Yuku free message boards

Yeah, I'm not at WHY WORRY? and THE KID BROTHER. That's where.

I attended the Atlanta screenings Friday and Sunday in that lackluster, poorly managed venue. I've posted a lengthy *review* of the festivities (not the films) on my About.com Humor home page and here is the entire entry, "Harold Lloyd: Loud and Clear and Cheated."
humor.about.com/od/moviec...oyd_fe.htm

I'm sorry I couldn't post the piece in full for you here, but there are contractual issues.

As you might imagine, I am deeply disappointed with the weekend's events and lack of showmanship of all involved. Very unprofessional from top to bottom -- and I say that from more than 40 years in the movie theatre business myself.

Another issue that's gone by the wayside in this discussion is why the Lloyd films were not windowboxed for contemporary projection. That's why the titles and screen images were cropped on the left side, the area of the film where the optical soundtrack goes on modern prints.

Either that, or no one equipped the theatre for true 35mm Silent projection, but I sort of doubt the images were printed full frame left-to-right. I'd have to eyeball the prints to determine for certainty.

The technical term for this practice of improper aspect ratio projection is called "Cheapness, We Don't Care About the Audiences."

Best to everyone in this Forum, except those responsible for the botched exhibitions,

Mike Durrett
Guide to About Humor


Copyright 2005 Mike Durrett. All rights reserved.

Dear J. Theakston:

Thank you for your thoughtful response, technical information, and pleasant welcome.

I do have respect for The Harold Lloyd Trust, but the organization should not be beyond criticism when failing to protect Mr. Lloyd's work. Taking outsiders' words for things is blind, bad business, pure and simple -- especially in show business. Golly.

It was stated previously in this thread that the organization or someone who appears to be a credible representative knew of print problems with the current circulation. You clarified a bit about San Francisco bumblings, but ongoing problems are always possible, especially on the retrospective trail.

You mentioned known print destroyers ("notorious Film Forum"), too. Were their prints checked out immediately after their playdates, assuming they were in this particular chain of exhibition? If not, why not? Are those the prints booked in Atlanta?

It is of utmost importance to protect the Lloyd Trust's interests and play square with the audiences being lured into flaccid exhibitions, such as witnessed in Atlanta.

Where exactly are these fine films without the fans and future fans?

Yes, I do know about film exhibition and one of the first things one learns is never to take the word of a distributor. That's not to say anyone is deceitful, but they are not known for attention to details and unblemished follow-throughs. Sony may be the exception, but I doubt that would be the general consensus of the disappointed attendees in Atlanta. I saw festering rage and hard walk-outs. I knew at the point of purchase what we were in for during the evening and we toughed it out.

I was not simply looking for activities to attend in Atlanta over the weekend. That was a bit offensive of you there, J.

I lived in Atlanta 40 years and departed, all activities consumed, except for movies and occasional live entertainments. I had been planning for months, nearly a year, as I recall, salivating in anticipation of these much ballyhooed Harold Lloyd prints promised to play within my grasp.

You seem to think, as many exhibitors do, frankly, that a movie event begins or ends at the ticket window. Living 80 miles from the theatre, having to drive through Friday metropolitan Atlanta rush hour traffic, pick up my wife, and arrive at the theatre early enough to secure seats is part of the event, too. There are also shaving, bathing, dressing, grooming, gasoline stops, and food concerns to enter into the equasion, plus the long trip back up the highway home. One double feature at the festival required approximately 9-10 hours of my time, plus my wife's involvement, and all of the related funding.

We happily designated three full days of our lives to attend these films: the highly touted Harold Lloyd comedies with pristine prints AND digital soundtracks promised, but not delivered. We, however, quit after two full days of disappointments and inconsideration.

Simply applying a scrawled note to the cashier's window is not a reasonable dodge of responsibility. I am sorry, but it is not. Not even for the patrons who live on the same block.

As I stated here, or in my full review mentioned above, the Landmark Web site was not updated over the weekend that I could see to reflect the sad conditions in the Lloyd retrospective. As of early Wednesday, their site still hawks "Dolby Stereo Sound!" Perhaps, Tuesday's new double feature performed properly. I don't know, but the weekend's offerings did not. Landmark should have updated their site to tell me (and others) I would be travelling 160 miles round trip to hear nothing. And don't give me "there was no one to do the update." It takes a few minutes and a credible, properly-oiled business should always have someone available to go to bat on short notice.

If nothing else, there is something called common courtesy which should extend to the patrons. Where was Landmark's courtesy online? Why do you not think it is acceptable for them not to play fair?

That Web site displayed unequivocably false advertising on their part and, by extension, the other business parties did, too, all of them in line to gain monetarily from the bait and switch. The bait and switch doesn't have to be intentional to extract an equivalent result.

Did the Lloyd Trust or Sony direct the theatre to update it's Web site of false information and present their product in its proper, defective light? If not, why not?

Furthermore, the Lloyd-Sony 1-sheet was still on the wall unaltered in the poster case in the theatre lobby, immediately adjacent to the Lloyd auditorium. It still boasted the new soundtracks as late as my Sunday afternoon visit. That was THREE DAYS after the impaired prints were being exhibited and still there was no alteration or masking out of the deceptive claims. Sloppy. Litigious.

I looked at that very same poster as I left the screenings Friday night. I reread the promises. I was eager to return to hear them fulfilled. I restored my trust in all of the parties you yourself have implied are worthy of trust.

I have stated I gave the theatre the benefit of the doubt on Friday and attended the screenings anyway. It wasn't until our Sunday arrival, I realized we had been duped. But, again, after all the travel, time, and expense, we wanted to see the movies. I'm capable of enjoying Harold's films with or without accompaniment. Whether we chose to go inside or not is not the core issue. The core issue is specific false advertising lured people to the theatre, including myself. I checked the Landmark site each day for updates and/or corrections.

The Lloyd Trust, Sony, and Landmark Theatres are all parties to the event. Knowing there were print problems, or as you've offered tonight, some of the theatres on the route are known destructive forces, no one apparently performed any quality control. In a perfect world, you wouldn't need to, but, hey, this is modern America theatrical exhibition. It can be a zoo.

I never asked for a refund. I didn't wish a refund. I do think it would have been proper for the Landmark manager to offer passes to the inconvenienced customers inviting them to return for future shows. That way, the theatre, Sony, and The Harold Lloyd Trust could keep the receipts and the customers would have received a kind gesture in return.

That's quite different than "COMPEL."

This free ticket awarding is commonplace customer service in most movie houses and good public relations. In fact, it's no skin off the theatres' noses because they see little, if anything, of the box office receipts to begin with, as you are aware, I'm sure. Theatres give away passes like there's no tomorrow, but try to get free Milk Duds out of them. Just try. Nope, that costs them money. Free passes are never a big deal for a movie theatre. Freebies bring in more warm bodies to buy snack foods, where the theatres keep all of the money. Man, they love that!

Finally, I am sorry you consider my remarks bashing. The customers of the Atlanta screenings of the Lloyd features were the ones bashed. I'm simply reporting what I saw -- and didn't hear.

I'm not the one that failed Harold Lloyd's supporters. I can understand any uneasiness from the principals responsible for the oversights, directly or indirectly.

Simple theatrical advice:

1. Don't book those prints too close together, so they can be inspected properly before the next engagement and replaced, if need be.

2. Make some phone calls and get status reports on the films' condition.

3. Send anonymous checkers (monitors) to each theatre to observe screenings in progress.

4. Ship the prints back into the Trust and screen them for condition occasionally before shipping them back to theatres.

5. Never trust others in show business. Again, golly.

Those simple steps are performed by others regularly.

Now, I am not angry. True.

I'm disappointed. True.

I'm concerned for the future of the Lloyd legacy. True.

We Atlanta viewers were treated shabbily. True.

The retrospective is not performing to high standards, regardless of industry spin. True.

I won't return to the 35mm defective retrospective. True.

I won't be purchasing the forthcoming DVD box set as we originally budgeted, nor will I allow anyone to gift it to me, spending money in my name. Probably true.

I might be weaker in a month or two. They are fine movies.

Best--

Mike Durrett


Copyright 2005 Mike Durrett. All rights reserved.

>>Ah Mike... you should be there, because everything went off without a hitch yesterday and I'm assuming will be the same today. Why Worry? and The Kid Brother are still playing this evening... you still have a chance to see them!<<

Thank you for the update, Paula. I could easily go to see the films, but I am going to stick to my principles and stay away. We were wronged twice and I will not tolerate or support such unprofessionalism.

>>I did contact Mike Schlesinger at Sony and he moved super fast to make sure the final two films were presented without musical glitches. For some reason, the management at the Landmark Midtown Art had NOT called him to let him know about the problems with the soundtracks. <<

Thank you also for validating my comments that the Landmark management is inept. And now we can add: uncaring. The blame no one called Sony goes way up the ladder to above the theatre level to the corporate office. Who's minding the store?

You said it yourself, "bored kids."

>>Despite the less than professional attitude of the Midtown Art management, I certainly wouldn't stop attending films there. They book all sorts of obscure, independent and foreign films that no other theater (including the Tara) will show. I've been going there several times a month since they re-opened as an arthouse theater and this is the first really bad experience I've had with them.<<

It was a doozy, though. You and I will never think of Harold Lloyd again without this unpleasantness creeping through our thoughts.

I've been going to the movies at Midtown, too, and looked forward to several titles during the fall season. However, I'll make other arrangements. My money will be spent elsewhere. They don't appreciate our business or fulfill expectations.

I wonder when their lease is up? That place has changed more hands than Angelina Jolie.

>>By the way, they DID give refunds. When I decided not to see Speedy without music, after having watching the second half of Girl Shy without music, they gave me a refund.<<

I always knew about the refunds. I came to see these movies. I had too much invested to turn around and leave. But there should have been more compassion for the customers. It was as if all of us patrons were the blame for the failures. How dare we be upset.

And again, as the Sony gent told you, they didn't even request back-up prints, as they continued to collect admissions. Never made the phone call.

I didn't need to read your explanation to figure as much in my heart. I'd have bet money no one called. It's the typical response of theatre types. I've seen it again and again.

>>OK, now that I've delurked just to cause this little firestorm of indignation over the botched Atlanta screenings of The Freshman, Girl Shy and Speedy, I might as well say... hello everyone! My name is Paula and I'm a Harold Lloyd-aholic.<<

I'm a Harold Lloyd-aholic, too. We just went through Prohibition.

Best to you, Paula. Perhaps we'll meet under happier circumstances.

Mike


Copyright 2005 Mike Durrett. All rights reserved.

Paula:

I've moved on, too. I am eager to see "Elevator to the Gallows." Thanks for the invite, but we'll be elsewhere with our $17 and snacks money. When I tally up several hundred dollars retained from specifically skipped visits to that theatre, I might risk returning. I really don't feel like I'm "cutting off [my] nose" by no longer patronizing them. I am never at a loss for a good movie to watch elsewhere.

OK, here's my recollection of the history of the Midtown. It originated in the mid to late '80s by Hoyt. At the time of the construction in progress, George LeFont owned the thriving Tara and he decided he needed to be in business with Hoyt, so they joined together. When Hoyt abandoned Atlanta relatively soon thereafter, UA Theatres acquired the Hoyt houses in the city. Later, Regal bought UA Theatres, but I don't believe they took the UA name off the Midtown. Then, Landmark acquired the Midtown a couple of years ago.

Yes, film is the best way to see movies -- theoretically. There is something to be said for DVDs, though. Perfect prints, perfect projection, perfect sound, extras not available in theatres, popular pricing, better snacks, room temperatures suitable for humans. (I caught a sore throat during the antarctic hours of "The Freshman" and "Safety Last.") The detail on the new flat screens is impressive, too, even on a computer monitor.

There are also brighter whites and colors on videos, even on a so-so monitor. Screen light in theatres is another of my pet peeves, and it is a rampant problem. The Midtown illumination for the Lloyds was acceptable, but not optimum. And I can't get over that the HL Trust and Sony didn't demand and/or follow through on the proper lensing and aspect ratios of the Atlanta showings. Grrrrr...

Those matters should be correct on the DVDs. Then again, they should've been correct at the retrospective.

Maybe I haven't moved on. *sigh*

Sharp eyes might even think Harold Lloyd movies look better on DVD. I was surprised to see how obvious his stunt doubles were in several of the 35mm films I attended.

There's also some unconvincing rear screen or process work that waters down the thrills, notably in "Speedy." Those things aren't so apparent on television.

Enjoy your movies, Paula. Don't forget your iPOD.

Mike


Copyright 2005 Mike Durrett. All rights reserved.