warpedpink
Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2009
- Messages
- 841
- Reaction score
- 2
Hi Everyone,
I thought I would share this email from John Waldo, one of the attorneys from the Cinemark case and the AMC agreement.
From: John Waldo
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 3:10 PM
Subject: Landmark Theatres Captioning Plans
Dear Colleagues:
I met this morning with Ted Mundorff, the chief executive officer of Landmark Theatres, which operates a chain of movie theaters that specializes in independent and "art-house" movies. Captioning at Landmark's theaters is particularly important, because the movies it exhibits appeal to adult audiences in the best sense of the word, and those people are the ones with the highest prevalence of hearing loss.
The good news is that Mundorff and Landmark are very much committed to captioning, and want to be our partners rather than our opponents. Mundorff indicated that Landmark will install full captioning capability at its theaters when those theaters are converted to digital projection.
The bad news is that the way the movie studios have structured their financial contribution to the cost of digital conversion doesn't work well for Landmark. Because it cannot count on the level of reimbursement offered to the large suburban multiplexes that show the mainstream releases often aimed at the youth market, Landmark may not be able to convert many of its theaters to digital, and may not be able to do so as rapidly as the major chains like Regal, Cinemark and AMC.
Landmark has converted and installed captioning equipment at two of its theaters, one in Baltimore, where it has been sued by the National Association of the Deaf, and one in Los Angeles (the Landmark). It uses Sony server-projectors, and is trying to use the CaptiView display device manufactured by Doremi, a rival server maker. Sony has supposedly developed a linking component that can make those two systems compatible. Mundorff reports that in practice, the linking component has not worked well, and often has to be re-booted mid-movie, which means the film has to be stopped and restarted. He believes the kinks will be worked out, and captioning can be accomplished.
He is also interested in the Sony eyeware that displays the captions on the inside of special glasses. Those are currently being tested by Regal at its Seattle theaters, and have generally received positive reviews, although the glasses themselves apparently are a bit uncomfortable. Mundorff says that because the glasses aren't actually in commercial production yet, prices aren't available, but are expected to be expensive.
For those theaters that are not going to be converted to digital, I suggested that Landmark contact the AMC and Rave theater chains, which are disposing of their existing Rear Windows Captioning units. He will consult with the RWC vendors to ensure that captions will continue to be available, but will consider installing those used RWC units in the theaters that won't convert to digital.
(I also told him that much of the historic objection to RWC from the user community arose when RWC was being compared with open captioning, and that where only the various modes of closed captioning are considered, RWC finds considerably more favor).
We also discussed the fact that some of the independent and "art-house" films are not captioned, particularly those released by the Weinstein Group. He agreed to contact those studios and find out why the films aren't captioned. My personal suspicion is that this is a chicken-egg problem, and that the reason those movies aren't captioned is that few of the theaters that exhibit such films are equipped to show captions. If Landmark commits to install captioning equipment, it might be easier to persuade those reluctant studios to provide captions.
Landmark's theaters in Washington, all in Seattle, are the Egyptian, the Harvard Exit, the Guild 45th, the Metro, the Varsity and the Crest. In California, Landmark's theaters are the Landmark, NuArt and Regent in Los Angeles, the Hillcrest, Ken and LaJolla Village in San Diego, the Embarcadero, Bridge, Lumiere, Opera Plaza, Aquarius and Guild in San Francisco and the Peninsula, and the Albany Twin, California, Piedmont and Shattuck in the East Bay.
I like the fact that Landmark appears willing not only to do the right thing, but to actually work with us and talk to us about what it plans to do, why it can't do everything, and how it can help us achieve our objective of greater access. I plan to keep in touch with them, and do what they say, will not take any further legal action against them in Washington, and would recommend that no action be taken in California.
John Waldo
Advocacy Director and Counsel
Washington State Communication Access Project -- Wash-CAP
Hearing Loss Law : Washington Hearing Loss Lawyer & Attorney : John Waldo Law Firm : Hard of Hearing, Disability, Hearing Impairment : Seattle, Bainbridge, Washington, Pacific Northwest <http://www.wash-cap.com>
Counsel
Oregon Communication Access Project -- OR-CAP
I thought I would share this email from John Waldo, one of the attorneys from the Cinemark case and the AMC agreement.
From: John Waldo
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 3:10 PM
Subject: Landmark Theatres Captioning Plans
Dear Colleagues:
I met this morning with Ted Mundorff, the chief executive officer of Landmark Theatres, which operates a chain of movie theaters that specializes in independent and "art-house" movies. Captioning at Landmark's theaters is particularly important, because the movies it exhibits appeal to adult audiences in the best sense of the word, and those people are the ones with the highest prevalence of hearing loss.
The good news is that Mundorff and Landmark are very much committed to captioning, and want to be our partners rather than our opponents. Mundorff indicated that Landmark will install full captioning capability at its theaters when those theaters are converted to digital projection.
The bad news is that the way the movie studios have structured their financial contribution to the cost of digital conversion doesn't work well for Landmark. Because it cannot count on the level of reimbursement offered to the large suburban multiplexes that show the mainstream releases often aimed at the youth market, Landmark may not be able to convert many of its theaters to digital, and may not be able to do so as rapidly as the major chains like Regal, Cinemark and AMC.
Landmark has converted and installed captioning equipment at two of its theaters, one in Baltimore, where it has been sued by the National Association of the Deaf, and one in Los Angeles (the Landmark). It uses Sony server-projectors, and is trying to use the CaptiView display device manufactured by Doremi, a rival server maker. Sony has supposedly developed a linking component that can make those two systems compatible. Mundorff reports that in practice, the linking component has not worked well, and often has to be re-booted mid-movie, which means the film has to be stopped and restarted. He believes the kinks will be worked out, and captioning can be accomplished.
He is also interested in the Sony eyeware that displays the captions on the inside of special glasses. Those are currently being tested by Regal at its Seattle theaters, and have generally received positive reviews, although the glasses themselves apparently are a bit uncomfortable. Mundorff says that because the glasses aren't actually in commercial production yet, prices aren't available, but are expected to be expensive.
For those theaters that are not going to be converted to digital, I suggested that Landmark contact the AMC and Rave theater chains, which are disposing of their existing Rear Windows Captioning units. He will consult with the RWC vendors to ensure that captions will continue to be available, but will consider installing those used RWC units in the theaters that won't convert to digital.
(I also told him that much of the historic objection to RWC from the user community arose when RWC was being compared with open captioning, and that where only the various modes of closed captioning are considered, RWC finds considerably more favor).
We also discussed the fact that some of the independent and "art-house" films are not captioned, particularly those released by the Weinstein Group. He agreed to contact those studios and find out why the films aren't captioned. My personal suspicion is that this is a chicken-egg problem, and that the reason those movies aren't captioned is that few of the theaters that exhibit such films are equipped to show captions. If Landmark commits to install captioning equipment, it might be easier to persuade those reluctant studios to provide captions.
Landmark's theaters in Washington, all in Seattle, are the Egyptian, the Harvard Exit, the Guild 45th, the Metro, the Varsity and the Crest. In California, Landmark's theaters are the Landmark, NuArt and Regent in Los Angeles, the Hillcrest, Ken and LaJolla Village in San Diego, the Embarcadero, Bridge, Lumiere, Opera Plaza, Aquarius and Guild in San Francisco and the Peninsula, and the Albany Twin, California, Piedmont and Shattuck in the East Bay.
I like the fact that Landmark appears willing not only to do the right thing, but to actually work with us and talk to us about what it plans to do, why it can't do everything, and how it can help us achieve our objective of greater access. I plan to keep in touch with them, and do what they say, will not take any further legal action against them in Washington, and would recommend that no action be taken in California.
John Waldo
Advocacy Director and Counsel
Washington State Communication Access Project -- Wash-CAP
Hearing Loss Law : Washington Hearing Loss Lawyer & Attorney : John Waldo Law Firm : Hard of Hearing, Disability, Hearing Impairment : Seattle, Bainbridge, Washington, Pacific Northwest <http://www.wash-cap.com>
Counsel
Oregon Communication Access Project -- OR-CAP