This is topic My theatre design idea 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=002062
Posted by Brandon Willis (Member # 2345) on 06-17-2008, 03:32 PM:
Just wanted to see what people think of one of my ideas for a "fantasy theatre."
I would build a theatre with 18 screens but only book films on 14 of them. The extra screens would be used as needed for promotional screenings, rentals, and things like that. We could use them for interlocks. If one of the main theatres goes down for whatever reason (bulb exploded, platter trouble, etc.) we could move the print into one of the extra ones. When the extra ones aren't in use, we would leave the lights off and not run the HVAC in them. A strict policy would be in place of not cannibalizing parts off of the extra machines for the main ones.
The idea is that customers will never come to my theatre and find that the film they want to see has been "canceled" due to a special event, "technical difficulties," etc. What does everyone think of this?
Posted by Edwin Schwing (Member # 1270) on 06-17-2008, 03:35 PM:
Do you really need 4 extra screens for that?
E
Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 06-17-2008, 03:36 PM:
That's an ok idea.
Your greatest challenge is keeping enough special activity going in the auxiliary screens to satisfy the rent.
And what if your special event requires the print that's showing in one of your regular houses?
This would cut your flexibility way down unless of course you were running DLP...
--dom
Posted by Brandon Willis (Member # 2345) on 06-17-2008, 03:45 PM:
We'll just make rent by charging so much at the concession stand that you have to take out a second mortgage on your home if you want snacks. And by playing commercials on every single reflective surface in the building (except the extra screens of course.) My theatre wouldn't be too much different from others. Maybe have them DLP equipped so we wouldn't have to take a print off of a main theatre for a private screening.
Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 06-17-2008, 04:55 PM:
You will be killed in construction costs and/or rental payment. You're basically going to be building or leasing extra space that you only need for some special events. Rent and building costs are done on a per square foot basis. The goal is to have a building that is just big enough to handle the business. The extra 10-15% space that you have (I'm assuming these are going to be relatively small auditoriums) is going to translate to 10-15% more overhead for the same business.
Unless you can have those screens booked solid with rentals it will not justify the expense. It is very easy to work rentals in with normal shows in a multiplex.
As for the technical difficulties. A decently run and maintained theatre should very rarely have technical issues that cost shows. The most common issue that will cost shows is power outages which don't care how many screens you have. Unless you have a (very high capacity) generator, if there is a power outage longer than 1/2 hour, you're going to lose shows.
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-17-2008, 05:17 PM:
quote: Brandon Willis
We'll just make rent by charging so much at the concession stand that you have to take out a second mortgage on your home if you want snacks. And by playing commercials on every single reflective surface in the building
So much for taking this thread seriously.
Seriously, anyone who would put in 4 extra screens and basically plan to never use them except in extreme circumstances, doesn't have any business sense. It's all about producing $ per square foot and your lender will never sit still for you having thousands of square feet sitting there producing $0.
Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 06-17-2008, 05:51 PM:
I agree; it doesn't make business sense. A suggestion is to design every auditorium such that the entire sound system or projector console could be swapped out. I worked out a system for someone where every auditorium had a spare window and a spare projector could be rolled up and plugged in for changeover operation. That same spare projector could also be used to replace the 'main' projector if it broke. Plugging it in would tell the system that it was a 70/35mm or just 35mm, DTS or Dolby, bulb wattaage, etc. A special base I designed would allow you to drop the any projector down at any auditorium and the angle would be correct. It wasn't cheap, but would be less than the money lost on several unused auditoriums. But the guy decided not to go for it.
Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 06-17-2008, 06:29 PM:
Buy good stuff; maintain it, have spare parts, and don't employ the village idiot to run it: Magic; no lost shows.
Rentals? Cancel underperforming shows. Louis
Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 06-17-2008, 07:22 PM:
If you had a lectern, decent PA, a projector to do power points, etc. house lighting bright enough for people to read easily a flip up desk surface to write on, available as early as 7AM and as late as your regular closing, allow the renters to serve their
own refreshments. All at a price that is no higher than a hotel charges for a room that seats what your auditorium seats. Do this and you will rent it two or three times a week. These are what potential renters as us about most often.
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 06-17-2008, 07:49 PM:
In a theatre where patrons perceived the management to be gouging them on concessions (more than the competition already does), ALL the shows, no matter what is playing, will be "underachievers" because the rooms will be empty. Any one of those rooms will be able to be used for rentals and "specials."
As for your wall-to-wall ads -- Brandon...I guess you haven't heard -- people HATE ads on the screen or on the walls or anywhere else in their faces. People don't appreciate an atmosphere where they feel you are trying to constantly sell to them. Walking thru the place you describe, I would be holding onto my wallet for fear management would happily steal money out of it if they got the chance.
I was in a Regal in Sarasota and walked into the men's room only to find an 11x14 framed ad in my face as I stood at the urinal. How totally crass. And I guess a few others thought so too, because a number of these urinal ads had some pretty obscene (but quite hilarious) graffiti written on them.
What's lacking in your description is any reference to the quality of the image and sound presentation or the overall atmosphere and the experience you want your patrons to walk away with and which hopefully will be what motivates them to choose your theatre over your competition. That will be much more important to your success than a few extra, empty screens.
If you want to try something unique and different from what the majority of the run-of-th-mill, assembly-line gigaplex is doing these days? How 'bout trying this: try hiring really well-qualified booth staff who respect the equipment, know how to keep it running flawlessly and who are competent film handlers who know how to do Film-Done-Right. You want a professional booth staff who are capable of running a booth in a way so the people watching the last show after a month's run (or more) are seeing the same pristine presentation that those who came the first night saw (to steal an over-used phrase). Give digital a run for its money....and without even needing to spend the money on it -- spend a lot less on film cleaners and a supply of FilmGuard for each screen instead.
Oh yah...pay your booth staff a decent wage. How's THAT for a fantasy theatre?!
Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 06-17-2008, 08:02 PM:
Those above the urinal and inside the stall door ads actually can pay pretty well. The agency does all the work and sends a check. We get solicited a couple times a month for them. It's tempting but don't do it.
Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-17-2008, 08:29 PM:
Nope, I'd make Pizza theaters out of them like Brad's customer did. Keep in mind you've got to have really good pizza and other food to keep em comming back! You can still rent em out too! Make sure you skip film and go straight to digital so you're not tossing out lots of semi-expensive gear in a short while
.
Mark
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 06-17-2008, 08:39 PM:
quote: Frank Angel
I guess you haven't heard -- people HATE ads on the screen
Cinema Advertising Council, a trade org repping 82% of the U.S. screens, show a hefty 18.5% gain in revenue to just under $540 million in 2007.
So those ads are not going to be going away any time soon.
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 06-18-2008, 02:15 AM:
quote: Bill Gabel
Cinema Advertising Council, a trade org repping 82% of the U.S. screens, show a hefty 18.5% gain in revenue to just under $540 million in 2007.
So those ads are not going to be going away any time soon.
Oh no doubt, and the price of gas is $4.29 (and it's not going to go back down any time soon as well) but that doesn't mean that the public is happy with either.
A fantasy theatre is one which money is no object and you can dream up anything you want and it would work. In such a case, I would certainly eliminate screen ads. Or ads anyplace else in the theatre, for that matter. I've never had a patron complain that we don't have ads on our screen. But I have got loyal patrons who send in UNSOLICITED donations because they love what we do.
Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 06-18-2008, 05:27 PM:
quote: Bill Gabel
So those ads are not going to be going away any time soon.
But the customers who pay to see them WILL be going away.
If you're going to have unused screens, why not use them to show continuous trailers, or even ads if there's no charge to get in? Of course it'd be hard to keep people from sneaking into the screens showing actual movies without paying. In the old days some theaters had screens that just ran newsreels all day.
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 06-18-2008, 06:34 PM:
The chains have made deals for selling the time on those unused screens during intermission. Some of that money helps pay for your wages at the theatre. And with more and more theatres converting to digital, those ads are going more the way of the commercials you will see at home. So you will be seeing them on both screens (Home and Movie Theatre). The producers of them will have more places to play them.
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-18-2008, 08:46 PM:
quote: Jesse Skeen
But the customers who pay to see them WILL be going away.
I don't agree. I hate movie screen ads (and we don't run them -- yet) but anyone who says they're staying home just because of them is full of shit. Ask people if they'd rather watch a few ads or pay a couple bucks more for their ticket, they'll opt for the ads every time.
When the ads interrupt the movie itself, then there is something to gripe about.
People still flock to live sporting events at hundreds of dollars per ticket, where they're staring at ads 100% of the time, on the scorboards, the video screens, the walls of the stadium, the programs, even the back of the tickets.
Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 06-18-2008, 10:16 PM:
Not only that... but even the stadium itself is usually an advertisement for somebody. Like "Seahawks Stadium" wasn't just magically named "Qwest Field."
Though does that actually influence people buying their services?
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-18-2008, 11:26 PM:
I think haing a corporate name on a stadium is more about bragging rights than anything else.
Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 06-19-2008, 12:57 AM:
quote: Mike Blakesley
I hate movie screen ads (and we don't run them -- yet) but anyone who says they're staying home just because of them is full of shit.
I don't think anyone is staying home JUST because of on-screen ads, but I think A LOT of people are staying home because the movie-going experience isn't as magical as it used to be. And ads are a part of that.
Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 06-19-2008, 01:48 AM:
quote: Geoff Jones
I think A LOT of people are staying home because the movie-going experience isn't as magical as it used to be.
I agree. Everyone I've talked to says that, as well as the ticket and concession prices. Less magic for more money. I simply just avoid the first few mins of the movies around here to skip the ads. I'd prefer to walk in right at the first movie trailer. As a projectionist, I hated the ads as well. They added to an already lengthy trailer reel, had to be changed out constantly, and detracted away from the whole cinema experience. Just my opinions.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-19-2008, 08:18 AM:
What Geoff said. No one (well, almost) would consciously decide to not patronize a particular cinema solely due to screen advertising. It's more subtle than that. Screen advertisements (and high prices, generally poor customer service, sticky floors and a million other things) cause customers to enjoy the experience less than they would otherwise and, thus, give less perceived value per dollar.
Also, in most cases, cinemas which do not run screen advertisements do not charge higher admission or concession prices.
I'm actually not terribly upset about slides (static images, no synchronized sound), as they are generally non-intrusive, but I really can't stand commercials or anything that involves motion and/or sound.
Agreed, too, about over-long trailer reels. Any more than three trailers plus (maybe) a policy snipe is too much and makes it unlikely that customers will remember any of the films advertised. Subjecting audiences to 20+ minutes of trailers and advertisements is usually counterproductive.
Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 06-19-2008, 10:03 AM:
quote: Scott Norwood
sticky floors
How bad are the theaters around you? I was thinking about this the other day when the "sticky floors" issue came up on some forum somewhere supporting day and date home release. I haven't been to a theater in at least 20 years that had sticky floors. During that time, I've been to GCC (moment of silence), AMC, Regal, UA, Muvico, Wometco and several independent theaters. Not once in the last 20 years has the floor been sticky.
As far as the advertising goes, I don't think people mind too much as long as it occurs before the advertised start time. As long as the only thing they see once the start time has arrived is trailers and the feature, they're ok with it. My one hard rule is that I will never put a rolling stock ad on at any of my theaters. I don't care how much revenue I'm "losing" by not running them.
Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 06-19-2008, 11:04 AM:
quote: Bill Gabel
those ads are going more the way of the commercials you will see at home. So you will be seeing them on both screens (Home and Movie Theatre).
Bill, no question, it's an advertising age -- ads everywhere. But that doesn't make them any less annoying to the public; my guess would be that the huge volume of ads just creates an even more negative response.
Thing is, the mounting threat to today's theatrical exhibition is that theatres are becoming less and less differentiated from the patron's ability to see movies elsewhere, and particularly at home. In the days when theatres were king, the only place you could see a movie was in a movie theatre. Those days are long gone and movies have become ubiquitous. They slide more and more into being no longer distinguisable from what can be seen in other environments. For theatres themselves to enhance that situation is folly. Putting commercials on a movie screen makes it more like TV, which, IMHO, is exactly what theatres should NOT be doing. People don't come to a movie theatre to pay money for a TV experience -- they can get that at home....and more and more that's what they are doing.
Just because ads are everywhere doesn't mean people like them. And you said it. you will be seeing them on both screens (Home and Movie Theatre). Only now, in the home theatres, where the "operator" can choose what to show, they DON'T have to see the commercials that are so disliked. So in the Home Theatre, the viewer ISN'T subjected to ads, while in a cinema he is. How twisted is that? Just another reason why the home theatre continues to be a growing threat. It is truly bizarre to me how theatre chain execs can be so short-term wise but long-term foolish.
Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 06-19-2008, 11:21 AM:
Frank it's the Greed of making a quick buck on those ads on a dead space in a theatre. Now with digital age of projection those ad companies can use and reuse commercials that they only could use in the TV market. Look at those monitor screens near the subway stair enterways that run commercials around the city here. I never liked running the ads myself at theatres, but the chains made the deals and I only worked for them at that time.
Posted by Patrick Dunn (Member # 3333) on 06-20-2008, 12:35 PM:
One thing about going to the big chains like regal and cinemark is that I can't stand the First Look! If I go to a movie chances are that I am going with my girlfriend or a friend, and I'd much rather talk to them, and all the first look does is interrupt that. At my theater all we have are slides, and I can just ignore those easily.
Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 06-20-2008, 03:26 PM:
The worst thing about Firstlook is that Sony is probably the biggest movie advertiser, and I don't play Sony movies. I won't program Sony trailers, but I have no control over Firstlook content, obviously. That, and the fact that our alternative content network gets their ads in after my policy trailers, which are the last thing on the preshow, so every time I go to start a movie, I get to hear about Death Note, or Bleach, or now Glenn Beck.
Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 06-20-2008, 09:19 PM:
CaptiveAudience.org recommends that you print out a flyer and use it to reserve your seat while you hang out in the lobby (or outside) and avoid the commericals. The flyer says:
RESERVED: This patron is avoiding cinema advertising and will return when the feature begins.
Has anyone ever seen one of these actually get used? On the one hand, it's pretty dorky... but on the other hand...
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-20-2008, 09:45 PM:
People who are walking in "when the feature begins" are beyond rude. I would not allow the use of that "seat saving" flyer.
Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 06-21-2008, 02:14 AM:
If I ever saw such a sign, it would be in the trash faster than you can say "the V5 is broken again." I am no fan of huge amounts of advertising, but theaters cost money to run. I do what I can to alleviate the issue of overadvertising, by keeping my nonsync volumes as unobtrusive as is reasonable, and running a small number of trailers and no snipes, so maybe the consumer should understand that we are an in business to make money, and that rising energy costs and skyrocketing corn prices cut very heavily into a theater's bottom line. That website quotes a 3.8% increase in average ticket prices from 2002 to 2003, and the Consumer Price Index rates inflation for commodities for that year at roughly 3%, as per inflationdata.com. As is evident, businesses are more affected by the inflation of certain commodities than individuals are. For example, rising energy costs are probably a bigger concern if you heat and cool a 20000+ sq ft complex all day than if I heat my 2700 sq ft house when I am home. As an individual, I decide not to cool my house in the summer, but my theater essentially has no choice. I choose not to light my house very much, and to use mostly fluorescent lights, another luxury the theater does not have. Coming back to corn, I can fairly easily not eat things that have much actual corn in them, although it is impossible to avoid corn derivatives, but the theater has to buy thousands of pounds of cornseed a week, and I am sure theaters haven't increased popcorn prices to fully offset the 70% increase in raw corn prices between 2005 and 2007 (usda.gov), although I don't know how much of that 70% increase has been passed on to businesses such as theaters.
My point being, yes, advertising sucks, but unless people are willing to pay more than twice as much at the box office and substantially more at the concession stand, it is a necessary revenue stream for many theaters.
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-21-2008, 10:13 AM:
I took a look at that captiveaudience.org site. In the FAQ it does make a decent case against ads, especially ones that are played at regular "movie" volume with all the lights out.
But I assume most places that run ads do it at a lower volume with the lights at half-level....am I right?
Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 06-21-2008, 01:57 PM:
The only advertising I run is my digital preshow, which is run at a calibrated nonsync about 8-10dB lower than my feature volume. Lights are at full, and the preshow ends at the scheduled start of the movie, commences digital policy trailers, follows with a short (and irritating) alternative content ad, and pops up the start screen (your feature presentation...). At this point, I start the projector, run two, no more, sometimes less, trailers with the lights at mid and the volume set for the feature. This is followed by the attached trailer, for which the lights are cued to dim. No snipes, no rolling stock. If anyone has such a big problem with our advertising that they feel the need to make such a statement as that sign, they should feel free to try and operate their own theater in today's economy without advertising.
Posted by David Zylstra (Member # 4230) on 06-21-2008, 03:30 PM:
quote: Mike Blakesley
ones that are played at regular "movie" volume with all the lights out
I'd be interested in knowing what theatre/advertising system cmpaa is talking about here - all the ones I know about are played with house lights up and maybe at mid for some of the ad show, but never at "movie" volume or lights down (I think they are being sensationalistic to try and get people mad - I find a few dubious "facts" in their FAQ).
We have not raised ticket prices in 2 years, alternate forms of income such as advertising is one of the reasons.
Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 06-21-2008, 04:41 PM:
While I know all of you guys hate ads with a passion...
When one of our pre-show video projectors was having a problem of randomly shutting itself off for no reason, these two ladies came out of that auditorium to complain. Just in case they were worried (since a lot of people see the preshow get killed and assume there'll be a problem with the movie) someone told them "Just so you know, the movie will be fine; they run off separate projectors" and one of the ladies said "I know. We just want to watch the ads."
And lol @ that captiveaudience site having an online petition. Apparently they're unaware that online petitions are meaningless.
Posted by Geoff Jones (Member # 3668) on 06-21-2008, 04:47 PM:
quote:
If anyone has such a big problem with our advertising.... they should feel free to try and operate their own theater in today's economy without advertising.
quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren
...yes, advertising sucks, but unless people are willing to pay more than twice as much at the box office...
A lot of people spend way more than twice as much to operate their own movie theatres... in their homes.
Again, I'm not saying ads by themselves are enough to keep people home, just a part of the equation.
I distinctly remember trying to talk to my wife prior to the last movie I saw, and feeling constantly interrupted & distracted by Regal's pre-show crap.
I myself would gladly pay a premium for an awesome presentation (giant screen, great sound, quiet audience, curtains, etc.) And I always make a point of buying concessions when I visit better theatres.
Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-21-2008, 05:22 PM:
quote: Geoff Jones
A lot of people spend way more than twice as much to operate their own movie theatres... in their homes.
You got your terminology wrong there. The correct term is "TV room." I hate the term "home theatre." They don't call the kitchen and dining room a "home restaurant."
Posted by Emma Tomiak (Member # 1862) on 06-21-2008, 08:29 PM:
quote: Mike Blakesley
They don't call the kitchen and dining room a "home restaurant."
HA! Awesome. Too true.
Posted by Edwin Schwing (Member # 1270) on 06-21-2008, 11:54 PM:
I must agree with Mike!
There is no such thing as a home theatre. A home is a home, a theatre is a theatre!
I would also like to point out that while I worked at a certain theatre when the "pre-show" was coming out, and everyone complained about it, People tend to complain MORE when the pre-show/commercials are not running properly!!
I do remember a couple of times where I did get complaints about the "pre-show/20/first look" was TOO LOUD.... I called the appropriate people and stated that the pre-show was too loud, I asked them to turn the volume down (as I was supposed to) and I was told that they did studies as to the volume level and it was determined that via their studies that the volume was at the correct level.
I decided that it was loud, and since they would not turn it down, I shut it off! (the "off" button is a great thing!) (Circuit breakers are also good things!)
E
Posted by Tristan Lane (Member # 1169) on 06-22-2008, 04:27 AM:
Mike,
That is one of the best statements I've heard in response to the doomsday believers out there that think "home theatre" will eventually shut down true theaters.
The logic is perfect.
Although many people could achieve better results in their kitchen at home, they still choose to go to places like Chili's or Applebees and eat reheated crap because it is an experience (albeit a lackluster one). The wealthiest people I know have fantastic kitchens, but are the ones I see eating out the most!
Cooking skills could also be compared to hook-up skills. Sure there's people out there that can't cook, and there's people out there who cant hook anything up or understand the technology they are buying. I still get a kick out of people that fork out tons of money to buy the best TV, Reciever, Speakers etc.... only to go home, and hook it all up using the Yellow, Red, and White cables included with the stuff. So there they sit waching all of their stuff in the home theater on their quality high definition set, with surround sound, and its all played in standard def and stereo.
Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 06-23-2008, 01:56 PM:
In my view, home theater isn't a room so much as it is a hobby. It's a goal where I attempt to create the ideal movie theater experience, but translated for the home environment. "Home theater" is such a broad term, that it's near meaningless without context.
The primary advantages that almost everyone I know talks about with home theater are control and convenience. Control over the start time, control over the volume and presentation, the convenience of watching what you want to watch, when you want to watch it, and with whom you want to watch it. Anyone with a decent setup is not going to say that it's cheaper than going to the movies, because it's not. It's a much larger expense than one can ever hope to recoup by not going to a movie theater, but the convenience and control benefits more often than not tip the scale.
The comparison to restaurants and home kitchens is not very valid, because while I could reheat food like Applebee's does, I can't make a filet mignon or ôpakapaka as good as a fine restaurant can, no matter how much money I spend on appliances in my kitchen. Even in the Applebee's situation (not fine cuisine by any means), someone is serving me, someone is clearing the table, and someone is washing the dishes. There's a convenience factor, even if the food is only marginally better than what I can do at home.
In contrast, though, it takes relatively little skill to operate a home theater system. If one does not have the knowledge and does not care to dive headlong into the technical side of the hobby, there are plenty of integrators/installers that will come in and take care of you, and all you need to do is press the "Watch movie" button on the remote. After the capital investment, a person can enjoy really high quality presentations in the comfort of their own home. Places like Netflix makes the ongoing costs pretty low as well, because you don't have to buy the movies.
To bring the topic back on topic, the entire movie-going experience is a combination of additions and subtractions. Enjoying a movie is an emotional experience, and it's very much like marketing. Anything that does not add to the experience takes away from it.
Advertising is an example of something that takes away from the experience. People put up with it, and most don't even complain, but I don't think there are too many people out there that consider advertising before the movie (except for the trailers) to be a valued part of the movie-going experience.
So, then it becomes a matter of whether that decreased experience for your customers is worth the money it brings in. The ad money is often so easily gotten for the theater that most don't even think about it. Someone takes care of it, someone else watches it, and they get a check each month. How much easier could it be?
The good news, I think, is that it isn't a black and white situation, where there are only two choices. If it's not practical for you to go without pre-show ads, at least separate the advertising from the movie so that in the mind of the customer, it's a separate experience.
In past threads on the subject, the best example of mitigating the negative impact of the pre-show ads is to separate the pre-show from the movie by closing the curtains and re-opening them. Ideally with some fanfare music, while dimming the lights, to make it obvious that the real entertainment is about to begin.
Don't have curtains? That's another one of those things that would add to the movie-going experience that would offset the ads that take away from it. Maybe you should consider buying some curtains with the money that is being made on the pre-show advertising...
Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 06-23-2008, 06:24 PM:
quote: Mike Blakesley
They don't call the kitchen and dining room a "home restaurant."
Mike, that is absolutely THE BEST line I've heard in a long time! 5 stars!
Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-02-2008, 11:03 PM:
Going back to the first line in a way: Let's say, if a local geographic area has over 80k in population and the only theatre in this radius has 8 screens playing only the first run mainstream fliks, could someone drop a 2 buck discount theatre in this area and make it a go - even with the home entertainment world here is at a high in this area since the populous are used to what "Hollyrock" wants: See it as a 1st run, then off to "WallyWorld" to buy the DVD a few months later?
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2