|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: LOOK vs AMC
|
Scott D. Neff
Theatre Dork
Posts: 919
From: San Francisco, CA
Registered: Oct 1999
|
posted 05-13-2015 01:49 PM
I know I'm late to the game, but re: clearances, does it do anybody any good to have the audience split up between every single theatre in a region? If the crappy movie Hollywood made only has X number of people interested in seeing it, can ANY theatre make a profit from showing it if they're only each getting 20% of the audience? And don't tell me the answer is for Hollywood to stop making crap movies, because Hollywood has been making crap movies forever and it's not going to change any time soon.
Furthermore, many of us complain that movie-going isn't an experience anymore and I'd say that's because we are no longer directed to see the movie together in the same place. Giving the general public the option to see it wherever they want to means mostly that they'll see it at the place closest their home, whether it's a good theatre or not.
If clearances were properly managed or distributors actually were to say (and mean) "We don't think this theatre is of a quality worthy of our product." then BAM, problem solved. Of course studios can't say that about the AMC in one town and then expect AMC to be happy about it in another town. It's all the fun of a symbiotic relationship. The same way some of us complain about how dumb your general movie goer is, we still need them to keep the doors open. So studios could complain about how awful a theatre is, but they still need them to sell their movies... or wait... they don't because they're trying to bypass theatres and stream on the internet because everybody keeps bitching about the distribution model.
Oh politics.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 05-13-2015 03:26 PM
The game when examined at first glance doesn't make any sense. Why would a theater chain like AMC build a new multiplex location near an existing theater that was already just as good, if not significantly better? LOOK is definitely a better theater than that slightly newer AMC 9-plex in Addison, TX. When two theaters are close to each other they usually have to go back and forth, taking turns playing movies from any Hollywood studio. One Warner Bros. release goes to one theater and the next Warner Bros. release goes to the other theater.
I think the ultimate goal in the game is putting the other rival theater out of business. Pull strings to get a few more of the top movies while the other location gets stuck with B-side garbage. You get Indiana Jones & the Last Crusade and the other theater gets stuck with Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. "Row, row, row your boat, gently down the..." Ugh.
:vomit:
AMC might try to use the following example in their defense:
The folks running Cinetopia in Overland Park are pissed they didn't get The Avengers: Age of Ultron. But this week they're getting Mad Max: Fury Road while the AMC Town Center 20 is not. Mad Max: Fury Road is currently boasting a 99% Tomato Meter score at Rotten Tomatoes, which is a hell of a lot better than the good, but not great 74% score the Avengers sequel was given. I've noticed some of the Mad Max shows this weekend are already sold out. The movie probably won't break opening weekend records, but it is poised to have a very strong opening.
Regarding where people choose to see movies, just about everyone is going to choose the theater nearest home unless another theater farther away gives them a good reason to drive the extra distance. If every theater was able to play whatever they wanted to book movie theaters would naturally be more competitive in terms of providing a good movie-going experience. Too often movie theaters operate the same way as hospitals do, a vertical monopoly that takes its customer base for granted. The theater operators figure if the local customers wants to see a certain movie in a theater the customer is going to visit his theater. So why spend any extra money sprucing up the place and making the sound & picture better? That affects the bottom line.
quote: Steve Dailey
The Cinetopia definitely does not have an IMAX auditorium. Three of the screens are nearly IMAX size though. The AMC he speaks of - the Leawood Town Center 20 - does have an IMAX audtitorium. Was Coltman misdescribing his own complex? But otherwise I wholeheartedly agree that it's wrong what AMC is doing here.
The Cinetopia location in Overland Park may not have an IMAX-branded screen, but two "GXL" screens equipped with Dolby Atmos, a detail the article did not mention. The competing AMC has one Prime screen with Dolby Atmos (soon to be converted to Dolby Cinema). An IMAX-branded theater equipped with twin 4K laser projectors might peak my interest, but the vast majority are using mere 2K based Xenon systems. Cinetopia seems like a much nicer theater than the AMC location.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Goeldner
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1360
From: Washington, District of Columbia
Registered: Jun 2008
|
posted 05-13-2015 04:59 PM
and I gather tix pricing for Dolby Cinema isn't going to be cheap ... regardless of all the bells and whistles, it's the pricing and which theaters have the amenities (7.1, Atmos, Auro) factor in my decision to which theaters I'll see a movie at. However "reclining seats" are far from what I consider essential (if I wanted those, I would have stayed home)
I honestly don't get the new Starplex Cinema in Ashburn Virginia, they built a brand new building, the auditoriums are 5.1 huh? ALL the auditoriums at the Angelika, Arclight and IPic can playback 7.1; and their 'IDX' screen is only 7.1 - what? no incentive to install an object based audio system on said screen?
Regal has built a couple new theaters in the DC metro area with RPX screens but NOT with Atmos, that's a major head scratcher, (although there was a news blurb from last year that those screens might get the Auro 11.1 conversion.)
I think everyone should have waited til DTS-X's announcement
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 10 pages: 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10
|
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