Doc Films, the longest continuously-running student film group in the nation, has had an increased number of issues during screenings this quarter, which the RSO’s leaders attribute to a combination of bad luck, projection complications, and reel quality.
The mistakes have included rough reel transitions, missing footage, and sound mix-ups, according to Doc Films co-General Chair and third-year Andrea Nishi.
Some of the errors were due to operator mistakes and miscommunication, Nishi said, but other problems are inherent to the equipment, such as poor film quality and the complexities of changing reels between two projectors.
During showings, the reels are operated by a head projectionist and two apprentices, most of whom are third- and fourth-years with at least two quarters’ experience volunteering at Doc. According to Nishi, all three go through training involving hands-on experience with reels and film.
However, Nishi said, it is impossible for a student-run theater to gain the projection experience of professional theaters, which do not have the same levels of student turnover.
“Every film that we show is projected by volunteers, and we want to make sure that everyone that wants to has an opportunity to learn to use the projection equipment,” she said.
Even with less training than professional projectionists, Doc puts forth 80 movies each quarter—more than many professional theaters do in a year, according to Nishi.
She also said that quality issues sometimes arise when the theater must accept lower quality films to acquire the variety of the movies it shows.
“In order to show the films that we want to show, we have to be willing to project prints that aren’t in ideal condition,” Nishi said. “There is always the increased chance that something could go wrong when you’re screening something that hasn’t been shown in twenty years.”
Students who attended a screening of Wes Anderson’s The Royal Tenenbaums two weeks ago noticed the problems but did not feel it was a regular issue.
“The screen went black, and then someone yelled out saying it would be up again in five minutes. It wasn’t,” first-year Kayla Reinherz said.
“We saw part of the movie that was supposed to come later, and so there were two big elements out of order,” fourth-year Alfredo Perez said. “I saw Mars Attacks! last spring and there were problems then, too, though it isn’t a constant thing.”
What a non-story and terrible piece of journalism. Fritz opens the piece with the premise that Doc has had “an increased number of issues during screenings this quarter” and then cites one recent screening and one from a year ago. What? There are risks inherent in showing FILM,especially older prints that have been moldering away in a collector’s garage or basement. But these risks and problems are nothing new. What next, Fritz: “Maroon Staff Stumped for Something to Write About”? No news there.
Scott – I can understand that, as the Special Events Chair of Doc Films, you have personal reasons for being interested in the content of this article, but your response is immature and idiotic. I love Doc films. I have been to four showings this quarter and unfortunately every single one had some type of technical glitch (the screen went blank, the sound went out, the bass blared uncontrollably, etc). I have talked with my friends about this and they too seem to always encounter similar problems at Doc films.
No one is attacking Doc Films. So, instead of snobbishly lecturing us on “the risks inherent in showing FILM” (which, btw, the author acknowledges in the article) and childishly attacking this “terrible piece of journalism” why don’t you (like a grown up) acknowledge the problems Doc is facing and perhaps intelligently comment on how Doc aims to minimize them?
I note that The Maroon recently published a “Correction” for this poorly-researched article. It would be nice if that correction appeared online.