The industry-wide digital cinema roll-out moved a step closer with Sony's announcement that it had signed a VPF agreement with Digital Cinema Implementation Partners (DCIP), the consortium formed by AMC, Cinemark and Regal to manage their transition to digital. That leaves only Warner Bros. among the major studios to be without a VPF agreement for the second phase of the digital cinema conversion.

"We're in the middle of negotiations," Warners domestic distribution president Dan Fellman said. "We're close. So we might be the last one, but we're going to get there."

Sony signed its VPF pact with Digital Cinema Implementation Partners several weeks ago, but the news was delayed pending internal review of the formal announcement.

Through VPFs, studios volunteer to pay the equivalent of print costs for years after switching to digital distribution as a means of defraying most exhibitor costs to convert auditoriums. Sony refers to its VPF as a "digital conversion fee."

For Warners, set to release more films this year than any other distributor, the cost of a VPF is likely to run considerably higher than that for studios with lower annual output. Sony also is among the most prolific film distributors.

Of course, the roll-out will depend on the unlocking of the credit markets as the DCIP 14,000-screen deal alone will cost in the billion dollar range. Then comes the Cinema Buying Group's (CBG) approximately 7,000 screens - a more complex deal despite the smaller size owing to the number of companies, the diversity of markets, and types of theaters involved.

I would be deeply remiss if I didn't bring your attention to this post on the digital cinema self-financing panel at ShoWest.

Sperling Reich must have the fastest typing fingers in the West to nail down as much detail as he does here from a fast-paced lunch-time discussion.

When Macdowell turned to Solomon to get an exhibitor's opinion the discussion turned somewhat acrimonious, in a friendly sort of way. "I happen not to be a proponent of 2K [projector resolution] and I have not been a big proponent of integrators," said Solomon. "I believe we should be able to band together and form our own consortium and go negotiate for our own VPFs. I don't believe in giving a cut to an integrator."

CBG's Campbell, like Christiansen, isn't as down on integrators as Solomon and is of the opinion such third parties might be necessary, especially in the short-term. "Self financing is not going to happen for a long time," said Campbell. "I think self-financing is going to be done through the integrators and if we have to pay a small fee of the VPF then so be it."

Solomon, whose smooth New Orleans drawl had Macdowell comparing him to a slick southern lawyer, is not the retiring type and is almost always quotable. Given the chance to air a few thoughts, he let his grievances fly. His comments received the biggest audience reaction by far. "If 2K is the way we're going, then 35mm is better," he argued. "Apparently digital helps distribution, but it doesn't do a thing for exhibition. If distributors want to go with 2K then give us the money and we'll get on with it, otherwise we're going to have to go at our own pace. If distribution wants 2K, give us the money!"

Solomon went on to get a huge laugh when he recounted asking one of his regional managers, "What's the difference between a 35mm film print and a digital cinema hard drive? He said, 'about 40 pounds'."

Levin attempted to diffuse Solomon by pointing out that two of the studios were present and on stage, ready to talk about giving Southern VPFs, but Solomon got the last word in during this exchange as well by snapping back "I know, but I have to figure out how I'm going to pay for [3D] glasses with one of them."

In one instant Solomon made public the rumor that Fox had been telling North American exhibitors that after "Ice Age 3" the studio would no longer be paying for disposable 3D glasses. Presently none of the studios pay for disposable glasses in Europe, though they have been footing the bill in the U.S., Canada and at times Mexico.

 Read the whole thing. It will be well worth your time.

Digital Cinema Implementation Partners (DCIP), a consortium of exhibitors Regal Entertainment Group, AMC Theatres and Cinemark, announced they have struck a deal with five Hollywood studios to support their digital cinema rollout. According to AP:

Five Hollywood studios have agreed to help pay for a $1 billion-plus rollout of digital technology on about 20,000 movie screens in North America, a precursor to showing movies in 3-D.

Digital Cinema Implementation Partners, a consortium of major theater chains, announced the deal Wednesday. The rollout in the U.S. and Canada, covering about half of all screens, is planned to start early next year.

DCIP topper Travis Reid noted that the rollout remains contingent on securing financing for the deal - a difficult task in the midst of the ongoing credit crisis.

"We'll be needing to execute in the debt markets and we hope to do that during the fourth quarter," Reid said. "We don't believe that the markets will be closed forever."

NATO applauded the agreement, but noted there are numerous theaters and screens not covered by the agreement.

With a deal in place for the largest U.S. theater chains, it is time to conclude a similar digital cinema agreement for the hundreds of independent cinemas and thousands of screens not covered by this agreement. It is imperative for the health of the industry and for the millions of moviegoers in small towns and cities that the benefits of digital cinema be spread as widely as possible.

NATO, through the Cinema Buying Group (CBG) and its selected digital cinema integrator Access Integrated Technologies, Inc. (AIX), continues to work with the studios to ensure that CBG members, who are smaller and independent exhibitors, often in small towns, are not left behind.

CBG's website is here. 

 Publisher Nick Dager starts it off with a bang:

The answer lies in the fact that the studios, either by happenstance or by design, are taking a very passive-aggressive approach in their negotiations with DCIP. Several studios are demanding higher virtual print fees, which exhibitors insist they can’t afford. Other studios are demanding that exhibitors convert to digital now in order to justify the costs of the 3D features due out next summer.

In some cases that passive-aggressive attitude exists in the same studio. In interview after interview Jeffrey Katzenberg, CEO of Dreamworks Animation has led the charge all but demanding that exhibitors waste no time in converting to digital, this of course so that his 3D movies can make more money. Yet his long-time partner Steven Spielberg tried to block the digital release of Indian Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. In a recent story on the topic reported in the Chicago Tribune Spielberg is quoted as saying, “Making a film on celluloid, as I like to do with all of my pictures, but then transferring it and releasing it and projecting it digitally is a very inferior image.”

Where does that leave the transition to digital cinema, and by necessity, 3D? 

 
Scylla, meet Charybdis:

John Fithian, president of the National Association of Theatre Owners, says the situation has placed exhibitors squarely between a rock and a hard place. "Several studio leaders currently hope to reduce substantially the virtual print fee support they are willing to provide for the digital cinema transition, at the same time that several other studio leaders demand that exhibition install many systems rapidly for the 3D slate in 2009,” he says.  “And at the same time one of the industry's filmmaking icons refuses to release a big summer picture on digital cinema screens except for locations where that is the only option. So, should we or should we not move faster with the digital roll out? How do they possibly believe that exhibitors will do anything less than push back? Maybe they should get their act together first before they try to tell us what to do."

So when do we put the "budge" in budget? Insiders differ. Some suggest the deals are dependent on a successful resolution to SAG/AMPTP negotiations, others ascribe the hold-up to the credit crunch fueled by the home mortgage meltdown.

What seems crystal clear (and you don't need special glasses to see it) is that the delay is all about the Benjamins. The 2009-2010 3D slate has only upped the urgency of resolving the basic calculation with a concrete and near-term demonstration of how much (and whose) money is at stake.