I'm been sitting on the sidelines during this long and interesting topic, keeping my thoughts to myself. I do believe that digital is the future, and maybe even the near future. How "near future" is defined, I don't know... 3 years, 5 years, or maybe even 10 years. What I will do when that time comes, I don't know... probably make the switch, whatever the cost. Having been in this business for 40 years, and having saved and invested, I'm in the fortunate position that when that day comes, all I'll need do is write a check. However, even though I'm in the position to do that now if I want to, I won't. I'll wait until ditital has proven itself. I like 35mm film. I like working with it, and I'm totally comfortable with it. It's not a question as to which puts forth a better image at this time as I think they are pretty much the same at this point. It's the reliability that I am concerned about. I don't want to have only a 99% success rate. In over 37 years of running my present theatre, I have never lost a show, that's 100%, so why would I want to drop to 99% with digital?
What has brought me into this discussion is the comment:"Do you mean to say that you can operate 35mm projectors for 20 years, for multiple shows per day, and never replace a single sprocket? The intermittent movement alone will blow out at least once or twice. Current 35mm is hardly maintenance free, why would you expect D-Cinema to be any different?" by TRANSIT. I have never lost, repaired or replaced an intermittent in either of my 1945 Simplex E-7s yet. That's over 23,000 showings. I want to see digital do that. Yes, I have replaced a few sprockets over the years, and a few gears as well. I probably replace at least one gear every 3 or 4 years. But since I have 2 projectors, the show continues to go on.
Since I'm 2nd run, it looks as though I won't get any help from VPFs, so I'm pretty much on my own anyway. If I join CBG, I'll get used equipment which will certainly be less reliable by that time then present 35mm, so why should I go that route. And why is this VPF program based on whether you're full time first run? Shouldn't it be based on what you gross, or better yet, what you pay in film rental? As a booker myself, and a member of Rentrack, I see the figures. There are hundreds of full time first run theatres that don't gross what my subrun theatre grosses. In fact there are many 2, 3 or even 4 screen locations that don't gross on all of their screens what I gross on my one screen, even to the extent that their film rental at 70% doesn't come close to mine at 35%.
Is it fair that I'm not eligible for VPFs just because I'm 2nd run when I earn the studios a higher return. Of course not... but as is often the case in this business, that's just the way it is.