"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Penton-Man]

Perhaps a visual aid would be helpful for the shark.

Look in the Calibration Report that Jeff printed out for you (I assume he still offers those reports as part of his service) and see if you can find an initial dBu/kHz squiggly graph followed by a final dBu/kHz graph – which should be different and visually reflect some of the advantages gained by the audio calibration.

Maybe if you have a scanner at home, you can scan both graphs and post the pics for the shark. Kris Deering or others can elaborate on the nuances.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

What was the last decent big budget original movie you saw (not based on some pre-existing media)...

I can't think of one.

See and read to the bitter end.................
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/ente...-of-gloom.html

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

...mind being specific about what he did to improve your sound? Treatments? Speaker placement?

I've got Audessy on my 9.8 and usually turn it off, feeling that with my bipolar deftechs, decent geometry, a quiet room and avoiding the high-end roll-off that "direct" is better... Still, hadn't heard about a dramatic improvement in SQ after a home visit calibration, would be cool to hear what you've got, and what's been done...

with your permission, dear Penton.

btw., just finished this second watching BBC's coverage of quali for 2moro's race... man, turn 8 looks crazypants on my Kuro, can't imagine it in a driver's cockpit!

There, that makes up for the 2 wheel drivel y'all normally go on about in this thread...

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

See and read to the bitter end.................
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/ente...-of-gloom.html

Interesting article. Here's a novel concept: Why don't the studios refuse to pay $20 million for an actor? How many productions have lost money because of an overpaid star?

Also, the cost of making films has gotten out of hand due to unions, etc. Isn't this why so many productions are being made in Canada in order to avoid the overpriced workers in California and other parts of the US?

The whole economy is shrinking and Hollywood needs to scale back as well. I'm for everyone making as much money as possible (I do in my life as well), but when times are tough, you have to tighten your belt (I know I have). Has the real world finally hit Hollywood?

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

See and read to the bitter end.................
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/ente...-of-gloom.html

[Jeff Kleist]

Interesting article. Here's a novel concept: Why don't the studios refuse to pay $20 million for an actor? How many productions have lost money because of an overpaid star?

Also, the cost of making films has gotten out of hand due to unions, etc. Isn't this why so many productions are being made in Canada in order to avoid the overpriced workers in California and other parts of the US?

The whole economy is shrinking and Hollywood needs to scale back as well. I'm for everyone making as much money as possible (I do in my life as well), but when times are tough, you have to tighten your belt (I know I have). Has the real world finally hit Hollywood?

Unions are hardly the problem, inflation, shrinking theatrical windows, overblown budgets and too much spent on marketing are a lot of the problem. For instance, part of what made the original Matrix so good was that it had a moderate budget, and they were forced to compromise. With quadruple the cash for the sequels, they went overboard on the CG and turned a lot of people off (among other things), ruining the "real" that made the first movie so appealing. That along with ludicrous levels of marketing (I've actually refused to see some movies due to overadvertising, see below). More research needs to be done to target audiences that will actually be interested in a product (one great example was advertising Firefly during the world series, I can't think of much worse of an audience to try to sell a smartly written multicultural sci-fi adventure to)

The one thing that digital is going to be great for is letting movies play longer and have more exposure. A small rural market could play Milk 3 days a week and mix it up with other art offerings on a single screen and repurpose the same for extra harry potter on the weekends. The flexibility will definately improve things for the smaller films. Assuming of course, as the article sadly tells the truth on, they can get made in the first place.

Studios are already refusing the $20 million an actor thing. Most movies today are being done on small upfront payments with much larger pieces of the back end to lower the risk. That was why they were having so much trouble with Mickey Rourke and Sam Jackson, they wanted to pay scale upfront, and someone like sam jackson doesn't get out of bed for what they were offering.

Personallly I think the studios were onto something when they ramped up the Searchlight and Vantage divisions, there's been a pile of modest budget (most sub $20 million) films that I really enjoyed. Sunshine was a great example. Too bad it was buried theatrically by once again, a marketing department that didn't know what to do with it. It was too sci-fi/horror for the arthouse and too arty for the multiplex. I only hope that next week's "MOON" fares better, it looks outstanding.

So in summary, marketing departments needs to get more savvy and innovative instead of relying on $50 million in megaphones The Hangover is a great example of this: Yet another grossout comedy that didn't cost a lot with $50 million in marketing behind it assuring that for the last 3 months i couldn't go to a theater and not see the trailer for it, which pretty much killed any desire to see it a long time ago. I can't be the only one who feels that way

[Bullseye]

Ticket prices at cinemas are half the price of a new release BD. When you are taking the wife/GF/partner to the cinema your basically spending the same as you would on a BD and thats only for the tickets. Throw in a drink or two, sweets and popcorn and you have little change out of a $50.

Thankfully the local cinema here has brought in a price of €4.50 price per ticket on Wednesday. Normally price of tickets are €9.00. Got to see Salvation for half the price I would normally have paid. Unfortunately there is no club membership with promotions. It would be nice to get a free pass for every 10 pictures you attend.

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Unions are hardly the problem, inflation, shrinking theatrical windows, overblown budgets and too much spent on marketing are a lot of the problem. For instance, part of what made the original Matrix so good was that it had a moderate budget, and they were forced to compromise. With quadruple the cash for the sequels, they went overboard on the CG and turned a lot of people off (among other things), ruining the "real" that made the first movie so appealing. That along with ludicrous levels of marketing (I've actually refused to see some movies due to overadvertising, see below). More research needs to be done to target audiences that will actually be interested in a product (one great example was advertising Firefly during the world series, I can't think of much worse of an audience to try to sell a smartly written multicultural sci-fi adventure to)

The one thing that digital is going to be great for is letting movies play longer and have more exposure. A small rural market could play Milk 3 days a week and mix it up with other art offerings on a single screen and repurpose the same for extra harry potter on the weekends. The flexibility will definately improve things for the smaller films. Assuming of course, as the article sadly tells the truth on, they can get made in the first place.

Studios are already refusing the $20 million an actor thing. Most movies today are being done on small upfront payments with much larger pieces of the back end to lower the risk. That was why they were having so much trouble with Mickey Rourke and Sam Jackson, they wanted to pay scale upfront, and someone like sam jackson doesn't get out of bed for what they were offering.

Personallly I think the studios were onto something when they ramped up the Searchlight and Vantage divisions, there's been a pile of modest budget (most sub $20 million) films that I really enjoyed. Sunshine was a great example. Too bad it was buried theatrically by once again, a marketing department that didn't know what to do with it. It was too sci-fi/horror for the arthouse and too arty for the multiplex. I only hope that next week's "MOON" fares better, it looks outstanding.

So in summary, marketing departments needs to get more savvy and innovative instead of relying on $50 million in megaphones The Hangover is a great example of this: Yet another grossout comedy that didn't cost a lot with $50 million in marketing behind it assuring that for the last 3 months i couldn't go to a theater and not see the trailer for it, which pretty much killed any desire to see it a long time ago. I can't be the only one who feels that way

Jeff,

I agree. The marketing budgets for "stinky" films get to be WAY too much. In fact, yesterday my family dragged me to see "Up" (not that I didn't WANT to see "Up," but seeing it on a weekend with a bunch of little kids talking to their Mom's through the movie isn't my idea of a good time)...anyway, I digress. The show started at 2:05, but after the theater employee coming in to do an introduction and to tell the patrons to turn off their cell phones (thankfully), 20 minutes of trailers proceeded to be shows! 20 FREAKING MINUTES!!!!! The only good thing out of the experience was the movie, which may be Pixar's most emotional story yet (brought a tear to my eye on more than one occasion).

[Jeff Kleist]

I agree. The marketing budgets for "stinky" films get to be WAY too much. In fact, yesterday my family dragged me to see "Up" (not that I didn't WANT to see "Up," but seeing it on a weekend with a bunch of little kids talking to their Mom's through the movie isn't my idea of a good time)...anyway, I digress. The show started at 2:05, but after the theater employee coming in to do an introduction and to tell the patrons to turn off their cell phones (thankfully), 20 minutes of trailers proceeded to be shows! 20 FREAKING MINUTES!!!!! The only good thing out of the experience was the movie, which may be Pixar's most emotional story yet (brought a tear to my eye on more than one occasion).

25 minutes of trailers before Star Wars Episode 1 midnight first show. There was almost a riot

BEFORE the movie

Keep in mind those free passes are only good 10 days into a movie's run, I'm usually not that patient and try to burn them on movies I wouldn't pay to see, but on Tuesday night at 10PM usually you can get an empty theater to MSTie the movie in if it's bad enough (Thank you Legend of Chun-Li ) I actually have my own Gypsy from when some friends and I would perform, unfortunately my friend in state college has Tom and Crow, Gypsy is not exactly portable or concealable

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

20 minutes of trailers proceeded to be shows! 20 FREAKING MINUTES!!!!!

I actually like a lot of trailers. If you're running a minute or two late, you didn't miss any of the movie.

You get to see previews of a lot of upcoming films. Though I have recordings set for "Nothing But Trailers" on HDNet, and am constantly downloading .mov trailers and converting them to MPEG4 to watch on my PS3, there is something to be said for seeing them on the big screen.

However, I don't go the theater a lot (I saw "Iron Man" last year), and I'm not sure I'll be seeing any this year... so I might understand why someone who goes a lot might be annoyed.

~Alan

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Thankfully the local cinema here has brought in a price of €4.50 price per ticket on Wednesday. Normally price of tickets are €9.00. Got to see Salvation for half the price I would normally have paid. Unfortunately there is no club membership with promotions. It would be nice to get a free pass for every 10 pictures you attend.

Where's that??

[Penton-Man]

This bit of theater news flew under the radar for many, perhaps due to the announcement coming close to the Memorial Day weekend and certainly surprised (some say shocked) the folks at Christie, Barco and NEC.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...5fa77018a85cae

The BIG Regal deal (along with the AMC deal) would bring close to a third of all the screens in the U.S. and roughly ten percent of all the screens in the world up to 4k exhitibion capability and should provide some impetus to making the production, postproduction and exhibition workflow more seamless and encourage further funding for 4k DI’s and 4k DCP’s such as Angels and Demons, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, and the Soloist currently showing around town.

This upgraded motion picture workflow process can only translate into even better looking Blu-rays to come down the pipe for folks to see in the comfort of their homes.

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Unions are hardly the problem, inflation, shrinking theatrical windows, overblown budgets and too much spent on marketing are a lot of the problem.

The "core" part of the problem is the short term, fast buck, bean counting ideology of the giant multi-national media companies who own every major Hollywood studio and every major broadcast TV network in the United States.

Giant-sized corporations hate taking chances on new ideas -such as a movie featuring new characters, a new story and doesn't have a sequel number next to the name. They prefer to get as much mileage as possible out of selling the same old thing and actually have the audacity to expect increased sales from such tactics. "Wow, I just ate 1 tub of plain Vanilla ice cream; I think I'll eat 2 tubs of it next week!" I think that's how they believe we as movie customers think. These companies also prefer making movies from other established sources, such as a TV series, comic book or even a video game because they at least have something to measure in forecasting how well the movie will perform financially.

An original screenplay with an inventive story line just presents way too many unknowns to these companies. Very often a ground-breaking original story isn't going to "fit the format" of what these companies think they can market, so they'll just pass on the "property" or option it to keep it in development hell where it can collect dust with countless thousands of other screenplays. The music industry (also owned by these media conglomerates) is hopelessly infected with much of the same problem.

I often have "WTF" reactions when I found out a sequel is being made of a movie that was a piece of garbage and didn't really do all that well commercially. Why are they making of sequel of THAT?. Because the studio thinks it knows what to expect and can adjust the production and marketing budgets accordingly and then turn a profit on the piece of garbage when it moves into home video release. Lots of direct-to-DVD movies are made on that model.

Unfortunately, overly bloated marketing budgets are a necessary evil to how media companies are financing and distributing big budget movies today.

Many movies are made with a LOT of borrowed money. The bean counting ethic relentlessly pushes for shortened theatrical release windows, or even eliminating the windows entirely so the loans can be paid off in full as fast as possible to minimize interest payments. The usual thinking is the movie will turn a profit only after it has hit video store shelves. That also means getting the theatrical run over and done ASAP. Book the movie onto a lot more screens. Run a tremendous marketing blitz up front. The movie will do most of its business in the first week and be completely played out in only a month. If the DVD and Blu-ray can be on store shelves 3 or 4 months out from theatrical release the movie may still be in the minds of the general public.

It's also pretty convenient the major broadcast TV networks are joined at the hip with major movie studios. That allows for more creative accounting on where the money goes with movie marketing. They're basically paying themselves while still being able to show a "loss" for that big TV commercial blitz. The fun doesn't stop there. Those media companies own cable TV networks, print publishing properties, outdoor advertising companies and more.

As to the "giant sucking sound" of movie and TV production business leaving California for Canada, Mexico, New Zealand, etc., outsourcing is hardly anything new. However the practice wasn't nearly quite so common and accepted as it is now. It's another downside of the bean counting ethic. Productions are going to move to where studios and their parent corporations can get the most bang for their buck. States like Texas, New Mexico and even Oklahoma are winning some movie or TV projects, but losing many others to sites outside the US.

Decades ago it was a big deal to be able to make movies in Hollywood. One could even call it a tradition. In practical terms, a great deal of the movie making infrastructure was exclusive to Hollywood as well. Few other places around the world could accommodate major productions. Location shoots had to be kept to a minimum. That's no longer the case thanks to modern technology, communications, the Internet and other factors like Panavision offices in numerous cities in North America and around the world. The growth in shooting on video and use of "digital backlot" techniques further lessen the need for a huge sound stage in Hollywood. The bean counters are aware of this.

[Bobby Henderson]

Originally Posted by Penton Man

This bit of theater news flew under the radar for many, perhaps due to the announcement coming close to the Memorial Day weekend and certainly surprised (some say shocked) the folks at Christie, Barco and NEC.

We've been talking about the Sony 4K thing over at Film-Tech for awhile. I'm not sure what to think about the situation other than it could leave Christie, Barco and NEC scrambling to find a 4K LCOS solution of their own.

DLP technology has already been in bad shape. The business of selling front projector and RPTV sets is all but dead. There's nowhere near enough money in commercial movie theater applications alone to justify further development of DLP. Forget about any 4K DLP chip. The real danger has been the likelihood of TI pulling the plug on DLP chip manufacturing whether the Sony 4K SXRD deal happened or not.

Cinemark is another exhibitor who some of us movie theater gear-heads believe may adopt Sony's approach. If that happens in addition to the big AMC and Regal announcements it could ruin much of the d-cinema business for Dolby, Cinedigm and others. Cinedigm (formerely AccessIT) has the most d-cinema installations. They have nearly all the Carmike Cinemas circuit of 2200 screens equipped, all of Rave Theaters' 500 or so screens and qutie a few others. But Cinedigm needs more business.

An additional worry is Hollywood movie studios may mandate 4K as the new standard and immediately end support of existing 2K systems. This is essentially what the studios did with the first generation of 1280 X 1024 pixel resolution DLP d-cinema systems. Cinedigm isn't exactly in great financial shape as it is. I think a mandate for 4K would kill that company.

From the theater operator standpoint, the move to Sony's setup has serious drawbacks. It's an entirely closed system of Sony-branded stuff. The other makes of projectors and servers were mostly interchangeable. Sony's first demonstrations of 4K were not very good. They didn't compare well to the brighter, more colorful images coming from 3-chip DLP 2K projectors. What's changed since then? Has Sony improved their projector a great deal? Or are they just signing big deals to get a not so great performing product into thousands of movie theaters. We haven't forgotten the various short comings with SDDS.

You know, the funny thing with all this is Hollywood is still mostly using 2K for CGI and digital intermediate work. 4K use is still very rare. So if there is a groundswell of 4K d-cinema installations, beware of the possible 4K logos thrown up in advertising. Chances are you'll just be watching a blow-up from 2K material. It's kind of fitting with the IMAX digital controversy also playing right now.

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

The "core" part of the problem is the short term, fast buck, bean counting ideology of the giant multi-national media companies who own every major Hollywood studio and every major broadcast TV network in the United States.

Giant-sized corporations hate taking chances on new ideas -such as a movie featuring new characters, a new story and doesn't have a sequel number next to the name. They prefer to get as much mileage as possible out of selling the same old thing and actually have the audacity to expect increased sales from such tactics. "Wow, I just ate 1 tub of plain Vanilla ice cream; I think I'll eat 2 tubs of it next week!" I think that's how they believe we as movie customers think. These companies also prefer making movies from other established sources, such as a TV series, comic book or even a video game because they at least have something to measure in forecasting how well the movie will perform financially.

An original screenplay with an inventive story line just presents way too many unknowns to these companies. Very often a ground-breaking original story isn't going to "fit the format" of what these companies think they can market, so they'll just pass on the "property" or option it to keep it in development hell where it can collect dust with countless thousands of other screenplays. The music industry (also owned by these media conglomerates) is hopelessly infected with much of the same problem.

I often have "WTF" reactions when I found out a sequel is being made of a movie that was a piece of garbage and didn't really do all that well commercially. Why are they making of sequel of THAT?. Because the studio thinks it knows what to expect and can adjust the production and marketing budgets accordingly and then turn a profit on the piece of garbage when it moves into home video release. Lots of direct-to-DVD movies are made on that model.

Unfortunately, overly bloated marketing budgets are a necessary evil to how media companies are financing and distributing big budget movies today.

Many movies are made with a LOT of borrowed money. The bean counting ethic relentlessly pushes for shortened theatrical release windows, or even eliminating the windows entirely so the loans can be paid off in full as fast as possible to minimize interest payments. The usual thinking is the movie will turn a profit only after it has hit video store shelves. That also means getting the theatrical run over and done ASAP. Book the movie onto a lot more screens. Run a tremendous marketing blitz up front. The movie will do most of its business in the first week and be completely played out in only a month. If the DVD and Blu-ray can be on store shelves 3 or 4 months out from theatrical release the movie may still be in the minds of the general public.

It's also pretty convenient the major broadcast TV networks are joined at the hip with major movie studios. That allows for more creative accounting on where the money goes with movie marketing. They're basically paying themselves while still being able to show a "loss" for that big TV commercial blitz. The fun doesn't stop there. Those media companies own cable TV networks, print publishing properties, outdoor advertising companies and more.

As to the "giant sucking sound" of movie and TV production business leaving California for Canada, Mexico, New Zealand, etc., outsourcing is hardly anything new. However the practice wasn't nearly quite so common and accepted as it is now. It's another downside of the bean counting ethic. Productions are going to move to where studios and their parent corporations can get the most bang for their buck. States like Texas, New Mexico and even Oklahoma are winning some movie or TV projects, but losing many others to sites outside the US.

Decades ago it was a big deal to be able to make movies in Hollywood. One could even call it a tradition. In practical terms, a great deal of the movie making infrastructure was exclusive to Hollywood as well. Few other places around the world could accommodate major productions. Location shoots had to be kept to a minimum. That's no longer the case thanks to modern technology, communications, the Internet and other factors like Panavision offices in numerous cities in North America and around the world. The growth in shooting on video and use of "digital backlot" techniques further lessen the need for a huge sound stage in Hollywood. The bean counters are aware of this.

Great post Bobby. I'd be curious to hear Penton's thoughts on this.

[kpkelley]

Hey P-Man,

Cold Souls is playing at the Nantucket Film Festival, have you heard anything about this movie? I like Giamatti's other work and was curious as to what the buzz was with this picture.

TIA.

[Jeff Kleist]

The "core" part of the problem is the short term, fast buck, bean counting ideology of the giant multi-national media companies who own every major Hollywood studio and every major broadcast TV network in the United States.

Giant-sized corporations hate taking chances on new ideas -such as a movie featuring new characters, a new story and doesn't have a sequel number next to the name. They prefer to get as much mileage as possible out of selling the same old thing and actually have the audacity to expect increased sales from such tactics. "Wow, I just ate 1 tub of plain Vanilla ice cream; I think I'll eat 2 tubs of it next week!" I think that's how they believe we as movie customers think. These companies also prefer making movies from other established sources, such as a TV series, comic book or even a video game because they at least have something to measure in forecasting how well the movie will perform financially.

You're absolutely right Bobby, that is the cultural problem behind a lot of the woes in the country today, not just the movie industry. Too much concentration on worshipping the inherently sociopathic entity that is the corporation, who insists it has to consume more every quarter, than on sending them to the corner when they're bad so they grow up to be a better person Newspapers aren't really dead, it's the corporate structure that took what used to be a good family business with a solid interms of dollars profit margin and applied the economics of manufacturing to it. All of asudden 5% wasn't healthy, it was a fireable offense which has lead to the dilution of content to boost profit. The same happened in the music industry, and now it's happening in movies.

Personally I think Hollywood would do well to require a lot more high level people like Penton to compete with the MBAs, at least a 1-1 ratio. What killed the music industry on the buis side is that too many people who only saw numbers got too much control over content, and I'd hate to see that happen again. In Japan's music buis they have a very different musical structure, and for the most part those directly involved with the talent are much more in control than the label, which while they still have issues with cranking out boy bands/pop idols seems to have lead to greater musical creative freedom for established artists to try crazy stuff. Hollywood used to be like that, but as Penton linked, hardcore powerful and creative agents are in short supply these days who can push projects like that through

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

This bit of theater news flew under the radar for many, perhaps due to the announcement coming close to the Memorial Day weekend and certainly surprised (some say shocked) the folks at Christie, Barco and NEC.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/...5fa77018a85cae

The BIG Regal deal (along with the AMC deal) would bring close to a third of all the screens in the U.S. and roughly ten percent of all the screens in the world up to 4k exhitibion capability and should provide some impetus to making the production, postproduction and exhibition workflow more seamless and encourage further funding for 4k DI’s and 4k DCP’s such as Angels and Demons, X-Men Origins: Wolverine, and the Soloist currently showing around town.

This upgraded motion picture workflow process can only translate into even better looking Blu-rays to come down the pipe for folks to see in the comfort of their homes.

[SquidPuppet]

If the June 14th Moto GP Podium looks like this (very, very possible).....

1. Rossi
2. Lorenzo
3. Stoner

We will have a 3-way tie for first place, with each rider holding 106 points, and more than a third of the season under our belts.

The above scenario is perhaps not only possible, but likely.

Unleash the mayhem and chaos please.

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

Great post Bobby.

Agreed, excellent post Bobby.

Originally Posted by DenonCI

I'd be curious to hear Penton's thoughts on this.

Me too

Penton, do many of the Hollywood uber-bigshots care about cinema, or is it just a relentless race to be the year's #1 studio, have the most $200m hits, have the biggest opening weekend, etc; ??