Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Theaters Unhappy About Faster DVD Releases

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the just-get-to-the-downloading-already dept.

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?"

15 of 664 comments (clear)

  1. But... by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Funny

    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
  2. Wait a second... by DrEldarion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Wait a second... by networkBoy · · Score: 5, Informative

      I think that there is another problem.
      While seing the movie in the theater is a more fufilling experience, the costs involved are simply too much.
      The movies where I'm at are $9.00 per ticket (IIRC the theater gets none of that), the concessions are also sky high.
      I simply can not afford to go to the movies, so I don't. For the cost of my wife and I going to two movies a month I can rent 6 movies at a time from Netflix and have a couple bucks left over to buy a bag of popping corn that I can flavor however I want.
      That's why movie attendance is declining.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    2. Re:Wait a second... by coolgeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't exactly agree. Yes, if I actually want to see a particular movie I will go to the theater because I get to see it sooner, and before anyone can spoil it for me around the water cooler. So that much I agree with. But the real issue is the cases where I say to myself "I'll wait for the disc". In those cases it is pretty much because the movie looks like it might be another predictable watered-down non-story and I really don't want to risk paying the theater premium to check it out. It wouldn't matter to me if it were 4 days, 4 weeks or 40 weeks before it came to disc, I still wouldn't shell out for the theater in these cases.

      So I have to go with the OP and say they are looking at it from the wrong angle. The time between theater and DVD release doesn't really harm the theaters. The true culprit is all the crap content the studios are producing these days. That and the fact that there simply are too many theaters, at least in L.A. that is the case. The only time I remember going to a full theater in the past 10 years was for Munich on a Saturday Night.

      --

      cat /dev/null >sig
    3. Re:Wait a second... by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yep, I think you pretty much summed it up. Theaters are claiming they offer a better experience, but at the same time they're desperately begging for a temporary 'monopoly' on showing films, before they go out on DVD.

      Personally, I want to like going to a movie theater. I really do. I like the experience; there's something sort of uselessly traditional about it. And not owning a home theater with a projector and a few kilowatts of sound amplification, it is a big step above watching a movie at home.

      However, as much as I like going, it's as if the theaters have been doing everything they can to cheapen that experience, to the point where I barely go anymore. And I ought to be their target market -- I have the disposable income and I don't have a home theater, or even a regular TV (their only competition is my 19" computer monitor). But the increased ticket costs, coupled with the outrageous price of refreshments, advertising -- I'm not talking about previews here, but actual bald-faced ads run before them, and the chance of getting stuck in a theater with some asshole who won't shut up; these things all make the value proposition a lot worse than it might otherwise be.

      I think the thing that might save theaters is if they made themselves even smaller. Although I like watching actual film movies, it doesn't seem like this is going to keep them in business. I'm thinking of basically 'extreme home theaters' that could be rented out for an evening for under $100. Get 8 friends together, and grab a theater for a night. Big comfy seats, and you pick a movie out of a catalog and they play it for you. Particularly if they allowed you to bring your own food/drink, I think there could really be a market for such a thing. You pick the start time, and you don't have to worry about being stuck with some obnoxious people (other than the ones you choose to bring, of course). All the equipment would be pretty much standard, off-the-shelf stuff. Maybe they could even get HD versions of movies and show them, since it's going to be a while before most people have that kind of gear at home. And rather than picking from just a few movies, as a viewer you'd have a large catalog. Maybe equivalent to the 'new releases' section of Blockbuster, if you wanted to get the theater the same night, but if you wanted to book in advance, I see no reason why a Netflix-like variety of stuff ought not be available. After all, for the theater it's just a different disc they have to plug in. A well-engineered system might even deliver them by wire, from some giant datacenter somewhere.

      The theaters are clinging to a business model that worked well before people had other choices. Now people have those choices, and they're going elsewhere. If movie theaters want to be around for another generation, they need to put some hard and creative thought into what it is that they offer, and what consumers want and are willing to pay for. Getting a six-week monopoly on a new film is a shoddy way to stay in business, and I think in the long run, consumers will find other ways to spend their time while they're waiting for the DVD to come out.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    4. Re:Wait a second... by LouisZepher · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not licking the floor would probably help him too.

  3. Really? by davidstrauss · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  4. This is kind of cool! by mellon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  5. So counter it! by MBCook · · Score: 5, Insightful
    We are getting close and closer to simultaneous releases (one movie has already done it).

    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.
  6. Re:Ahh yes... good times... by tgd · · Score: 5, Funny

    In a movie theater, no matter where I sit, the loudest person in the theater always ends up sitting next to me.

    Don't let your girlfriend catch you saying that.

  7. Let the consumer decide... by KC7GR · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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

  8. Re:Ahh yes... good times... by brjndr · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is /.

    You mean his mother.

  9. View from the east by raju1kabir · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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
  10. A "fuller, more entertaining experience", huh? by The_REAL_DZA · · Score: 5, Funny
    To the theatre chains:
    Let's see if I understand what you're asking/expecting. I have a
    • 36" tube television (yes, it's one heavy mofo, and I hereby declare a pox on the engineer who designed it with out handles somewhere on it, but that's a slightly different rant...)
    • an inexpensive but completely satisfactory Dolby 5.1 surround system (which, to date, "Monsters Inc." seemed to take the best advantage of...go figure)
    • leather covered La-Z-Boy (rocking) recliner
    • a private bathroom of which I can avail myself at any time without missing any of a movie/show thanks to the handy-dandy pause button on my
    • personal remote control (which, btw, also allows me to relive however many exciting/hilarious/etc. seconds of whatever I may be watching as many times as I want...)
    And, lastly (just to round-out my "experience") I have
    • two three-year-olds, so I can count on the floor being sticky and the air to be full of popcorn

    And you want me to pay >1/2 the purchase price of a DVD to fight my way across town to stand in line to sit beside a teenage cell-phone-addict , behind the lady with the towering beehive and in front of the place-kicker for the Tennessee Titans to see a movie once ? And you want me to wait even longer after the studios figure they've milked all they can from the theatre-going crowd to get to view it in the abovementioned (and, in case you missed this, preferrable ) venue?


    I bet they wonder why I rank them with telemarketers and spammers...
    --


    This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
  11. Re:Yawn by TheSolomon · · Score: 5, Funny

    When I was a teenager, me and my girlfriend snuck in a whole rotisserie chicken. It was delicious, if not messy and extremely wonderfully smelling. ;-) We left the container and a pile of bones behind; I'm sure the cleaning crew was non-thrilled.