Slashdot Mirror
Theaters Unhappy About Faster DVD Releases
dolphinlover writes "As movie studios such as Walt Disney Co. have pushed for more rapid DVD releases of movies to combat piracy on the Internet, executives of movie theater chains such as Regal Entertainment Group and National Amusements Inc. have countered, saying that seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience' and that the time window between movie and DVD releases should even be extended. Their views run counter to Disney's Chief Executive Rober Iger view that DVDs ought to come out simultaneously with the theater releases of movies. Both sides say their plans would benefit consumers. Is either correct, or are both approaching the situation from the wrong angle?"
I download my movies, you insensitive clod!
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Regal Entertainment Group and National Amusements Inc. have countered, saying that seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience'
If seeing a movie in the theater is so significantly better, then there should be no problem here, right? If it's so much "fuller" and "more entertaining," then it should be able to stand on its own without worrying about when DVDs get released.
That's just not the case, though. Many people only go to theaters because that's where movies go first, and people don't want to wait. When given the choice, many would rather have the DVD. It's cheaper (two movie tickets is often more than the DVD price, and you can watch the DVD whenever you like), the food isn't overpriced, you can sit in more comfortable seats, you don't have to deal with people yelling "WHERE YOU AT" into their cell phones, no commercials, no waiting for the movie to start, you can pause the movie if you need to go to the bathroom, the floors aren't sticky, you don't have to drive anywhere, you don't have to deal with other people asking each other "okay so who's that?" and conversely you can converse with your fellow movie-watchers without getting told to shut up, etc. Yes, you have a big screen and nice sound in the theater, but home theater systems are constantly getting better.
The theaters are threatened because a lot of people DO prefer watching movies at home, and they're losing their major advantage. If they don't like it, they should try to make their experience better, not bitch and moan about quick DVD releases.
How could consumers possibly benefit from fewer choices? If seeing the movie in the theater is better, then I'll do that regardless of whether the DVD is out.
Well, maybe http://www.gimpshop.com/ would be useful for them?
Let the consumers choose! Do they want "a more fulfilling experience", or do they not want to spend $4 for a medium popcorn?
Screw the theater, I want my movies straight to DVD.
Are theatre owners across the nation members of a union of some sort? Or an association that collectively negotiates with the movie studios? I'd love to see these guys shut down their theatres for a few weeks just before a few big blockbusters are set to be released.
Theaters Unhappy About Faster DVD Releases
Did I click on The Onion by accident? No shit they are unhappy about it. What did you expect?
Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
So despite the fact that distributors have disrupted the free market in order to slant movie watching towards being in theatres by staggering the release of the movie on DVD until 6 months after it is released in the threatres, this supposedly "fuller, more entertaining experience" needs further help to survive in a free market?
Personally I like going to the movies with friends, but if it was "better" then surely people would choose that over a DVD with both are available in parallel, instead of being forced to see the movie at a theatre?
My 3D Texturing Skinning work (under construction)
If it is such a 'fuller, more entertaining experience' then what's the problem?
That means that people would go the theater instead of buying the movie or both.
They are not even coherent with themselves.
Going to the cinema does make for a better movie experience, however smaller screens and more choice have (for me anyway) ironically removed the big premier movies, over here now my local cinema has closed and left only the megaplex type places which don't feel the same.
The cinemas are being pushed to show more and more films, with releases almost every weekend it feels very diluted with no build up.
I would goto the cinema here in England if opening night was worldwide instead of opening in America weeks or months ahead, the first time you hear about a movie makes your mind up - if thats months before the UK release you end up hearing about the next big American movie and forget about the one you wanted to see.
We live in a global village and the internet has allowed us to hear the hype about American releases much sooner than they are available, there was a time when tv/magazines etc would begin the push once it reached our shores, there might be a one liner about some premier or other, but the magazines focued on what was available over here, now within days of the American release theres a cam or a screener available (sometimes sooner) - no need to spend cash.
So global releases and hype when it is due will get me back, I couldn't care less about delay to DVD as long as the movie is available in the cinemas when I hear about it.
liqbase
... buggy whip makers upset about new-fangled "auto-mobiles"
+1 fashionably cynical
if it didn't cost over 10 bucks in the north east, maybe i'd actually go see a movie in theaters
While I believe that a simultaneous release will do an in-justice to theaters, a faster release to dvd will only help sales and exposure of a film. It would be able to maintain the momentum generated from the flood of advertisments of the theater release which will attract customer who never intended to see the movie in the theater anyway.
Please protect my business model by offering less consumer choice.
I hate theaters. The sticky floors, the seatcushions that everybody has sweat into before you, sharing air with people who probably have avian flu.
I can't wait until they implode and the space can be used for something useful and less disgusting. Given a choice, I would rather spend that money on a decent home entertainment system and zero-day movies on disk, and turn the megaplexes into nature preserves, or high-class dinner theatres.
As I have previously said: In a movie theater, no matter where I sit, the loudest person in the theater always ends up sitting next to me. You'd think with my "I've killed already tonight, and you're next" countenance, people would stay away, but I seem to attract the crazies. Prime examples: In that crappy Sky Captain movie, when the flying ships dive straight into the water, this guy next to me starts shouting "THAT DEFIES THE LAWS OF PHYSICS!!" In that crappy Manchurian Candidate remake, some dumb bitch sits down right next to me, babbling through the whole movie. When Meryl Streep goes into a long speech, this woman starts shouting "MERYL STREEP AT HER BEST!!" During Batman Begins, some fat ass was munching down bag after bag of chips right next to me. He'd finish a bad, then extend his hand out and drop the bag on the floor, and go for another. Then he'd start belching, or fall asleep and snore really loud. What the hell is it with these people?? Can't they see that I want to watch my crappy movies in peace??
The funny thing is the high-quality rips come from DVDs not camcorders in movie theaters.
The side that gives consumers choice is right. So let's see who that is. Movie producer is saying: let's put the DVD's out at the same time. That will allow consumers to decide whether to buy or to see the movie in the theater. The theaters want to keep the movies out of consumers hands, forceing them to see the movie in the theater if they want to be able to talk about the movie in the watercooler relevance timeframe.
So the movie producer is right.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
If the question regards benefit to the consumer, then by all means release simultaneously, giving consumers the maximum opportunity to choose their viewing experience.
That ain't the question, however. The real question is how do film producers and distributors maximize their profit - and the theater chains are simply the tail getting wagged by the dog on this one. If they want to thrive, they need to emphasize the "experience" that they purport to offer, which for starters, would mean:
1) Rationalize the pricing for snacks,
2) If the movie claims to start at 7:00, start the upcoming feature trailers no later than 7:05 - if you want to show lots of other ads, do it before 7:00 with the lights still partially up.
3) Some theaters already do this, but summertime morning "freebies" that get moms and their kids into the theater are a great way to build that next generation of theater goers.
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Good.
Most movie theatres I've been to have crap seats, sticky floors, overpriced food, poor picture quality, too many ads, and irritating people sitting around me. Much better to pay the same, or crucially less the cost of a movie ticket, and rent a DVD with the same (to me and my Dolby Digital/DTS rig) quality of audio, better quality of picture and comfier seats.
And if I like the movie, I can buy it to repeat the same quality of viewing over and over again. That way I don't have to risk projectionists who are asleep at the wheel, and let movies play out with unfocused pictures, poor quality reel switches and glitchy or badly-speakered audio.
neuro at well dot com (when I post, it's my opinions, no-one elses)
Both sides say their plans would benefit consumers. Is either correct...
No. They're both just trying to maximize their own profits.
There is absolutely no reason for theatres to be unhappy about earlier releases of DVDs. Why?
Because, most films are in and out of the theatre in a mere 2 weeks unless they're big hits (Harry Potter, LotR, etc.) or Hollywood agenda films (Brokenback Mountain) which Hollywood will keep in theatres for months and months even without ticket sales.
But how long was Serenity in theatres? how long was Night Watch? or Joe Avg film. Not long. I try to see my out-of-state fiance at least once a month. often there are movies I want to see with her but never get to because they're out of the theatre in 3 weeks flat.
There is no loss here....
Move along....
Here's an easy solution... bring back ushers to theaters. If someone is talking, kick them the fuck out. I've had people THREATEN me with physical violence because I told them to shut up while I was trying to watch the movie I payed for. Get the rude assholes out of the theater and maybe more people would be willing to go. I used to really enjoy going to see a movie in a theater, when people had a little common courtesy. I've even gone to see re-releases in the theater, because it's a fun night out - but I won't tolerate paying for a movie I can't enjoy due to the people around me.
What we're really seeing here is the invisible hand of the market correcting an imbalance that's existed for a long time. The stick is piracy: studios don't like it, obviously. The carrot is, if you release the film on DVD immediately, people will buy that instead of the pirated version. A win for everyone except the pirates and the theaters.
And what about the theaters? They've had us over a barrel for years, charging insane prices for tickets and for food from the concession stand. This isn't going to be a lot of fun for them, because now their audience is going to be solely people who actually like to go to movie theaters. And this is certainly smaller than the audience of people who either like to go to movie theaters or don't like to wait for movies to hit video.
The theater owners are in denial about this - they're not planning for it - and that's going to hurt them, unfortunately. If they were to jump on board and start planning for the inevitable, I think it'd work out pretty well. In the long run, it'll work out anyway - some people really do like to see a movie in a theater. I certainly do. Target that audience, and give that audience the experience they want, and you've got a solid business. Unfortunately, it's probably a smaller business than the one you have now. Sad for theater operators, but really not fixable.
Someone to clean the damn place, someone to watch for people on their phones, and someone to keep others from talking during the whole movie.
Theaters live in a happy-crappy-monopoly. Yeah, they're not a true monopoly, but they have a crappy level of quality they can hit and people still come!
When they can provide something worth doing, I'll go. Right now I only go when I want to see something badly enough, I probably saw 4 movies last year in theaters.
So why don't the theaters step up to the plate? Besides fixing all the other things that they often need to (which will be brought up endlessly in this thread) why not sell the DVDs? Here is the theory:
You go to a movie and you when come out you are offered the chance to buy the DVD of the movie you just saw for... $10. Same with the soundtrack (for $6).
If you liked the movie, then you can buy the DVD right then and there. If you didn't, then you don't have to buy it. This would be an extra source of revenue for the theaters, and would probably boost DVD sales (since it would be much easier to sell to someone who just watched the movie than someone walking by a display in Wal*Mart or Best Buy). Those who don't go to movie theaters (like me) would still buy the DVD at a store as usual.
In fact, by selling that DVD for $10 and not the normal $20, I'm betting there are people who would go to the theater just to buy that DVD that way. The cost of that DVD ($10) plus the cost of the movie ($20?) would be more than the DVD alone at a store ($20), but they would also get to have the theater experience for what would be a discount ($10 difference) compared to normal price.
Theaters are still trying to be what they were in the 70s when you couldn't watch any movie you want any time. Heck, things have hardly changed from the 40s in the theaters, except for the lack of newsreels and the amazing number of ads they show.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
What is it that they could be pissed off about? If the delay between theater and DVD is at least 4 weeks, that's more than enough as most movies are in and out of the theater chain system by then anyway. The only theaters that might have a problem would be the dollar theaters, but they tend to show indie films anyway. What the theaters should really be pissed about is how movie studios are churning out complete and absolute shit that is not attracting much of an audience.
-=*(CC)*=-
Downloading legal, content-owner-authorized movies is great. However, the majority of downloads now are illegal copies. And to be responsible to their stock holders the movie companies have to make this move.
Seeing a movie in a theater can be a great experience.
Paying $5.00 for a 40 cent box of candy is NOT.
Watching a P2P illegal movie downloader led off in a made-for-TV perp walk.. Priceless!
Counting the days till we see that on MSNBC...
Cogito Ergo Sum
It's funny because it's true.
neuro at well dot com (when I post, it's my opinions, no-one elses)
Theaters might consider getting into hosting big screen lan/console gaming parties, in order to remain somewhat viable as entertainment venues.
I'm for simultaneous release.
There will always be those who will want to see a movie in the commercial theaters. These are most likely folks who have chosen, for whatever reason, not to invest in home theater setups. There's no problem with that at all.
There will also be those who couldn't be paid to set foot into a commercial theater. These are folks who have chosen to go the home-theater route, however much they chose to spend, and who are tired of screaming kids, sticky floors, and inconsiderate boobs who don't seem to know where the 'Off' switch is on their cellphone or pager. There's no problem with this mindset either.
So, with that in mind: Go ahead and do simultaneous release of DVD and in-theater. Let the paying consumer choose what format they want to see the movie in. Even better, get the rental outlets to pick up on it when the DVD hits. That way, if it looks too good to be true (as 'Robots' did to me... Lord, what a dud!), it'll be low-risk to the buying public to find out.
Heck, simultaneous release might even provide motivation for the studios to put out better movies. If they do such a release, and it bombs, the loss will be much greater than if they just did a theatrical release, so the motivation will be "Do a better job!"
Keep the peace(es).
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
The Public Movie Theater is dead. Long live the Home Theater.
"A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
GeneralEmergency
In big cities, going to the theatre is a total roll of the dice. You get crews of thug teens talking on mobile phones, pointing laser pointers at screen, etc. Sure -- speak up and complain -- the management *really* cares, and will take care of it *right away*.
...the more consumers will benefit. As much as I hate agreeing with the movie studios, they are correct in this instance, just as a stopped clock is correct twice a day.
Customers are unhappy about
Ridiculous prices
Crying babies
Idiots in the audience who decide to narrate
Sticky floors and filthy seats
and
Cell phones
Did I miss anything? Fix that crap, and you won't have to worry about release schedules. There are still movies that need to be seen at theatres to get the full experience. But I simply won't put up with the rest of that crap, or theatres that tolerate it.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
Quite simply, they're both coming at it from the angle of their own revenue streams. There's no right and wrong, you just need to choose whose pile of money you're talking about.
+5 Insightful, really!
Theaters are a good place to kill time when there is a power outage in your neighborhood.
Other than that, I agree with you.
Both sides say their plans would benefit consumers.
Well, why don't they just try them both out, then we know who's right?
Maybe, if you can avoid 20+ minutes of annoying ads followed by 15 minutes of previews. And if you manage to get an audience where people don't spend the entire movie yakking on cell phones or narrating the action to their friends "Later in the movie you find out that 'Rosebud' is his sled. But this is the part where..."
A good trip to the movie theater is much better than just watching TV because it's a communal experience. It's the modern equivalent of sitting around a campfire listening spellbound to a good storyteller. When you interfere with that experience -- by playing obnoxious ads or by talking -- you make it worse than the solitary experience of the living room. People are less inclined to go to the effort to risk all that frustration.
What can theaters do?
And if rude audience members would just be a little more polite, and studios would make better movies, the rest of us would be more inclined to go in the first place.
I might believe this if theater owners actually talked to real live people instead of reacting to protect their antiquated business model. I'll add my two cents just to prove that I don't prefer poorly maintained, poorly cleaned, and way-overpriced theaters with their sound and projection systems out of whack. The boutique theaters are doing well because they're in good shape, offer a more interesting selection of movies, and many of them actually offer real food as opposed to just the same old candy, popcorn, and nachos that we've seen for decades. C'mon. Their biggest innovations are stadium seating and way-too-loud DTS (at best)? Give us a reason to go to the theater and (surprise!) we'll go.
it's fun to see how broadband internet and ubiquitous multimedia-enabled computers are wreaking havoc on traditional media businesses. an argument over how long to artificially delay the release of dvds? why buy cd's, movies, games, and (soon enough) books when you can download them? for something that's so right in principle (a completely non-physical medium of distribution), its potential is going to waste as a medium for piracy. you'd think high piracy rates are lighting a fire under their asses to utilize this medium of distribution. but they won't. they'll just bitch bitch bitch that pirates are using this medium of distribution to fill a gap in the market (distribution of multimedia via internet) that they don't feel obligated to satisfy
This is obviously self-serving on the part of the theatre chains. The more ways consumers can purchase (or rent) content, the better it is for them. Movie tickets, DVD purchases and rentals, paid-for downloads, subscriptions, pay-per-view television - the more choices, the better it is for the consumer.
Can anyone think of anything beneficial about a long delay before a DVD is released to the public?
cheers,
Andrew
I see "spots" on the screen when I go to the theaters, when I complain, they say I shouldn't be capable of seeing the spots. They say they are cues for the projector? Somehow I doubt that. They're also not digital, so the picture sucks too. We have a brand new ginormous theater complex here, and it's beautiful. Too bad it sucks to watch movies there.
That's OK, theater owners. (In Soviet America...) DVD users are unhappy about Theater Releases.
For the one or two movies a year when you're willing to put up with cell phone ringtones and screaming babies in order to see/hear/feel the explosions (and the jiggling body parts) louder/bigger/better than your home theather can provides, the theaters provide a useful service.
And in probably the one or two times a year when I'll sympathize with MPAA: Faster DVD releases are essential. Movies these days are so nondescript (even the ones with body parts either jiggling or being blown up) that if I don't see it in the theater within the first couple of weeks, I'll have forgotten I ever wanted to see it by the time the DVD comes out.
I'd like to see the theater-vs-DVD delay measured in weeks, not months. Seriously, by the time a movie's been out for two weeks, it's either no longer playing, or it's playing in the "seats 20 comfortably" back halls of the Megaplex 21 where the screen's not much bigger than a TV anyways.
The ironic part is that the theaters brought it on themselves. Remember when a movie theater had 2 (nice, big!) screens at most? The theater manager cycled content in and out of those screens quickly enough to keep the money rolling in. When a theater has 20 screens, the expenses for the content go up by a factor of 10 -- but the net effect is "20 channels and nothin' on", and it's a lot harder to keep 20 theaters full than it is to keep 2.
Whatever maximizes net profit is the correct thing for Movie producers/distributors to do.
I mean honestly, with the dropping cost of home entertainment systems is there really that much of a drive to spend the money to goto the theator any more?
There are some flicks I'll head out for, block buster action flicks usually (HP 4, Lion Witch and the Wardrobe, and Underworld 2 where the last 3 movies I saw in the theator). But for most movies my home entertainment system is plenty good enough.
But why would I spend over $30 ($6+ in gas, $18 in tickets, $8 in refreshments) to take my wife to a movie in the theator when we can watch it at home from the couch on a 48" screen? $20 bucks on a DVD and some popcorn, or $2 for a rental. And then I can pause the movie if I have to run to the bathroom (or if I get food poisoning and miss 75% of LW&tW! damnit!)
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
If we ever reach a point where DVDs are released at the same time as movies in the theater, get ready for ADVERTISEMENT CITY. You think non-skippable content on DVDs is bad now? Just wait until they start coming out at the same time as the theatrical release.
I'd suggest that timescales will shorten even more, then quickly disappear altogether - first for second string movies, then the blockbusters.
The movie industry needs only a few theatres in the country for premiers, etc. HD-DVD, Blu-Ray and downloads are a bigger deal to them.
Currently:
Proposed (and future potential slippery slope outcome):
I'm not surprised they are complaining. Now all three are contending for that first dip.
Personally, I've stopped going to the theater. If I go with my wife and get anything to eat or drink then I've surpassed the price of the DVD (at least in IA the theater prices are "reasonable"). For the quality of movies today...I can wait a few months for the DVD. An extra $20 isn't worth it.
It's no surprise to me that theater profits are down and they're contemplating moving DVD release dates up. Why? THE CONSUMERS WANT IT! Which, to me, means there isn't a total monopoly on the whole deal because we have a smidget of a say by voting with our wallets.
:wq
Hollywood agenda? Brokeback was in the theatres for a long time because there was a devoted fanbase watching it over and over again. Plus, there weren't many good movies coming out after it to bump it off.
I read the internet for the articles.
New flash:
I imagine this comes as good news for those of us that have decent theater rooms. Although not quite the real theater experience, it sure beats sitting next to strange people on opening night. And now if we could get our movies the same time as regular theater goers, all the better.
Some unrelated news:
Mc Donalds execs dont like Wendy's restaurants opening all over the place because mc donalds provides better environment for kids.
Microsoft execs don't like these evil ppl giving code away for free because their products offer better user experience.
etc...
Be honest. The only reason theater executives dont like this is because it is competition for them and it hurts their business. By not releasing dvd soon, people are forced to go to the theater to watch the latest movies. Guess what, the market is working around this issue and piracy is giving users what they want: Be able to watch new movies in their house.
In a free economy, studios should be able to release movies on dvd whenever they want, and movie theaters would just have to compete in plain old VALUE, not by applying monopolistic tactics.
Just out of curiosity, when Americans are spending billions of dollars a year on stuff called "Home Theater," what did theaters think was going to happen to revenue?
Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?
Movies make most of their (theater) money in the first few weeks anyway; DVDs don't impinge upon that market yet, and probably won't affect it much unless they're released with or very shortly after the theater release.
People like me (parents) don't see things in theaters anyway, so I'm happy to have the DVD out sooner -- while I still vaguely remember the ads. The main target audience for films these days tends to be younger, less patient, and less saddled with expenses that detract from entertainment (kids, mortgage), and have more free time (see previous), so they'll probably see it in the theater.
And it IS a fuller and more entertaining experience in the theater, usually. The margin has been closing recently with smaller theaters and larger/better TVs, but it's got a ways to go.
The problem isn't the DVD's. It's a few things....
Hollywood has been turning crap movie after crap movie out every year. What they don't realize is we can sometimes get equivalent stuff that may even be better. Examples are the very well done Star Wars and Star Trek fan flics we've been able to download for free. Hllywood wants to make easy movies and they are not challenging themselves or the screenwriters any more. Considering that of all the summer block busters in the last few years we have seen a tonne of sequals or rehashings....oneexample is Peter Jackson's stinker King Kong.
Why why WHY do you have to charge us 6 bucks for about 80 cents worth of pop? I can easily pay almost as much as a amusement park ticket if I get each person in the group outfitted with a popcorn and a drink. It's GOD awful expensive to go to a full price theater. I remember seeing FIRST run movies for a buck back in the day. I also remember theaters not charging 5 bucks for a box of Snocaps. They want more people to come to the theater, then they shoul dlower thier prices. Maybe we need to go back to only have 1 or 2 theaters. Maybe the movie megaplex wasn't such a good idea....
Gorkman
What are you people thinking?? Since when do companies try to do the best for the custumer? The only thing they are supposed to do is suck out all your money, as much as possible and as fast as possible, of course. And how do they get more money? Theathers get their money when people come, and every person pays the ticket. DVD's pay the ticket for 10 people, at the price of 1. And yet again, some people would buy both if the DVD came a month late like in old times. It's a war between two powers. Of course the 3rd wins... guess who
http://naerey.switch-case.org
The time it's in the theater is just part of the reason Theaters want to delay the release. You may very well make your decision (DVD/Theater) Based on how long your gong to have to wait to see it on DVD.. People are much more likely to choose "Seeing it in the Theater Today" over "Seeing it on DVD in 6-8 Months" than they are if the choice is "Seeing it in the Theater Today" vs "Seeing it on DVD Tomorrow."
-Jason
Regal isn't playing with a full deck anyway... http://www.alternet.org/story/34016/
Bwaa.... the DVD's are stealing our profits, mommy!!!
I wonder why the theaters don't focus instead on:
* Provide better services
* Wiping the floor filled with dried sodas
* Having better restrooms cleaned more often
* Having better rules like getting someone out when his cellphone rings
* Asking less for the popcorn ($3.00 for the big one, and $2.99 for the small one which has 50% less)
Oh, I forgot it, they still think we're money-spending idiots who want to fill their pockets. Too bad.
Their business model is becoming irrelevant. Much as the music industry selling songs on physical media, their model is failing. So they flail around looking for someone to blame ( much as the riaa does ).
Of course, I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Disney on this. Those people are soulless.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Remember when book stores were supposedly going away?
Well, a lot of the neighborhood ones are gone. But there are still plenty of bookstores going strong. They either are huge box stores that offer espresso, a wide variety of magazines and books for browsing, and comfy chairs; or -- they are specialist stores with knowledgeable staff and also have a nice browsing environment and a variety of related goods (e.g. sci fi books and gaming). Either way, these stores are not just means of distributing books; they're destinations you go to in their own right.
I think if the theaters truly believed that the experience they offer is so much better than the home theater experience, they could survive even if movies were simultaneously released for DVD, download and theater. They'd be happier and make more money if the other media didn't exist of course. But, I think, the experience they offer is not so superior that most people would bother. They are not, in other words, places you'd go to for their own sake.
Which is odd in a way. The old neighborhood movie houses were. Sometimes you went down to the movies to see a movie you had to see. Othertimes you just went to see whatever they were showing you, or more likley a double feature, with a cartoon reel and maybe a news reel. What's interesting is that the neighborhood movies houses that haven't been abandoned or carved into little bits still are destinations in their own right, if not to the same degree they were once. The sterile suburban cineplexes are possibly an idea whose time has come and is going.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I am the consumer and (in this case as well as most where people claim they know what's best for their consumers) I know that I'd rather have the choice of whether I want to watch the DVD in my living room or go to a movie theatre.
The best solution for this would be to have the movie start in the theatre and have a 2 week delay for releasing a higher priced DVD (for e.g. $30 instead of $20). Then after the movie is done playing in theatres (4-6 months) the DVD should fall to the regular $20 price.
This way you're giving those who want the DVD the chance to get it earlier and those who'd rather pay less can wait the 4-6 months for the regular price or a year or 2 for the discounted price.
The new smaller theaters allow you to hear the movie that is in the theater next to you, and in the end the experience sucks. I'd rather enjoy snuggling up on a sofa with my other half and watch a movie in the comfort of my own how. I can also stop the movie ( especially the new 3 hour experience ) and add my own intermission. I think it makes for a more romantic evening.
Only 'flamers' flame!
Does slashdot hate my posts?
Hello, McFly, anybody home? At $8.00+ a pop per person for a ticket and about another $15 to $20 for food and drinks only to have to sit in a crowded room with idiots on their cell phones, large groups of annoying teenagers, retards who bring their crying infants and old women explaining things scene by scene to their deaf husbands, do you wonder why consumers are increasingly staying home?
Going to see a movie is about more than just the movie, it's about the experience and as it stands now in most theaters, the experience sucks. There's an awesome theater about a half hour away with huge seats spaced far enough apart where you can order good food (not just pop corn and candy) and alcoholic beverages. If I'm going to spend a small fortune to go see a show it'll be in a place like that. Otherwise I'm hitting the second run theater a month after the show comes out or catching it on DVD 6 months later.
It boils down to prices versus experience. If I'm going to be in a crowded theater with seats close together and have to put up with all of the other crap I mentioned above, then it better be for a reasonable price. I don't mind paying more, but it better be in a theater that provides an experience that justifies the price.
It's a shame too because I used to love going to the movies but now I reserve it for the big budget, special effects laded summer popcorn flicks. Those spectacles were made to be enjoyed on the big screen and I'm willing to tolerate the crap some of the time.
Disney pushes for faster DVD releases to combat piracy? If I were to be downloading movies instead of buying them....theoretically that is (glances around nervously)...I would wait until the movie is available for download in it's DVD "screener" or DVD release version (terms I would imagine pirates use, not that I have any first hand account of any of this...it is hot in here? Can I get a glass of water maybe?). I mean, who would really want to see the video-camed version of still-in-theater movies with people laughing or talking or whatever? They suck (or so I've heard...from newspapers and such. I don't know anyone that is now, or was a member of, the Pirate Party. Do I need a lawyer?).
So Disney pushing for faster DVD releases only pushes it faster into pirates hands!
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
It actually is a "fuller, more entertaining experience", as long as they're referring to my bladder after drinking the $6.00 small-keg-o-cola, and the joy of impromptu voiceovers from a 12 year old with a cell phone and The Batteries Of Infinite Talk Time (tm). I was in tears by the end of "Return Of The King", and it had nothing to do with the movie.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
The sound and projection quality in the last few theater experiences I had sucked major ass. Either the volume was too high, too low, too overpowered by the gunshots/explosions in the action movie in the next theater over ... AND the image was too dim, too askew, misaligned, etc.
I used to like going to the movies when I was a teenager. I guess that's why their target market is mostly teens.
I love when people bitch about the price of cinema snacks, because you simply don't have to buy any! I mean, it's not hard, folks. I generally get a coffee or something that's very close to the price on the outside world, and save my money for another movie ticket or a beer afterwords. I figured out snacks were a rip off 25 years ago.
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
I go only to see the movie I deem needs the big screen to fully enjoy. Starwars Episode 2/3, Gladiator and LoTR to name a few big screen epics.
Other than that the movies are over priced, too crowded and noisy. People talk over the movies and yap on cell phones. Constant crunching and rustling of bags as well as that occasional stinky person. In all it's a horrible experience going to the movies these days.
Now at home, i have peace, healthier food and no stinky people. I can pause it if I want, i can crank my 6.1 system. Best of all, I can have some privacy with my honey instead of a thousand people watching us and not the movie... But then again there's nothing wrong with people watching.
the reason why the refreshments are so high is because the theater is not getting any revenue from the movie the first few nights. After that they start getting a small percentage and the longer the movie plays, the higher percentage they keep.
The movie industry wants all of it. They know if they sell the dvd, the movie goer who would see the good movie at the threater several times won't. This means even less revenue for the theater. Releasing the DVD at the same time as releasing the movie in theaters would kill the theater industry.
Commercials ? WTF ? Starting 20 minutes after "start" time ? Loud, rude patrons ? Overpriced snacks ?
Why do they think they can subject us to that garbage and still expect us to pay for tickets. The idiots don't see that they are their own worst enemy.
-- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
Anything that gets me a DVD faster is a good thing IMHO.
Besides all the rude people talking on phones, kicking my seat, kids crying through the R rated film, etc. DVD's make more sense on the wallet too.
For my wife and myself to go to a theater:
$20 admission ($10 x 2)
$20 refreshments ($10 for a popcorn that I can microwave at home for $1???)
$40+ babysitter (absolute minimum. if we go to dinner first, add at least another $20-$30 for babysitter - I'm not one of those parents who take their 3 year old to the latest R rated flick)
So it costs at least $80 for 2 people to see a movie at the theater. And that is only if we go straight there and staright home. Compare this to DVD:
$20 DVD
$5 Microwave popcorn/soda/chips/whatever I want.
Watch on my 51" HDTV with surround sound.
***PLUS**** No screaming brats. No cell phones. Explain to me why I should shell out $80+ when I can get a BETTER viewing experience at home for $25. Granted, the TV is an initial investment, but I *need* that for watching 24 and Lost anyway....
The local cinema here has raised it's prices 5 times in little over a year. The cinema is less and less of an attraction for me partly because of this. Sure, you get the big screen and the great quality, but there are downsides - the people aspect for one.
People throwing popcorn, people talking loudly, people rustling snacks, people coughing, people sneezing, people getting up to go to the toilet, people kicking the back of your seat and so forth. It can be very distracting.
Also, you have no control over the movie. If you want to go take a piss, you're going to miss a few minutes (usually the part where the large-breasted A-list actress gets her top torn off, or the Arnie-type snaps a few necks and somehow manages to make a non-explosive object explode).
Then there is the increasing amount of adverts... the less said about that, the less likely I am to annoy myself.
I'm not saying it's all bad, watching a film at the cinema can be very enjoyable. But with home entertainment systems getting better and cheaper, and cinema prices and advertisments on the rise, I do find myself wanting to go less and less. I used to watch a movie at the cinema at least once or twice a month, the last time I went was a few days after Serenity was released, which was months ago.
She's built like a steak house, but she handles like a bistro....
Sooo let me get this right: 200+ a year for netflix, and I can watch what I want, around here anyway with rare exceptions the the theaters are so terrible that a VHS /DVD is better. I think the REAL issue has nothing to do with P2P,DVD or any of that crud it's that a 12 doller ticket plus 4 doller popcorn plus 5 dollers of gas (two gallons at 2.50 each) is sooo close to a 20 doller DVD that I personally can wait till it's in the discount bin. Or get it two for one for one or watch a bunch on netflix. I think that if Mr.Valentine (or who ever is over the MPAA these days) wants to encourage people to go to theaters that he might consider looking at the economics of film development, and grant comitee to help leverage the cost down thus making it so people don't get reamed. Just a crazy idea. I meen what am I thinking? How could it possible be more econicly pheasable to rent a movie 6 times or get it from amazon used once then get reemed at AMC 2000. Oh wait it is! Not speek of the fact that the closest theater around here is so terrible that it's inside a strip mall. THanks but no thanks. I hate the seats in that POS theater and the day it goes into better management is the day my backspasams, and urge to not ring the neck of the pimplefaced snoty nosed punk that says: Oh **** I burnt your popcorn. HOW In the Hell does that shit happen? I have a popcorn maker. Their not THAT hard to use. Granted the one he was using was such junk I was amazed it even worked.
To me it only means faster DVD rip (read: downloaded version with decent quality, not some crappy CAM or TS) to be available on the internet ... If anything it helps piracy.
I think they could work out a deal, like all theatres get a percentage of the DVD sales or something. And when you see the movie in a theatre you get a discount on the DVD, and you're able to buy it as you leave.
FreeSimpleGames - some fun games I made
Having a cool home theater system is nice and all but sometimes I just want a reason to go do something. And local theater is really, really hit or miss, and rock shows are loud and it sucks to have to stand around for hours after you've been working all week. What's wrong with going out to a movie?
P.S. I know, I know ... I must be new here.
Breakfast served all day!
SUV 20mpg.. $6/2.50=2.4 Gallons
2.4X20=48 Miles round trip.
24 Miles one way.
I live 30 miles from the nearest Theater.. But only 2 miles from Blockbuster/walmart.
-Jason
Release simultaneously a good movie on DVD and screens, and people will watch it AND buy it. Release Bambi 2, Tarzan 2, The Naked Lion King 33 1/3 on both media, and you'll see how DVDs win. Release a mediocre "not for kids only" film on both media, you'll get mediocre box office and mediocre DVD sells.
The problem is not content, it's quality. Give me a good reason to spend my money on your entertainment proposal. I'll do it. I'll buy the Holy Trilogy in three different formats... but not the Old Testament Trilogy.
See my point? Focus on quality entertainment. going to the movies used to be magical because of the stories they told... now, it's just an activity for a rainy day.
I just watched Steven Soderbergh's Bubble, a movie released on cable TV, DVD and movie theater at the same time. It was a great experiment, shot for cheap on HD Video cameras, using unknown actors. (one major character just retired from being manager at the local KFC). For sets, they filmed inside the actors' real homes.
Ultimately the story works because the characters are great and the plot is interesting, but this was a great project and I highly recommend you guys check it out.
But, during the Oscars, the President of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences made a HUGE pitch about how movies should be seen on the big screen!
... what'dya mean it's not playing today?
I think he's right. I'm gonna go see Star Wars IV at my local theatre!!!
Did anyone else see that Oscar segment and think "How the hell am I supposed to watch all these great movies on the big screen if they're not kept on the big screen?" Heck, most of the movies in that montage I was either not born yet, or not old enough to get into the theatre when they were first screened?
The dumb part is that a Friday night "Oscar Night" at the theatre would probably go over extremely well. Have one screen of your local megaplex devoted to some great movie of the past. Hollywood can even do the distributing. *That* will give you a realistic test of releasing a movie simultaneously to screen and DVD, and will give me more options over the dreck that usually is on screen.
Trust me, I have seen a lot of movies both in the theater and at home (LoTR Trilogies, Ice Age, etc). The picture/sound quality in my home theater creates a lot fuller, more entertaining experience.
Plus I don't have to deal with gum on the floor, cell phones, and noisy people. Home theater equipment is dropping in price very quickly, I think this is the theaters biggest concern, not how fast a movie goest to DVD.
See my Home Theater
Get help for your germ-phobia, dude. That's just pathetic. Do you wear gloves, too, when you shake someone's hand?
...saying that seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience'
These same executives should be forced to view movies at their own theatres. They obviously have not been to one!
From the stale popcorn with fake butter (blech! how many pennies did that save you?) to the overpriced food and drink to the filthy bathrooms that they won't pay to clean anymore it is pretty obvious that movie theatres are no longer interested in providing a 'fuller, more entertaining experience', just in grabbing the most profit while providing the least service.
Ignore these assholes, Disney. I haven't been to a movie theatre in 10 years and, personally, I don't care whether you release movies to the theatres at all!
It's my understanding that about half of a given movie's earnings are from theater sales. If that's the case, releasing on DVD simultaneously is going to seriously cut into ticket sales (and hence movie profits). Guess what has to happen then - DVD prices have to go up to make up the difference.
I think I'd rather wait and buy a cheap DVD than pay twice as much for the disc just so I can have it a few months earlier.
one thing i cant stand is having to smell and listen to every disgusting mutant that crawls in to a theatre. if i had my way, they could beam the movie in to my brain while i was in a place were i dont have to breathe the same foul air as every virus infected human in the city. fuck theatres! dinosaurs! let em burn!
The theaters are as bad as blockbuster... they thought that doing things the same old way would work forever. And, just like the payphone industry, they're dying.
Movie theaters gouge for ticket prices, concessions, and want to use the same old projectors and crap they've been using for decades. No thanks. If they want to stay alive, they have to offer something better than the widescreen hidef screen at home, and apparently they can't. Well, except for the same old corny appeal to the "cinema experience". Someday, I hope, they'll at least offer a definition of that that doesn't sound like it was written by a neolithic shaman.
The most compelling reason for me to choose DVD over going to a movie theater has nothing to do with how bad theaters have gotten. I just really like to see the bonus features after I finish watching a movie. A lot of times I'll learn about a movie, and read reviews, decide it's a great movie that I really want to see, and deliberately wait for it's dvd release, just because I know the bonus features are going to be really good, and I want to see them right after I've seen the film for the first time. Syriana is a recent example of this (it also sounds like a movie that would bear repeat viewings, but anyway). Maybe theater owners could do something like this: Print a password and url on every movie ticket sold, and set up a website that streams exclusive content, like the bonus features of the film you just saw in the theater. It would be a start.
The theaters are threatened because a lot of people DO prefer watching movies at home, and they're losing their major advantage. If they don't like it, they should try to make their experience better, not bitch and moan about quick DVD releases.
SOLUTION: Issue 5 inches of duct tape for each mouth, install cell-phone jammers, provide eye-openers and you have got an experience you won't soon forget!
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Although it would not be good for the cinemas... I believe that a fuller more entertaining experience could be had at home... in a movie room that had decent projector, comfortable clean seating, and a great sound system. Not having to wait on line, or rush to make the 8:00 showing, or struggling to find good seating are real problems that don't exist in home theaters. All that great picture quality, large screen, and sound system at the cinemas would be utterly wasted if I had to sit against a side wall next to a loud child, or behind a tall movie-goer. That and having to spend 50 bucks for a night out with the wife isn't so great either. The only thing that keeps me going at all is not wanting to wait a year to see the latest film.
You all are over-thinking this again. Unless a movie just came out, I don't go to the theatre anymore. Movies come and go so fast now it just kills the desire to do so, and everyone I know feels the same. Worst case scenerio: I'd pay $16-18 bucks for a pair of movie tickets (plus gas), and two weeks later the DVD is on sale at BestBuy for $14.99. So IMO, yes, they're right. Unless you are just the "Movie Go'er" type, more than likely your interests have been dwindled by this as well.
I do however feel that there is a hidden element that no one is considering: Home Theatre Systems. Years ago it was a thrill to go to the theatre, if not just for movies like the Matrix or a good WW2 flick. Nowadays, stores give away free satelite speakers and a subwoofer with a bottle of Dasani, so damn near everyone has one now. Instead of going to the movies, all the true audifiles (like my brother) can't wait to get it on DVD so I can "come over and hear movie_x on surround!"
You hit the nail right on the head.
I would definetly grab a DVD of a movie that I would like to see. That way I can afforably eat food while at the theatre. Pause the movie if something comes up. Not have to hear annoying ppl talk so see them walk by. As for the sound quality, most speakers out there are quite decent. And if the story is really good, you don't really care about the sound that much since you are immersed into the movie.
What benefits the consumer is what the consumer wants. What do they want? Do they want the theater experience or do they want the comfort of their own home entertainment center?
Frankly, Even at $25 for two tickets and popcorn, and seeing a movie approxamitely once every other week, if I decided to save that money, I'd still not have enough money for the minimum payment on a $5000 entertainment center, complete with surround sound and super sized TV.
I also find the experience of a theater very enjoyable. The screen is bigger than I can buy anywhere, the accoustics and sound system at a modern theater are very good in my experience, AND I get the experience of being in an audience. Laughing and cheering with a bunch of people in a theater has always made any more more enjoyable. Some of the star wars haters will always complain, but the feeling of the audience whooping and hollering when Yoda uses the force to whip out his lightsabre and get into a fighting stance... it's priceless emotion.
And nothing beats an action movie on a huge screen. Sense and sensibility doesn't lose anything being watched on your TV, but you had to see... and I mean SEE... episode 3 on a big screen at least once to get the beauty of the visuals... if you are into that sort of thing.
Now, you may prefer being at home and not want to deal with the muck on the floor, or stupid people with cell phones. You may not want to have to deal with schedules or times. These do not bother me as much. I'm selective of my movie theaters and some of those theaters do suck much more than others. I prefer comfortable seats and decent equipment and no weird smells. If you don't have a theater like this, I would not be surprised if you prefer home theaters. If your eyes aren't sharp like mine then pretty special effects might not impress you at a 50 foot viewing angle.
The point is, the market should go where ever the market says it wants. If people like movies in the theater, fine. If people want to see more movies sooner at home instead, fine. BOTH of these men are looking at the issue from a selfish perspective, regardless of who is right. I believe there will always be demand for movies in the theater, but how much is dependent on the people buying the tickets and DVDs, not the CEO pigs who want to take your money regardless of what you really want.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Theaters traditionally make more money per ticket the longer a film is out. The first hot weekend, much more of the ticket costs go to the distributors, later, the theater keeps more and more of the ticket price.
Studios are incented to pack everyone into the first weekend. Theaters want nothing more than the sleeper hit of the year -- where audience builds over time.
Faster dvd releases mean less opportunity for the most profitable time a movie is in the theaters.
The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
Given an alternative between buying the DVD and going to a theater, a person will choose what option gives them the best value for their money (external factors such as marketing bias aside). Home viewing of DVDs is more cost-effective in the long run, due to the high overhead of food sales at theaters and the ability to view the movie multiple times for one fixed cost.
What do theaters lose when DVDs are offered soon after the movie release? People will choose DVD over theater, and the theaters will go under. Even if theaters do manage to provide a better viewing experience (cell phones, sticky floors, and babies crying are clear detriments), they can't compete with a slightly worse product that costs a lot less.
What do studios gain by offering DVDs quickly? They don't have to split profits with anyone, and they don't have to deal with third party theaters cutting into their profits by showing ads. What's more, studios could stop releasing film altogether, and provide only straight-to-home-viewing-device products, eliminating theaters entirely. With the current state of technology, this may happen anyway, as more and more theaters become bankrupt.
This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
First I'd argue that yes seeing the movie in a theatre _is_ a better experience. Being in the movie theatre is not. The sound, screen and environment is great. The yelling teenagers, overpriced food, sticky floors, and so on aren't.
More importantly, as soon as the demand drops off in theatres, there is no money to be made. The theatres are saying that fewer people will go if the DVD will come out sooner, but if it is, in fact, such a fuller experience, then that's not the case. People will go to the threatre if it's a fuller experience. On the other hand, if the theatres are full of it, and in fact people only go to the theatres because they must, then of course theatre-goers will drop off.
Besides- studios and distribution want to get their money back as soon as possible- and if they can speed the DVD release and play off the advertising and hype already in the market, they're in better shape.
PS: *still waiting for the limited release Sarah Silverman's "Jesus is Magic" to come to DVD*
-M
when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
There are only a few theatre owners in places of towns on up (rural theaters tend to still be localy owned). I can not see a difference amongst the majors; high prices on admission and food, uncomfortable seats, unkepmt bathrooms and seats, etc. The fuller experience that they deliver SUX. The DVD from home is flat out competition and winning.
Somewhere down the road, the theatres will move to having restaurants, children play area, etc. at a decent price but until then, I will buy the DVD.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
And, truly, modern business is all about cutting out the middle-man. And why not? Especially if they really aren't adding any value?
All theatres do is take a cut. Why should they continue to get that cut if nobody needs them anymore?
There will still be room for "nice" theatres, and so-called "dinner theaters" like the Alamo Drafthouse or whatever, but the chains are gonna die. And good riddance.
who are these idiots in charge of our entertainment? want to combat falling box office figures? reduce the time before it comes out on dvd! I can only speak for myself but I know when I see film in the cinema listings I just think "It'll be out on DVD in a month, I'll wait till then". Everyone I know says they think exactly the same thing. I think someones scraping the bottom of the barrel, desperate to find a solution to the falling sales problem that isn't an admission that they need to change their thinking about content, business-models and the fact the consumers cash is being overstretched by all sorts of new and different goods. Off topic a bit now: I used to go to the cinema a lot but not anymore. I don't download movies, I've got better things to do with my computers than fill them full of resource-sapping p2p software and gigs of downloaded stuff i'll probably not use. I guess I've just started to associate going to the cinema with dissappointment, that's the symptom I think they need to combat, actually increasing the quality of their product, rather than chase the phantom problem of pirates. Anyway, It's all be said before ad-nauseum.
I drive an 88 Fiero with a beefed up 3.4l engine and a dieing 3 speed auto (no overdrive). It's about 25 miles to my theater of choice (stadium seating, THX sound, huge screens, free parking). At $2.59/gal in a car that gets 20mpg at best I'll easily blow $6 driving to the show and back with out detours.
Last RV I drove got 8 mpg on diesel. At $2.70/gal for diesel it would cost almost $17 to travel round trip to the show.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
I've had several HDTV's since early 2001, and am constantly let down by the blurry scratchy hairy film prints i see in theatres. When star wars episode 1 was coming out George Lucas made a big deal about digital theatres being the new thing, and when episode 2 came out i had ONE theatre in the whole D.C. area that showed it, and it looked decent. Now its 2006 and there's TWO theatres, and they hardly ever actually show movies in a digital format, just wheel film projectors in to keep showing junk. I agree with everyone that people talking, sticky floors, and $9.50 prices (i've boycotted theatre refreshments since 1994 when i first started seeing commercials before the previews) are mainly what keep me away, but if some people would jump on the digital projection then i'd at least see some lame blockbuster movies that benefit from image quality in theatres.
I used to go to the movie theaters much more often, I have documentation to prove it too, because I keep all receipts for tax purposes. My statistics are simple: I go to movies less and less. This year I only visited the movie theater one time. I am not interested in going to movie-theaters to watch movies that are DVD watchable (basically movies that don't have gigantic special effects that are found in The Matrix and LOTR for example.) Any comedy or an action movie goes just fine in front of a 56" wide Toshiba HDTV that I setup for my parents (I don't own a TV,) without all of those annoying people around me, without overly expensive drinks, without noises, phones.
I don't infringe on copyrights, so I don't download pirated stuff, so I just wait for a DVD to come out and it works out just fine, thank you very much. Of-course I wouldn't mind an earlier rather than a later DVD release.
You can't handle the truth.
fuller, more entertaining experience'
Is he really being serious here? I am not sure if anyone saw this but there was a blurb during the academy awards where Jake Gyllenhaal was introducing someone or something late in the show. He was saying something about DVD's and the "home theatre" experience never being able to mimic the experience of the big screen. I can't remember the exact verbiage but it really doesn't matter --- the verbiage was SOOO wrong that he halfway laughed his way through the statement and cast an odd look as if he KNEW what he was saying was BS. He had clearly not read those lines before and as he was reading them off the teleprompter it became very clear that he, himself, did not believe what he was saying. And neither did anyone else.
Anyway, the reason I bring this up is simple: the theatre owners keep crying the same battle cry -- but they are being oh-so-disingenuous if they claim they actually believe that.
Let me just lay out a few of MY issues with the theatres:
a) Advertisements
b) Advertisements
c) Advertisements
d) Overpriced for the "value" I get (ie: bad movies)
e) Advertisements
f) Advertisements
g) Overpriced concessions, sticky floors, other ppl in the audience, etc.
Anyone with 1/2 oz of common sense KNOWS these issues. Yet, the theatre owners somehow think we are stupid and don't know this. Which is why at every turn, they become more and more irrelevant. The more they "talk", the more I don't listen.
Bathroom and food break anyone? Look, they just run until the menu is available. Besides, on all the DVDs that I own, I rip them to my server for my personal use. I totally skip the ads.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Oil is now over $66/barrel. The first big "die off" of movie theaters hit the giant opera house theaters that still existed into the '70's on the main drag. When oil prices spiked, these huge behemoths couldn't afford to heat or cool the huge spaces - so they were consolidated into "multiplexes". And that was before folks have home cinema...
So, the multiplexes reduced the screen sizes, increased the seating density and are moving to digital projection. Those that still use film reels don't hire good projectionists, meaning that prints get dirty and repeatedly spliced. Guess what? They've killed the theater ambience, increased the cost and driving distance - and the home experience is becoming superior (and already is for some part of the population). Movie theaters should have died in the 70's, but the home experience wasn't there yet. In other words, they're dead and they don't know it yet.
The final nail in the coffin will be $100+ oil, and $500 50" screens. Your children will laugh at the weird notion of watching movies with a bunch of strangers.
jh
"seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience'" You've got to be kidding me. Outrageous ticket prices. Outrageous consessions prices. Jerks who talk through the movie, cell phones, the kids that have to walk past you every 5 minutes. The girl that screams like she's been shot every time something startling happens on the screen. If that's what he's talking about... he's going to have to do a lot more work to market that fuller more entertaining experience. Because the alternative is check a couple boxes on netflix, the movies arrive at your home with no having to go to the theater in the first place. The pizza guy drops off a pie or you heat up a plate of wings or whatever the hell you want. Soda by the liter of whatever you want. Beer or wine could be on the menue. You can pause, rewind, or skip scense on the DVD... the rude people are someplace else... and you're chilling on your comfy couch. The Home Theater experience is a richer, fuller experience in my opinion.
MadOgre.com
I've a solution to this never-ending problem....let the theatre's sell the DVD's first, then the distributors (Blockbuster), then Cable. If you want the DVD immediately, go buy a ticket to the theatrical release, walk to the counter, buy the DVD, and leave. You don't have to watch the movie at the theatre at all. This will increase sales on all fronts; you go to see the latest movie, like it so much, and buy it right there. We Americans are the most impulse-buying people on the planet, that's why there's candy by the cash register at the local 7-11. Box office numbers go up, DVD sales go up, everyone's happy (except Blockbuster, but they are on the way out anyway, as soon as IPTV and Fiber to the home arrive).
The movie theaters need to remind people of the compelling reason to go to the theater. For me it's the experience of being in a crowd of people who are all excited about the movie and the collective response to the movie.
If Star Wars Episode 27 was released on DVD and in the theater the same day, theaters would still sell out. Why? Because opening night is a great experience due to the other fans who are also excited about it.
What makes theaters bad is the experience after those first precious viewings when people show up that are less interested in the film. Why are they there if they are going to be text-messaging or making jokes with friends? Those are best done with a DVD viewing... MST3k acts at home.
If you want the theater experience to be a 'more entertaining experience' then you need to do a few things.
1. Pay the workers more than min wage. That way they're be cheerful and friendly to me.
2. Don't make me pay insane prices for food/drink.
3. Start to use digital projectors. (Make the experience better with better looking films.)
4. Show better films. (Talk to your friends in Hollywood, tell them to spend less of their budgets on marketing and more on the script.)
5. Move the seats further apart. Make it a comfortable experience.
6. Fewer commericals. (More trailers instead.)
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
I would watch a movie on DVD before i would go to the Theater to see it. I find the quality on a DVD to be way better than the theater anyway. The DVD should be out the day of the movie so i can rent it or download a copy.
Greetings from piracy ground zero (southeast Asia). The day a movie comes out in the cinema anywhere, I can find it at any of dozens of shops within a 10-minute walk of my home on DVD for US$2. The quality is bad for the first few weeks, but the shopkeepers are honest about it, and customers can decide whether it's worth waiting for a better version.
Hollywood studios used to release films months later here than in the US. Absolutely everyone watched the pirated ones, and cinemas were empty, closing down left and right.
Now they do simultaneous release (US and Asia), there is a new breed of cinemas with reclining seats and über-THX Dolby what-have-you, tickets are US$2.50, and films don't stay in the cinema longer than 2 or 3 weeks (this is easier than in the west because there is a far wider range of films to show - in addition to all the American movies they show Hong Kong, Korean, Indian, Japanese stuff, subtitled into 2 or 3 languages depending on the source).
It seems to be working. The cinemas are crowded - last show at the big ones in town is after midnight and even then there are a lot of sold-out screens. The first week a popular movie is out, the only way you're going to see it in the evening is if you make a reservation online or via mobile. People go to the movies for the experience, because the experience is genuinely different from watching at home. And then when the supply of people who want that experience is tapped out, they leave it to the pirates.
So I really don't think the availability of DVDs is cannibalising the cinemas' market. Or if it is, they have successfully adapted to it.
Granted, I've never seen a legit DVD for sale here and I couldn't imagine where to go to find one, but I guess not everyone can be a winner.
"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
Umm, even if DVDs came out before the theatre releases people will still pirate movies if prices dont come down.
I've already invested in some new home theater equipement because i PREFER the home theater experience to going to the movies. If they released DVD's at the same time they release to the theater I would never go to the theater again.
I would spend the $20 it takes to go to the theater and buy the movies that i want to see close to release and netflix the ones that I can wait for. I would probably also invest in more Home Theater equipement. possibly a larger TV, better quality sound system, better seats/lighting/etc
As a consumer that loves movies it would probably actually be more expensive for me if they released at the same time, but IMO it would be worth it to not have to deal with going out to the theater.
I
I bet they wonder why I rank them with telemarketers and spammers...
This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
If theaters are unhappy that 2 months after a movie release you can buy the DVD, what are they complaining about?
Usually if a movie has that quick a turn around, it did dismal at the box office. Theaters could keep a crappy movie in their cinemas for 2 or more months, but most theaters toss out low profit yield movies quickly.
I have found very few movies that are box office hits have a quick DVD turn around. Even then, I think that Theaters hold on to movies way too long. A 24 gigaplex doesn't need to be showing movies from 6 months ago.
In Canada, at least, there is a discount theater chain that offers movies that are a few months old for only $4.25 (or $3.00 matinees). I have often seen movies "released" in these chains that are already out on DVD, but people still go to them. Its cheaper then renting, even with two people, and people still enjoy seeing movies on the big screen, especially if they don't have a premium Home Theater system. I would be hard pressed to find this theater chain complaining about the fast turn around for DVD movies, considering they still make money after the DVD is released (the theaters are always about 3/4 full when I go).
If a movie doesn't do well at the box office, then you can't draw blood from a stone. Movie theaters won't make much more money after a few weeks if a movie sucks, and they will be losing money if they don't put a profit maker in its place. The movies that do very well have already made the movie theaters millions, so expecting them to hang around for 6 months is just ridiculous.
Overall, I think this is a moot argument. If movie theaters want to make more profit then stop charging $14 for these premium stadium like complexes with their $6 gallon of Coke and $8 popcorn. If the offered movies for cheaper box office prices, you will get people going back to the cinema. If you charge so much money that it is actually cheaper to buy the DVD then to spend a night at the movies, what the heck to you expect?
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
Kids should be happy listening to wireless broadcasts. /dag-nabit
I drank what? -- Socrates
Don't you little pirates feel powerful?
Yes
You did this.
Cool
First off, it is ONLY in the theaters' benefit to keep the movies there longer. Check out the revenue structure of the movie distribution companies. In the first few weeks of a release, the theater makes 0% of ticket sales; they live on concessions. Only when a movie stays long past this do they start to make an appreciable return. An early DVD release can cut into these late term profits.
On the other hand, every movie costs them money. So if a movie doesn't sell very many seats, and people aren't buying expensive concessions, it will get pulled. Why waste time on a known loser when there's a chance with the next big thing?
Theaters are not "Hollywood." They are at the mercy of the distribution companies as much as the average consumer, and are trying to stay in business any way they can.
Also, you did not just compare three of the biggest audience pulling films of the year with *Night Watch*. Let us count the strikes against it:
1) Subtitled, so the mass market stays away from it.
2) But wait, its a crappy mass market movie.
3) It's terrible, and utterly incoherent. Really, I think that's all we need.
Just wait til you see the sequel.
And Serenity was shown in private screenings around the country for almost a year before its theatrical release. Anyone who really wanted to see it, already had (or just watched Cowboy Bebop instead).
I used to like going to the theater - when it was $4.50 or $5 for a ticket... and popcorn didn't require a 2nd mortgage on the house... Now that ticket prices are $9.50+ and popcorn is basically being run by profiteers, I stay home.
I watch PPV or DVD's on my 32" screen w/Bose 901's... Put my feet up... drink a beer... pause when I gotta piss... turn it off if I get tired, and come back to it later... PPV is $4 at the most, usually $2, sometimes $1... There's no sticky floors, no screaming rugrats, no assholes on cell phones, no one in front of me with BIG hair, no one jamming their elbows into my ribcage because their seat is too small, no one talking about whatever next to me, no sick people surrounding me and spreading their disease, no crying babies, no worrying about parking, no teenage gangbangers pulling their bullshit, no pricy food/candy/drink, and BEST OF ALL - NO FUCKING ADVERTISEMENTS!!!!
I went out with the new girlfriend last weekend - figured we'd stop off and see a movie after a nice dinner... After standing in a cattle line about 200yd long to get into the friggin theater, we had to wait thru 25 minutes of ads and previews... SHE looked at me and said "What are we seeing again?" I had to look at the tickets to figure it out... totally forgot...
The only things I've ever liked at the theater were in iMax and those tickets are like $18 each... I go to the midnight showings because it's true fans, and there's no kids... See LoTR or Matrix or HP on iMax - totally worth it...
The night was great - the movie was a total downer... next time, she wants to watch it on my TV and I guarantee we'll have a much much much better time...
The theaters should be afraid... very afraid. The studios need to release direct to DVD and PPV at the same time as the theaters. I also want it so that if I purchase a PPV, then at the end of the movie if I like it, I want a DVD sent to me for another $9 (including shipping/handling). That'd make it a $13 experience... If it sucks, then I risked $4 *oh well*
The typical theater deal is "90% over nut." The nut is the cost of running the theater. Ticket proceeds first pay that, and then 90% of the remainder goes to the distributor, and only 10% to the theater. The profits come almost entirely from the snack bar.
Some movies, such as Star Trek, attact crowds that eat so much junk food that theaters pay 100% over nut--*no* profits other than snack bar.
hawk
I think you mispelled "robber".
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Am I the only one who sees a chance for the theater owners to profit a bit out of this deal? Let's say Star Wars Episode III was released in theaters and DVD on the same day, what's to stop an enterprising theater owner from setting up a small kiosk in his lobby with said DVD for sale (with just a slight mark-up of course). Those theater goers that found the movie to be worth owning could then buy it without having to make a separate trip to the store. It seems like a good idea to me.
Yeah, but Brokeback would have made more money if those devoted fans didn't keep coming through the back door...
sorry, just couldn't resist that one.
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
It has always been my understanding that the Theaters are not exploiting the opportunity to maximize the potential of the theater experience. Enhancing marketing to include DVD distribution after paying to see the movie would promote moviegoers and also allow opportunities to cross-sell and upsell for the studios. Personally I think there is too much advertising and not enough merchandise avaiable. When I sit in an empty theater on a weekday and I think about how the empty space could be used, I often imagine ocming to the theater not just to get high-margin soda and popcorn, but to also leave with some tangible reward.
Yeah, I hate it when I'm masturbating and somebody is watching me from the other row. I wish the movies came out on DVD right away, because I just can't wait!
Theaters used to be a fuller more satisfying experience, but nowadays unless a theater is brand spanking new then it is likely that the audio equipment is 10+ years old. Not only does the audio equipment suffer from degredation but how old was the technology when they first purchased it? It is likely that many entertainment enthusiests have BETTER audio systems at their home (albeit smaller) that reproduce the sound much more acurately. How about the video also? This is the age of high def. I would rather watch a high def movie on a 50" screen than a regular def movie on a 200 foot projection.. If theaters want to attract people back then they need to do it with what they originally did it with.. by wowing the customers with technology that is not readily available in homes.. plus they need to make their popcorn and soda cheaper..
The only dollar theater here just raised its price from $2 to $2.50 . . .
hawk, not believing that this has actually happened to Vegas
How about I get a copy of the DVD for going to the theater? Or make the DVD an optional part of the ticket price? Or you can decide if you want to buy the DVD when you leave?
James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
I'm sorry but if you are just now responding to the $12 tickets, $5 popcorn, $3 soda, then you're quite slow. If you've taken yourself and a date to a movie in the last 10 years, you already know that its going to be at least $20 (already more than the price of the DVD). Put this together with the other downsides, and you're just plain dumb.
Personally I would rather invest in a nice home theater setup (HD video, 5.1 audio, setup correctly!) and avoid the 16 year olds, high ticket prices, lines, static movie times, smelly theaters, and crowds of people.
Get paid to code OSS
Do these people live in a bubble? Have they never even been to a theater? For me and date to see a movie, it costs close to $20 now, before popcorn, drinks, and the other "experiences".
Then when you finally get to a seat, a sticky seat, you have to mess with cell phone users, talkers, smokers, babies, etc. The volume is either ear-drum blowingly loud, or whisper quiet. Plus, movies lately have sucked. Does any of this seem fuller and more enteraining? Any of it sound worth $20?
For $20, I can get 2 or 3 movies, see them as many times as I want within a WEEK, with as many people that can cram into the living room. I can control volume and I can even pause the movie to run to the R/R. I know my seat won't be sticky, and if anyone has to use the phone or smoke, they go out on the porch.
Now what sounds more like a more enteraining experience?
Both sides are correct. Each of them is trying to push an agenda for the DVD releases that benefits them the most. Theaters want it pushed back so people will be less likely to wait on the DVD, and see it in the theater. The Movie studio wants to release as soon as possible, hoping to circumvent piracy (yeah, right), and try to get people to just buy the DVD. In most places you can buy the DVD for the cost of two tickets at the theater. For a family of four, it would be cheaper to just buy the movie and watch it at home. We won't even add in the small loan you would have to take out to get drinks and popcorn. Bottom line though is that the theaters will lose out on this battle unless they get creative. The studios make the product, and they want to make the most money possible off of it. If they feel theaters are not the best way to do that anymore, tough luck for the theaters.
"We need to be focused on bringing the wow factor back to the experience," she said. "Movies are meant to be seen in the theater."
n er seats at a theater (and while I'm slightly overweight I'm no fatty, only a size 12. Buying an elliptical to shed the fat, BTW)
seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience'
I prefer watching movies at home with friends. Here's why:
- I keep my floors clean.
- My chairs, sofa, futon, etc. are very comfortable - unlike backache-inducing, more-cramped-than-coach-seats-on-commercial-airli
- I can put my feet up, stretch, lie down, hop on one foot, or stand on my head while watching a movie at home
- No annoying people yelling "Oh no you di'nt" at the screen
- film's superior resolution is more than negated relative to DVD by perpetually-out-of-focus projectors. If my television ever goes out of focus I'll crack it open and adjust it, or replace it. Theaters never bother to pay a "projectionist" to maintain focus throughout a movie - or even adjust focus beforehand
- Even stadium seating sucks
- I can pause DVDs for pee breaks
- I can eat whatever I want during a movie at home, drink water without paying $3.00 for 16oz of tap water, make a milkshake, or whatever
- My sound system at home (mostly Pioneer Elite components) is far superior to typical movie theater systems
Now, if they were to keep the movies in focus, push seat rows slightly further apart so I can put my feet up (or let the seat lean back a little more), either clean up the floor or throw out punks who leave a mess (or preferably both), oh, and did I mention actually focusing the projector? Then, a theater experience might be better than a DVD. I've seen only ONE movie in the last few years that was very crisply focus, and it went out of focus just a few minutes into it.
I really would like to know why paying $11/person to watch an out-of-focus movie on a big screen is superior to OWNING the DVD for between $9.00 and $25.00 and watching it in very crisp focus on a 36" screen. Somebody please explain this to me. I've only bothered going to one movie in the last year (Chronicles of Narnia/The Lion, the Witch, and The Wardrobe) and that's ONLY because I've been a fan of the Narnia books for 23 years. I usually wait for the movie to hit DVD before seeing it.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
As someone who recently purchased a projector and 106" screen... Screw you movie theaters!!
So let me see its a better exp.
So my local movies place has the following.
a) Bad sound quality
b) Bad picture quality
c) Rude staff
d) costs money
e) other people causing distractions and talking etc.....
So if this is the case when are people going to provide some sort of place to show movies of a slightly better contention ratio of 300:1 con on my adsl is only 20:1
The only reason why people go to the cinema is
a) the cute girl for some reason wants to
b) to shag the cute girl in part a
Alot of readers here have already pointed out the physical theater disadvantages, commercials, exorbitant ticket & food prices, cell phones, and voice-overs, so I won't bother expanding upon those point.
Hollywood is just trying to figure out the fastest way to sell us crap and DVD is cheaper than sending out 2400, 88-min long, film reels.
"The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
Boo hoo. Lower your f***ing prices.
$50 for two to go see a crappy movie, eat greasy popcorn, drink watered-down coke, and listen to bloody disrespectful tweenies talk through the whole thing.
Some experience!
The faster a DVD hits the shelves, the earlier you'll find your ripped movie on the net!
Selling DVDs too early creates the illusion of big earnings!
Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
if they would add more annoying commercials, then we'd all pay more to go to the theater.
they just lack imagination. I'm here to help
If they make that experience too expensive for the consumer, of course people will stay away.
Economics dictated our decision long ago. Typical family of four (two adults, two kids), tickets @ $9/person = $36, snacks for four @ $5 per person = $20, travel costs to get to theater (not insignificant anymore, especially if you're 30 minutes from the theater like we are), and opportunity cost from time wasted waiting in lines, watching five or six trailers, travel time, etc. The total cost in hard dollars is more than $60 in many peoples case.
Or pick up the same video at the grocery store several months later plus snacks galore for $20 and not spend any wasted time.
So tell me, what's the "experience" that is worth the $40 premium per show? Great surround sound and a big screen? Let's really see what the cashflows the movie theaters are asking us to give them with some easy discounted cashflow analysis. In order to do this, we need the "net theater experience" amount, which is the theater experience cost less the do-it-yourself cost for the movie and snacks, which in my example is $40.
Four movie experiences per month at the theater: $40 x 4 = $160
Undiscounted total of monthly cashflows for three years: $160 x 36 = $5760
Discounted (Net Present Value) using 4.5% I/Y: $5419
This means that the value of a $160 per month outflow of your cash, over three years, is worth $5419 today This present value number is necessary for a fair comparison of what I'm about to do. Understand that you're choosing the stay at home model, and you already have the snacks and the movie. Using the NPV calculated, you also have $5760 to go out and buy your own home theater experience.
What kind of experience - surround sound, big-screen, etc - can you buy for about $6000? That's what you're paying the theater in the model over three years (and honestly, your system will probably last longer than three years, so this model is unusually fair to the theaters).
And worse yet, this model allows you to avoid all the lines, the driving, the excessive trailers, lets you pause the movie when nature calls, replay scenes, avoid the idiot with the hat in front of you and the excessive talkers, sniffers, and chatty children in the row behind you.
Sounds like the stay-at-home experience sure beats the theater one. Not a good time to buy stock in theater companies...
Very Expensive Tickets
Cell Phones
Crying Babies
Expensive Food
Rude People
I only go to a theater to see a movie because I -really- want to see it.
It's the ONLY reason I *ENDURE* a movie theater experience.
If it's not that great of a movie I will wait for the DVD.
I think a DVD is far cheaper and offers a much better experience that a Theater.
Regal Entertainment has the worst idea of what a theater experience should be.
If they spent as much money on the movie EXPERIANCE than they did on the
look of their Theaters it might just be a better experience.
Regal theaters assault their patrons with bad architecture in every color imaginable while selling this idea of a "better experience"
Then there is always going to be the @sshole talking on the cell.
The family taking their babies or ADD children to the show.
The vats of butter with popcorn.
The Salt and Sugar Diabetic Express
And people who general don't care about anyone else around them.
Dear Hollywood, your movies suck ass. The issue isn't about theater-vs-dvd release. Your profit problems are content driven. Make better movies, then your customers will make this whole issue into a moot point. You could project the freaking thing onto the sky from deep space and a lot of people simply won't care because the movie (product) is the stepped-on crap that you are currently offering. Yes, go on making your tragically bad movies less convienient to view, and see how that brilliant business model works out.
Sincerely, Keanu Reeves
Why don't movie theaters start showing more re-runs. I mean seriously there are some movies that are just better on the big screen. You could have a web page with a sign up list. When the number of people who wanted to see a given movie in the theater hit some specified limit you could show it assuming say half the people on the list showed up you would make good money. I'd pay to be able to watch Gibsons 'passion of the christ' on the big screen once a year. Not to mention some of original LOTR or star wars movies. No home theater can compare. I think it is a turely untapped market. hmm... I'm going to put some more thought into this. I think my local theator allows for 'rental' of whole theators for 'private viewing' I wonder what the cost is.
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
It's not just the crap content in movies. It's the damn "downloading is stealing", car, and etc etc advertisements that are a pain in the ass. You could lump previews in there too sometimes, but for myself I do tend to find those somewhat imformative about what's coming out (sometimes too much for those previews that show all the best scenes at the get-go).
Sorry theatre-owners, but sitting at home with my TV, surround, and a DVD unit capable of skipping previews is often enough a better bargain for my cash. Drop the shitty previews and I might consider going to more shows.
Or this might make way for a new market. How about a mini-theatre with rooms fitting about 8-12 people, and projection units with surround. If the movie are coming out on DVD anyhow it should be cheaper/easier for the theatre to snag the DVD copy. Then , you can drop in with a bunch of buddies and watch it on a not-quite-so-big-screen-but-better-than-mine environment. Throw in some comfy seats, cut down the commercials, and reduce the price of bloody popcorn and I'd be sold on that.
"seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience'"
My wallet certainly isn't left fuller, and that I don't find very entertaining.
I used to see 4-10 movies a month at the theater for more than 5 years. Now I see less than 12 movies a year at the theater. My reason's for going less are: The audio always sucks. The screen is never in focus. Sometimes the aspect ratio for the movie is wrong. The crowd on opening night makes it hard to get good seats and if you don't see if opening night it will have damaged frames in the film. I never thought I would be saying this but I agree with Disney and think that the movie should be release on DVD at the same time as in the theater but only if they don't raise the price on the DVD.
who are tired of screaming kids, sticky floors, and inconsiderate boob
There are those that go to theatres for the same reason. Having a big-screen TV and surround at home is nice, but for some home is where the screaming-brats, naggy-longterm-visit mother-in-law, and various other family woes live. Depending on the movie, sometimes the theatre is still a more relaxing part of a "night out"
From the Slashdot summary:
"executives of movie theater chains such as Regal Entertainment Group and National Amusements Inc. have countered, saying that seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience' and that the time window between movie and DVD releases should even be extended."
From TFA:
"She [Shari Redstone] said offering a fuller, more entertaining experience to consumers not only generates more revenue, but protects the theatrical window."
This is in the context of Shari explaining how some National Amusements theaters have been using gimmicks to get butts in seats.
The article doesn't suggest that theaters provide a fuller experience; it suggests that they need to do this to maintain business, i.e. they're not very good at it now.
Changes the entire meaning of the summary.
Take care,
Mark
There is a solution...
But (a) the *content* is still strongly adhering to Sturgeon's Law, with endless sequels, remakes and Old-TV-Show-To-Film adaptations, (b) the 20 minutes of ads in front of the feature, maybe half of them actual trailers and (c) the complete disrespect by about half the audience for the half that actually WANT TO SEE THE DAMN MOVIE.
Thanks, there's not that many films I'm so jazzed to see that I'll put up with the crap at the local megaplex. I'll wait the 3-6 months for the DVD, and be able to pause the movie for bio-breaks or getting the snacks *I* want, and not miss anything but the excess noise, parking hassles, etc.
When my wife and I went to England in '01, we went to an IMAX theater that was playing several movies (6+ I think). It was setup just like a regular movie theater - popcorn, pop, etc - and business was booming. These weren't regular movies migrated to IMAX, but the selection was still great and the movies we saw were awesome.
Serve adult beverages. I'd be much more inclined to go see movies in theaters if I could drink a 36-oz Margarita while there.
Going to see a movie is ridiculous these days. You cannot get away with less than 100 dollar outlay for a family of 4. I remember when movies went from 2 dollars to 2.50, and the papers were saying that consumers would find that a hard pill to swallow. Before long, they jumped to 4, 5, then 7.50. Now if I want to see a movie, it is 14 dollars per adult. The DVDs, even the day they come out, are often in the 22-25 dollar range, making it far cheaper to purchase the DVD and watch the movie as many times as you want, at home. Why don't movie executives get it? They have dumbed down the content to ridiculous levels (Charlie's Angels 2, Stealth, etc.) and jacked the prices. Why do they have to pay Cameron Diaz 20 mil to star in such incredible crap as CA2 ? The studios deserve to lose money if that is their game plan. Make the admission price 8 bucks, all the time. They will see an increase in attendance, I guarantee it. DD.
Both sides say their plans would benefit consumers.
For a clue on who's got an incentive to lie about consumer benefit, ask "who has the most to lose?"
It's pretty obvious.
I say sod that. I'll go to the cinema, beat the shit out of the fucker that DARES SPEAK DURING REVENGE OF THE SITH, and then download that bad boy!
"...movie studios such as Walt Disney Co. have pushed for more rapid DVD releases of movies to combat piracy on the Internet..."
I don't know about combating piracy, but it would help get the DVD quality bootlegs out there a lot quicker.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
...you don't have to deal with people yelling "WHERE YOU AT" into their cell phones...
Please... everyone knows the correct usage is "where are you at."
"But how long was Serenity in theatres? [...] Not long."
Maybe that's because it was both crap and didn't have much appeal with the masses.
I see nothing entertaining about enduring high ticket/concession prices, twenty minutes of commercials, rude cell phone addicts and play-by-play artists, and then being disappointed in the end with inferior product.
Do the math. A family of four can pay $80+ to see a movie in a theater, or $15-20 to watch it in the comfort of their own home. Thanks to rising fuel/insurance costs and a shrinking labor force, families do not have the disposable income they did 10-20 years ago. We adapted, now it's the theater's turn.
The theater owners are fighting a losing battle to perpetuate a failing business model. Adapt or die. Or lobby your congresscritters. Whatever.
Judas, they even used the Oscars as a vehicle to pitch their bitch about missing out on the 'movie theater experience' ENOUGH!!!
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
The incubation period for the Flu is from 24 to 72 hours.
d Overview.htm
Source: http://www.yale.edu/yhp/departments/health_ed/Col
The incubation period for the Common Cold is from 2 to 3 days.
Source: http://medplant.nmsu.edu/Diseases/cold/cold.htm
Mod parent down as Wrong.
occultae nullus est respectus musicae - originally a Greek proverb
How about instead of the theaters telling us what we want, they let the consumers decide. I would love for simultaneous releases. There would still be movies I would want to see in the theater, but mostly I'd get the dvd version.
It costs on average $20 USD for new release DVD's.
Suppose that first run movies are simultainiously release in theaters and DVD.
Now I can either outright buy the DVD the day of release and go home and watch it in the comfort of my home, or I can shell out near $20 per person to see it in a theater where I will probably not enjoy it half as much, due to ringing cellphones crying/whining children, or chatting teens.
I seriously have not enjoyed going out to the theater since high school.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
It's much bigger than a business card -- its just under 50mm high, and as wide as they want. (That's because imax runs 70mm film horizontally through the camera/projector. From that 70mm, you take off the sproket holes and sound tracks, and that leaves you with about 50mm...)
So each imax frame is slightly larger than a standard paperback novel. ie. freakin *huge*.
Ian Ameline
Obviously, the solution to this problem is to sell the DVD on the way out of the movie.
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Really, funny...
Although I recall it did get nominated for best picture. I don't recall it being a very big grossing film over all.
In fact, it was 23rd following such movies as Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Hitch, The Longest Yard, Fun with Dick & Jane.
Even Chicken Little out grossed the film. Along with The Pacifier, Flightplan, & Saw II. and numerous others. It barely passed the Dukes of Hazzard.
Even though it received more media attention than all of the above combined.
So why bother with the over commercialised neon-lit multiplexes? I don't think I've ever seen what you describe in any of the independent cinemas I go to. The added benefit is no advertising with the films started at the scheduled time, not 20 minutes later.
I wonder if this is about piracy or if it's just another ploy to let the studios double (or triple or quadruple, etc.) dip in the DVD market. Think about it, the day the films released a bar bones DVD of the film is also released. It's probably not anamorphic and comes with the film only. Then 6 months down the line the studio releases the "special" anamorphic edition with special features, DTS sound, etc. This gives them an even better excuse to double dip and the sad part is a lot of consumers will spend money on both versions. For some reason I don't see piracy as the only motivation here.
Oh, I disagree with releasing the DVD & the movie at the same time. But most DVDs are released at least 3-6 months after theatrical releases and the vast majority a year later.
And there is no option to see it in theatres at that point for most people.
I think the real issue is that they think if there are more new releases people will be more likely to rent a newly released to DVD movie they didn't see last year from Netflix than pay $10/person and $8 for a large popcorn + $7 for two medium sodas for a total cost of nearly $45 for a couple to go see a 2 hour movie. Oh, and yes...those are the prices around where I am.
I'd be happy if when you were walking out of the theater you could buy the DVD right then. I've been to a couple of movies (such as the Incredibles) where basically half way through the movie I had decided that I was going to buy the DVD when it came out. I think there'd be a certain level of impluse buying if a movie was really good.
I think that Movie Theaters should imbrace this and use it as a way to generate additional revenue.
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
saying that seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience' and that the time window between movie and DVD releases should even be extended.
If movies provide a "fuller, more entertaining experience", why do they feel threatened by earlier DVD releases, possibly even overlapping the movie?
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Faster DVD releases? You've got to be kidding me.
I'm still waiting for the DVD release of "Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang", one of my favourite movies of last year.
Seeing the movie was in the cinema around October 2005 and the German DVD is scheduled to hit April 28th 2006. I can't really confirm this faster DVD release myth.
Exactly, the same with half the movies that came out. So who gives a shit if they are released to DVD 3-6 months later.
Sure, I understand not wanting them released to DVD the same time as they're released to theatres. But 3-6 months. They're not losing anything. As for the big blockbuster films. Those usually don't get released to DVD for nearly a year.
I worked for an AMC Theatres for about 2 years back in High School. It was a pretty bad job, but needed the money. Well when I got up into doing booth (ran projectors), I got like a 10 cent raise. We were handling the FILMS that are worth millions of dollars, and I got 10 cents. The moral is, the Movie Theatres could care less what movies they are playing, and what quality, they just want their concessions sales. They would try to bribe us with weird things to try and get our sales times/speed/amount up so the managers can get a bonus. The Movie Theatre system is a HORRIBLE sysem right now, and hopefully it will crumble on itself.
$sig$
...theaters (as a rule, there probably is an exception somewhere) haven't allowed people to bring backpacks in anymore. My former roommate used to stop by the McDonalds next to his regular cinema and get a combo or two (I know, he was a sick person) and stash them in his backpack to munch on during the show, without a complaint from the staff. After 9/11 all the cinemaplexes then posted signs banning backpacks.
The next best thing is a trenchcoat with big pockets. While you wouldn't want to be stuffing soft food items in there, they are handy for items in hard containers. I myself will sneak in a couple of Sauza Diablos and Cornuts for snackage.
Where a ticket costs $12: Fuck Regal Entertainment Group
Where a movie scheduled to start at 4:00 runs 40 minutes of adds and starts at 4:40: Fuck Regal Entertainment Group
Where a small popcorn costs $5: Fuck Regal Entertainment Group
Where a 16oz soda costs $4: Fuck Regal Entertainment Group
An article with some info on the 'video window'
From the above article:
'Part one' of the article and more interesting Hollywood artices here:
'Box Office'
'Insurance'
'Financing'
There are more at that site... most are good reads.
Please stop APK.. you're only hurting yourself.
I don't think that the fact that DVD releases are coming out sooner is THE factor in lower theater attendance, the fact that movies will be out on DVD is. Often I've thought of going to the theater to see a movie, and then decided against it since it will be out on DVD, usually within 6 months (with the exception of holiday-related DVDs).
High ticket prices are another factor. The price of DVDs has dropped to the point that I can go to the store and buy a DVD, and I will pay less than I would for a movie ticket and snacks at a local theater. That is just for one person, add in an entire family and the cost of buying a DVD is much less than the cost of going to the theater. Even starker is the difference between the cost a ticket and a movie rental.
Add to this something I've found irritating: The sheer number of non-movie ads before movies. I don't mind trailers, I expect them and look forward to them. But I find the number other types of ads irritating and this has been a factor in me deciding not to see a movie at the theater.
I agree that the sound systems at many people's homes are better than the sound you will get at many movie theaters. I saw Tim Burton's Corpse Bride at a theater and I could barely understand what was being said. I had to wait until it came out on DVD before I could actually understand the dialog in much of the movie.
Another factor is the sheer number of movies that are now available. Current movies in the theaters are competing with movies previously at the theater. A possible thought going through someone's mind when considering going to the theater to see a movie:
A final factor to mention is stated by this question: Is the movie industry releasing movies that people actually want to see? I'm a fan of anime and for me home video is virtually my only source for anime movies. Often I've found many anime movies better than the live-action movies that have been released.
Thanks for reading.
Not too recently, Edwards Theaters was purchased by Regal Entertainment.
Not long after that, I had the following experience..
I ride a bike, and stop at the mall. I know it's going to rain the next day, so I go in to purchase a new umbrella. I then see that there's a movie I'm interested in (playing at the local Regal, ne Edwards) theaters.
"Sir, you can't go in with that", the manager states.
"With what, the umbrella?. I just bought it."
"Yes sir. It might be used as a weapon."
"I'm on my bike, so I have no place to put it. Can you watch it for me?"
"I'm sorry sir, but we cannot take responsibility for personal items."
"Well, what am I going to do with this ticket? Can I have a refund since you won't let me watch the movie?"
"I'm sorry sir. We do not give refunds. The person at the ticket counter should not have sold you the ticket."
Basically, because I had an umbrella and it wasn't raining, they would not allow me to enter the theater. Granted, this is in southern California and rain is a rare sight, but sheesh.
Couple that with a $2 increase in the ticket prices, and I won't ever set foot in a Regal Entertainment theater again. If it's not shown in another theater chain, I'll wait for the DVD or cable movie. And no, I don't have a home theater system.
I also don't like my bike shoes sticking to the lobby floor, and having to sweep popcorn off the theater seat before I sit down.
However, I don't think I'm missing much. In the theaters we have the following:
Coming this summer we have three sequels, two remakes, and one mashup. Someone tell me why I want to spend $20 for poor customer service, sticky floors, and movies with little original content.
You're right, I don't.
How about somebody tell me how I can use my apostrophe without it opening the search bar in firefox?
People who think they know everything really piss off those of us that actually do.
alright, after reading the same stuff about movie theatres for the two hundredth time in a row I have to say KNOCK IT OFF!!!
everyone knows how horrible the movie experience in movie theatres is...
it's expensive, the floor is sticky, rude employees, loud people, loud babys etc
it is simply not necessary that EACH AND EVERY ONE of you posts these same points
everyone in the world knows this
everyone except hollywood which is still thinking "uh, it's the piracys fault, that noone buys our movies ALTHOUGH the special effects get better and better all the time"
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
...the movie is worth watching at all, DVD or theatre.
Assuming that the current movie theater structure goes the way of the dodo, how will we know which movies are actually worth seeing? What I mean is that currently, a lot of the marketing for upcoming movies occurs in the theaters (posters, trailers, etc). If a movie suddenly appears on the DVD rack and I've never heard of it before, chances are it sucks really bad (as oppossed to sort of bad, like most of the movies that are not straight to DVD).
This might be a good thing, allowing a more level playing field for independent and small budget films, but it also might result in even more annoying previews that you can't skip at the beginning of each DVD you purchase. Either way, it will mean that the studios will have to make some changes in how they do business.
Richer and more fulfilling? Um, no.
I've only gone to a movie theater three times in the last ten years: once in Japan in 1996, once in Viet Nam in 2001, and once in 2004. The motivations: in 1996, my friend was leaving Japan and neither of us had ever gone to a movie there, so we decided to try it. In 2001, my brother-in-law and his wife took me and my wife to a movie. In 2004, there was a movie that I just had to see and didn't want to wait for the DVD.
In none of those cases did I go because I thought a theater would be somehow a richer experience, although in the last case it wasn't bad. It seems like the kind of people who go to see The Passion of The Christ are also the kind of people who turn their cell phones off in theaters. However, there was still *way* to much advertising, and the snack bar prices were so high I bought nothing. How much of an annoyance was the advertising? Let me put it this way: I've been to theaters three times in the last ten years, and I expect to go a lot less often than that over the next ten years. Between the commercial bombardments and the high ticket prices, I have now decided that I can *always* wait for the DVD.
I doubt many theater owners or managers read Slashdot, but just on the off chance that there are any out there, you need to regard this as a big clue stick. Pretty much everyone I know holds this opinion, and pretty much everyone I know goes to movie theaters even less often than I have over the last ten years.
If you want better audiences, limit the commercials to five minutes or less at the beginning of the movie, like in the old days, install cell phone jammers everywhere, whether they are legal or not, have ushers who go around asking people to be quiet and to leave if they won't shut up (and bouncers to help, if needed), and if you want to sell me something at the snack bar, don't scalp me.
It's like this: people might pay nine bucks for an experience that really is richer and more rewarding, but pay nine bucks for an experience that pales compared to sitting in the comfort of my living room and watching a DVD? No chance.
Were that the case, they would not need to fear the shorter time to DVD.
After all, people will pick the experience they like better.
Oh. Nevermind.
"If, therefore, any be unhappy, let him remember that he is unhappy by reason of himself alone."
~Epictetus
Have you rented/purchased a DVD recently? The only DVDs you can get w/o commercials are ones from Chinatown (they even edit out the FBI warning for you too). Even worse, you can't fast forward through them!
In fact, just after television came on the scene, the film industry was forced to introduce "novelties" like Cinerama, CinemaScope ("Movies Are Better Than Ever!" went 20th Century Fox's ad slogan) and Panavision to counter the "let's just stay home and watch TV!" attitude that was beginning to arise in the early 50s.
Lately, we've seen the advent of stadium seating and of course IMAX. While technically impressive, these latter-day improvements to the motion picture theater experience are really just a continuation of the battle for entertainment consumers' hearts and minds.
Now, with the very-affordable home theater systems available today, and high-density DVD formats about to make their entry, I think it's only a matter of time before theaters begin to die. The cost of transportation, tickets and concessions, not to mention the use of precious time, aren't worth it already to a great many people.
Within ten years, I predict that "new release" will mean a film is now available via subscription service to download to your home theater system, and indoor movie theaters will seem as quaint then as drive-in theaters do now.
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
You think purses are great? Get a friend in a wheelchair, or a wheelchair for yourself!
For one showing, we were able to fit a 6 pack of Cokes, several bags of chips, boxes of various candies, etc. under the seat of a friend of mine's wheelchair (he is actually paralyzed). The only camouflage necessary was a coat thrown over the back and, if someone does see you, the odds of a theater flunky stopping a guy in a wheelchair are slim to none! It's foolproof!
What you have described has been discovered by the rest of the world a few years ago. You can rent a room with good audio/visual equipment, go in there with a few good friends, and make as much or as little noise. This is very popular in Asia, since most homes are no where big enough for a gathering of friends, let alone the A/V equipment. However, the reality is, if you are getting together with friends, who wants to just sit there quietly?
What is really scary is all the posts stating this is a great idea.
Had to be said...
At some point following the above suggestions, you should be able to enjoy the rest of the movie (or get a refund from the manager to see it some other time). It pays to start the above as soon as someone makes noise, because the sooner you can resolve this, the more you enjoy your film.
This is why I don't go to the cinema. Why should all the onus be on me to babysit other grown adults that can't behave properly. Why would I consciously put myself in a position where in order to enjoy the movie I need to first run the gauntlet of admonishing a fully grown adult with the mentality of a primary school student. Do this enough times, and you'll just get sick of it, or eventually get flipped off by an indignant, self righteous, over petulant ignoramous whose plan was probably to draw someones ire in the first place.
Eventually I got tired of the foreplay and just started walking straight up to these people saying; "Excuse me. Shut the fuck up." This had the added advantage of working on actual children too.
After a few rounds of this I was just disgusted with myself, both for actually going to such lengths for a crap movie, and of course, putting myself in the position of having to do so time and again. I turned to DVDs, and things have never been beter since.
All of the above can also be summarised as : Grow a pair. You're a goddamn adult, so start acting like one
A pair of what? Jerk goggles? I tried that. I never want to ever again. There's a fine line between being OK and being an asshole, and honestly, it's crossed the moment you turn around in your seat and bring yourself down to their level. Just leave the cinema and never, ever look back. It's a wonderful feeling.
May the Maths Be with you!
Face it folks- faster DVD releases are the least of the theater's problems. The handwriting on the wall says the indoor theater is going the way of the drive-in theater. If they're smart, they'll figure out what they're going to do with all those theaters once they close the doors.
Heard any good sigs lately?
Sharp 1024X768 DLP projector - $900
Netflix Monthly fee - $15.00
Smartfood whitecheddar popcorn - $3.00
Not having to listen to some knucklehead talk on his cell phone during 'Walk the Line'--Priceless
i like the idea of going to the movies, but 3 things tend to change my mind. 1. current movies suck 2. food is outrageously expensive 3. commercials 1. is self explanatory. 2: if they lowered the price more people might buy and the theater would make money. 3: if i wanted to watch commercials for 10 minutes i'll just wait for the movie to come to television in 3 years.
I have a 4 year old daughter and while I could arrange a babysitter going to the cinema is already expensive enough without having to pay £20-30 for a babysitter for 3-4 hours. I have done it a few times but my idea of a good night out is not queueing 10+ minutes for tickets that cost £8.25 each, then queueing another 10+ minutes for popcorn/drink (can't queue for food until you have tickets its a 'security' thing apparently). Then sit in uncomfortable seats which have not been clean properly and have chewing gum, popcorn or coke spilled on them. Not to mention the messy floors. I am not a clean freak but if I am pay £8.25 for my ticket I expect the damn place to be clean! I also have to put up with idiots who refuse to turn their phone off because they are expecting the most important call of their lives during the 2 hours of the film. Now if I am lucky that nobodys phone rings I still have to put up with them checking it every 5-10 minutes incase they missed a call/text. I mean wtf is wrong with these people. I wish I knew their number I would ring them and say "your car has been broken into" just so they get interrupted and have to leave the cinema. Assholes. Also I have no control over the movie or where I sit. If I am lucky I will find a seat in a location I am happy with that is clean enough to sit in. However I still have the problem with not being able to pause it, rewind if I didn't catch the last conversation enough to understand it, etc. And finally why can't my popcorn and coke be small. I know they do a small size but it is the size of a large coke from mcdonalds! I just want a small ½ litre of coke and 150-200g of popcorn. I dont want 3 litres of coke and a ton of popcorn. I want fairly priced food and drink in normal sizes. No one we are getting so fat in the UK with these stupid sizes. Ideally I would like to take my own food into the cinema. Or they should sell something other than popcorn, hotdogs, sweets, icecream and fizzy drinks. When I was a kid (in the 80s, yes im young) I remember having fruit and fruit juice in the cinema. I used to love an orange while I was watching Jurassic Park. Now I will openly admit I have downloaded movies. I don't do it because its free, I do it because I seriously hate going to the cinema. If they released the movies on DVD when it was released in the cinema I would purchase it the day it was released. If I don't like the movie I can return it or sell it on, no biggie and not much (if any) money lost. I have a nice 36" CRT which is great. I would love to watch a top quality version of the movie of the movie, sadly I can't until the movie is released on DVD and I can buy it, unfortunately buy the time this happens a DVDRip has been available for a month or two and I have already seen the movie. The world is different now to 20 years ago. 20 years ago people didn't have 50"+ 1080p DLP TVs with 7.1 surround. Going to the cinema was the only way to get such a great movie experience, now you can do it in your home and with everything going HD in the next 2 years more and more people will have systems that offer a better experience to a cinema. The movie companies need to realise these things and release the movie on DVD (or HDDVD/BDROM) at the same time of as the cinema. I am sure I am not alone in saying I would purchase it on DVD. iTunes has proved their is a market for new types of systems for media. The problem is the companies are too scared to see that they need to adapt. Their business model needs to change and they are shitting themselves as they thought it would last forever. Everyone who has a successful business thinks it will last forever. Newsflash. It doesn't. Wise up and change before another company comes along and replaces you.
The big theater chains should stop whining like spoiled brats.. These folks do a hell of a job --> http://www.drafthouse.com/ [Alamo Draft House]
The big chains should be more like this local chain. They are based in Austin, TX and they are growing like a wildfire. Their business model provides higher profit margins than traditoinal movie theatres. And if memory serves me right, they are planning on expanding to other states.
In Austin, when people want to see a movie, they look to see when/if it's at the Draft House. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie anywhere else. I gaurantee the Draft House folks aren't bitching about early DVD releases.
I'd still go see a lot of movies at the Draft House even if they were out on DVD at the same time. Hell, they show a lot of older movies that are already available for home viewing. I've seen movies there when I would normally wait for the DVD release.
What's so great about it?So I'm actually on the movie studios side for once. They should give the big theaters the big finger. And Regal Entertainment and the like should put up or shut up..
Its always benificial to the consumer to remove options. The DVD releases should have a two year window, in this fasion, the impatient people of the world will be forced to have the more "fuller" experience of watching it at the theater. Or downloading the bootleg. Whichever the consumer decides is more appropriate.
I blame the whole mess on consumer ignorance. A useable choice would only serve to confuse them further.
I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
Just last night this topic was brought up in my mind. I went to see a film on an IMAX screen. For two people it was $22 just for tickets. That was alright at that point, however by the end of the night it was a waste. About half way through the movie my Girlfriend and I decided we would be happier just leaving. The movie wasn't that good, seriously you can't be as comfertible at a theater as you can in your living room, on your couch, with a friend or whatever. Not only that you don't have people sitting behind you and you don't have to worry about bother others either. For me DVD is the thing. The "better experiance" you get at a theater (sound, screen) is not enough to over through personal space comfert, etc. That I have at home. Give me a big screen and A DVD player and a couch. Thank you. Maybe Ill buy a projector too, let's see? If you saw one movie a week you could buy a projector in a year.
Just as arcades in times of yore provided a superior experience, and faded out as home consoles grew stronger and stronger, movie theaters will die out as home setups become bigger, better, and cheaper.
I...I'm attacking the darkness!
"Regal Entertainment Group and National Amusements Inc. have countered, saying that seeing a movie in the theater is a 'fuller, more entertaining experience' and that the time window between movie and DVD releases should even be extended."
If it was so much 'fuller' and 'more entertaining' then it would be able to compete without artificial market manipulation such as delaying the releases. Obviosuly the market doesn't think ti 'fuller' hence theaters struggle and want reflied by forcing us to go to them or have to wait longer to see a video.
The day the theater and DVD release dates coincide is the day I stop going to the theater for the purpose of watching the movie. If the event is social, where watching the movie is only one of many purposes, I might still go. But if my intent is purely to sit and watch the new movie, DVD all the way.
No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.
If I had investor funding and could get a building to do it, I would absolutely LOVE to open an adult-only theater. We could show common films that everyone else is showing, and maybe stuff that isn't the big-studio material. Who knows.
:D
I'd want to have 1, maybe 2 screens, tops. Have the seating arrangement be more of a slightly-sloped floor, but not squished together stadium seating. Instead, recliners, couches, and tables. Serve *good* beer and alcohol, food such as steaks and seafood to those dining. Allow a short dining period before the movie, and perhaps an intermission so that people that go to the restroom without missing part of the movie, plus it allows for ordering additional drinks or food without disturbing anyone.
THEN I could feel okay with charging people $20-$25/person to get in. They'd get their money's worth. Good food. Good beer, and hopefully a good movie. Get a good sound system going in there, and I would like to think that THEN people might be willing to come back. No babies crying. No cell phones (install a jammer).
I'm just so swamped with everything else I'm doing right now that I can't go looking for funding, and to be honest I think that theaters and big-name movies as they are now will be going away soon anyway.
If anyone agrees and wants to send money my way though, let me know. With proper funding lots of good things can happen.
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).
No, they're not. The Disney approach gives consumers more choice, allowing the market to decide which people like more: DVDs or going to a movie theater. The movie theaters want to artificially restrain the availability of DVDs so that consumers only have one option.
The point is, the market should go where ever the market says it wants.
Exactly. But that runs counter to your subject line. Only one of these positions is trying to offer consumers more choice.
BOTH of these men are looking at the issue from a selfish perspective
So are most people trying to make a buck. That has no bearing on which position is better.
When Hollywood has to compete with home theaters, gaming, cable, web surfing and MySpacing, we're a long way as a society from the one that could support movie theaters. The interim period with its rat hole multiplex boxes hasn't pleased many, and now we're at a tipping point brought on by economics and disintegrating mass taste.
No need to mope about it, either. Technology has rewritten the rules, and in the future filmmaking and film distribution will answer to niche tastes, just as publishing does. For those who love independent, foreign and cutting edge cinema, the decline of the dinosaurs can only amuse us. You say you don't have a googleplex at which to go see your new Tom Cruise exploso-nationalismo-Scientologo flick or your Mel Gibson Christo-whippo-suffero flick? Oh no! Strap on your DVD hologlasses, then, and stfu!
That's not quite the case.
As it stands now, there are some movies where people will go see them in the theatre rather than wait 3mo for the DVD.
But if you condense it down to a month, or less, then you'll lose those customers. If I know I can see it at home if I just wait 2 more weeks, there is FAR less incentive to go to the theatre for alot of movies.
Hell, as it stands I never go anyhow. It's been months since I went to a theatre.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
Neither makes sense in my case. - I go the a cinema because I feel like seeing a movie on the big screen, not because a certain movie is available in the cinema exclusively at that point in time. - I buy a DVD because I enjoyed seeing a movie (in cinema, on tv or through more obscure means) and want something that reminds me of this experience. With exception of some 5-movies-in-a-box deals I've never bought a DVD of a film I had not seen already.
The problem is there are at least two more options.
1) I know the movie will be cheaper next sales season (as low as $5) so I watch one of the 137 hours of movies I have not watched yet and wait for the DVD to get cheaper.
2) I just disengage entirely from the movie. At $15.00, there are many movies which are not good enough to crowd out say.. everquest, playing ultimate, going skiing, going out dancing, watching a movie I already bought, watching something I Tivo'd, watching something I downloaded off the internet (Legal stuff like Star Wreck, Star Trek The New Voyages, Jib Jab stuff, etc.).
Studio entertainment is priced too high per hour.
Just to make it clear--- if it was the BEST film in the world and they wanted a hundred bucks to see it, very few would see it. That is $50/hour for entertainment.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Controversal flim recieves media attention, film at 11!
Brokeback was never super popular, but there is that dedicated following of fans that watch it over and over, unlike many of those Blockbusters where attendance for the first week was strong but sharply declined in the subsequent weeks. Brokeback started out slow, but didn't decline nearly as fast.
I read the internet for the articles.
The last quote ["We need to give the consumer a reason to leave the house, put down the iPod"] by Shari Redstone, president of National Amusements, shows that modern day executives may have finally educated themselves about the true principles of marketing and its strong orientation towards the consumer. On the other hand, it looks like the time to make adequate change is running out. Had executives acted upon their concerns of "focusing on brining the wow factor back to the experience" and improving the industry at an earlier time, this news article wouldn't have been released. In terms of a management perspective, they have failed. The problem these days isn't so much about knowledge anymore, but timing. Unlike the old days, today's leaders acknowledge there is a failure of seeing "down the road" and are clearly showing a spirit to think outside the box by harnessing to changes in the environment. After half a decade of magazine articles covering the topic of adapting your business to change, that lesson has finally been learned. But it all seems to serve no use if you don't execute your decisions early enough. This article is a wonderful example of that.
Our AMC theatre (the AMC 30 in Olathe, KS) has an open food policy, you don't need to smuggle anything in. Rumor has it that a someone with strict dietary restrictions (religious, diabetic, I'm not sure) threatened to sue because of the limited concession offerrings, and the theatre buckled.
We abuse the policy all the time, bringing in large meals (especially chinese takeout).
One day, we will roast a pig in there.
... so I have something to do other than sit in an uncomfortable chair in my dark, cold, crowded, noisy apartment and watch the movie on a sub-par display with sub-par sound.
Oh wait...
m0nstr42.blogspot.com
If I was a theatre owner, this would scare the bejesus out of me, too.
So the options would include: buying the title for $15 at big box
store, renting the title for $2.50 at other big box store, or
paying upwards of $40 for a family of four to enjoy the debatable
merits of the current "Theatre Experience".
The cost/reward equation here does not require an advanced
degree in mathematics.
People will choose, and that choice sounds like funeral parlor
music to the cinema multiplexes.
Cinema is magic!! Nothing compares the mystical experience to that of TV. But Hollywood just keeps making films for 16 year-olds and the theaters have nothing to market exept how new the film is. What the industry should do is release entertaintment films for the purpose of being watched at home, while leaving cinematography for the cinephiles. Theater bussiness will shrink, but it will become healthier with dedicated audiences. Look at the "V for Vendetta" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0434409/ Can it be watched at home? By all means no! The dark atmosphere of the film cannot be reroduced at home. It is like comparing masturbation to sex!!
It's a sincere question, and the second statement is true. If truth and sincerity are flaimbait, then that is too bad.
Quicker release of DVDs is not about piracy, it's about distributors thinking that DVDs are a bigger and more lucrative market and somewhat about producers that finally see "profits" if the DVDs sell.
Simultaneous release also offers lower or more efficient marketing costs as the marketing for weeks one and two of a film's release would generate ticket receipts and DVD sales (rather then another crank up of the publicity machine and a second media buy x months later for the DVD release). This is also meant to get more money in some till before word of mouth kills the demand on the mediocre and bad movies that come out. And I ask you to think about how many comedies seem to pull some scenes in order to be able to get bookings as PG-13 in the theaters and then release unrated DVDs because the "forbidden fruit" makes the title sell better? Do we really know how much real overlap of the DVD sales market and ticket buyers there really is?
My suggestion? The distributors, in return for simultaneous release, collect a smaller percentage of receipts in the first 2 and 13 weeks of release. (Maybe the theatres keep 80% of ticket receipts in the first two weeks.) Incidentally, I think it's the fact that theatres cannot survive on their take of ticket receipts during the effective shelf-life of a typical first release that has led to the high cost of going to a movie.
Another suggestion: theatres are given a two week window of exclusivity for DVD sales, so theater goers who want a keepsake (or maybe an unrated version or director cut) can get it only in the lobby on the way out. Maybe on the same web page where one can buy a movie ticket, one can choose the cd and the theatre owners who are currently booking the film get a cut of the DVD sale. Think what that would mean to small independent films that get bookings in large markets at art houses and get discussed in the national media, but may never make it to a smaller market.
I would guess that DVD success is correlated to box-office success. Killing the theatres is not in anyone's best interest.
I like the concept of small, personal theaters. A bit like those hot tub places - in fact why not equip them with a hot tub? (Yes, I live in California). A friend of mine suggested that the theaters be portable. Why not be able to hire a big tractor trailor rig that is outfitted inside to be a very, very posh movie theater? The rig pulls up in front of your apartment building. You and your friends step into a fantastic seating area, all plush and sound proofed. The movie you want to see is screened. You step out and the rig drives off to its next appointment.
If this were fark, the likely tag here would have been: obvious.
My wife and I (oops, I'm out of the /. demo already) haven't
been to a non-Alamo Drafthouse theater in a very long time.
They bring you snacks, dinner and drinks during the movie,
including a fine selection of beer and wine.
Their pre-show entertainment is actually entertaining (no Coke
commercials), in ways that true movie fans love. Obscure
Japanese TV commercials? Check. Bollywood production numbers?
Check. Cheesy disco dance instructional videos mashed up with
the theme from Knight Rider? Check.
And, if you talk during the movie, they'll "take your ass out".
Seriously: if you raise an order card for the waitstaff, a manager
takes care of a noisy patron near you. But I've only had to do
that once in many many visits, since all shows are 18 and up.
W00t!
*That's* what the mainstream movie theaters need to understand -
the whole movie going experience has to be upgraded, not just
the movies or their projection technology (but that's another rant).
I don't work for the Alamo, but sometimes I wish I did:
http://www.drafthouse.com/
Quoth the Moose: Any job worth doing is worth complaining about.
The other side of the coin, though, is if DVDs are released consequent with the theatre, then downloads will go through the roof. DVD rips available day one of release? This is such a stupid idea, that the only reason I can see for it is that the movie industry wants the downloads to skyrocket so they can point at huge downloads and sinking theatre attendance and promote more even draconian DRM laws than what the DMCA already is.
Surely the fact that DVDs are stopping people going to the cinema is living proof that this is totally incorrect?! If the cinema was truly a better experience, then they would have nothing to worry about.
Disney is saying movies should be available to the public sooner? The same Disney that creates artificial scarcity on its DVD titles by only releasing them for a limited time? The Disney that regularly creates situations like being able to rent Lion King 2 but not Lion King? Do they want people to be able to buy the DVDs they want, or not? Something doesn't add up here.
They could sell the movie you JUST WATCHED at the theater if the movie was released simultaneously!
You could decide you loved the movie right there and buy it on impulse, doubling (or more) the revenue the theater makes off of people that like a moive just once and then never see it again!
Bring on the scalping!!!!!
I wish theater's could sell DVD's of the movies being shown, but restrict the sales only to people that have just paid to see the movie. I don't care about paying twice to see the same thing, I just want DVD's to be released a lot sooner, particularly for movies that don't stay in theaters long, or never get shown at a theater near me.
-==- Buy a Mac and leave me alone!
Everyone patronize your local dollar theatres! Even if they aren't actually a dollar anymore (the one here is $2 for an evening show) it's still cheaper than that crazy surround sound system at home that people seem to claim is the norm any more. I don't know where you live, but *I've* never been over to someone's house that has one.
Back here in my country , there are rumors circulating about AIDS victims piercing needles to unsuspecting movie goers. Thats one of the reasons people stop flocking the movie theater.
God gave Linux, the devil gave BSD, and a hacker gave Bill the MS-DOS - anonymous
- An excuse to get out of the house
- A way to watch a movie on a huge screen
If I were to purchase a giant screen TV, ( > 50 inches,) it would be difficult for a theater to compete with my system at home. I really want to go to a theater where I am so close to the screen that I have to move my head, AND be comfortable doing it at the same time.No, I will not work for your startup
The studio would be advised to release the DVD about a month after the theatre release. You've gotten most of the value of out ticket sales at this point but you can still capitalize on add dollars spent for the theatrical release during the DVD cycle. They don't want to kill theater sales but they do want to piggy back on them. My guess is that a month is the right amount of time but market research can tell for sure.
The theatres on the other hand are just trying to survive and they are failing. Until they change their business model to offer more than a simple viewing on a big screen with loud audio (something we can get at home now) they will be a dinosaur watching the comet approach.
Finally, the consumer is best served by choice so what's best for them is a simultaneous DVD and theatre release. The consumer is happiest when he/she can act according to his/her whims and that means the most choice the soonest.
All that said the studios own the product, everyone else is a middleman or end user so it's likely that we will drift toward the first scenario I've detailed assuming that it is indeed the best scenario for the studio.
about faster release schedules. They make their money mostly on concessions, not tickets. If they can shoo more people through the doors, they make more money, eh?
Other than this text, there is no discernible information contained in this sig.
Once upon a time, a global sneaker company sent two market analysts to a foreign country. Each analyst independently sent a report about local market conditions for a company expansion.
The first one said: Cancel the expansion plans. Nobody here uses shoes of any kind.
And the other analyst: Great oportunities here. Nobody has shoes!
I rarely go to the movies anymore because there is rarely anything on that interests me, but I do know that if the DVD version of a movie came out at the same time as at the theatre I would buy the DVD and watch it in my self-built home theatre. With a 120" screen, HD projector and surround sound it is as good as the real thing, but I can watch the movie whenever I like, pause it if I need to, or watch it again later without the cost of going to the movies plus buying the movie on DVD later.
Home theatres are getting increasingly cheaper to build, with projectors and flat-screen TVs (although a good projector with a big image throw), surround sound systems and DVDs getting cheaper all the time. I would rather invite some friends around to my house to watch it.
This is a problem at the moment with the lack of time between theatrical release and dvd release. DVD Producers just dont have time to make good dvds when the final content is due as the film is released. There was a recent interview on CHUD (here http://www.chud.com/index.php?type=interviews&id=6 261/) with Richard Taylor, the dvd producer for King Kong talking about the new 2 disc special edition. He talks about how difficult it is for the dvds to have any decent special features like commentary and production diaries when the director and crew are all so busy right up untill release that the dvd producer can't get the time of day before the final content for the dvd is due. What this leads to is more barebones dvd releases followed 6 or 12 months later by a special edition, and then sometimes again later.
Most people probably dont see this as a problem, but as someone who takes an interest in features and likes nothing more than watching a film I have enjoyed and listening to the director commentary to get a bit more out of the experiance, I'm worried that if the release date of dvd is pushed forward then there will be no features initially and that only some movies will get the special edition releases down the track.
"The stupider people think you are, the more surprised they will be when you kill them..."
Your idea is solid, but your downplaying of digital projectors is a mistake. IMAX is a huge supporter of digital projection and has been for a long time. Digital is the future, even for IMAX.
There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
they servived vhs they will servive all the new formats. but everyone is right thers some bad places out there where you get sticky floors and loud people or simpley so loud it will send you running out of the place. but the star i go to when i take my gf out has always been a good place and its huge one of the biggest in the state so its never overcrouded so even if you hapon to be buy one of those annoying people you can just move. even large releses like the second matrix movie the place still wasent packed full they just played it in 2 or 3 show rooms at the same time rather then pack everyone together. then again like i said its one of the largest ones in the state and also one of the best ran. of course not all places are megaplexes and tend to be ran poorly. but if they wanna blame low sales then there blaming the wrong thing. its crappy movies thats made my not go see anything. but in the same sence im also not downloading anything just not crap worth watching. even if dvds came out the same time movies did well ran therters still make good places to take a date mostly couse they dont allow cell phones lol and i can make my gf turn that fucker off lol.
If movie theaters are a "fuller, more entertaining experience", then wouldn't customers automatically prefer to watch in cinemas anyway, even if the DVD was available? The only reason to artificially limit the distribution channels is if you know you need to force your customers to choose particular distribution channels against their preferences.
(1) Insane ticket prices (and the insane actor's pay rates that cause them)
(2) Insane concessions prices
(3) Idiotic slide shows before the movie
(4) Pesty and annoying commercials embedded in the movie's start up
(5) Product pushing embedded in the movie
(6) Listening to some FOOL take a cellphone call
(7) Listening to some FOOL's baby scream and whine and bawl throughout the movie
(8) Listening to some IDIOT chatter throughout the movie
(9) Loud, rustle-producing concessions packaging and the TWITS who rattle it all through the movie
(10) Scores with lowest-common-denominator music such as Country and Rap (country+rap=Crap)
(11) Listening to some inconsiderate LAMER with a cold or flu behind me and KNOWING I'm going to catch it
It's not the delay between DVD release and theatrical release that keeps me from going to the movies. It's those 11 things. I don't care if they DOUBLE or TRIPLE the time between theatrical and DVD release, I'll still watch it at home, thank you, with an awesome sound system and my wide screen and NONE of the above annoyances. Not to mention the ability to instantly drop the volume 20 dB when some ghettowhack/brokebackcowboy comes on and tries to be "meaningful." And the ability to see it again when my kids come over. And the ability to pause when someone needs a break.
Come to think of it, I don't know why theaters even still exist.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Or perhaps they can bundle a ticket with a coupon for a subsequent DVD purchase at insane discount.
Don't know how it works for other people, but for me $25 buys either a pair of movie tickets or a DVD. Never both. So unless they figure out a way to combine the experience of movie theather with a convenience of DVD, their attendence will just keep dropping.
3.243F6A8885A308D313
Ok, this is only a forecast according to my beliefs but I will write it anyways. Cinemas are going to become what Theatres are now, in 10 or 15 years there will only be few cinemas, and only very few people are going to visit them.
The cinemas that will stay are the IMAX ones, or with similar technologies. Movies as we know them are going to be released directly to the people (via disc or internet). Going to the cinema will be as today is going to the theatre (I think I have been only 4 times in my life...).
Meanwhile, people will get the new movies from machines similar to the candy or coke vending machines (the disks will be disposable and recyclable).
As a lot of people wrote before, nowadays there is *nothing* really *better* in the cinemas than in a nice home theatre, and given that someone spends £15 for a cinema night one day, that is £60 monthly or £720 every year; for that price it is possible to buy a 32'' plasma TV today.
So, the cinemas must then provide something that can not be obtained with home cinema (and I mean something good, no sticky floor or talking people), but they have to aim for *other* market (that means, to avoid competing with home cinema).
Why do peoplpe still go to theatre plays? because it is something different!. Why do people go to IMAX screens? because it is different, and if anyone of you have experience a planetarium well, that is another experience.
Not so long I remember reading a story on slashdot about new technology of the cinemas that George Lucas and the director of LOTR where entusiastic about, well, I hope it is developed for the sake of the cinemas.
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Lets face the fact. it is not the person next seat who wont shut up, its not the ads, and its not the loud music or stupid movies that keep us all theatre lovers out of theatres and on the bittorent sites.Its the freaking price tag. in 1998 ,ticket cost was $5 and that was fine. And then i saw something saying concession stand. and i ran there for pop corn and coke. that was for 15 bucks. That was not cool.
today if i take my girlfriend for a movie in toronto, it costs me practically one pay day. I can pay same price to do something else. may be a nice dinner or have party with my friends and which is definately more fulfiling.
So screw all theatres. I did not go to movie at all last year. Saved money for a better amplifier and now I can watch all the downloaded or bought stuff on my hometheatre and I can watch movie with my girlfriend without some one telling me "For god sake there are kids over here". Naah just kidding. but seriously as some one already said with the pop corn done the way i want and food i want, its just not worth going to theatre anymore. Please note I said worth. hey if they reduce the price i would still go.
I don't mind spending $6-7 bucks on "cheap night" for a good movie. but the last good movie I saw in theatres was spiderman 2... I've had two gift certificates from relatives for $20 in my pocket but no movies to watch.. Last year I wasted $10 certificate on a movie I don't even wanna admit I went nto see..
First suggestion for movie theatres is to get studios to put out quality not snazy special effect with no story line, hollywood actors everybody seems to love just to put out a picture, or these stupid commedies by guys like the wayan brothers that should be direct to video.
Realize you have to attract audience (just one example) Cut prices for snacks.. instead of pinalizing for bringing in snacks, give us a reason not to.
I don't download theatre movies because I know a) it will be out on dvd soon and is probably not worth my $10 b) a week or two before dvd release a PERFECT copy will be available for download from internet.
Movie theatres are dead. they just don't know it yet!
they might as well try to make it work like the nick in asia who said the theatres are now packed because they decided to make the experience as enjoyable as being home and if they succeed all the better for them and us, if they loose at least I can't fault them for trying.
I think the last time I saw a movie in a theater was in 2002. For the price of admission for two people alone, I can usually buy the DVD. My stereo has better sound than the theaters I've been in, and my couch is way more comfortable than any theater seat. On top of that, I have the freedom to watch the movie on my schedule, pause it if I need to, and my popcorn is much better than theater popcorn. Not to mention the cost of snacks at home is about a tenth of what it costs at a theater. Lastly, I don't have to woory about what's on the floor, and there's no risk of there being rude folks in the audience to detract from the "experience".
I basically have no use for theaters anymore- they're just way too expensive and offer an inferior experience.
The dry fish swims alone.
I don't goto the theatres because if you ever want to see something half decent and it's new, you have to get there really early and when you do finally wait and wait, you get 15 freakinc commercials. It's like, I thought I paid to see this.. I'd probably never goto the theatre to see another movie if DVD's were released at the same time as the theatres.
I agree with the theaters that for some movies it is much better to be seen on the big screen (e.g., Star Wars/Trek, LOTR, King Kong, etc.). Movies where the special effects are a supporting character in itself, really need to be seen larger than life. Movies where the driving force is the plot-line/story, can be seen, IMHO, smaller and more intimately at home on the comfort of your own couch.
Seems like a lot of folk are in agreement here. I stay away due to the price and all the negative aspects of trying to watch a movie in a public venue. I'd like to see DVD's out asap and I would also like to see the lousy region code protection go away as well. It is a pain to have to dedicate 1 system for US region 1 dvd's and another for region 2 (Europe).
forgivness is easier to get than permission
When I was 18 we snuck a 750mL bottle (in my back pocket no less, no coat or anything) of Captain Morgan into a nice, new AMC theater (with lots of goons...I mean staff around) and drank the entire thing in about an hour. Had to beg people in the parking lot for a ride becuase we couldn't stand up.
Ah, good times.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
The theaters are screaming poor me poor me, but they fail to understand that they control the studios. The movie theater association should group together and say we will not show your movies unless we pay this amount"." When the studios show a 25% drop in theaters willing to show their movies they will learn real fast that they have to lower the cost of renting movies to the theaters.
The movie industry knows this and has some changes in store for you. For once, new technologies can:
a. make a media that plays only once..unless 're-authorized' for a fee!
b. make a player that can look back at you and recognize faces and bill them for the experience or prosecute them, and you, for sharing ('piracy')
c. make a player that can prohibit skipping over commercials, and report you to the local gestapo if you try. Remember these will be connected over the phone or some other line to make them really two way devices that can watch your every action with an unblinking eye.
d. make players that watch you for eye movements and subtle body movements to profile you for advertising of a type that might 'interest' you. Salivate in food commercials or food segments of programming and suddenly a food commercial of a type the master program determines you might like will appear even out of sequence. Same for other activities of yours that the observation program can recognize. If you are percieved to have a health problem, an automatic notice can be sent to your health insurance provider to check on your cancellability, etc.
e. the observation program can determine if you have a messy or dirty house so that you car and house insurance can be cancelled, and you employer notified. if you are seen to have a rifle rack over your mantle and this is observable by the 'TiVO box' camera, then you can be referred to the government as a 'terrorist' by your television.
f. observation program knows what alcoholic beverages look like, and can turn you in to your insurance company to relieve you of your car insurance and homeowners or rental insurance..not to mention your health insurance. In addition, if your kids are present, another notice can go the friendly local gestapo to bust you for 'contributin to deliquency of minors, etc.'. God help you if your two years old runs in front of the TV naked..
g.....nice world, hah?
Perhaps, at 29, I'm too young to have ever really experienced the "magic" of cinema. Or perhaps my local theaters just don't have it. Theaters have always just seemed like crowded rooms with giant televisions.
The darkness is about as magical as watching TV in my basement.
I think you're right about one thing-- perhaps when theaters ditch the low-end and return to being someplace worth going with a dedicated crowd, the magic will return.
I can't imagine that there's anybody who wouldn't prefer to see a movie in a nice theater, with great picture and sound, over watching it at home, even on a high-end home theater setup. The problem is, that choice no longer exists. A lot of the time, you can't count on the presentation at a local theater to be any better than you get from a DVD at home, and that's if you have modest video equipment. And you definitely can't count on having a pleasant drive to the theater, or decent popcorn and a quiet audience once you get to your seat. You can be sure, though, that going out to the movies will take longer and cost more, that you'll be expected to sit through advertising and marketing material unrelated to the movie, and that the theater will not adjust their showtimes to suit your convenience. So I guess my point is, yeah, quicker DVDs releases probably do hurt movie theaters, but not as much as the theaters hurt themselves, and it's hard to imagine why anybody who isn't in the theater business should care.
Of course there are inconveniences at the theater, but it's not much different than going to a restaurant. At a restaurant, you pay a higher price for the same food you can (with some effort) prep yourself and eat at home for much less. We don't complain that the $20 T-bone at a steakhouse is more expensive than the $7 T-bone at the grocery store. We don't stop eating out because of the rude people at the table next to you. We don't come to message boards and brag about how we jacked the pizza guy instead of paying for the pizza.
I have a 53" inch TV at home, but it cannot come close to comparing to seeing the same movie on a 50-foot screen. I love going to the movies. Since I was a kid, I've always looked forward to going to the theater. Seeing the posters for coming attractions, smelling the buttery popcorn in the lobby, watching trailers and anticipating the movies you'll be looking forward to, seeing the action on a huge screen.
Watching a movie at home cannot compare to the moviegoing experience and never will.
I love watching movies in the theater. I am thrilled to pay $18-25 bucks (more if I pay online) to take my sweetie to the movies and pay $20 bucks for some popcorn and sickening, syrupy coke. My sweetie really likes getting the bottled water for $4 dollars, she says "its exciting to pay so much" and it makes her feel "decadant". For me, the experience is really hightened by the half-hour to an hour of irritating commercials and silly nonsense that they play before the show. I find that they have a great calming effect and do a wonderful job of putting me in the mood to watch the show.
I especially like the commercials for the television programs. Who knew that I could get both television commercials _and_ movie commercials _at the same time_ and for such a reasonable price too!?!?!? Its really good to be reminded about all the truly wonderful television shows that are out there. Why without them, I would probably miss all those additional opportunities to be further educated about all the exciting products and services that the marketers have so thoughtfully selected for me!
And I don't know who thought it up, but kudos to whomever it was that decided to place the flatulant fat guy in front of me and the ceaslessly talking couple behind me. They were an excellent choice to distract me from the row of wiggly, whining kids with the constant coughs two rows up. How exciting it is to sit there and wonder while we wait for the mysterious illness we'll surely develop during the week. That's one of the best parts for sure. Who knows what it'll be this time? Last time it was malaria. My sweetie is hoping for denge fever.
And then there's the best part. I know its incredible, but on top of all the value that I've already received just to this point, it gets even better! They turn down the lights and switch from the really sharp projector showing the commercials to the other projector for the movie that has that soft, slightly fuzzy look we both love so well. And the sound is conveniently lower too. Before it was just blaring when all the commercials were playing. I'm glad they are so thoughtful and turn it down for the movie. I wouldn't want to miss any of the comments from the audience or be distracted by the movie when the baby cries. Maybe this time we'll get really lucky and someone will be talking on their cell phone! I can only dream.
And the movies they show these days are great too. Man I love those movies. They're not like the old movies that were so... unpredictable. Ha ha. I used to get so freaked-out by those. You never knew what was going to happen next-- sometimes those old movies had me sitting on the edge of my seat. Well, not anymore. Whew. Now days things are different. You might think you couldn't possibly guess the plot or what's going to happen next... but guess what? With today's movies, you really can!!! Oh man, what a thrill. I love knowing what's going to happen next. Its so reassuring.
And you know what else is reassuring? All those remakes of old movies. Yup, I gotta admit, that's one of the things that really makes it for me. Sure the originals were okay, but the remakes are just so-- oh, how can I decribe it...?? Its like getting one of those cool new Rolex watches they sell on ebay for $15.95, or the genuine Gucci bags they make now in China-- I really like going to the theatre and not having to worry about the plot. I've seen it before and it was good then, so surely it will be good again now.
And you have to admit that its really nice of those movie people to tone down the movies a bit so I don't have think so hard. I'm such a guy... I like my action big, my adventure swashbuckling, my ladies buxom, and my plots-- ummm-- well, you don't really need the plot-- they just get in the way anyway. With all that other stuff, what do I need a plot for? And its really cool the way they can pump out movie after movie with the same effects and the same lines and the same actors. Man, oh man... they were excellent the first time I saw them and regardless of what my swe
If the distributors simulatneously released the video, then the cinemas could sell copies of the films at the concession stand. Loved the film then buy it on DVD, right there.
I went to a shopping mall in the Philippines a few years ago and saw something that still amazes me. The movie theater had *two* competing snack bars located *outside* the front door of the theater. You could get popcorn at either place before going in. Not only that, they would let you bring any outside food you wanted into the place. The only thing the theater made money on was the tickets. They showed Filipino movies and American movies, and they were only about two weeks behind the U.S. in getting new releases. So it seems to me the "they only make money on the snack bar" rule is not universal.
Three reasons. People, People and People.
I saw March of the Penguins and had to hear more narration from the guy behind me than from Morgan Freeman.
And why is it that parents can't get a babysitter anymore? V for Vendetta probably isn't the movie that is okay to haul the 4 year old to see.
I saw screw the theaters and release every movie directly to DVD. Make the theaters work for our money for a change.
But morality is a subjective thing. Your morality doesn't apply to me insofar as my actions are concerned. It only applies regarding your judgement of my actions.
(with the caveat that 'you' and 'me' in the above paragraph are meant in the general sense.)
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
So, whatever happened to dochawk.org?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?