|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Theatre Names
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pravin Ratnam
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 844
From: Atlanta, GA,USA
Registered: Sep 2002
|
posted 01-29-2003 04:02 AM
Robet, my reply may come off as weird. But I agree and disagree with your point. I feel that if a chain has and markets a demonstrably superior visual and audio screening experience to patrons, they will regain some of their discriminatory senses and will seek out a better presentation. For a long time in the 80s, patrons just went to the more convenient and nicer looking theaters. Once digital started getting all the hype inthe early 90s, i remember theater chains proudly listing which auditoriums had which digital format in their movie listings. Then more and more people started seeking out digital audio and stadium seating. But it took at least one major chain to whet the customer appetite and make it a priority once they rediscovered quality. An individual theater would not be able to shift regional consumer priorities.
Now that digital sound is no longer the buzzword it was , a lot of theaters, at least in Atlanta, have cut back on the importance of showing movies in the proper digital format. Formats are mislabeled in paperlistings proving that managers dont feel a need to be aware of the sound possibly because customers are not asking as much nowadays leading to complacency. If all the chains scale back in the sound and video quality, then patrons will not bother to seek out a better presentation and will make popcorn and location more of a priority. And I believe that is the case in a more than few places, including Atlanta. When I see managers confused by my queries in recent years, it tells me that managers are ignorant because customers are not pushing them for this information anymore.
Same with projection. People are so used to 2:1 cropping of 2.35:1 pictures, barely acceptable projector bulb intesities, that we need a major chain to maintain and market a superior visual experience so that people will want to seek out those theaters that show a better picture. I think patrons have been lulled into a passive acceptance of the current projection standards. It's like VHS versus non anomorphic DVDs in the mid 90s. I could see the quality difference and stopped renting vhs tapes right away. But people who used to stop by my house could not appreciate the difference and thought the quality difference was there but not that significant. Once DVDs started getting better, then even they started shunning VHS tapes becasue the difference was too big to ignore, especially with anamorphic dvds. If film studios continued to come out with very average quality DVDs, I doubt VHS rentals shares would be declining as rapidly as they are now even if an average quality dvd is still superior.
Theaters are not realizing that by looking at the short term cost savings, they are harming the industry in the long term. As DVD has greatly increased the home video experience with sound better than most movie theaters, and a picture that actually is closing the gap between home video and theater quality thanks to poor projection standards by chains like AMC, moviegoing has become only a must see in the first couple of weeks or wait until dvd experience. What chains dont realize is that once a whole generation gets comfortable with the idea of expecting parity in the home video and theater experience, then the only reason to go to the theater would be the must see factor of a buzzworthy movie in the first week or just be part of the crowd. People will start staying more and more at home to watch other movies on dvd in increasingly cheaper big screen tvs. Once this habit gets ingrained for a few years, it will be tougher to regain their patronage. DVDs are already coming out with more footage and earlier release dates. The big thing theaters have going for them is the "ability" to have a high resolution picture on a big screen with a crowd. So ,yes I agree customers want a superior picture. But unless there is a significant difference, they won't bother to seek out theaters further away just for the picture like I try to do.
It is always cheaper to retain your current customers than attract new ones.
Sometimes, I wonder if theater chains that condone 2:1 cropping in some theaters deserve class action suits for fraud if they do not warn the customers with a sign since we expect the whole frame when we visit a theater.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
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
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic