Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Paramount Yanks "Tomb Raider" Sequel from Regal Theatres

This is topic Paramount Yanks "Tomb Raider" Sequel from Regal Theatres 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=000830

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 06-20-2003, 11:13 AM:

Risking a potentially harmful battle with the nations largest theatre chain , Paramount Pictures said Wednesday that it will not book its upcoming Lara Croft Tomb Raider sequel, in 47 of the chain's multiplexes after Regal refused to permit ads for Jeep to be displayed in its theatre lobbies. Regal informed the studio that it will not allow third-party ads in its theatres without compensation.

http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/2003/20030619.html#3

[ 06-20-2003, 04:34 PM: Message edited by: Bill Gabel ]

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-20-2003, 11:31 AM:

When it comes down to placing an actual Jeep in the lobby, I would support Regal on their feelings. I think it is going just a little "too far." Theatres are not car dealerships.

Just my opinion....

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 06-20-2003, 11:37 AM:

Well, note that Regal is opposed to the Jeep ad because they aren't getting PAID for it. Pay them, and I bet they change their mind. [Frown]

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-20-2003, 11:58 AM:

I think Regal should get paid if they do put a motor vehicle on display in a lobby.

I would presume Chrysler is paying Paramount quite handsomely for a promotion like this....

As far as standees and one-sheets....that would be more questionable, especially if it has no ties to the movie. I would have no problem with a picture of a Jeep on the promotion standee for the movie, but that is as far as it would go.

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 06-20-2003, 12:16 PM:

Regal/UA/Edwards theaters that split product will not play Tomb Raider 2. The title of this thread implies that Regal/UA/Edwards has banned the picture when it has not.

According to the Hollywood Reporter (via Reuters), Regal Entertainment Group has a corporate policy against unpaid product placement by a third party in its theaters. REG saw the Jeep tie-in for Tomb Raider 2 as unpaid product placement by a third party.

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 06-20-2003, 02:58 PM:

Somehow I don't think that not showing BoobRaider 2 is going to be a huge loss for Regal.

Posted by Aaron Haney (Member # 747) on 06-20-2003, 03:04 PM:

Here is a more permanent link to the IMDb story:

http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/2003/20030619.html#3

(The front page of IMDb's StudioBrief changes each day.)

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-20-2003, 03:19 PM:

So Paramount will only let theatres book Tomb Raider if the theatre agrees to park a Jeep in the lobby for some period of time? That's insane! I wonder if this applies to independent theatres, many of whom couldn't fit a Jeep in the lobby at all, even if they removed the concession stand.

I fully agree with Regal on this one. It's onerous enough for the film distributor to demand 90+% of ticket revenue, but to force exhibitors to do stupid promotional tie-ins that have nothing to do with the movie is beyond ridiculous. [Mad]

I can understand requiring movie-related promotional stuff, like displaying posters and/or showing trailers that promote the film itself (and thus benefit exhibitors, too), but forcing theatres to promote unrelated products is terribly unfair.

(Apologies if I misunderstood the article and am over-reacting.)

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 06-20-2003, 04:29 PM:

I did not enjoy the first "TOMB RAIDERS" film and I have no plans to see the sequel. If Paramount was smart, they will come out ahead if they could get as much theatres to show the film the day it opens because if this film is a 'stinker' like the first film was in my opinion, they will be the loser if the film was indeed bad and create bad word of mouth publicity from the people who saw it during it's opening weekend. I too agree with Regal for standing firm against 3rd party advertising.

-Claude

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 06-20-2003, 06:14 PM:

And what happened to Lara Croft's Land Rover?

I think the old girl is slipping if she has traded her Land Rover in on a Jeep! [thumbsdown]

Here's a girl who had a Land Rover, an Aston Martin and a Triumph motorcycle, now she is driving around in a Jeep! Next thing you know, she will be hopping in to my Dodge Minivan. Being an, ass kicking, archeological adventurer must not be paying what it used to.

First James Bond trades his Aston Martin in on a BMW and now this. [Eek!]

She will never be invited to tea with the Queen again.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-20-2003, 07:00 PM:

So who really gives a dam about Regal, Paramount, Toumb Raider, or the "Cheep" anyway????
Mark

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 06-20-2003, 07:47 PM:

From the look of the article, it seems that Paramount should have discussed their Jeep promotion with the chains before promising they could deliver ad space and theatre square footage outside of the normal advertising means. I hate 3rd party advertising with a passion... but this would be an inroad that you can bet the studios would use in the future, replete with the "do it or no booking" hammer. In a sense, it's every bit as dangerous as the notion that a studio might eventually get a percentage of concessions.

For better or worse, Regal thinks they've found a way to make more money at their locations that's not directly related to the studios' licensed product. I can't see how a studio could assume rights to any of that.

As for the movie itself... I think it'll make a great drive-in picture this year! [beer]

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-20-2003, 07:59 PM:

Mark, I am certainly not a big fan of Regal. Regal probably would wish I would just "dry up and blow away."

But I honestly hope Regal stands firm on this issue. If Regal buckled under pressure, the next thing you will see is some promotion followed by a sales person "taking orders" for their products in a theatre lobby.

I personally think Paramount "crossed the line" on this one....

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 06-21-2003, 02:03 PM:

If they parked a Jeep Rubicon in my theatre, Sean (my assistant manager) would have put 12,000 miles on it and played in the mud the whole time, buy the time they came to pick it back up. Taking the keys and the battery wouldn't slow him down much. Then all the cool Rubicon parts would end up on his Jeep Cherokee.

Then I could hold the Jeep hostage till my advertising fee was covered. I'm thinking that I'd like 10% of my box take. [Big Grin]

Go ahead and park a Jeep in my lobby, I dare you!

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 06-21-2003, 04:28 PM:

I also don't believe that a film company has a right to impose 3rd party advertising next you could see a deal say requireing exclusive advertising for say coke to play a movie yet your theatre sells pepsi

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-21-2003, 05:35 PM:

Am I missing something? How exactly would one drive a Jeep into a theater lobby anyway? Most theaters only have pairs of 36" glass doors. With both doors opened you might have several inches under a 6' wide clearance. My Chevy truck would require a 78" wide clearance, with the side power mirrors folded in. Anyway, to get to the point, most Jeeps are as wide as my truck and they're not fitting through a double set of standard glass doors.

Very few theaters have any kind of overhead door or large cargo entry capable of admitting a vehicle. So Paramount is f**king stupid for coming up with this one. Don't they realize most movie theaters are not located in malls anymore? Morons!

And then the advertising tie-in, expecting theaters to act like car dealerships is just plain arrogant. If the theater has to show off cars for a movie, I suggest the movie distributor ask the theater for some parking lot space for the vehicle(s). I agree with Regal's view that they should be compensated for third party advertising, especially in this case since they're having to do the actual ad legwork.

Posted by William Leland III (Member # 1400) on 06-21-2003, 06:02 PM:

I don't think they have to have a Jeep inside the lobby, like most have said it will not fit, i can assume the Jeep placed outside by box is what they mean.

We have had cars parked outside our theatres before, it doesn't bother me other than they take up room and sit there for months, I just dismiss it as another cheap way of advertising but the dealers did give us keys and said we could take "test drives"..... [beer]

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 06-21-2003, 06:26 PM:

Ol' Sumner got a little too greedy on this one. I agree, they crossed the line.

They WILL be after concessions before long. Every now and then, one of them tries to break down resistance by pulling a stunt like this.

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 06-21-2003, 10:33 PM:

Edwards used to do buissines with TrendWest (a timeshare company) and we used to park all sorts of vehicles in our lobby.

Once we parked a Chevy Avelanch in the lobby. We had to take the double doors off the henges to fit it through, but we succeded.

Most of the Trucks and SUVs we parked went in fine without detaching the doors.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-22-2003, 12:25 AM:

I glanced at the 1-Sheet today, and there was no picture of a stupid Jeep on it. I hope Regal stands firm all the way!

If not, maybe there should be a contest for the customers to win the damn thing. But you know as well as I do that will probably never happen.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-22-2003, 01:16 AM:

47 whole theaters won't be getting this movie? Oh man I bet Regal is filled with fear and intimidation. 47 theaters! That's not exactly the whole chain. That's like 3 average city blocks for Regal! Oh man Regal better reconsider if they want to stay in business! Beware Regal... Paramount is pouting!

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 06-22-2003, 02:46 AM:

If everyone remembers Regal did not open "Rush Hour 2" on the break at any of their locations. I don't think it will harm Regal's profits those weeks that "Tomb Raider 2" isn't playing at thier 'split' product locations.

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 06-22-2003, 03:18 AM:

Perhaps they can't place the ads, we have an exclusive agreement to place ads/promo's in toilets & lobby.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 06-22-2003, 03:47 AM:

quote:
47 theaters! That's not exactly the whole chain.

True... but if Paramount's trying to place Jeeps into those theatres, they're probably in some of Regal's larger markets.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 06-22-2003, 05:52 AM:

Oh well. Paramount will lose more money than Regal since they take 99.999% of the box office share (or whatever it is) if they take it from their larger theaters. The only reason to release any movie in the first place is to get as large of a gross for opening weekend as possible. Paramount will cave in because they want to see more $$$. Unless they expect the movie to completely bomb. Either way Regal wins if they hold their ground.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-23-2003, 09:17 AM:

You just can't seem to avoid ads and promotions anywhere. [Roll Eyes]

The Rochester airport looks like a new car dealership, with about a dozen new cars parked in the waiting areas. The Monroe County government rents the space as "business opportunities":

http://www.rocairport.com/org36.asp?storyID=1202

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 06-23-2003, 11:31 AM:

Anyone else notice the blatant Cingular logos placed strategically in all of the Charlie's Angels trailers?

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 06-23-2003, 12:08 PM:

Yep [Roll Eyes]

...But it was nice to see they knew enough to maintain the old Bell logo on Charlie's speakerphone.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-23-2003, 05:46 PM:

Everything is getting labeled with a corporate name anymore. Nextel just bought rights to have their name stuck on the NASCAR Winston Cup Series. Just about every stadium has a corporate name on it now.

Give it a couple more years of progress. You'll see a freaking NEXTEL logo above your bathroom door, perhaps even complete with voiceover announce: "Bob's bowel movement this morning, sponsored by NEXTEL!" [bs]

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 06-23-2003, 09:20 PM:

....complete with sound effects in Dolby Stereo with split surrounds.... [Big Grin]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 06-24-2003, 07:07 AM:

...and transmitted across the country with NEXTEL's "Walkie Talkie" feature. [Big Grin]

Posted by Charles Everett (Member # 889) on 06-24-2003, 04:54 PM:

Putting this back on topic: Advertising Age has picked up the story. They also wrongly state that Regal has banned Tomb Raider 2.

Somebody in Knoxville ought to make it clear to the press that Regal/UA/Edwards is playing Tomb Raider 2, just not if the theater has to split product.

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 06-24-2003, 07:51 PM:

I wouldn't worry about technical specifics about this. The real issue is not that some of Regal is still carrying, only that those with split product are not. MOST americans would have NO idea what the hell you are talking about.

This is why the press has decided to just state that the film has been pulled from 47 theaters. The original article does not specifically state that this is all of thier theaters. The fact it got pulled at all is of interest, not what percentage of Regals it got pulled from.

Dave

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 06-25-2003, 12:10 PM:

In apparent retaliation for Regal Cinema's decision to refuse to allow signs for Jeep (and actual vehicles) to be displayed in theatre lobbies in 47 of its megaplexes. The car company has yanked it's ads from Regal's Digital Content Network.

http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/2003/20030624.html

[ 06-25-2003, 02:27 PM: Message edited by: Bill Gabel ]

Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 06-25-2003, 12:22 PM:

A far cry from when Tomb Raider opened here! Land Rover produced limited edition models, based on Lara's vehicle, I say based 'cos they put a nasty diseasel engine in place of the V8. Anyroad cinemas with a friendly Land Rover dealer nearby ran joint promotions, and opening night saw a couple of these beasties parked up outside the cinemas, with patrons allowed to look, touch and book a test drive.

No idea what the deal with the cinemas was, probably Land Rover went about with the softly softly friendly approach, not the 'thou shalt have our vehicle outside' approach.

btw. Why are those 'soft roader' made by Chrysler called jeep? I learned to drive in a real jeep, or GP to give it its proper title, built by Wyllis with three gears, and no synchro. A far cry from the mobile gin palace that wields the name today!