|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Thor: The Dark World
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 11-28-2013 04:49 PM
quote: Mike Blakesley
Maybe they could come out with an "Atmos Lite" type of thing that has a less-fancy equipment package (maybe not so many channels, at lower cost?) so a smaller exhibitor (or a multiplex with small auditoriums) would be tempted to go "All Atmos."
The Atmos sound processor is, indeed, way too expensive for many smaller scale deployments right now. But that price will come down sooner or later. I also expect that some serious competition, using another object based sound format will eventually come by and will force Dolby to lower prices.
As for the channel thing: you can have anything UP TO 64 channels right now*, but for a smaller room, there really is no need to put like 64 speakers in. Although it would be rather pointless for now, you could even install a CP850 and keep your current 5.1 or 7.1 B-chain. But as soon as the CP850 will go for the same prices as the CP750 or even CP650, you could start with getting your A-chain ready for Atmos and optimize the B-chain later, by putting in more, better speakers and amps.
* Actually, the CP850 itself only supports direct output of 16 analog channels, if you want to break out to more analog channels, you need a DAC3201, which offers an additional 32 analog channels.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 11-29-2013 02:06 PM
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Bobby, dinner and bar etc are irrelevant.
It matters to non-techie theater customers. The dinner in a movie theater concept is the thing I hear people talk most about when it comes to seeing movies in theaters, especially female movie-goers. A few years ago very few theaters offered the dinner/bar in a theater concept. It was just Studio Movie Grill, Alamo Drafthouse and maybe a couple others. Now more theaters are moving in that direction. Even big chains like AMC are trying it. It's a significant trend that competes against what IMAX is selling.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
As for Atmos, it is cute and all, but I just don't see it making a splash long term. I see Atmos being just as relevant as Dolby EX and that did not do all that well.
Cute and all? Now you're just plain trolling. Calling Atmos "cute" and equating it to Dolby•EX is an ignorant statement.
quote: Mike Blakesley
Imax has the advantage of having name recognition all on its own. People automatically think "Imax = biggest screen, big sound, stadium seats." Whether that's entirely true or not these days, is another matter for the moment; right now in 2013, people hear Imax and believe they're getting the best premium experience on an Imax screen.
Every fan of IMAX doesn't have a clue of just what he's getting for that high priced ticket. He doesn't know anything about the projection technology or that it isn't even 15-perf 70mm film. He doesn't know what the hell "laser aligned sound" means. He doesn't know how any of that stuff compares with the hardware in other theaters. The popularity of IMAX' digital theaters is built entirely on brand worship and misinformation. That's a recipe for disaster in the long term, regardless of Dolby Atmos being available or not.
IMAX is making itself vulnerable in the very same way THX did back in the late 1990s. THX was big and popular up to the mid 1990s. Even The Simpsons spoofed it. THX made various choices to make more money while watering down the integrity of its brand name at the same time. Some theater chains tried to rip off THX, but could go only so far because of certain sound system features patented by THX. Ultimately, theater chains decided they didn't need THX anymore and started abandoning it in 1995 as they started building stadium seated theaters.
IMAX is lucky no theater chains have started advertising Better than IMAX claims about their own house-brand premium screens. It's only a matter of time before some theater chain starts doing it, probably one with no IMAX-branded screens to protect.
quote: Mike Blakesley
Atmos has further problems in that it's an unknown name (so far). Most people would say "Huh?" upon hearing the name. Actually the bigger problem is, it's too expensive.
The Dolby CP850 has a list price of over $30,000, but Dolby says no one really pays that price. Atmos is currently too expensive and complicated to install in just any theater. However, it is feasible for large screen theaters, especially those which charge a premium to enter. Atmos is ahead of its time in respect to some pieces of movie theater hardware. Dolby is working with manufacturers of speakers and amplifiers to make Atmos more practical to install in the future. Dolby struggled with the 1st & 2nd generations of Dolby Digital processors. Then it hit a home run with the CP500. They may go through the same thing with Atmos capable processors.
The bigger threat I see in the near term for Atmos is movies not properly using the format. If someone goes out of their way to see a movie mixed in Atmos in an Atmos-equipped theater and it ends up sounding not much different than regular 5.1 that customer will be disappointed.
For instance, there's hardly anything special at all about the Atmos mix to Thor: The Dark World. The only thing you'll hear that shows off Atmos is the Dolby Atmos trailer played before the show (if the theater bothers playing it).
Movies are what really drive new developments in theater technology. It took a decade after Apocalypse Now was released before 5.1 audio became the high end standard for movie theaters. If Apocalypse Now hadn't featured such a then revolutionary 5.1 mix the lossy digital sound formats, home theater and HDTV might have standardized on 4.1 or 4.2 audio. Dolby needs more mixes like that of Gravity to sell Atmos to more theaters.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 11-29-2013 04:44 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
The dinner in a movie theater concept is the thing I hear people talk most about when it comes to seeing movies in theaters, especially female movie-goers.
Personally I don't see why this whole dinner-in-a-movie thing is so popular. First, I don't relish the idea of not being able to see what I'm eating. Second, when I'm watching a movie I want to watch the movie, not be occupied with chewing, cutting up a steak or something, reaching for condiments or whatever, and dealing with staff walking around delivering drinks and whatnot. The whole concept just seems ridiculous to me. When we go out on a "date night," I'd prefer to go eat first and THEN see the movie, or vice versa. (But then, our kidless selves are not paying $$$ an hour for babysitters I guess.)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 12-01-2013 05:55 PM
Marcel, what exactly has Alamo Drafthouse really proven? To me not much as there about 15 locations in the United States, well there also 4000+ other cinemas. From what I understand, the Alamo Drafthouse is a franchise, I would really like to see the grosses of the Alamo Drafthouse against a competing theatre, for one thing they do not charge a premium on the ticket price for a movie so it is nice for the cinema franchisee to sell some dinners but the theatre is still not charging a premium on the ticket price for the experience. AMC Dine-in at a movie is a little better of a concept and they also have the cinema suites, but there are still so few of these theatres that it really makes no difference, AMC does charge a premium for it from what I am seeing online.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
but a concept known as "service cinema", where you can order drinks and snacks and have it delivered to your seat, has been around for about 20 years and is doing quite well in a few niche markets.
Yes, you are right this concept does alright. We have the concept in my area, it is called Cineplex VIP and it took about 15 years for Cineplex to get it right. At first they offered a cinema of about 30 seats, you have food delivered to your seats and screens were about 15 feet wide. Finally Cineplex got it right when they made the size of the theatre 150 seats, they offered reserved seating, slightly nicer chairs, a bigger space between seats and they delivered to your seat. They also allow alcoholic drinks into the theatre and nobody under 18 is allowed into the theatre.
The big difference between dinner and movie concept and the VIP concept is that they charge $19.99 for a ticket before you buy any food or drinks.
Cineplex offers IMAX at $19.99, Ultra AVX at $15 and VIP at $19.99, all at one venue and all combined that is about 800-1200 total seats at one of their theatres, that is called making some serious money. All before a customer has even bought a concession item. Cineplex also charges a surcharge for Dolby Atmos, but it is rolled into the AVX pricing.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-01-2013 07:53 PM
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
It is not popular and nobody is really doing it and it is stupid to think that it would succeed. There are a few locations that might succeed but that is it, I think they are in the southern states. To start up a dinner and a movie idea is setting yourself up for an EPIC FAIL.
No. "Epic Fail" is writing an ignorant comment like within a forum where the site owner is deeply involved with Studio Movie Grill, one of the chains that has been pioneering the concept.
Also, using the outdated, tired term "Epic Fail" or even "Epic" is a failure.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Cineplex also charges a surcharge for Dolby Atmos, but it is rolled into the AVX pricing.
If Cineplex Odeon wasn't in bed with IMAX on some of its theaters it would be beating up IMAX with negative advertising to promote its Ultra AVX theaters as being BETTER THAN IMAX. Regal, AMC, Cinemark, Consolidated Theaters and a few other chains could be doing the same thing. They all have premium priced, large screen theaters carrying a different acronym than IMAX and some of those theaters are clearly better than an IMAX Digital screen.
Executives at IMAX are completely foolish if they think they can merely get by on their brand name. Without 15-perf 70mm film they have giant bullseye painted on them. Their level of hubris has them asking for it big time.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 12-02-2013 02:42 AM
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Marcel, what exactly has Alamo Drafthouse really proven? To me not much as there about 15 locations in the United States, well there also 4000+ other cinemas.
I wouldn't exactly call a company that expanded from a single to 15 locations a failure. As I stated before, it is still a niche, but a niche with "followers" like Studio Movie Grill and AMC and they don't seem to be totally unsuccessful either.
You know, the essence of a niche market is this: it doesn't need to conquer the whole world do be successful. And for all we know, within 30 or so years, cinemas without restaurant service will be the niche market.
quote:
From what I understand, the Alamo Drafthouse is a franchise, I would really like to see the grosses of the Alamo Drafthouse against a competing theater, for one thing they do not charge a premium on the ticket price for a movie so it is nice for the cinema franchisee to sell some dinners but the theatre is still not charging a premium on the ticket price for the experience.
From what I know, they operate both their own locations but also do have franchised locations. And I don't understand why I should be paying a premium on my movie ticket for the added service of food and drinks at my seat, shouldn't that be covered by that same service? Besides that, a theater that also operates a restaurant service, should make much more margin per seat than a normal movie theater, so why would you want to rip off the customer with dubious added premiums?
quote: Bobby Henderson
Executives at IMAX are completely foolish if they think they can merely get by on their brand name. Without 15-perf 70mm film they have giant bullseye painted on them. Their level of hubris has them asking for it big time.
It will probably take a bit of time, but eventually, what goes around comes around...
| IP: Logged
|
|
Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012
|
posted 12-02-2013 08:21 AM
Marcel, I am not for raising the prices of the tickets for customers who get served food and drinks at their seats, nor am I for raising prices for tickets at any other theatre. But, the price of the movie ticket is rising and consumers are not having any issues paying an inflated price for their tickets. The facts are that people are paying for IMAX, Liemax, VIP, and the RPX BS experiences. IMAX, Liemax, VIP and the BS RPX segments is where the real money is (at least for the box office), lets also not forget that 3D adds a surcharge as well.
My main issue is when Bobby said that IMAX is losing out in the dinner and a movie segment as they have no foothold in the segment, what are they losing out on? IMAX is not in the business of selling popcorm, drinks or steaks, they are in the business of selling premium priced tickets for a premium priced movie going experience. And selling premium priced tickets is something they have shown they are very successful at, both Gravity and Catching Fire set records for attendance levels for IMAX so it is not like people are turning off of it.
I really would like to see the financials of the dinner and movie concept. The financials for IMAX, AMC and Cineplex are all public. For simple box office take, the dinner and movie concept has no chance as the ticket prices are just standard prices. The dinner and a movie concept might be a niche idea, it probably does okay for the franchisees, but I highly doubt these theatres are grossing anywhere near what a single IMAX screen is grossing.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-02-2013 09:15 AM
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
But, the price of the movie ticket is rising and consumers are not having any issues paying an inflated price for their tickets.
Baloney. If that was the case movie theaters wouldn't have to run alternative 2D shows for many releases in their theaters. They could go 3D only. Some people don't like watching movies in 3D. Far more hate paying extra for it. There is already a large percentage of the American public that doesn't watch movies in theaters at all, and it's not just older Americans either. Many don't go to movie theaters anymore primarily due to cost. The movie industry has been pushing their luck with all the price gouging in recent years on tickets, drinks & snacks.
At some point the movie distributors and theaters are going to go too far testing how much price fatigue they think the public can handle. Then they'll be marketing to an even smaller segment of the general public.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
It will probably take a bit of time, but eventually, what goes around comes around...
All it takes is for the consumer to get the slightest bit educated to the fact he's not seeing any different an image with IMAX digital versus what he would see in an ordinary 2K movie theater (or really in 1080p on his TV set at home). Back when theaters were running 35mm film it didn't cost extra to see 35mm projected on a giant screen. Good sound didn't cost extra.
These premium priced theaters have to deliver something more than ordinary picture and halfway decent sound to justify a surcharge. The "plain" theaters should be delivering great picture and sound quality in the first place. The acronym labeled theaters have to deliver something on top of that. Right now, most are not. Dolby Atmos is one step in the right direction though.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
My main issue is when Bobby said that IMAX is losing out in the dinner and a movie segment as they have no foothold in the segment, what are they losing out on?
IMAX is selling a product based on a lie. Eventually that lie is going to catch up with them.
In the "digital" realm IMAX is doing something anyone else can copy or even outdo. That wasn't the case with 15-perf 70mm film. In the film days IMAX had exclusivity with some 15/70mm titles which kept them from being played on competing special venue theater screens run by Iwerks and others. IMAX has no exclusivity on Hollywood movie titles. Any digital movie featuring an IMAX logo on the poster can be played in any competing big screen theater. IMAX' sound system sucks. Dolby Atmos is going into dozens of competing premium priced big screen theaters. That's opening an area of vulerability for IMAX. Several digital projector manufacturers are working on laser projection designs. So it's obvious IMAX isn't going to have a corner on the laser projection market.
Overall, I think the premium priced big screen concept could be in trouble in the long run due to consumer ticket price fatigue. Unlike 15/70mm film, big screen digital doesn't deliver a fundamentally different experience from that of a standard digital theater.
Movie theaters chains compete with each other and have to appeal to as many market segments as they can. The dinner in theater concept is growing in popularity. In time you could see theaters dropping those big premium screens just like they dumped THX. Theaters could branch more and more into the restaurant and bar business, showing more alternative content, especially as Hollywood studios keep pushing to narrow movie release windows or even do day & date releases.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chris Slycord
Film God
Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007
|
posted 12-02-2013 02:54 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
IMAX is lucky no theater chains have started advertising Better than IMAX claims about their own house-brand premium screens. It's only a matter of time before some theater chain starts doing it, probably one with no IMAX-branded screens to protect.
It's definitely not "just a matter of time" for that to happen. That's because, legally, if I were to advertise that I'm the best in town, I don't have to prove it but if I were to advertise that I was better than my competitor, I'd have to definitively prove it/back it up.
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Marcel, what exactly has Alamo Drafthouse really proven? To me not much as there about 15 locations in the United States, well there also 4000+ other cinemas. From what I understand, the Alamo Drafthouse is a franchise, I would really like to see the grosses of the Alamo Drafthouse against a competing theatre, for one thing they do not charge a premium on the ticket price for a movie so it is nice for the cinema franchisee to sell some dinners but the theatre is still not charging a premium on the ticket price for the experience. AMC Dine-in at a movie is a little better of a concept and they also have the cinema suites, but there are still so few of these theatres that it really makes no difference, AMC does charge a premium for it from what I am seeing online.
It makes absolutely no difference whether they are charging a premium or not. What matters is if the concept of dinner theaters works. And the fact that both Studio Movie Grill and Alamo have expanded pretty well in the last few years tends to indicate that it can definitely work. And while both are based in the south, your claim that this only has worked in the south ignores that they both expanded elsewhere.
And to be frank, your idea that dinner theaters are merely "nice for the cinema franchisee to sell some dinners" is pretty inept considering that regular cinemas work the same way (them being nice for the location to sell popcorn, soda, candy, etc).
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 12-02-2013 03:45 PM
quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Marcel, I am not for raising the prices of the tickets for customers who get served food and drinks at their seats, nor am I for raising prices for tickets at any other theatre. But, the price of the movie ticket is rising and consumers are not having any issues paying an inflated price for their tickets. The facts are that people are paying for IMAX, Liemax, VIP, and the RPX BS experiences. IMAX, Liemax, VIP and the BS RPX segments is where the real money is (at least for the box office), lets also not forget that 3D adds a surcharge as well.
You know what's funny? I went exactly here (warning: it's Dutch, but I'm sure you can manage to see what I'm pointing at) to watch The Hunger Games: Catching Fire in D-IMAX. As you can see on the current schedule, they're showing Catching Fire both in D-IMAX and "normal digital". When I was there, the movie was just a few days out, the IMAX theater was actually rather deserted*, the other show, starting about an hour later, was almost completely sold out.
Just a freak incident you'll guess? Well, I don't... I also don't think there is this big difference in mentality between North America in general and this part of Europe, that could explain it. Most people definitely don't want to pay the extra, if they don't have to. If you don't give them the choice, they will pay the surcharge, because they came to see that movie, but they're not going to like you, because they paid extra for the privilege...
To be honest, I personally hate the concept of those surcharges for "premium service", which is only available on one or two select movies. You know why? I don't like the idea that you're going to give me a sub-par experience, for that movie on which you don't even give me the option to upgrade, because it's not playing in your most kick-ass room...
* I actually spoke to some of the people around me. The people behind me explicitly choose the IMAX version, because they liked the bigger screen and louder sound, so those were the fanboys. The people on the right of me choose this version, because 3D and IMAX versions were included on their flat-fee Pathé Unlimited Gold Membership card...
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic