Showmen's Trade Review (Jan-Mar 1945)

28 SHOWMEN' S TRADE REVIEW February 3, 1945 Projectionists Quick To Present Their Side vs. The Film Carriers Just as we expected! Our article on care in film handling from the viewpoint of the film carriers has drawn the fire of projectionists. Many of the projectionistwriters take us to task for heaping the blame on the theatre while painting the film carriers as "the white-haired boys who do nothing but good" — as one of our projectionist friends expresses it. Actually, our attitude in this matter (which STR first took up early in the war) is that there are two sides to the subject, and that a worth while purpose can be served by a renewal of the discussion from both sides. To that end we concluded our article dealing with the film carrier's side of it with an invitation to projectionists and theatremen to let us hear their side of it. Well, we got the other side of the story — but quick, and here it is : "Your facts, although true to some extent, do not present a true picture of conditions as they really exist" says Gene Moss, I.A.T.S.E. No. 602, Trinidad, Colorado. In seventeen years in theatre business, I have rarely seen a theatre employe who was ever guilty of anything approaching the gross carelessness you describe. At the same time I have yet to see a film delivery driver who handled the film in any way that resembled care." "Incidents are not hard to cite," Moss continues, "for example, I have in my projection room at this time a trailer box so badly smashed it is beyond repair. The Cause : This trailer was throzim from the truck and a four-reel feature was thrown on top of it. Not by the projectionist or one of his stooges, but by the film delivery driver ! "Another incident which happened less than a week ago ; the driver threw a can of feature film from his truck a distance at least half-way across the sidewalk and when cautioned by an operator (not myself) to be more careful with these things, the driver said: 'You run your machines and I'll run this end of it.' Another driver told me not so long ago that he didn't care how roughy he handled the film as his only concern was to make deliveries and pick-ups as fast as possible so he could get home sooner." Moss describes another driver's failure to close the gate on his truck with the result that the programs for five theatres were lost as he sped along the highway. A farmer found the film scattered over a three-mile stretch and not knowing what it was or what to do with it, waited several days for someone to advertise or call for it. He finally called the theatres (collect) and asked for information. "Considering the shortage of prints," Moss writes, "actions such as these are inexcusable. I have been told that similar conditions exist in other localities and complaints of operators result in nothing. In defense of exchange workers, I will say we never receive an inspected print that is in bad condition. With the shortage of containers, reels, film and trained help, It is my opinion that they are doing more than an excellent job." Moss concludes, "It appears from conditions here that it is not in the theatres or the exchanges, but on the film carriers' trucks that a great majority of the damage and rough handling takes place." Carriers 'Not Handling Eggs' A Massachusetts projectionist writes: "When the case is new and the reels upon which the film is wound are new it is an easy matter to properly pack the reels for shipment. It is seldom that a theatre receives cases and film in this condition. The cases do get damaged somewhere and as far as I can see they do not receive this treatment in the projection room. I have frequently seen the drivers loading and unloading and they are not very gentle in the process. They surely are not handling cases of eggs." Clarence H. Gleason, projectionist at the Embassy Theatre, Waltham, Mass. writes : "Theatres that play pictures soon after release date really get the breaks in receiving prints in fairly good condition. However, theatres that play second, third and fourth run really are up against it. One would assume from the above that the film would be damaged from being run through the projectors so many times in the previous runs. Such is not the case. In' spite of the fact that many projectors do not receive the care they once did, by and large they are not yet in such condition that they butcher the film. The first run houses still keep their projectors in good condition. The film is in poor condition long before it reaches the theatres that do not keep projectors in good condition. I have received film from a first run house without film ever going back to the exchange. I know that house and the men employed are of the finest. Still, when I receive this print I have to make quite a few repairs. This repair is of the nature of breaks in the sides of the film through into the sprocket holes. This is traceable to the reels being uneven and consequently when the reels are placed into the case they are jammed together in such a fashion that unevenly rewound film is compressed on itself because of the close quarters in the film case. "Theoretically if this film was returned to the exchange it would be completely repaired and I should be able to place the film in the projector and run a continuous show. Actually this is not so. The film arrives at the exchange and, due to the fact that this particular print must be put on a certain train in order to make the next play-date the film is often shipped with only a casual inspection. What I mean to convey is that there are not enough prints in the possession of the exchange in order to properly service the film before the next run. Close booking is as responsible for poor film cor¥lition as many other reasons. "The damaged reels do not accoutit for the many weak and crooked patches that are present in a print. This is the fault of the projectionist and also the exchanges. Some projectionists still make patches by hand (myself, for one) in spite of the fact that film splicing devices are available in the projection room. Naturally I have an alibi. The patching machine is not fool-proof. Both sides of the film should be cleaned and roughened in order that a good splice be accomplished. "With the splicer one needs two scraping tools — the one with the splicer and the old stand-by razor blade. When using the splicer, men sometimes place the strain on the new splice before the splice has dried. This results in a crooked splice. It also becomes tiresome to make a splice every few feet with the machine. It is easier for me the old fashioned way, and after over 23 years of practice I think I make a pretty good splice by hand. "The machines used in the exchange also are guilty of too tight a take-up and 'pull' the splices before they are dry. Good managers do not like patches that cause the picture to head for 'off stage,' or towards the gridiron. When using the splicer most men use the 'felt moistened in water' to soften the emulsion before scraping. When the brush carrying the cement is applied, it picks up some of the water and carries it back into the cement bottle. This causes a dilution and such cement soon loses its effectiveness. The presence of this moisture at the splice doesn't improve the vulcanizing ability of the cement either. These splices do have to be renewed during subsequent runs. "Most first run houses inspect their prints after every projection, hence the motor rewinds are not used in these houses. Many men feel that it is up to the exchanges to take care of their own product and that duty does not belong to the projection room, although no prideful projectionist would ever run a film without first inspecting it." Cites Need for Container Repair Tom McNamara, lATSE No. 505, who edits the STR Projection Clinic, couldn't resist the temptation of commenting on this problem of film handling. "I have often wondered" McNamara comments, "just why it is that the exchange shi^ pers insist on packing film in cases that are obviously fit for nothing but the scrap heap. The excuse today may be the scarcity of materials and manpower but these cases appear no different today than they did before the war. This is not a war-connected situation. When we receive film in these cases there is no alternative but to reship in the same cases and we know that in so doing we are running the risk of damaging film before it gets back to the (Continued on Page 37)