Movies Losing Popularity at Box Office

andyring writes "Without the slightest mention of piracy, the MPAA said box-office revenues declined by 8 percent last year. About 40 percent of the decline came from the U.S. Now if only they'd realize that the decline is from movies sucking more than my shop vac." It's been a while since a film warranted spending the money to watch it in a room full of strangers.

Comments

Why Movies Suck

[ackthpt]

Really. There's jibes all over in the press about it. Most of the films in the past year I spent my money on were at a place like this.

Why?

Because I've seen it all before, now they're re-doing it all and nothing surprises me. Then I go to the Del Mar or The Nick and see something

• See a story which is either deeply thoughtful or genuinely entertaining.
• I have no idea where the story is going.
• See really good acting.
• See a production done so well I forget for a moment I'm actually watching it on a screen.
• Suprising. Innocent Voices, that was an eye opener. Amelie, that was a charmer. Run Lola Run, that was just cool.

Steve Martin in the recent remake of The Pink Panther is a prime example. I already have some idea where jokes are going, long before the punch. The acting isn't anywhere near as good as the first (Sellers may have been an ass, but he could act comedy.) Honestly. Steve Martin (The Spanish Prisoner) and Kevin Kline (A Fish Called Wanda) are really capable of great acting, but this was pretty weak.

I'm a real flim buff. You can tell. I take my own popcorn salt, rather than risk they'll have table salt shakers from SYSCO.

Hey, get that guys post! i want to create a movie based upon it! car chases! beautiful women! huge fireball explosions! sophomoric humor! It'll be great!

Re:Why Movies Suck

[stefanlasiewski]

The Nick is an exceptional theater for an exceptional town. There are many people in Santa Cruz who want to see the funky flicks.

But leave the Santa Cruz Bubble and art houses like the Nick become incredibly rare-- they usually only show 1 movie a week. The Nick is showing 6 films this week. We arguably have a couple nice arty theaters in Berkeley, but they are plagued by loud people, cell phones, drunks, etc. (Students? I don't know).

Even Santa Cruz is loosing their Art houses--- there used to be 5-6 funky arty movie houses in the area. I think they are all gone except for The Nick & the Del Mar, and the Del Mar nearly went bust a few years ago.

Re:Why Movies Suck

[ackthpt]

The reason for that is that they have choked off the supply of works going in to the public domain. Historically, Hollywood has dipped into the public domain for ideas. Nothing new into the public domain = nothing new in Hollywood.

There's still buckets of stuff in the public domain. That said, there were a lot of great movies made of stuff copyrighted, like Gone With The Wind and The Wizard of Oz. I just think they've got some twisted idea that they won't take a risk. I think Heinlein's Tunnel In The Sky would make a killer film, but not with the calibre of actors I've seen cropping up lately. Lord knows they did a real job on Starship Troopers.

Re:Why Movies Suck

[rlauzon]

There's still buckets of stuff in the public domain.

Most of which has been already used in something "new" that is still under copyright, making it a risk to use.

Last estimate showed that 80% of the currently available works are still under copyright but have no known owners.

I think Heinlein's Tunnel In The Sky would make a killer film

Agreed. But who owns the copyright? Heinlein's been dead for nearly 20 years.

Also, Hollywood doesn't want to pay for writing. Disney, for example, timed their version of Peter Pan so that it wouldn't come out until the story passed into the public domain.

Re:Why Movies Suck

[networkBoy]

"Agreed. But who owns the copyright? Heinlein's been dead for nearly 20 years."

UC Santa Cruz IIRC. He bequethed his literary work to the library. Which means a film would be excellent as (assuming is has a good director and cast and budget) it's a great story and the money would not go to waste.
-nB

Re:Why Movies Suck

[Scarletdown]

There's still buckets of stuff in the public domain.

And some of the studios do still draw on PD material.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0401729/

I sincerely hope the title in the above link does actually become a reality on the big screen. And I hope that whatever studio is doing it doesn't completely fuck it up.

This is something I've been waiting to see made into a movie (or series of movies) since I read the books back around 1980 or 1981.

(And I hope whoever they cast as Dejah Thoris is just as hot as Burroughs described her in the first book.)

Re:Why Movies Suck

[shaitand]

Not really, those reviews came from people who hollywood could court or who have such oddball taste in movies that nobody actually relies on their reviews. In fact I could only name two film critics (one of them is no longer around) and I haven't agreed with a single review of theirs that I ever heard.

On the other hand, reviews from real people rate about 80% of the time. Hollywood also needs to get over their obsession with making their money in the theater. If they were smart they would cut out the middleman and do unlimited dvd by mail (ala netflix and blockbuster) with PERMISSION to copy the rented films.

It doesn't impact hollywood one bit if I have 1 movie or 10,000 movies. It does impact hollywood if I am spending $30/month on movies and that is all going to blockbuster online (tip, they don't throttle and give free weekly instore rentals on top of it).

Re:Why Movies Suck

[evildogeye]

I completely disagree. I *always* want to go see movies, and I would be happy to pay $20 per ticket. I don't really care about money. I just want to see good movies. Lately, well for several years, actually, I haven't been interested in most of the movies that are out. It may be my fault for not looking close enough, of for getting too old, but either way, the reason I haven't gone to see movies is not because of price but because of lack of interest.

Re:Why Movies Suck

[howlingfrog]

But the fact is that no decent music has been written since the Baroque era.

Beg to differ. I'm happy to pledge my undying devotion to Renaissance and Baroque music above all other, and I agree with you completely about Mozart and the rest of the Classic era music--99% of it combines the worst elements of Baroque music with the worst elements of Romantic music. But even beyond that other 1%, there was PLENTY of great music after the Classic era ended (for reference, I consider Beethoven's Fifth Symphony to be the border between the Classic and Romantic eras). I refer you to Beethoven, Brahms, Dvorak, Grieg, Holst, Mussorgsky, Shostakovich, and Stravinsky, to name a few. And that's just taken from traditional Western art music, and just those who were consistently great. There are plenty of mid-level composers who turned out a masterpiece once in a while, too.

There have been some great musicians in popular music of the past century or so as well. Most modern popular music is crap, yes, but the same is true of any era--crap from the past has just had time to be forgotten. The jazz tradition has Scott Joplin and Duke Ellington. As far as rock goes, the more I learn about music theory, the more I appreciate the Beatles. Procol Harum and Queen also put out top-notch music by any standards. And over the past 15 years, there's been some really good stuff coming out of the progressive/melodic metal genre. I'm not saying most of it is truly all-time great, but some of it is, and a lot of it is more than adequate even by the highest standards. Stratovarius, Nightwish, Kamelot (only after Roy Khan became the lead singer), Him, and to a lesser extent, Hammerfall (talking about the music, not the lyrics, in this case) and Sonata Arctica, are metal bands that have songwriters who can legitimately be called composers and performers who could be professional musicians even if their chosen genre was not rock.

If it's not just any Baroque music, but actually J.S. Bach you're using as your standard for "decent music," then no, I'm not claiming any of that music is as good as his. But none of his contemporaries or predecessors were as good either. The fact that the greatest genius in human history happened to be a musician and happened to live during the Baroque era does not mean that that the Baroque era produced the world's only good music.

Box Office Down... DVDs ???

[TubeSteak]

Box Office sales dropped.

What happened to DVD sales?

Re:Damn it's tough being a pimp . . .

[DA-MAN]

Here's a thought Hollywood, stop making movies about gay cowboys and pimps. Get real writers and try making a quality movie or at the very least a movie about topics that people give a shit about.

Please. This sentence is hypocritical and trollish. Brokeback Mountain is a good movie with a good script.

Actually it isn't hypocritical or trollish. It's just worded horribly.

Gay Cowboys and Pimps == Movies about topics that most people don't really give a shit about. Don't believe me, look at the ticket sales. BBM may have had great writing, and even been a great movie (i don't know, haven't seen it) but very few people cared about the topic.

As far as the bad writing, do I really need to throw down examples? There are way too many to name.

My point is clear, if Hollywood wants to make more money they can do one of two things:

1) Make movies about things people care about. Even if it's not the greatest writing/acting/directing, people will see movies about things they are interested in.

or

2) Make movies with good writing. good acting and so on. There is more to movies than special effects

But if they want to maximize their profits, they can combine 1 & 2.

Re:whats wrong with old movies

[Potato Battery]

"Wish I could get Turner Classic Movies without having to pay for 90 other channels I have NO interest in."

McCain is actually working on legislation to require cable to go a la carte. From what I've seen, the cable companies are down with it, but the bundle-monsters like Disney and Fox hate it.

I really hope it materializes. We haven't had TV for a couple years now, but if I could just pick a couple of channels I can't get now without a multimegabuck megabundle, it would be great to be able to casually flip on the tube again.

Mashed Potato Cinema

[Mundocani]

I was floored when the MPAA president tried promoting moving theater attendance during Sunday's awards by espousing the virtues of viewing a movie with a group of strangers brought together by a common cause (is watching a movie really a cause?). Does he really believe his own crap? When was the last time he even saw a movie with the general public instead of in a plush private theater ahead of its general release date? I, for one, am not a big fan of paying a fortune to fight with strangers for a decent seat only to have to put up with chatter and cell phones throughout the film. I'm certainly not building mashed potato cinemas at the dinner table along with thousands of others who will find themselves also drawn to this mysterious force bringing us all together to watch some hollywood shovelware.

Movie theaters suck, that's the problem.

[fahrvergnugen]

It's not about the quality of the films available. The films are about as good as they've always been, to be honest. That is to say, they're shit, but they're entertaining, so I'll keep going.

It's the theater-going experience itself that has become intolerable. I'd go back to the movies in a heartbeat if I knew of a theater that had the following policies:

1) Theater owners need to hire large, hardass, bouncer-type stone cold ushers. If you talk, you're out. Cell phone? Out. Laser pointer? Out. Kick the seat in front of you? Out. Smartass who yells comments, thinking he's the next Joel Robinson or Mike Nelson? Out. If you're bothering the people around you in any way, instead of watching the film quietly or respectfully (or making out quietly, that's always cool by me), then you're out on your ass, no refund, and cry me a fucking river.

2) Theater owners must enforce the MPAA ratings. Don't let kids buy tickets for The Shaggy Dog and then sneak into Saw II. They ruin it. Check IDs at the box office, and check tickets at the door of the auditorium, and bingo, no more problem. I tried to see the Exorcist re-release 5 years ago, and it was ruined by a theater full of teenagers who were all holding tickets to see the latest g-rated insult to IQs over 50. I haven't seen a horror film in the theater since.

3) Theater owners must stop showing advertisements before a film starts for products that are not other films. People resent paying $12 to be a captive audience for 30 minutes of television commercials.

Bonus un-necessary but IT WOULD BE AWESOME policies:

4) Theater audiences must SHUT THE FUCK UP. In the last ten years or so, I've noticed a disturbing trend. Audiences seem no longer content to just laugh at the funny parts or cry at the sad parts. They now must treat a film as if someone is filming a sitcom, and they are part of the live studio audience. Here's a news flash, people: IT'S A FUCKING MOVIE. IT CAN'T HEAR YOU. Stop clapping and cheering when the Warner Brothers logo shows up at the beginning of the next Batman film. Stop applauding when Neo beats down Agent Smith. Definitely STOP GIVING THE CREDITS A STANDING OVATION. What, are you fucking retarded or something? What the hell is wrong with you people?

3) A liquor license, even just wine-beer, for R-rated evening showings after 8pm. I'd love to be able to drink a cold one while I'm watching a movie in a room full of grownups. I already have a local theater that does this with second-run films, but I'd love it if I could get this kind of service in a first-run show with a kick-ass sound system.

It's not that the movies suck...

[Macdude]

Most movies made during any one year have always sucked. It's not the suckyness of the movies, it that for the price of:
  - parking
  - the tickets
  - the $4 small bags of popcorn
  - the $3 box of raisinettes
  - the $5 cokes
I can buy a DVD, get a couple of pizza's delivered, open a bottle of wine (or a couple of beers), nuke a bag of popcorn and enjoy the movie on my schedule in a room with comfortable chairs that have lots of leg room, floors that aren't sticky and covered with garbage, a room without noisy assholes talking on their cell phones, stupid people constantly asking their friends "what did he say?" and "who's that?", a speaker system where the bass isn't being over driven and the center channel speakers aren't blown, a place where I don't have to sit through 15 to 30 minutes of commercials before the movie starts and if I have to get up in the middle I can pause the damn thing.

I don't go to the theater because the theater experience sucks.

In the past people went to the movies because it was an event, they looked forward to it for days or weeks ahead of time. Everyone was there to enjoy and drink-in the experience. Now we go to the movies because we don't have anything better to do.

Its TV show on DVD... They kill movies

[acomj]

You can now buy TV shows on DVD. If you get one season of a TV show thats probably 10+ hours of viewing. It takes time to watch those shows, times you aren't spending at the movies.

That and the movie going experience is terrible.

Quit bitching about movie theatres! Demand better!

[ajv]

In Australia, we have Gold Class Theatres, run by Village Cinemas. They've really thought about what it is to go see a film as an adult, and it really works. Most of the time, the Gold Class sessions are full, so it is working.

You book your seat online before arriving, so you know where you're going to sit, and no queues. You can pick up your ticket from an ATM style thing out the front if you want to get it quickly, or you can go in and pick it up whilst you're ordering your goodies for the film.

You can order hot food, pizzas, cakes (including creme brulee and lemon tarts... even choc top ice creams - but adult flavors like rum n raison and dark chocolate), champagne, wine, beer, decent cafe quality coffee, coke (if you must) to be delivered to you seat during the film, which is placed on a little table between every two seats... which has an inbuilt ice bucket. As there's so few seats, the waiters do not have to lean over someone else or squeeze past hundreds of others to give you your stuff.

They have 30 or so reclining armchairs in a small theater with a smallish screen, but top notch acoustics and audio gear, usually not too loud (although Return to the King was painfully loud).

There's heaps of space between you and the next person in any direction. Even if you're laying down flat and Sideshow Bob is in front of you, you can still see the screen.

As the tickets cost $25, and the food aint cheap, it keeps the plebs and kids away for the most part. Sure I spend like $60 or $70 going out to see a film, but it's been an enjoyable experience, no brats, great food and beverages and I've felt like I got my money's worth.

So quit whining about crap theaters, and ask for your own Gold Class theaters!

Now if only they make more films like Amerlie and The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou and less shit like Date Movie, I'd be inclined to go to Gold Class more often.