Digital Cinema Not Quite There Yet

An anonymous reader writes "A Reuters article explains how, in some ways, the digital future of movie theatres isn't quite here yet. Despite the push for new technology in the projection booth, theaters have been slow to adopt the new and expensive gear." From the article: " Many in the movie industry hope digital cinema will help revive theater attendance, which fell 9 percent in 2005 in the United States. The studios stand to save about $1 billion a year in print distribution costs because they will be shipping digital movies via computer hard drives, satellite and broadband cable, versus old celluloid canisters. But digital deployment is expensive at about $100,000 per screen, and while the studios agreed to foot most of the bill, current equipment does not meet all the technology standards set by the industry."

Comments

Re:Movie Attendance

[3arwax]

Many PGs, most PG-13s, and all R rated movies are fully of violence, sex, and profanity. Hollywood is not making movies to please their audiences but to please themselves, corrupt America, and prove political points. How long until they figure out that most families, where the real money is, don't want to watch this trash?

Hollywood Doesn't Care About Attendance

[Illbay]

I might have said it differently, but yours is short if not so sweet.

Take a look at the Academy Awards this year, what do you find?

The most-feted films, besides being among the "most fetid," were also far, far down the list in terms of box-office--supposed to be what Hollywood is about, right?

Not only were the highest-grossing films frozen out of the top awards, but the "buzz" was all about films like "Brokeback Mountain" and "Crash" that almost no one saw. Hollywood's elitism and arrogance are on display constantly, yet THEY don't seem to be able to figure out how they got there, or how to find their way out again.