by Ron Merk

When I was thinking about the title for this series of musings on how to get noticed in the entertainment industry, I was a little concerned with the word “margins” since it often has the same meaning as “excluded from the center.”  Then I thought again about studying back in college, and how important it was to notate my text books in the margins of the page to clarify a fact or issue in my mind, or to help me remember it easily. Thus, those notes in the margins became very important for me, since they essentialized the vast amount of information in the textbook on a specific subject. Notice that I didn’t say “simplified.” So, while many of us independent filmmakers are not in the mainstream of the entertainment industry, we should not consider ourselves in the margins, or on the sidelines or on the bench, just waiting for a chance to to to play in the big leagues, or as minor league baseball players call it, “the show.”

Having said that, I think it’s very important that we understand that our chances for “hitting a home run out of the park” are minute, and subject to chance, timing and luck.  If you look at the number of feature films submitted to Sundance last year, and the number that actually were chosen to be in the festival, and then factor in the chances of getting picked up for distribution with a decent advance and a good deal, or success at the box office, you will see that the reality to moving from the margins to the mainstream are a small fraction of one per cent, a very small fraction.

Clearly, there are no guarantees, even if you do everything right.  So, what’s can we do?  I suppose the word that comes to be is passion.  We need to find the passion for what we’re doing, and focus our energy on the project that we most believe in, and that we believe has the best chance for success.  Stay with it, and don’t let go.  Can I offer any other advice?  The answer sadly is NO.  But there’s a great quote from Franz Kafka to keep in mind: “Don’t bend; don’t water it down; don’t try to make it logical; don’t edit your own soul according to the fashion.  Rather, follow your most intense obsessions mercilessly.”

The Last Word on the Zach Braff Kickstarter Controversy

by Ron Merk

It would appear that no one wants to have the last word on Zach Braff’s grab at indie arts cash on Kickstarter.  Today’s Indiewire features yet another article on the subject, with pros and cons listed as if there was a trial going on.  There is!

http://www.indiewire.com/article/after-all-that-hubbub-whats-the-final-verdict-on-zach-braff

Here are my comments on Indiewire today:

“I’m the Editor-in-Chief on an online magazine for filmmakers, Indieplex, and wrote three articles about Zach Braff’s Kickstarter campaign which are still up and running. In one of them I suggested to him that he take the two million dollars and divide it up amongst 400 Kickstarter arts project because it’s the right thing for him to do. It would provide $5000 each to all those projects, do much more to help independent art-making than his follow up to “Garden State” and make him the hero of the arts community. I still would like to see him do this, and yes, it would be great if he responded to this idea”.

Okay, that’s the last word.  I promise.  Unless I hear directly from Zach.

by Ron Merk

News of the passing of Ray Harryhausen hit me very hard.  As a kid I grew up watching this master craftsman’s work in so many films, and while I never knew much about him back in the 50s and 60s when I saw those great films on which he imprinted his style, I knew that they were all “of a piece” but never had any idea that they were all by the same person.  I just assumed there was a studio someplace that did these scenes.  That studio was Ray Harryhausen.

I had the great honor and pleasure to be friends with film director, Don Chaffey, who directed the film “Jason and the Argonauts.”  I think most people would agree that the duel between Jason and his men with the skeletons is one of the great special effects sequences ever put on film.  The co-ordination of the live-action portions of the scene, carefully and skillfully set up for the camera by Chaffey, and the animation of the skeletons, masterfully animated and matched to the live action by Harryhausen and his team is without equal.  I saw the film recently on TCM, and it still had the ability to thrill me.

Harryhausen and skeleton from Jason and the Argonauts

I spent many evenings with Don Chaffey at his home working on a project called “Dolls…They’re Deadly,” a script I had written that Don wanted to direct.  It involved a number of sequences which required stop-motion animation.  Don said to me, “Don’t worry.  Harryhausen is our man.  There’s nobody better in the whole business.  He’s not only a superb technician, but he’s an artist.  His characters are as expressive as human actors.”

Coming from Don, this was high praise.  Don was a no-nonsense kind of director, and he didn’t suffer fools (not for very long anyway).  I won’t cite the long list of show biz people he thought were f—–g idiots (his words, not mine), but he just didn’t like to work with anyone who wasn’t a total professional.

My one regret is that the film didn’t get made.  Don’s wife became terminally ill and he devoted himself to her care until the very end.  Don had sent the script to Robert Urich (Don directed him in the TV series Vegas) and Bob loved it and was ready to start shooting any time Don yelled “action.” Don had also called his old pal, James Stewart, and told him about the project which had a great part for him, and Stewart was leaning toward doing the film, even though he would be playing a psychopathic (but sympathetic) character whose life is destroyed through the neglect and foolishness of others.  Unfortunately, his family or agent or management (we never were told which it was) talked Stewart out of doing the film.  “Not good for my image,” Stewart told Don, “but it’s one of the best darned scripts I’ve ever read.”

So, I missed a great opportunity to work with two Hollywood legends in one film, Stewart and Harryhausen.  If only…..

Harryhausen, like Stewart, occupied a truly hallowed place in the pantheon of Hollywood.  His work was really a genre of its own.  Nobody could touch him.  Every time I see a film in which he provided the special effects, I see it more as a Harryhausen film than that of the actual director.  His imprint on a project was immense, and unmistakably his own.

He has left large footprints to fill.  Even Mighty Joe Young might have to stretch his big toes to fill them.  As we have moved into the digital world of effects, with most of the kind of work formerly done in stop-motion now being done in the computer, I feel as if the wonder and the charm that was at the center of Harryhausen’s work are now gone, gone forever, like Ray.  He and his creations will be missed.  His life’s work was to portray great legends on film.  Now Ray Harryhausen is a legend, too.

If you’d like to read more about Harryhausen, the New York Times and Empire just published a great piece on his legacy. You can read about it here and here.

Ohio Movie House Shows Its Last 35mm Film

by Ron Merk

On April 30, 2013 Andy Holyoke, Projectionist for more than three decades, ran the last 35mm print that will be screened at the Little Art Theater in Yellow Springs, Ohio.  I heard the story on National Public Radio, and it saddened me to hear that film as a projection medium is becoming more and more like the proverbial dodo bird, and while not extinct, it will be harder and harder to see films projected on film. You can hear the interview on NPR by going to the following link (or check out a transcription of the highlights at the end of this article):

http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=180051277&m=180136104

That sound of the film running through the projector will soon be replaced by the silence of a digital projection system which does not have mechanical parts that emits this wonderful sound that tells us that there’s a film playing.

You may ask if I’m getting nostalgic, and part of the answer is yes.  But part of the answer is that we are losing something.  Think of the difference between a painting made in watercolor and one made in oil paint.  Theoretically, one could create the same image in both kinds of paint, but would it be the same painting?  Clearly not.  Film has unique qualities that relate to its physical make up.  I remember seeing an old MGM film at the UCLA Film and Television Archives which was being screened in a 35mm nitrate print.  I asked someone who from the archive why the film had such a luminous quality.  They told me that it was the fact that it was a nitrate print.  Nitrate film had “this quality” that safety film didn’t have.  Maybe it was just the molecules of the nitrate material or the enormous amount of silver in the emulsion that gave this glow to the actors who were performing in this wonderful black and white world.  Perhaps it was a secret known only by the film, itself.

As fewer and fewer of us are able to watch an actual film being projected, this sense of wonder and all that film brings us will become more and more difficult to experience.  There is something truly “incandescent” about film projection, and I don’t mean to make a pun here.  It glows not only on the screen, but in our memory, too.  Film brings us something that no other medium can bring.  A certain look, a certain feel, and neither can be replaced or duplicated by the new technologies.

So when you get that rare chance to see a film made on film projected on film, grab the children and the grandchildren.  The circus is coming to town!

Ohio Movie House Screens Its Last Reel-To-Reel 35mm film 

Story from National Public Radio April 30, 2013

Transcription and Courtesy of Steven Bognar

After Tuesday, projectionist Andy Holyoke will help retire the Little Art Theatre’s vintage Italian reel-to-reel projectors.

It’s the end of an era at the Little Art Theatre in Yellow Springs, Ohio. On Tuesday, the theater ran its old, 35 mm film projector for the last time. Then, starting Wednesday, it will close for several months to install an expensive new digital projection system.

The Little Art’s conversion comes in response to a sweeping mandate from big Hollywood studios that all of the country’s theaters — big and small — convert to digital. The studios say they’re going to stop offering their movies on film, so theaters that don’t convert — or can’t afford to — won’t be able to screen new films.

In that sense, the Little Art is lucky. Unlike some small theaters, the nonprofit movie house raised hundreds of thousands of dollars to convert and will reopen soon enough. But Tuesday’s screening is a bittersweet moment for Andy Holyoke, who has worked as the theater’s projectionist for 35 years. He talked to NPR’s Audie Cornish about his life as a projectionist and how the job will change.

Interview Highlights

On the significance of reel-to-reel film in his family

“I brought my infant sons up and put them in a cardboard box while I was running the projector. They both ended up doing some time as movie projectionists, so it runs in the family. I’m going to miss it.”

On the benefits of converting to digital projection

“I’m the guy doing the work here, so I won’t have to splice movies together and carry film cans up and down stairs. I see one of the great benefits as being when a movie is made and opens at 1,000 theaters all at once, they won’t have to have 1,000 prints printed; they’ll only have to make 1,000 discs, or maybe they’ll even do it all over the Internet and there will be no discs.”

On what he plans to do next

“Well, I’m a jack-of-all-trades, licensed at none. I’ll keep doing that; and I build straw-bale houses, so I’ll keep doing that.”

On what will take his job’s place

“Well, I’m not sure what happens next, but my feeling is that the skill set involved in being the projectionist is going to be being able to push a button. Therefore, I’ve been telling the other projectionists that if they want job security here, they better learn to pop popcorn.”

On the challenges of running the projector

“There certainly are things I’m going to miss. It’s kind of like what I think of as a police officer’s job is: hours of tedium punctuated by moments of sheer terror. And that’s pretty much what being a movie projectionist is. Everything’s going fine, and then all hell breaks loose. All of a sudden, there’s no picture, you know, or all of a sudden there’s no sound, or all of a sudden there’s film cascading onto the floor and you have to decide: Do I stop it? Do I back it up? Do I start it over? Earlier in my life as a movie projectionist, I used to have dreams about the movie theater. There’s always a full house waiting for me, and I’m trying to figure out why the projector is sideways on the floor and the film’s running backwards, or something like that.”

On how he watches movies and the quirks of watching 35 mm film

“How I watch a movie is I’m up in this little booth at the back of the theater, and every once in a while I have to get up and change a reel or, you know, answer the phone. So I’d say that’s not really watching a movie, which brings up a point one of our patrons mentioned the other week. He said, ‘It’s OK that you’re going to this new technology, but I really want that seven seconds of darkness to happen before the movie starts,’ because that’s one of the unintended consequences of our old system. When you turn on a 35 mm projector, they don’t turn on the picture and the sound until 7 1/3 seconds has elapsed since you pushed the button. So that means at the beginning of the movie, you push the button to start the movie — it’s totally dark for 7 1/3 seconds. And that’s something that digital stuff probably doesn’t need.”

Photos courtesy of Steven Bognar and Julia Reichert

One anecdote that I’d like to pass on to our readers is an experience that I had more than 30 years ago, when attending a film screening at one of the old “grind houses” (second run, continuous performance from morning ’til 2AM) cinemas on 42nd Street in New York.  They were playing a couple of dopey films (okay, we’ll be kind and call them guilty pleasure films) that I wanted to see.  I remember that one of them was in CinemaScope and filled the giant screen in perfect focus.  When I looked at the distance to the projection booth and the steep angle, I asked myself how could the whole picture be in focus?  Being a curious sort of guy, I went to the manager and asked if I could speak to the projectionist.  In a flash, he was down in the lobby.  I guess he didn’t get too many people asking to talk to him, and welcomed a reprieve from the loneliness of being up in that dingy room for 12 hours a day.  He asked me what I wanted and I just asked him, “How is it possible for the whole picture to be in focus with that steep angle?  I can understand part of it being in focus, but not all.”  He just laughed and told me, “Well, it’s nothing I’m doing.”  I was aghast.  “How is it possible?”  He laughed some more and revealed his secret.  “It’s the lens.  It was made specifically for this theater, taking into consideration the distance and angle.  Wish I could take credit for it, but I certainly take pride in knowing that things were done right in my booth.  Makes my job a lot easier, and keeps the customers happy.”

Welcome aboard, Peter.

Ron Merk

Editor-in-Chief

Indieplex Online Magazine

Introduction

The Projectionist, often conjures up a mysterious character, is about to go the way of steam train stokers and lighthouse keepers, to be released from his or her labors by computers in most cases, or a handful of specialist individuals. But once upon a time the Projectionist was seen as an important role, and in fact were often showmen in there own right. I was very pleased to be asked to write this article, on a topic which I am greatly passionate about, and which has been a large part of my life so far. However, I have to be clear from the outset that as I am only in my 30s it means that I missed out on much of the great show parts of cinema, and so I have to rely on the stories of my peers which have been told.

Early Days

Written in numerous projectionist manuals is a line to the effect “The Projectionist is the last link in the filming making chain and it is your responsibility to show that film in the best possible way“. And it was this belief and value which was instilled into the projectionist for most of the next century. Right from the very beginning showmanship and presentation was at the heart of the role for the projectionist. Once upon a time the Projectionist would be the person who would have to hand crank the film through the projector, working out the best way in which to make the projector work and to crank the machine at the proper frame rate! Often a projector and film would be bought without any instructions in the early days of cinema, when many ‘bioscopes’ where run and operated by funfair showman. These basic affairs of a tent with a few benches and a screen, got more and more ornate as the showman tried to out-do each other and persuade the audience to visit their film shows rather than a rival’s. There were big fair organs, powered by steam engines, and stage shows. All required a great deal of skill to make it happen.  In the USA, it was common for small storefronts to be converted into theaters, charging five cents for a show, thus the ubiquitous name “nickelodeons.”

1920s – 1940s

Cinema presentation move into permanent buildings, often taking over existing theaters or music halls. From the mid-teens through 1940 cinemas as we know them today started to be built on a large scale, taking on the both grandeur of theaters and needs of the film industry in their architecture, and equipped with the latest projection, lighting and (late in the 20s) technology. They were palaces for the people – “Picture Palaces” or “Movie Palaces” were the names by which they were most commonly called. Often these cinemas would put on a program of film, along with live performance as well,  called “cinevariety” in England or prologues in the USA. – ( http://mikelangcinevariety.wordpress.com/cine-variety-memories-of-a-forgotten-era/.) It was for this reason that the projectionists role also required a large number of the same techniques and traditions as live theater, including controlling the lighting, curtains and theatrical effects.

Whatever the cinema, the Projectionist was a showman and took great care with everything they did. The program would change more than once a week and each one had the same level of care and dedication given to it, with each film being rehearsed. Films would be run on more than one projector in those days and a projectionist could lose his job for missing a changeover cue and a blank screen happening as a result.

A projectionist would have to earn their way to being head projectionist by learning the requisite skills, starting as a rewind boy, spending all their time cleaning the projection room, often for many months before being allowed anywhere near any film. And it would be a long time even then before a projectionist would be allowed to even touch a projector.  This extract from what is obviously a much longer documentary demonstrates very clearly the care and attention that went into the projectionist’s work: Cinema showmanship Late 40′s style: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvQWMSZS-Rs. In fact such was the importance and value given to the projectionist, that there was an ‘Operators Creed’ - this was not written by me, but was found in a 1935 Projectionist Diary, but is just as true today as it was then:

Trying to describe the perfect opening is very difficult when it is such a visual thing, and there are not many examples on the internet to demonstrate it. Many cinemas would have several sets of curtains and a set of masking, along with a variety of lights, foot lamps, stage lamps, auditorium lighting and more. Often there would by live music performed before the film. This would have been an orchestra or cinema band and later on with the cinema organ and eventually a phonograph record. The lighting would slowly fade down, as the music track – appropriately chosen for the film comes to the end and the logo of the film hits the curtains which open as the rest of the lights fade down and open up to reveal the screen. With “This is Cinerama” when the film went from the small black and white documentary of cinema history, filling the traditional 1.33:1 screen, and then the curtains opened up to reveal the huge, curved Cinerama screen, audiences gasped as they rode the Coney Island roller coaster in a way they had never before done in a cinema.  Such was the power of “presentation.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lII5rXbxcCs. During this period of time there could be up to five projectionists in the projection room at any one time for a show. It was all about giving the audience what we would call ‘an experience’ these days, but it was done in the same way as live theater or an opera.

The 1980s-Present

With the advent of the multiplex cinema, many projectionists lost their jobs en masse, but there was still a requirement for their skills, although there were less of them in the projection booth. By this time there was generally just one single projectionist with more and more automation to assist with screenings such as the film platter system, on which the whole film was mounted instead of doing projector changeovers for separate reels. There were still curtains to open and close and masking to be adjusted to the proper screen ratio for a specific film, as well as some lighting changes in most cinemas, so a lot of the presentation and showman skills were still required. This video from the Empire Leicester Square is of the Laser Show which use to run before the film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQivA1_ajrg.

However, slowly over time cinema chains have decided that it is no longer necessary to have curtains or lighting adjustments in the auditoriums, or even the masking.  Audiences now walk in to a cinema with a big white blank screen, and some of the awe that had once filled them was inexorably and finally lost. with the advent of Digital Projectors it is possible for the entire presentation for a cinema circuit to be controlled by one person in a room anywhere in the world. For the majority of cinemas a single uniform presentation style began to be implemented. Only a very few independent venues still required to have a projectionist because of their desire to continue to do some theatrical presentation.

But cinema has become more complicated with all the different formats, aspect ratios, sound systems and other requirements from content makers. While the everyday films are can be run by left to low-pay non-skilled workers. These people have no sense of whether the film is being shown in the best possible way, whether all the speakers are working properly, if the lighting source lamp is aligned correctly, if the 3D filter is in its proper place – and many other questions that most of these amateur “projectionists” don’t even know to ask.  This word is often delegated to concession workers, assistant managers, or anyone who just happens to be available when something needs to be done in the booth, or if heaven forbid, something goes wrong during a screening.

I am lucky that I have the chance to still get to run films with a bit of presentation – opening and closing curtains, masking and lighting – both in venues which are digital and others which are film. But all is not lost, there are still a few cinemas in the world where the art of showmanship has not disappeared completely. The El Captain Theatre in Los Angeles still puts on an amazing show, have a look at these YouTube videos:  http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=El+Capitan+Theatre

Recently I have launched a new website entitled “We Can Still Show Film”, dedicated to capturing all the venues and projectionists who can still show film across the world as we move ever closer to a 100% digital environment. Like any technological change jobs will be lost, and in this case the projectionist is the person who find that in the majority of cases their skills, passion and knowledge will no longer be required or appreciated except in a few specialized venues.

About the author:

Peter J. Knight, otherwise known has The Mad Cornish Projectionist (www.madcornishprojectionist.co.uk), has been involved in the cinema exhibition industry since 1997, when he was started as an assistant projectionist at Flix – Loughborough Student Cinema (www.flix.org.uk). Later becoming head projectionist and actively involved with the overall running of the organization. After graduation Peter moved to London where he has freelanced as a Projectionist/AV Technican since in a variety of different venues from arts centers to preview theaters and even at the Glastonbury Music Festival. Peter is chairman of the Projected Picture Trust (www.ppttrust.org), an organization interested in the preservation of cinema technology equipment, and is also the vice-chairman of the BKSTS Cinema Technology Committee (www.bkstsctc.com), an organization which is interested in education in the current day cinema technical worker and cinema technology development. Peter also writes extensively about all areas of the cinema industry and the technical elements of projection. He has also recently just launched We Can Still Show Film (www.wecanstillshowfilm.com) a free international website which is aimed at recording all the people, venues and companies still able to handle film.

3-D or not 3-D, That is the Question!

By Ron Merk

As someone who was lucky enough to be a kid of movie-going age during the Golden Age of 3-D movies back in the early to mid-fifties, there is only one word to describe how audiences reacted to this first look into the third dimension on screen.  The word is thrilled.

We didn’t care if the film was a A or a B picture, as long as something was coming at us, off the screen and into the theater.  Most of the films were pretty much programmers, but that didn’t both the kids at the Plaza and Tivoli Theaters in Newark, New Jersey where I saw most of the 3-D “classics.”

There’s a great site on the internet, created by 3D expert, Bob Furmanek:

http://www.3dfilmarchive.com

It is jam packed with so much information about 3-D, it’s practically jumping off the computer screen.  Check it out.  It’s worth the time, and if you’re interested in film history, this is an important part of it, especially the with present renaissance of 3-D filmmaking.

If you’re one of those people who fondly remembers having a lion in you lap (Bwana Devil) or who ducked when arrows flew off the screen (The Charge at Feather River) or who thought you’d be hit by flying boulders (It Came From Outer Space), then you’re going to love this site.  If you’re still a youngster, you’ll have a chance to catch up on history and what brought us here to the current state of 3D filmmaking.

And if you have any questions about 3D filmmaking, Bob is your go-to (or should I say go-three) guy.

May 2, 2013

Dear Zach,

It must be truly amazing to have raised the two million dollars you were seeking for your follow up to Garden State in just a few days on Kickstarter.  This illustrates the power of your celebrity and people’s willingness to help you with your personal project.  But clearly you’ve seen the enormous amount of negative response to your fundraising on Twitter and other sites.  You have a solid career in television, agents, lawyers, residuals from “Scrubs” and lots of rich friends who could have easily provided the money that will give you artistic control of the film that you talk about in your pitch video. Instead you made a choice to do this campaign on Kickstarter to raise the money.

You must understand that there’s a finite amount of money out there, and by vacuuming up two million dollars, you may have inadvertently taken these financial resources out of the pockets of many other deserving projects trying to raise funds on Kickstarter?

Instead of using that money for your own project, here’s what I think you should do:  divide the $2,000,000 up amongst 400 projects on Kickstarter.  Give $5000 each to campaigns that are really in need, and which have good ideas for the arts, music or film.  Your name would be on four hundred films or projects instead of just one.  Your name would be everywhere. You’d be the hero of the arts community, instead of someone who comes across as narcissistic and selfish. Thousands if not millions of people would be saying what a great guy you are.

Please do the right thing.   Kickstarter is an amazing thing and by helping 400 people, you will be doing much more to change the world than ever possible with just one film.  And Zach, there’s something else that will probably happen….that two million that you need will come knocking on your door faster than you can say instant karma.

Regards,

Ron Merk

By Ron Merk

As a kid back in Newark, NJ, I just fell in love with the movies, and it’s where I loved to spend my weekends.  I remember the first 3D movie I ever saw, and quite vividly, since it was “The Charge At Feather River,” replete with flying arrows and tomahawks which we all ducked as they came zooming at us in very amazing dual-projector 3D.  I remember looking around the theater and seeing a room full of people, all wearing 3D glasses.  It was like a trip to another planet in some ways.

The 3D fad (as it came to be known later) ran for a few years, and for the most part the films made in this process were programmers as they used to call B-pictures.  Action, adventure and horror were the main genres portrayed in three dimensions.  But they were fun, and we always looked forward to any film that advertised it was “coming at you in 3D.”  There were a few good films made in 3D, including “Kiss Me Kate” and Hichcock’s “Dial M For Murder.” But for the most part, critics were not kind to 3D films and used to say, “if you want a lion in your lap this is the film for you,” or other such derogatory references.  But audiences loved these movies, and always came away with the feeling that they had been thoroughly entertained.

Of course, it’s now nearly 60 years since most of these films were made, and unfortunately, they rarely get screened in 3D, if at all.  But there’s good news.  Jeff Joseph (of the late, great Sabucat Productions) and his great team, are doing a massive, wonderful 3D event in Los Angeles in September, at the Egyptian Theater in Hollywood.  It’s a rare chance to see these films as they were intended to be seen.  They’ve also unearthed 3D films that were never shown in 3D or for which elements had been lost and recently located, as well as shorts, cartoons and 3D rarities (one of my favorite programs).   So, if you’re a student of film, technology or just love movies, check out the website, don’t say I didn’t warn you that “they’re coming at you.”

I normally don’t “promote” events on this site, but this is a real chance to see a true piece of film history, and one that now resonates with filmmakers and audiences as the new wave of 3D films hits our screens.

The presentation at the Egyptian is first class, with all of the films being shown in their original 3D process, whether polaroid or anaglyptic or “other.”  I attended the first 3D Expo that Jeff and his team put together about 10 years ago, and I can tell you that seeing these films again in 3D on the big screen was simply thrilling.  Audiences, too, are great, as they cheer the characters or react loudly to what’s happening on the screen (and off!).  Pick up a large popcorn at the concession, and get ready to have a great time.  And if you do get a lion in your lap, just remember that Ron sent you!

Here’s the complete information on the festival:

World 3-D Film Expo III Returns to Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood

Hollywood, CA – The World 3-D Film Expo will return to the Egyptian Theatre, September 6-15, 2013. The ten-day festival will pay tribute to the 60th anniversary of what many film historians regard as the “Golden Age” of 3-D, and will include screenings of the John Wayne western HONDO, the Vincent Price horror film HOUSE OF WAX, Cole Porter’s musical KISS ME KATE, and sci-fi thriller IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE., and even later 3-D films, such as 1983’s JAWS 3-D. Lesser-known titles, such as THE FRENCH LINE with Jane Russell and SECOND CHANCE with Robert Mitchum, will also be included.

The Expo is partnering with digital 3-D projection sponsor RealD to present a number of screenings in RealD 3-D including Alfred Hitchcock’s DIAL M FOR MURDER and Jack Arnold’s sci-fi/horror classic CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON. Stefan Droessler, 3-D historian and head of the Munich Film Museum, will present an in-depth overview of “European 3-D Filmmaking 1935-1953,” including long-lost footage from the 1936 Berlin Olympics.

The festival will also be home to several premieres including the Los Angeles Premiere of the 1946 Russian 3-D adaptation of ROBINSON CRUSOE. September 14th will mark the World Premiere of the stereoscopic version of the 1954 Korean War drama, DRAGONFLY SQUADRON. The film was only released in a flat version during its initial release, and has never been seen by audiences in 3-D. Newly-restored 35 mm prints of shorts “Rocky Marciano, Champion vs. Jersey Joe Walcott, Challenger” and “College Capers” will be screened in 3-D for the first time in 60 years. Most programs being presented at the festival will be shown in archival double-system 35 mm. prints, many of them the last known copies.

The World 3-D Expo has been called “a Woodstock for movie geeks” by film critic Leonard Maltin. Organized by Jeff Joseph of SabuCat Productions, the Expo was first presented at the Egyptian Theatre to sold-out crowds in 2003 and again in 2006. “The technical demands of presenting 3-D cinema and the increasing difficulty of finding prints means that for many of the films presented, this may be the last time they are ever screened in this format” says producer and programmer Jeff Joseph.

Tickets for the festival are available on the Expo website at www.3-dfilmexpo.com or by calling the Expo Box Office at (661) 724-0934.  Individual tickets are $18 per show; an Expo Pass for all 35 programs is available at $399 including priority seating. The World 3-D Film Expo will be held at the Egyptian Theatre at: 6712 Hollywood Blvd., Hollywood CA 90028.

Please note that the World 3-D Film Expo III is not a presentation of the American Cinematheque which owns and operates the Egyptian Theatre.

For more information about the Expo, please contact Jack Theakston (jack@3-dfilmexpo.com) or Dennis Bartok ().  For more information about RealD, please contact Heather Dawe, Director Marking – RealD at phone: 310-385-4015 or e-mail: hdawe@reald.com.

Some say the manure has hit the wind machine in Hollywood, as Kickstarter takes many hits because of Zach Braff’s three-day blitz of his fans’ wallets and the successful raising the full two million dollars he says he needs for his follow up film to “Garden State.”

Like much of what has happened in the film business over the past 40 years to constantly change the playing field for filmmakers, there is one constant: Any time something comes along that can really help independent filmmakers (cable TV with its promise of many specialty channels, home video, digital tools, and more recently crowdfunding) Hollywood soon realizes the value of these things to the bottom line, and then quickly subsumes the innovation or idea. This has historically dashed the hopes of filmmakers in the margins of the business finding their way to the center, or at least having a way of making a decent living as a filmmaker, and not having a so-called “day job” to pay the bills.

It would appear that once again filmmakers have been pushed to the sidelines of fundraising for their project by the big elephant in the room (famous people with big fan bases). While there’s no language on our birth certificates that “life will be fair, “ it seems to be that the initial goal of Kickstarter (now possibly evolved into something different) was to give independent artists a way to raise money for the projects that would never be realized without the financial help that Kickstarter initially promised.

When someone like Braff comes along and raises a two million dollars, more than two hundred $10,000 projects or four hundred $5,000 projects may not be able to find their funding because it’s all been sucked up by the vacuum of Braff’s or Veronica Mars’ celebrity. There is only a finite amount of money out there, and when big projects take large chunks of it, small projects can not get funded. In an earlier article I wrote on this subject, I likened crowdfunding to a ponzi scheme. I have not changed my opinion on that subject. Crowdfunding has become too crowded. In the end, someone is NOT going to get the money they’re seeking.

There has been lots of noise about this recent Kickstarter issue. Read more about it:
“Don’t Hate on Zach Braff – Rage Against Kickstarter’s Perry Chen” by Reginald Nelson
http://www.thewrap.com/media/blog-post/don-t-hate-zach-braff-rage-against-kickstarters-perry-chen-88081

One short excerpt:
Kickstarter was co-founded by its current CEO Perry Chen, a struggling former musician and gallerist. Chen, along with Charles Adler and Yancey Strickler, started the brilliant crowdfunding site for creative artists and inventors who would raise money based on how good your “idea” or concept is. Backers support you not based on how much profit the product would generate but on what they want to see enter the creative space.

Filmmaker Magazine – Letter from Scott Macaulay

One short excerpt:
Perhaps Braff’s campaign just represents a maturing of the platform in the same way that Apple is now morphing into a more predictable value company instead of a high-stock price growth engine. But one thing in Braff’s Kickstarter video rubbed me the wrong way. It was his rant against “the money guys.” Basically, he said, he had this cool movie, but the money guys won’t let him do things like cast the actors he wants and shoot a scene at Comic-Con. Who are these money guys? Can’t Braff find other ones? He’s got a track record, as do his two producers. I should also note that the money guys have read the script, while his Kickstarter backers — his new money guys — have not.

New Zach Braff Movie Hits Kickstarter Goal, Could It Threaten ‘Veronica Mars’ Record? By Lucas Shaw
http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/new-zach-braff-movie-hits-kickstarter-goal-could-it-threaten-veronica-mars-record-88126

Two Short Excerpts:
Many have rebuked Braff and Kickstarter over the past few days, both on Twitter and in the press, unhappy that Braff can raise so much money for a project because of his celebrity. More than 60 percent of the 25,000-plus film and video projects launched on Kickstarter have failed and no successful project had topped $1 million until “Veronica Mars.”
and
Kickstarter founders Perry Chen, Yancey Strickler and Charles Adler created the platform to help anyone with a creative idea secure financial backing for their project. They never specified restricting the platform to those without financial wherewithal and have stayed out of this recent scrum.
So has Braff, beyond having this to say to his critics:
“The people who would say, ‘Fuck him, he should pay for it himself,’ I don’t expect those people to be the supporters of this project. [...] It’s not a scam. If I wanted to make dough, I’d go back and be on another TV show.”

Are Hollywood Millionaires Ruining Kickstarter? Let’s Ask the Internet by Diane Garrett
http://www.thewrap.com/media/article/are-wealthy-celebrities-ruining-kickstarter-lets-ask-internet-87641

One short excerpt:
By mid-afternoon, Braff was half-way to his $2 million goal. But passions were running high against the campaign on social media, with a sizable contingent questioning whether wealthy celebrities should use a platform favored by those without similar financial access.
Filmmaker Tony Rocha implored people not to give Braff money for his project. “Please do not give Zach Braff your money,” he tweeted.
“I have never seen so much hatred toward Kickstarter/crowdfunding in a single day,” tweeted Ben Leach.