|
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
|
Author
|
Topic: AMC Spending $600 Million to Remodel Theaters With Larger Chairs, Fewer Seats
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 08-09-2014 09:20 PM
Yes, high-back seats are installed in SOME theatres -- not a huge percentage I'd guess, but that's my point -- how often are they routinely cleaned? Which brings us to the Friday night 20/20 broadcast(ABC). They did a report where they did incognito swab tests of theatre floors, seat arm rests, seat upholstery and (gasp!) the floors. Not surprisingly, the micro-orgamnisms and bacteria they found on the seats were, in a word, disgusting -- everthing from ecoli to streptoccocus to human feces. They made a point that theatre seats are never cleaned or cleaned rarely. All I am saying is that if they install these push seats (I am assuming "plush" precludes them using easily cleanable vinyl), they really need to NOT let these couch seats decend into a kind of CDC deadly organism storage units. AMC has to institute a RIGOROUS upholstery cleaning routine.
What was even more disturbing in this piece was that they pointed out three things the general public does not want to hear -- many theatre have vermin problems like 1) cockroaches (they showed a picture of a dozen of them scurrying about the floor), mice (pictures of them too), but the one thing that will keep hords of people out of the theatre -- BED BUGS (a picture of one crawling on someone's hand.)
As for those rose-colored quotes about increases in attendence... quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Attendance in renovated AMC auditoriums has leapt 80%, on average, despite the drastic reduction in capacity to sometimes fewer than 70 seats.
Are they kidding? 80% -- what kind of crap business were they doing before?
quote: Mike Frese was the last to post
Box-office revenue was up more than 60% at the 37 AMC theaters that had been fully reseated in the first quarter of this year, said Mr. Lopez.
So attendence was up 80% but box office revenue was up only 60% -- that's quite a trick. quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Mr. Lopez acknowledged that the biggest attendance boosts would come in theaters that were weak performers, some of which were losing money.
So Mr. Lopez thinks that it will be reclining seats that will turn a loss-leader into a high performing venue? If he thinks the seats make the difference between a great theatre experience and one that no one wants to attend, he needs to be in another business.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 900
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 08-09-2014 09:57 PM
I can understand the possibility that weekday attendance might be better. The seats could be an attraction, especially to those horny young people and that could help fill the theatre.
But on weekends, when the vast majority of the business is, unless no one was showing up to the theatre even then, I can't see how there wouldn't be a big decline in business, since most of the seats are gone.
As far as overall declines in business, what did the industry expect when they make movies available in other media weeks after it appears in a theatre? The theatrical window used to be a year. Now it's about a month. And there are studio executives pushing for day and date. Somehow they have it in their heads that this doesn't cause cannibalization of theatrical revenues.
The problem with movies being available everywhere (cable, web, Redbox, VOD, Hulu, Netflix, iTunes, etc., etc.) is that it makes them disposable and ordinary (as do the incessant reboots and horrible films). When films are disposable and available in Redbox for a dollar, it cheapens their value and their worth to the culture.
One thing I noticed when I visited an AMC in Queens that had gone this route is that because there are so few seats, it's actually much harder to find an ideal seat. Also, the seats are "reserved", so you have to pick your seat at the box-office.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 08-10-2014 07:31 AM
Martin, you're right of course, the distribution patterns which are totally in the control of the producers, have crippled small circuits and the independents, so in essence, only 3 mega chains run the exhibition industry. Evidently the Justice Department has been asleep at the wheel for decades on this. I guess the Paramount Consent decrees were so exhausting for them that they have had to rest for the next 70 years.
BUT, that consolidation potentially brings unintended power; the big three EASILY have enough muscle to add a clause to the 'Master Contract" before they sign it -- The "Producers agree without qualification or encumbrance, that the rental of the Motion Picture shall be exclusive of all other ancillary markets including but not limited to, cable, satellite, cell phone service, optical disc, or any other means of exhibition other than motion picture cinemas for a period of not less than four months from the date of the first playdate. This may be modified jointly by consent of both parties." A contract has to be written and agreed to by BOTH parties.
NATO should have done this decades ago, but exhibition never said squat; they just laid back and accepted whatever was in the contract handed to them by distribution. They didn't even whisper, "Be gentle, and please use some lube." It would only take any two of the mega exhibitors to refuses to play a title, and that would be the end of those 70, 80 million dollar grosses on opening weekend which the studios simply can't live without. Exhibition has ALWAYS had the power to control the rental terms if only they weren't such greedy chickenshits; they just never had the balls to do it.
Why do the studios get to write the contract terms? All exhibitition had to do from day one was to hand the distributor THEIR contract and their terms and say, "Hey, you want to play your movie in this theatre, here are our rental terms and conditions you need to agree to in order for us to rent screen time to you. Sign on the dotted line."
Of course that would mean exhibitors would have had to be united, maybe form an industry organization, maybe call it something catchy, like NATO or something...oh, wait, done that. But it would have to have BACKBONE; the members would not give into GREED and sneak off and capitulate. And of course the only muscle the studios have is that they could withhold product...and sell it where? To those ancillary markets alone? Does anyone really think they would be willing to take that risk? More importantly, would the many investors? There is no studio system any more and even that fact gives exhibition strength -- Jack Warner might have had the grit to try to starve out exhibition, but today it's all banks and investors bankrolling pictures, and they are not about to risk THEIR money so the picture they have invested in can play for a dollar on a cell phone. Just look at opening credits at how many "studios" claim to be presenting a film -- those are all investors.
BTW, about NATO -- they are such wussy wusses that when ABC asked them to comment on the 20/20 dirty theatre story, they "declined the invitation." Usually when a corporation is caught with their pants down, they opt not to appear on camera, mostly because on camera a reporter can ask questions they know they can't answer, plus they have their pants down, but at least they send some nonsense written statement basically saying, "No, you got it wrong...we're innocent of anything you said...unless you have pictures, then we were tricked into it; if you have video, then we have no comment."
Last observation -- this is an AMC idea? And it's good they are at least trying to do SOMETHING that will make them stand out, but then they admit they this isn't so much a way to make the theatre experience unique, but just another way to fleece the public even more by using new seats as an excuse to raise prices.
As to the original question of how well will these seats be sanitized -- just let's remember what chain it was that had to close its doors for days at its largest NYC theatre to get rid of BED BUGS. Yes, it was AMC's Time Square location. Guess the systematic cleaning routine of their REGULAR seats was a FAIL. Imagine what a more difficult challenge it will be for them to clean those PLUSH couches. You can just rename them Bed Bug Hotels. Oh my.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russ Levinson
Film Handler
Posts: 17
From: Douglaston, ny USA
Registered: Sep 2012
|
posted 08-11-2014 12:18 PM
My theater is 2 miles from one of the first AMC to go with the recliners. They are up over 70% revenue, however it is very difficult to get a seat there without buying in advance. Most young people love the theater despite the high prices. The reviews are almost all excellent online, but some complaints about cleanliness, too many sold out shows, high prices. They are now forcing people to see 3D shows whenever they can(Only 1 2D Ninjas show). My theater numbers are actually up due to the fewer seats, high prices, and the forced 3D at this particular AMC. We focus on lower prices, comfy seats, and mostly 2D shows. NYC,in general, has far too few theaters, but most of Queens actually has a good amount of theaters and screens.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 08-11-2014 12:28 PM
quote: Frank Angel
BTW, about NATO -- they are such wussy wusses that when ABC asked them to comment on the 20/20 dirty theatre story, they "declined the invitation." Usually when a corporation is caught with their pants down, they opt not to appear on camera
It's totally understandable that NATO doesn't comment on this thing. NATO is just a club that has members. They have NO control or even knowledge of the cleaning practices of their member companies so they can't go around making claims or promises about this situation. Besides, from past experience they probably know that if they argue the point, then the media will just blow it up further. They're better to shut up about it and let the story go away on its own.
The companies that were named in the story need to address it and it should be a wakeup call to the whole industry to take a look at their cleaning practices and fix any problems they have.
I do NOT understand why the media hates the theater industry so much. Why do they keep singling us out for this kind of thing when EVERY other industry serving food has the exact same kinds of problems? Where are the stories about disgusting floors in restaurants, not to mention disgusting seats, ketchup bottles, door handles, and such? Don't even get me started on theme parks, traveling carnivals, stadiums, shopping malls and other places where filthy humans gather (and eat) in bunches.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 08-11-2014 01:11 PM
To be fair, ABC's story did include restaurants. ABC's Nightline I believe it was (possibly 20/20) did a similar report going everywhere -- public transportation, kid's arcades, hospitals and restaurants -- a particularly big deal was made out of a restaurant where the busboy used the same dirty wash rag going from table to table for his whole shift. The sample from that rag was particularly disgusting. They even swabbed houshold items in the reporter's home which was as filty as most of the other places they tested; her motification was profound.
Thing is, seems the WORLD is just teaming with germs and contact with these microbes is unavoidable, but the reality is, thankfully we usually deal with them pretty very well given our incredibly efficient, built-in anti-microbe protection -- our immune system. Without it we probably wouldn't live out the week. Problem arises when that system is compromised as it is in children and the elderly, and of course people who are sick. Our bodies usually laugh these "threats" off. How many people get deathly sick from touching the arm rest of a theatre seat? But do a culture on it and you get a dramatic shocking "news" story.
And while most of us won't get sick from 99% of the organisms we encounter every day, that's no reason for establishments not to keep things as sanitary as posssible.
Personally I worry more about what the theatre does with its unsold popcorn at the end of the night than whose dirty hands touched my arm rest before me. Do they throw out the left-over or do they collect it and store it for use the next day? If they do store it for reuse, who handles it and under what conditions getting it to and from storage and how sanitary are the storage containers? Are they reused every night causing them to get coated with oil that eventually will go rancid? Is it stored where vermin can get at it? Popcorn is the equivilant of a Peter Lugar's porterhouse steak to mice and roaches.
I am much less conderned about germs on the theatre seats as I am for that other issue they brought up; my immune system can deal with the germs on the seats but it can't protect me from BED BUGS in the seat. Evidently Manhattan and Brooklyn are the epicenter for the bed bug scourge. NYC BB Concentration Map Eeghads!
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
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
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic