Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Art films and profitability?

This is topic Art films and profitability? 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=002074

Posted by Jon P. Inghram (Member # 4125) on 07-12-2008, 01:26 PM:

http://www.kansas.com/101/story/458261.html

quote:
Inner-city movie theaters routinely struggle with profitability, Warren said, unlike their suburban counterparts. He has said Old Town is a consistent money-loser but has declined to give specific figures.

The secret to inner-city profitability, said a board member of the National Association of Theatre Owners, is art movies.

Anybody running art movies in a downtown area, or had a downtown theater not do well because it wasn't running art films?

[ 07-12-2008, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: Jon P. Inghram ]

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-12-2008, 02:20 PM:

deleted

[ 07-14-2008, 04:14 AM: Message edited by: Monte L Fullmer ]

Posted by Jon P. Inghram (Member # 4125) on 07-12-2008, 02:48 PM:

.

[ 07-14-2008, 11:46 AM: Message edited by: Jon P. Inghram ]

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 07-13-2008, 05:29 PM:

You have to have a downtown of size in a city to have a theatre there and the town has to be supportive of art film, which a lot of cities of 200,000 population, like Lubbock, simply doesn't have. It also matters not how large the local university is, as most of the students are too broke to attend art movies but will instead chose main-stream fare when they can afford to go.

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 07-13-2008, 05:59 PM:

A downtown art theater would not make it here without some major major financial backing. Ticket sales alone wouldn't even come close.

Art films don't do well here, and this MSA has about 2,000,000 people in it and a university (well, UNLV anyway [Big Grin]

). I have to hand it to REG and Cinemark for at least trying to keep a couple of screens available for art product. But most of the art product that is out there at any given time doesn't play here - the bookers know this market. Those of us that would like to see these films here generally have to wait for the video.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 07-13-2008, 10:28 PM:

The figure that usually isn't available is how those big city theatres do with "art films" vs. main stream releases. While many "art" films may routinely make $20K or more when they play in New York and LA, many theatres in those same cities may do well over $100K on the opening weekend of a major block buster. I know the Metreon in San Francisco did something like $300K for the opening weekend of 300.

I think what may be the issue here is the survival of a single screen or twin theatre that tries to play the same stuff as the multiplex out at the local mall. In those cases, many people will go to the mall location because of easier access, more parking, more show times selections, etc. But if the downtown theatre is the only one playing smaller films like The Visitor, then obviously that's where patrons are going to go.

Also, it's important to remember that many "art" films attract a very small portion of the population. In a city like New York, the movie is still going to put up an impressive gross if it's only pulling ½% of the population. But when that same move plays in a city of only 20,000, it's going to translate to a lot of empty showings.

The one advantage many art houses have over first run theatres is they usually only have to play the movies one week rather than 2-3 weeks for first runs. That means they can have fresh product every weekend. If you only have 1-2 screens, it can be a killer to constantly have one screen under performing due to 2 week minimums.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-13-2008, 11:20 PM:

"Art films" tend to do much better in cities like New York and Los Angeles because both cities have major creative industries, lots of museums, schools that teach art and film, etc. There's a much larger built in audience for independent film in NY and LA. Often the filmmakers will personally promote their films in both places and even do things like arrange special screenings at universities.

NY and LA also have more in the way of press that covers independent film releases. Most cities in America don't have that sort of thing. That hurts the word of mouth factor.

Publicity and marketing usually makes the difference between how well a film performs. The major studios are able to put a lot more money into it.

Posted by Jon P. Inghram (Member # 4125) on 07-14-2008, 12:29 PM:

Not counting the sports bar, we've got 5 screens. What I'm hoping they do is convert the sports bar into more of a dinner theater and use it to show the art films, sporting events, and older movies (on Blu-ray, or DVD if not available in HD yet.)

I don't have a clue if the area is large enough (or cares enough [Big Grin]

) to support an all-art-film theater, Wichita's population is around 356,000, the metro area about 597,000.

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 07-14-2008, 01:25 PM:

quote: Jon P. Inghram
older movies (on Blu-ray, or DVD if not available in HD yet.)

why, why, WHY? show them on film! that's what you're there for!

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-14-2008, 01:31 PM:

quote: Jon P. Inghram
to support an all-art-film theater, Wichita's population is around 356,000, the metro area about 597,000.

The capital city of Idaho has this Art Theatre (which I service) ,it's been in successful business since 1984 and Boise is half the size of Wichita and it's surroundings.

quote:
show them on film! that's what you're there for!

He probably would - if the prints are still available. Also, if he's doing video, he's not (and can't be) charging admits.

Posted by Jon P. Inghram (Member # 4125) on 07-14-2008, 01:55 PM:

They claim they're going to go all digital so running a film print wouldn't work, which also makes me wonder about how easily they'll be able to run art films.

And I thought you can obtain rights to videos to charge admission? I was thinking of Blu-ray or DVD as I assume there are many more films available that way than as proper digital prints.

It's also quite possible they'll change their minds and keep some film projectors, but I really don't know as the way I've found out about news at our theater has mostly been my dad calling and saying "Hey, did you see the article in the paper about what they're doing at your theater?" [Roll Eyes]

quote: Monte L Fullmer
The capital city of Idaho has this Art Theatre (which I service) ,it's been in successful business since 1984 and Boise is half the size of Wichita and it's surroundings.

That's a reassuring bit info, thanks!

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-14-2008, 02:30 PM:

quote: Jon P. Inghram
I thought you can obtain rights to videos to charge admission?

You probably can, unless it's Disney, and even then you probably can if you throw enough money at them.

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 07-15-2008, 02:48 AM:

In reference to the art theatre in Boise, I'm glad I'm wrong.
Maybe that would work here...

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 07-15-2008, 09:11 AM:

Art films just have to be marketed in such a way that the public in a given community will know what film is playing and what the film is about.

Every now and then our local Carmike theater will show an independent film. Unless it's something that has had a lot of media coverage the show will likely play to empty theaters.

Another problem is those art films will sometimes show up at the theater with little advance notice. Some big release bombs badly and it gets cleared out leaving some available screens and then something different gets thrown in to replace it. I think it really helps if the theater has some way to let the public know weeks in advance what movies they'll be playing. That will do more to get the public to anticipate the release of certain independent films. Unfortunately it seems like only independently operated movie theaters are able to provide customers with any such convenience.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 07-15-2008, 12:33 PM:

Because my theatre is a small market, we are usually way down the food chain when it comes to getting smaller films. While we may want to play some of these films, we often have to wait until way beyond the point where people are still talking about them. And when we do get one, it's often at the last minute so we don't have an opportunity to run trailers or display the one-sheets for a few weeks ahead of time.

It would help immensely if we were able to actually get a confirmed date 3-4 weeks ahead of time. But then we always seem to run into the issue of a studio release having better legs than expected or a week with 4-5 studio releases.

Posted by Chad M Calpito (Member # 3736) on 07-15-2008, 12:43 PM:

At my theatre, we play a mix of Big Films and Art Films. Most of the time, we get Art films with no advance time to run trailers and display one sheets. Other times, we get Art Films from the local Landmark Theatres where there has been talk about the film.

Most of the time, we have a few scattered people throughout the auditorium and other times, there will be a decent crowd.

Posted by Kenneth Wuepper (Member # 1174) on 07-15-2008, 04:35 PM:

It has been our experience that the Art Film audience is anti-multiplex. Recently we booked a title and advertised it heavily. The local multiplex picked the title up and played it the full week before our single showing. Not remarkable was the fact that our single showing out grossed their entire week. Oh yes, and they played it a second week so they had it playing the same day as we.

I had to apologize from the stage before playing a preview with one of our features. It seems that these folks do not like trailers either. Our best advertising is with our own little publications and the internet.

The real secret to art film success is the regularity with which these films are presented. The patrons need to know that they can come to your theatre on a certain day and you will be showing an art oriented film. If you are careful about selecting the titles, they will not even check but just come as they know the film will be entertaining and unique.

Our little film strips in the lobby make unique take home reminders of our films. We publish a series of six titles each time and there is always 2 weeks or more before the first showing.

Yes, that lets the multiplex know what we are showing but if they book it ahead of us, they don't steal "our audience" as these folks are insulted and see that as an effort to steal their patronage.

You must be patiently committed to building an audience for this product. It may take a while (perhaps more than one year) but the patrons are very happy to see the films and will be supportive of your efforts.

Learn your audience and tell the world what you are playing.

KEN

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-15-2008, 04:56 PM:

quote: James Westbrook
I'm glad I'm wrong.
Maybe that would work here...

.. It can work, but don't expect miracles right off the top. It'll have to grow in since you're coming up with a "novel" idea that nobody's ever heard of.

But, you'd better plan on doing some heavy duty advertising so the whole county of Sedgewich will eventually know about you.

(I was in Wichita last month coming in on US-400 from Pittsburg heading home...)

Posted by Robert Crabtree (Member # 4795) on 07-16-2008, 04:26 AM:

Something else to think about- age distribution in the community.

In my neck of the woods, seniors disproportionately are the ones seeing art/indie movies. When I went to see TransAmerica at the local indie theatre, all but 3 of the crowd of 80 people were in their golden years. Even when I worked at an art house in a college town, I saw more seniors than usual go for those shows than the Regular Mainstream Movies in our other 12 theatres.

While the company I work for has a much greater presence in CA than in FL, more of our art houses are in FL. If you're frequented by lots of seniors, art movies might be a good move.

One thing that I think bucks this general trend- movies not in English. On the rare occasion the regular first-run received a subtitled movie, almost all of the refunds came from seniors exclaiming "We didn't know you had to read the movie!"

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-16-2008, 04:58 AM:

quote: Robert Crabtree
age distribution in the community

Nah, not really - age really has nothing to do who attends this form of entertainment. I've seen young adults to senior citizens attend this little 4plex in my area and have been well pleased, satisfied and thus being loyal regular customers to this local venue.

It's usually the well educated, upper class and very socialistic sort of people of all ages that attends this form of entertainment for the simplicity of being entertained that has more of a "mature and original" (grown up) content within the films - not the typical "stories and plot that a 5yr old can figure out." content that dwells in the mainstream movies today..

-Monte

Posted by Laurie Higgins (Member # 4843) on 07-16-2008, 04:39 PM:

It's been my experience here in Atlanta that all the art house theaters have to dance as fast as they can to make any money. All the theaters that are left are half art house half regular films. They also do all kinds of midnight movies and special showings to try and draw a crowd. They have also all subdivided into home made multiplexes like enclosing the balcony and making a second theater. That is what they did at the Plaza Theater, an official Atlanta Landmark. You have to climb a ladder to get into the booth they built for that one. You can also hear the other movie through the wall. Yay!

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 07-16-2008, 04:54 PM:

I've been told by some people who love art houses that they find that kind of thing to be part of the experience. Crappy sound, crappy screens, sitting on old worn down sofas and recliners, scratched prints, etc. For my money, I would much rather watch these films in a proper theatre environment so I can enjoy the movie without other distractions.

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 07-26-2008, 03:45 PM:

Even though it is a nonprofit historical theater, I saw this article, saying that my local arthouse is hurting financially due to building repairs. I've been there several times this month, and probably the busiest I've seen it was for My Winnipeg, for which I'd guess attendance at 100 or so. This theater deserves to be open forever, because it is gorgeous, historic, and has the absolute best presentation I have ever seen.

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 07-27-2008, 07:41 PM:

I believe that what makes them art films is that they are not commercially viable, if they were they would be in the multi plex raking in the bucks. Art films typically have little or no appeal the the general movie going public, often boring, poorly made, covering subjects or stories that few want to see, many I've screened were shot out of focus incorrectly exposed. After being hit by that kind of stuff a couple of times people reluctant to go back, justifiably so.

Art films have never done well in this market, we've tried it many times, they stay away in droves.

[ 07-27-2008, 09:16 PM: Message edited by: Bill Enos ]

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 07-28-2008, 12:00 PM:

With some rare exceptions, most foreign, art, independent films that have potential to do well are picked up by the major distributors. The remaining titles may, or may not, be good films but they require more effort in promoting than most majors are willing to give (ie, spend). The problems is that most independent distributors do not have the resources to promote these films either. Unknown (to the public) film equals no attendance.

It could be the "best" film ever, but without distributor promotion your audience is going to stay home. Those few "art" houses that are successful have spent many years building up an audience that will trust their programmer enough to gamble on an unknown title.

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 07-28-2008, 12:15 PM:

Except that with the internet, an unknown title remains so for a matter of minutes. I don't have to trust the programmer if I can look at the theater's website, look up the title, cross reference it against IMDB and review sites, etc. All I need is to know about the theater and have an interest in films other than the crap I'm constantly playing at my own theater. I guess the problem for arthouses is that there aren't enough people who are so disaffected with Hollywood, but still love films. I drive a 30 mile round trip pretty much every week, pay $2 in parking, $6.50 for a ticket, $4 for gas, just to see a movie at such a great theater, playing movies that are better than those that I'm playing. Much of the time, I've never heard of the movie before reading it on their website.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 07-28-2008, 12:31 PM:

Except that with the internet, an unknown title remains so for a matter of minutes.

Alas, for most of the art film audience, searching the internet is more trouble than they are willing to go though.

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 07-28-2008, 12:43 PM:

What are you trying to say? [Big Grin]

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 07-28-2008, 01:26 PM:

quote: Mitchell Dvoskin was the last to post
Except that with the internet, an unknown title remains so for a matter of minutes.

Except that this movie will only be "slightly less unknown" rather than "known." Sure, there are sites geared towards indie films, but the average person isn't visiting those. And sure, IMDB lists every movie around, but I can only search for movies I've actually heard of.

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 07-28-2008, 01:44 PM:

Well sure, but I'm assuming that someone who wants to see art/indie films already knows where to look, they just want to verify that the product is what they're interested in. I can name all the major venues for art/indie/classic films in a 30 mile radius. When I get a hankerin' to see such a film, two minutes on the internet tells me just what movies are playing, and what they are about. This would've taken me a half hour or more making phone calls, assuming a theater that is open three days a week even has someone answering phones at 2:30 Monday afternoon.

Going to an arthouse theater is a result of having a specific interest in cinema. If you have that interest, chances are you may be willing to take a few minutes of your time on the internet to satisfy it. I've spent more time than that posting on Film-Tech today, not to mention car forums and surfing news sites, but then again I already know what movie I'm going to see tonight. The Wackness at the Michigan Theater, 7:15. The only reason I've seen trailers for it is because I frequent this theater regularly. They have the best presentation ever.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 07-28-2008, 02:07 PM:

quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren
I'm assuming that someone who wants to see art/indie films already knows where to look

And I wasn't talking about Indie fans at all. As Mitchell was saying, the art films that have decent viability get picked up by a distributor then get marketed and they get decent crowds. And the art films that don't get that, don't get marketed much. So the people who aren't actively searching for indie material will never even know about it.

Posted by Brian Guckian (Member # 1678) on 08-11-2008, 07:58 PM:

Maybe the very term "art film" is part of the problem; it often has elitist connotations and as Bill pointed out earlier is often simply a cover for very poor quality (and even sometimes obscene) material.

The French UGC cinema chain briefly had a presence (one very large multiplex) over here. They had an interesting approach of referring to "World Cinema" instead of "art cinema " or "arthouse" cinema.

Their policy was "Film for All" and they showed a mixture of Hollywood, European and Asian films, along with independent titles from all over the world. It seemed to work very well; there was no distinction as such between standard studio fare and films from everywhere else.

There was no elitism or pretensiousness; although sadly they sold out their interest and withdrew a couple of years ago (AFAIK this was due to corporate manouvering rather than any financial problems).