|
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Have you ever had the public object to a proposed theater?
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 09-22-2015 10:07 AM
quote: Jesse Skeen
And that's NOT going to happen when theaters are purposefully built that aren't much different than one's own living room.
There are some movie theater auditoriums that are designed like a big living room, complete with couches, tables, etc. It makes the "TV in public" experience that much more authentic. The new trend of installing big recliners is basically a costly act of importing part of the living room movie watching experience into the commercial space.
quote: Jesse Skeen
And why even shoot movies in 2.35 anymore if most new screens are just going to letterbox it? A proper BIG 2.35 screen would be reason enough to patronize any theater that has one.
I think the 'scope format is going to be doomed in the long run if the powers that be can't figure out practical ways how to get it un-fucked in theaters. It's now the smallest, lowest resolution, lowest quality format. Scope being letter-boxed on the DCP is WRONG. Letter-boxing 'scope on movie theater screens is WRONG. Arri and Red both have ways to shoot true 4:3 anamorphic on their camera systems, and Arri's new Alexa65 has a 5/65mm size frame. But the post production people and movie equipment people just have to treat 'scope like a letter-boxed TV format instead. Meanwhile there's TV series like Fear The Walking Dead and a few others shooting their footage with anamorphic lenses, yet composing for full screen 1.77:1. It's a bunch of pretentious bullshit, or basically a joke to get people ready for the death of 'scope. They'll still deliver that anamorphic football shaped bokeh and lens flares, but it will all be TV ratio. Once things like the new laser-flavored version of IMAX and its taller screen get established it could add more pressure to movie makers to dump 'scope.
quote: Justin Hamaker
The purpose of going to the movies for most people is to get out of the house. To enjoy some entertainment without having to worry about the phone ringing or whatever housework needs to be done.
I think the movie business is taking its customer base for granted. Hey, let's just re-make more bullshit and throw it on the screen; these dumbass customers will show up anyway! Haw haw! I recently heard a re-make of Mary Poppins is in the works. What's next? E.T.: The Extraunnecessary?
People have more choices of entertainment now than they did 20 or 30 years ago. And a trip to the movie theater just to get out of the house has become pretty freaking expensive. Most new movies aren't worth the high ticket and concessions price. They're certainly not worth owning on Blu-ray either.
Theaters may still be drawing enough customers for now, but there have been some uncomfortable attendance swings. With some of these big theater chains having their finances really stretched it won't take too much of a downturn to get them in deep trouble.
The movie industry would be flat out stupid to underestimate how fickle the general public can be and how quickly an attitude swing can decimate an industry. Look at what has happened to book stores and video stores. Most are gone. A bunch of brick and mortar retail chains are struggling badly due because of losses to online sales. Shopping is a huge just to get out of the house activity for many. But those shoppers clearly show they'll gladly stay at home and click a few buttons for a bargain.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jesse Skeen
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1517
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 09-23-2015 01:06 AM
quote: Justin Hamaker
The purpose of going to the movies for most people is to get out of the house. To enjoy some entertainment without having to worry about the phone ringing or whatever housework needs to be done.
Ironically it seems there's more ringing phones coming from ones people have brought into the theater than there is at home! If I'm SERIOUSLY watching a movie at home I won't even ANSWER the phone- many times I have the sound up so loud I can't even hear it ring and won't know that anyone's called until the movie's completely over. If theaters want to survive they need to go back to being the MAIN way people see movies. The studios have been messing that up by releasing stuff on home video faster- theaters could counter that by showing them on a bigger screen than even the richest person could have in their homes, but instead they're packing in as many small screens they can into the smallest spaces. (Another irony is that some people are actually installing side-masked 2.35 screens at HOME, just so they can watch scope movies without letterboxing, while new theaters continue to install native 1.85 screens with top masking or NO masking at all!)
Digital has its pros and cons vs. film, personally I see it as a step backwards because it's technology that isn't much different than what you have at home. While it's been harder for theaters to mess up than film was, the way scope is handled on it IS a joke. The frame should've been natively 2.35, or used an anamorphic lens (which would probably result in some movies being shown wrong, but at least it'd look better at the places doing it right.) The trend towards framing for narrower IMAX screens is troubling also, whether it's on film or digital- recent films have been promoted as showing "more" picture in IMAX because the regular theater versions were 2.35 but the IMAX version had extra picture on the top and bottom. Movies that shift ratios constantly throughout (like Guardians of the Galaxy and the last Transformers) annoy the HELL out of me- they're shown that way on Blu-Ray also.
It's also funny that "retro" movies seem to be a thing now- I've noticed Cinemark particularly likes to show "Jaws" a lot. These are usually marketed as "See it again, back on the BIG screen!" but there isn't much joy in seeing these on a small top-masked screen rather than just watching it at home. There's a lot of movies I have at home that I'd gladly go out and pay to see on a REAL BIG SCREEN, but not what the industry passes off as one these days.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Dave Bird
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 777
From: Perth, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted 09-23-2015 10:15 AM
We certainly have the odd patron ask "why we don't use the whole screen" at our drive-in. With digital, Flat more or less fills our screen, and for Scope we had it set to "fill" the entire top of the screen by shifting all the way up and leaving 7-8 feet "blank" at the bottom. I just figured might as well, the higher the better for people looking over top of other vehicles.
Of course, what these patrons are probably comparing to are the old days with film when Scope was cropped at the sides and Flat at the top and bottom to fit a 2:1 screen. I prefer the way we're doing it now of course, the screen is plenty big and I want to see the entire picture as intended.
We're looking into adding a new screen over the winter, and I'm not sure what would be best. I think Barry Floyd built his screens to Scope specs if I recall correctly. I think that'd look great, we seem to play mostly in Scope, although the questions we'd likely have to field from now to eternity on why the difference in how we presented on the different screens might drive us crazy. Maybe best sticking with 2:1.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 09-23-2015 11:47 AM
quote: Mitchell Dvoskin
Young people still like movies, but I don't think that the exhibition industry has a clue as to what motivates young people to actually go out to a theatre, or what motivates them to stay away.
Who needs a study for that? I can tell you what motivates them.
It is: What the people around them want to do.
The end.
Seriously. If a movie, concert, play, or whatever seems "cool" to teens, then they'll show up in droves. If it seems uncool, or especially if it seems "old," then they won't. They're exceedingly fickle. That's why all teen girls thought Justin Beiber was amazing five years ago, but today he's becoming a joke to increasing numbers of that group. Even if he still does good music, with every day that passes he's becoming more and more uncool (and getting old, too).
The actual quality of what they're seeing can make some difference but it sure doesn't make ALL the difference. That's why they don't care if they watch something on a phone. It isn't cool enough to see it in a theater. But if something seems cool right now, then they'll make the effort -- but only if at least some their friends want to do it.
In three months, the new Star Wars movie will be cool -- for about two weeks. Everybody will want to see it. After that coolness wears off, then only the super fans and repeat viewers will want to see it in theaters. The rest will wait till it becomes available on their phones (if they want to see it at all) because it won't be the cool new thing anymore and even if one kid in a group wants to go see it, if his friends don't want to bother then he won't either.
If the only way to see Star Wars was in a theater, then the coolness would last a lot longer. But the studios and the internet have wrecked that.
It drives me nuts how much money is spent on studies and surveys when plain old common sense will give you the answer most of the time.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scott Jentsch
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1061
From: New Berlin, WI, USA
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 09-23-2015 01:29 PM
I think your observations are very astute, Mike. It's surprising to me how quickly teens can turn from fans to detractors, but probably not that surprising, given how fast they communicate via texting, group chats, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc.
I've seen a group of teens that were giddy about the first installments of Divergent and Maze Runner turn completely apathetic towards the second installments because they were dissatisfied by how the stories they enjoyed were adapted.
Much like the malls that once held them, movie theaters are no longer the destinations they were in years past. My personal experience in observing teen behavior recently is that they tend not to have attention spans long enough to last the 90-120 minute running time of most movies. About an hour in, they're getting restless and reaching for their cell phones to take selfies and to communicate with their friends who aren't there.
Combine that with the incredibly short shelf life of the average movie, and I can imagine that it's very difficult for a movie theater to attract a loyal customer base in sufficient numbers.
As much as I like philosophizing about what's wrong with theaters these days, the fact remains that city staff and elected officials are bound by what they can do within the constraints of ordinances and other rules that are already in place. If they try to go outside those boundaries, they leave themselves open to lawsuits that they won't win, and they get a reputation for being hard to work with, which then squashes future development.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 09-23-2015 04:19 PM
quote: Justin Hamaker
At this point I thing the argument that screen size matters is completely lost. Young people are increasingly indifferent to where they watch movies.
The movie production business and commercial movie theater industry both ought to be concerned about this. They're out of their minds if they're not.
The cable TV industry is already very worried about viewing habits of millenials. The cable TV industry just booked its first ever year over year net loss in subscribers. Lots of people have been "cutting the cord," disgusted with rampant price increases over the past 5 years and many cable channels filling big parts of the their program blocks with crap. Millenials have been shunning cable in huge numbers. They're opting for much cheaper (and more mobile) options like Netflix, Hulu (and illegal outlets of content too). Unless the cable TV industry makes some major adjustments to its pricing and the content on many its extraneous junk channels they're going to be in big trouble soon.
Not many tweens, twenty-somethings and even thirty-somethings are emotionally attached to any brick and mortar institutions, like movie theaters. The movie industry seems to be treating its customers as if they're idiots who will buy anything. A lot of the best quality dramatic entertainment available can be watched by way of streaming via Netflix, HBO Now, Amazon Prime, Hulu, etc. A bunch of it isn't Hollywood movies either.
quote: Justin Hamaker
Yes, most people would argue that a movie like Jurassic World demands to be seen on the largest possible screen. But it's an increasingly hard argument to justify when many young people are perfectly content to view it on the screen of their mobile phone.
Very often the mobile phone has nearly the same pixel count as the content being projected on the screen. Even though the image is tiny, it looks a lot sharper on the phone, especially if the projected theater screen image is soft or just plain out of focus for any number of reasons.
quote: Mike Blakesley
The actual quality of what they're seeing can make some difference but it sure doesn't make ALL the difference. That's why they don't care if they watch something on a phone. It isn't cool enough to see it in a theater. But if something seems cool right now, then they'll make the effort -- but only if at least some their friends want to do it.
Price and convenience are big factors. The factor of "this movie is cool and I'll be uncool if I don't see it this weekend" can overcome those price and convenience factors. But that factor isn't there for most movies. When someone goes to a movie theater he has to carve out a big chunk of his day or evening and direct his undivided attention at a screen for a couple hours. That's actually too damned much trouble for some people.
I wonder if some people developed ADHD through environmental habits or peer pressure (all my friends are on Ritalin, I should be too).
quote: Scott Jentsch
Combine that with the incredibly short shelf life of the average movie, and I can imagine that it's very difficult for a movie theater to attract a loyal customer base in sufficient numbers.
What all the tweens, teens, twenty-somethings and on probably don't realize is the commercial movie theaters make the movie industry as we know it possible. If business at theaters fizzles enough to make them disappear the traditional movie studios will disappear too. They won't have the business and revenue model present to fund big budget movie productions. Two hour movies too often have the prerequisite happy ending and Save The Cat paint by the numbers plotting. Once they're "stale" and on Netflix they're not as compelling a choice as binge watching a season of Longmire.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 09-23-2015 04:29 PM
On the subject of cable TV, I am willing to bet that, in addition to streaming content, digital OTA broadcasting is a factor in the demise of their subscriber base. Many people originally subscribed to cable in order to get the benefits of improved television reception. Now, in may cases, on can get a better HD picture with a regular antenna than from a cable provider. Moreover, the addition of subchannels has provided more variety in OTA programming.
The one thing that cable can do that streaming cannot (yet) is provide high-qualit live sports coverage, which is important to many subscribers (and why ESPN is the most expensive "basic" channel for cable providers to carry).
With respect to the "why people go to movies" question: I remember having this discussion with a patron at the first theatre where I worked (in the late '90s). There are three basic reasons that he gave (all of which still hold true today): to see something that is not available elsewhere, to see films with higher picture and sound quality than is available in the home, and to have the social experience of seeing films with other people.
I don't know much about the current teen market, but where do kids go on dates these days? Movies are pretty much an ideal first date, since the price is reasonable, they are readily accessible in most communities, they don't require that the couple make a lot of small talk, and the back row of a darkened theatre can provide some opportunities for "interesting" activities. Is there something else now that offers these things?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jesse Skeen
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1517
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 09-24-2015 12:40 AM
quote: Justin Hamaker
At this point I thing the argument that screen size matters is completely lost. Young people are increasingly indifferent to where they watch movies. Yes, most people would argue that a movie like Jurassic World demands to be seen on the largest possible screen. But it's an increasingly hard argument to justify when many young people are perfectly content to view it on the screen of their mobile phone.
So why bother having theaters AT ALL anymore? Amazingly one of the owners of the property where the San Jose Century Theatres still reside (sitting closed for more than a year now) argued in response to those protesting their closure: People are happy watching movies on their cell phones now, so why should we bother keeping these (huge, magnificent and for me life-changing) theaters open? Had I been able to speak directly to her, I would tell her that's all the MORE reason to keep THOSE theaters open- to show people that there's a BIG difference between those and watching a movie on your "f---ing telephone" to quote David Lynch.
Theaters and studios still occasionally promote "See it on the BIG screen!", especially for revival showings of older movies, but I always laugh at that- WHAT BIG screen? We don't HAVE any more BIG screens here! I really laughed at that Regal Cinemas "Go Big" (or something to that effect) campaign- having worked for a year at one of their theaters and seen every movie that played then, there were many where I thought "That would've been really good on a BIG screen instead of these small ones!" The industry simply isn't getting it.
I haven't seen any logical reason to have cable for more than 20 years now- it started out promising but is now largely more of just the same crap as regular TV, and with just as many (and sometimes MORE) commercials, even though you're PAYING to see them. It's good to see others finally waking up to that, but they'll see the same thing with movie theaters if the industry keeps going in the direction it's been going in.
When people come to your theater, you want them to go out thinking "Wow, that was INCREDIBLE- I can't wait to see another movie there!"- EVEN if the movie itself wasn't that great, because you at least presented it the best it could ever look and sound in a unique environment. The last few theaters I've left thinking "why did I waste my time and money there, I could've bought the Blu-Ray disc for about the same price and watched it at home with my cats and no annoying people in the audience." And that ain't right.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1 2 3 4
|
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)
But she came to some show recently and afterward she said, "I forgot how much better it is in the theater!"
Printer-friendly view of this topic