Slashdot Mirror
Piracy Not To Blame In Decline of Moviegoers
lucyfersam writes "In a somewhat surprisingly earnest assessment, the NYTimes has an article about the massive decline in movie-going that does not once try to blame piracy and file-sharing programs. It sounds like studios are beginning to understand that they have only themselves to blame." From the article: "Multiples theories for the decline abound: a failure of studio marketing, the rising price of gas, the lure of alternate entertainment, even the prevalence of commercials and pesky cellphones inside once-sacrosanct theaters. But many movie executives and industry experts are beginning to conclude that something more fundamental is at work: too many Hollywood movies these days, they say, just are not good enough."
Let me see, which would I rather do: spend $30+ on a movie ticket, popcorn, and a drink just so I can watch the latest subpar selection of movies at a time set by the theater and have popcorn thrown at me by 13 year old cell phone wielding children, OR pick up whatever movie from the redbox for $0.99 (or DVD rentals through the mail) and a drink and popcorn from the local store all for less than $5 and watch it on my widescreen in the comfort of my own home. Tough call.
Movie Studios Curb Internet Piracy
Hollywood studios have come up with an effective method of deterring Internet file-sharing of movies: Make movies that no one wants to pirate.
In a somewhat surprisingly earnest assessment, the NYTimes has an article about the massive decline in movie-going that does not once try to blame piracy and file-sharing programs. It sounds like studios are beginning to understand that they have only themselves to blame.
But many movie executives and industry experts are beginning to conclude that something more fundamental is at work: Too many Hollywood movies these days, they say, just are not good enough.
Obviously this article was conceived, written, and posted by a BitTorrent using hacker who wants to see the continued demise of Hollywood be blamed on the wrong parties. There is no way that Hollywood is putting out bad movies. Look at how much they cost to produce, direct, edit, and market!
Even Robert Shaye, the studio leader behind "The Wedding Crashers," one of the summer's runaway hits, shares the worry about the industry's ability to connect with audiences. "I believe it's a cumulative thing, a seismic evolution of people's habits," said Mr. Shaye, chairman of New Line Cinema.
Yeah, people are annoyed with the fact that they have to pay $9.00+ to see something that cost 100+ million to make and it fucking blows. "Wait for DVD" is an all to common quote, especially with the MPAA pushing them out to the stores as fast as they can in order to attempt to curb piracy in the theatre.
It's really funny that they quoted Shaye. His movie, one of the few that did anything this summer (I haven't seen it yet), was done on a 40 million dollar budget and grossed nearly all of that back in its first weekend alone...
In previous years, he said, "you could still count on enough people to come whether you failed at entertaining them or not, out of habit, or boredom, or a desire to get out of the house. You had a little bit of backstop."
Yup, and honestly, it really seemed that it was more worth your while to spend quite a few dollars less, find a more enjoyable movie, and be able to relax for two hours. I can do that at home just as effectively for MUCH LESS money if I only wait for two months ($3.00 opposed to $18.50) and watch the DVD.
The box office numbers have led to intense, broad-ranging conversations across Hollywood about the implications. Many studios have commissioned market research to investigate the causes of moviegoing behavior - or the lack thereof.
Pay me, I guarantee you'll find out more and it will cost you less. I'll start you off here: pay the actors less money - they aren't worth 20+ million a movie. Don't use so many pointless special effects - they aren't working in most instances. Charge less for the movie so my ticket prices aren't $9+ -- you'll be able to better compete with DVD and people will be more likely to go to see the show. Ban cell phones, talking, and make adult only showings - it'll make adults more likely to see a movie w/o having to listen to a bunch of underaged kids, take calls, have their ringtones going, and spend the entire movie talking instead of watching the movie and/or making out. Finally, ask people what they think about it instead of whoever you have been paying to figure it out for you. In the article, Michael Lynton said:
Audiences have gotten smart to the marketing, and they can smell the good ones from the bad ones at a distance.
If we can why can't you? Seems like an open and shut case to me.
Quick, someone check for the 4 Horsemen. Repent, sinners! While you still can!
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
Hell, even my movies suck. I wouldn't want to see them on the big screen, nor would I want people wasting $7 per ticket to go see them. That's why I've adopted Creative Commons as a licencing scheme, released it as "free to copy and share" and just release everything on the internet.
COMING SOON: "I Know What You Did Last Friday The 13th During That Cultist Teenage Chainsaw Massacre Thingy Part VIII"
Would you pay to see this shit?
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
While the movie studios don't have direct control over these prices, a $10 admission and a $3 hot dog in the theater seems a little ridiculous.
Perhaps because most Hollywood movies are targeted at 13-year-old American girls? Like, Oh My God, how could they, like, not get it?
the sky is blue and up is thattaway ^
Good to see that the NYT doesn't want to jump on the "Evil Pirate (Yar!)" longboat.
Any given day I can think of numerous diversions preferable to going to the movies. DVD's are out so quickly I never feel like I missed anything by not seeing films on the big screen. Except for LOTR that is...
Now, I think that some of those theories are completely valid. Commercials in the theaters absolutely piss me off. If I'm going to spend 9 bucks to watch a movie, they better not force me to watch commercials before it. Next thing they'll do is start commercial breaks in the middle of the movies. The cell phones are annoying and I like doing other things more than I like watching movies, but in the end, it comes down to what they are finally realizing. The movies suck. If there weren't any cell phones or commercials and I didn't have anything to do, I still wouldn't go.
FTA: In previous years, he said, "you could still count on enough people to come whether you failed at entertaining them or not, out of habit, or boredom, or a desire to get out of the house. You had a little bit of backstop."
That's amazing, because that's what I always figured they were thinking. And that's the attitude that keeps me away.
Now, I love good special effects as much as the next geek, but, call me old fashioned here, I actually like my movies to have this thing called a plot.
I used to say that I'd just wait for it to come out on video but I won't even waste my time with that anymore. Inevitably, I find myself at the end saying, "Well, there's two hours of my life I'll never get back."
I'll actually deal with the commercials and other annoyances if it means that I can be completely entertained.
A man with a gun is called a citizen. A man without a gun is called a subject.
Remember when we used to hate all the damn previews? Now we look forward to them, thankful the commercials are over!
I'd pay extra for reserved seating in a theatre with class and no commercials and previews.
-Z
Nothing to see here. Please move along
Oh No!! The MPAA has taken over Slashdot.
I have noticed with the theaters in my area, that the previews are getting close to 30 min. long. With previews that long, I don't bother to show up to the theater till the time posted the movie should start. It is getting ridiculous.
I mean, if you've seen any article about the decline in movie going in the last... however long on Slashdot, at least 90% of the posts say exactly that.
1. Most movies suck ass, and even morons won't pay to see them.
2. All movies cost too much to see, even matinees at most theaters are costly these days.
Drop your quality and raise your prices, then blame someone else when your profits slip, god bless America.
--Nuintari
slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.
One of the main reasons why I go to the theatre is the awesome surround sound. But now with 5.1 surround sound for the home theatre, big-screen TVs, and my cozy couch, I have zero need to see it in the theatre. Sure the silver screen is big and cool, but not anymore. I go in to see a 10:00 show, at at 10, there are 20 minutes of commercials, then 20 more minutes of previews. Then after thats all done, I forgot what movie I came in to see.
"We just need a few more good movies."
Yeah, we too.
For those of you who have been complaining that there hasn't been a good movie put out (myself included), fear no more! Go see The Aristocrats and you'll thank me for it. The only problem was I missed a lot of it because I was laughing too hard.
On another note, does anyone else think that the movie industry is rivaling the game industry and vice versa? Lots of whiz-bang special effects but no real story line to keep you interested and coming back.
Too many Hollywood movies these days, they say, just are not good enough.
Now that Hollywood has stopped sniffing glue, could they maybe call the RIAA and break the news to them?
It seems that instead of focusing on producing real "art in story telling", Hollywood had decided to take the "easy road" of special effects, sex, gore and big names. Now, don't get me wrong, I appreciate fx/sex/gore/big names as much as any movie goer, but, at it's heart, I want a story. These other things are great to have and add benefit to the experience, but, I want a story.
Many of the really good movies lately have come from the animation studios. They have to have a good story, good characters, etc, otherwise, it's just a nicely rendered nothing.
I know most of the yuppies here will say they don't go because they don't release anything worth seeing anymore. Yeah, whatever. I know I personally don't go much anymore because of the cost (and I'm not talking about gasoline). It's $7/person to get into the theater, and putting aside the guilt trip to buy concessions, I want to have a soda when I'm watching the movie. I have a soda drinking problem, and going the whole movie without a major drink sucks. I do not, however, wish to buy a large soda for $4-$5 (depending on the theater). But I usually do anyway, which contributes to the high cost.
Movie distributors need to charge less, theaters need to lower the price of their concessions, and the industry needs to introduce variable-priced tickets depending on the production costs and perceived popularity of the movie. I'm not willing to pay the same price to see "Bewitched" that I am willing to pay to see Star Wars Ep III. I might be willing to see the earlier if it were a few bucks cheaper just for something to do. But that still leaves the problem with the price of a damn soda.
Whine all you want about recouping costs, but that doesn't change the fact that I choose not to go. Too expensive.
but the article still failes to mention MY number one reason for not going. it's freakin' $9 per person. i can buy the dvd for $15 when it comes out and watch it at home with my girlfriend for less. AND i don't have to watch all the stupid commercials and listen to crying babies.
People are tired of paying to see commercials and advertisements. 15 minutes of commercials before a feature length advertisement is not what people wish to see. Perhaps this is why Adsense has taken off so well? Small unobtrusive text ads? That will never take off!! Huge flashing in-your-face graphical banners is where it's all at!
...after all, I espied Lucifer ice-skating to work this morning and Caterpillar's jumping for joy on the giant order of snow plows he just placed...
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
it must be nice for these executives to have finally dislodged their heads from their asses.
what we've all known for years...
General consensus seems to have been that movies are generally getting worse, and less ideas, thus remakes.
It'd be nice to see a parallel report on the music industry. In fact, I'd like to see some hard science on this too...
(by which I mean published on Slashdot because I'm too lazy to actually look up hard science in "hard-science weekly", or wherever the hell it's put)
The first step is admitting you were wrong. Now, let's start step 2: Stop doing the thing that's hurting you and your audience.
Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
"Multiples theories for the decline abound"
I think the post ignores the most obvious reason. Those Hollywood grass-fuckers can't come up with an original idea.
On one hand, I agree that a whole lot of movies today are horrible. On the other hand, people today know nothing of movies or what a good movie is. Take for instance Charlie Chaplin. The man was a romantic genius, pouring his emotions on the screen with "Modern Times" and "Limelight" and tens of other wonderful productions. He wrote, directed, acted in, and even composed the music for most of his work. But people today don't get him at all, and they don't even rent copies of Modern Times at Blockbusters any more.
Or Kurosawa. Seven Samurai is a brilliant film and yet most people can't sit through it. Or Jean Luc Goddard, there's not one movie of his at Blockbuster's. So why make good movies? So that the experts can say they're good? Movies are out to make money and the bigger problem at hand is, how do you make people go to a movie, not how do you make a good movie. I think there is no way, theatres are doomed. People will more and more sit on their lazy asses and pay the 3.99 on demand price whenever the movie is available. So what? Museums used to be hopping places too and now they're just tourist attractions.
Let's see... commercials, idiot plots, insufferable traffic, $3.75 for a chocolate bar, garbage, sticky seats ... oh yeah, a delightful experience.
But I think there might be hope for capitalism in the US afterall! Hollywood is old school and very traditional; they like things done how they've always been done and in the past have been completely unwilling to acknowledge the need for change. Luckily, the dollar is a very powerful persuader. That being said, I still really enjoy the move going experience but let's save it for movies that are actually entertaining. Let them keep making the crap but send most of it straight to DVD. Might piss the theatre chains off but business is a changing.
i went from watching atleast a movie a week to about 1 every month or so. its just that movies suck. i got tired of wasting my money on something that they just dumped all their money into special effects and forgot about scripts. im hoping that soon the 'eye candy' era will fade out and will go back to just writing good movies instead of relying on good effects. movies like Stealth and what not are definitely not relying on a good script. its scary because at some point, someone said 'HOLY SHIT! I GOT A GREAT IDEA! A PLANE... THAT THINKS ON ITS OWN AND BLOWS THINGS UP! and its fighting only a funny/witty black man, some duffus white guy and a hot chick'
1) Ticket prices have become ridiculous. I like going to the theater in general, but the prices are only warranted on very rare occasions that a film deserves to be seen on the big screen. There was a good discussion in the Tipping Point (I think) about how ticket pricing doesn't reflect supply and demand. The same price for Spider-Man and XXX: State of the Union? A lower price for films not that much in demand would increase the amount of overall tickets sold in gross revenue.
2) Two Towers had about 45 minutes worth of commercials that preceded it. By the time they were over and the film started, I wanted Frodo to get captured and tortured by some orcs.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Is Bram Cohen dead or jusr that Bit Torrented movies are now legal?
A lot of the movie theatres are just in a disgusting state. They're just not appealing environments for me.
You go there and half the ticket booths are not staffed and the automated ticket machines are all malfunctioning, so you can't pick up tickets bought in advance without having to wait in line.
You get inside the theatre and half the concession stands are unstaffed.
The ones that are staffed have lines longer than the bathrooms, have sticky goo all over the counter and are staffed by people who have no concept of customer service whatsoever.
Once you get your $3 coke, that costs $1 outside the theatre, and start walking to take a seat, you have to struggle to not get your feet stuck to whatever sticky shit is covering the floor.
Whenever you arrive at your seat, you're hoping that you don't sit down on one of the many seats that have been broken for more than 2 months. Once you're reasonably happy with the seat, that still creaks and is uncomfortable, you have to clear your immediate surroundings from droppings left by people attending the previous screening. Anything from gum on the seats and/or armrests, empty soda cups in the cupholders, nachos boxes with old, smelly cheese under the seat, etc.
Then when the movie starts, it actually doesn't start until 20 minutes of commercials.
Why would I go enjoy all that voluntarily?
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
"It sounds like studios are beginning to understand that they have only themselves to blame."
Er, no. One NYTimes journalist has understood that the studios have only themselves to blame.
Do not forget about the rising price of movie prices themselves. Look for yourself at how much prices have gone up here. I can tell you inflation was not that high.
Look at other emerging markets. Tivo: It used to be that you would go and watch a movie when there was nothing on television. Now you can watch the shows you want to see on TV (and there are a lot more channels to choose from), when you have time. Going to the movie theater is now far more inconvenient than it used to be.
Another emerging market: Video games... With a limited amount of entertainment, dollars available and those funds are currently shrinking... Something had to give way to pay for the emerging video game market. Simplest answer: Movies are no longer having their competitive edge that they once did.
Victory is gained, not in knowing your opponents next move, but in preempting them.
We all know that popcorn doesn't cost $3 a bucket. A soda is not $3 either. And a dollar pack of candy shouldn't be $3.
The theaters are nearly the size of my living room anyways. Why pay money to sit in someone else's living room?
Commercials. I shouldn't have to pay for my movie twice. I paid the ticket at the door - lose the commercials.
Rude people. Once upon a time, people knew how to conduct themselves in public. If you ever want to know how far away from that we've gotten, go to the movies. You'll see.
Lying reviewers. I'm sure payola is involved somehow. Even the lamest movie has at least 3 idiots from some newspaper "raving" about how it's an "edge of your seat extravaganza!" Dear movie industry, you can cut that out now. Nobody believes these people and that's your own fault.
No difference in quality. Most of these dinky theaters have absolutely *lousy* audio. Primarily because you're sitting in a narrow cabinet. Bigger theaters make for better sound. And better picture quality too. The larger screens of days gone by could hide many sins. Remember watching Star Wars your first time? Looked great, didn't it? Then when you got your very first VCR tape of it you couldn't help but notice the light green boxes around all the spacecraft? Bigger screens are *better* - that's why.
Ok, that's enough rant for me for one day. Feel free to add more.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
I've been taking my two little boys, age 5 and 2, to the kid movies. The audio in the theaters sucks so much ass! It's almost painful. They need to make the theater experience better in order to compete. Otherwise, it's not really worth the bother, and much easier to rent the DVD later.
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
Recently I went to a movie. The 30 minutes of ads and movie previews were very interesting.
u th cheered. The guy right behind me asserted "We'll go to that one!".
The commercials were bad enough, but the movie previews topped them all.
Can't recall what it was, some sort of robo-ai-fighterjet-calamity. Totally stupid. Yet the local countryside-themoreexplosionsthebetterthemovie-yo
So... if the moviegoers decline, yet the stupid still find the movies great it must mean the people are getting more intelligent!? Nah... can't be.
Nice thought, though.
Meme of the day: I browse "Disable Sigs: Checked". So should you.
In just about any creative enterprise, there is tension between the creators, who are often motivated by love of what they do; and the bean-counters whose only goal is to cut cost. The bean-counters have been winning. They've squeezed so much life out of their products for short-term gain that they've ignored the long term consequences, which we are now experiencing, at least in the USA:
- Crappy movies nobody wants to see, (hello Hollywood)
- Crappy music noboby wants to buy, (hello top 40)
- Crappy cars nobody wants to drive, (hello GM)
- Crappy software that is barely tolerated, (hello Microsoft)
There are people who will pay time and money for quality, but it isn't clear they can support businesses large enough to displace the mediocre behemoths.
I suggest looking for independent theaters where you live. Here in Pittsburgh, we have The Oaks Theater. This weekend they're showing Back to the Future for $5 and their snacks are reasonably priced!
--------
It's OK to be social, just don't tell anyone about it.
No, not the price of labor, although the payscale for some high talent actors is amazing. But let's face it; most of those actors aren't just selling their talent, they're selling their name and history of past successes in roles.
But here's an ugly truth: The next time you go to a movie theatre to see the next big summer blockbuster sci-fi blam-kapow film, you'll probably pay, say, $10.00 for the film ticket.
It costs the theatre $14.00 for the rights to show you that movie, per person. So right off the bat, they've lost $4.00. Hence the insane prices at the concession: They *have* to make that money back at the concession, or else they have to raise the ticket prices by %40 or so.
The cost for special effects and high budgets is passed on in this way. The rights for a theatre to screen a movie made on a budget of 20 million dollars is much cheaper. The rights for a theatre to screen a movie that cost 200 million dollars is much more expensive.
Theatres frequently lose money per ticket sold, on the more expensive films.
"To pass through the jungle; silence, courtesy, ferocity, as the occasion demands." -- Kamau, "Proper Passage"
- Annoying long "announcements"
- intolerable high sound volume.
People used to go see new opera. They didn't redo old operas.
... there are new ballets and new rock music and new jazz ... but it's all derivative. There's not a whole lot new coming out.)
Same with "classical" music: they didn't go to hear old songs performed, they went for new songs.
Same thing happened with Rock and Roll. People used to go the hear new songs, now they go to hear old songs. Same thing with ballet and jazz.
(Yes, yes, I know
So. The same thing has happened with movies. Hollywood just keeps remaking old movies; there is very little new stuff.
TVs got big enough and DVDs got good enough that there's not that great an incentive to go to a movie theatre and pay 10 bucks for a ticket. You can rent a movie for $2.99.
Shark Boy and Lavagirl! I mean, come on - 3D! IT'S A 3D MOVIE FOR GOD'S SAKE! That means you get special glasses which YOU GET TO KEEP!! How can you complain about the price when you are getting special glasses FOR FREE?! Check her out: LAVA GIRL
Allow me to recap:
- 3 dimensions (4 if you count the time it takes to watch the movie, upwards of 10 if you factor in certain physics theories)
- SPECIAL GLASSES
- Hot lava girl
Motorcross.
Its really all a money issue. For 2 people to goto the movies its about $30-40. This would get your 2 tickets, popcorn, candy, and drinks..
Sometimes, even pirates are on the losing end.
Geek Of The Day, "A geeky place for geeky faces."
"Too many Hollywood movies these days, they say, just are not good enough."
They got really close here, but the honest truth is that many people who would have gone to movies simply aren't quite as bored as they once were. While not all information is free, the internet makes it much easier to access information and people... There's plenty of people learning, socializing, or just getting a load of visual kicks off the net that movies just can't compete with.
To be quite honest, why _should_ people have cared about Cotton coming to Harlem in the first place, what the Matrix is, or if the funky looking chick from that unfunny Bill Murray movie can escape an island? Arguably, they didn't. Most people just want to avoid boredom or spend time with their mates without actually having to converse. There will always be a market for movies, but probably not quite as big a share of the market ever again.
That, and the modern theater experience sucks. $3.50 for popcorn is a huge markup, 10 minutes of previews is about 10 minutes too many.
You mean that people do prefer watching movies at a cinema over watching low quality artefact covered versions on a 15 inch monitor?
Naah!
Is it really that tough to figure out why they aren't making as much? It's too expensive!
They have to realize, it's not like everyone can afford 20 bucks just for admission for a couple to go to the movies. Add food and a drink onto that, and you're talking about at least a 30 dollar night.
Instead of raising the price, why not try lowering the price a few bucks? I'm sure the difference in price would be offset by the amount of people going back to theaters.
I DO like going to the theater to see a movie. It gets me out of the house, and it makes me feel like I'm doing something as opposed to sitting around watching tv. But it's not possible to spend 20 bucks every weekend just for 2 hours of entertainment. A few months down the line and that 20 bucks could BUY me the movie on DVD.
I have a home theater, have had one for several years now. And for those years I have had a rapidly declining urge to see anything in the theaters. At home I have personalized surround, and a controllable environment. I don't get raped at the till for ticket and food prices, and I don't have to sit through a movie punctuated by annoying talkers, cell phones, and small children brought inappropriately into more mature films than they should be.
Sorry Hollywood, but I can spend my 20 Canuckbucks at Best Buy and watch the movie dozens of times, each time pitying thoe poor bastards who had to endure the theater "experience".
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
Even with the admission by Hollywood players that piracy is not to blame in the decline of theatre ticket sales, the reasoning is still self-serving. By claiming the decline is due to Joe Public having big screen televisions, surround sound, and DVD quality, the studios are trying to make their case (indirectly) that the only way to survive this multimedia age we live in will be to simultaneously release features to both the theatres and pay-per-view/DVD markets. And this means squeezing exhibitors to starve off this plan. How would they do that? By forcing exhibitor demands for better financing (and potential revenue share of the savings) of the digital projection & distribution changeover.
To me, this also means that there will be further consolidation of the exhibitor chains and the squeezing of independents which seems to happen to all industries eventually. Say hello to more Regal Cinemas blaring 20 minutes of advertisements of NBC television programming in digital cinema projection glory.
And yeah, I am still pissed that Regal no longer honors the "Regalator" cups since Regal was acquired-on-the-cheap from bankruptcy along with UA Theatres and formerly terrific Edwards Cinema. chain...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
Rarely do they use sex and gore in movies over the last few years. That would give the movie an R-rating, thus making it less marketable.
However, look at the biggest hits critically and financially this summer: R-rated movies based around sex.
And, actually, this is great. Studios won't put out a "less marketable" R-rated movies about those dirty, nasty subjects unless *gasp*, it's worth putting out!
Leading us to the eventual, "When the only R-rated movies are quality, then only quality movies will be R-rated".
Whispering every so often is one thing, but my girlfriend and I have had some bad experiences with going out to see a movie. We had a couple sit down next to us and the woman was some frumpy, dumpy middle age woman and she kept glaring at my girlfriend (who was just resting her head on my shoulder) and even coughed up and sprayed a bunch of spit on my girlfriend's leg. Then there are the cell phones, the kids that aren't forced to sit down and watch the movie or leave and things like that.
We really need the theatres to say to people, "look if it's an emergency, take the call, but otherwise if you take the call we'll throw you out." I leave my cell phone off anyway. The real problem is that so many Americans are just selfish bastards and don't bother to think about others. They don't care about others' rights because it's all about them, them and only them.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
They can blame piracy all they want, but the fact of the matter is, the movie going experiance is no longer the same.
I can't even remember the last movie I saw in a theatre, but I remember the experiance.
I went with the girl I was seeing, and tickets alone were 20 bucks for both us. The, I spent 17 dollars on popcorn and drinks.
When we got into the theatre, the floor was sticky, the seats were uncomfortable and the theatre was packed. When the lights when dim, we had to sit through about 20 minutes of actual commercials for things like preparation h.
During the movie, people were talking to each other. People keep on getting up to go do whatever. Cell phones were ringing. The girl in front of me, with the brightest display I have ever seen on a cell phone keep sending and recieving text messages.
Now compare this to my apartment. I have a big leather couch, a nice flat panel TV with a DVD player. I can buy a DVD for 10 bucks if I really like to movie, or rent it for 3 bucks to see if its an good. I can make some popcorn, and curl up on the couch with whoever and enjoy a nice quite and cheap evening at home.
So, its a combination of the home theatre now being afforable, the rising price of admission and the decline of society that is to blame.
Piracy is just a beautiful scapegoat so they don't have to address the real problem
I like going to the cinema. I'm predisposed to enjoy a night out watching a film and going for a drink afterwards and discussing it. However, even I'm sick of it these days.
Why?
1. Too expensive.
2. Cinemas are run by idiots. I regularly have to get up and complain to get the picture shown correctly (and on one occasion, with sound).
3. Idiots who eat/talk or generally make nuisances of themselves, and the cinema staff do nothing.
4. Formulaic drivel. The large Hollywood studios have driven out of mainstream cinemas anything remotely interesting in favour of their relentlessly formulaic shite. Well, ok, not entirely, but unless you have a big studio behind it, it just doesn't ger exposure.
5. Adverts/patronising lies/lectures about copyright instead of starting the film. I don't mind trailers (in fact, I quite enjoy a good "coming soon" section)... but I'm sick of being patronised and treated like a mark rather than a paying customer.
We all know that crap is king
Give us dirty laundry!
Look at the last 5+ years of TV programming, and you can really see that Hollywood doesn't have any clue as to what may be popular. The whole "reality TV" craze happened because there is so little interesting on TV nowadays, that they were bound to draw attention.
Hollywood has been too busy trying to push actors and actresses with no major appeal onto us as consumers, and thinking we will buy them. cast members that should never be more than supporting actors/actresses, some pissant director/casting director will decide should be a star, and the movies are flops because of it. I mean, Brittany Murphy as a headliner in a half dozen movies? Please! She's not even that good looking, and all of her characters come across the same!
It's fairly simple. Better plots. Better stories. Better chemistry between the cast. Better casting.
Look at the last 5 years of comedies that have come out, and how many of them really do have that "rewatchability" factor? That if you were surfing through HBO, and saw it on, you would watch it again, even if you had seen it 4 times already? There aren't many, in my book. And the funny part is, most of them weren't huge box office successes. They did ok, but weren't blockbusters.
Maybe that is what Hollywood should start looking at. Would that movie generate repeat interest? If you don't think it will, don't make it.
i did not realize how bad new movies are until i rented "On The Waterfront". The whole cast was absolutely amazing, the plot and script was so intense. i am now just renting classic movies. don't get me wrong, i still love "The Matrix" and other sci-fi eye candy, but to fully understand the power of a movie, you need to see a film that was created to tell a story, not just written and edited for a best demographic to dollar ratio and actors who love to act, not just are pretty and get by on that. True, my wife could not get over how "gorgeous" Marlon Brando use to be, but he had the acting skills to back it up.
AMC theaters now make it like they are doing you a favor by giving you commercials to watch before the movie. 'HEY! IF YOU MISSED THE 20, MAKE SURE YOU GET HERE 20 MINUTES EARLIER TO CATCH IT NEXT TIME!' translated to nonmarketing-ploy speak... 'hey! get here earlier so we can get some more money by shoving commercials in your face despite the fact that we just raised the prices of tickets another dollar. '
and Hollywood is seeing the ugly truth. When will the music industry face up to the simple truth?
My humor is probably your flamebait
1) I would not blame lack of theatre turnout due to piracy. Most people go to theatre for the big screen experience, to do it with friends or significatn others, etc.
Also, I was watching on the news (it was some media news blub) saying that DVD/CD piracy has increased by 30%, and most of those is friends to friends (not peer networks) --- but the movie/music industry has increased sales by 40%. I might have the numbers slightly off, but that's about right. This was last week, maybe the week before.
So while piracy increased, movie sales increased more. Plus even if the %'s were equal, i think that actual numbers are not...in essence if there were 1 million more pirates per year, i think there were 5 more million cd/dvd purchases per year.
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
Sure there have been less moviegoers in recent years and yes movie piracy has risen but the MPAA forget some other factors that can affect the decline in "moviegoers" mentioned in the article such as the widespread availability and purchasing of DVDs and DVD players that provide home theater quality films at affordable costs to everyone, and bigger TVs that have also become very affordable to more people.
And because of that, for the people who live in suburbia where there are people with large screens and dvd collections, inviting a few friends over for popcorn and a movie is much more social and convenient than going to the theater. That's what I see more often these days among people of all ages. The rise of the middle class is more evident than ever and it shows in every aspect of the economy.
We went to a theater recently, driving quite a ways to get to a good one. No particular movie in mind, just a night out to see whatever good was playing. Nothing good was playing, and we're not going to drop >$20 to just see nothing good. Prices just don't line up with the quality - supply and demand reigns, so we bought 3 used DVDs at Blockbuster for the same price, and saw 6 hours of good stuff at our convenience, AND get to keep the media.
Unless it's good material needing a huge screen (and "Wedding Crashers" ain't it), the price is just too high.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
Maybe the MPAA should inlist the help of Dick Tracy.
The Tools Of Ignorance wanna be a tool?
pay the actors less money - they aren't worth 20+ million a movie.
While I don't disagree with you, can we start with cutting the salaries of the executives first? Those are the real salaries I want nixed and they are paid far more than the actors.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
So what's wrong with movies. In every one of the past 10 movies I've gone to:
1. It seems punk kids get up in the middle of the movie, disappear for about 20 minutes, and then come back with their friends. They then all go out again and do the same with more friends. Sometimes they don't even come back? Meanwhile this is distracting as anything. Stay for the whole thing or leave.
2. At least 10-20 people pull out their cell phones and either a. fiddle with them with the backlight on, or b. talk to whoever called them, often yelling at their (assumed) parents that they're in a movie and can't be picked up. Go outside!
3. There are at least 5-10 people who do a combination of a. talk throughout the whole movie, b. get up and shake their fist in an ?Arsino? Hall type fashion at something funny being said during the movie.
4. Generally 30 minutes from the start of the commercials to the 'Feature Presentation'.
5. Movies are predictable, uninteresting, and generally awful. Maybe 5% of them are actually worth seeing.
6. Movies are now $10CDN at the 'big' theatres (as low as $4 at the little ones), but they were once 13.95CDN. Not to mention popcorn and a drink will run you another 10-12$ CDN.
7. Lack of promotion- the last movie I saw with good promotion was MONTHS of Dukes of Hazzard hype and links to music television networks. You don't have the same hype you once saw for movies like The Matrix, or even movies like Toy Story. You need to get people excited for your crappy warez.
8. It's antisocial. In a day in which people sit inside at an office all day, why would I want to go sit in a smelly theatre with punk kids for two hours? This is a part of the atmosphere. Making it more of an activity rather than staring forward for 2h would be an interesting feat, but you have to do so without destorying the movie... think about it.
Now I'm as much of a movie fan as anyone else- I watch movie after movie on TMN, but the quality is way downhill. It's all been done for some time now. The effects are to the point of becoming overdone. Face it- Hollywood just doesn't offer the same humour, action and advenure once seen. there will never be a reproduction of 'Office Space' or 'Way Downtown'.
PS: Oh- and that set designer that says he makes movies and how pirates steal his living.
-M
when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
Everyone has their reasons for not going to the movie theaters. My reason is basically tied to the cost of fuel. With the current price of gasoline (coupled with bad movies), I've cut back on entertainment. I've even cut cable tv out.
But many movie executives and industry experts are beginning to conclude that something more fundamental is at work: Too many Hollywood movies these days, they say, just are not good enough.
They finally got it. Took them damn long enough.
Technoli
That was pisser, and worth the price IMO.
I think ppl in the entertainment industry (I did stand up comedy for a few years) do find it more entertaining than the average Joe.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
I think most people are just waiting for the movies to come out on DVD. How long did it take for Sin City to come out? 3 months??
"Niggers ruin my movies."
How civilized.
"If the movie stinks, just don't go!"
MAKE A MOVIE THAT DOESN'T SUCK! Most are not even worth my bandwidth. I will bet you piracy has gone down, not because they are cracking down, but because HOLLYWOOD PUTS OUT CRAP.
Go hug a kitten.
- Hollywood acts like a large organization. For the individuals
making investment decisions, big money and careers
are at stake.
- They tend to stick to previously successful formulas.
- Which leads to a risk adverse climate.
- Which leads to a winner take all environment (large
stars and budgets dominate)
- Which stifles innovation and restricts access to
market for smaller and
experimental films.
- Which results in bad movies.
QED.---- It won't be as bad as you fear or as good as you hope, but it will take twice as long as you plan.
Piracy, quality, yadda yadda.
There's a economic depression going on. That's why people are cutting back on movie ticket purchases.
Salaries are down, raises are gone, jobs that pay well are scarce, and those jobs easy to get are slavery with a timecard and optional Medicaid.
There's a price for the free-market utopia that's finally upon us, and will be with us for at least another fifty years. That price is an increasingly impoverished workforce.
Broke people don't buy stuff. And there are only so many upper middle class and wealthy people to buy expensive real estate and splurge on $50 outings to the movies.
Attendance is down because people are cutting back on the luxuries. And DVD rentals are what, a dollar a day?
Too many Hollywood movies these days, they say, just are not good enough.
Now if only the RIAA would realize this about music...
I disagree with most of the FP lot.
Most movie theaters are located in very high rent areas. Of course tickets will also be pricy. I don't think there's a quality drop, it seems pretty status quo.
I truly believe that our beloved Internet is to blame. You're seeing the same death knell in brick and mortar retail, restaurants, and even car buying. In a capitalist view, time preference is making new markets. The idea behind time preference is that markets flow towards the faster and cheaper sources. Price is rarely the reason.
Car dealers are selling cars at cost -- with no change in the market slow down. Cars are bought with future earnings often (financing). A lot of people fear their future earnings. Movie theaters prosper when people have money and time right now. Job security has declined, debt has gone way up, savings are nil.
My retail stores are down 50% since 2004. I have less cash to pay my employees. They have less cash to go to the movies. The movie theater employees have less cash to buy my goods, so they buy online -- money that is 'outsourced' to another state, unlikely to return to my local economy. Rinse, repeat.
Our dollar loses more value every day as the Fed inflates our currency. That is a fact. My local economy suffers, and in my experience the money that is made online by big warehouses tends to end up in Mexico and Asia. Not enough is recycled back to theaters, car dealers and local retailers.
Eventually time preference always wins. As our standard
of living declines, the standard of living in Mexico and Asia increases. The Internet is allowing the free market to balance itself out. Wage
internationally want to equalize no matter what government or big business wants to do. Its the law of a supply/demand reality.
Who here went to movies & restaurants often in the 90s? How many new cars at 8% interest did you buy then? How many new cars at 0% and employee price will you buy this decade? How much has your debt gone up in that time?
If Hollywood stopped producing formulaic repeats of old TV hits, etc. maybe they'd produce something more interesting.
Quality DVD Player: $300 Netflix Subscription per year: $240 Being able to watch a movie while naked: priceless
I don't know why people feel the need to eat during movies anyway. I think they do it mainly out of tradition.
I avoid having drinks because the last thing I want is to have to run to the bathroom in the middle of the movie. I hate having to do the old "Is this scene going to be important to the plot?" check before I can run off.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
Last year's number are an abberration, mainly due to one film. The Passion of the Christ brought in people that typically do not go into movie theatres, it also brought in more repeat sales as some people felt compelled to watch it over and over again. This same phenomenon happened with the movie Titanic, with many people boasting they had seen it 5 times or more. If sales stay constant until years end the film industry is looking at one of it's highest grossing years of all time. The dirty little secret is that all those terrible movies we complain about (Stealth, Duece Bigalow) will make a substantial profit. Yes it is lower than last year but in the movie industry all it takes is one monster hit to change that. Not making that grand slam every year does not make it an decline.
Well, let's all hope that digital distribution to movie theatres will open up the market a bit and give some of the more interesting indy features a chance.
I dont think that we'd all feel that ripped off if we actually got to see interesting movies.
Children on mobile phones still suck, though.
-Quality of movies
-Quality even of independent movies
-Price of a night out at the movies/person
-Price of the same crappy movie on dvd in 1 month
-Subscription price of netflix/blockbuster etc
-Price of a nice size flat screen plasma
-Price of a nice surround sound system
-Experience of watching the same crap in the privacy of your own home, not having to listen to juvenile delinquents behind you, with the ability of a quicky from your beloved if the movie is really sucks.
1. Stop releasing sequels.
2. Stop remaking classics.
3. Stop turning books/comics into films.
4. Stop relying on special effects.
5. Write a good story, dammit.
If copying movies over the net was technically impossible, movie piracy wouldn't be as bad as today. But it is. On the other hand, they offer NO alternative (aside from suing) to the people who are willing to download movies instead of going to an overcrowded theatre where popcorn price are insane, babies are crying and teens are making more noise than the THX sound system.
:), just 10 years ago, i'd never seen that many people getting up and going to get a refill or taking a leak during a movie. This is really disturbing when you are trying to concentrate, and if I go to a theatre, last thing I am looking for is the "living room" feel where everyone talks or comments while the tv is on.
:) but if there would be a download service that would cost me 10$ a movie, I'd pay it, I'd split it with people watching me, and we'd have a superb experience, they'd get new money from people that wouldn't have gone to the theatres in the first place, but I admit; I don't know how this could affect their current audience. Still, there's a HUGE market for internet downloads, and iTunes didn't make artists go starving.
It's been what... about over 5 years now that most people can get fast net connection. How come there's only a handfull of online video "renting" services? This is because some dinosaurs didn't want to change, they even had the chance to see their audio cousins getting smacked by piracy and had YEARS to prepare to counterattack by offering a better experience. They didn't. Today, they are way behind.
One of the reasons I went from going every week to the theatre, down to about 3 times a year (aside from the obvious "i'm not going to pay 20$ to see this much crap" is also that the overall experience seems to get worse or I am getting older
This brings me to the living room feel. Actually I think more and more people like having projection screens or large displays, it's more affordable than it used to, and best of all, movies are out to DVD just a few months after showing in theatre, cheaper, so you can basically have almost the same experience, "free" popcorn, talk without disturbing, or watch without being disturbed, and best of all, you can rewatch or rewind if you missed something, at your convinience, and when you feel like it. You don'e need to drive to a specific time, you don't need to wonder if it's going to be filled at a premiere before you show up, etc..
I own a projector and sound system, and I must admit that it's not a THX experience, but it sure as he** better than the last 5 times I went to a theatre.
Of course, if there would be more SWIII or shrecks being put to the screen, I wouldn't want to wait and they would probably get me back in the theatres
People are willing to pay overquota bandwidth, or HS internet ONLY for that purpose, I don't think the argument that they get it for free thus they wouldn't pay holds for everyone. If you get them on a faster pipe at let's say 5$ (or less) a download, at a high quality, many would pay.... I would.
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
When?
As they story points out, some people own 2+ consoles, play MMORPGs and need their web fix.
There are only 7 nights in a week!
I agree with kids and mobiles. Perhaps if they made an > 18 cinema (not rating! I would PREFFER the > 18 played the U/PG movies that TEND to have so many kids - you cannot beat a decent Pixar animation, and obviously >18 movies shouldn't have too many kids (in my old age a kid is < 22))
Back on point. Not enough time (stick) not enough good movies (carrot) too many movies of yesteryear means too many DVD's of newish films you haven't seen (bale of hay).
So. Is it me or the only development done on slashdot is the fucking 'word in image'. It seems to change its algorithm every fucking day. Right now it does multi-resolution shit.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: longer
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
I pay ~$100 a month for a full-on Dish Networks setup - already had 500 watt 5.1 in the living room. Got a dual channel DVR from Dish and a dual receiver in the home office wired to the two PCs in there. If I'm still bored there's always Netflix.
The reason I say this is that after going to the movies once or twice a month or so I finally got sick of it. Two movie tickets, one shared soda and a bucket of popcorn run about $25 and the spousal unit believes that Movies Always Include Dinner Out.
So - if I get out of the deal for less than $60 I'm doing pretty well and it made the whole satellite thing extremely attractive.
These days we go to the movies a couple times a year instead of a couple times a month - and that's only when we think some film's special effects must be seen on a big screen - like LOTR, Star Wars, War of the Worlds and so on.
She's got about four gazillion channels of TV to watch, enough sound system to make the neighbors complain and in the end it's one hell of a lot cheaper than going to the movies.
Oh - and the full-on Dish setup is only about ten bucks a month more than digital cable was; and we wired up two more sets and got two more premium packages plus a DVR in the deal. Cable companies, maybe you should pay attention too.
And for the rest of you folks who think you have monopolies, I also bought two cell phones recently and ported the home wireline to my wife's cell. It's time consumers started voting with their feet (and with their wallet).
we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
-- anais nin
"More movies! Less suckage!"
ACHTUNG! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen.
I wish that certain movies would cost less than others. If less advertised, lower budget movies cost say $6 instead of $9 they could probably get more people to see it (and have more refreshment sales and the possibility to generate more buzz). I mean, why does the movie that cost 20 million to make and little marketing cost as much as the 150 million budgeted marketed to death movie cost the same?
Okay! We all know that the MPAA ( The group of people hired by the Mafia who represent their wholly owned industry of Hollywood) whines that online piracy is causing them huge loses, but as Newsday stated so well, Shed no tears for the motion picture industry
The facts are that no matter how many press releases they shove down the throats of their news subsidiaries they are not losing money on any measurable scale because of people downloading video camera captures of movies online. If they ever cleared the system of book keeping they use so that stars, writers, producers etc did not have to sue to collect actual profits Excerpt from How the Movie Wars Were Won by John W. Cones and even going so far as to try to tell Stan Lee that the movie "Spiderman" made no money forcing him to sue for revenue, then MAYBE I might have some sympathy for them. Were you aware that based on Hollywood bookkeeping four of the top ten movies of all time...LOST MONEY!!! So they have no idea what their actual revenues are versus costs, so at this point no one can say if they are losing money. I think the entire problem is that the massive amounts of money generated by this industry have resulted in one overwhelming problem. Greed.
So, lets talk about why there is a decline in movie attendance, based on the assumption of it NOT being piracy. Well, first lets examine the fact that,
"In 2004, domestic box office sales were $9.2 billion (with three-quarters going to the major distributors, who must share the box office gross with the theaters), up slightly from 2003. DVD sales and rentals came in at $21.2 billion, up almost a third from the previous year." -Newsday
Hmm so they made MORE money in 2004 than 2003, okay well what about the current 2005 movie year?
"Blase adds that 2005's gross reflects that 10 fewer films have been released by the studios so far this year. And, she says, if you eliminate 2004 anomalies like "The Passion of the Christ" and "Fahrenheit 9/11" - the highest-grossing religious and documentary films ever - 2005's box office is actually up by 2 percent" -Newsday
So in 2005 the box office is lagging and they have released fewer films, and have not produced any automatic sellouts like those based on a religion held by a majority of the nation or those based on propaganda that would make Leni Riefenstahl happy. It is easy to see the real truth is that the evil online pirates sharing second rate views of movies are the problem here, isn't it? The problem is the MPAA and their watchword. Greed.
So aside from those numbers, let's talk about a trip to the movies. I have a rather 50'sesque Nuclear Family with a Y2K twist, my wife and I have two children half the week and they spend the other half with their father, but we have them weekends. So for the sake of argument I will assume a Saturday evening viewing of a movie and at regular price. Before someone asks why not go to a matinee and save money, locally the regular versus matinee pricing is not really that different, $9.50 evening, and $7.00 matinee. But in the interest of fairness, when I hit my totals cost for the evening subtract 10 bucks if you want matinee pricing. Why have mostly empty daytime showings and not reduce the price to attract more customers? Greed.
So lets go step by step through what it runs my family to see a movie, and I will pick something harmless that we all attended as a base. Charlie and the Shreking Nemo is about as white bread as they come in the movie field, we look it up to find out times, and we pack up the car. Now nearest Gigantagoogplex of screens is in the suburbs because Showcase/AMC etc fear urban areas so much that Magic Johnson is making a mint setting up theatres in cities. My city has 105k people and not a single screen in the city limits but immediately outside of them we have 30 plus screens.
I don't go to the theaters much because I have a home theater setup. Besides the obvious benefits (better food, better drinks (including booze), ability to pause the movie, much lower cost, etc) the biggest issue with me is the annoying people in the theater.
The last movie I saw in the theater was the last Star Wars movie. I waited until the movie had been out for quite some time to avoid the crowds. This idiot couple sitting behind us talked and talked during the movie. We finally were fed up and turned around and shhhhhhhd them. They got all pissed off and a few minutes later moved. When I left the theater I realized my sunglasses fell off my head, and when I went back and looked they were gone. I know that couple stole them. I saw the girl pick something up off the floor right before they moved.
Its the damn food prices! That are absolutely insane! I remember when they first put in fast food chains at the local movie theatre... I was looking at the Burger King menu and thought, jeez, these prices are almost the same as their regular chain stores... After I bought it, I asked where my drink was, he said it wasn't included and it woulds cost me another 4 bucks!!! I don't mind paying 9$ for a ticket but another 10 bucks for a softdrink and popcorn is insane. Personally, I bought a widescreen TV and it costs me 50$ a month. Thats less than 2 theatre movies for me and my wife.
"Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
that's the problem. it's easy to throw money at FX, sex, and gore, and get quality results. really it's just as easy to throw money at a screen writer, but you can't expect consistantly quality results. that's why there are rewriters. and even if you get quality, a great script doesn't always make a great movie. in fact it's generally cheaper to spend money on writing, and throwing more money into writing isn't going to make a project good. in fact, the opposite is probably true. it's fairly easy to choose an effects house that has done good work in the past and judge if do it again. fx are a very refined process. the more money you give them the more they can put on screen. it's also incredibly easy to find an attractive woman in hollywood willing to take her clothes off. you can't find this kind of consistancy in screen writing. even a finished script that sparkles on paper won't neccessarily make a good movie. good stories can be made awful, even in the hands of capable directors and producers. it's just the way movies work. there is so much work and input required that a few bad elements can taint the whole project. this is made worst because the product is so high profile, and careers are based on reputation. everyone wants input, and producers with money and power will always get their say. too many cooks will spoil the soup even if they are all qualified. i'm not saying every movie movie exec is qualified to put together projects or revise a movie's trajectory, but even the skilled experienced ones are going to run into some walls.
I enjoy going to the theatre, I'd much rather do that than sit at home and watch a movie. I almost never, ever watch movies on DVD except for stuff in my own collection that I watch when bored. I haven't actually rented a movie in probably 6 years. However, since going to the theatre is expensive, and you have to sit through 35 minutes of commercials and previews and "mini-features" that are actually commercials in disguise, plus annoying people in the audience most of whom are unsupervised children between the ages of 13 and 17 (and I mean children, these people act like they are 6 years old), rude ushers, rude box office employees, rude and incompetant boobs at the concession stand, constantly bumping elbows with some doddering middle aged guy with a gaggle of rugrats hanging off his shirt screaming about Sponge Bob, and standing in line fer chrissake for 20 minutes ahead of time to have a shot at getting a decent seat ... it's a lot of hassle.
So, I pick and choose my films VERY VERY carefully, and I'm rarely disappointed. This summer I've seen Batman and The 40 Year Old Virgin, and both were top-notch films. I also saw War of the Worlds, mostly because the GF wanted to see it, and it was a complete dog turd of a movie. I kinda knew that going in, though.
"I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
I've spent much more time enjoy reading movie reviews on rottentomatoes than watch the actual movie at theatre. For the last five years I go the theatre once (at most twice in a odd year) every year.
I'm just curious, where is going to the movies going to cost 30 dollars
I live in upstate new york, and its 9.75 for a ticket at the mall. I think this is about normal for giant multiplexes, but lets say that it's low and that a ticket costs 15. What theater is going to charge 10 bucks for popcorn, and 5 for a drink? The most expensive I've ever seen is 6.75 for popcorn and 3.50 for a drink and those came with free refills.
Hollywood is JUST NOW realizing that they make a lot of really bad movies.
(Film at 11.)
That's "Mr. Soulless Automaton" to you, Bub.
When I don't, which is often, I don't.
Movies are down because people don't have as much disposable income as they used to, and there are more and cheaper choices to spend it on then movies.
It's that simple.
Same with music CDs.
The cost of entertainment is not the only cost that has risen. Everybody knows the economy sucks (except Bush) and has sucked for years. Most people were not involved in the dot.com boom, either. And those who were were working sixty hours a week, so they didn't see any movies either. Entertainment is not recession-proof either.
As for other factors, I do see a lot of movies when I have money. I've never noticed much cellphone use (every theater has a promo telling you to turn yours off). I go later at night when there are fewer kids. I don't go to theaters frequented by, shall we say, the lower classes (i.e, don't go see a movie in a black neighborhood, duh - and I used to do this a lot when San Francisco's Market Street had six theaters on it, back in the seventies.)
As for quality of movies, this is entirely subjective. I just saw "Four Brothers" and it got a round of applause from the audience at the end. It was good. Not great, maybe, but good. People need to stop expecting every movie to be the "Best Movie" winner at the Academy Awards. Ninety percent of everything is crap, and movies are no exception.
The best movie I ever saw was a tiny little film with people in it I never heard of (except Ellen Burstyn) called "Spitfire Grill". This thing should have swept the Oscars. It was brilliant. It has since been turned into a musical on Broadway. Everybody in it was perfect, including the female lead whom I never heard of and has never done anything since AFAIK (actually according to IMDB, she has done quite a bit, but nothing you'd remember, except being in Nicole Kidman's "Birth" last year.) There were no special effects, no big stars, no promotion. If I hadn't been in prison and had nothing else to do, I wouldn't have seen it.
Everybody knows that in the movie business, out of every four movies made, two lose money, one breaks even, and hopefully one makes enough to make up for the other three. So don't expect three out of four movies you see to be great. They won't be. Start adding "suspension of greatness" to "suspension of disbelief" when you go to a movie.
It's ENTERTAINMENT, NOT great art. You want great art, go to the opera.
Again, the issue is always management. Keep the asshole producers and studio execs out of the movie, and movies would get better. Just this week, there are articles about Terry Gilliam fighting the Weinberg brothers on his new film.
And none of this is going to change any time soon.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Yeah I mean these movies are so bad these days, it's barely worth anyone's time or bandwidth to download them illegally anymore.
What you reall want is to see a film WORTHY of watching in such an environment, whether on your deluxe Home Entertainment Center or the local Bijou -- That's what's really at issue this year, a bunch of duds. Probably one of the most popular films, not necessarily in cattle herding terms, but enjoyment, is March of the Penguins. That speaks volumes. You also expect the theater management to do something to block cell phones. Have to asked to see the manager and complained, or do you just grumble a lot then make postings on /. and hope the theater managers of the world happen by it and repent?
Digital theaters are on the way and the bar for getting a "film" on the local screen will be less an issue, except where those are in collusion with Hollywood and MPAA to keep the bar up there against independent film.
Theaters offer an environment I could only manage if I won the lottery, which I've so far failed to do. So for my $ it's still a good deal, as long as there is something WORTHY of my time and money. Hollywood is part of your problem, not just the tired remakes, but the fact you have very little variation in performers. We've gotten away from ugly, but talented people who made the great movies of the golden age, to a bunch of look alikes who don't vary from one film to the next, Tom Cruise as an example. Hollywood likes "safe bets" and has therefore cut out a lot of the real character that made films so interesting in the past, because the found the public was just fine with vanilla. Problem is, too much vanilla acting has made it all dull.
Support independent cinema. Most of the best films I've seen in the past 5 years were at the Nickelodeon or Del Mar theaters in my city. Find and give your custom to those where you live.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The reason for decline in theater attendance is that it is just too damn expensive. I have a family of 6. The cost for us to go to the theater is about $70 even at matinee pricing. That's about $35 for admission and another $35 for popcorn and drinks. It's just too much money for 90 minutes of entertainment. It's really the snack prices that put me over the edge. $35 for popcorn and soda is absurd. We *like* going to movies but at these prices I choose to invest in my own home theater and wait a few months for the DVD release.
Theatre attendance declining because U.S. studios don't make good movies? What other shocking revelations await?
Next, they'll be saying that U.S. auto manufacturers are declining because they don't make good cars.
Thanks heavens there's at least one area in which the U.S. still leads. Thanks heavens Microsoft still makes the world's best software.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Give another tolkien trilogy and i will come back. Try to fool me with another boring "fit to all" scenario and you will never see me again.
I don't need a love scene right in the middle a galactic battle to please the 13 years old girl audience nor do they need an assassin X86aZ droid hidden in a love scene to please me.
I guess the right question for a filmwriter should be: What do I want to see? Instead of What do they want to see.
I'm sure the result will be completly different.
People aren't completly dumb. They don't need the eternal :
- A guy loves a girl and there is vilain.
- Happy ending.
- All these clichés repeated ad nauseum since the 30's.
OlivierLately I've only been going to movies at the Classic Cinemas theatre near my home. It doesn't show all of the movies that have been out, and it doesn't show the movies when they are brand new, but it sure is a great experience to go there. The movie only costs $3, there's only one GIANT theatre to worry about, on Friday and Saturday evenings they have a real-live organist playing before each show, and they have free popcorn refills. Definitely the way movie watching should be.
Posted from the wireless couch.
The internet and rise of computers have turned too many people into hermits, and not to sound like a "player hater", but today it seems like more and more relationships are mainly bedroom oriented. This of course also results in many people being reluctant to start relationships to begin with. The whole drug thing has also really kept going strong despite the "war on drugs" which generally keeps people either on the couch or in the fridge. I think it is safe to say that one contributing factor to the decline in movie theatre revenues is that there are fewer dates being brought to them, and that much of the general population is degenerating to the point where movies do not provide their stimulation as much as drugs, alcohol, sex, internet, video games.
There are also home movies. I have opted out of going to the movies several times, because it was a long movie and I didn't want to have to go that long without smoking. What ever happened to intermissions!!! I understand that it would be rude of me to want to smoke in doors, but at least have a heart and give the smokers a little break.
let me amend that last sentence. ...will run into several dozen walls on every project they work on.
I agree with the theory that DVDs should be released simultaneously with the theatrical release.
I have two young kids, so I can't go and see movies in the theaters as much as I'd like. (Actually, I never get to see movies in the theater.) However, I keep being inundated with movie marketing in such away that I really want to see certain movies. But by the time they come out on DVD so I can rent them, I no longer care to do so. The marketing fog surrounding me has long since cleared.
A good example is the movie "40 Year Old Virgin." It sounds hilarious and I really want to see it. Will I want to see it four months from now when the DVD is release? Almost certainly not.
All the money the studios spend on marketing is wasted on people who cannot, for whatever reason, not go to theaters. If DVDs were immediately available, the marketing would not go to waste.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
While I agree that movies nowadays suck, what many people fail to realize is that the majority of movies coming out have always been formulaic crap, almost as long as they've been making movies. Look back at the golden age of going to the theaters in the '50s: of course there were some phenomenal movies back then, but these were the exception, not the rule. Most of what the studios churned we remember now only because of MST3K. They nailed the real problem when they talked about the "backstop" they used to be able to depend on because they were, literally, the only game in town.
See, once one moves out of the parents' basement, one don't have to go to a theater for the best chance of a little alone time in the dark.
In fact, when you're married, you'll find you always have a date waiting for you at home! Ready to complain that you didn't take out the trash!
It seems that when people talk about this they seem to beat around the bush a lot and never outright say that maybe the reason people aren't going to see movies is because most of them suck? There. I said it. The industry is in denial, and denial is the first stage in coping with a death apparently, or more like the death of a once great venue for entertainment? But seriously, there hasn't been anything out there recently that seems worthwhile seeing excpet maybe March of the Penguins! (Wobble, wobble -- cracks me up every time.)
Generally the mathmatical formula for a bad movie
Advertising / Quality
Eg..
Catwoman
Skycaptian
Stealth
Too many Hollywood movies these days, they say, just are not good enough.
...
Really? No shit! Imagine that, and here I was getting ready to see Lilo and Stich 2, or the latest alien clone or
Movie scripts are terribly unoriginal and whenever they do branch out they're always buried in controversy or what not.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
I'd see more of them. The formulaic 70's tv show remake smells the same as a new mutual fund. Developed out of a well calculated, conservative profit motive. "These types of films, with these actors, tend to gross this revenue." It's completely uninspired and it sucks as a result. Life Aquadic was the last good film I've been to and I'm still waiting. Commercials in theatres?! $11 a ticket to watch them? The whole thing sucks.
One of the biggest problems I see with the Cinema releases recently is that you no longer _have_ to go if you want to see the big movie soon. The Studios have been so eager to minimise piracy that you've only got 4 months to wait for the average DVD release.
4 whole months. Woo.
Couple this with the fact that there are so many films coming out that, even ignoring the obvious junk, I'm constantly behind with the films I want to see that I've got a massive list of unseen stuff, you've got to have something pretty bloody spectacular to get me to make the hassle of babysitter-finding, ticket-booking and a 30+ minute drive to the cinema.
Fundamentally, though, they really, really ought to look at their numbers. Name me a multinational corporation in anything other than the entertainment industry that hasn't tried to improve profits over the last decade by cutting costs. Now look at how much making an average summer movie has gone up by over the same time.
Want to make more money? Stop handing wheelbarrow-loads of cash to 7 executive producers to sit around a table and attempt to micromanage the plot to death, before paying 10M+ to mid-range talent who don't actually do anything to get bums on seats on opening weekend.
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
Another factor might be this: Over the last 5 years or so, Hollywood's marketing machine has become increasingly effective at hyping every single movie, making the opening of a movie seem like an event you have to participate in or be forever mitigated to a lowly social rung. This has made movie openings much larger than they were 10 years ago, even for utterly crappy movies. It might take them a while, but eventually people become numb to the hype and these new marketing techniques, and movie attendance drops accordingly.
Being about 50 years old I have seen most of our shift from theaters to home viewing. I have noticed that theaters seem to be getting smaller and more numerous. The multiplex near my home in megapolitan southern California has more theaters than gates at O'Hare airport (and they are arranged similarly), but most of them are smaller than the theater in the tiny little home town of my youth. At the same time, home theaters are growing - both in size and in number. I wonder when and where the convergence will happen...
2) The brain drain caused by the growth of the various indie movie scenes has finally come home to roost. Now, Hollywood has always, always been about money first and quality second, and 95% of what the major studios release has always been crap. However, because of the ready spread of relatively low-cost editing equipment and the growth of a robust indie film circuit, there is no longer any need to fight the inertia inherent in Hollywood to make a good movie. Now, an indie movie can get national and international distribution, plus DVD sales, without Hollywood and will be able to recoup its cost more easily than ten years ago. If you keep your movie below the $2.5 million level, you can have a successful career without having to deal with the studios.
Which is a long way of saying that a lot of the creativity has left the mainstream movie world and moved firmly into the indie scene.
I am a believer of momentum and curves.
They always serve to remind me why I am glad I only wasted time downloading the crappy thing
> "Wait for DVD" is an all to common quote, especially with the
> MPAA pushing them out to the stores as fast as they can in order
> to attempt to curb piracy in the theatre.
That's something else I've wondered from time to time. I feel that there are now so *MANY* movies out there that it's just physically impossible to see all the ones you want to in movie theaters. So eventually there just gets to be a number of them out on DVD where they're cheaper, and I feel now I've got so much catching up to do I can catch up all I like on DVD and never get to the point I need to go see one in a theater before there's a new bunch out on DVD.
So even those of us who don't mind the quality of movies are watching them on DVD anyway because there's just so damned many in such a quickly moving pipeline from cinema to DVD to television.
Then I hit my local pawnshop where I buy my music cd's and bought a crap load of new realease DVD for $5-7 (cdn) each.
Went home made some popcorn and enjoyed new realease movies at home. No retarded money spending, no line ups, no dealing with huge crowds.
The movies compenies will not get my money anymore and I'll buy used dvd's to save ME even more cash.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
I generally don't watch the excremental "blockbusters" that flood the theaters with their effluence, but I prefer the "arty" movies, i.e. with dialogue written by and for the post-pubescent. Those tend not to last more than a week in the theaters, and they don't benefit too much from a huge screen, so as soon as I hear about one, I put it on my "saved" list and get it in a couple of months.
Maybe I'll go see "The 40-year-old Virgin" this weekend. At a matinee. By myself. And I'll ride my bicycle to the theater...
Around me, the price of a movie is 9 dollars so to go out with my wife to the movies cost $18.00 (not including junk food). My view is that if it only costs 12 bucks for my wife and I, I would probably see twice as many movies a year. The theatres and Hollywood have overshot the "sweet spot" of movie prices and even though twenty dollars is not a lot of money, there are too many alternative forms of entertainment one can do for less or with better value than a movie when going out. It has nothing to do with the quality of the movies because movies have been on par with previous quality of entertainment in previous years- just the price has changed. It is cheaper for me to buy a dvd of the movie than to go to the theartre and watch it. Go figure.
I miss the Karma Whores.
I didn't know that. Does help explain the commercials and concession prices, doesn't it?
But I'm still not letting Hollywood or the theater chains off the hook. Every business is feeling pricing pressure and I'd like to welcome the private jet flying, cocaine sniffing Hollywood fat butts to the party. Take some aspirin for that hangover and start figuring out how to make the deal better for everyone.
And theaters better come up with an experience that's better than what I can get at home with a 1,000 dollar video projector and surround sound system, otherwise they can kiss their business good bye.
Honestly, I don't feel a bit sorry for either of them. Get busy or start planning a smaller theater complex.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Ever since then, I have been taking a serious look at beamers, and wondering which room I might want to convert to a part-time movie theater -- one with a digital picture, no scratches. Oh, and my popcorn is better, too.
The only reason I still see a lot of movies each month is because one of my local cinema chains offers unlimited movies for £14 a month. In fact, you can get it for £11 a month if you exclude the west London cinemas, but as I live there I pay £14 to include them and every other one in the country.
Given a normal ticket costs £8.50, it's easy to see how it can be paid off. In fact I usually end up seeing one or two movies a week totally as much as 8 or more a month at times. 8 moves for £14? That'll keep me in the cinema, even with inflated drink and popcorn prices.
Releasing simultaneously won't bring in more money, it will bring in less. Movie theaters will become as rare as drive-ins if they do this.
If Chaos Theory has taught us anything, it's that we must kill all the butterflies.
Starting with the one I haven't seen posted yet...
Action movies today are too fast for 24fps film. With all the fast motion and cuts, it becomes a blur. Those few extra fps on DVD with a clear TV completely blow away a projector. It is a whole different movie at home.
TV's got bigger while movie screens got smaller.
Home audio is better and you have a freaking volume control.
People get imposed upon while the MPAA looks for cameras.
The quality of movies has declined. What happened to many great movies per year? As it is, even Stealth will win awards this year just because it was released.
If you muct run commercials, run them BEFORE the movie is scheduled to start, while people are comming in. We paid for a MOVIE, not a commercial.
People are RUDE in theaters. STFU! Theaters should enforce this and remove people who ruin it for others instead of looking for cameras.
The pricing for food and drinks is crazy. It is a long time well known joke.
If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
The price of the movie for 2x$8.50=$17.00
Add popcorn or candy for 2x$3.50=$7.00
Soda's 2x3.50=$7.00
Total=$31.00 = 4 hours work? to pay for a movie that's likely not worth renting at Blockbuster for $3?
Why aren't they showing up?
I wholeheartedly agree! At least someone with some influence has realised this blatantly obvious situation exists.
They should be worrying about the quality of their films. "the island" was a special effects packed remake of this turkey called "parts the clonus horror", which was ripped a new one by Mike, Crow, and Servo back in the late 90's.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
When I think about it, I've been to a movie theater once in the past 3 years. Before then I went probably at least once a month. Why I don't go anymore:
1. Shitheads talking inside the theatre.
2. Shitheads not putting their cell phones on silent.
3. In my opinion, a general decline in the quality of movies.
4. I just don't watch movies as much. I've found alternative methods of entertainment.
5. The first two are really the top reasons, if anything makes me angry its.....
In other countries you can still go see a local movie for less than an average workers hourly wage, you don't see commercials in theaters, and snacks don't cost 8 times their normal value. They seem to be doing OK.
I imagine that this is because in other countries movies aren't expected to be a multi-billion dollar industry. The films are small affairs usually telling believable stories about peoples lives rather than the ridiculous contrived nonsense that hollywood pumps out.
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
I'll tell you exactly why I stopped seeing movies in theatres.
FUCKING TV COMMERCIALS before every damn movie. I don't mind seeing TV commercials when I'm watching television. Commercials allow them to pay for the airwaves they're sending my way. Fine, fair trade.
However, to see the price of movie tickets go up $2 to $3 per in a three year span, while at the same time they're subjecting me to their damned marketing CRAP is too much.
I'm not going to pay $10 to watch commercials. I'm paying that much to get a big screen, big sound, and NO ADVERTISING. (movie previews are fine, at least they're on topic)
There's nothing more annoying than seeing that same shitty ass grainy TV commercial at 40' across and blasting your ear drums out.
You hear me movie execs? You allow commercials before your movies, and I WON'T SEE THEM. Fuck you.
Movies are a prime example of my theory.
How much money is spent on advertising a movie? What percentage is that of the total cost? How much do the theatres themselves advertise? How much of that is the total cost? In short, how much money is used (I'd love to say wasted) telling me to go see a movie that I already know that I want to see because of the natural free advertising that takes place every day? (Look up movie listings through the movie theatre's website, see articles on CNN / imdb, hear from friends, hear countless plugs on TV [not ads]). All of those communications costs the film crew zero dollars. Those affect me. Then you buy an ad on TV or in a magazine. Trust me, I'll almost never see it. Even if I did, why would I go to a movie that I didn't learn about from a more trusted and objective source? Why would I even by aware of your commercial?
That's just movies. It gets far, far worse than that. Company A buys products from Company B which buys from Company C which buys from Company A. 'A' gets investor pressure (or anything, really) and starts a marketing campaign to get more customers, thus increasing the price to 'B'. Now 'B' needs to market and/or raise prices to break even with the change, costing more to 'C', and now 'C' must do the same, causing 'A' to choke. These 3 companies are now in a little inflation loop which will hurt not only these companies, but every other customer to 'A' 'B' and 'C'. My little theory says that our complete and stupid over-exposure to advertising is now responsible for a significant portion of the change in cost of every product, thus wages, thus inflation. Now of course currently oil is slated to bring the price of every product up by a decent amount too, but I mean aside from that.
In short, not only do I find advertising annoying and insulting, I find it threatening.
Some of your ideas are interesting but the basic premise is flawed, movie theaters are like pizza places. You have a high fixed cost and low variable cost, it's easy to make a profit in volume.
Were that I say, pancakes?
- An interesting plot...simple enough, one would think. "Rob Schnieder goes to Amsterdam and poses as a gigolo to foil a murder mystery" doesn't count.
- Dialog that sounds more like it was written by Quintin Tarantino than George Lucas.
- Character development. This does not include a guy who thinks fat chicks are worthless until Tony Robbins hypnotizes him and when it wears off he finally realizes he's in love with one and it's what's on the inside that really matters.
- Quality acting, as opposed to anything ever done by Keanu Reeves.
- Jennifer Connelly
Actually, that last one is enough on its own.Here,Here.. Did I just agree with a Disney exec? I would only add ONLINE Distribution as well.
I want the choice on day one. Go home for 20bucks & watch it from the couch or Go out with the wife on a date. Theatre goes will go, some will buy the DVD right after watching the movie. DVD buyers will buy it, some will go to watch it on the big screen. (StarWars, FireFly, Batman etc...)
We like take out, but we also like to sit down every once in a while. If you make the choice come down to: spend $20 bucks on an unknown or spend $9 buck on unknown, I might end up spending $29 by the end. Its a "good thing" for us and them.
I hope the theater owners are scared, Spend some time trying to come up with a valid reason why I ought to shell out 30-50 bucks to watch Julie Roberts cry 5ft tears with commercials. Piracy would all but die if DVD's of NewReleases were out at the same time. I know I wouldn't waste my time and Bandwidth on a Cam version of a film I could purchase now. ( I already came to this conclusion around the time theHulk was leaked.) We spend a total of 20 bucks a paycheck on DVDs (usually used or under $10), 5 of us in the house. We've seen exactly 5 movies in the theatre since Farenheight 911. One person at each.
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
The last few times I've gone to the theater I felt cheated. Expensive ticket prices, expensive refreshments (and who wants 2 gallons of soda?), 20 minutes of commercials, then a sub par movie. Add to that the many distractions of phones, chatting, people going to the bathroom 20 times (thanks to the 2 gallons of soda) and other things. No thanks. I think that even the die hard movie goers have started feeling the same.
It's a shame really. I have fond memories of going to the movies when I was younger. My childrens memories will be of watching the DVD at home (which isn't really a bad thing I guess).
Aych tea tea pea colon slash slash slash dot dot org slash
Looking at the local paper, I see that we had 7 movies released this week. Even when I was a PFY, I never had the time or money to see 7 movies in a weekend. Nevermind today when I have a real job, wife and family.
AC -- I'm AC but I'm not *that* AC.
UK Prices:
£7.50+ per adult in a standard seat eg no leg room.
£3.00+ for a popcorn.
£2.00+ for a drink.
So thats £22 for a couple translates at current rates at about 39USD
Now think that the typicl UK cinema is designed to cram people in, and not that comfortable. Some are pretty filthy too lots of popcorn stuck to the floor.
Then you have the films.
After a short time on release the sound (especially SDDS has degraded because some idiot decided it was a good idea to put it on the edge of the film) goes funny. Many of the films I see have a few sound drop outs which are annoying.
The arthouse and some flicks are good, but I would say at least 85% of what comes out is crap or not worth paying that much for.
Films get rated as a watch, DVD rental or can't be bothered for me.
--
And a random useless piece of info:
If you want to never be able to watch a film in peace again look out for the change over dots at the top right corner of the film. One at the start and end of every real. I can't Ignore the things now I noticed them:(
When I go back and watch movies like "The Goonies" or "E.T." or "Cocoon" or even the first three "Star Wars" movies, I can't help but be caught up in that sense of wonder I felt when I first watched them. It just seems easier to suspend disbelief. Now, it might be because I watched these movies as a child/teenager, but I don't think so... Even "old" movies like "Rear Window" (greatest movie ever IMO) or "Casablanca" (ALSO the greatest movie ever ;) which I didn't watch until I was much older seem to just draw you completely in and keep you entraced right up to the end.
Maybe it IS the overkill with special effects or maybe it is just the shear glut of movies coming from Hollywood nowadays. But I don't think so... I think Woody Allen is right and somewhere along the way the art of crafting Hollywood movies has been diluted.
Maybe "The Chronicles of Narnia" will get it right...
and there has definately been a trend of declining attendance over that time period but the worst part has been the last 4 years. After 9/11 we had no customers for about 2 months. It took about six months for us to start having crowds again and even today we typically only sell out one or two shows on a friday or saturday night. In the mid 90's we would typically sell out 5 or 6 of our 10 houses every fri and sat night.
You can't blame it on our ads or the length of our previews either. We show 3 previews and one ad (always for a DVD or movie related product or film festival). Our average preview time has increased from 10 minutes in the mid 90's to about 12 minutes today.
The bottom line is that we rarely show a movie for longer than two weeks now. It used to be that a three or four week run was normal and we would always have a few movies that were three or more months old.
When I first started working here they had been showing "Raise the Red Lantern" for 13 months and it was still selling out shows both on the weekends and on random weekday evenings!
On the bright side, 40 year old virgin is hysterically funny. But it and batman are the only movies doing any business for us now.
Played a good cop who was chasing things in "The Fugitive."
Unfortunately, when an actor does such a good job in a role, and enough money is made from it, that actor HAS to produce ten to twenty more films of increasingly bad quality. Tommy Lee Jones, as a tracker cop who chases bad guys through snow covered Oregon, just seems rehashed and boring now.
Hollywood takes the masses for idiots, and seem to think that "new" is bad. Lucas, at least, wasn't too scared of producing something new and off-the-wall. It is a pity that he fell into that trap recently, as well.
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
1. quality of the movie. If it sucks, I ain't goin'. Include here also unnecessary special effects, and intentionally jerky or fuzzed-out choreography. Worst example I've seen to date: The Bourne Supremacy. Let's start a line to kick director Greengrass in the ass for transforming what could have been a very good movie into unwatchable crap.
2. Noise. Listen up, movie people - I'M NOT DEAF! Although I would be if I went into the theater while you were engaging in shock troop sonic crowd control while showing commercials and previews.
3. Commercials. I pay money so you can show me a bunch of BELLOWING commercials? No. I stand outside the door until they're done, put in my earplugs (the movies themselves are still too loud), and then go in. How do I know when they're done? Easy. I can _feel_ the noise from 50 feet away. So it had better be a really good movie before I go through this hassle.
4. Crappy and intrusive soundtracks. Not meaningful music, but the shrieking just for the sake of making noise. Just shut up already so I can watch the movie. If I wanted to listen to irrelevant music all through the movie, I'd bring along my iPod. Although, to be fair, it seems like crappy music also gets added to the DVD, that wasn't in the original.
Yeah, you're right. I don't go to see many movies any more. Last one I saw was March of the Penguins - and I'd have preferred it without the narration.
1. Never see a movie in the first week it is out.
2. Always arrive 15 minutes late. (no commercials for me).
3. Never use the concession stand.
Setting his threshold to 5, Sparky eliminated most of the trolls on /.
And frankly, I don't know that I want to. Is it THAT funny to see and hear all the variations on obscenity that top comedians can come up with? Is there something else I'm just missing here? Sure, I like a good laugh as well as the next guy, maybe more so. But what is it about 'The Aristocrats' that has the critics and comedians raving so hard in general? I guess I just don't understand the appeal.
It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
In fact, IMAX's stock has risen > 100% over the last 3 years. Gross revenues are also pretty strong.
I find it very interesting that this fact was not even approached in the article that maybe the movie industry should consider implementing or creating new technology to attract people. Maybe 3D movie technology?? Dont know of any home movie theaters that you can buy with that...
As with most markets, newer technology is the answer.
The reason so many films are boring is because.... I've already seen them.
Most films nowadays are just a rehash of a film made a few years ago under a different name so after a few years you get to see almost all the films that have ever been made.
But books have been around for ages and people still read them! For a start a book costs a fraction of the cost of a movie so a publisher takes a small risk publishing a odd book that will only be read by a few people, films cost megabucks so an odd film that will only get a few viewers isn't going to make any money so it won't be made. Add that that it only takes a couple of hours at most to see a film but it takes much longer to read a book so you can get through far more films than books, and the type of story and the way you tell it in a film is far more limited that that of a book and it doesn't take long before you've seen almost every movie ever made (by only seeing a fraction of them).
Anyhow, the reason I don't go to the cinema to watch films is because I've already seen them already. It's exactly the same reason why I no longer buy music, because 80% it seems to be covers and the other 20% sound just like something else from a few years ago.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
What they need is to put scenes in movies where people are jumping with explosions behind them. Jumping and explosions, lots and lots of them. In fact, you could fill up a whole movie with nothing but people jumping and explosions. Now that would sell. Who needs plots and dialog and stuff?
By the perception of illusion, we experience reality
With worldwide ticket and DVD sales, I would guess that almost EVERY movie made these days turns a profit. Yeah, initial ticket sales are lower, but who cares?
What it amounts to is people buy DVDs now instead of tickets. The studios would like if people bought tickets AND DVDs. Yeah, whatever. Greedy fucks.
Bring back the drive-in movie theater... BTW Are there any left ? I haven't seen one in years :-( They could really build some great venues with the latest technology.
Remakes, sequels, TV sitcoms, CG crashfests, blood 'n guts gore fests, etc. There's no there there.
Why would anybody want to pay the extorted prices to see the dribble coming out of Hollywood? It's a vast wasteland. Any creativity is limited to creative ways to exploit the latest pop trends and pseudo-clever CG. Nothing produced in Hollywood has artistic value.
The Internet/video games, and the local riverboat casinos.
Web browsing (particularly forum participation) and video games put me in control of the information I use. If I want to quit and come back later, it'll be waiting for me. I can change topics/games in a few seconds if I want to. I am entirely in control. Sitting passively in front of a screen is so 20th century.
The money that I don't spend at theaters goes to the casinos (well, on bad days anyway). I can sit at a table, play some blackjack (again, I have far more control here than staring at a movie screen), hang out with my friends, chat with the dealer, chat with the other people at the table, maybe have a few rounds, and it's all a good time. I know when I sit down that the house has a ~1% edge on the games I play. I go in with a fixed amount of money and if I lose it all, a) it's not going to break me and b) I don't feel compelled to try to get it back. It's gone, but it would have been gone anyway if I had blown it at a theater.
In the past, there were lots of services that were public, in public spaces, and you had to interact with people in order to access them. With new developments, more things are changing to a more private/personal fashion. People just don't go to a phone boot, they use a cellphone. The same happends with Internet/Computer access, shopping, etc. People prefer to use the service from the privacy of their own homes. It seems that people hates people even more as time passes, and they try to interact with others as little as possible. Society has changes, and the market will have to adapt to this changes.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Movie ticket sales have been declining since the invention of television. According to Edward Jay Epstein, "In 1948, 90 million Americans--65 percent of the population--went to a movie house in an average week; in 2004, 30 million Americans--roughly 10 percent of the population--went to see a movie in an average week."
Epstein has been writing a number of quality articles for NPR & Slate about the Hollywood profit shift from movie theatres to home theatres. Here are a few of the recent ones.
The Vanishing Box Office
Hollywood's Death Spiral
Hollywood's Death Spiral, Part 2
Hollywood's Profits, Demystified
I see fewer problems in the UK... a little more in Germany (suprising) and forget about going to cinema in Greece, where people actually have to speak up to hear themselves over the film and each other.
Oh in Greece, if someones phone rings, the etiquette is for them to answer it (forget how bright a phone screen is while ringing, and you are in a dark cinema) and carry on a normal conversation, albeit slightly louder to compensate for the movie.
Of course, dialing out is also not a problem, or sending a text message (again that bright screen).
It is all much better than watching the movie, because if a person in greece actually watches the movie, they start talking 10 to the dozen about it (or I like to hope it is about the movie) not jus to the person next to them, but to someone 4 seats away.
Also, they are all commentators, and cannot just laugh, but have to say 'oh wow that was funny, did you see that, the guy walked into the wall... ahahhaa, I am hungry lets eat a gyros later, what did you do last friday?' instead.
Of course, I am assuming, I can't understand a word they say (well I can, but I like to switch it off).
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Look back at all of the movie greats, then ask yourself whether they'd get made today in Hollywood. The current market woes are due to lowest common denominator movie-making.
No-one wants to buy a movie unless the "market" includes damn near everyone on the planet. Thus, you end up over and over with single movies which:
- Cannot use dialog above reading level four
- Must have at least one nude scene
- Must have at least one murder
- Must have at least one high school student
- Must have at least one octogenarian
- Must have jokes
- Must have bathroom jokes
- Must have drama
- Must have melodrama
- Must have computers
- Must have new-age anti-computer granolaness
- Must have a standoff
- Must have a car chase
- Must have a horse race
- Must have a prayer scene or implied act of god
- Must be a love story
- Must be a murder mystery
- Must be a light comedy
- Must have room for product placement
Of course, by the time you put all of things in over and over again what you get is an incoherent mess with little room for plot that jerks the audience around like nobody's business, which is a mortal sin because none of them were really that interested in seeing it anyway.
The studio execs need to narrow their audience targeting by choosing one or two of these things for each film (preferably that do not contradict) and including only them.
Better to narrow budgets and targets and make a simpler, more focused, more skillful film that 500,000 people absolutely are dying, DYING to see than a kitchen sink "blockbuster" style film that 30,000,000 people couldn't give less of a damn about but *shrug* they guess they'll go catch a film and kill a Friday night, if they can get together the energy to put socks on and anyway it'll probably just have the same explosions, boobs, scat scenes and recycled mysticism as the last ten films they saw...
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Lately, however, I've discovered that there is a vast wealth of good indie films, with decent acting, excellent stories, and the cost of admission is just a dvd rental. "Primer" is an excellent example. It was made on $7000 US, and it is the best movie I have seen in several years. I see no reason to go see a crappy big-budget film when there are better options.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Going to the movies is supposed to be a sight and sound experience. Far too many movies don't justify the price for the experience because you get just as much enjoyment at home as you do in the theatre. Examples of movies that justify the experience in my opinion are LOTR series, Bram Stoker's Dracula and other movies that saturate your sight and sound. Maybe if Hollywood realized all movies don't justify the same price and changed their pricing structures accordingly they'd see better returns from their investments. If the ticket price was the same as the rental price for a lot of b grade movies, I'd probably see more movies in the theatre. Now some studio suit can read my writing and take credit for the idea when it works.
I think the reason is that Hollywood lost the art of telling a story. To much emphasis on bigbreasted blondes and too little attention to the details. Watch some of the old movies and see the difference. Long live "The Criterion Collection"
I wouldn't say the products aren't good, just not good enough.
I'll pay $5 + 2 hours of my time to watch a not great movie, I'm just not willing to put up with $40+ the rappy theater environment to watch it.
Music CD's aren't worth $20, so I don't buy them. I'll just turn on the radio. Sometimes I'll see a decent CD on clearance for $5, I might grab it.
It use to take almost two years for a movie to get to rental and even longer to own, now it takes about 3 months and everyone has dvd player. Has anyone ever considered that this might be a huge competition? It is cheaper, where I live at least, to buy a movie than pay for two tickets to see it. Only a small percentage of movie goers are set on seeing the movie when it first comes out, and that is only for a small subset of movies. Besides, with all the dvd purchases, and now television shows going for absurd prices does anyone really feel sorry for the studios?
As far as I'm concerned most Hollywood movies suffer from movie executive meddling, basically the excessive script-rewriting and second-guessing. For instance, I could have done without the stupid car chase in Batman Begins and the whole "new and cool" Batmobile altogether. It did not add one ounce to the plot or make the movie any more interesting. In my mind and was there to try and get kids techno-geeked about Batman. And they needed to fill some time. The unwillingness to take a chance on the passion of a film maker, let the director and artists involved have true artistic input and leave the movie-making to the movie-makers, not the bean-counters. But of course it's a business, right? Not an art form...
Something Witty Goes Here
One particular film/song is successful so they just clone it and flog the same formula to death because they have no imagination whatsoever.
Hollywooods' latest non-idea seems to be re-making 70s TV series and films...badly
And this summer it seems that ALL the releases - or at least all those with a significant advertising budget - are exactly such remakes.
At last the critical media are beginning to question how much, if any, of the studios' financial downturn is actually due to "piracy".
(Combine that with the recent story about how the people who file-share also BUY several times more records than the typical record customer and perhaps some clues will begin to penetrate.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Most cities will have a few smaller theaters with much better conditions. The screen may not as big, but it is plenty big. Also, the sound systems generally sound much better.
Luckily I also live in Austin Texas, and we have the Drafthouse.
A wonderful theater that serves food and beer. Get a bucket of beer, and a couple pizzas and you're good to go. I don't even care I just dropped 40 bucks at the theater cuz it's just a better experience.
When I'm not seeing a movie at the drafthouse, there is still a nice "normal" theater we go to. It only has like 8 screens, but has all the latest flicks. The screens are big, the sound system is excellent, the conditions are clean, the seats are comfortable, and the ushers will respond to noise complaints. Not that there really are any, the theater is in a kind of a posh shopping center. Any kids there must have good parents, because they are well-behaved. The ticket prices cost
If you have a shitty movie going experience, switch theaters. Stay away from the huge multiplexes and theaters inside malls. Find the good ones. Or start a drafthouse franchise in your city
When prices are heading north of $10 for a less than 2 hour movie, while video games offer $1/hour of good play, that better be a d@mn good and unique movie experience to get me into the thearter. This summer has had few of those. Everything else can wait for NetFlix to mail it to me.
In fact, if anything, LotR has carried this industry the last 3 years, IMnsHO.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Didn't mean to screw up Revenge for you. But that scene where Annikin killed all the children was hilarious!
-Pat Robertson
Very good point. While a few trailers can add to the ambience of the theater experience, and they can be fun to make fun of with your spouse/date/friends, 30 minutes are just to much, especially when combined with the theatre's own advertising.
Let's go buy some snacks...
...
...
Shop at Karl's Jewelry...
The Fremont Mall has a new Chinese food joint!
And now with our feature presentation.
[trailer 1]
[trailer 2]
On an off note, does anybody have any idea why they're called trailers if they precede the movie rather than trail them? :-) -- Paul
OpenSource.MathCancer.org: open source comp bio
I just can't understand how a multi-billion dollar industry can't figure that it's doing something wrong. What seems so intuitively obvious to the average American just seems to stump all of these corporate big wigs. They will have to spend millions on market analysis to figure out that their movies suck and they will have to start either making a better product or charging less.
Your analogy of the auto industry is right on. I couldn't believe when I read an article a few months ago that GM didn't know how much money it makes on any individual model of car. American auto makers can't figure out that their biggest problem is most of their cars suck. People won't pay higher prices for a sucky product. Like the movie industry, automakers either need to make a better product, or charge less. These are all basic economic concepts that most of us should have learned in high school, but a movie studio CEO or board member for an auto manufacturer can't seem to grasp the concept.
Find coupons in Greeley
Movie theaters are not hospitable. If I can't smoke a good joint during the movie (which is required for much of the Hollywood dreck to even be able to sit through it), I am less likely to go to the cinema, when I can happily do it in the privacy of my home.
:)
Luckily the cinema I go to has a nice park outside, so at least I can do it before I enter
It's something that seems to just fit. And for the money it's about what you get at McD's or other fast food for around the same money. As I understand it, theaters don't make much on the gate, they're counting on the concession stand to make their money so the faster they can shepherd people through and the more they can sell the better the bottom line.
I get a bit grumpy when I see people working a concession stand in a horribly inefficient manner. Hey, have one do the register and drink and another do the popcorn, you can move those people through like greased pigs.
On the topic of grease, I can't stand that fake butter. Gives me headaches and stomach aches. I saw an ad in a theater trade publication, "Maximize your profit with Sun Gold Butter Replacement blah blah blah" Yeah, it's all about profit. Too bad, that's the one thing likely to turn me off $4.50 for a bag of popcorn.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
If movies of varying budget had varying ticket prices, I'd believe that.
Why would anyone get into a business where its sole distributor charges it more than the business can charge the customer? Why wouldn't they just stop showing the big budget movies and make more money?
Now first, let me admit, I'm a Lifetime Member of Cinema Seattle, so I get to see 40 or more free films every year until I'm dead, and take a guest. Which is a total bargain.
But, as someone who's been a cineaste for decades, it is very true that the film industry has been going for the cheap easy films, which bore the pants off of us, compared with prior years, and are more hung up on stars than content.
Now, there are exceptions: The Constant Gardener, which has both a cool story and great actors; the upcoming Tim Burton film The Corpse Bride; and more.
But in general, it's not film piracy that is killing film audiences - most of the pirates in fact seem to be going for Japanese and Chinese and Indian films that the studios won't show over here, so you can't blame people for that.
It's not having better content than cable TV. There are some fine shows on cable TV nowadays, and if you have a large-screen TV, you don't have to shlep to the theater and sit next to someone who talks thru the movie.
Personally, I rank films in two groups: films that must be seen on the big screen - and films that would be just as fine seen on TV at home on some cool channel like Sundance or IFC or BBC or CBC where they don't edit it to make it saccharine barf city like the lower bands do.
And there's been a bunch of films that were so predictable, for quite a while, that I didn't even bother going to, even though they were free.
Recently that's been changing, so I have hope for a resurgance of film, but the last few years have been dreadful.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Yes, movie attendance is down this year. But what most articles don't mention is that movie attendance was at record highs for the previous two summers!
I'm tired of everyone thinking that all businesses and industries must GROW GROW GROW. Why can't it be sufficient to maintain what you already have?
Greg
There\'s no place like ~
I live in Tucson, we aren't podunk rural, but sure as hell not NY, call it maybe a million people including surrounding areas. Housing is very cheap, wages tend to be on the low side. Ticket price? $8.50.
Screw that. I'd rather spend the money on making my home theatre better. These days, it's quite accessable. You can get a good sound system for like $1000-$1500, and a widescreen HDTV for $1000-$2000. Ya, buys a lot of nights at the movies, but there's something to be said for watching in your own living room. You watch them on your own schedule, you can pause and go to the bathroom, you can have a beer, there are no screaming kids, etc.
Basically the only thing theatres really have going for them is timeleness of release, you get to see it there first. Other than that, I'd much rather just have some friends over to my place, or go over to theirs, and watch movies on a good home theatre.
I used to go to the theatre once per week, but currently it is twice per year. The reason: simple, over here in german speaking Europe, you go to a movie theatre, you usually sit through 10 minutes of commercials, then you even have to go through the no piracy blblabla shit at least twice then you have to go through the previews and then the movie starts. That means on the average you spent around 10-20 minutes of getting terror from the advertisers and then even worse terror for being blamed to be a pirate before a usually really lousy til mediocre hollywood movie starts. Movie theatres are not fun anymore, to the worse, the customer insulting has started on buy dvds as well, so DVD sales are stagnant over here as well...
You drove 20 minutes to watch the movie that you thought was going to last 140 minutes. But nope, there's "the twenty". And then the previews. And then the traffic outside the theater after the movie ends. It's not just the money you're throwing away, it's a huge chunk of time!
Not that I post on slashdot or anything.
go ahead and mod me off topic, but from the article:
/.er does it, but this is the NY @!#$ing Times!
"With competition from video games, hundreds of television channels and DVD's, that's no longer the case, he said."
I can let it go when the average
You go to the counter, and want some popcorn. They scoop it out of a giant tub of popcorn that looks like it's been there for a few weeks. The heat lamps are nonexistent, or turned off.
What the hell? I mean, it's not cuisine, but, would you accept a 6-hour old hamburger that's room temp?
This must be a some strange artifact of multiplexes that I don't quite understand. When I managed a small theater years ago, the concession folks were very adept at making just enough popcorn so it was always fresh and hot. Heat lamps always on, turn it over quickly, toss it when it's nasty, and freshen it by mixing in a fresh batch.
I don't recall the last time I've ever seen a popper actually running in a theater. We'd always running the popper right before the movie, because the smell of it running was enough to get people to buy.
How hard of a concept is this? Of all places, a movie theather should make good popcorn, dammit!
I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
For all you who are whining about the cost of going out to the movies, consider:
My kid went to see Rent in NYC w/ his summer camp group. Including travel (bus) from New Haven CT, it cost $85.
Yet any decent show on Broadway runs for years. If the product is good, the price isn't important.
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
too many Hollywood movies these days, they say, just are not good enough.
Finally! They understand! Movies are too canned and similar now. You see one per year from each genre and you've seen the rest. They need to get away from the canned scripts and get back to being inventive. It's no wonder documentaries are making a ass-load of money lately. It's the only thing that has the possibility of being unique in the theatres lately.
WURD!!
The state of affairs with theaters and their respective business practices are atrocious.
I went to see Red Eye a few nights ago at a local AMC theater. The showtime was established to be 2140 on the ticket, newspaper, and online, so I arrived at 2130. The film never actually began at 2140, not even the previews. Immediately at 2140, the advertising switched from the standard slideshow of local businesses to thirty minutes (Yes, I actually timed it.) of premium advertising of television shows, Coke and Pepsi products, and the armed services. This was not standard previews, but much more. Finally at 2210 the actual previews began and they lasted about ten minutes.
This misinformation about showtimes is very distasteful and dubious. If anything, it makes me not want to see a film in theater anyway. Even if Hollywood quit making banal films, the theaters would still need the modify their practices to bring me back.
What I find hard to believe about this is that AMC theaters was just purchased by Loews theater company, which in 2003 had a class action lawsuit filed against it for misrepresenting the start time of a movie by five minutes due to premium advertising, not previews.
More information is available here about the suit against Loews:
http://www.nomovieads.com/doc.htm
If Loews a brief can be levied against Loews for delaying a film by 4:49, I wonder what would happen with its newly purchased child-company that delayed the film by nearly thirty minutes.
p.s. - For those armchair economists out there, I am in doubt that this premium advertising is really necessary, given the increases in ticket prices and profit structures from concessions.
Even the Politburo concurs with Process of Elimination http://process-of-elimination.net
My bigest hang up with the movie theaters is the fact that you pay close to $10 a ticket and then have to sit through 30 minutes of commercials before previews start. Around here it seems the average time before the movie starts is about 30-45 minutes. If you are going to show so many commercials lower the freak'n ticket prices. We have some great theaters here in Birmingham yet no one seems to get that we go to the movies and are willing to pay the money to see the movie, not the commercials. Matter of fact I make it a point to go out of my way not to buy anything from Companies that advertise in movie theaters.
I figure if I boycott them enough and enough of us get together to do that we can just rub out the ads by making them lose money. I think we should start writting letters to these advertisers to make this point
The backstory of the joke is fascinating as well . . . it was Johnny Carson's favorite joke, and he corresponded regularly w/Penn Jillette during the making of the movie, up until his death. That's neither here nor there in the argument to see the movie, I suppose, but it struck me as very interesting.
I dunno. . . I went to see it with a good friend of mine (who isn't/wasn't in the entertainment world) and he thought it was great as well.
Sure, there are quite a few variations that are similar, and at times you feel like their running a treadmill, but the moments of true originality are there that make it magical.
Gilbert Gottfried's piece is probably the most disturbing thing I've ever heard in my life, and (as I stated above) the mime is just so fucking funny it's ridiculous. I nearly shit my pants laughing so hard.
And it's nice to see comics like Doug Stanhope and Sara Silverman on the screen. . . both true talents that have been wasted on the few vehicles they've been given to work with on television.
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
I read in the fortune file today that the most common given name in the world was "Mohammad" and the most common family name was "Chang".
Just think of all the people named "Mohammad Chang"!
By that token we need to make a movie that will appeal to them - a romantic drama-comedy with heart, that involves speeding things that go whoosh, big explosions and hot actors.
It's sure to be a winner.
Video games don't cut into movie revenue. Hell I am planning on going to see a movie, just as soon as I finish World of Warcraft.
.50 dollars/hr) Crystal chronicals entertained me for only .30 dollar/hour. A movie with my girlfriend costs me 10 dollars/hour and I have to listen to her bitch about how bad the movie was.
*heh* But honestly compare the price to entertainment ratios. In warcraft I am getting 2 hours of entertainment for every dollar I am paying. (cost of
For movies to compete they need to be new and fresh or they need to cost the same as other entertainment.
Nuff said,
Zack
Honestly, I can't imagine seeing 26 movies in a year...Most of popular cinema is crap.
Then again, if you're going to arthouse films...That probably explains the better-behaved audience.
Man, lemme know what theater you're going to. I'm at a point that I only hit up at theater about once every 4 - 6 months because I simply can't stand the people that go there... loud, talking, cell phones, pda's, everything... i leave pissed off every time and it rarely has to do with the quality of the picture, but the quality of the people viewing the picture.
It would seem that Mr. Lynton is the first of many people in Hollywood to emerge from his cave after years of intense hibernation. Let's see what other obvious talking points he and others can come up with.
Who knows...maybe they'll start producing better movies now.........BWA HA HA HA HA!!! AH HA HA HA HA HA!! Oh man, I crack myself up...
A side question: how much of "weekend box office revenues" is due to the rise in ticket prices as opposed to an increase in ticket sales?
Some folks say that improved home theaters is a cause. I say not entirely, as I have a fairly nice home theater and still will see movies in the theater. Going to the theater is a group and/or date experience. It's a social activity that is, for the most part, relatively inexpensive. People who love movies, no matter what type of home setup they have, will still go to the theaters to see both good and bad movies.
Some folks say that DVDs and Netflix/Blockbuster is a cause. The shorter the timeframe between major release and DVD availability certainly is a factor. If I knew that a movie that I was interested in seeing was going to be out on DVD in 2 or 3 months (with bonus features!), then why should I bother going to the theater and paying the same amount of money on tickets? I understand why the studios want to piggyback on marketing to help increase DVD sales, but if I knew that a particular movie was NOT going to be released on DVD for a few years then I'd be more likely to see it in the theater.
For example, Pixar announced last year (when they pushed back CARS) that their new release schedule is: Big Release in May for the Summer; DVD Release in November for Xmas. I know that going forward, every year I can expect to find the latest Pixar DVD around Thanksgiving. As long as I'm willing to wait until Nov, then I know I'll be able to see the movie then. BUT... if Pixar had a policy of waiting 7 years before releasing their movies on DVD (7 years being Disney's traditional "next generation" math for releasing videos/movies/DVDs) then they should see an increase in theater sales.
Through in the fact that with multiplexes the way they are, there no longer are "event" movies, with people waiting in line for hours to see the latest. Instant gratification has cut into building buzz and desire to see something. It may be better for the consumers to have 10 screens showing MegaMultiManIV for the opening weekend to choose from, but I remember waiting for hours to see Indiana Jones, Luke Skywalker, and Egon Spengler on the big screen and making going to the movies something special.
Sure, high concession stand prices and obnoxious cell phones, noise bleed, etc. are all there, but those are usually isolated incidents.
After I picked up am Infocus projector for $1200 from Costco that was it for theater going for me. 92" picture, quality is as good or better than film.
The last movie I saw in the theater was LOTR ROTK, the audio cut out three times, people were talking and there were ENDLESS commercials before the movie. After that no more. It really has nothing to do with the movies (although many are bad), it's the theater experience, it just sucks. I can even walk/streetcar to 2 multiplexes from my house and I won't do it.
Now, $2 movie with a beer and a burger at McMenamins theater pub is another matter.
While I completely agree with points 1, 2, 4, and 5, I disagree completely with #3.
The primary concern is not if a book or comic is transferred to a theatrical release but rather whether or not it's done well and faithfully based on the original material.
I am thrilled that Peter Jackson did Lord of the Rings. Even with all of the (often unnecessary) literary licenses that he took in The Two Towers, the trilogy as a whole was very, very well done and did not rely on special effects but instead focused on the characters. I would have done certain scenes differently (like eliminating the warg rider attack, which never occurred in the books), but his movies were IMO the best adaptation of the books that Hollywood has made.
I've heard that Sin City is exceptionally close to the comics. It's a bit too violent for me, so I doubt that I'll see it, but everyone that I've spoken to who is a fan of the comics says that it was very well made.
The Spider-Man movies were also very well done.
Sadly, for every good adaptation of a book there are a number of bad adaptations of that book or others, such as The Hulk. We just have to pan those as the badly done movies that they are, but no more or less than any other movie.
I agree that there is a point of saturation. If too many movies of a certain type come out in a short span, movie-goers are going to be turned off, just like when a song gets far too much radio air play, but the saturation is more often because what's gettng repeated either sucks or just isn't good for multiple viewings/hearings.
If a book adaptation can be written well, presented well, and yet remain faithful to the original matieral, then there is no reason why it should not be made just because another book adaptation was recently released.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
Ticket prices are not rising much more than inflation. Ticket prices in 1989 averaged $3.99. According to http://www.westegg.com/inflation/, the inflation-adjusted value of that amount in 2004 is $6.06. Ticket prices averaged $6.21 in 2004, about 2.5% higher than inflation - but even that may be within the margin of error of the survey data. Assuming that your data is correct, ticket prices are not rising much....
I just put my cell on vibrate :). I'm not going to turn the thing all the way off because my cell phone is where I take the majority of my calls and I should at least make it available at all times, even if I don't answer a call in the theatre :).
No one touches/takes my cell phone without my explicit permission. At least not if they value their lives ;).
"The boy is dangerous, they all sense it, why can't you?"
They defend themselves buy saying theyare just giving the consumer what they want, yet it's clear consumers like new stuff. Look at Sin City. Hollywood hated that movie because it broke all kinds of rules, some offical, some just defacto.
Like the DGA says you can't have more than one director. A director can have ADs, but only one director. Rodriguez quit the DGA over that so he and Frank Miller could co direct. Studios say you can't do black and white films, barring something epic like Schindler's List. Also, you can't cast big name-good guy actors in bad guy roles, espically non-sepaking roles, because they claim the actors won't take it. Elija Wood said it was a blast playing Kevin in the movie. And so on.
Well, for all that, the movie was a massive success, and made Rodriguez a shitload of money. Audiences clearly responsed, even though it wasn't done "correctly" according to Hollywood knowledge.
Sequels are ok, but remakes ARE NOT! Batman Begins, Star Wars... both did great.
Have you actually compared the new Batman to the previous ones? The only commonality is the source material. Batman Begins did well because the creative team respected the source material and made a movie that moviegoers actually wanted to see. Which is the whole point, supposedly.
My stupid web site
It is by far my favorite theatre because:
-No commercials whatsoever (they freely admit their prices are a little higher because of this, but that's fine with me).
-Reserved advanced seating. No more saving seats or getting to the theatre an hour early and waiting in line. It basically removes the general chaos entirely.
-Ushers for EVERY screen and they WILL enforce behavior rules. They'll tell people on cell phones or talking to shut up (though cell phones don't work in much of the building; I have a feeling this is intentional). I think this is rarely used since the people smart enough to go to Arclight are all people fed up with the usual theatre experience.
-No admittance after the movie has started. Period.
It is absolutely wonderful. The technology is also excellent - great sound, video, and theatre design. The front-row seats are perfectly useable! In fact they are very good seats. There is a HUGE open space between the front row and the screen.
It's also next to Amoeba Music, a great music store, which is a bonus.
Vote Libertarian
I hit the theater maybe twice a year now. It used to be at least once or twice a month. I've stopped going for two reasons:
I will continue to see only blockbuster special effects films, like a Star Wars, Indiana Jones, or Lord of the Rings.
All the others I can buy the DVD for the cost of a ticket for myself and my wife.
The Luddites were ahead of their time.
...and to make a comparison.
When I was 20 (10 years ago) I could buy a computer game for EUR 15-20 (they are close to EUR 45-50 now). A music album was reasonably priced as well.
I would buy two games and go to the cinema in the same month. Today, I will either buy a computergame OR go to the cinema every TWO months. Big difference. The costs for entertainment in general has sky rocketed and does not reflect what people are willing to spend.
Living in Los Angeles (aka, the Greater Hollywood Area), I have found my movie habits change dramatically. Of course there are the usual reasons of bad movies and the like. But for me, the theater atmosphere will make or break it.
Los Angeles has a good share of high end theaters like the Arclight. No commercials. Reserved seating. Closed doors movie start. And only for a couple of bucks above the other theaters.
It makes a huge difference. The whole atmosphere caters to adults, including the in theater bar and restaurant. On an adult budget, it is worth the extra bucks to take a night out of the house and get the big screen experience.
In contrast, the Bridge has attempted to reach the same market by dedicating only some showings as Director's Hall showings with reserved seating. Unfortunately, the other showings draw the usual teenage crowd making the whole scene less appealing.
Los Angeles also has a lot of art house theaters. And while they aren't as comfortable or convient, they do expand the available selection.
Anm
In other news, the sun rises...
Please allow me to hate the creator of the 120-character limit: *HATES*. Thank you.
Tivo lets me fast forward through commercials and netflix brings me my movies that I've heard about through channels other than TV commercials.
I don't even know what's IN the theaters for about the last 6 months.
What the *next* level will be is going to be just the opposite of what you get on DVD now:
Cinematic presentations will have Extras and Scenes that can only be viewed in the Theatre version.
How juicy does that DVD version look now?
We also use our old student ID's go get a student discount. When you include food, that comes out for a cheap $15 date!
Oh, and we go to the theaters late at night at around 11, avoid the insipid movies if we can, and often go on the weekdays. Makes it a whole lot better that way.
Have to tried going to an art theater? They're usually closer downtown than megaplexes, have cheaper tickets, better food, much better movies, and nicer audiences.
"Worker bees can leave
Even drones can fly away
The Queen is their slave."
A real problem is theater owners don't let ushers do their freakin' job. People with cell phones, people that talk during the movies... the list goes on and on. Back in the day, you did crap like that, the ushers would ask you to step outside. If you didn't, you're out on the street.
Ushers are just there to clean up anymore. I can't blame a 16 year old kid for not wanting to confront a self-righteous patron who is blabbing away on a cell phone or talking during a movie. The kid would get yelled at or worse. No kid needs to deal with that.
Why should we go to the movies if we're going to have to go with a whole bunch of other people that consider the place their own second family room where they can do whatever they please? $30 for that? Screw that.
The main reason I go to the movies less these days isn't the quality of the movies, but the quality of the moviegoers.
Where else to people behave on par or worse than animals? At the movie theater people will
Do you blame theater workers for not being enthusiastic about cleaning up after all that? If they wanted to clean up after animals they'd be working at a zoo. Oh wait, maybe they are.
I'm not apologizing for the theaters. Ticket booths are usually understaffed, ticket checkers are usually retarded people in wheelchairs (seriously, for the tax breaks), ticket prices are too expensive, concession prices are probably inflated 500%, previews/commercials are WAY too long and theaters in general are messy. But if I was going into a business the last kind I'd choose would be one where my average customer is a slob that's going to leave their garbage all over the place.
The /. article is appropriatly titled. Just remove the "Piracy not to blame" part because it's really about the "Decline of moviegoers."
Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
I'll just go back t watching my bootleg of Episode 3.
In the summer or fall, yeah, it seems like there's too many movies and not enough time. Until January or February, when there's nothing to see but shit.
I always wonder why studios don't save more good flicks for these months. It's not like there's any other movies to compete with.
Yeah, they say these are not good moviegoing months. But I'm wondering if that's a self-fulfilling prophecy: of course it's a bad time for theatres when all they're showing is shit!
My stupid web site
People these days are so shameless. I saw The Aristocrats just last weekend, and no matter how angrily I glared, or how loudly I hissed, everyone around me just kept going with the noisy laughter. Fortunately, I carry a roll of duct tape for situations like these, but it seems the management at Loews doesn't take too kindly to vigilante justice. God, it's so obnoxious. I'll never go to a Loews again.
Film programs do an awful job of training film students to write properly. They tell people to watch movies, throw Syd Field and "The Writer's Journey" at them, then spend the rest of the time teaching the technical aspects of filmmaking. What you end up with is a bunch of film students with no reference to life except through film, so what do they write? More of the same! I had a friend who grew up in the whitest, upper-middle class suburb of San Francisco, attended film school, then immediately moved to Hollywood and started writing drug/mobster films because he was a huge Scorsese fan. No life experience. No understanding of struggle and hardship. A copy of a copy of a copy.
Hmm, could it possibly be the um... QUALITY of the movies? Or perhaps the prices? As if that weren't enough, they throw in COMMERCIALS! If I wanted commercials, I'd watch the movies at home on cable. The movie industry needs to get a clue.
I hate paying $10 for a ticket and then the lights dim and a stupid commerical for Fanta soda or Razors blasts at 120 db. you can't even ignore them because it is so loud.
i don't mind the previews because at least they are relavant to the movie going experience.
I guessIam just spoiled by tivo. I only see commercials if I watch live events (go BoSox!)
Theaters have their place for movies with large images like LOTR and Star Wars. These are the only movies I will go to the theater for, and I do so with great trepidation that some lackwit will ruin the experience by being loud and rude. I actually will take off work during the week a few weeks after release for the chance at an empty theater during a matinee. If a bunch of lackwits show up, I leave and try again the next show. I value the immersion that much.
The cost doesnt keep me away...there are plenty of movies I'd like to see, and do, at home...its the rude people that keep me away.
The decline in movie attendance has been a long time coming. The basic industry has been on a major growth spurt since the mid-1990's. Every year has seen a growth, usually double digit in percentage.
And this is all with the same formula movies, a declining theater experience (the addition of commercials, cell phones, higher prices, etc...), and rapidly growing alternatives (inexpensive DVDs, near cinema quality interactive video games, and the Internet).
One also has to question if there has been a decline in revenue or a decline in the growth rate of revenue. Often public relations flacks for entertainment corporations or Hollywood journalists are a little unclear on the difference between the two.
Basically the movie industry has finally reached a level of saturation after a long period of growth. The real question is whether the industry will be able to maintain a secure level of revenue (say the level of a few years ago), or whether they will actually experience a real and (to them) severe decline in both revenue and attendance.
This has happened before in 'da biz'. There was a severe decline in the late 1950s due to saturation and a new technology (home television) and another lesser decline in the early 1970's (due primarily to a cultural shift from the WWII generation to the baby boomers). The television challenge was met by big blockbuster productions with new 'super theater' technologies like Cinerama (an early IMAX big-screen experience). The baby boomer challenge was met by recycling old movie plots and film grammars into big budget productions like Jaws and the first Star Wars series.
My guess is the the industry will pluck their butts out of the fire this time by pushing for digital screen theaters coupled with lower cost productions. There is going to be a tense transition period because of the cost of converting the theaters to digital screens will come at the same time that it will be necessary to reduce admission fees to regain audience numbers.
The good part is that every revenue squeeze in the movie business has resulted in a burst of new high-quality films from independent and previously unrecognized sources. The television squeeze of the 1950s led to interest in the European films and the French New Wave. The early 1970s squeeze enabled small powerfully films from new directors like Scorsese, De Alma, and Coppolla.
A unforeseen concern for the movie studios is that with DVDs and powerful PCs, people are able to re-edit and illegally release big movies according to their own vision. The most famous example so far has been "The Phantom Edit" version of the The Phantom Menace Star Wars movie of 1999. This was a benign effort to remove a character and tighten the editing flow (to change slightly the film grammar).
With so many films being made with the same actors and the same plots, it won't be too long before completely new movies start to appear comprised of sampled scenes from all these films rearranged with new dialog and sub-plots. Expect the industry to over-react when the first of these films begin to circulate. Especially when home video manipulation technologies evolve to the point of being able to do pseudo-blue screening and other synthetic cinema digital effects on sampled cinema.
I think that the movie executives are missing the mark when it comes to blming other media for the decline in movie attendance. Its how they make them that is at fault.
Though many films may look good on paper, what usually happens is that producers, writers, and committees often change the intitial ideas into something that looks desinged by committees. Which is exactly what happens.
And more writers and producers do not know what real life (outsied of show business) actually is like. Many of them are from second or third generation show business families that started years ago when the movies really mattered. Now only the box office and merchandising matters.
Add to that the innumerable marketing of toys, video games, clothing, and other junk that we really don't need, then the movies become just another merchandising gimmick. The movie then takes second place to licensing arrangements. the story is lost.
Another thing that destroys movies is the obsessive need for special effects and action over chracter and plot. What drove blockbusters like Lord of the Rings and the Harry Potter films are not special effects and action scenes for their own sake but plot and character.
What Hollywood needs is less Hollywood and more reality.
... independant and foreign film. Usually when I went there (when I was 20 years younger)with my girlfriend there was nobody in the projection sale so it usually ended in fondle time...
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
I think you could have stopped after the first 6 words.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
The better solution I see is to make more "niche" movies. Movies that have a strong appeal, if only to a smaller portion of the population. The more likely solution I see is to make fewer movies, that try and appeal to everyone. The thing is, it's much easier to make a good movie that appeals to very specific tastes than to make a good movie that appeals to everyone's taste. And if you make a GOOD movie, then that's the biggest thing that will draw audiences.
There's basically four types of movies:
1. Good movies that target a large portion of the population.
2. Good movies that target a small portion of the population.
3. Bad movies that target a small portion of the population.
4. Bad movies that target a large portion of the population.
Number 1 there is obviously the best type of movie, as far as the production studios are concerned. But it's also by far the most difficult to make. Number 2 is almost as good, but is MUCH easier to accomplish. Number 3 isn't so good, but is better than number 4.
Consider: you have your own specific tastes in movies. Which movie are you more likely to want to go see: a good movie, even though it isn't targetted specifically to your taste, or a bad movie that was meant to appeal to you? Personally, I'd take the good movie over the bad movie. And since I think it's likely much easier to produce good movies with a smaller target audience than good movies with a larger target audience, if I were a movie producer, I'd go for the smaller target audience.
Join moola.com, play games to earn money.
IMHO some of the biggest blockbusters to come out in the last few years (LOTR trilogy, Star Wars 1-3, Spiderman, etc...) have been more enjoyable for me at home. I attribute this to the HUGE cinema problem running rampant across america. Let me explain... With the quality of Digital FX becoming so good lately, there is so much to see in each frame of these films. I find myself viewing movies like i was at a tennis or ping-pong match. The size of the screens at these huge multi-plexes are so big, that to see everything there is to see, i find myself turning my head from side to side while watching. Not only that but the bigger the theater size the more poor the sound quality. I much prefer watching in one of the smaller theaters or in my home on a 50" screen. At least in the smaller theaters the sound is good and you can focus on the screen cause its the size of a normal wall instead of the side of a building.
Don't ya hate it when the correct spelling of your favorite screen name is taken?
I really don't blame my decline in going to the theater on the quality of movies. I can still pick and choose some great films.
I simply don't go because the theaters themselves are a complete shell of what moviegoing used to be. Let me count the ways:
1) No projectionists. The movies are always poorly focused, not framed, the sound is off/too loud. And there's nobody up there! They just press buttons. Oh, and just try to complain. Teenager #1 says to teenager #2 "check theater 12" and nothing happens.
2) Prices. Come on! $10??? AND you have the audacity to show me commercials? You can EITHER raise prices or show me commercials. But you can't do both.
3) OTHER PEOPLE. This is the big one. People are just getting dumber, louder, and more selfish. This is the main reason why I do not go. Every time I tempt fate and give another movie a try, I just end up adding more data to my vast collection of empircal evidence in favor of increasing human stupidity.
So, fix theaters and human bahavior, and then I'll be back!
--- witty signature
Is pay people a percentage of profits. So you get a saliry for your work, something that even if the film bombs you aren't out on the street, but the real money for you is in the success at the box office. Film nets huge dollars, you make huge dollars, film never makes back it's production cost, you get nothing.
Problem is, anyone who's ever worked in Hollywood before will enver accept that. Why? Because the studios are lying fuckers. They have a tricky, BS accounting setup so that none of their films ever make money on paper. Matrix? Lost money according to the studios. Interesting they thend made two more, isn't it? It is, of course, to get out of paying taxes, but also to sucker people.
Often they'll offer you net points to work on a movie, meaning percentage of net profits. Sounds like a good idea right? If you make 1% of a big movie's profits, you make a lot. Well no, you'll never get a check for anything because the studio will tell you the movie lost money.
So of course all vetrans won't accept the situation, it's cash up front, or gross points (a percentage of the gross sales) which studios won't give out usually.
Having said this, we have a new Cinema here (called Cinetopia) that is showing 1st run movies, costs about 20% more than standard prices (9.50USD for a regular showing, 13.50USD for a "living Room" Theatre". Check out http://www.cinetopiatheatre.com/ as I now call this a complete experience. A 1st class restaurant within the Theatre (Wine Bar, Tapas, etc). Also the seats are all wider, leather (not cloth) and each row has 9" more legroom and is 9" taller than standard stadium seating.
There are only a few of these types of theatres around the country and I am sold. I will never go to a Regal again (Course I have been going to Century Theatres anyway). No Advertising!
Because their brainwashing techniques are no longer effective.
A blinding flash of the obvious.
Ron
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
After many years of adolescent poverty, I now have the disposable income that allows me to watch as many movies as I want, even at their current wallet-gouging prices. Still, I fall into the category of people who prefer DVD to theaters, but I go once in a while, if only to reinforce the opinion that I'd rather be at home.
I can handle the previews and movie trivia.
I can handle the guy who coughs uncontrollably during quiet scenes.
I can handle the mild whispering from the old woman who can't hear the dialogue over the coughing.
I can handle the teenage girl whose phone is constantly beeping from her text message conversation about the old woman.
I can handle the flying Skittles from the guy annoyed by the beeping.
But...
What the fuck gave Loews the idea that, after paying the exhorbitant prices, wading through sticky floors, sitting through commercials, and recognizing all of the surrounding nimrods that are conspiring to ruin my experience, this was a good idea...
The movie theater has the nerve, the incredible audacity, to ask if I want to donate to a charity and the ushers walk up the aisles shaking their tin can, swinging it out over your seat, as if to say, "Hey, you cheap bastard. While you're eating your junk food and having a night out on the town, there's a sick kid in a hospital bed."
Maybe I'm just the dick and don't realize it, but after I just dumped $40+ for a couple tickets and some of the cheapest food there is to produce, how about you take a couple dollars off the obscene profit you made from me, donate that (you don't even have to tell me), and shove the tin can right up your ass.
Around here, the Century theaters dont care if you bring in your own food and drink.Me and my wife, for movies that look good(chronicles of narnia, brothers grimm(yeah i know matt damon and heath ledger...oh well) we will go to grab some good food like real burritos or chinese food, get to the theater at matinee times, and relax...usually first showing is not that packed and we can get decent seats...during the commercials we just read our books or talk to each other...I really did wish, as a lot of other people said here, that they did start the previews at the time that is said by the media(websites, newspapers, moviefone)..but thats something you give up for the pleasure of watching the film. I do believe there will come a time when they will just push dvd sales on the same day as theater releases for films that they know will do well(large releases..lots of advertising)Hey we have to deal with commercials everyday to watch any of the shows or listen to any music from the radio out there..i think 10 minutes isnt that bad..at least they are not stopping the movie several times to show commercials
~~"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~~Dennis Miller
I forgot about IMAX. They are a fun experiance. Can't say I would ever look forward to the dukes of hazard on the big screen, even when I liked it (when I was 12). twelve year olds can't have there parents pay for gas and crap on the screen
FYI, a bit about Sweden.
Movie tickets cost about 13$. I can't remember wha t poporn and soda costs (I don't need it).
There is mostly not much disturbance during the movie. People who paid 13$ for a ticket usually want to se the movie. And if the parents paid, they keep their kids quiet.
The main problem is selection. If you live outside the 2-3 larges cities (and most people do), you're pretty much limited to the top 10 American and top 3 Swedish movies.
They might try varying the price of the ticket depending on the quality of the movie or on how much it cost to make. I just realized that regardless of movie cost or quality - the cost of the ticket is the same. It varies on the type of person (student / senior) attending, not the type of movie.
A romantic comedy with low production costs might be willing to accept a much lower price per ticket than a big summer blockbuster.
At least let the theater owner set the prices by movie. All movies are not created equally. Let the market determine the price of the ticket. That would also give Hollywood some much needed feedback on what a movie is worth.
All that "crappy stuff nobody wants" you list is making humongous amounts of money which comes out of an amazing number of pockets ... and the "quality" audience doesn't pay nearly as much (as in: not even close to the same order of magnitude).
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
Crappy movies decline YOU!
I still don't see why theatres gouge you over using the online ticket purchase service. Sure, there's a cost for them to run that, and they can bill it as the expense for your convenience ... but long-term, we're actually streamlining their operation. Guaranteeing them filled seats, and decreasing the need for additional ticket salespeople. Why must they slap another $1 or $1.50 onto the ticket (other then the 'because they can' reason)?
F 'em.
Aparrently like alot of people here, I've just about quit going to the movies. Lots of factors, but I'm curious if any other /.ers share this reason: I'm tired of over-payed celebrity talking heads acting like they're God's gift to man. The hop on the late show to hock they're latest movie, which was just like their last one, and go on about how hard their lives are in the 11 months they don't work.
These people make hundreds of millions for pretending to be somebody on a camera for a couple months out of the year. For all the talk about globalism and evil multi-billion dollar corporations, it seems to me they're the worst offenders.
The straw that broke the camel's back for me was Cruise's little tirade - how dare a peon like you play a joke on your Thetan master!
Is it just me or is the movie industry stupid?
They know their popularity is down, yet they advertise anything and everything.
Instead, between each movie, while people are waiting for the main feature, they should have reels after reels of movie trailers, instead of repeating the same coke / car commercials over and over again, and just a couple of trailers or none at all. Promote your own stuff where you can control it best. Add voting pushbuttons to the seat armrests so people can provide feedback on the movie trailers they find the most interesting.
Something else that I find stupid is those multiplexes that have one of their minimum wage monkeys come with a microphone to introduce the movie. Hello?! I know what movie I'm coming to see.
I'd rather have them place a coupla goons with a sign that says "If Bubba sees your phone ringing, he'll throw you out of the theater".
It mostly comes down to #5, but also:
Hire somebody who can act the part. Some people can act well, but not in all roles, and some are just bubblegum actors who might look good but lack in talent.
I have no problem with sequels. It's when they keep releasing sequels, with no new content/ideas/etc, that it starts to suck. A lot of TV series can be interesting through a whole season... so how come a movie can't be interesting through 1-3 episodes?
Remaking classics... there are a lot of classics out there that are good, but the concepts don't mesh with the modern world. So don't take a classic and 'modernize' it to the point that it takes place in a spaceship in 2733 instead of a pirate ship in 1733.
Comic book films... some are good, some are bad. The problem is that, over time, they're long. You can't just summarize the first 50 comics in a half-hour and then throw together episodes 51-55 in the last hour. By the same token, you can't do a bunch of background and then throw a shit ending at it about how a big green guy becomes a force of pure energy and then ends up in South America saying "you don't want to make me angry"...
Books? I know some books that could make great movies. LOTR was actually pretty good. The biggest problem is not sticking to a timetable. LOTR was a long set of movies, but it was split up and managed to get a good portion of content in it. As much as I'd like to see some of my favorite books onscreen (Narnia could go either way) it kills me when they butcher the main points of the book
Still with #4 Stop editing the main points of a good book to feed the unwashed masses. Books have an audience, and you can't make it please everyone. If you want to make a book-based-movie, don't ignore the book's audience.
Special effects are nice. They can add realism/imagery to a movie, but they can't substitute for plot and decent acting.
#5, write a good story. Many movies nowadays are taken from good stories but butcher them. Doom is going to be another resident evil (I actually found there to be somewhat of a background plot in Doom3).
And my final point... movies don't have to please everyone. If you try and sell a movie to 10,000,000 people and most don't care much for it, and the main audience of the source material hates it, then you've failed despite selling 10,000,000 tickets because people will not trust you to produce something good in the future. Dump some special effects and overpaid actors, stick to the plot, and maybe only sell 8,000,000 tickets... you might gain a few new followers from the general masses and you won't piss off the majority of the longterm fans.
The reason they aren't making as much money is they haven't released Passion of the Christ II yet.
OddManIn: A Game of guns and game theory.
I've found that every store I shop at is quite willing to take cash. You also seem to be forgetting a few things:
1) I'd have cable and a TV even if I didn't use it for home theatre.
2) I'f have a stereo even if I didn't use it for home theatre.
3) Money spent on convenience is often well spent.
I suppose you could argue a home theatre system is a waste if that's ALL it was for, if the only thing you ever did was rent DVDs and watch them. However most people would have a TV with cable or satalite of some description anyhow. So getting one good for a theatre like experience is just an upgrade. Likewise, many people would have a stereo for listening to music anyhow, even if they didn't have home theatre, so a surround sound system is just an upgrade.
By the way, the prices I'm talking here are for a real high-wuality experience. A large projection TV, 40" or more, 6 to 8 large high quality speakers (Like JBL Northridge or something, not little cubes). You can easily get a wide TV and satalite+sub surround for under $1000.
But really, there's something to be said for the convenience. Where you can just wander out to your living room and watch a movie when you want. You can eat or drink whatever you like, you can pause it when you like, you can skip parts if you like, etc. When there's other people with you, it's your friends, people you want to be with, not random (often annoying) teenagers.
It's the same with many other conveniences. If you actually do the math, you find it's very often cheaper not to own a washer and dryer. You take their cost, matenance and utility bills (which is a lot for an electric dryer) and you find that a laundromat is often cheaper. They use big industrial units that do a lot more and last longer, and usually use gas dryers, so even when you factor in profit for them it often works out to less money. However you'll find few home owners persuaded by that, they'll take the convenience any day.
I did a cursory read of the posts so far, and it appears nobody has proposed this one yet, so allow me:
The last four years have been an unprecendented period (in my opinion) of political partisanship in America, partially because of the unusually even balance conservative and liberal partisans.
In the years leading up to our last election, we saw (again in my opinion) an unprecedented volume of America's entertainers enter quite vocally into the political debate. As a result, there are now many Americans who look at the film stars of 1990-2001 and instead of thinking "cute actor; great roles", think "political idiot; endorsed Kerry."
Add in the fact that Hollywood has historically given significant contributions to Democrat candidates...
People want to go to movies to escape real life -- they won't go if actors in the film are too intimately tied in their minds to real-world political conflict. This may well be an indictment on these conservative ex-moviegoers - they simply need to learn to "let go" and get on with life. Hollywood has always been populated by a group of idiots largely out of touch with reality, right?
Actors come out in support (or opposition) of political causes all the time -- but the sheer numbers, the frequency, and the extreme polarization in the country in the last four years have worked against them this time like never before. The result? Ten to twenty percent of the population no longer has the desire to funnel money into Hollywood.
The cure for cancer is coming: Reovirus
All movie theaters were built for a previous evolutionary cycle of humans when we all sported a single arm, to judge by the Marxism-inspired armrests.
Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
It could also be that you're a lot more tolerant of others than I (and a lot of Slashdotters, apparently) am. I generally go out to movies with several people, so I see a wide range of personality types.
... they quite often run small-run movies
:)
Me? I've literally started yelling at the screen lately once the 4th or 5th commercial comes on. A couple of my friends get VERY offended at this, and tell me to "chill out, it's just a commercial, it's like TV".
Me? When some asshat 2 rows behind me starts discussing the plot with his wife, who hasn't seen the first 2 Lord of the Rings movies and is only there because her man wants to see it, I instantly focus in on their conversation and stop paying attention to the movie. When I make snarky comments about this as we leave the theatre, I'm often told by friends that they didn't hear a thing from behind us.
Me? Cellphones do not have to ring constantly to be an annoyance. A single ring drives me up the wall, because I really don't see why it's so difficult to put your phone on vibrate. My friends will often be a little more generous, saying "everyone forgets sometimes".
Also, I suspect you don't go to as busy a theatre as I do:
lines are decently short
The more people in a theatre, the more distracions/annoyances, I find. It's gotten to the point that I try as hard as possible to go to afternoon matinees during the week (hey, gotta use up that vacation time somehow!), and I'm almost never bothered then.
But a packed house for a popular movie? Forget it. Sometimes as many as 20 people are talking/ringing/kicking my chair. It's intolerable.
You may simply be more tolerant, and quite frankly I wish I could be like you
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
I don't have a real solution to the issue. For me, tho, the problem is that entertainment is everywhere. At one point you had to seek out entertainment, now you can't get away from it.
I recall the last time I rented movies (on tape, about a dozen years ago) it costed 3 dollars a day. Now for the cost of three days rental I can own a film, sometimes a really good one.
For the cost of going to the theater a half dozen times I can get 100+ cable channels with a few decent movie channels (read uncut, unedited films) plus about 60 music channels.
My old RadShack walkmen use to work for about two hours and I could only carry a couple of cassettes. Today I have 500 albums on my Archos, the batteries last for about 10 hours, it sounds better and it's rechargable.
Everyone I know has the same thing going on; cable/satelite, big screen TVs, 5.1 sound, tons of DVDs and CDs for cheap...
Why do I need a theater? It's not even that I'm a cheapskate but I have so much entertainment at my own home it makes it hard for me to want to go out to the theater. This doesn't even include the books, video games and internet sources.
And to be honest I don't even know what film I would want to see. It seems that a lot of the posters have what they feel are tons of good movie ideas that people would want to see. I can't think of a single film I want to see made today. It seems that Hollywood botches any good concept to the point that I can't recall a good film. Everytime they get a new concept they destroy it by trying to make it too diverse and appeal to too many potential customers. I don't need a love story, a 20 minute karate fight and a touchy feely message in every film I see.
Maybe I'm just too jaded by the endless media blitz.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
Build a cage around the theatre so that cell phone signals can't get in and you'd be back in business. There's so many people yakking on their cell phones, text messaging, etc. that its ridiculous. You want to talk on the phone? Go outside and talk. I don't think it's an unreasonable request.
Life is such a sweet insanity. The more you learn, the less you know.
I use the touch-screen ticket machine to buy my tickets. It's quicker than waiting in line, and I don't have to deal with any surly humans.
A month or two ago, a new final screen---after I have swiped my card---asked for my ZIP code. WHAT??? I entered 99999 and continued.
A few weeks later, I tried to enter 99999 and it rejected my credit card. Luckily, I tried XXX99 where XXX are the first three digits of my ZIP code. It worked.
The ONLY reason they could possibly REQUIRE (not ask for, REQUIRE) my ZIP code to complete the transaction is so that they can uniquely identify me. (Apparently, when you use a credit card they don't know who you are, but CC info + ZIP code = unique identifier.)
If they reject XXX99 in the future, I'm going to have to start dealing with the surly people and long lines again.
Transcript show: self sigs atRandom.
I can concur, and offer solid evidence of this, coming from a Canadian city where the populace is well known for being a tad, shall we say, frugal. These people drive 15 miles out of their way to save 10 cents on a gallon of gas, for example.
When the original stadium seating first arrived, movies were around $9 (CDN). Within a few months, prices had gone first to $11, then to $14. Attendance dropped incredibly. It was so bad that I actually went to the #1 movie of a summer blockbuster on the second night it was playing, and there were 5 people in a theatre that could seat easily 200.
Within a year or two, someone wised up and lowered prices to $8. Ever since then, theatres have been packed. Line ups galore, sometimes you even have to buy your tickets the day before as shows will sell out.
We often make the claim of "lower your prices and people will buy more", which is generally not true. Believe me, all business want to maximize their profit. This, however, was a genuine case of it. The theatre chain ended up building an entire new theatre with 14 screens just to handle the demand.
200 seats @ $8 is a LOT more profit than 5 seats @ $14.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Ticket: $10
A bottle of water: $3.50
Gas (let's say it takes a little over a gallon to get there as I live in nowheresville): $3
Forget popcorn and what not. When all is said and done, it's costing almost $20 to go see a damn movie that, more often than not (lately, anyway), is not worth it. The last movie I saw in theatres was Return of the King becase that trilogy just NEEDS to be on a big screen.
I simply can't justify paying $20 to sit in a theatre when my $17 NetFlix subscription gets me 3 DVDs at a time with unlimited rentals. I can wait the couple months to see most of these movies on DVD.
Piracy has done NOTHING for lack of movie ticket sales, lack of movie ticket sales has come from CRAPPY movies!!! If movie studios would take the time to come out with something original instead of a sequel or a remake for every damn movie that has been out more than 20 years ago, maybe we would have some incentive to attend the movies. I'm so sick of hearing studios complain that people copying movies is what hurts them. Make something that's original and classic instead of birthing out another Herbie movie, or another Ring movie. Hasn't the industry learned its lesson from Police Academy? Lord of the Rings was the last movie series that really captivated and moved an entire audience to go see it over and over again and spend the money on a ticket. We might see it again with the Chronicles of Narnia, but I highly doubt it.
Yeah, my karma sucks....but so do the mods.
The so called Global economy is sure making harder for US business like you to compete. But believe me whatever money you are losing is not ending up in the hands of Mexican people. Even if you are competing against mexican business now and losing the money is staying on hands of the privileged, like it always have been.
Eccl 3. It's simple.
This showed up earlier this year Self Heating coffee Now if our friends in Japan would just do the same with Sake' More info here
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
Around 1:30 PM, Thursday, August 23, 2005, hundreds of movie theaters became so packed with people that they had to virtually shut down. Commonly known as the "slashdot effect", this led to hordes of angry movie-goers returning to their mothers' basements with thoughts of Battlestar Galactica re-runs.
Stangely, only three women were seen among the crowd.
Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche
1. A $5 movie now costs $8.50
2. The previews go on forever
3. Talk Down Editorials about pirating movies being aired in front of a whole audience that just paid $8.50 to get in.
4. It costs just as much for me to take my family to the movies and buy them popcorn and drinks as it does to go to the amusment park or the water park all day.
There really are many bad movies out these days.
NOTE TO HOLLYWOOD:
It does no good to pay $120 million on "named actors" and have a big budget "flop" by only making $40 million....When most of the really good movies (the ones with real stories) can be made with normal actors for $20 Million and be considered a success if they make $40 million.
The real failure in Hollywood is the amount of money lost on "big budget flops".
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
...the good scriptwriters are all working for HBO. It's pretty clear that there isn't a shortage of good writing, it just doesn't happen in Hollywood.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
I don't open the screen while the movie is playing :).
I do however, like to know when a txt or voice mail or call comes through. And yes it does go to voicemail also, but sometimes it may take up to five minutes befoer my voicemails and txts get pulled through after the phone is turned on, and I don't like waiting that long.
Also, my cell phone is my primary phone, I do not have a landline, and I do need to be accessible at all times (aside from when I'm asleep) for my business and family use, in fact it's specifically in my contract with my employer that I am always available and that includes my cell phone.
I've never understood why people do so much whining about cell phones and how annoying they are but yet continue to support them by buying them and *gasp* using them in public :). If you're so obsessed with not hearing someone's ring tone as you're in the grocery store or theter or wherever, why not turn yours off all the time too? that way we can all not be bothered, and we may as well not have the things :).
it's the way things are going, especially as more and more people drop landlines for cell phones. Just because you personally don't like it, does not mean that it's wrong for the rest of us to use them.
"The boy is dangerous, they all sense it, why can't you?"
In the late 1970s ..
.. you must be like .. OLD
Wow dude
<sarcasm>
. . . when you can just go to McDonalds/Burger King/Taco Bell and get the "special edition" cup or toy?
Saves you about $10 and you get just as much as you would from sitting in the theater for an hour and a half.
</sarcasm>
What?
You don't walk into a restaurant, sit down at a dirty table and think "My God, the previous people to eat here were complete slobs!"
No, but a lot of people sure do give me dirty looks when I don't do McDonalds employees' jobs for them. And by people I mean fellow patrons, not the employees.
It's one thing to not throw human feces around in a restaurant, but if I wanted to clean up after myself I would have eaten at home, for a lot cheaper. Unfortunately, McDonalds et al have convinced the populace that it is OUR responsibility to clean up our tables, because they have oh-so convenient garbage cans on the way out. This attitude spills over into many other venues, I find.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
You can't make a good movie and then expect people to just magically arrive, you have to market the thing ... how many ads (and "press releases") did you see for Star Wars? Now, how many did you see for Kurosawa? There is just no comparison, it's no wonder nobody watches the good movies, they don't even know they exist. The advertising budget alone for the mainstream movies is usually at least multiple times the entire production budget of the good movies.
Most local theaters have a special showing some weekday morning where moms can brings their kids and babies and just let it all hang out. That is a good thing for that crowd. So how about se have talking and non talking shows. How about taking the non-talking theater and sheilding it so that pagers and cell phones just don't work? How about screenings where it is restricted to adults and beer is served? My point is that the audience has changed, but the theaters haven't adapted. Theaters are still showing movies the way that they did in the 40's-60's. The only improvements theaters have made are color, air-conditioning, sound and lately, better seating. The only thing a theater can do for you that you can't do at home has to do with the group experience. But the groups are too diverse to put up with one-anothers expectations. Back at Expo '67 the Romanians had a theater where the viewers 'voted' during the picture, and based on the votes, the picture took certain turns and plot twists, kind of like those 'find-your-fate' books. With just 5 choices in one film it would be possible to see 25 different movies! That will keep them back in the theaters. Get some interaction and some interactivity going and the whole group can enjoy it. Bore them with the shlock that is showing now and they'll get fed up and act out, it's only human nature. If you make a blockbuster, great; but you can't re-make a film to that same standard and expect it to be a big hit, because we've allready seen that before and we're looking for a 'new experience.' Have 'MST3K' night and let everyone yell at the damn screen. Anything but the expectation that we will pay big bucks and 'sit silently in awe' for boring, poorly made films.
"Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
People still eat at theatres?
--- I hate my sig
Anyone remember "Coupon: The Movie"?
...So I could take my kids--Samantha and Joey and little, little Tyler. . .on it, for fun. But now I don't know if I even *want* kids!
.for opening my big, fat asshole eyes. Look, don't cry. Don't cry, movie executives! It's not your fault. The American public have screwed the movie industry over for the last time! Oh, they'll see this movie! You bet they will.
John: This is the biggest failure in movie history. "Coupon: The Movie" has made zero money. You people are responsible. I wanna know what the hell happened.
Bob: Look, the reports show that's the most popular coupon in country; everyone uses it.
Tom: I don't get it. People love the coupon, they should love the movie.
John: Well, they don't! And what I wanna know is, who green-lighted this picture?
[Silence. Tom's watch beeps; he takes it off and tosses it in a glass of water.]
John: [accusatory] Tom?
Tom: Didn't even glance at it.
Bob: I thought I saw it on your desk.
Tom: De-de-no, I uh didn't *green-light* it. As I remember it, I found this thing out. I was just shepherding it around. You know, David? Didn't you nurse this at your teat for a little while?
Paul: [accusatory] David?
Jill: [accusatory] David?
Paul: David?
David: Well, I seem to recall giving it the go-ahead.
Bob: Huh?
David: The green-light, not the movie. I gave a go-ahead to the green-light. I mean this thing had a thumbs-up way before it got to me. Wasn't even uh my thumb, it was a woman's thumb.
All, but Jill: [accusatory] Jill? Jill?
Jill: I vaguely recall giving it a thumbs-up, [innocently, playing with her hair] but that's not the same thing as a green-light, sir. Bob, you've been very quiet.
All, including Bob: [accusatory] Bob? Bob?
Bob: Oh. Uh, well, what we've got here is a classic Chinese telephone. [laughs] Nothin' against the Chinese. Uh, but uh I gave this picture a very tentative gangs-away, which is an old term from the 30's that means "cut loose." Paul?
All, but Paul: [accusatory] Paul?
Paul: [nervously] No! I, sir, all I gave this was the old one, two, buckle my shoe, three, four, shut the door, five, six the......sticks? Jay!
All, but Jay: [accusatory] Jay? Jay?
Jay: Uh, now people, sure. I mean uh, I may have err-err-err, slapped it up a bit [demonstrates]. You know, [kisses the air] Huh? [pretends to rip it open and stick his head inside and eat it.] Sure, I might have done that. Huh? ["squeaking" John's nose, pinching his cheeks, etc, while he makes noises] Hi-yah! Da da da nuh nee nee nee, ha, oh!
John: You're right! You're right. But, guys? I'm goin' down here. And, I swear, if I have to go from being super-rich to rich, I swear I'll kill myself! And, I'm not goin' down alone!
Bob: You act like you're the only one here who has been hurt by this thing! [getting all emotional] You know, I wanted to turn that movie into an amusement park ride!
Jill: [upset] I was gonna turn it into a theme restaurant. What do I tell my maid?!
[All try to calm her.]
Tom: [really upset] What about me?! I had planned for this thing to be a big blockbuster so I could start a trendy heroin habit, but now that's never gonna happen!
[All try to calm him.]
David: [looking forward, his glasses are off and we see his eyes for the first time in the skit. He's got contacts in a la Michael Jackson in Thriller] No! Noo!! [bangs fists on table] I'll tell you who's responsible, sir--the American public, and I know you're close with them. But, they manipulated us. They tricked us into believing that this movie is what they wanted to see, pretending to like that coupon.
Jay: Let me at 'em!!
[Bob calms him.]
David: Where's your golden public now, sir? I'll tell you where. They're all laughin'. Laughin' at you. Laughin' at the biiig, fat asshole.
John: Thank you. Thank you all. .
Jay: How are ya gonna make 'em?
John: We'll sue the pants off of 'em!
Bob: And then we'll sell 'em pants!
All: Yeah!! Yeah!
This space intentionally left blank.
http://movieweb.com/movies/box_office/alltime.php If you notice, most of the movies are ORIGINAL movies, and the sequels that did the best were Spielberg/Lucas collaborations, or cartoon sequels (Shrek, Toy Story) Take a clue Hollywood. If the sequel wasn't penned 30 years before the movie was in a book, don't waste our time.
Yeah, my karma sucks....but so do the mods.
I can't help noticing that no one has brought up the possibility that people might be finding better things to do with their time. Are we so indoctrinated as to think that people will always consume passive media? For me, in most instances, I have better things to do with my time than to sit there and absorb what Hollywood tells me. I'm not saying everyone has to be the same way, but I find it more fulfilling most of the time to work on a personal project or hang out with friends than to watch a movie or TV show. I do still watch movies sometimes, but it's an out-of-the-ordinary thing for me.
So I put forth this suggestion: perhaps people are finding better things to do with their time?
(Kind of ironic, since I'm an animator, helping provide passive media for other people to consume)
CRAPPY MOVIES + RETARDED TICKET COST = PISS OFF
Nevermind most people can build a home theatre reletively on the cheap, that is actually superior to what you get in your average theatre. Not to mention you don't have to stand in line, or deal with stupid kids, as all movies are rated at PG14 to get the largest viewable audiance.
Last movie I watched in theatre was Star Wars 3, and the only reason I did that,was becuase I watched all the rest that way, and it was more of an event than anything else.
As soon as Hollywood starts taking some risks, and making new films (not just re-hashed shit), and theatre companies stop charging my Monthy rent as a ticket price, then they might see some increased viewers, interest, and perhaps even better more stable profits.
you know the people at movies who talk, bring screaming children to movies inapropriate to them, forget to turn their cellphones off, and are generally annoying? I'm not one of them.
you know the other person, the rare kind, who yells "SHUT UP!" at the first group of people when they start misbehaving? yeah, that one's me. and I've actually gotten applause for it. I do feel like I may be disturbing the movie, too, and I feel bad about it, I do, but if you people can't control yourselves/your children/your cellphone, I'm going to yell at you to shut up.
Spending 3k in cash is still 3k that you could have invested at 10+% a year. I get the convince issue but I like the motivation to go out because I don't like staying at home all the time.
Anyway, surround sound systems are pointless for music. They work, but it's 1/2 the cost for a high-end 2.1 system vs. a high end 5.1 system.
I am living in an apartment is so I can't really turn up the sound on my speakers anyway. Large screen TV's with sounds systems also take up a lot of space.
Granted I live in an area (Fairfax, VA) with a lot of stuff to do that's close. Hell I can walk to a mall and 2 different theater complexes so convenience is almost mute issue.
Cable is nice but with high speed Internet and lots of other things to do I did not watch it much (when I had it). You could say you would have it anyway but if you cut out the movie packages you can save close to 50$ a month anyway. I workout an hour a night, read, go to the movies, snow board ect so getting sucked into TV land is not how I really want to spend my free time. Yes having a great entertainment system at home is affordable, but it's a lot more costly than what you're presenting.
Note: I am using an 800$ flat screen for my PC but that was a gift that was returned after she started using a wide screen dell laptop. I also had a 350$ set of klipch 4.1 speakers for by PC that I picked up in collage but they broke and I replaced them with some cheepo 60$ 2.1 system, but I don't really notice the difference as I have to keep the volume low and I stopped playing FPS's. I understand that for people who live in sub divisions it's nice to set up an area to watch the big game with the neighbors (as it where) but as a young person I like being more mobile with my entertainment $$$.
I'm sure a lot of people don't go to the movies because the theaters are crap, but that's not the case for me. I don't mind being in a crappy theater. And I don't mind that most movies are crappy either, I wouldn't go see them in any theater. I seriously don't go to the movies because the movies themselves are lame. Most of it is recycled content anyways, and even though sometimes they get it right, such as the case of The Italian Job, the fact is that in my eyes, Hollywood is struggling to come up with anything worth seeing. The last several movies I've watched in the theater, minus my friends dragging me to that episode three movie, were Focus films and computer animated films. From what I've seen, those are the only two studios who are coming up with consistently good stuff. Flash bang boom explosion movies are like cheap thrills (obviously not monetarily speaking), but a movie that I'd actually watch several times has got to have a good story, a new perspective, or something unordinary, and it's sad to think that exploding planes and cars and people dying left and right has become ordinary on the screen. It's boring without a good story, and it's free on television. Same with sex appeal, just look at the failure of Cat Woman. Recycled content with bonus sex appeal clearly isn't cutting it. Look at the Incredibles. A good story, the new perspective offered by CGI, likable characters who you actually care about when they get hurt or die, that's good stuff, and that's why I paid the $15+ for my ticket and food and two hours in line and came out of the theater happy.
Maybe it's not a problem with the movie theaters per-se, but with the jerks who live in your zone?
Fixed costs:
TV Set: R$ 1500
Sound System: R$ 1000
DVD player: R$ 300
--- Total ---: R$ 2700 (~US$ 1150 fixed)
Monthly costs:
SKY: R$ 130
Videoclub: R$ 28
--- Total ---: R$ 158 (~US$ 70 monthly)
Movie going for two (*):
Parking: R$ 3
Good theatre: R$ 30
Coke: R$ 3
Popcorn (small): R$ 3
--- Total ---: R$ 39 (~US$ 15 per movie).
Now, let's assume no interest. If I only use my home theatre for 15 months, I will have spent US$ 2200. If I go see 10 movies per month (easily done in your own home theatre) for the same period, I will have spent US$ 2250. hehe.
Now, my Sky plan has 5 Telecine movie channels and other channels bring movies. My videoclub let me stay with 5 movies at all times on me, and I have 48-72 hours to bring them back (and it's in my workplace). The three of us easily watch 20 movies/month, with brings the time-to-pay-for-itself of my home theatre down to 5 months. Make it 6 months and we still can catch one blockbuster per month in the theatre, especially the ones Lucas likes (he's 6yo).
(*) actually, we're three (me, Ivana and Lucas), with the fourth one coming, but whatever.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
See, I don't buy this. At least not as an overall consensus. I just think we hear from the cheapskates more often, and also people value movies far less than other forms of entertainment. You may be different than the average person, so I'm not commenting specifically on how you view things :)
:)
Most people I know see nothing wrong with dropping $20-40+ PER TICKET for a sporting event. $40-80 for a concert. $100+ for the latest broadway musical. All entertainment that lasts 2-3 hours.
But $10 for a movie? Somehow, THAT'S a rip-off.
Maybe the cheapness of a DVD rental does it for people, but then again, why pay $80 for a concert ticket when the CD by the same artist is 1/4 the price? The only answer I can think of is venue. You're paying one hell of a premium to see music performed live, and personally, I'll pay a premium to see a movie on a 30' wide screen with a $50,000 sound system. But maybe that's just me
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
I've known two people connected with the entertainment business.
- One does the ship rigging for movies like Master and Commander and Pirates of the Carribean.
- The other is friends with a screen writer who worked on that post-Seinfeld comedy starring Michael Richards (Kramer).
Same story from both of them: the studio's MBAs think they know what makes a good movie better than the directors / actors do. So unless you have a strong director, you get this formula:
- Start with decent script
- Add in decent director and actors
- Insert Harvard MBA jerk who's both divorced from reality ("Can we move that island over there?") and doesn't know how to entertain people.
- ???
- Loss!
(Obviously this doesn't cover the cases where the script is just boring or stupid.)
Where are my mod points when I NEED them? The above post is dead on.
We have always been at war with Eurasia!
You know what's trite and unoriginal? All the comments on this thread from people saying things like, "OMG EVERY MOVIE SUCKS NOBODY PAYS TO SEE MOVIES BECAUSE THEY ALL SUCK", "OMG THEY'RE SO EXPENSIVE TO SEE I MEAN A DRINK COSTS FOUR BUCKS", "HOLLYWOOD IS A BUNCH OF IDIOTS", etc. Now, these things are all true (except the last one to an extent, cuz if I were a Hollywood producer, I'd be looking for safe investments, the same way 99% of the people here would as they looked out onto the street and saw the other 1% panhandling cuz their "risky" movies didn't pan out), but every person who's posting these comments is acting as though they're the first person ever to come up with their brilliant insights and we should all bow before them. Unoriginal comments wrapped up in new packaging complaining about Hollywood taking unoriginal ideas and wrapping them up in new packaging. Irony: It's Delicious!
This is the NFL, which stands for "Not For Long" if you keep making those bulls*** calls.
The Hollywood way is flawed.
if you pay 1 dollar for a lottery ticket on a 5 million dollar purse and you lose. Then no big deal -- you will live to play another day.
if you pay $4.9 million to win a $5 million lottery -- and you lose then it is a big deal. Even if you win there is not much to celebrate
The movie industry has positioned it such that the only way to be "more" successful is to have 2 or 3 mega blockbusters at a time. And the public has shown that it really only supports 1 or 2 mega blockbusters at a time.
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
Many of you people show up at the theatre late, and miss the previews. This violates your contract with the theatre and is in-effect, just like stealing. Anyone purposely skipping these previews is stealing the movie.
--
Jamie Kellner
Chairman and CEO of Turner Broadcasting
Too bad. Seems you're missing out on the Masterpiece that is Batman Begins. If you plan to see one other movie this year, make it Batman Begins! You will not be disappointed!
"Charlie and the chocolate factory" is also good.
And it has way more midgets.
You can't take the sky from me...
Cost is the major factor for not going. I'd pay $5 to see a bad movie, but not $10.
Quality Movies - If there is a moive I want to see, I see it. Though, I wont see just any random movie anymore, because of cost.
Innovation. Back in High School, (92-96) theaters changed. Stadium Seating, THX and other sound systems were big draws for the youth crowd for the latest James Bond and Star Trek movies. Should movies move from standard definition to High Def just like TV ? Where are the 48 FPS, HD digital movies ?
I'm surprised not to see more mention of commercials in theaters as an irritation, because that tops the list of them for me. When commercials (other than movie trailers and concession ads) started showing up back in the 80s, I remember audiences hissing and some people (e.g., me) would actually walk out, demanding refunds. Are people so cowed now that sitting through 20 minutes of commercials after having paid $10 for a ticket is just business as usual?
I found these few sections from the article (towards the end of the article) very interesting. It is in regards to making movies available to home consumers immediately at release.
Last week, John Fithian, the president of the National Association of Theatre Owners, accused Robert A. Iger , the incoming chief executive of Walt Disney, of leveling a "death threat" at theater owners for having suggested that the lesson to be drawn from the slump is that moviegoers want films to be accessible in theaters and on DVD simultaneously.
Mr. Iger had observed that studios ignored consumers at their peril. "We can't allow tradition to stand in the way of where the consumer can go, or wants to go," he told analysts this month, warning that "the music industry learned this the hard way."
Mr. Iger's conclusion - that consumers want the choice of seeing movies in their homes at the same time as in the theater - is being reached by others in the industry as well. But it remains contentious, resisted not only by the owners of theater chains. Mr. Lynton of Sony was adamant that the theatrical experience should be protected, while Mr. Shaye said he was still "on the fence" on the subject.
Warren Lieberfarb, a former Warner Brothers executive who was a main advocate of the DVD in the early 90's, warned that going to the movies had become too expensive over all, given the excellent quality of home theater. "It's not just the DVD. It's not just the DVD window," he said. "It's the flat-panel television and the sound system, with the DVD option, that has radically changed the quality of the in-home experience. The home theater has arrived." As a result, he said, "you have to change the business model of the movie business."
I personally find this extremely exciting. When you think about it, the movie theaters have a stranglehold on consumers in terms of being able to access new releases. If you want to see a new release, you only have one place to go: the local cineplex. Now, the cineplexes do have to compete with each other, but in the end all of their business model's are about reducing costs. So, what you end up with is the crap that we are offered today: sticky floors, bad seating, bad sound, dirty screens, noisy people, 400 seat theaters where only 150 seats really have a good view, etc. They are providing the bare minimum: a chance to see the movie. Sure, there exists the high quality theaters that take an interest in their patron's experience (small theaters, properly calibrated sound systems, comfortable seating, gourmet food service, ambiance, etc). But they are few are far between because the cost is much higher to run such a theater and the number of patrons is lower.
If the releases were available to the consumer, I think we would experience a renaissance in theater opportunities. People all over would be running custom theaters to cater the movie experience for their friends and family. Think movie houses now: at 7:00 pm 20 people show up, drink and eat for 30 minutes, socialize, etc. Then everyone moves into the theater for a 7:45 pm showing of the featured movie.
The theaters would still exist for the masses, but more people would get into the customized experience for the quality of it all.
good when there aren't that many.
TOS and TAS were liked after their time, then 10yrs after the series the movies started, one every 2-4yrs which wasn't uncommon in the 80s, but they weren't remakes and remakes havn't been doing very well. Then there were the new series, dofferent enough to not be considered remakes, bu there were 25 seasons in 18yrs with most overlapping, a little overkill.
Cut back on the number of movies and go back to when the acting was mostly good and the special effects, done with models, suplemented the plot and the acting. I've read rumors of an A-Team movie, Rambo 4 and Rocky 6, they should not be made, they were good, mostly, in thier time and should be left that way, possibly also true with Indiana Jones 4. Why not make a Caddyshack 3 with a CGI gopher?
F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
I've gotten so frustrated I'm actually looking into starting my own theater. I'd kill to have the nick up here.
Since when did operating systems become a religion?
So I see that most of the obvious culprits have been exposed: Ticket prices, lousy flicks, expensive popcorn, dirty theaters, noisy crowds.
Let's add another one to it: With gas prices hovering near $3/gal in many places, why not just stay home and watch cable?
Are you telling me you've never spilled any popcorn in a theatre? Or that you picked up every little piece when you did? C'mon, do you scrub public toilets and counters after you use them? Empty the trash bins when they look pretty full? I doubt it, that's not your job, is it? Does that make you a slob? No.
[I have no name!:/]# _
I'm sure we all know that one person's story, pro or con, does not give us a good picture of the actual state of things. I'll add my anecdote anyway-- I quit going to movies in the theatre with any sort of regularity (I see 2-3 a year now) because of crap like this. Not that it was a great film, but the showing of "Hellboy" by my house was made more enjoyable by a gentleman who got more phone calls than I do in a week. At no point did he cease talking on the phone for more than a minute, and many, many times he answered his call waiting.
I haven't seen thrown food in a number of years, so my gut feel is that that's fairly rare.
Screaming babies added their own vocals to my viewing of "Crouching Tiger" to the point where some guy finally yelled at the parents and the crowd gave him an ovation.
It doesn't happen all the time, but it's probably about 2/3 of the time that I leave the theater pissed off by ringing phones, talking on phones, and screaming babies at non-kids movies. (A screaming kid at a kids' film is to be expected)
Toss in the fact that the sound is terrible and the prints so scratched that I really *do* get a better experience at home, and there just isn't that much reason for me to go anymore.
That one movie attracted lots and lots of christians who normally never go to movies.
Maybe some hollywood execs know this and we'll see more christian or special-interest films?
PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools
The quoted portion was supposed to be this...guess I didn't hit Ctrl-C hard enough. :)
So, question: Did you get, walk out, and tell the theatre you wanted your money back because you couldn't enjoy the movie because the lady in the next seat was oboxious? Did you even change seats?
About time they woke up and realized that crap doesn't sell, and that remakes of the same old movies or the same genre done to death is just BO-RING.
No piracy - they just put out crap. Now if they could only get the same fricking idea about their "music", the world would be better off. Content that sucks leads to no sales.
All Ad hominem replies happily ignored as the sender shall be deemed to lack the faculties to comprehend the equation.
Elijah Wood also played a "bad guy" in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Quite passable, really.
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
One of my best movie experiences was going to see the movie Kung Fu Hustle at a theatre. Why? Well, when I got there, there was no one else in the the place. None, ziltch, zero, nil. I grinned to myself with a hearty laugh and put up my feet, and enjoyed the show immensely.
If someone in the movie buisiness is wise, they will gather some usefull information from these posts. I usually use IMDB to screen out bad movies. I don't know if others do. The theatres in Canada (Ontario) are usually better. I guess you can attribute that to our personality. I have on very odd occasions had to shush a younger viewer, but rarely. I still choose wisely as the cost is still up there. $10Cdn + $5 popcorn + $2 pop, all per person. For these prices, only the must see movies are worth it. Star Wars III and War of the Worlds are great examples of a must see in the theatre. So for those U.S. folks, when your here, come see a movie, its cheaper and quieter.
Can you say it? Because you know it's true. Too many good movies like Lord Of the Rings has it so that people expect EVERY movie to be that good. And when it isn't (invariably), they are disappointed. Don't let people bullshit you. They spent tons of money watching mediocre movies in the 60s, 70s and 80s. Before that they were simply thrilled to have movies at all. Now, as so many have pointed out, DVDs are stealing the show. The movies aren't getting worse, people just forget the bad ones from yesteryear. They seem to think all black and white movies were as good as Casablanca. The only remember the classics. Everybody should have been alive in the days when Hollywood was churning out a movie a week, when the actors were literally owned by the studios. Then they'd have something to bitch about. Show me any period in history, and I'll show you a ton of lousy movies. It's no different than rooting for the local sports team. Sometimes they win and sometimes they get their asses kicked. Either way, you paid the $30-40 to get in. Just ask a Cub fan. I say it all the time, and I'll keep saying it until people finally get it. Open your eyes people. Start looking at yourselves and your expectations. Or better yet, make your own movie.
Seriously, people might actually see the movie if they knew it wasn't going to be available right away at the cost of 2 tickets.
In the good ole' days they didn't release E.T. on VHS until 8 years later, which let it be re-released in the movie theater 4 years later.
I think I remember that rightly. Maybe not.
translation:
I'm broke, I live in a cramped shithole, and I think that you people with lots of money are dumbasses for not living just like me.
BTW, you should spend less time in the theater and more time apologizing to your english teacher.
the RIAA of course.
They're basically the master of the "Lather, rinse, repeat" of every single formula they have.
The comic-based movies aren't nearly as good as Spiderman and Spiderman 2 (spare Dunst's screaming damsel in the first one), and they just keep on making more movies based on characters from Marvel and DC, but it doesn't really have content.
The slapsticks ran out of material like 7 years ago, and has been recycling the jokes ever since.
The sci-fi novel-turned-movies aren't nearly as good as the novel itself.
The triumpth-over-adversity movies is basically a script with a fill-in-the-blank for the protagonist's name.
From the commercial for Stealth, they could've just concentrate on one or two things and made it a great movie; for example, they could've concentrated on cutting humans out of the loop; or how the US seems to make more and more advance weapons when there's little need to do so, to the point that they cannot stop their own weapons; or women in the military and their struggles. Instead, they just took parts of it and throw it together and call it a movie.
No wonder no one is shelling out $10 bucks or however much to get into the movies. For that price I could almost rent 2 DVDs and enjoy them in the comfort of my own home.
So, CD sales go up - but not as far up as the exec's and corp's would have liked - so they blame pirates.
Movies go down completely and nobody wants to blame pirates? Not even a little?
I say we blame that 13 year old pimply faced kid tearing tickets (ushers, I believe they're called). This kid makes a couple of bucks an hour to tear tickets. Not enough to buy a CD or a DVD let alone pay the bloated price of a ticket to his own movie theatre (he probably has to work an enitre week to pay for a date on a Friday night - if he can get one).
The last thing this kid is going to do is boot out a rowdy patron. Especially when that rowdy patron is a friend of his.
This kid does, however, have dad's computer at home with broadband Internet and dad's big screen TV. And like the fellow mentioned above. Even this kid would rather take his date home on a night his dad's out, to watch movies on the couch. Even if he get's free tickets and popcorn at the theatre. Even this kid doesn't like the rowdy patrons, the cell phones or the crappy movies they make these days.
When Gone With the Wind opened, people turned up in tuxedos and ball gowns. They drank champaigne and ate quality finger foods. They had their chaufeurs drop them off at the front of the building where a quality user actually ushered them into the theater - holding the doors open for them and actually helped them find their seats.
Blame the pimply faced kid.
Yeah. It's all his fault.
I always loved going to the cinema. Then they ripped out all the old straight-backed chairs and replaced them with modern moulded ones. As I am 6ft 4in this means I get a headrest in my shoulderblades.
I cannot sit throught a film now unless I want to emerge with a slipped disc and have to take the next six weeks off work
I haven't seen a movie in the theatre's since Austin Powers last flick... why?
... movies are insane... you can spend close to $10 on tickets alone!!!! Or I can watch a movie on TV for the cost of the cable bill... hmmm... what am I doing? Movie at home, with good food... or expensive movie and crappy theatre food?
- Time (I'm busy)
- OnDemand (by Comcast) lets me watch what I want, when I want... and already paid for thanks to having some pay services (HBO and friends).
- Money
Yea... movie theater? go to hell. I'm watching cheap legal movies from the comfort of my own home. Want me back? Good food and low prices may work.
Oh yea, clean the sticky floor... it's like a booth in a strip club.
In the 1970s movies took risks. Girls were possessed (I mean the Exorcist, get your minds out of the gutter), taxi drivers shot pimps through the head, the Godfather made an offer you couldn't refuse.
Nowadays the best the studios can offer is either to try and show how much money they spent on computer effects, or to retread EXACTLY the same tread as before (I want a GUARANTEED hit - so do Basic Instinct, but call it something else and change up the faces and names) or to mine the culture for something that they feel will guarantee a hit (e.g. Dukes of Hazzard).
There are people out there with novel ideas and creative voices, but the theatres would rather NOT take some risks and have a mega hit and two modest flops - they want three movies that make OK money that they can try and HYPE into hits.
Same as music - "what category can we put this in?" - can we have another Kanye West please. For Christ's sake, nothing that doesn't sound like everything else we've ever done.
The first thing the studios need to do is diversify rather than amalgamate. They then need to go back to finding interesting new stories, and hiring new and inventive people to tell them. However, the chances of that happening are about the same as the chances of Rush Limbaugh admitting he's wrong.
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
Babysitting for FREE !!! :-)
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Not only are drinks and popcorn cheaper, but there's more flexibility in consumables, and acceptable behavior is broader.
Plus you get replays.
Motion pictures started out before television. You used to be forced to go to a theatre to get them.
Now, seeing a really good space opera in a really good theatre still appeals to me. But the combinatorics of that are worse now than ever before.
I would still be willing to go see "2001 A Space Odyssey" in a really good theatre, even though that movie is almost as old as I am. The theatre adds to the experience of a dazzling audio-visual creation.
I didn't want to even read about this summer's dreck.
Amen.
I wish they all could be as good as Firefly, LOTR, Pulp Fiction, Big Lebowski, Fifth Element, or at least as good as La Fem Nikita or Brotherhood of the Wolves - but I draw the line there.
H0llyw00d - get a job!
--Fac Iustum Nec Time-- --Veritas Prevalibit--
I think the saying goes "hollywood rereleases everything every 10 years."
If you look at chinese and european cinema you'll understand.
But Hollywood fears change, it fears film makers pushing the limits and changing the format. Hollywood fears new original scripts and stories.
The sad thing is that there are plenty of good films and scripts out there, hollywood just doesnt care for them. Since they KNOW they can just keep throwing shit at the fan till something sticks.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the market is flooded with too much entertainment, period. This is not just limited to games either, all forms of entertainment take up a single resource people have to manage - TIME, so therefore if you want people to buy your stuff they have to have a good reason and enough time and money (to justify it on entertainment) to do so.
Hollywood movies these days:
Story : GOOD
Direction : VERY GOOD
Costumes : VERY GOOD
Acting : GOOD
Photography : EXCELLENT
Special Effects : SUPER
So what's the problem?
Screenplay : AWFUL
Why? Because today screenwriters are
yesterday tv generation. They don't read
books.
I disagree. One of my retail stores is next door to a VERY Mexican neighborhood. Some of my employees/customers are Mexican ("right off the boat"). They work very hard and send a lot of cash back to their families there. Sure, the families don't live like kings, but many of them have better standards of living than 20 years ago.
The US has not produced as much as we did in the past (due to government inflation causing higher labor rates causing us not to be able to compete), and production is what helps keep money flowing in.
I think movie tickets going through the ten dollar barrier (on average) in America for the first time had a huge role to play:
there is something about not getting change back that has put people off paying to go to the cinema. Of course, no one working at the studios will admit to that.
Inferior product has always had successes and superior product has always had the risk of failing, but going and seeing a film is increasingly going to see a specific film that you have picked out rather than just going to the cinema and seeing what is showing because it is a cheap night out. And that is because of price, especially when the price broke a psychological barrier.
As an aside, Bingo is enjoying a resurgence of popularity in this country and that is nothing to do with new fangled technology or innovations or perceived quality:
it is a cheap night out.
Rule #1: never, ever, buy any kind of concession at a movie. They're junk (and yes, I do love hot buttered popcorn, but not enough to pay $5 for it), they're overpriced, and you're there to see a movie, not eat. This is just a tradition our society has, you're perfectly welcome to break it.
Rule#2: go to a matinee, they're $5 - $6, not $9 - $10. Okay, not so easy to do if you work a regular job, but you can wait a week or two after the release and see a movie on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon. Half the damn price, same damn movie.
Rule#3: go alone. Yes, I know, everyone in the theater will think you're a loser. So what? If you're in a position where you have to pay for someone else's ticket (assuming you both have means of course) and you don't want to, then don't. Plus, you have the advantage of not having to converse about a movie that you loved with someone who just didn't get it (this happened to me after American Beauty). Again, you're going to the movies to see a movie, not necessarily to be social, although that can certainly be a nice part of it too.
The lesson? Movies aren't that expensive, all our stupid traditions around them are. Break the paradigm and do what you want. If you find that it isn't worth going to a movie without those things, that's fine too, just get the DVD through NetFlix or whatever.
I'm broke? I just turned 25 and I have over 10k in savings thanks vary much. I am making a little under 60k a year so I could be broke if I tried living in the burbs and driving an SUV but I like living 4 miles from work and not caring about gas prices. It's all about the choices you make..
My first year out of school I had a huge apartment, but it's a waste of cash to spend more than a grand a month on an apartment IMO. Sure you can't have huge parties but other than that I don't really notice the difference.
*They* are the ones who signed off on this summer's glut of crappy movies, and they are the ones who will sign off on *next* summer's glut of crappy movies.
Let's see if they truly take responsibility for their own poor decisions and understanding of the market.
Hollywood's current business plan:
1. Make crap movies
2. Charge excessively high prices for tickets
3. Charge excessively high prices for concessions
4. Fail to remove customers who ruin the experience for others
5. Call your prospective patrons criminals by blaming online piracy for the decline in sales
6. ????
7. Profit?
Hollywood needs to remember one thing about customers - if you piss them off, they will stop being your customers.
Insanity is a gradual process; don't rush it.
The volume has reached a point that I get a headache even with earplugs. It's not loud just in the loud parts- it's loud everywhere. I complained to the manager recently and he just refunded our money instead of adjusting the volume.
Second- I MUST sit through 6-8 minutes of commercials before the showtime when the movie is new to get a good seat. I don't mind slide-show ads but blurry pixelated "projector" ads (again with high volume) are very unpleasant.
I don't download movies. I just stopped going to see them because the experience became so unpleasant that the movie has to be -excellent- not merely -good- to put up with those conditions.
Other minor nits
The movie either needs to be the kind that plays better with a crowd or the kind that plays better on a big movie screen. And with a 57" screen at home from 9' away- the theatres are losing ground with these 16'-20' screens, only the really big screens give the "movie theatre" feel.
There is so much entertainment I cannot see it all (I'm at least 200-300 hours behind on TV shows now). I've gotten SO far behind that now some of the movies I missed, I can pick up $5 used or $7.50 new. This makes it even less likely that I'm going to go to a theatre.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
- Excessive amounts of commercials. I enjoy seeing previews of upcoming movies, but the TV-style commercials for other products annoy the crap out of me.
- Ticket price is too high, especially given all the commercials.
- People who talk through the movie.
- Concession prices are too high.
- Too many frickin annoying teenagers.
However, I have to say that if I didn't have all of the other options that are available to me (pay-per-view, free on-demand movies that come with my HBO subscription, DVD purchase or rental, video games, PC games, etc.) I would probably go to the movies more frequently.Movie theaters may just be finally starting to become obsolete like drive-ins became obsolete when VCR rentals became popular. The cost/benefit ratio in favor of staying home and watching a DVD or watching a cable on-demand movie are starting to become too great for many people (especially families) to justify the expense and hassle of going to the movies.
It's two things, not just bad movies. It's movie studios' own fault (due to greed) for releasing movies on DVD way too soon. Example: They are already releasing "Batman Begins" soon.
That's nuts! Summer's not even over yet and the big summer movie is hitting DVDs. Why are they doing this? To "maximize revenues". But they are also shooting themselves in the foot.
People see a trailer and think "I want to see that movie". Next thing they know the movie is no longer in theatres 3 weeks later. Another thing happens, people think "that looks like a rental" and they know they only need to wait a couple months to see it on DVD.
If you want people to act on impulse, you need to create the feeling that they need to see it in the theatre now, or else wait "forever". Studios are failing at that part and making people feel perfectly fine in regards to waiting for the DVD.
I remember reading once some time ago (I don't recall where) that the price of admission to a movie went straight to the movie studio. The theatre only made money on the concession stand.
If nothing else, this explains the cost of the consession stand - it's the only way the theatre itself makes money, the rest goes to the studio.
Ron Gage - Westland, MI
Umm, no. I was talking about scary and violent movies too. Sure, if you were watching Legends of the Fall, the kids would get bored and leave, but would you really want them to see Scream, Reservoir Dogs or Saving Private Ryan?
I didn't see the others but I liked "Saving Private Ryan" and if I had kids I'd let them see it. I don't think it's some much what kids watch as to whether parents talk to their children about what they watch, give it meaning and talk about what's good or bad about it. The important thing is to make sure they understand it.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I think one major reason for the decline in movie-going is the loss of impact of good special effects. Since most special effects can be performed with a laptop, the punch of the summer movies has been extremely deflated. I mean, when was the last time you went to see a movie for the special effects? After the advent of Star Wars, the marketing of the film could be entirely around the special effects and people would go by the droves. There hasn't been a must-see movie for effects in a long time. (And don't fanboy about Episode III - the only reason you went to see it was so you could get some closure on the abortion that was Ep I and II.)
It's wierd how clubs never seemed to forget the "class" thing even as cinemas went completely grunge-egalitarian. Especially, they never forgot that policing the customers gets you a better kind of customer, and you can charge a premium for that. Nobody would be surprised to see a nightclub that charged big money and required formal evening dress. Your jaw would likely drop if the cinema did that - but why?
Supposedly, the primary value proposition of modern cinema above home DVD is the "atmosphere".
Surely one of these idiots must have thought, if we're selling atmosphere, better go out of our way to be sure we have some? Industrial boxy buildings and bright-casual uniforms on gum-chewing slouched staff make for a poor attempt at sophisticated glamour.
I remember when I was a kid, folks used to dress up for the cinema, and the staff used to be smart, and the theater itself was as glitzy as could be done with gilt paint, coloured foil and cheap velvet.
When did they forget?
Who needs a 'partner'?
Women do, that's who. They are programmed to trap someone who will stay with them and help raise their kids. Men, on the other hand, are programmed to disseminate their genes in the widest possible manner. Both strategies support human survival in their own way.
But now we live longer and healthier than we were meant to. Women are bearing children, on average, much later in life. And men can keep siring into their 70's and beyond. The counteracting agendas of the genders used to balance out, but this recent development of longer lifespans results in couples whose needs diverge as they get older.
Thus, as a 41-year-old husband and father, I am currently separated and dating a much younger girl. And I'm pretty happy about that.
Problem number three: A movie is not the best place for a first date. You need to interact, not stare at a screen on your first date. Dinner good, movie bad.
I would actually say dinner is NOT a good idea for a first date. Lunch is better.
It's a short affiar: friendly and light. No heavy pretense that comes with Dinner. If you don't hit it off, you're only wasted an hour or so of each other's time. If you do, you can always make additional plans that evening if you wish.
Why would anyone pay like $10 a ticket to see some crappy movie. So often today, movie companies put out movies with bad acting, and more importantly, a bad plot. Producers trying to take big names and turn them into movies (Cat in the Hat ring a bell). They take brilliant books or whatnot, and ruin them in the theater. It's no suprise that people don't want to go to the theater. Every once in a while there is a good movie that comes out that easily deserves the $10 price for the ticket, Lord of the Rings for example. The message should be clear. Make better movies and you will attract more moviegoers.
What's the matter, James? No glib remark? No pithy comeback?
Call it flamebait, but John Williams's Star Wars musical score really made for 2 generations of horrible summer/winter blockbuster scores. Too dramatic, ubiquitous and well... overblown. All movies sound alike now (the big one's - -pretty much)and it interferes with taking any script seriously.
If I want to see "Flight of the Phoenix" then I suppose I'll just see the Jimmy Stewart version. Or if i want to see "Manchurian Candidate" I can't see how anyone can top Frankenheimer's work of that period (BTW.. See "Seconds" by Frankenheimer) both of these movies are first rate on little things like sets/atmosphere and moods. Some scenes remind me of acid trips (that others have told me about:)
Why can't hollywood remake underperforming movies (You know the one's nobody saw the first time)and actually try to improve those dogs (reduce,reuse, recycle...) rather than the movies people with money (i.e. adults with a fond memory for nostalgia)
That lowest-common denominator mind-set keeps me away from those gawd-awful things that pass for movies today (all with horrible Williamsesque scores... MyGod: When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
I was waiting for that. 'hearing a remake of a tack commerical...'
copyright © 2005 Flamsmsmark the ravings of a melancholly i
While watching the trailer for Stealth before Star Wars Episode III, I suddenly realized it seemed to borrowing a lot from the Star Trek episode "The Ultimate Computer". New military technology replaces people, discussions about what people should do, and of course the computer goes mad killing people etc, and the folks being replaced need to stop it. So watching it, I thought I know how this turns out. Anyway, I have always thought that was a good episode from the original series.
Anyway, I would suggest watching the Star Trek episode (its about 48 minutes), and save your self the money and time of "Stealth".
I'll go along with most of the reasons given so far for reduced attendance, but if some others feel as I do, factors behind the trend also go deeper on a more personal level.
1) I feel a bitterness towards the major studios. It parallels the way I feel towards Microsoft, Wal-Mart or Clear Channel. I resent having to sit through legal and anti-piracy notices on DVDs that I buy or rent. I resent the heavy handed push to control technology, especially the broadcast flag efforts. I resent the high prices. I resent advertising that goes beyond trailers. I'm more apt to attend a smaller but well-run locally owned moviehouse than go to one of the big-chain multi-screen megaplexes.
2) I find it harder to make decent income at at time when gas and housing costs are skyrocketing.. The current U.S. political and economic climate gives me a feeling of carrying debt beyond my own, adding to feelings of needing to be increasingly selective about spending. Most movies seem a poor value to me.
3) I feel pressure to be more selective in spending time also. Just as things like the net have cut into tv viewing time, there's also less freely burnable time for the theatre. Many movies aren't worth my time alone, and they piles of cash too? I might as well wait until they're on tv, which I usually treat as only a background process.
4) Anytime-news-access on the net, PVRs, iPod music, and now Podcasts have increased my natural thirst for getting what I want WHEN I WANT IT. I'm increasingly becoming less willing to plan my life around a tv, radio or movie schedule.
Over time it seems that the broadcasting, cable, music and movie industries have become increasingly optimized as corporate profit engines (short-term anyway) while becoming too far and increasingly removed from nurturing the arts they depend on or the public good. It has reached the point where I feel it is my duty as a citizen to avoid supporting them if possible.
The one movie I saw this summer that left me feeling really good was March Of The Penguins. The rest were a waste of my time.
Some friends and I were complaining about some of the same things I hear in this thread, about poor audiences, high prices, etc., and we thought we'd buy a theater and start a "Theater Club". Imagine my surprise when I found out that a 6-theater complex had a $75 - $80,0000/mo. air conditioning bill. (Houston, Texas yearly average). Basically, when we figured it all out, it would take about $300,000/mo. just to operate the thing, if we could even find a ditributer for films. (Highest expense: Movies distributed cost based on the number of seats in the theater.) I'm not surprised that theater prices are high, and I'm not surprised that theater managers will take money from anyone coming in the door.
Given that these problems will not go away by themselves, what are the solutions? (I agree with William McDonough (http://www.mcdonough.com/) that regulation is a result of poor design.) There is a huge fortune to be made by the designer who resolves these problems and makes theater-going a pleasant experience again. (I usually see 3 or 4 movies a week, but I usually go in the afternoon early when there aren't any kids or crowds. Summer is a bummer for movie goers like me.) I know there are places in Japan that have counter-frequency generators that kill cell and pager transmission. That would be a good start. perhaps if each seat was provided with individual noise-cancelling headphones, that would also help (and, yes, I know that brings up other problems of hygiene, etc, but that's where solving those problems brings in the fortune. Legitimately patentable solutions.)
Of course, maybe we could change society? I have a friend who is a cameraman for Fox Sports, and he described a goodwill game between the Astros and a Japanese team a few years ago. All the players were applauded when they came on the field. All the players were applauded for good plays. Players bowed to the crowd to acknowledge the applause. When the game was over, all the spectators stood up and applauded the teams. Then they sat back down, and rose one row at a time to file out of the stadium in an orderly fashion. And they took their trash with them!
"The mind works quicker than you think!"
"The Twenty" starts twenty minutes BEFORE the movie starts. When the movie time arrives, it's straight to movie previews, no ads.
I'm actually suprised the fake zip code works. This is done to try to prevent stolen credit cards from working. Gas pumps are doing this too, and I have started seeing this in stores. You need to enter the zip code that is on the billing address of the credit card. This is because it is a piece of information the card holder probably knows that is not printed on the credit card.
Trust me if they want to identify you they already have your entire credit card number, they don't need your zip code!
If you have kids, your the friggin parent. Make them go to bed, and if they get up for something trivial, punish them.
And make them more rebelious? As an insomniac I was one of those children who didn't sleep, my mom told me how as a baby I hardly ever slept, that most of the tyme I lay there waving my arms in front of my eyes. I'd either get up and watch tv, go outside, or read in bed. Sometyme I prefered one over another or I'd do two at once. For instance I liked climbing up on the roof or simply lay in the grass and alternate between reading and staring at the stars.
FalconShould there be a Law?
You can get a real nice XGA DLP for around a thousand bucks and it'll throw an AWESOME 80-100 inch diagonal picture on most any decent wall (without even the need for a screen)
I'm with you 100% on the relative worthlessness of $3000 40 and 50 inch plasmas though.
Enjoy.
This ain't no upwardly mobile freeway This is the road to hell
Ahh the typical well reasoned /. discussion :).
First, as to those of you who say turning it off is common courtesy, how is it discourteous if I have it on vibrate and am not sitting there with it open? I simply do not want to have to wait the 30 seconds for the phone to power itself up and then also have to wait another indeterminate length of time as messages and voicemails come through scattershot. That's not discourteous to the rest of you, that's simply me ensuring that information that is supposed to get to me does so in a timely manner.
,in this respect they have. Cry me a river, build me a bridge, and get over it. I'm not changing my habits just so that Mr Jones standing next to me feels better.
Second, the world we live in is one where things are instant. That means that people *expect* that if you have a cell phone, they can call it, and they further expect that you will be available to answer said phone. If I purposely ignored my boss's calls or called him back any later than absolutely necessary, there would be hell to pay, because I'd be impeding the running of the business and furthermore I'd be willfully ignoring my responsibilites. Same thing with my family.
Now, if I am in the theater, I am not going to be answering it, but anywhere else pretty much I will.
Hell I answer my phone in church (I walk out and join the crowd of other adults who are also doing the same thing chatting with grandma or their business colleagues or whoever). No place is sacred, nor should it be.
My final point is that while I realize that it is hard for people to accept that today's standards of courtesy have changed
"The boy is dangerous, they all sense it, why can't you?"
$30+ is not worth it, especially when morons are allowed to make noise during the movie.
That's something I found amazing when I went to see a movie when I was in Germany. No matter how funny, scary, or shocking the movie was you wouldn't hear a peep from the audience 'til after the movie.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Sheesh. What are you invested in that nets you more than 10% a year? Cocaine futures?
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
I know what you mean. I thought I would take my elderly mother out to a nice movie. I believe it was called Rocky Horror something. The people in the audience behaved atrociously.
In a sense that's how the "Rocky Horror Picture Show" is supposed to be, it's an active audience participation movie.
Virgin!
FalconShould there be a Law?
There was once a time where I could spend $5.50 per 2 adults and $4.50 per child; movies in theaters were compriably priced to a $19.99 DVD. And I would make point to attend those films. At those ticket prices I didn't mind the $3.95 soda pop or bag of candy. Now I'm spending in upwards of $35 for tickets, the quality of the movie is down, I sitll have to fight for the good seats, and the price of food is up! Why would I enjoy that?
Smart consumers would rather purchase or rent the film in 6 months and get the DVD bonus features than be subject to the price hikes at the multi-plex. The quality of the movie in theaters is also poor. Most all movies have that 15 minute splatter mark to remind the projectionist to change the reel. And the sound isn't exceptional when compared to my home stereo system. Today, the whole audio / visual experience of a movie at a theater is no longer superior to my home theater. And if I want to watch a film again, I have to pay full price. Why can't I use my ticket to come back free after the opening week rush?
<b>They need to release films in higher quality digital video with superior sound systems and bring the consessions to the audience.</b> And bring back the ticket prices to the 1990's price levels. Or, another business model could forget the multiplex and come straight to pay-per-view. The value of going to a theater is now missing when compared to movie alternatives. It's time to redesign the thinking in Hollywood.
- Garfield: The Movie
- Catwoman
- The Hulk
- The Fantastic Four
- Scooby Doo
- Matrix Revolutions
- Troy
- White Chicks
- Alien vs. Predator
- Fahrenheit 9/11 (OK so I hate Michael Moore, sue me)
- Gigli
- Tomb Raider: Cradle of Life
- Van Helsing
- Mean Chicks
- Anacondas
- Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2
- Butterfly Effect
- Surviving Christmas
- Johnson Family Vacation
- Around the World in 80 Days
- Dumb and Dumberer
- Alexander
- Resident Evil Apocalypse
- Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo
- Bridget Jones 2
- The Cat in the Hat
- King Arthur
- Daredevil
- Elektra
- Stealth
I could go on.There are way too many talentless hacks trying to fill leading roles in big budget movies (Jennifer Lopez, Hugh Jackman, Ashton Kutcher, etc.), and way too many big budget movies being directed by talentless hacks. Way too many crappy movie adaptations of comic books and video games. Producers in Hollywood are not doing their job. They blow all their money on a big name actor, a big name director, or a big name license, and then come up with crap for a script, blow some more money on marketing/advertising hype, and then expect people to show up in the theater like sheep.
..movies are getting pretty bad, expecialy when it's so bad people just don't want to waste the time pirating it.
Nifty article on the contribution of theatres to the movie experience.
Particularly poignant seem to be:
- Movies Play Better with Big Audiences
- Because Classic Theaters are Like American Versions of Cathedrals
- Classic Films Become Brand New Experiences
The shared experience of moviegoers is a critical piece of the picture, valued so much at one time that theatres were designed like ornate cathedrals in homage to our cultural prowess presented on the silver screen.The Death Penalty: Killing people to show others that killing people is wrong.
Besides the obvious that have aready been mentioned multiple times, there is no end to the list of "what's wrong" with movie theaters...
Number one on my list, is they have not kept up with the increase in the DIVERSITY of TASTE of the viewing public. They target a couple of relatively narrow categories, those which they appear to believe cover significant market segments (and probably do, but there's a lot more of them now than there used to be), to the exclusion of all others. I look up what's playing in my neighborhood, and find at lest 150 screens to go sit in front of within a reasonable distance, but find that all 150 screens are showing the same 12 movies, virtually none of which I'm interested in seeing. So while in fact I do have 150 screens to choose from, I only have 12 movies to choose from. It wouldn't matter to me if I see "Skeleton Key" in theater A or theater B or theater C or theater D, all within close distance, if I wanted to see "Skeleton Key" at all! But they're trying to amortize their ad budgets, preferring "blockbusters" to diversity. Get a clue guys, the "blockbuster" concept is a complete anachronism in an extremely diverse marketplace. The music industry could stand to figure that out as well and get over the "good old days" of the supergroup.
Frankly, I prefer OLD movies, and actually WOULD like to see them on a big screen. There's one theater near me that will do that, a neat REALLY OLD classic theater but that has one of the worst sound systems I've ever heard-- the reverberations in the theater make the experience awful. Plus, whoever picks their selection of old movies needs their head examined-- they really suck. It needs someone who knows the old films well enough to actually seek out those known to be particularly enhanced by the large screen projection and be able to get them! Unfortunately, it's probably getting harder and harder if not impossible to get good prints of old films on demand, they have to find some restoration society or something because they aren't likely to get much help with that from the studios...
Last time I saw an ad on TV for a movie I actually wanted to see, I looked for it in my neighborhood. Come to find out it was only playing one place anywhere in a radius of about 150 miles, and that was 50 miles away-- yet they spent big bucks advertising the movie to get me there. I'm sorry, those big ad bucks weren't enough to get me to drive 50 miles to see it, despite the fact that I was willing to go somewhat out of my way for that particular movie-- they just made it TOO HARD (the movie was Howl's Moving Castle, BTW). Consequently, it's obvious that the movie index sites are only useful for people who want to go to the theater to see ANY movie, not to see a particular movie. They have to face it, there's just fewer and fewer people willing to do that. And if they can't find a way to fix it, film theaters may just go the way of the drive-ins. At least in drive-ins you had SOME privacy, and wouldn't have to listen to cell phones and the like if drive-ins still exited. The big problem with drive-ins was they couldn't keep you from bringing in your own snacks (oh, that's not a problem for ME, it's only a problem for THEM. That's customer-centric for you).
There's only one advantage now to seeing the movie in theaters, and it's the only thing studios are banking on: You get to see the movie first.
Studios are not banking on this as much as they used to. They are releasing more and more movies direct to video (especially Buena Vista), and they are realizing that they have to compete with pirates. In fact, from the article:
The movie theater experience gives married couples a chance to spend time together without having to interact and possibly annoy each other.
And Hollywood stories are awash with wish-fulfilling fantasy relationships (When Harry Met Sally, etc.) that encourage couples to idealize their togetherness.
Groups that fear societal collapse due to a lack of "family values" should subsidize movie nights for married parents. It would help couples to keep their sanity and stick it out when parenthood gets rough.
Even rich Americans have a limited amount of disposable income. Why spend $25-30 on a movie for two when the movies that were out last month can be rented on DVD for $5 or purchased for $10? That same money buys you three albums on iTunes that you can enjoy for a long time on your iPod and get the same 'social benefit' as having seen the latest crap from Hollywood. Music not your bag? then you could rent/buy a video game or watch pay per view for your entertainment.
Fact is, movie quality has been declining in direct proportion to movie price increases and at the same time, many many good substitutes for time and cash have been coming to market.
Perhaps the only thing that can SAVE movies is digital distribution.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
You claim that unlike films shown in the cinema, DVDs are commercial-free. Ever heard of UOP? Many movie studios have abused the unskippable portion of DVD Video, which is intended for copyright notices, by blocking the menu button during commercials. Some claim that this practice allows the studios to sell new releases for 20 USD rather than 30 USD.
You're talking about investing money, yet you're renting an apartment?
Pot, meet kettle.
If you want to save up some cash look into small cap growth funds.
s px
Now I don't use this company but this is the first thing that popped into Google.
As of 7/31/2005
Wasatch Core Growth 5 year average 16.79%
Since Inception*15.05%
http://www.wasatchfunds.com/Performance/returns.a
Granted I don't know anything about that company but it's about what most growth oriented barely managed mutual funds look like. If you pick at random from small company's you tent to do better than 10% ROI over time assuming a little cost dollar averaging.
PS: What I mean by cost dollar averaging:
With exagurated numbers.
Let's say your buying 100$ worth of stock every month
For 6 months:
10$ = 10 shares
20$ = 5 shares
33$ = 3 shares
20$ = 5 shares
10$ = 10 shares
33$ = 3 shares
Now the price is 20$ if you sell will you make any money?
Well you got a total of 36 shares for 600$ at an average price of 16.67$ a pop even though the average price was 21$. So just made 36 *20 - 600 = 120$ or 20% ROI.
Now most stocks don't go up and down that much, but the same basic idea helps out a lot over time.
After reading though the comments already written, I agree with many. But I know that for me it's the price that keeps me from the movies.
However, there is a "dollar" theater that is reasonably close that charges $1 per day ticket, $1.50 for a night time ticket, and 50 cents for all shows on tuesdays. My wife and I just wait a few months for something new to come and go to that.
What's great is that even if the movie was garbage, how bad do you really feel when all it cost you was $1.00 for two people? At that price, you can even walk out and not feel like you have lost. Half the time, we just dig change out of the ashtray in the car to go to the movies. That's why I know that price is the main problem with movies today.
Though, I must say, I did see Butterfly Effect and thought it was quite enjoyable.
And I don't hate Michael Moore. --He may not be a journalist of extraordinary integrity, but at least he's doing the job as described on his business card, which is far, far more than 99% of the other talking heads have done for this past decade. What's wrong in asking questions in a media culture which is doing everything it can to sell the Bush/Israeli agenda? --I'd have liked him to ask the really hard questions, (about Israel and the questions surrounding the shady details of the 9/11 attacks themselves), but he probably did what he could get away with without being killed in a small plane crash.
You're not another boring Neocon sympathizer, are you?
-FL
Here in the good old Empire (as I like to call it), movies cost 1800 Yen a pop to see. That's $16.35 per person. Then you throw in train fare and food / drinks and you're talking some serious hurt on your wallet. (well, my wallet because I, as the husband, get to pay)
So, my wife and I really have to want to see a movie to go.
And this is after ten years of recession. Unbelievable.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. - Victor Hugo
- Why go see a movie when you can buy the DVD in a few months for the price of two tickets?
- They show so much in the previews, I feel like I've already seen the movies. Remember the 'Alien' (or was it 'Aliens') trailer that just had the egg cracking open? Compare that to the new Fantastic 4 trailer, or even the 20th anniversary Alien trailer.
- I don't like how the MPAA is suing people and trying to limit what I can do with movies I buy. Going to fewer movies is a form of protest for me.
- Ticket prices are getting worse
- Concession prices are getting worse
I think the biggest reason though is the quality of movies coming out. Are they seriously surprised that "Stealth", "Herbie: Fully Loaded", "Bewitched", "The Bad News Bears", and "The Island" didn't do well?Haliburton. You've just to forget about pesky morals.
That may well be, but I have no problems with surrendering a litle bit of privacy by always having the phone on except for when I'm asleep. When I give someone the number and tell them they can call me, I expect that some of those calls will come at inconvenient or late at night.
:).
If you have a cell phone and people have that number, you are in fact tacitly agreeing that they can call you at their discretion unless you specifically tell them not to call during such and such hours.
And to those of you who say that it disturbs your peace of mind or is annoying etc even with it on vibrate, it also disturbs me when your insane concepts of courtesy interfere with my ability to get things done or do things. So it kind of goes both ways.
If you spend your entire life worrying about how something you do might offend someone, you will end up doing nothing valuable at all, because you'll be so worried about making someone mad at you that you will just fence sit your entire life. If the rest of the world doesn't want to dance to your tune, dance around them
"The boy is dangerous, they all sense it, why can't you?"
So let me get this straight:
You're frustrated that DVDs come out so much later after the hype because the hype is your only reason for wanting to see the movie in the first place... and your ideal solution to this is for them to release the DVD immediately, in the middle of the "marketing fog", so that you will be compelled to go out and spend money on something that you would admitedly NOT have bought of your own free (unmarketed) will.
Wow. Just wow.
Maybe I'm alone in this, but the PRIMARY reason why buy or go to see a movie is because I think that it may be good, not because the man in the magic glowing box tells me to go watch them. The fact that you actually desire the man in the glowy box to tell you what to do because you can't do it without him is nothing short of terrifying.
Am I the only one on /. commenting in this topic who goes to the movies and never buys anything but the ticket? Everyone's complaing that it's too expensive and the food kills your wallet. So? Don't buy any food or beverages. You are going to the movies, not to a restaraunt.
Now granted, tickets are expensive, but I enjoy it.
- Adam
The Computations of AdamR
http://www.adamreyher.com
A lot of this has already been posted, but in the Theatre vs home arena:
- Cost: $30 to go watch a movie? I think not, most likely more. In my area: $7.50-8.00 a ticket. This is always at least x2 because it's always with at least myself and my girlfriend -- possibly another chunk of mula for a broke friend or nephew. Popcorn is generally around $4.00. A a couple drinks at a minimum of $3.00 each. If we've already ate, we'll prob. want a candy bar or two -- add $3.50-4.00; If not, add the cost of the mean at ranging from $5/ea -> $20ea on a standard non-fancy eatin' night.
- Environment: At home, we sit in comfortable counches spread out with room to streach. We can enjoy beers (I live in UT, there is no way you can drink beer in the theatre without going to a special location that only plays older movies), puff bowls if we like, pause to take a bathroom break, etc. You can't beat it. Also, there are no cell phones going off, no people talking in the movie unless it's us, no one standing up in front of us, etc.
- Picture and Sound: I have 47" HDTV and a quality surround sound system. It's brighter, sounds better, I can crank it as hight or low as I want, etc. In the theatre there are pops in the sound and picture, it's dim, the speakers usually suck, and so on. I can even rewind if I missed something. Can't do that at the theatre. Or perhaps, maybe I enjoyed the flick so much I'll watch it again (in theatre, procede to the first bullet item in this list).
I could list things forever. It's true, theatres are obsolete. Sure it's fun to go out sometimes, but really, if I'm going out, I'd rather do somthing besides watch a movie. Learn to make your buck some other way.
While I agree with most of the complaints posted, I found I had a much better movie going experience overall when I attended independent or foreign films. The audience behavior was much, much better than when attending Hollywood films. Guess we're all "voting" with our dollar, as it should be.
Since movies cost so much and aren't usually very good, i can only wonder why less people are going to the movies. 7,8,9 dollars a ticket is too much for multiple people or even one.(well maybe not 7 dollars)Not paying each actor 20 million dollars may solve hollywoods problems and movie theatres ticket price.
I was about to say I didn't think many /.ers would of heard never mind know what dollar cost averaging is. What most don't know is that starting at an early enough age by using dollar cost averaging and compound interest a person could have a big nestegg to retire on. Admittedly it's hard if not difficult but if a person were to save and invest $2000 a year from the age of 18 to the age of 25, just seven years and $14,000 by the tyme they're 65 they'll have almost a million dollars at 10%. Even if they can't afford to save that much that early and have to start later or with less but they keep investing the nestegg will still grow. As far as I'm concerned almost from the moment soneone starts working they should be saving and not end up having to depend on Social Security to make ends meet in retirement. I realized sometymes things don't work out but that's what SS was originally supposed to be, a safety net and not something many relied on. Bush's push to privatize SS is one of the few things he'e doing right.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Three Words:
Alamo Draft House
If you don't have one near you, I pity your movie experience.
I refuse to watch the movies, because they have got minorities saving the day, and Whites as the bad guys or as losers. Way too 'hollywood' for me!
The theatre in my local town is $4 for anything other than a matinee or $2 with your college ID/matinees. They get first run movies all the time. They charge $3 for a large popcorn and 2.50 for a large(frickin huge) soda. And you know what? You get a free refill on each. FREE!
The sad part is that all the jerkwads in my town travel 45 minutes to a larger theatre with stadium/leather seating. How ungreatful is that. So the theatre smells sometimes and its understaffed; thats only because the people refuse to go there.
If theatres worked this way. everyone would go to movies (sometimes repeatedly) all the time, just like I get to do.
In a real Marxist society, the state would seize all the arm rests, give each person half an arm rest and then build giant chairs for themselves with 20 or 30 arm rests so they can rest their arms in a myriad of possible ways.
Hollywood should really think about TiVO as being one of the major culprits to the loss of movie goers. It's easy to just watch the show you wanted to see in the first place, and at any time that you want. File sharing has a tremendously low impact on this issue, and the people who do file share, usually still end up going to the movies anyways. I personally have no need to go to anything but the "good" movies out there. Otherwise, I'll kick back and watch the latest episode of whatever I like, and when I like.
I like the movie theater experience, but the cost is now an issue, especially when that $50 buys a tank of gas or two.
Everyone has mentioned the price of seeing a movie these days as being expensive. Personally, I don't mind shelling out $30-50 to see a film with my GF. What the problem is, is there are so few movies that are worth the time to see. I have almost entirely switched for foreign films and indy films in the last few years, because of all the crap that Hollywood is producing.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
It was dark, nobody saw you grab the phone. Police are human too, and they hate stupid brats chatting on their cells just as much. She'd probably have to drag you through the courts to get action.
If I were sitting next to you, I'd probably lie to the police if she tried to pull you down. "I think I saw her get pissed off and try to throw it at him"... Explaining her way out of that would make her very irrational in front of the police.
...and the police would know exactly what I was doing :-)
Am I the only one who misses the drive-in? Most of the movies I saw during my college years (late 90's) were at the drive-in in the sleepy college town. Wednesday nights were $5 a car-load, so we'd load up a pickup's bed with blankets, beanbags, and recliners, and head to the show. The movies were recent (within 1-2 weeks of release), and the concessions were cheap. The audio was broadcast over FM, so you could crank it as loud or soft as you wanted. You didn't have to worry about people talking or using their cell phones, you were too far away to hear them anyway.
I don't know if the owner ever made much money off of the place, I just think that he liked to see the kids have a good time. That man is my hero to this day.
If a little cell phone light sets you off, man, lay off the caffeine, eh?
BZZT. Wrong. How about you take your phone into the lobby and check it there. If the call you are waiting for is that important, you can walk 30 goddam feet into the lobby to check it. Its called common courtesy. Theaters are dark for a reason, and light can be just as distracting as noise.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Here's a simple and truthful thought. I got married 2+ years ago.. My wife works a shitload of hours and is a nurse. She wont go to the movies unless its on the 1st of 2 consecutive days off. She wont go to the movies the day before she has to work. Also she says that the prices are high.. "Just wait for it to come out on dvd." Mind you she's not American. I tend to view the theatres as a social activity which well I've missed alot of the previous movies. Though I did attend the big big ones (Matrix, Star Wars, LOTR). Didn't see Sin City amongst any movies that came out in the last 6-8 months. So here's another tally reason. Yeah I can go w/o her but heck when my other friends are broke its not as fun going to the movies unless you go with someone.
There's no Freedom like UFP-dom
I don't mind the previews. Usually they target them by genre and there's a chance I might learn about an upcoming film I might like. (Yes, there's a lot of hedging in there.)
It's the @#%$! commercials that I can't stand! I already paid admission to get in to the theater, I don't need to sit here while you try to talk me into buying a new car/soda/deodorant/whatever, and I don't need to watch TV ads thinly disguised as entertainment "news" ("The Twenty," I'm talking about you!)
re: Mr. Lynton said he would focus on making "only movies we hope will be really good."
Does this mean he is admitting to intentionally green-lighting flicks he knew would suck flop at the box office?
That is strikingly similar to the music industry. If it weren't for payola they'd have to resort to *gasp* signing talented acts!
The MPAA and the RIAA are always blaming piracy as the reason no one goes to buy their stuff.
For the RIAA, it is simply that people don't like all of the DRM stuff on their music and want to find other ways to get it.
As for the MPAA, maybe there is just not as many good movies out.
Just my 0.002315 cents...
Sperm and fecal matter in my hair and not a care in the world.
Meh.
So when will they go after people like me who come in to watch a movie, and neither buy nor sneak any food or drink whatsoever?
What if you find that you're hypoglycemic and need sugar now so that you don't pass out?
(I also pay off my credit card bills each month, and supposedly the credit card companies call folks like me "deadbeats".)
That's an unsubstantiated myth. Credit card companies love cardmembers who don't carry a balance, as they still make their money off the merchant fees without having to worry about handing the account over to a collection agency. Buying your movie tickets and other purchases with a credit card and then paying in full each month is a great way to rebuild your credit score. In fact, American Express offers a class of card just for cardmembers who don't carry a balance.
My theater has been rising prices 50 cents every couple of months. It is now $8.50 per ticket. To see a movie, my wife and I would pay $17 to get in the door. Then of course we want a big popcorn and a couple of big sodas. That sets us back $16 (for 2 cents off soda, and a buck worth of popcorn). Then great we spend over $30 for a date. Now, there are 5 commercials to sit through before I can get to the previews. Dear god, I used to go to movies because TV had too many commercials.
"If it actually _isn't_ twaddle (I wouldn't know; it holds no appeal)"
Did you like the first austin powers? when myers was all fresh and dirty?
Did you like half baked?
Big Lebowski?
I would say 40yr old virgin is right up there with those. I went into it expecting a slightly funny but mostly mainstream movie. what it actually is is a movie for this decade, imho the funniest movie of the year. very very funny.
of course i downloaded the VCD's off pirate bay so this whole article is kind of funny. I wouldnt have even attempted to go to a theater and see it (im hella poor) and therfor would probably have been robbed of that little bit of happiness. when entertainment became more about the artists than the audience, it became narcissistic and expensive/excessive. thats what i dislike about hollywood films. this one however, is definately worth a look.
I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
Everyone who mentioned the cost of popcorn or drinks when saying why they dont go to movies can go fuck themselves.
I dont play video games because cheetos cost so much.
Try not eating for five minutes and maybe the fat wont press against your brain so much.
This is not a troll. This is an OPINION.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
I find that I can browse the movie categories at bittorrent sites for hours looking for something decent to download... and guess what... there is nothing! I've seen all I want to see and all the new stuff just seems like it will be crap so I don't even bother.
Meh.
Or just play hundreds of old nintendo games on an emulator on my computer for free.
I hope you're talking about homebrew games for Nintendo platforms, such as Solar Wars and Bombsweeper and Tetanus On Drugs and Luminesweeper. Otherwise, go directly to jail, do not pass Go, do not collect $200. If you want to compare unauthorized Internet copying of 1980s video games to something, compare it to unauthorized Internet copying of 1980s movies.
If you are in a block buster, you can make 5 bad films before what you get payed decreases radically.
What this mean is good actor may do some odd ball stuff just to see what happens, or to try and puch there talent anopther way. So it will get panned. Rightfully so, but at leas there trying new thing. OTOH, bad actors who happen to be in a blockbuster(BEn Afflick, I'm looking at you) will then go off and do crap. Maybe, they'll get lucky, but often they fade away.(Ben Afflick, I'm looking at you)
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
20 bucks for a night at the movies is a good deal.
assuming the cinema make sna effort to shut people up.
A night out has ALWAYS been mor expensive then staying in.
to put it another way:
you knoiw, I went out to dinner and the charged me 20 bucks for a meal!
I could have bought the food and prepared it for less money then that. go figure.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Most of the theaters in my area put "Please turn off your cell phones" in with the logos and stuff they run between the commercials and the film, right in there with "No Smoking" and "Please be quiet." I remember counting something like three different "TURN OFF YOUR PHONE" messages in just one showing.
People who yak on their phones during the movie don't even have the excuse of ignorance.
Then there are the commercials -- almost public service announcements, really -- that some cell phone company has been making (Cingular, I think), that start out with some dramatic scene (I can think of one submarine drama and one wire-fu duel) that gets interruted by a ringing cell phone, at which point the actors stop what they're doing and freak out. "What's that?" "It's coming from the audience!"
I rarely go to the movies anymore outside of getting paid to go there (counting customers, recording the reaction to the trailers, etc) by several marketing research firms. If there is a movie out I or my girlfriend want to see, often we don't get to see it because of our conflicting schedules or I may get to the movies to do my job, but I don't watch the movie if its one me and her want to see together. But we don't feel rushed because we know the DVD will be right around the corner. Then we can watch whenever, do whatever during it, etc.
Going to the movies can be a fun social experience, and there can be a potential positive from sitting in a crowd enjoying a good film.
But the bar is higher now because people can afford to put together a really nice HDTV based home theater that will remove a lot of the need to go to the movies and void the hassle - lines, cell phones, etc. Plus YOU get the control the schedule, and adjust the sound/picture to your tastes.
And I agree with the assesment that film quality is down. Where are the compelling films? Lord of the Rings trilogy raised the bar very high, and nothing has been close since. Get to work out there in Hollywood and make some good films.
For myself, I stopped going to movies, when I found that even the "decent" ones were obscene in my book, and the deep ones were terribly trite.
I stopped listening to pop music -- even free radio music-- when I started to notice that for every song I could say "rant against the system, by the beneficiaries"... "personal problems being aired"... and so on.
I stopped watching TV when I started feeling dirty after every episode of anything.
I stopped looking at the newspaper (yes, I still hit news.google.com) when I found myself reacting even as I realized that they were publishing that stuff just to get me to react. Sorry, I don't need more post-WTC fear.
So now I read classics, and the Bible, and relax by taking a walk. Maybe at some point I'll take up gardening.
But the products are definitely *not* good by any measure.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
In the article the decline in movie quality is placed directly at the feet of the studios for producing poor quality movies. While this is a neat solution, there are other complications.
In addition to creating poor quality movies, the cinemas are facing serious competition. Not just from DVD/Home theater setups, but also from computer and console games. People today have more options as to how they spend their entertainment dollar.
meh
1 more midget..assuming there are no midgets in BAtman.
All the umpa loompas are played by one guy.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
And why does it have to be that way? I've been to theatres in Holland that allowed outside food/beverages, had reasonable prices for their concessions, and their ticket prices were approximately the same as they are here. Any idea why that would be? Me neither.
And for gods sake do something about the frame rate. Movie theatres flicker. Badly. It really messes with me. It didn't used to bother me, but it does now.
plus-good, double-plus-good
There was some science fiction outer space movie (Star something), on a few months back that I intended to see, but never got around to it. There is another one out Stealth and sinse I'm into military aircraft I thought it would be interesting, but never made it to that one either.
I just don't have time to go out to he movies anymore.
1. Gas at around $2.60/gallon. I ain't drivin'.
2. Most movies are remakes of either old movies or old TV shows. As soon as a writer comes up with something good, I'm there. Please! The Dukes of Hazzard???
3. If you are lucky, a $20 bill might pay for a medium coke and a medium popcorn. Don't expect much change.
4. Crying babies, obnoxious adults, etc...
The heck with it, I'll wait for the DVD to come out. Assuming that Hollywood gets better writers and movie makers and starts making something worth watching while sober.
I think more americans have problems with type 1 and 2 diabetes and being obese then being hypoglycaemic. I guess it's one way to loose weight, stop buying popcorn and other junk food. Here in australia most people I know never go to the candy bar, which are a total rip off in the first place.
Movie Theaters are finally running into what video arcades had to deal with a few years ago; the home gaming experience was achieving parity with what could be experienced in an arcade. And I can imagine movie theaters will start taking a page from arcades. Much in the same way that you can go into an arcade now and see any game imaginable (so long as it's a racing or light gun game), movie theaters will probably pare back on many different movies and focus on more "sure things". Which means that it'll be even harder to find something different. :( It's a little too much to hope for that they'll cut costs and find ways to make the movie theater something you truly *can't* get at home.
I find that if a movie is really good, I'll get pulled into it, and it really doesn't matter if I'm watching it in a theatre or my $300 27" Magnavox because I'm totally engrossed with the movie. It's only the really crappy movies where I get bored with the plot and start caring about things like the sound system. But that's just me.
You're talking about investing money, yet you're renting an apartment?
Pot, meet kettle.
In this crazy real estate market, I would say investing in real estate could be a pretty risky proposition. Sometimes, it really is just smarter to rent.
Dude, you don't clean up the table when you go to a restaurant where you're required to live a tip. It's not the case that McDonalds et al have convinced you that it's your responsibility to clean up. They just created a new type of restaurant where you exchange the requirement of leaving a tip for taking up some of the responsibilities you'd be paying for.
The idea is that in a fast food restaurant, there might be a lot of movement, and at certain times of day, it might be darn crowded. Instead of having people wait for a table that is ready and cleaned, everyone moves out quickly with their trash, and you sit your ass down. Fast food.
Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.
The last time I went to a theater, after not going for a year or two, I was appalled not just by the commercials, but by their VOLUME! In a tiny shoebox theater, they blasted the commercials twice as loud as the movie. I always used to enjoy previews, but the commercials are enough to keep me home with my Blockbuster Online DVDs.
Sure, a lot of what Hollywood is turning out these days is crap, but they usually turn out a few good pictures a year. The problem is that none of them are good enough to want to brave the cell-phones, screaming two-year-olds, traffic, 1/2-mile parking lot hikes, and other obstacles one has to put up with to attend a movie these days.
Add to that the competition with other entertainment media, DVR's, Netflix, and the rise of (somewhat) affordable, good-quality home viewing equipment -- hell, why don't they just put the movies straight to DVD?
Proverbs 21:19
that I would inflict upon you. That's why I don't go to the fuckin' movies anymore.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
I think more americans have problems with type 1 and 2 diabetes and being obese then being hypoglycaemic.
True, but if you take insulin (all type 1s and many type 2s), it's a good idea to carry something with sugar in case you OD on insulin, although it's less important with the newer ultra-slow insulins. Besides, type 1 DM is caused more by cow milk during infancy than by obesity.
Perhaps attendence is down because of the internet -- not piracy, but word about crappy movies gets around a lot faster than it used to, so people avoid them more readily.
Doesn't have to be 20ft. The only reason the screen is so big in theaters is so you can stuff alot of people in there. While a 30" screen might not be as 'immersive', you can get 50" screens easily today, and a projector isn't much more. You simply sit closer to the screen.
Heck, look at the difference between old movie theaters and new movie theaters. I'd tend to say that the new theaters have half the screen size and a quarter of the seating. Heck, I remember hearing some double decker theaters in larger cities. The sharp reduction in seating is due to larger, almost bucket seats as well as a sharper floor pitch. This was mandated because people don't like being packed that tightly, so the theaters responded.
Like what was said, going to the movies just isn't as good of a bargain anymore:
$7 popcorn vs. Homecooked meal, $2 microwave, or whatever you want to pick
$7 drink vs. $2 two liter botter, or your choice of other drinks, to include alchohol.
$7.50 movie ticket per person per viewing vs. $5-30 for the DVD.
Travel to Theater, have to deal with crying babies, kids, talking people, cellphones , people talking on cellphones(arrgghhh!!!). Or your house(milage may vary).
As for the sound, I often find movies to be set too loud. Spare my eardrums! Besides, a properly set up surround sound system can be supprisingly quiet.
I don't read AC A human right
Name 5.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
So letting "Dukes of Hazzard" into the public domain, thus allowing ANYBODY to make a movie based on it, would do good things for the state of film?
Yes, without a doubt. Because then you will encourage refinement of the original idea, which obviosuly was not so terrible since the TV show was quite popular.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Good movies are good movies.
Not even an snob can deny quality that has been lavishly paid for.
I should know, I tend to be snobish.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
The last two times I went to the movies here in the UK, I was in a bad mood before the movie even started.
:)
I've paid good money to escape from my life (Sin City and Batman Begins) and before these start, I'm subjected to 2 adverts showing people being knocked down and killed on the road. One was a drink-driving campaign, and one was about speeding. Both were shown at both movies.
These ads are pretty rough, and they're not what I'm there to see. When I complained to UCI, they were less than sympathetic to put it mildly, so now I don't go anymore. I've gone from 2 trips per month to none. I guess I'm one of these statistics
Generally many movies don't make it big because they basically suck. Uninspired makeovers, no plots etc. And I guess it will get worse each additional year. Same with music, there's just so much good stuff out there already that at some point it will be hard come out with something new and fresh, because all has been done before.
I've read some people also complain about the previews and ads shown, but I actually enjoy seeing previews as I'm not always aware of movies coming out, ads on the other hand are stupid. I can imagine if you go see movies frequently you can get annoyed with seeing the same previews over and over.
Things I like:- I'm out of the house - going to a theater is a nice change of environment for me and my wife
- Bigger is better - well, not always but some movies are just more fun to watch on a big screen with loud audio
Things I don't like:Sample this!
I live in Tucson...Housing is very cheap
Have you tried to buy housing in Tucson recently? The price has increased by about 50% or so in the past two years.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
Well, I liked the german movie theaters.
The people are polite and quiet, it is considered VERY bad manners to not switch off your phone, the sound is good, and the picture as well.
But... firstly, the price has shot up (8,50 Euro?!), and - worse - the adverts are up.
Here in Munich I sat through 40 (fourty!) minutes of advertising before the film starts.
Sorry. Not interested in paying money to watch ads. Especially since they're all aimed at the lowest common nominator, i.e. are really dumb.
DVDs have become cheap. Renting a DVD (over 24h) is really cheap. Since I don't need to see a movie when it comes out, I simply sit at home, in front of my 21" PC screen. Good enough.
Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
1. Stop playing fucking advertisements before the movie. I paid to watch the movie. I did not pay to watch some dumb commercial about how some rich kids drive around the country partying in barns drinking coke (aka poision). I should not have to put up w/ 10 min of commercials just to watch 20 min of "comming soon" promos for movies that suck. by default now i let a movie come out , wait a month and then go see it 20 min late and i always show up exactly on time b4 the movie has started. 2. put in cell phone jammers. yes, its against teh law in the us but not in europe. hell, do it anyway and just blame it on the building. 3. No more sequels. i really want to see some good stories or innovation. No more "the ring 3020 -the quest for more cash"
And no, I'm not kidding about this either.
You folks can mod me down as Troll and Flamebait all you want, but frankly, a large number of Americans are sick and tired of the blatantly Leftist views coming from prominent people in the movie industry. As such, many American moviegoers are doing a de facto boycott of movies, probably a good reason why movie attendence is substantially down this year.
I blame the whole schism between the movie industry and many Americans on the blantantly political "documentary" (a word I use highly advisedly) Fahrenheit 9/11. Strongly supported by most of the movie industry and Democratic Party politicians, the movie invokes the type of fact manipulation that would have done the producers of films like Triumph of the Will and Der Ewige Jude (The Eternal Jew) proud, to say the least. Also, look at how Mel Gibson got denounced by the movie industry for producing The Passion of the Christ; yet despite all the denounciations, this movie made an amazing US$600 million worldwide in first-run theatrical release, even more amazing considering that the total production and marketing costs was around US$50 million!
In short, I think the movie industry need to stop making political statements in public so often (and interjecting a lot of it into the plot of the movie itself). They already lost a good number of moviegoers due to this trend, and pretty soon the movie industry will wonder why a lot of movies aren't making money in US theatrical release anymore.
Piracy, quality, yadda yadda.
There's a economic depression going on. That's why people are cutting back on movie ticket purchases.
Salaries are down, raises are gone, jobs that pay well are scarce, and those jobs easy to get are slavery with a timecard and optional Medicaid.
There's a price for the free-market utopia that's finally upon us, and will be with us for at least another fifty years. That price is an increasingly impoverished workforce.
Broke people don't buy stuff. And there are only so many upper middle class and wealthy people to buy expensive real estate and splurge on $50 outings to the movies.
Attendance is down because people are cutting back on the luxuries. And DVD rentals are what, a dollar a day?
Hollywood makes almost zero movies for children and the ones that they do are usually rated PG or PG13 and full of inappropriate language and content. Our kids are left watching DVD's of the Beverly Hillbilly's, and other old TV shows and movies. WAKE UP Hollywood. All of the parents aren't as "Progressive" as you might believe.
Thanks for the link to the article. There's another article on the 'Times site here that discusses what some theater chains are doing to boost their business. I blogged an analysis of sorts here
Cheers!
The Fool. "Bring me my blue fright-wig. I must look handsome while I express my rage."
Aww, whatsa matter liddle bonchy-wonchy? Did da big bad editor pooh-pooh your liddle story-wory?
Aww. Too bad, poor liddle bonchy-wonchy.
So when was it dat you were going to be an editor? Any day now?
AHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!
Do audiences in the US typically buy snacks at the cinema?
The movie costs can't be like this elsewhere because in my experience very few people actually buy snacks at the cinema. Despite the signs up at my local cinema saying I can't bring in my own food I just do anyway - sweets go in pants or jacket pockets, drinks and popcorn go into a backpack or my coat. I'm certainly not paying their snack prices.
"The Motion Picture Association of America estimates that piracy involving bootleg DVD's deprived the film industry of more than $3 billion in sales last year. That figure does not include lost sales from pirated works peddled online, for which industry insiders say they have no reliable estimate but which they assume to be substantial."
"I always thought that piracy connotes something glamorous," Barry M. Meyer, chairman of Warner Brothers, said. "Let's call it what it is: theft. I think it's just like shoplifting."
Remeber: we do have 100 years of cinema to take advantage of :-) ... and sometimes I run out of shows to watch, and it can happen that I am not in the mood for a 2h movie that day.
Really, I like some classics, so Telecine Classic is nice to me... and my videoclub has bought this month a new DVD collection with Chaplin works (15 DVDs) Notice that only those make for a month...
We did have an interesting, and good national (Brasil) movies in the 1950's (nice chanchada comedies), some very artsy stuff in the 1960's-1970's -- and some nice stuff came out in the last 10 years (Central do Brasil [which I have already watched], Cidade de Deus [which I haven't]). After I lived in Spain (1998) and perfected my Spanish, I have being watching a lot of Spanish, Mexican and Argentinian movies, too (feels good not needing the subtitles).
So, no, I think I did not exhaust my movies yet.
As a matter of fact, what I feel like I am exausting is TV -- I watch 2-4 hours/day of series (mainly SF shows, but some nice ones like House, Desperate Housewives) and I download a lot of SF shows to watch on my DVD player. I watched all Trek shows, B5+Crusade, SG-1, SGA,
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
I saw "Brothers Grimm" at a nice stadium-seating theatre this weekend.
I was about 10 minutes late, and still sat through over 30 minutes of previews. Half hour wasted.
Then, to top it off, the movie sucked. Really sucked. Which I consider common these days for Hollywood products.
So, $15 +change for popcorn, prezel, and one drink, plus $8 per ticket... that's $31 that I spent on what I now consider a waste of my time. Why the heck would I go back?
From now on, I'm going to wait until movies come to the library. It's free, it's legal, and it has a better selection than the theatre (which is scarey to say, seeing as how limited my library's selection is).
If Hollywood wants our money, they need to realize that they are not entiled to my pocketbook. They have to offer something of value in exchange.
That's one coward's $0.02
Good sake should not be heated. Heating is to make barely drinkable sake slightly more drinkable.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
My point is that people tend to forget about inflation. A lot of people think they can retire at little early (say 62) because they have say 1mil, but they forget they need to have a nest egg that does more than meet their needs it needs to grow because at 3% inflation 1mil is not going to be worth nearly as much when they are 80 than it looked like at 62.
Actually some people are working longer and retiring later. In part because people are living longer I believe the retirement age should rise as well. At 62 a person who retires at 62 will get half of what they will get if they retire at 65, I'll like to see something like the retirement age increase one month a year or some such if for no other reason than to try to make sure Social Security doesn't go into crisis by the tyme the last of the baby boomers retire. However if a person plans for retirement, invests while working, and buys and pays off their home that million in today's dollars should provide plenty of income, even if they stay in the house they raised their children in. A million dollars earning 5% is $50,000 a year, and that's not including SS, but because the mortage is paid off they don't have to worry about the costs of housing. They could also sale the house and get a smaller place for less thus adding the remainder to savings, and inflation helps here by increasing the sales price of the house. Of course housing need to be affordable for everyone which means lowering costs of new housing and/or raising net income (after taxes). Lowering taxes will help directly, but also lower taxes means people will have more to both invest and spend, prefereably more investments. As both spending and investing increases wages can increase as well, a positive feedback loop. Oh and the bit about million not looking the same at age 80 as it does at 62, no it doesn't but the rest of life won't be as long, and who needs $50,000 annual income when they're not workinga nd the martage is paid off. Unless the person does a lot of travelling one of the highest costs should be health related but medicare and private insurance shouldn't require much of that $50,000. Other than healthcare costs expenses should be lower so some of the $50,000 income can be reinvested, heck a person can sign up for a company's DRIP, Dividend Reinvestment Program, if they haven't already.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Incorrect. Their prices are far from fixed.
A movie that only cost 3 million to make. The distributors and studios put a FAR smaller per-ticket-royalty cost on the movie theatres than they would for a movie that cost 100 million to make.
Pretty much any science fiction movie you've seen in the past five years, and the movie theatre you sat in was losing money by the ticket. They have to make that back. Volume only works when you can handle the volume required (hence the recent growth of mega-theatres; they're equipped to handle that volume of people, and are cheaper-per-customer to run than smaller theatres).
"To pass through the jungle; silence, courtesy, ferocity, as the occasion demands." -- Kamau, "Proper Passage"
The movie costs are in fact like this. (With a strong "depending on the distribution cost of the film" which can be as low as 2-3$ for a low-budget film, and upwards of 14$ for an extremely high-budget film, summer blockbusters, etc.)
So, on average, a movie theatre is making a profit on most tickets, since most movies don't cost them more than the ticket price. But some do.
Other means of revenue involve advertisements, promotions of other upcoming films, concession prices, etc.
As an interesting side note, the prohibition of outside food and drink is for two reasons: Revenue protection, and insurance. The screen up at the front costs a movie theatre about 20 thousand dollars.
Insurance covers food and drink being thrown at the screen... but only if the food was bought at the concession!
"To pass through the jungle; silence, courtesy, ferocity, as the occasion demands." -- Kamau, "Proper Passage"