"Is (fill in movie name) good?" Like I'm going to say "No, it sucks, don't come and see it!"

Or,

However if we " spend our money on other entertainment items " the sooner quality entertainment returns.

The quality was much better in the fifties and sixties when product wasn't as plentifull but quality was superior, They did not produce as many films but the quality was far superior.

Am I wrong?

I think a lot of movies are targetet to one particular kind of audience. Obviously, the movie companies would like to have EVERYBODY pay to see ALL of their movies but, in reality, that's just not going to work.

We have War movies, Teenage movies, Comedies, Adult Dramas, Action movies and a hundred other categories or sub-categories of movies. I think that almost every movie has its merits IF you can correctly identify it's main audience.

For instance: People who didn't like the movie, Clerks, are probably NOT going to like Jay and Silent Bob. People who like Clerks and Jay and Silent Bob are probably NOT going to like Princess Diaries. However, families with pre-teen girls are likely to love it. (BTW: I think Princess Diaries is an EXCELLENT movie for pre-teen girls. It goes back to the old familiar Disney "formula" we all know and love.)

When I am asked the question, "Is it good?", the answer I want to give is, "I might not have liked it but there's got to be somebody out there who will, otherwise it wouldn't have been made."

The scattershot marketing techniques the movie companies use nowadays is only serving to confuse movie goers. When they come in to see two or three movies in a row that they didn't like they are more likely to pass on that one movie that they definately will like. Their marketing only serves to shoot themselves in the foot.

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

One person responsible for 12 to 16 screens means they "watch" about 40 movies during an 8 hour shift. Probably an impossible task, so theatres trying to "do film right" need to train and empower their floor staff to monitor the picture and sound quality and report any problems immediately. Likewise, my suggestion of adapting the SMPTE Theatre Quality Evaluation Program by enlisting a group of technically-saavy movie buffs to be your "eyes and ears" in return for free admission.

What is the SMPTE program? Do you have a link describing it?

We had a small theater chain here in Washington State that hired a local film critic to advertize the movies being run in Mount Vernon. Well, the critic blasted most of the movies so bad over the local radio stations that nobody would watch them. Then the critic would say what theater had the movie.

The theater business owner seemed to be at a complete loss as to why the grosses for a specific movie were worse than everyone else.

The critic finally lost his contract - when the theater chain went bankrupt.

The SMPTE Theatre Quality Evaluation Program (TQEP) provided an evaluation form that SMPTE members attending movies could use to help theatres identify and correct presentation problems. The original technical paper and evaluation form are in the Film Tech "Manuals" section under "Instructional Documents".

The original TQEP had limited success, since SMPTE members were not uniformly distributed throughout the country. For example, theatres in the Los Angeles area often received multiple evaluations for each screening, whereas theatres in rural areas never received evaluations. The principles of having technically-saavy theatre-goers subjectively evaluate presentation quality were later adopted by the Lucasfilm THX Theatre Alignment Program (TAP) and the Kodak ScreenCheck program.

I'm suggesting that the TQEP evaluation form could be updated and modified, and that technically-saavy moviegoers could be enlisted by theatres to evaluate presentation quality on a routine basis, perhaps in return for free admission.

Thanks for your ever flowing fountain of knowledge. I will see if I can work something out here.

 |  IP: Logged