|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: SF Strange: Century 9; AMC Metreon playing Day & Date
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 900
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 03-24-2018 12:16 AM
quote:
That reminds me a little of the situation in Manhattan. A movie could be playing at a theater in Times Square and also be playing maybe half a mile away at a cinema like the Ziegfeld at 6th Ave & 54th St or the Loews complex on 34th St a few blocks East. This was back in the late 80's when I observed the situation.
| IP: Logged
Originally, the Ziegfeld insisted on an exclusive, but I guess by the mid- to late-80's, the distributors wouldn't give them that anymore even though it had 1150 seats. I was always under the impression that they didn't get the original runs of the Star Wars films because they insisted on the exclusive, although they did get the original run of Close Encounters exclusively, IIRC.
In NYC, Times Square and the Ziegfeld location were/are considered completely different neighborhoods. Times Square was pretty seedy in the 80's and a lot of people who patronized the Ziegfeld wouldn't go to a Times Square theater.
But back in the 80's, those theaters could fill a lot of seats even during the week and it didn't matter if a film was playing in two nearby theaters. Today, it's a different story, especially weekdays and why the theaters are ripping out all the seats (although I personally think that's insane because anytime they sell out a show, they're leaving money on the table).
I don't think the Empire 25 has installed lounge seating as yet aside from the Dolby Prime screen (unless it's only on some screens), but the seat count has dropped from 4916 to about 3370. The Regal E-Walk (9) across the street has installed lounge seating and the count has dropped from 3276 to 1344.
The Loew's 84th Street 6 was 2980, then 2385. With lounge seating, it's now only 865.
The Chelsea Cinema 9, now owned by Cinepolis, was 2330 and is now 1507.
The Cinema 1, 2, 3 on the East Side was originally 1000 when it was only two screens, then it was 1035 with 3 screens and now with lounge seating, it's only 335.
A local 5-screener near me in Queens which plays a combo of mainstream and art films and was still showing 35mm up until about two years ago, was 860, but with lounge seating, it's only 272 seats. With one of the screens having just 36 seats, it sells out often and I've seen potential customers get really pissed off. (I don't blame them).
So with so few seats, nearby theaters can play the same films especially on weekends, not that there's that many theaters in NYC that are near each other anymore. Manhattan is down to 27 theaters and 205 screens. The entire city is now just 55 theaters and 432 screens.
Since July of 2012, we've lost 27.8% of the seats and we've lost 56% of the seats in just over 30 years.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 03-29-2018 01:27 PM
On page 1 of this thread I talked about the day and date strageness in Lawton, OK between the AMC Classic 8 (formerly Carmike 8) and the Patriot 13 theater. That's no longer an issue since AMC shut down the old 8-plex a couple weeks ago.
quote: Martin Brooks
In NYC, Times Square and the Ziegfeld location were/are considered completely different neighborhoods. Times Square was pretty seedy in the 80's and a lot of people who patronized the Ziegfeld wouldn't go to a Times Square theater.
I didn't think Times Square itself was all that bad. I think it was down to just one or two porn theaters in the late 80's. IIRC things got more seedy a block west over on 8th Avenue. In the late 80's Times Square had the Loews Astor Plaza, which had even more seats than the Ziegfeld. The Criterion Center, Guild Embassy and National Twin also showed quite a few movies in 70mm.
quote: Martin Brooks
But back in the 80's, those theaters could fill a lot of seats even during the week and it didn't matter if a film was playing in two nearby theaters. Today, it's a different story, especially weekdays and why the theaters are ripping out all the seats (although I personally think that's insane because anytime they sell out a show, they're leaving money on the table).
Yeah, I remember standing in line for what seemed like at least 2-3 hours to watch Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade at the Astor Plaza. Manhattan had a decent number of single and twin screen theaters; a few with 4-6 screens and hardly any with more screens than that back then. Any well-anticipated movie could generate long lines. I even remember a long line for Goodfellas. Auditorium capacity was quite a bit better back then.
Recliner seats have a certain novelty to them. Unfortunately they make me think of a home viewing experience more. And then when the seating capacity in some of these rooms is dropped down to under 100 it really messes with the sense of scale one expects from the movie-going experience.
quote: Martin Brooks
So with so few seats, nearby theaters can play the same films especially on weekends, not that there's that many theaters in NYC that are near each other anymore. Manhattan is down to 27 theaters and 205 screens. The entire city is now just 55 theaters and 432 screens.
That's pretty sad. It's another side effect of the speculative feeding frenzy going on with New York City real estate. I really feel like it's in a serious "bubble economy" zone. Movie theaters are one of those quality of life leisure/entertainment things accessible to people in most income classes. The cost of housing has become so ridiculous there that I wonder how all the service sector businesses with lower wage jobs can keep their positions properly staffed. A big part of NYC's growing homeless population are homeless people who have jobs. Neighborhoods I usually tried to avoid (Harlem, Brownsville, Bed-Stuy) have been mostly gentrified in recent years. Where did all the lower income people that used to live there move? Did they leave the entire region? Overall I don't think NYC is in a sustainable situation. That speculative bubble being driven by foreign investors, hedge funds, etc could pop at any time.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 900
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 04-05-2018 12:34 AM
quote: Bobby Henderson
A big part of NYC's growing homeless population are homeless people who have jobs. Neighborhoods I usually tried to avoid (Harlem, Brownsville, Bed-Stuy) have been mostly gentrified in recent years. Where did all the lower income people that used to live there move? Did they leave the entire region? Overall I don't think NYC is in a sustainable situation. That speculative bubble being driven by foreign investors, hedge funds, etc could pop at any time.
It hasn't happened yet, but I fear NYC is going to have massive population losses in the future because it's become unaffordable for the working- and middle-classes unless they're already in a place that they own or with a lease with restricted increases. NYC is still gaining population which is at a peak. It's just been estimated at 8.623 million as of December, 2017. It was 8.538 million in July of 2016 and 8.175 million in 2010.
But between 1950 and 1960 when many middle class people moved to suburbs, the city lost over 100,000 people and between 1970 and 1980 it lost 10% of the population: a net reduction of 823,000 people. It took 20 years to get back to that population level.
That could well happen again. While crime is at a record low and the city is relatively clean compared to the past, housing prices are absurd, the subways are failing and much of what made NYC unique is being destroyed by the commercial real estate industry whose greed makes it impossible for independent businesses to afford the rent and as a result, NYC is now filled with national chains and is largely the same as everywhere else. Frankly, I don't understand why tourists spend the money to be here since they largely eat and shop in the same chains they have at home.
While we've lost a lot of theaters, there are a few new theaters coming: Regal is building the Market Line 14 in a mixed-use new building on the Lower East Side; Flushing, Queens is getting a new 7-screener built by a company from Shanghai, also as part of a mixed-use development and Nitehawk is soon reopening the Brooklyn Sanders/Pavillion as the Prospect Park 7.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 04-05-2018 02:27 PM
quote: Martin Brooks
It hasn't happened yet, but I fear NYC is going to have massive population losses in the future because it's become unaffordable for the working- and middle-classes unless they're already in a place that they own or with a lease with restricted increases.
People who don't live in the NYC area are probably not aware of all the fraud and scams that have been going on in recent years to force low and middle income people out of rent controlled properties. So much speculative investment money has been pouring into former "combat zone" neighborhoods. Land lords and property owners have been brazen about their tactics at removing undesirable tenants to get on that gravy train. Elderly renters have been prone to abuse; most pay their bills the old fashioned way, by mailing a check. Well, the land lords just don't cash the checks. Then they evict the rent-controlled tenants due to lack of payment. When enough lower income tenants are evicted they can sell the property. There are loop holes that will remove an apartment building from rent control if enough renovations take place and a high enough percentage of tenants are paying above a certain level of rent.
The gentrification process has led to a surprising backlash in a few large American cities. Young, white millennials (many of them with liberal tendencies) mostly meant well by moving into neighborhoods that white Gen-X people like me avoided. The trouble is all sorts of businesses designed to cater to their white, hipster sensibilities followed, pressuring or snuffing out the original ethnic culture of these neighborhoods. Living costs shot up. Young white tenants were only too happy to be stupid with their money and they paid these increasing prices while the neighborhood's long time residents couldn't keep up with the cost inflation. So now there are protests erupting in some cities and even vandalism of coffee shops, vintage clothing stores and yoga studios. Long time residents of these neighborhoods are being forced out and they're pretty damned pissed about it. These white millennials have been caught off guard, thinking black anger was reserved for white "rednecks" in "fly-over country."
Of course, my big question is: where the hell are these people going to go?
Big metros in Texas are adding residents far faster than New York City. At the same time living costs are starting to get pretty ridiculous in places like Austin and a growing number of zones in sprawling Dallas-Fort Worth. Transplants from New York City looking for more affordable city life in Houston might find themselves struggling the same way in a different place.
Oklahoma's living costs are among the most affordable in the nation. And that might be just fine for a middle-aged or retired couple escaping the high cost coasts. A young couple looking to start a family would still avoid this state for what has happened to its public school systems. A decade of mis-management has Oklahoma crumbling. There are other low cost of living states in the same situation. Our teachers are currently on strike (and I don't blame them for it either). The cost of living and doing business is creeping up in Oklahoma via products being shipped in from out of state (food, office supplies, building materials, etc). If I want to see Ready Player One in "IMAX-3D" at our local theater, I'll have to pay $18.30 per ticket. That's pretty expensive when you consider where average Oklahoma wages are running versus wages in the coastal big cities.
So that's where we now have a Catch-22 situation for many young adults. The situation is a little easier if a young adult doesn't care about getting married and having children. Who cares how bad a local school district is operating if you don't have any kids going to school in it? If having a family is an important goal the choices and situations get far more difficult. Any city or town worth a damn ought to care about having a good school system though; businesses will not be able to attract or retain a good work force of young adults without it.
I've heard people say "the market will correct itself." Well, I don't know about that. Many of us remember the real estate bubble last decade and what that did to the world economy. And then we have examples like Japan where long term extreme living costs have absolutely routed the nation's population growth. The United States has factors like its absurd, price-gouging health care system and plenty of other sectors that bend parents over the barrel. I think "the market" has proved it will eat its own seed corn for short term gain.
Cities like New York City and San Francisco could be on the verge is big population losses. However, I think there is a strong potential for big population losses to happen everywhere in this country over the long term. We've already had a stagnant native-born population growth picture since the early 1970's. All net gains have come via immigration; we all know what's happening there lately.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
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