|
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
|
Author
|
Topic: What cinema brand/naming had the most brand recognition with consumers?
|
Scott Jentsch
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1061
From: New Berlin, WI, USA
Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 08-26-2013 01:20 PM
Back when Dolby Digital had an issue with sound dropouts at the reel changes, I would seek out DTS presentations instead. Once that was resolved, it didn't matter much, even though in my mind I knew that DTS was the superior format, so all other things equal, I would seek out the DTS shows.
While Robert's statement about the content of the movie being paramount in people's minds is true, I agree with Brad's assertion that people consciously or subconsciously know when something is wrong. They may not be able to articulate it, but they form an impression and that impression will affect them when they decide where to see a movie.
In markets where movie theaters are many miles apart, it can be difficult to justify driving an extra half hour or more to go to a better theater, but when you have several theaters within a short distance of each other, then the differentiating factors come into play, and the theaters on the short end of the stick are going to suffer.
I also think that there is a tendency in this industry to discount the ability of the moviegoer to understand and appreciate quality. A casual moviegoer shouldn't be expected to understand all the things that go into a quality presentation, but if these things are pointed out to them with some explanation as to why they are better and how to recognize it, they'll come away with a higher appreciation of the quality presentations and they will also begin to demand it when they decide to spend their money.
Manny's questions are all about the effectiveness of marketing.
Effective branding can definitely sway customer preferences. Too many businesses slap a brand on something and do nothing to educate and inform about the brand - resulting in lackluster results. The theater industry seems compelled to brand everything possible in the hopes of impressing the public that isn't able/willing to find out what it really means. Smoke and mirrors will only get you so far.
If you have two identical theaters, the one that is marketed should always get the larger portion of the customer attention. Why wouldn't it? If people are looking at two otherwise identical choices, they'll choose the one that has some differentiation. Even if they don't know what THX is, the THX-marked theater would likely draw more people because there is a distinction attached to that theater. You'll sway even more people if you educate and inform, and even more than that if the presentations are consistently excellent (this last part is important, because failure to do that will end up backfiring against the marketing and cause a net negative response).
A logo alone isn't going to do much beyond making the artist happy that created it. But backing that logo up with information and then following through with an excellent experience attaches a lot more weight and meaning to that logo and actually makes it mean something. It's amazing to me how many theaters/chains mess this up...
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 08-26-2013 06:27 PM
Dolby is still around... Dolby might have had the distinct problem of being around everywhere and later becoming almost irrelevant as a distinguished brand when Digital Cinema got hold. But Dolby still has Atmos and their 3D system that offers quite some distinction. Also, it remains the most widely recognized brand and their trailers are still playing in many cinemas around the world.
DTS is no more (at least not in cinema), what remains is Datasat and that's also beyond dead, at least regarding their legacy digital sound system, formerly known as DTS.
We all know the story behind THX, they're now in the licensing sticker selling business. Theaters are no more a focus...
For now, the best branded all-in-one package is, unfortunately, Digital IMAX.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Connor Wilson
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 190
From: Sterling, VA, USA
Registered: Jan 2011
|
posted 08-27-2013 09:01 PM
When we are speaking of Dolby, we're talking about over 45 years of experience in the recording industry. It's only been 42 years since Dolby noise reduction was introduced to film with "A Clockwork Orange", so most of Dolby's career was about cinema. Dolby innovated the analog realm as well as the digital realm of film. While Dolby cares about Digital Cinema, 3D, and Atmos today, people think sound when they think of Dolby. The Dolby name is universally known and the simple term "Dolby Digital" is a household name as it is not only an alliteration but a worldwide standard in electronics. I know very few people who know about Dolby Atmos, I know one guy who associates good sound, be it LPCM, DTS-HD Master Audio, or even 5.1 surround itself, as "Dolby Digital." Dolby Atmos just doesn't have muscle yet.
I believe the THX process is a good practice but it's rarely being done today. Today, they are a brand certifying consumer electronics and the theatrical component is slowing down. There are very few theaters that play a THX trailer before a film, let alone THX-certified cinemas themselves. A Joe Blow who spends $5,000 on THX equipment is going to end up with poor sound if he does not treat the room correctly.
IMAX is the buzzword of average people who want something away from their sub-par average experience to a sub-par premium experience. The IMAX setups that tend to live up to what they are supposed to be are the 15/70 setups, but those are dwindling more than THX-certified theaters. IMAX is damaged goods. If you're lucky, you'll get an incredible experience like Inception at Udvar-Hazy Center.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 08-28-2013 12:22 PM
A Clockwork Orange was one of the first (if not the first) movie to use Dolby noise reduction in the production and/or post-production process. However, the original prints were released in standard mono with no Dolby NR.
The British short film A Quiet Revolution (1972) was the first release to feature Dolby noise reduction applied to an optical mono sound track on 35mm film.
Dolby noise reduction was a big deal, not just in terms of movie audio, but also with home stereo systems. I can't recall if 8-track cassette tapes ever supported Dolby NR, but those things were a pain in the ass to use. My parents had a Pontiac LeMans with an 8-track player we used on road trips. I hated punching all sorts of buttons in addition to the fast forwarding and rewinding one had to do to access a particular song. I think younger people are completely spoiled about the instant song access convenience that comes with digital audio. Anyway, the cassette tape format took away all those "sides" that 8-track had. The better quality tape decks also boasted Dolby noise reduction. I didn't like the early implementations of it because I thought it sounded muddy. But it put that Dolby logo all over HiFi gear.
The cassette tape format also did a number on consumer reel to reel tape machines. My dad bought a big Teac reel to reel player when we lived in Iwakuni, Japan. A single, large reel could hold hours of music, but the format wasn't portable at all. Cassette decks could be built into boom boxes or Walkman players. The Dolby logo found its way onto plenty of those devices.
The prominence of IMAX branding is something that really only applies to recent years. And it's a very hollow thing at that. IMAX is nothing like what it used to be. The Dolby brand has been far more visible for far longer.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mike Blakesley
Film God
Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 08-28-2013 02:21 PM
quote:
Dolby noise reduction was a big deal, not just in terms of movie audio, but also with home stereo systems. I can't recall if 8-track cassette tapes ever supported Dolby NR, but those things were a pain in the ass to use
...
I think younger people are completely spoiled about the instant song access convenience that comes with digital audio. Anyway, the cassette tape format took away all those "sides" that 8-track had. The better quality tape decks also boasted Dolby noise reduction. I didn't like the early implementations of it because I thought it sounded muddy.
I'll bet about 90% of the listening that was done on Dolby-equipped cassette systems was done with the Dolby switched off. Cassettes were capable of pretty good sound, but you had to be using good quality tape. Most pre-recorded cassettes were made on crap tape, so on the average consumer system they sounded better with Dolby turned off. If you made a tape of your own from a good LP, on a good tape deck, using quality tape, and recorded with the right settings, then it would sound too bright and hissy with Dolby off.
Higher-end 8-track recording machines did offer Dolby noise reduction toward the end of the 8-track era, but I don't think any pre-recorded tapes ever had it. Even if they had, they would have suffered from the same problems cassettes did.
quote: Bobby Henderson
My parents had a Pontiac LeMans with an 8-track player we used on road trips. I hated punching all sorts of buttons in addition to the fast forwarding and rewinding one had to do to access a particular song.
8-tracks were not really designed for the person who wanted to listen to specific songs....they were meant for album listeners. If you were "fast forwarding and rewinding" I guarantee you did NOT have an 8-track player in your LeMans, because it's not possible to rewind an 8-track tape.
You are right about today's generation not knowing how lucky they are with the instant access thing. That all happened when CDs came along. I talked to many CD owners over the years who say they've never heard some of the songs on CDs they bought.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5
|
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
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic