Slashdot Mirror
18 To 24-Year-Olds Are Hitting the Big Screen at Lower Rates (fastcompany.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: For data and movie geeks, the MPAA's latest "Theatrical Market Statistics" report is a wealth of information about the health of the movie business. The big picture: 246 million people went to the movies in the United States and Canada last year, a 2% increase from the year before. But dig into the trends and things start to get a little more interesting. For instance, looking at per capita attendance broken down by age group shows 18- to 24-year-olds are hitting the big screen at lower rates than they were in 2012, although they saw an uptick last year.
They're broke that's why.
Ticket prices keep going up with inflation, wages not so much.
Perhaps if there was something worth watching...
Something other than re-hashed comic books perhaps...
1. money. boomers spent a generation ruining any chance of a millenial or post millenials ability to buy anything more than a bus pass.
2. Theaters. Exorbitant fees for tickets and concessions price most of them well outside the range of the 18-24 demographic. the ones that can afford it, generally avoid it and wait for the online/blu-ray. The theatre experience is sticky floors and 30 minutes of capitive audience advertisements for everything from car insurance to taco bell, and its an insult to anyone whos paid actual money to sit down and see a film.
3. films.: six sequels to the fast and the furious? Ten remakes of Cinderella? thats not film, its the conceptual blueprint for purgatory. The average film experience is either waiting for the next release of 17 new and well planned Marvel movies, or enduring a wasteland of film targeted at the fifth grade comprehension level so as to maximize audience range. Pixar used to churn out a good film, but frankly theyre just in it for the toy licensing (Cars 3 anyone?)
Good people go to bed earlier.
The last few times that I went to the cinema, I was very disappointment with the experience.
The last thing I saw was in 3D, so I had to pay an additional 5 bucks. So, 40 bucks for two people. Then 5 bucks for the "small" 200 ounce soda and another 5 bucks for a "small" dumpster full of popcorn.
Then you sit down in the grungy seat and watch the movie. Then notice that the audio is not really calibrated all that well.
Then the movie is over and you try to pry your shoes from the soda glue all over the floor. Maybe you even use the bathroom with the pervasive urine smell and racist comments carved into the doors.
Yeah... Hard to imagine that attendance is down.
I don't know a single gen Z that is conservative, not a single one, and I live in the middle of the red-state midwest.
Most people are posting the same 2 view points (with the 3rd probably being simply the experience sucks because reasons):
1.) Home theater systems are so much better now, mine is amazing and/or there are amazing ones available.
2.) People, especially in the 18-24 yo age group, are fucking poor and can't afford to go to the movies (most of these are ignoring the obvious, that they can't afford the home theater system either).
I'm not in either of those 2 categories (more like the 3rd, without the money or inclination for a huge home theater, apartment dweller and not rich with a deep loathing of crowds), but this seems like a poll worthy topic (no I didn't check to see if it already exists) with "Cowboy Neal is my projectionist" as a 4th?
To paraphrase a German comedian, I need money, not an occupation. I can keep myself busy just fine, don't worry about that.
Working is the necessary evil to get money. Just as much as the employee is the necessary evil to profit (as is the customer, by the way). Stop dancing around the subject and celebrate the "always working" idiot.
Working is the necessary evil, not the goal.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Your vehicle numbers are way off.
A 2017 Ram 1500 base truck is about $26,500 MSRP, which probably means it can be had for $25,000 at the dealer if buying off the lot. If you want the base as a 4x4 it's about $31,500 MSRP, which can probably still be had for under $30,000 out the door.
A Ram Promaster 1500 (based on the large Fiat van chassis) is around $30,000 MSRP. The 2500 model is $33,000 MSRP and the 3500 is about $36,000 MSRP, all as cargo configurations. The passenger variants, only availabe as a 2500 chassis and a 3500 chassis are $34,500 MSRP and $38,500 MSRP respectively, and given that there are a lot more parts on the passenger versions this $1500-$2500 markup isn't unreasonable.
Now, if you want the Laramie package, or you want all leather, or you want the megacab with the 8' bed and the Longhorn custom interior with the Katzin seats, yeah, you're going to be spending quite a bit more. Thing is, you don't really need that stuff. You might need a stronger engine in the base model truck, but those modern V6 engines that all three domestic automakers use are quite good, better than their entry-level V8s were only a generation ago. You probably don't need that upgraded configuration.
If your numbers are coming in $60,000 for a cargo van and $45,000 for a pickup truck, it's because of standards that you set.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Not the original poster, but social justice warrior is someone who takes a look at something and defines it in terms of social injustice, almost always without looking at it very deeply, and feels the compulsion to fix that injustice no matter the cost.
For example:
A company has 5 entry level workers, we'll call them A,B,C,D,and E. A (male with 10 years experience, and the best worker) gets paid $15/hr, B and C (one male one female each with 8 years experience) $14 and hour, D (3 years experience) is paid $13 and hour, and E (15 years experience, but mentally retarded) is paid $10 an hour. The SJW boss comes in and "fixes" the social injustice (C was female and should be paid equal pay, D was discriminated by age or whatever the latest fad is, E should be paid just as much because they have the same job regardless of productivity) by taking the average $13.20. Feeling awesome at fixing this social injustice he goes and celebrates. 2 weeks later, employee A leaves the company because a competitor gave him a raise to $20 an hour as he was been grossly underpaid given his skills. A couple weeks after being overworked, employees B & C leave the company because they can't keep up with the workload now that A has left, and they can't perform at the level he was. The company is now left with one employee who is just out of college has no industry experience and continues to make mistakes that A, B, or C never would have. The company while trying to find replacements for A, B and C can't find any except new college graduates. Product quality suffers, quantity production is in the toilet, and a month later the company goes bankrupt. Employee D loaded with college debt, takes the first job he finds at $12 an hour, and Employee E is out of work, back on social programs, and lives the life as a hermit in their 10'x10' apartment.
SJW moves on to the next company, touting how awesome of a job he did at his previous employer right before they went out of business.
Right, wrong, or indifferent, that is what a SJW is -- looking for social injustices, finding them where they don't really exist, and fighting to get the fixed, no matter the cost or if they should be.
From what I know about Rightists and Alt-Rightists this is their view on Social Justice and SJW:
"Social Justice" is a set of petty, morally bankrupt and often contradictory ideas presented as a justice that all people should follow and believe. Like giving certain groups of people more rights than others for the sake of correcting discrimination, in their view that is unfair and just another form of discrimination.
"Social Justice Warrior" is a person indoctrinated by this ideology and who fights to spread it.
Also, I would like to say something that is my own opinion: avoid accusing or implying a group of people have a connection or agree with Adolf Hitler's ideas, even if not totally unfounded. I say it because:
-It generally doesn't bring them or others to agree with you if they don't already
-it is a problematic tactic that can make you look desperate and/or aggressive
-You might force the other side of the argument to be completely hostile to you, turning a discussion into a fight when that could be avoided by exerting moderation.
> I would also like you to explain to me what a "Social Justice Warrior" is
Replace the words with:
Stupid
Juvenile
Whiner
and you'll start to understand it what it means.
SJW is (typically) a dumb Gen Z with a pet peeve over some perceived bullshit "injustice" -- basically anything that doesn't agree with THEIR myopic philosophy. Now instead of actually _doing_ something AFTER careful analysis of BOTH sides of the issue, because issues are almost never black and white, they would rather have a knee-jerk reaction and whine about it instead.
For more information see the book:
SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police
There is no reasoning with these irrational people. They believe their POV (point-of-view) is the ONLY right one and blindly ignore facts. The classic attack is the ad hominem using labels as misogynist, trigger, microagression, etc. They are so insecure with their immaturity that they have to attack everyone else who doesn't agree with them. It is the ultimate Political Censorship gone wrong.
South Park poked fun of their stupidity in Season 19 by calling them Pussy Crushers
* Truth and Advertising
* PC Principal or DailyMotion
The only valid tactic is to ignore these whiney cunts -- because they make the classic Internet Trolls look like Saints in comparison -- otherwise you are just wasting your time.
You can fix ignorant.
You can't fix Stupid (Juvenile Whiners.)
My Presidential vote history:
Reagan, Bush, Perot, Dole, Bush, Kerry, Obama, Obama, (Sanders) well, fine. Clinton. Since I have no choice. Dammit. At least its not Trump.
Your affiliation may change as you learn more. Which way it goes depends on how you feel about what you learned. Conservatives used to be about being fiscal conservatives and small government, hands off on the rest. Now they are about social conservative and HUGE government. They say small government, but their vote history is always HUUUUUUGE military and corporate control and the rest gutted to make the military even more HUUUUGE and corporate control more profitable. Fuck that, I am no fascist. Time to reign this runaway horse back toward the middle, and maybe a little left of there.