This is topic So there's this closed movie theater near me... in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=000486
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-03-2002, 07:42 PM:
I have a dream... heh heh.In neighboring small town Cottage Grove (15 mins south of Eugene, straight shot on I-5) sits a now-closed twin cinema, appropriately enough named Cottage Grove Cinemas. I drove down and looked at it today, was surprised to see it's in a relatively new retail shopping center. Looks like the building was originally constructed with the cinema in mind. It's a conventional commercial/retail building, only the end with the theaters is 2 stories high instead of standard 1-story commercial height. Unfortunately the auditoriums have been gutted, including removal of the center dividing wall between the 2 smallish rooms. I would guess each may have seated 150 or so. However the lobby, ticket booth, and restrooms are still intact. The shell of the concession stand is also in place. Looks like the upstairs booth is intact too. Though of course there is no usable equipment left. The drop ceiling was painted black. Yay. You can see the outline of the sloped seating arrangement along one of the sidewalls, though in its gutted state it's now just bare, flat concrete floors.
So, is there a rule of thumb for the minimum size of a small town that could support a twin cinema with, say, 300 seats? I think Cottage Grove is like 8000 or so. There are no other theaters there, so anyone who wants to see a movie must drive about 20 mins. up I-5 to Cinemark 17 in Springfield. Hmm, do you suppose that's what killed the twin? I should try to locate the original operator and find out what the story is...
Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 04-03-2002, 09:22 PM:
The bad thing is that the landlord of the shopping center may not want a movie theatre there at all. We have run in to this kind of resistance a couple of times. And they can afford to sit on the space for quite a while untill the type of tenant they want comes along.
Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 04-03-2002, 10:08 PM:
The only problem is 20 minutes is not a long way to drive to see first run.
I assume the twin would have been a sub run.
Here we are putting in 3 screens for 14000
With the nearest cinemas 1 hour away.
Posted by Jerry Chase (Member # 660) on 04-03-2002, 10:28 PM:
A town of 8000 can't support a theatre now, and probably couldn't at any time after 1952. Rule of thumb back in the heyday of twins was *at least* 10,000 in the village (20,000 was better), double that within ten miles - and nothing else to do in the entire area for recreation. This was before cable, video tapes, satellites, or DVD. County seats got preference, and closest competion had to be about twenty miles away. A lot of people got burned trying to do a "Jerry Lewis" twin theatre in a thin location.
In towns like Cottage Grove, residents are now used to driving just to shop. Kids aren't interested in meeting the same kids they go to school with, so they want to party (and watch movies)in the city and would all but ignore a local theatre.
Sorry to dash dreams but a theatre has about as much chance surviving there as a steam locomotive (maybe less).
Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 04-04-2002, 06:55 AM:
Jerry is on the money............If you count the number of screens in the USA and factor the number of people I feel you need to make a comfortable living off a cinema ( 15,000 per room ) the USA would have to double their population. Demographics is very important...I would not build or run a cinema in town of 60,000 people if 50,000 are 70 to 80 year old "Condo Folks". My former boss long ago, Marvin was involved in the Jerry Lewis expansion; which was happening at the same time as the TransLux twins in small towns. Marvin and I in the 1970's did many TDC ( Theatre Development Corporation ) package cinemas in small towns which was an improvement of the Jerry Lewis situation....I feel many of those situations are gone. The Regal expansion, as a former cinema operator, was the most disturbing when the numbers where telling you that at the end they where building rooms that they could not even pay the electric bill to keep open....it was a nice ride but there is no more "steam" in the engine.
Richard Fowler
TVP-Theatre & Video Products Inc. www.tvpmiami.com
Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 04-04-2002, 10:36 AM:
the big kicker here and the obviouse one. THe fact that the auditoriums have been gutted and the center dividing wall is gone tells me that the landloards want the space for something else like more individual stores that can be fitted into that space. All that needs to be done is the floor leveled and new walls put up.
Posted by Adam Fraser (Member # 1074) on 04-04-2002, 12:12 PM:
It sounds as though this is a lost cause. Especially because the theatre is a run of the mill. For a small theatre to stay in business in a small town these days you have to have an attraction so people will come for some reason besides the movie. IE: History, architecture, decorations. Also, the town almost always has to be a tourist town so you can draw from more than the 10,000 person residence base for patronage. Very few people are going to make a special trip to see a mall theatre.------------------
Adam Fraser
www.pinestheatre.com
Posted by Paul Turner (Member # 832) on 04-04-2002, 09:17 PM:
Just say NO, David. I graduated from high school in Cottage Grove. When people in the town wanna go out, they go to Eugene. The town will not support a twin. I was there when the Drive-In in CG went out (The Corral). It did miserable biz at the end. Now that was a loss.
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-05-2002, 11:28 AM:
I agree with most of the comments: This is probably not viable. If the good people of Cottage Grove want to go to a movie, it's 15 minutes away, with stadium seating and other attractions such as restaurants and the mall. Big night out in the "big city" for them and not all that far away.
Posted by Andy Bergstrom (Member # 360) on 04-05-2002, 01:59 PM:
How about a $2.00 admission 2nd run house? Just an idea. If you can provide a good enough reason for people to stay in the area it might work. What is the population of the surrounding area? Maybe use some creative programing and heavy local involvement.
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-05-2002, 03:43 PM:
There's a 12-screen $1.50 theater in the same mall as the 17-screen 1st-run theater that's 15 mins. away. So you would be competing against that. Granted, their presentation is awful (has been pretty much that way since it opened), but it's near restaurants etc. so bargain hunters looking for a night in the "big city" might rather go there.
Posted by Jim Ziegler (Member # 86) on 04-05-2002, 04:07 PM:
Presentations are quite frequently not the best at dollar houses, as they always run used prints.. Now, if ALL of them are scratched, then it is probably their fault..
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-05-2002, 04:13 PM:
When I say bad presentation, what I mean is that since Day 1 (they opened in 1990), as a general rule their screens have been dim & under-lit, sometimes with non-uniform illumination; fuzzy, jittery image; and weak, anemic sound systems (Ultra-Stereo, probably not SR-compatible). They did install DTS on 2 screens in the mid-90s, but didn't bother with split surrounds or subwoofers as far as I could tell. The last movie I saw there was Riding In Cars With Boys. The print was actually in very good condition, but the screen was dim and fuzzy, uneven illumination, there was something blocking part of the image in the lower-right corner (looked like an aperture plate that someone started cutting but didn't finish the job or maybe the plate wasn't in the correct position at all), and the sound was AM-radio quality with no directionality. Luckily it only cost me $1 to get in (first show of the day is $1, $1.50 after that).
Posted by Paul Cassidy (Member # 951) on 04-19-2002, 12:33 PM:
Yes it is very hard to compete with Multiplexs with 12 to 21 screens and you only have 1 or 2 , the customers want to see their film when they want, not when you are showing it...I was showing as many sessios as I could 6 or 7 a Day but not able to show the same one twice (exception being "Jurassic Park 1" that movie showed All Sessions All week for weeks) as I had to cater for the children in the mornings ,teenages and Adults in the afternoon and evening sessions ,so with one screen it has it's draw backs ,people wont stick around and wait for their film they will go down to the Complex that has the Feature showing in 4 cinemas at staggered times ,long weekends is where I made my money showing Movie Marathons , school and club outings then there is special Ethnic Films (Bollywood) for a small theater to survive it needs to have the backing of the Community and a multi-use ,such as Live Theatre , coffee meetings for senior citizens with a Classic Movie.... you know something different from the Plex as there is no way you can compete , so you need to be slightly out of step from them.------------------
A KIWI eats,roots & Leaves.
Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-19-2002, 12:40 PM:
Followup: A former owner of this theater (actually a member of the family that owned it) reads film-tech and contacted me. He says they were quite successful running it as a family operation (this was before Cinemark 17 opened 15 mins up the freeway). But they wanted to expand, add screens, and the landlord balked. At that time, the theater was sold to a larger company with many other locations. They could not make a go of it. The theater was closed and re-opened several times by the same corp. owners and it just wasn't working. Might have been because it was now a "corporate" theater instead of being family owned and run. So when they bailed out, the landlord basically decided "No movie theater here, period" and isn't interested in seeing the space used that way.