Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Cinearts Theatres shun F & I films for Hollywood fare

This is topic Cinearts Theatres shun F & I films for Hollywood fare 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=001701

Posted by Mike Croaro (Member # 3123) on 05-23-2006, 07:39 PM:

Hi Folks:

Whats up with the Cinearts @ Emprire (SF) and Hyatt(Burlingame)? Both theatres seem to show Hollywood films these days. Both played Mission Impossible III and Da Vinci Code. The Hyatt is slated to open X-Men III this Friday.

Too bad. The Foreign and independent films fit these cinemas much better than mainstream films.

Posted by Ky Boyd (Member # 23) on 05-23-2006, 09:17 PM:

Because unlike Landmark Theatres and many other independently owned arthouses, Century's CineArts Theatres aren't true arthouses. It's just branding, the same as AMC's "AMC Select" and Regal's "Cinema Art."

Century plays the cream of the arthouse crop in their CineArts theatres, mostly product from the specialty divisions associated with the major studios. It is really rare to see CineArts play much of the more obscure, less wide appeal titles that come from many of the smaller distributors.

They also play off art house product fast and don't give it a chance to breathe and find its audience. And when the studios and they smell money on big tent-pole pictures like MI-3, DV Code, and X3, they put them in the CineArts theatres to boost the screen count. DV Code is playing at both Century's San Jose Complex and at CineArts at Santana Row. These theatres are across the street from each other!

To be fair, DV Code is much more defensible as a film to put in an arthouse as it truely has adult audience appeal and by playing in some arthouses it will attract those who might not go to the big megaplexes that are invariably catering primarily to the teen to 20 something market.

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 05-24-2006, 03:19 PM:

Century to the Art House Films: "I'll drop you faster than your puny grosses screwed me over!"

[ 05-24-2006, 05:17 PM: Message edited by: Eric Hooper ]

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 05-24-2006, 03:34 PM:

But Ky, I do seem to recall that you played My Dog Skip at Rialto shortly after you opened it... [Smile]

-Aaron

Posted by Dan Zastrow (Member # 3796) on 05-24-2006, 03:47 PM:

Ky-What you said....

And its always the "$" and should be for a big chain like Century. But my concept of a true art house is that its part of the community. For instance-how did your bicycle to the theater day go? A great local event but not a moneymaker for you.
We had 300 kids here yesterday to watch FAVELA RISING and didn't make a dime. On Monday night we showed AGEING OUT about the crises with foster children growing out of the system with zero life skills. Important films that should be seen. At the same time we'll run WATER and MRS. PALFREY AT THE CLAREMONT and certainly work to maximize our box office but that is not the sole reason to be here.

Posted by Andrew McCrea (Member # 674) on 05-24-2006, 05:03 PM:

Are the CineArts actual theatres, with all screens devoted to "independent" fair, or is it a deciated screen in a few complexes?

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 05-24-2006, 05:16 PM:

Well, they WERE all-screen dedicated to art films, but the Marin and the Hyatt have gone blockbuster with DVC, X-men, and Poseidon this week!

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 05-24-2006, 05:37 PM:

How well were these theatres attended showing independent and foreign fare? The artsy types whine incessantly about the lack of the fare they say they want to see, but when a theatre puts its neck on the block and shows the stuff nobody comes. Catering to these people is financial suicide. No matter what, the bills still have to be paid and art films don't cut it.

Posted by Dan Zastrow (Member # 3796) on 05-24-2006, 05:53 PM:

Bill-
That’s the problem that Ky was obliquely referring to. The chain theaters designate a screen to be "art" and take the cream of the crop of the cross over art films that would help to sustain the true specialty movie house that also runs some of the more esoteric, less mainstream films that don't pack as much box office.

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 05-24-2006, 06:52 PM:

I really dislike it when a cinema professes to be an 'arthouse' yet will show the biggest blockbusters when they come in. Or the arthouse down the road from us will programme exactly the same foreign/'art' releases we're showing. Yet somehow they're more worthy than our chain. Why not just be honest and trade on snob value?

Posted by Ky Boyd (Member # 23) on 05-24-2006, 09:09 PM:

Yes Aaron we did play My Dog Skip. But My Dog Skip is much different than MI-3. [Smile]

There seems to be a preconception here that all arthouse films are small grossers. Our run of Brokeback Mountain in Santa Rosa outgrossed our competitors run of King Kong by a wide margin and both opened the same week. Check it out on Rentrak if you don't believe me. Water, which is playing both at the Rafael and the Rialto is an excellent example of why the major chains are ill-suited to specialty films when the tent-poles are coming out. The film opened decently but not spectacularly but word-of-mouth has helped it increase its business while Art School Confidential opened quickly (and way to wide I might add) and is fading.

Dan - the bike thing is tomorrow, but you are right, I'll lose money on the movie but hopefully those hungry/thirsty bikers will hit the snack bar, which is why we chose a film with family appeal. (Anyway, its gotta be better than last year when it rained. That was really a disaster.) But either way, its a great community relations move to do the event. The bicycle coalition loves it and its a way for me to help them get the word out about biking and possibly get a few folks who haven't been to the theatre to come check it out. Hopefully they will like what they see and come back for more.

Bill - properly done, art films can pay the bills and as you say "cut it." In six years, my theatre has lost money in one year, the first one, and has been profitable every year since.

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 05-24-2006, 09:21 PM:

Can't you get smaller films on better terms from the distributor? Or run two independent/foreign films in one screen, that seems to work for us even on move-overs, can nearly sell out the smaller screens.

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 05-25-2006, 04:01 AM:

While everyone is championing Landmark, let's look at some of the films they've played at the Midtown 8 in Atlanta.
Now Playing: The Da Vinci Code, American Dreamz. Opening Friday: X-Men

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 05-25-2006, 09:09 AM:

Mark Cuban is a smart man, but he doesn't know the Specialty film market. It just gives opportunity to many other exhibitors. And look out, here comes Sundance.

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 05-25-2006, 12:54 PM:

Everybody loves the 'indie film' label. So much that it's excruciatingly overused by studios & theaters alike. Fox Searchlight, Paramount Classics, Warner Independant are all on the bandwagon. It's easy comarketing for them & the theaters which makes me more than sketchy about the validity of the term independant as it applies to any major studio's releases. They've choked their "big studio" divisions with uninspired tripe so that smaller films might seem apealing on the basis that their budget isn't appallingly huge. But does that mean the film is a true indie? Not in my opinion.

But I applaud the effort at anything better from studios & theaters, I just don't want to see indie become a genre rather than a classification (any more than the damage done, at least).

Posted by Dan Zastrow (Member # 3796) on 05-25-2006, 02:46 PM:

For the big studios that have their "indie" division and the big chain that has it's "art" screens its just about not missing out on a revenue stream. Every one of them is looking for the next MARCH OF THE PENGUINS or WINGED MIGRATION but when times are lean like now they have to fill the screens with something. I love what Century does to get around that. When they do have a "specialty" title and place it in what is otherwise a commercial theater they say that its "A Cinearts Approved Screen". [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Scott D. Neff (Member # 185) on 05-25-2006, 09:37 PM:

quote: Mike Spaeth
While everyone is championing Landmark, let's look at some of the films they've played at the Midtown 8 in Atlanta.
Now Playing: The Da Vinci Code, American Dreamz. Opening Friday: X-Men

Exactly! Landmark plays first run movies in a good handful of their markets, nobody rags on them for being untrue to their independent film roots.

I rarely see "Art Theatres" turning down the latest Tarantino flick if it's offered to them. Can anybody seriously tell me that an art theatre should turn down "mainstream" product just because it's labelled "mainstream"? I'm sure ANY theatre owner would play DV Code if there wasn't another theatre in town.

We also know how political the studios can be. If there's nothing preventing Landmark from playing X-Men at their theatre (ie. no other theatre nearby) and Fox wants it to play there, then Fox reminds the theatre that they can't cherry-pick their product, that they need to scratch each other's backs.

That's why, I feel, that the most successful art theatres are the independents; the people that take over the old multi-plex because it's affordable. These theatres don't really have a choice of what to play so they take the time to build their audience and make an atmosphere that is distinctly different from the people who ran the theatre before them.

The million dollar question is: What would all the art theatres do if suddenly their nearest competition closed? I somehow doubt that they'd still be showing Kinky Boots.

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 05-25-2006, 11:31 PM:

For the record, I think it's great that the Hyatt has gone back to mainstream fare. I could never see how they survived showing ROCK SCHOOL six shows a day...and nothing ever seemed to last there more than a week...

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 05-25-2006, 11:40 PM:

They aren't an art theatre if they're showing Kinky Boots! Suppose it's a foreign film.

Posted by Dan Zastrow (Member # 3796) on 05-26-2006, 12:00 PM:

Scott
The art houses CAN play any of the major release films even if the local giga-plex is running it. When it comes to the big studio releases there is no clearance issues. The folks who are running true specialty screening rooms care very much what hits their screens and, as I have said in an earlier post, box office is not always the determining factor. If they did pick-up DV Code, which any theater with a sheet on the wall and a magic lantern could, they well would have had a nice weekend BO. But they do not because they really are trying to be an alternative. I'm not a snob; I watched DV Code and loved it. I simply believe we need to nurture other kinds of film watching environments, which would include micro-cinemas, outdoor screenings and the local independent houses.
[Smile]

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 05-26-2006, 03:06 PM:

Let's not forget that a growing amount of Landmark's indie content is produced by Magnolia, owned by 2929 entertainment, of which Landmark is a part of.

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 07-26-2006, 12:57 PM:

Hmmm, let's see what's showing at the "CineArts" Santana Row this week!

- Clerks II
- Lady In The Water
- Pirates: Dead Man's Chest
- Devil Wears Prada
- Superman Returns

Tee-hee. [Razz]

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 07-26-2006, 04:01 PM:

Hey Clerks II is "sorta" indie, at least a sequel to an "indie."

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 07-26-2006, 07:56 PM:

quote: Mike Spaeth
Clerks II is "sorta" indie

It's budget was about $5 million to make and $20 million to market. [beer]