show films in Midtown that the public wouldn’t otherwise be able to see. Nowadays, if a film takes in $10,000 or $15,000 in a midtown theater, that’s not enough to maintain it in a larger house, and so the film closes. We can keep something longer because our operating costs are low.’'
At the Criterion the ‘'Blade Runner’‘ fiasco occurred because this was the first 70-millimeter film to play on the theater’s upstairs platter, and the adjusting of the platter for the weight of the heavier-than-35-millimeter reel had been done incorrectly. The projectionist was elsewhere and didn’t spot the problem until minutes later.
Similarly, when a recent performance of ‘'The Sword and the Sorcerer’‘ at the Cinerama was interrupted by several minutes of trailers for other films the projectionist was away. A bit of sensing tape on the Cinerama’s platter automatically triggered the platter to stop and turned on the theater’s auxiliary projector, which was loaded with the trailers.
That this equipment works great until anything goes wrong was the unanimous opinion of the various projectionists visited. But, they agreed, if problems develop the show is lost. The platters can’t be repaired as quickly or easily as more old-fashioned equipment can, and if their speed isn’t perfectly adjusted the film may tear.
Nevertheless, automated projection is becoming more and more prevalent. ‘'A certain level of competence is required to run this equipment,’‘ Mr. Moss said, ’‘but it isn’t so demanding that 5, 6, 7 or 10 of them can’t be run simultaneously. That doesn’t have to mean a loss of quality. There’s always been a degree of featherbedding here, and what you’re seeing is the number of employees reaching a more realistic level.’'
At some point, the realistic level is liable to be exceeded. There are now theater complexes with eight screens operating out of a single projection booth ‘'that looks like a bowling alley,’‘ according to one projectionist who has seen the setup.
In places such as northern California and eastern Long Island, theaters use a ‘'sharing’‘ policy, which means one projectionist shuttles between screens that are not even in the same building and that may be miles apart. There are even ’‘usher-projectionists’‘ and ’‘manager-projectionists’‘ in some regions, although in New York Local 306 continues to resist such ideas.
‘'If you think you see bad projection and get irritated at us,’‘ said Robert Endres, who works at the Ziegfeld, ’‘just imagine what your usher can do.’'
The Ziegfeld’s performance of ‘'The Wall’‘ was ready to begin. On the screen, instead of the inexpensive ’‘kaleidescope’‘ image that has replaced curtains at many small, new theaters, the Ziegfeld’s two sets of curtains were ready to open.
With everything in perfect working order, Mr. Endres opened the dark outer curtain, then the transparent inner one, and showed a trailer. He closed the inner curtain again, dimmed the house lights, and turned up the sound to ‘'show level.’'
The equipment – three projectors, none with platters – was immaculate, and appeared to be in perfect working order. As ‘'The Wall’‘ began without a hitch, both Mr. Endres and Mr. Gordon looked pleased. The Dolby sound was delicately adjusted, and the image was big, bright and clean. The movie was terrible. But that wasn’t the projectionists’ problem.
That 1982 New York Times article can be accessed here, but for a fee of $3.95:
View link
I believe we have access to the Times archives at my job. I’ll check it out on Monday.
Here is a 1963 ad for “How the West Was Won” in 3-strip Cinerama at the Route 59. Notice the date at the top. Most likely this big premiere never took place that night.
View link
Did anyone go to last night’s show? I was interested to know how big the audience was, and whether or not they fixed the surrounds. I almost went back again myself, but decided not to at the last minute.
Thanks, Warren. That was a very fitting tribute to Mr. DeMille, who died earlier that year on January 21st. I sure would’ve loved to have seen “Spartacus” in there …
Foster Hirsch said Sam Goldwyn practically blackmailed Sidney into taking the role after Harry Belafonte turned it down, which may be one reason he’s never liked the film. But Al A. is right – he never let that show in his performance for a second.
As for Dorothy Dandridge, I couldn’t take my eyes off her whenever she was on screen. Knowing how unhappy her real life was and how tragically it ended made her performance that much more touching.
Vito and Roadshow talked about the “West Side Story” overture image. Thanks to Martin Hart’s Widescreen Museum, here is a shot of that image actually being created:
View link
Here is Martin Hart’s caption:
Linwood C. Dunn, photographic effects icon for decades, and his associate Cecil Love, photograph the colorful overture/title sequence to Robert Wise-Jerome Robbins' West Side Story in 1960. Dunn’s 65mm work was done with a Mitchell FC, fitted with appropriate lenses for Super Panavision/Todd-AO or Ultra Panavision. Love was Dunn’s optics expert. The film’s main credits, appearing at the end, were created by Saul Bass.
Photo courtesy of William Luca