Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 'London 'costliest' for film-goers'

This is topic 'London 'costliest' for film-goers' in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=004848

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 10-18-2006, 02:01 PM:

quote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6060808.stm

The prices quoted in this BBC news article, based on a survey carried out by the Liberal Democrats on the London Assembly are:

£17.50 - London
£6.32 - Copenhagen
£6.28 - Paris
£6.06 - Amsterdam
£5.82 - Stockholm
£5.40 - Berlin
£5.40 - Brussels
£4.71 - Rome
£4.70 Athens

The London price is said to be for a seat at a top cinema in Leicester Square on a Saturday.

Now, London is a very expensive city, but I can see several things wrong here.

The cinemas in Leicester Square are likely to be the most expensive in the Country, I think the last time I went to one of them I paid about ten pounds, but that was some years ago. They don't quote prices from any other cinemas. There's no indication as to which film this was for, nor for which seats in the house. They do mention the 'average cost for a similar show', but we have no idea what they consider to be 'similar'.

They (the BBC) say that the figures were published on the eve of the opening of the London Film Festival. Is the quoted price for a normal film, or a festival screening; it's not clear.

It's anybody's quess what seats for what films in what cinemas the prices quoted for the other cities are for; maybe something comparable, maybe not, it doesn't say.

There's no mention of comparative earnings in the various countries, so the prices are pretty meaningless anyway.

Then we end with some silly quotes from a 'spokesperson':

'Dee Doocey, London assembly's Liberal Democrat Culture spokesperson said cinema is "becoming a luxury few can afford".

She added: "London topping the European price charts is just another case of 'rip-off' Britain. (Missing closing quote here sic.)

"Only here do you need to be earning almost as much as a Hollywood star to afford to see the latest flicks." '

The large crowds of young night-clubbers in Croydon pay a lot more than £17.50 for a night out; are they all on 'Hollywood star' earnings?

You would be welcome to buy a full-price adult ticket at the David Lean Cinema at the Croydon Clocktower for £6.25 for a normal show. If you're really unlucky you might even have me as your projectionist; I'm still doing the occasional shift there. They're actually screening two of the LFF films there on the 25h of October as part of 'Film in the City', and for these a slightly higher price applies, £7.

Some things in London really are very expensive, but I don't think cinema tickets are one of them.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-18-2006, 07:19 PM:

Those prices seem pretty expensive to me!

As of this writing the exchange rate between the Dollar and Pound is $1.86 = £1.

At that price, one of us Yankees would need $11.63 for that £6.25 ticket. That top seat at Leicester Square would cost $32.55. Ouch! That's more than most special edition multiple disc DVDs.

quote: Stephen Furley
The large crowds of young night-clubbers in Croydon pay a lot more than £17.50 for a night out; are they all on 'Hollywood star' earnings?

They must have lots of scratch coming from somewhere, be it movie deals, drug deals, rich parents, etc. I certainly don't drop hundreds of dollars on a night out clubbing. They're probably just trying to live out the bullshit fantasy images they see in music videos and fashion magazines.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 10-18-2006, 07:30 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
That top seat at Leicester Square would cost $32.55. Ouch! That's more than most special edition multiple disc DVDs.

But Bobby, you didn't take in account the BJ guys get during the film...

quote: Bobby Henderson
I certainly don't drop hundreds of dollars on a night out clubbing.

Oh my, YOU must be totally FUN for a night out on the town as a party bud/companion! [thumbsdown]

I spend more than that on a clubbing night... OH... Ummmm... NOT for the male bar flies/hookers either! That's a separate fund! HA! [Wink]

(Just couldn't resist teasing you and yanking yur chain, bub!) [Smile]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-19-2006, 01:45 AM:

While I agree with Stephen that these figures are a deeply flawed means of comparison without a lot of other contextualising information (for example, are they comparing like with like? Is the Copenhagen ticket price also for the best seat in an upscale city centre house?), I also agree wholeheartedly with the 'rip off Britain' sentiment. Having just spent a week in Alaska, I was struck by the fact that cost of virtually everything, from hotel rooms to a replacement battery for my camera, was significantly cheaper in real terms than it is in York. For example, Stephen's £6.25 ($11.67) for a normal rate ticket at the David Lean compares to $3 at the Bear Tooth in Anchorage. In terms of their programming and audience, I'd say that the two places are directly comparable. About the only retail item that costs about the same there as it does here in real terms (i.e. about 40% more in dollars than in pounds) is alcoholic drinks. And this is despite the fact that virtually everything has to be flown or shipped in (ironically, the beer is about the only thing that was made locally - and that's the most pricey commodity!).

Even in the European countries I've spent most time in recently - Germany and The Netherlands - everyday consumer items are slightly cheaper than in the UK; though the difference is nowhere near as great as between here and North America. Of course these impressions could be misleading, because I'm not paying income tax, housing costs, healthcare costs, or all the outgoings that a permanent resident has but a visitor doesn't, in any of these places. But I know several people who've come to live here from the US or Europe, and they've all commented on the higher cost of living. One friend is seriously contemplating a return to the US for that reason alone, despite feeling that her job prospects wouldn't be as good if she went back.

If I had to identify a reason for this, it would involve expressing some potentially controversial political views. So I won't, but will simply flag up that, depending on whose figures you believe, the total overall individual tax burden in the UK (taking into account everything: income tax, NI, VAT, duties on this and that, etc.) has gone up from 30-35% in 1997 to 45-50% in 2006.

Reading news reports about how our tourist industry is declining, I'm not surprised: anyone earning a salary in euros or dollars and then spending it in pounds must be taking a massive cost hit.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 10-19-2006, 03:29 AM:

I certainly agree that London is a very expensive city; many things here seem to be, on paper, about twice the price that they are in New York. There are a few exceptions; I needed to buy a few three-ring binders in Staples for example, and they were more expensive than out two or four ring ones here.

If somebody wants to write an article comparing cinema ticket prices in london with those in other cities, then that's fine; they would almost certianly find them higher than most other places. What the Lib. Dem. people who compiled these figures on which the BBC report was based seem to have done is to take the price for the most expensive tickets they could find for an ordinary show, i.e. not something like a royal charity gala screening, which would obviously be much more expensive, and compare the price to unspecifies tickets in various other cities. I don't have information on prices in all those cities, but from people I've spoken to who do have experience of a couple of them these prices seem to be typical prices for a first-run film. £10.50 is a high price for a cinema ticket, but most tickets sold in London cost a lot less than £17.50, and I'm sure that you could find tickets in those other cities at higher prices than those quoted.

This seems to be similar to me writing an article comparing the cost of a brand new Rolls Royce in London to that of a brand new <whatever today's equvilent of a Ford Cortina would be> in the other cities, and then concluding that only the very rich in London can afford to buy a car. There are much cheaper cinema tickets available in London, and you can often pay even less if you wait and see the film a few weeks after its release; just as you can buy a secondhand car cheaper than a new one.

Even the £17.50 price would be within the reach of most, not all, people, if they wished to pay it. Many people choose to pay much more than this for other forms of entertainment, and they could choose to pay the price for these tickets, if they wanted to. If they don't want to, then they can choose to buy cheaper tickets if the want to

A lot of people here complain about the standards of presentation in cinemas today; if you pay a reasnable price for a ticket and the presentation is poor, then you have grounds for complaint. If you insist on paying a very low ticket price, so that the cinema cannot employ, and keep, good staff, then maybe you get what you pay for. I don't think that 'typical' ticket prices in this Country are unreasonable.

If you want to write an article on the high cost of living in the UK, then I think there are many better things that you could compare; housing for example, which really is beyond the reach of many people, or walk-on long distance rail fares.

quote: Bobby Henderson
I certainly don't drop hundreds of dollars on a night out clubbing.

I know of people who spend £200 a weekend doing it; they're not wealthy, they just choose to spend a very large part of their income on this. They may not do it every weekend, but maybe two or three times each month.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 10-21-2006, 06:50 AM:

I always find it amusing that noone ever does a comparison between cinema and live theatre tickets.

When people complain about the price of cinema tickets, I always want to ask them "Have you ever been out to a normal theatre?" That's the expensive stuff.

£17.50 for a cinema ticket at London's west end? That's cheaper that an average theatre ticket off London.

Lets do some research:
For Their Current Productions:
£16.50 -Bradford Alhambra Theater
£23.50 -West Yorkshire Playhouse
£23.50 -Manchester Exchange Theatre
£16.50 - York Theatre Royal
£19.00 - Crucible Sheffield

Where are all the news articals about theatre prices?

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-21-2006, 12:44 PM:

It's easy to see why the price should be higher to watch a live stage play. If it's a Broadway show in New York, the play is probably performed exclusively in only one venue.

Movies aren't live and they're usually shown on many thousands of movie theater screens.

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 10-21-2006, 09:08 PM:

quote: Stephen Furley
I know of people who spend £200 a weekend doing it; they're not wealthy, they just choose to spend a very large part of their income on this.

Using Bobby's exchange rate near the top of the page thats about, what, $372 American? I know guys that spend about that for a two-week period on beer.

Years ago, every July 4th a local kid who taught at the U.S. Army Ranger School would come home and pick up everybody's tab at the bar across the street from our theatre. Hell, he would even encourage the people in there to stay and drink more. Wasn't too many years that went by he was droping over $1000. Didn't even phase him. And as far as I know (because my wife won't let me go), he's still there every Independence Night. Tell me that doesn't make you proud to be an American! [Big Grin]

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 10-23-2006, 11:58 AM:

In London the current ticket price for Disney's "Mary Poppins" on stage is topping at E55.00 (sorry for using the cap E).
On Broadway it's pricing at $110.00 and more for Premium tickets.

In London "Lion King" is E55.00
In NYC it's $111.25 and soon for the holidays $121.25 [Eek!]

"Beauty and the Beast" in NYC is at $110.00

Movies here are at $10.75, unless you go to IMAX $14.00

Los Angeles still tops New York City in movie ticket prices at select locations. Arclight

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-23-2006, 02:56 PM:

quote: Aaron Mehocic
Using Bobby's exchange rate near the top of the page thats about, what, $372 American? I know guys that spend about that for a two-week period on beer.

I know of people that spend that much as well in a two week period. They're called alcoholics.
[Razz]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-23-2006, 06:31 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
Movies aren't live and they're usually shown on many thousands of movie theater screens.

....but cost millions of dollars more to produce.

Movies are still a bargain (providing you get a good presentation...admittedly a crap shoot these days.)

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-24-2006, 03:19 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
I know of people that spend that much as well in a two week period. They're called alcoholics.

If you're buying it retail and drinking it at home, agreed that your liver would take quite a bashing getting through that much. But if you're drinking it in bars, then (at a rough calculation) that works out at around 3 pints an evening. That's above the norm (it's about what I'd drink on a typical Friday or Saturday evening, but certainly not the rest of the week); but if you'd classify that as alcoholism then there are quite a few alcoholics about.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-24-2006, 08:51 AM:

No matter how you cut it, $370 a month is akin to a car payment. That kind of money may mean little to some folks, but for most average people making around $30,000 a year that can be pretty expensive.

Just my opinion, but if I'm going to spend that much money on something I would at least like to have to something tangible to show for it, such as a new motorcycle, jet ski, high end computer system, new wardrobe, plasma tv, furniture, etc. Fuck all that over-spending on drinking shit.

I'll go out and party once in awhile, but I see no reason to blow that much money doing it.

quote: Mike Blakesley
....but cost millions of dollars more to produce.

Movies do indeed cost millions more to produce, but a major Broadway production is usually not cheap by any means either. New stage plays are typically performed in only one venue and you're seeing that cast of performers live, acting right in front of you. I love movies, but like it or not all movies are canned and with very few exceptions the actors typically don't come anywhere near the average person's zip code.

Mel Gibson did make a recent surprise visit to Lawton to promote his new film, Apocalypto, arranging a private screening at Cameron University. He did that since the film's lead actor is from nearby Ada, OK and wanted various Native American tribal groups to get a look at the movie. As cool as that was, that visit still doesn't impact the actual movie. Anyway....

quote: Mike Blakesley
Movies are still a bargain (providing you get a good presentation...admittedly a crap shoot these days.)

They're a bargain if you're talking average prices you pay in my part of the country ($5 for matinees and $7.50 for evening shows). When the price of the ticket is above $10 the show quality had better be pretty damned good. If the ticket price is near or above the cost of the DVD, I'm sorry but I'm probably just going to be inclined to wait for the DVD -or better yet, just rent the DVD.

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 10-25-2006, 01:19 PM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
But if you're drinking it in bars, then (at a rough calculation) that works out at around 3 pints an evening.

Exactly. Most of their drinking is in a bar setting. Moreover, to be fair, that amount ($370) probably also covers any food they may purchase from the kitchen and tips to the bartenders.

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 10-25-2006, 06:48 PM:

quote: Aaron Mehocic
Exactly. Most of their drinking is in a bar setting. Moreover, to be fair, that amount ($370) probably also covers any food they may purchase from the kitchen and tips to the bartenders

One we don't tip bartenders in the UK as a matter of course

Two, a pint (20 Fl Oz ) of beer will cost a minimum of £2 ($3.60)

Therefore 3 pints a night = $10.80

31 nights at $10.80 = $334.80 [Mad]

A standard cheap bar snack will be about $6-8
[thumbsdown]

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 10-25-2006, 11:39 PM:

quote: Dick Vaughan
Two, a pint (20 Fl Oz ) of beer will cost a minimum of £2 ($3.60)

They do a lovely pint of 'Abbot Ale' at Weatherspoons for £1.59

[Big Grin]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-26-2006, 03:03 AM:

You'd struggle to get anything drinkable for under £2.50 in York, even in cheap chain places like Weatherspoon's (and besides, the Weatherspoon on Coney St. is what might be termed an 'in through the door, out through the window' establishment, which it is probably advisable to be armed before entering); and the prices are north of £3 in some places. That having been said, York is a more expensive place for leisure activities than most of the region, probably because of its large tourist industry.

As Dick said, about the only people you'd routinely tip in Britain are waiters at full service restaurants and taxi drivers. And even then, you wouldn't typically tip a taxi driver at US levels unless he'd done something over and above the call of duty, e.g. carried heavy cases up a long drive (typical example: if the fare came to £4.60, you might invite him to 'call that a fiver'). It took me a while to get use to the convention in the US whereby, basically, you tip everybody for everything except buying retail goods in shops.

Posted by Scott D. Neff (Member # 185) on 10-26-2006, 12:20 PM:

Every time I scan the list of topics, I keep thinking this one says "Londons COOTLIEST film-goers"

I was worried Phil moved across the pond...

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 10-28-2006, 09:55 AM:

Anyway

I'm now book for the 20/11/09 14:10 showing of 'Casino Royal' at Odeon Leicester Square. I've chosen a front stall ticket for £12.50.

[Big Grin]

I'll write a review of the movie (and The Leicester Square Auditorium) when I get back.

Ok what's a good book for me to read on the coach down to London?

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-28-2006, 01:59 PM:

How about Casino Royale?

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 01-07-2007, 09:13 AM:

Well that took me a while to organise some pictures anyway.

Click here to see some crappy pictures of london took when I went to see Casino Royale.

More crappy pictures to come when I go to see Apocalypto at the Empire leicester Square tomorrow. [Smile]

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 01-07-2007, 09:51 AM:

Will these feature you downing a bottle of tequilla and then screaming racist abuse at some poor policeman? [Big Grin]

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 01-07-2007, 11:24 AM:

The £17.50 ticket quoted for Odeon Leicester Square is nearly double what you would pay at the cheapest West End cinemas. That price only exists because of industry politics, if Odeon were forced to share 'Casino Royale' for example with the Empire, Vue and Cineworld cinemas in the West End they wouldn't be able to charge more than £10. Although admittedly if the current situation didn't exist the place would have been carved up by now.

As for the price of drink, unless you go to a Wetherspoons, university bar or similar cheap chain pub it is £2.50 minimum in London, and usually around the £3 mark even in the suburbs. In a nightclub you are looking at £3-£3.50 a drink on weekends. Probably spend £20 minimum in a night.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 01-09-2007, 07:29 PM:

More Pictures on my second trip to London yesterday.