Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Boxoffice Magazine rant

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Ground Level » Boxoffice Magazine rant (Page 9)

This topic comprises 16 pages: 1 2 3 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16

Author

Topic: Boxoffice Magazine rant

Troy Hilsman Powell
Film Handler

Posts: 30
From: Jacksonville,FL
Registered: May 2007

posted 10-27-2008 10:07 PM

I hear ya dennis benjamin.I was just getting ready to post the same opinion about the classifieds but you beat me to the punch.The only way that I would even want the mag now is because the do have a good up to date industry directory that they come out with every now and then.I used to rely on the classifieds to buy and sell equipment on the side but I guess that got shot out of the water too.MAN that sure does burn my grits.

| IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-29-2008 08:11 PM

Bump.

The December issue arrived today. All 48 (yes, 48) pages of it (the inside front and back cover ads do not count).

This one continues the trend of not providing information that would be useful to exhibitors.

Here are the articles:

- guy who runs a box office numbers web site says that there are lots of good films scheduled to open in December (has this ever _not_ been the case?)

- guy who runs a web site about digital cinema says (using many words) that "no one can say for certain where the digital cinema rollout will go for here" (this is probably his least informative article yet)

- NATO's John Fithian (who I don't think has ever said anything remotely negative about the exhibition industry) says that the exhibition industry is recession-proof

- NATO director of media and research talks about video release windows (which is somewhat interesting, but not really useful)

- big multi-page article on the 90th anniversary of Sanborn Theatres (which reads like one big "congratulations to..." ad)

- article about the remake of "The Day The Earth Stood Still" (interesting, but not useful)

- bunch of quick blurbs and lame reviews about upcoming releases

- historical article about the initial relesae of the original TDTESS (I actually enjoy these articles, but they aren't useful)

There's nothing here that would be remotely useful to a theatre owner or theatre manager--nothing about marketing or promotion, no equipment reviews, no substantive film reviews, nothing about booking policies or strategy, and nothing else that would help the exhibitor in his business.

[ 11-29-2008, 09:14 PM: Message edited by: Scott Norwood ]

| IP: Logged

Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 11-29-2008 10:37 PM

I haven't looked through mine, but the popcorn bag that was glued inside messed up the John Fithian article when I removed it.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-30-2008 01:52 PM

quote:
- NATO's John Fithian (who I don't think has ever said anything remotely negative about the exhibition industry) says that the exhibition industry is recession-proof

To be fair, he says "recession-resistant."

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 11-30-2008 04:16 PM

quote: Peter Cane
We have about 200 leather-bound volumes (about 1,500 pp each) of the magazine going back to 1924. The last of the leather volumes was scanned yesterday. We are in the process of separating these files into individual issues, and we will be posting about 3,000 weekly and about 300 monthly issues of Boxoffice by the end of the year.

Mr. Cane, how do we access these? I'm seeing probably less than 100 issues on issuu.com. [Frown]

| IP: Logged

Tony Ratcliff
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 216
From: Madison, IN, USA
Registered: Mar 2002

posted 12-03-2008 07:41 PM

I found the "attached" popcorn bag to be extremely tacky for a business orient magazine. I felt like I was opening Better Homes and Gardens or something.
The advertisement orientation of Box Office has gone way too far. Even if they DID have equipment reviews, could we trust them to be objective if the manufacturers are paying for multi-page ads?

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-03-2008 07:48 PM

quote: Tony Ratcliff
I found the "attached" popcorn bag to be extremely tacky for a business orient magazine. I felt like I was opening Better Homes and Gardens or something.

Why? It was a product sample. Nothing wrong with that. I subscribe to Billboard in my other job and it frequently comes with stuff pasted in.

Posters in this thread should keep in mind that magazines work far in advance and it may take a couple more issues for any changes to show up (provided they are able to take any of the suggestions made here to heart).

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-03-2008 07:58 PM

quote: Steve Guttag
One would think that equipment reviews would be useful...all kinds of equipment too. Projection, sound concession...seats...you name it.

Of course if those reviews were truthful the magazine would loose its advertisers one by one. It'd would be usless really... just like the reviews in the old Audio Magazine and Stereo Review magazine... Something good was found in ever piece reviewed and every unit sounded good even though some were pieces of crap. That was the whole reason for those underground stero rags and today they have become JUST as usless!

Mark

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-03-2008 09:00 PM

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Of course if those reviews were truthful the magazine would loose its advertisers one by one.

I don't think so...those companies need to reach the audience provided by the mag. If B-O is speaking to its audience, the advertisers will stay onboard.

| IP: Logged

Peter Cane
Film Handler

Posts: 12
From: San Francisco, CA, USA
Registered: Mar 2008

posted 12-03-2008 11:38 PM

Thanks again for all of your comments. I hope you all get a chance to see our January 2009 issue. It should hit the street in about two weeks and I think you will be pleasantly surprised. We've incorporated many of your comments. We'll be working on incorporating even more as the year goes on.
Among the many new features in the January issue, my favorites are two new awards we're giving out each month - The Front Line and Front Office awards. The former goes to a theater employee who deals with the public at the box office and concession stand. The latter is for theaters managers or any of the other myriad of jobs necessary to keep the place running. There are modest prizes, but the point is to recognize a job well done with a full-page article and photo in BOXOFFICE. If you know of any qualified individuals, I'd appreciate it if you'd send your nominations to cole@boxoffice.com.
As always, your feedback and comments on the new issue will be welcome.
An aside to Tim Reed - only a group of test issues have been posted to Issuu.com. We have close to 3,000 issues completed and ready to launch on boxoffice.com. As you can imagine, it's a pretty complicated process and it's taken a little longer than originally planned, but I believe the entire archive going back to 1924 will be ready and available before the month is out. Thanks for your patience.
Peter

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 12-06-2008 10:29 AM

Wonderful! I really look forward to that. Thank you, sir.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 12-06-2008 07:48 PM

quote: Peter Cane
If you know of any qualified individuals, I'd appreciate it if you'd send your nominations to cole@boxoffice.com.

I am qualified, but I demand the front cover. [Wink]

| IP: Logged

John Hawkinson
Film God

Posts: 2273
From: Cambridge, MA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 12-07-2008 04:17 PM

Be careful what you wish for, Joe!

--jhawk

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 12-09-2008 02:50 AM

To add to what Tim has mention about the issuu site, take a gander at this page

In the search window, type in "boxoffice magazine" and see what is presented here

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 12-25-2008 04:20 AM

UPDATE: I received the January's issue today at our theatre and I'm totally impressed on how the layout has changed to the better!

More better organized, articles in proper place, up and coming movies towards the back in more easier format to understand...

(...and I'll forgive the stapled issue this time...it should be getting thicker as time moves on with more articles, stories and other items of interest to be printed..)

Keep up the good work - this is definitely a forward moving improvement for such a well published magazine!

-Monte

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 16 pages: 1 2 3 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.