Kodak Trying To Get Its Name Removed From Kodak Theatre

Kodak Theatre, the famous theater on Hollywood Boulevard that hosts the Academy Awards, may soon have a different name. As part of its recent bankruptcy filing, Kodak is now trying to get out of the 20-year, $75-million-dollar naming rights contract it signed back in 2000. The theatre’s about page states,

The naming of Kodak Theatre, in a 20-year marketing partnership with Eastman Kodak Co., was one of the most significant non-sports corporate sponsorships in history. Kodak’s prominence and long-standing connection to the film industry in Hollywood made the relationship a natural. In fact, for the 78th consecutive year, ever since the inception of the Academy Awards, Best Picture was produced on Kodak film.

The next annual payment owed by Kodak is reportedly $4 million.

(via The Hollywood Reporter)

Image credit: Kodak Theatre by mkoukoullis

  • Guest

    it’s always sad to see a company with such history disappear. I’m young and I don’t use much film, so I don’t think I’ve ever known Kodak in its glory days–but my dad has stacks upon stacks upon stacks of old kodak contact sheets. 

    We did have one of the first digital cameras by Kodak, but despite that promising start, everything beyond that point was ****. Wonder if they would have survived if they made more of an effort with DSLRs instead of those “easyshares”.

  • Joseph Campanella

    It’s strange that they’d write that for 78 consecutive years the Best Picture was produced on Kodak film, when SLUMDOG MILLIONARE was shot on multiple digital cameras.

  • Joe Tumbler

    Slumdog millionaire was not kodak,  kings speech was not kodak,  and hurt locker was not kodak.  Pretty sad they need to blatantly lie like that.. but i guess when you are going out of business you tend to get desperate. 

  • Rico Zamora

    They’re not lying. If you both learned how to read, you would notice that it states that Kodak film was used on Best Picture winner for 78 consecutive years since the inception of the awards…in 1929. Do the math. This year is the 84th Academy Awards.

  • Rico Zamora

    Correction: 1927

  • D.

    Anyway, what does other movies matter when almost 90% were shot on Kodak and STILL are. because that’s what cinema is about.

  • Guest

    true, although their wording is horribly awkward.

  • Sergio883r
  • Chris

    Ways to express that the Best Picture was filmed with Kodak for 78 years include “From 1929 to 2007 Kodak film…” and “in 2007 for the 78th consecutive year” or even what you said “for 78 consecutive years from the inception of the awards”.  What they said was “In fact, for the 78th consecutive year, ever since the inception of the Academy Awards, Best Pture was produced on Kodak film”, which which is past continuous, and without an antecedent strongly implies it continues to the present.  The only possible antecedent to this, though it’s extremely strained, is “The … theatre opened in November 2001″ which is also clearly not the date they intended.

    This means to be the prior posters clearly do not have problems with reading comprehension, they took a past imperfect sentence pegged to the present and extrapolated from that the (incorrect) fact that the awards started in 1934.  As for the charge of lying I see three possibilities:
    1) The Kodak theater hired someone with a very tenuous grasp of English grammar to write their about page.  Given the complexity of the sentence structure and the fact that their errors favor them, I find this highly doubtful.
    2) The about page was written in 2007 and nobody has looked at updating it for 5 years.  I would actually accept that.  I doubt the Kodak Theater pays a lot of attention to their about page.
    3) The page was intentionally written to mislead people into believing movies are still shot with Kodak film, which I would call lying even if the lie is contained in inferences made from their tense choices.

  • Paul

    Dear Internet users,

    Please, for the love of all humanity, go and read what chapter 11
    bankruptcy means and why a company would file for it before declaring that Kodak are “going out of business” or “disappearing”. Sure that could still happen, but it’s not the certainty that the ill-informed seem to think it is.

    One of the things Ch11 lets them do is get out of long term and expensive contracts like this one, which I would hazard a guess is an overpriced and ineffective way to advertise your name. Nearly $4 million a year for what amounts to a few fleeting mentions during the Oscars and not much else that gets national or global media attention? They’d be better off spending that on a humorous 30-second ad during the Superbowl…