quote:

---

...and Hollywood wonders why theatre business is down 8 to 15 percent from last year.....shit like this hitting the screens... - Monte

---

First of all, Hollywood is not totally to blame here. If I was right all the time I would be a friggin billionaire, as it is, I am not. So for what it's worth, right or not, here is my personal outlook and opinion on what exactly is wrong with the state of the theater industry today.

Look, I loved the DUKES of hazzard, and so did many other people. Critics may hate it, and those that chose to hate it will also hate it. No offence intended or taken, it's just that kind of movie.

But to blame it for the downslide in box office?

Personal feelings aside, and as I do respect the community here in general, I do wonder myself why there is so much victim play in the industry.

Used to be there was a time when you couldn't get tickets, shows sold out all the time, and the films then were not any better than this one in particular.

Also there were times when there was amazing product to be seen, yet you couldn't fill the seats.

There are many social aspects as to why the business has it's ups and downs. Same goes for the stock market. Right now, the theater industry is getting a long overdue realignment. It is an easy one, not taking too much bite. Only 8-15 percent? Would we rather have a total crash?

In any market, there are spurts, growth, and yes, even realignment. It happens, and is part of basic economics. If the DUKES came out last year, as part of a blockbuster year, there would have been no mention of how films like this are destroying the bottom line.

However as it is, revenues are down this year. It isn't product as a whole for the reason. Right now our economy is going through its own realignment, and the housing market is set explode, which way is up for debate.

There seems to be an awful lot of films this year from sources that for various reasons have developed a certain amount of hatred for them. This contributes to overall general disatisfaction for the rest of the industry, however it is not a general indicator of quality or quantity.

2005 will most doubtedly be noted as the year of the duds, and there are many films that were entertaining enough, yet seemed to have trouble finding solid ground. Whether through writing or directing choices, it seemed as if this year was nothing but misfires and miscommunications.

You can't blame hollywood and the movies alone. Overall customer disatisfaction has a large contribution to the downfall as well. I myself cannot sell a product unless I know it, and believe in it. Imagine if you have just one person in the theater that hates a certian movie, and carries that negative attitude towards a product that you are trying to sell, and spreads it like wildfire to everything they touch. It won't be just that movie, but the emotions regarding everything in the facility will be effected.

Customers like to feel good. When you feel good, they feel good. When you feel like crap, so do they. Regardless of how much you may hate a film, you have to find a way to at least give the impression to your entire staff that you believe in the product, or you won't sell any products period.

Imagine going to a car dealership. The new model is in, and you hate it, so you want to sell the old model. People want the new one, they saw it advertized, they came to you, and they want it. You hate it, and they feel that. They don't want the old one, and you give them your bad vibes on the new one. Customer lost. Revenue gone.

Where I work now, we work very hard to generate customer satisfaction through consultative education. I may not find harmony with the product, however my customer just might. If I can understand his/her point of view, and match that to the product in question, I can understand the connection, and there I can find balance in the equation. Harmony is achieved.

If I plain refuse to understand the connection, to understand my audience, then I also refuse the positive energy that is gained when harmony is achieved.

I have sold out shows that were just plain dumb and stupid, and I personally hated the shows. However, that bieng said, I chose to understand the core audience, the connection they had to the show, and what it means to me to feel good about providing my customer with the experience that they desire, even if it is not my cup of tea.

Right now, there is no harmony in the industry. From critics who are trashing everything in sight, to theater employees who have no desire to show up for work, the mood is negative and it is growing exponentially. Right now, I do not see any real change unless someone is willing to step up and be that service that people want.

There are two points to remember..

1. Being a leader is not about leading other people, it is about leading what you do, and,

2. In the absence of true leadership, people will drink the sand when there is water nearby.

It takes true leaders in our industry to show us the way. You can either play the victim or you can play the savior. The choice is purely up to us as individuals, as leaders.

Give the customer a top notch experience, let them know you side with them, not against them, don't loathe them for thier movie choice, don't hate them for wieghing in at 400 pounds while they buy an extra buttered popcorn and a diet coke, and definately most definately show them why, regardless of the quality of the movie, why they should be coming back to your theater each and every weekend.

If we all did this, regardless of product, what benefit would we see? If we can quantify the benefit of our location to the customer, would it matter what film they saw? Can you quantify it? Can you give them the value of it?

Do this, and I truly beleive that product aside, you will do well, you will be a true leader.

Ciao
 

---

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 08-06-2005, 06:35 PM:
 
Apparently there are a lot of people in my neck of the woods who don't agree with Dave's assessment. I talked with our Managing Director this afternoon and he said you could have fired a cannon through our lobby last night and not hit anybody. Fewer than 150 attended the whole day (Friday), and we have it in our two biggest houses.

I just talked to the booth this evening, and they said we are dying with the Dukes again. This is NOT a moneymaker, and worse, there is nothing up against it this week.

I shudder to think what additional "Dukes" will do to the bottom line the rest of what's left of a disasterous summer. But that's a topic for September.
 

---

Posted by Matt Fields (Member # 3211) on 08-06-2005, 06:53 PM:
 
Dukes will end up being a regional hit. Great in some places, lousy in others. I sold out my first show last night and was 3/4 full for the late show. But I'm in hillbilly country.

People like to see themselves in movies. Hillbillies will go watch hillbillies.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-07-2005, 02:34 AM:
 
I agree with the leadership thing. Why C.B.deMille, John Huston, William Wyler, and all of the good ol' directors knew how to lead, direct, and be in control - and they all made good movies that everyone can remember.

Now, once again, it's a generation thing-the passing of it and the passing of quality.

Course, Hollywood needs to think about the most important part of their business, and that is family-orientated features that EVERYONE can attend, instead of singling out stories for a certain age group or class of people - as what is happening today: movies aimed towards the youth and young adults.

Adults and older people feel that they're being left out in left field with movie entertainment. They don't come out since the films nowdays are way below their calibre and not on their level.

Plus, with the PG-13 rating, it seems that filmmakers are really pushing the envelope and taking advantage with this rating so they can still get the "R" that they want, but just lightly water it down to attract the younger generation. I think this is the biggest concern of all with the moviegoing public since they feel that there is hardly no difference between the two ratings in the subject of content.

"Dukes of Hazzard" and others that flopped in the big houses will be hits for the discount houses for the simple fact of monetary value. Who want's to see junk for 8 to 9 bucks when they can head on over to a discount house and see the same for 2
bucks and feel that they've definitely got their money's worth?

That's were the business is really heading off to...before the DVD sales (which I've heard that the release dates from film to DVD of certain releases are inching close together..and the public knows this as well - to enjoy in their new fandangled home theatre systems: the 2nd threat, with being the 1st threat was the invention of the TV set...) take into being.

..but the nice thing of it all: is that people STILL love to get out of the house to be entertained and will come out to see a movie on that MEGASCREEN in your GIGAPLEX and will remember that they had a good experience.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Anslem Rayburn (Member # 1267) on 08-07-2005, 05:38 AM:
 
The simple fact is this:

You have to make your theater more inviting than the home theater experience. Smiling faces at the box office and when entering the building. Get rid of people that detract from the film (talkers, crying babies, etc.). Make your popcorn and drinks better than they can get from a microwave and a can of pop. Make it an event to be shared by all.

Many movies are being offered on DVD and Pay-Per-View a matter of weeks after they are in theaters. Why pay $8 per person when you can watch it for $4 for the whole family in 2 or 3 months? The experience of going to your theater has to be above what they can acheive at home. That doesn't mean you can't run ads during intermission, but your 20' wide screen better be scratch and dirt free when the movie starts, your sound better be mesmerizing, and your customer service better be top-notch. "The Show Starts At The Sidewalk"...
 

---

Posted by Jon Morgan (Member # 3059) on 08-07-2005, 11:09 AM:
 
I, personally, would like to see DeMille's take on the Duke boys.
 

---

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 08-07-2005, 11:27 AM:
 
Our local movie critic who usually doesn't like that type of film really liked Dukes of Hazzard, gave it 3 stars out of 4. We played Cinderella Man to 500 at the 4 pm matinee and 800 for the 7.15 yesterday. Crash at 9.45 only brought 350 though, with the same number for the midnite of Labyrinth. The midnite is $3.00 and the others are $2.00. Give 'em value for the buck and they'll come.
 

---

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 08-07-2005, 05:05 PM:
 

quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr

---

Apparently there are a lot of people in my neck of the woods who don't agree with Dave's assessment. I talked with our Managing Director this afternoon and he said you could have fired a cannon through our lobby last night and not hit anybody. Fewer than 150 attended the whole day (Friday), and we have it in our two biggest houses.

---

quote: Mike Heenan

---

....doubt that it's the reason everything is going so bad at the box office.

---

quote: Lyle Romer

---

why have DVD sales been dropping also? If more people were waiting for the DVD then DVD sales should be going up.

---

quote: Brad Allen

---

And we simply don't have ANY actors today...

---

should have added "new" behind the word "actors". Then, this will make the statement more definite.

But, like I mentioned, with Hollyrock making movies geared to the young adult, the young adult don't need to be given anything really special. All they care is to goto a movie that'll make them laugh-no matter how bad the story and plot is.

Or, goto a movie that has CGI's, action, explosions, etc. I.E. - a "no-brainer" movie...and these are easy to make.

Plus, Hollywhore knows of the overseas market and how valuable some of the countries really depend on movies made in the U.S.

Some countries will kill for any form of entertainment from the States-no matter how good or bad it can be.

So, basically what we see and think is so-so to almost crap, it's a seller overseas.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-08-2005, 11:18 PM:
 
From what an exhibitor can do in today's theatre biz, Mr. Wolfe seems to have the right idea and it appears to be performing as well or better than other plans. That is, to provide an "experience" that is not only different but superior to what the customer can achieve at home. More power to you Mr. Wolfe!
 

---

Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 08-09-2005, 03:45 PM:
 
Yes, I should have been more accurate in my statement. But after I tried 3 times to post a reply and have film-tech eat it, I was frustrated and in a hurry to post the reply.

What I meant to say was, today's crop of actors can't act their way out of a bag incomparison. Mr Hanks, and others that Steve mentioned I by no means consider to be of today's crop. They are definitely the cream of the crop. Unfortuntely we see far too little from them these days.
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-09-2005, 04:09 PM:
 

quote: Brad Allen

---

They are definitely the cream of the crop. Unfortuntely we see far too little from them these days.

---

quote: Richard C. Wolfe

---

I do however, try to make the best with what I have, and to take what I have and make it a unique theatre going experience, something totally different then what is found at the local megaplexes. I have posted here many times about my management philosophies... the use of stage curtains, colored lighting effects, old time uniforms for the staff, cartoons, the theatre pipe organ... I could go on and on. Many people, maybe most think I'm out of step with the times, and maybe I am.

---

Richard,

It sounds like you are doing everything right, and are being rewarded as a result. People respond to showmanship, and it sounds like your customers know where to find it.

Sure, there may be other factors at play, such as lower ticket prices, but you also have the challenges associated with playing movies closer to their DVD release.

Before theaters complain about poor business, they need to look at successes such as yours, and then they need to look at themselves to evaluate whether anything could be improved, before they start whining about how it's someone else's fault that business is slow.

The industry needs more theaters with attitudes and approaches such as yours. Unfortunately, I think you are part of an endangered species...

Keep up the good work, and if you ever want to expand, we have a 4-plex near here that's sitting empty.

Scott
 

---

Posted by Robert Harrison (Member # 3202) on 08-11-2005, 06:06 PM:
 
The following is an imaginary interview with Martin "Bud" Buckpasser of Bloes Cineshack:

RH: How did you become interested in the exhibition industry? What do you love about movies?

BUCKPASSER: You know, whenever I'm asked this question, I always paraphrase that classic line from "Gone With the Wind"..."Frankly, I don't give a damn...about movies, that is." Now, admissions and, most important, popcorn sales, that's what I'm talking about!

RH: If you don't care about movies, then why has your company spent millions of dollars on stadium seats and digital sound?

BUCKPASSER: You think I wanted to? I'm just keeping up with the Joneses. It's like a mantra now..."Stadium seats and digital sound! Stadium seats and digital sound!"

RH: That would explain a lot.

BUCKPASSER: Hell, that explains it all! American Multi Crackerbox started building multiplexes, so we all did! But then, after we copied them, they turn around and build even bigger places and closed the little ones. I tell you, it's the theatre owners' version of the Biggest Dick Contest.

RH: Don't you ever do anything expressly for the customers' benefit?

BUCKPASSER: Shit, no. If we did, we wouldn't be getting all this grief from the ADA, the American Dumbass Association!

RH: You mean, of course, the Americans with Disablities Act?

BUCKPASSER: Call it what you will, it's a pain in the ass. No sooner do we spend all that money on stadium seats, do they start harping about wheelchair spaces. We have 'em!

RH: Yeah, right in front of the screen!

BUCKPASSER: Look...if we have to start redesigning for one minority group, and people in wheelchairs are a minority, the next thing you know we'll have to start running movies in Spanish for the border hoppers.

RH: That's a really harsh attitude, don't you think? I mean, I never wrote any letters to the theatre owners begging for stadium seats. And I know there weren't any senior citizens clamoring for it. They all like to sit in the back of the auditorium and they HATE climbing stairs. Yet, with stadium seats, the back of the house is all the way up the stairs!

BUCKPASSER: Again, you are speaking of a minority, a minority that, I might add, is too cheap to buy any concessions. This is a business. It must make money and we can't accomplish that by catering to our customers' wants and needs.

RH: So, does that mean that digital sound wasn't about the customers, either?

BUCKPASSER: Hey, all I know is that somebody thinks it's written in the Bible that every time Dolby or whoever invents a new sound system, we have to install it. I had thought that the industry learned its lesson back in the early 70's. Theatres back then quit fooling around with large guage film and stereo sound. I mean, if it was okay to see "The Godfather" and "Jaws" in mono, why do we need 9 channels of sound for "Harry Potter?"

RH: People didn't have home theatres back then.

BUCKPASSER: What's your point?

RH: You have to compete, don't you? Just as the theatres did in the 50's with television. Give them that something extra.

BUCKPASSER: How the hell can we do that when Dolby keeps seeling the home market the same stuff they sell us? And cheaper, too?

RH: Perhaps a return to some true showmanship?

BUCKPASSER: We're giving people more than ever before. For instance, back in the day, do you remember ever getting a "pre-show?"

RH: I remember looking at some beautiful curtains instead of adverstising, which is all those pre-shows are really about, whether they be slides or video.

BUCKPASSER: Advertising helps pay the bills.

RH: Isn't that what the customers do?

BUCKPASSER: Frankly, no. A lot of 'em sneak in food and drinks, ripping us off.

RH: I think that most people would agree that the rip-off is the price of popcorn and such at your concession stands.

BUCKPASSER: The prices we charge for snacks are still cheaper than other venues, such as arenas and other places with captive audiences.

RH: Captive audiences? That's a curious term.

BUCKPASSER: Well, it just means...

RH: I know what it means...they can't get food any cheaper once they are in your building!

BUCKPASSER: Now, be fair. We lose a lot of money to the film companies.

RH: Oh, yes. That hoary old industry excuse.

BUCKPASSER: What excuse? They make a lot of money off of us.

RH: That's because they make the movies that people come to see. Do you think people would come just to see the ads?

BUCKPASSER: I wish! I'll tell you, though, that what I have seen in all my years is that people come for different reasons according to their age. For instance, young kids just want to go see what the bathroom looks like every five minutes. Older kids just want a place to screw around in. Senior citizens only come to complain about anything and everything. And ALL age groups spend so much time on their cell phones, that I'm surprised that they see more than 10 actual minutes of any film they attend. And that 10 minutes is usually the end credits. For some reason, those credits are like a religion to some.

RH: Well, if your presentations weren't so lousy, maybe folks would actually watch the films. Perhaps if you switch to digital projection, that will grab their attention.

BUCKPASSER: Oh, don't get me started! I'd like to kill that George Lucas! He started that 70mm revival with the first series of "Star Wars" films. We put in a ton of 70mm projectors. Then, his buddy Spielberg starts with the DTS and swears off 70mm! Now them boogers want us to switch ALL our projectors to digital video instead of film. Well, you know what? If Lucas and Spielberg want us to switch to video, they can pay for it themselves! They got more money than I do.

RH: Did it ever occur to you or any of the other theatre chain owners that if you would quit playing what you call "The Biggest Dick Contest," building screens, screens and more screens, that you might be able to afford to run a profitable business?

BUCKPASSER: Hey, when things get TOO bad, we always have that back-up plan called "merging." Bloes and Cineshack Opium used to be competitors. As were American Multi Crackerbox and Generic Cinema before they merged.

RH: Yeah, about that? Maybe there needs to be another consent decree type of law that would eliminate that practice.

BUCKPASSER: What do you mean?

RH: Well, originally, the studios owned theatres. Independent theatre owners bitched to the government and they stepped in and changed the status quo. Are things really any different now? The independents are still being squeezed out by what is becoming the same sort of monopoly.

BUCKPASSER: Oh, come now. That's business! Look at K-Mart. First, they absorb Venture and now they're merging with Sears. That's just business.

RH: And how many people lose their jobs after these mergers, when the store closings occur?

BUCKPASSER: Again, I say, that is business.

RH: And I say, how does "business" expect people to buy anything when they don't have a job? And those that do get a job at one of your theatres get paid diddly squat. It is well known that every time there is even a mention of the minimum wage going up, the Irritional Association of Theatre Owners are the first ones to campaign against it. Yet, by God, you'll never hesitate to raise your admission and concession prices every 15 minutes!

BUCKPASSER: Oh, my. Look at the time. I'm sorry, but I will have to end this interview now. You see, I haven't had a vacation in five weeks and I'm due to go on my fourth one so far this year tomorrow morning, so I have some packing to do. Goodbye.

[ 08-11-2005, 10:48 PM: Message edited by: Robert Harrison ]
 

---

Posted by Richard C. Wolfe (Member # 431) on 08-11-2005, 10:10 PM:
 
Are you sure that was an imaginary interview?
 

---

Posted by Bevan Wright (Member # 1884) on 08-15-2005, 03:59 PM:
 
Disney’s Iger Suggests Closing DVD Windows
Author: HOLLY J. WAGNER

hwagner@questex.com
Posted: August 10, 2005
Email this Story to Friend


On the heels of a weak quarter for movies theatrically and on video, Walt Disney Co. president, COO and CEO-elect Robert Iger suggested that studios need to re-examine release windows and how they market movies for those venues.

“A number of things have to change. We have to look more aggressively at windows changing … not only for the studio business but also for the TV business,” Iger said, adding that consumers should not have to wait six months for a rerun to see a favorite or missed TV episode.

“We can’t stand in the way and can’t allow tradition to stand in the way of where the consumer can go or wants to go,” Iger said. “Windows in general need to change. I don’t think it’s out of the question that DVDs could be released in the same window as the theatrical release. All the old rules should be called into question because the rules of consumption have changed so dramatically.”

Revenue for the Walt Disney Co.’s studio entertainment unit was down 15 percent to $1.5 billion for its third quarter ended July 2, and its operating income decreased $62 million to a loss of $34 million, but is optimistic for the rest of the year.

Executives cited a decrease in worldwide home entertainment revenue for the decline. Unit sales in this year’s quarter, which included National Treasure, The Pacifier and Disney/Pixar’s The Incredibles, were down compared to the same quarter last year, in which Buena Vista Home Entertainment released Kill Bill: Vol. 1, Disney/Pixar’s Finding Nemo, Scary Movie 3, Bad Santa, Brother Bear and Cold Mountain. Buena Vista also saw a decline in home video unit sales for feature films of comparable box-office strength.

“We’re pretty much discovering that with newly released [video] titles, if they don’t move in the first month, they don’t move at all,” Iger told analysts. “So there is a fair amount of pressure on a title when it is initially released. The falloff, in terms of consumption or purchases after the first month of the title on the shelves, is much more dramatic than we used to see.”

Higher worldwide theatrical film distribution, lower film cost writeoffs and improved television distribution results partially offset the losses.

Disney also took a $24 million write-down related to MovieBeam, which the company shuttered late last year.
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 08-15-2005, 05:44 PM:
 
Well, he's right that windows need to change. They need to INCREASE. Just think about it.

Let's say a movie does blockbuster theatrical business. By holding off the DVD for say, a year, the anticipation builds up. Sure there would be some piracy, but that's (supposedly) what the DVD extras are for -- something you can't get from the pirates.

On the other side -- if the movie tanks theatrically, by waiting say 6 or 8 months for the video, the public gets the "bad taste" out of its mouth and the movie can be repromoted -- or even re-edited, if they think that'll solve it. If a film has a reputation of being a stinker, why would anyone want to buy it in 2 months?

Of course this article does what they all do -- it blames everything but the real problem, which of course is bad movies.

There's also my other idea, which is "bonus scenes" on the theatrical release. If, say the "Lord of the Rings" movies had scenes that WILL NOT BE ON THE DVD! the fans would have packed the theatres even more, and still bought the DVD anyway (and would still be clamoring today for the "theatrical" version to be released on disk.)
 

---

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 08-15-2005, 07:09 PM:
 
I think Warner's did just that... on Alexander, they released the directors cut... and I believe (but not positive) that the theatrical cut isn't on dvd, but who's gonna want that?
 

---

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 08-16-2005, 12:58 AM:
 
Course, the real big thing is that last year, starting if February with "Passion", we had a grand year of $300mil movies that came out. Theatres were rolling in the dough with those high grossing movies as

"LOTR-III","Passion", "Shrek2", "Spidey2", a host of others with ending with Disney's "the Incredibles"

This year had the grossers, but not as it was last year-why we are down some. Just hope that circuits put some of this extra earnings away to survive for next year instead of screaming bankruptcy again due to spending that extra money for nothing.

-Monte
 

---

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 08-16-2005, 10:36 PM:
 

quote: Richard C. Wolfe

---

Even though I'm subrun, I'm still playing the same product that all of you are, just a little later. If it's the product to blame, I should be experiencing the same rate of decline. Other then my old time management style, the only other things I do different is that I have low prices... $3.00/$2.00 for tickets, and refreshment prices where nothing costs more then $2.50 for the largest item. I also run NO preshow screen advertising.

---

quote:

---

And if George Lucas says the next star wars (you don't really think he's going to stop do you?) will be a simultaneous video and theatrical release does that mean you will not play it?

---

quote: Jonathan M. Crist

---

a bunch of theatres got on the bandwagon and said they would not play it because of the simultaneous release but they probably would not have played it anyway

---

quote:

---

And if George Lucas says the next star wars... will be a simultaneous video and theatrical release does that mean you will not play it?

---

quote: Darryl Spicer

---

wouldn't surprise me if two things happened in the no window scenario. 1, Video stores not allowed to rent the movies while in theatres. 2, only full MSRP can be applied to the disc while in theatres and this price could be even higher than the normal prices you see now.

---

quote:

---

The Real "Story": It's the Movies!

No Seismic Shift in Consumer Preferences Compels Unwise Simultaneous Release - National Association of Theatre Owners President John Fithian Responds to Disney Chairman Robert Iger on the Alleged Demand for Simultaneous Release

National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO) President, John Fithian, issued the following statement in response to comments by Walt Disney Chairman Robert Iger during a conference call with Wall Street analysts last Tuesday, August 9.

"Walt Disney's Robert Iger says American consumers demand it all and demand it now. To placate this instant-everywhere appetite, Iger suggests it may be necessary to release movies in theatres, on DVDs, and everywhere, at the same time.

"Mr. Iger knows better than to tell consumers or Wall Street analysts that they can have it all, everywhere, at the same time. He knows there would be no viable movie theatre industry in that new world at least not a theatre industry devoted to the entertainment products of Hollywood. And he should know that Hollywood studios would be merely one shriveled vendor among many in that new world of movies-as-commodities-only.

"Iger considers the slowdown in theatre box office and DVD growth a 'wake-up call' for the industry. I'm not sure who was asleep, but it wasn't the exhibition industry. Here's what we know about 2005 the movies are not as good. They're not terrible. They¹re just not as good. And so the industry has experienced a temporary drop-off compared to 2004 ­ the biggest box office year in movie history.

"Further, factor out last year's big grossing specialty surprises ­ 'Passion of the Christ' and 'Fahrenheit 911' and add in the fact that there are fewer wide general releases this year, and the alleged industry 'slump' disappears.

"Just to reinforce the point that our industry cycles are driven by movie quality, it is interesting to note that DVD slow-down has roughly tracked the theatrical window. That is, movies that have done poorly at the box office have tended to fare poorly when released on DVD.

"On the other hand, DVDs that sell well benefit enormously from the advertising platform and national conversation generated by theatrical release. Does it really make good business sense to plunder that $25-billion-plus worldwide theatrical window without a very solid assurance that even more DVD sales will make up for the lost theatrical revenues? And if you answer that question based on number-crunching in your home entertainment division, are you really willing to bet the farm on the proposition that consumers will rush to watch even more movies at home after you've whacked the advertising platform of theatrical release? And have your number-crunchers accounted for the possibility that consumers have basically bought their DVD libraries, and will hereafter be increasingly conservative about their purchases?

"It's a product-driven industry. When the movies are really good, the industry does really well. And vice versa. New gizmos and conveniences regularly influence consumer patterns ­ but there is no seismic shift in the simple fact that good movies make people want to go see movies. Consumers are smart that way. Analysts can get that."

---

quote: Bobby Henderson

---

If studios ban rentals and force a kind of MAP (minimum advertised price) model, a lot of folks will be more than happy to wait for prices to drop -or wait for the "real" version of the DVD to show up on store shelves.

---

quote:

---

WHY THE SLUMP?
Wednesday, August 24 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The summer movie season, which officially ends on Labor Day, Sept. 5, is expected to produce box-office results 9 percent below those of 2004 and attendance figures 11.5 percent below, according to box-office tracker Exhibitor Relations. In separate interviews with today's (Wednesday) New York Times studio executives generally acknowledged that the downturn could be attributed to unexceptional and unexciting films. New Line Cinema Chairman Robert Shaye, whose studio produced Wedding Crashers, one of the summer's few blockbuster hits, told the Times that in previous years, "you could still count on enough people to come whether you failed at entertaining them or not, out of habit, or boredom, or a desire to get out of the house. You had a little bit of backstop." Universal Vice Chairman Marc Shmuger remarked similarly that "there's a cumulative wearing down effect. We're beginning to witness the results of that. People are just beginning to wake up that what used to pass as summer excitement isn't that exciting, or that entertaining." Michael Lynton, chairman of Sony Pictures Entertainment, vowed that from now on, his studio will be making "only movies we hope will be really good." But Tim Rothman, co-chairman of 20th Century Fox, disagreed with his peers. ""Everybody keeps saying it's the worst of times; it seems fine to me," he said.

---

quote:

---

Disney in set-top box venture

ZURICH -- Switzerland's Kudelski and the Walt Disney Co. have set up a joint venture to develop and market a video-on-demand system for digital television operators worldwide, the firms said Wednesday. The security software group and Disney subsidiary Walt Disney Television International said the set-top box system would offer a selection of movie and other television content delivered to its hard drive, as well as the capacity for subscribers to record personal content from existing channels. The system is designed to run on satellite, cable, terrestrial and IP digital video recorder hardware platforms, the companies said. The system will not be available in the United States, Canada and Japan. (Reuters)

---

quote: Brad Allen

---

I believe that the film co's have been quietly training John Q Public to wait for the DVD release for several years....and it is partly working. It shows in the legs of films.

---

I think if people are being trained for anything, it's that they HAVE to see the movie on opening weekend, in the first seconds of opening day if possible. That's the biggest reason for short legs. That and 6 prints of one title in the megaplexes.
 

---

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 09-04-2005, 08:56 AM:
 
This years slump can be summed up in in one sentence..

The public is tired, very tired, of spending hard earned dollars at the local mega-plex only to endure slip-shod presentation of a less than exciting film in a non customer friendly environment.

I can see that for myself now that I'm out of the business. Actually watching a film in a paying audience has proven this to me. Last night 7:30pm show - Transporter 2 - Had to turn around and remind the four teenies behind me that there was someone sitting in front of them and I coudl hear what they were saying..

At lest they had the decency to apologize and keep quiet the rest of the show... There have been so few movie out this year that have ANY appeal at all.. and it's a shame when folks who get in free grumble about what's being shown. I'd rather stay home and mow the lawn...

Let's hope that next year is better...otherwise, theatres will begin cutting back even more which will further degredate the 'theatre experience'....
 

---

Posted by Mike Croaro (Member # 3123) on 09-06-2005, 10:07 PM:
 
Hello Jason:

Nice to hear from you. I avoid the multiplex (in the SF Bay area)at all cost and frequent the smaller theatres (1-4 screens). Kids and teens hate them because they lack "everyhting" and avoid them at all costs. Older people tend to frequent these theatres and they are more polite and considerate.

And the arthouses? These people are so sophisticated and polite you wish you knew them personally!

I can't ever imagine living in a small town with only one theatre. I patronize at leat 20 different theatres from SF to Berkeley to San Jose.
 

---

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 09-09-2005, 04:21 PM:
 
Mike,

Name your favorite haunts...

I'm sure you get to the Cinearts there at the Hyatt, right?

Eric
 

---