|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Dreamgirls Ticket $25.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Coate
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1904
From: Los Angeles, California
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 12-11-2006 03:41 AM
From the article "The End Of Theatical Cinema: One Year Later" by Rick Mitchell
quote:
And, given the complaints about high prices last year, which industry types naturally ignored, the consequences of the recently announced plan to charge $25 for “Dreamgirls” in its exclusive run at the Cinerama Dome in Los Angeles, the Ziegfeld in New York and the Metreon in San Francisco probably should be seriously thought out. It may be a “toe-in-the-water” test of the revival of roadshow-type production and presentation, of which Steven Spielberg was a fan, and for which a price increase may be necessary for the implementation of certain experiential cinema technologies, but it will only work if audiences feel the film and the technology are worth the additional cost, as they did in the early days of roadshowing in the Fifties. Though [in Los Angeles], the ArcLight, Bridge, El Capitan, and Grove appear to have been successful with such aspects of roadshowing as higher prices and reserved seats, the regular audience at these theaters are exclusively well-heeled Westside trendoids, less affluent film buffs who live near them being unable to afford to attend on even a regular basis, and I have not heard of such techniques succeeding or even being tried in other parts of town or the country, with the possible exception of equally trendy Manhattan.
There is really nothing about “Dreamgirls” or its presentation to make the higher price seem worth it to the majority of potential moviegoers. On the surface it appears to be nothing more than a megabuck remake of “Sparkle” (1976). Yes, the show has name recognition. So did “The Wiz,” “The Phantom Of The Opera,” and “Rent.” Most theater fans consider film versions to be inferior to stage versions, especially of musicals. And there is a generation gap issue here, even with black audiences. But, like the public embrace of repurposed films in Imax, the hype equating a higher admission price with something special, even if it really isn’t, may be enough to get a sufficient number of trendoids in to allow Paramount and Dreamworks to claim the price increase was a success and they or other distributors to try it with another film, probably a $300 mil+ presumed sure thing that turns out not to be.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 12-11-2006 12:49 PM
quote:
given the complaints about high prices last year, which industry types naturally ignored,
With this phrase, Rick Mitchell proves that he is an idiot.
Just because people complain about high prices, the industry is supposed to say "Oh, OK, we'll just lower the prices. Sure, we'll make less money and we'll have to cut everyone's salary, so quality will suffer, and we won't be able to replace anything that's broken or upgrade our facility, but so what? Nobody will care, because we'll have lower prices!"
He is probably one of those who always bitches about taxes for highway improvements, and then bitches because there's a pothole in the road.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 12-13-2006 02:05 PM
quote: Michael Coate
Read the whole article and I predict you'll change your mind about the writer.
I don't have time to read the whole thing at this moment, but I looked it over. He says the industry could benefit most from making more movies that MUST be seen in a theatre to take advantage of the whole experience cinema has to offer. A good idea, sure - but too much of the home audience simply does not care enough about the whole experience. They just want to "see the movie." They don't care if the picture is cropped, the sound is mono, or the color is goofed up. As long as plenty of dialogue is coming out of their surround speakers, they're happy.
The best way to improve the theatrical bottom line, which of course will never happen, would be to put off the DVD release for say, a year or two. Book the movie in fewer screens to build excitement, rather than having 25 showtimes a day. Advertise and promote the movie while it's still in theatres so it would build an audience, rather than burn-out the ad budget in the opening couple of weeks. Of course, all this is based on a requirement that the movie would have to be good to start with.
But even given the good ideas in the article, his notion that the industry has ignored the complaints about prices is still dumb. Nobody's "ignoring" anything....there's just nothing that can be done about it. Everything costs more nowadays. The complaints are silly anyway. If people want all the slam-bang of the big screen, it's got to be paid for. Movies are still a bargain compared with all other out-of-home entertainment.
The solution to the complaints is educating people as to WHY movies cost what they do. And if movies were suddenly half the price, the DVD people will still wait for the DVD to come out since they know it'll be just a couple of months, so nothing would be gained. That's why a l-o-n-g window would help business more than anything.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 12-17-2006 04:26 PM
I for one would expect that for my $25 for a seat at this DOG of a film, I would rather they had decent barf bags at each seat instead of playbill booklets. But aside from my personal, substantial aversion to seeing DREAMGIRLS, just having reserved seats does not a Roadshow make. In fact, reserved seats is the LEAST important aspect of this type of presention. The MOST important being the title -- it certainly has to be a HOT title with heavy pre-release publicity. And it most certainly has to be, as Rick Mitchell pointed out, a substantially higher quality presentation technology, to which I would say that it had to be shot on FILM, and that being 65mm and if not a 70mm release print (although there would be no reason not to strike 5/70 for a house like Ziegfeld, but the very least a 35 reduction EK showprint with NO VIDEO intermediate at all -- that's the kind of quality of which "Roadshow" presentations are made. Anything less is just marketing hype.
And one last thing about reserved seats -- the fact that the big Z has a very mild sloped floor and in the front rows it even seems to have a reverse slop upward, it makes for relatively poor sightlines. And although I love the Roadshow mystique, I sure don't want to pay $25 and wind up with some big doofus plopped in front of me blocking half my view of the screen. I still would want to pick my own seat if all the other aspects of a Roadshow presentation are there. What advantage does reserved seats give the theatre anyway? Or the patron, for that matter? The patron would only have an advantage if he could pick and choose his reserved seat, not if it were just assigned to him.
Now if someone actually knows that this is a 2K ![[dlp]](graemlins/dlp.gif) "roadshow" presention at the Ziegfeld, then those who are running that theatre (is it still Clearview Cinemas?) and Paramount excs should have a special place in the lowest ring of hell RESERVED FOR THEM. And me, excuse me while I reach for a barf bag with the DREAMGIRLS logo on it!
| 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
![[sleep]](graemlins/sleep.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic