Movie Theaters in Big Trouble

[kentek]

Maybe they will allow Super 8 filmmakers project on their big empty screen.

[ccortez]

Sad, isn't it? When I was a teenager in the late 1980s, I remember going to $3 Tuesdays at the local cineplex. The lobby was completely crowded.

It scares me that everyone I know who used to go and see $3 movies every week (at a whopping cost of around $150 a year) now spends $5000 on a fancy widescreen TV, stereo and HD DVD player.

I get your point, but that's a MIGHT fancy TV (and/or other gear) at that price!

[ccortez]

Expecting to see throngs of cars and hordes of people, especially kids out of school. for the afternoon showings, instead we wondered if the multi-plex was open. Hardly a car one in the lot, and less than ten people showed up to see the movie we chose. To say that attendance is down is a vast understatement.
David M. Leugers

there's no films worth going to see, except for when Marvel or DC remakes a comic book character..

That's simply crazy talk. I'm picky and there are 6 or 7 things I'd LOVE to see in the theaters right now, and that's living in Austin, TX, not NYC, where I used to be able to see stuff that was never bound for smaller markets.

To say that Hollywood used to make these tremendous movies that motivated audience markets and now they only make crap is so oversimplifying the equation...

[brokenflashlight]

To say that Hollywood used to make these tremendous movies that motivated audience markets and now they only make crap is so oversimplifying the equation...

Totally agree. *see my previous post



Also, super-8-epiphany: How can you believe the only movies worthwhile these days are comic book adaptations? I'm sorry, I just can't comprehend anyone believing there are no good films being made today... which, in turn, is causing poor attendances. That's pure ignorance. I get the whole "home theatre experience" over the "big screen experience" arguement (though I, personally, believe theatres will never completely go out of style, much like radio never will. ebbs and flows, though).

Paul Thomas Anderson(can't wait for There Will Be Blood), Charlie Kaufman(can't wait for Synecdoche, NY !!!), Spike Jonze, Michel Gondry, Coen Bros., Richard Linklater, Jim Jarmusch are all writers and/or directors that immediately come to mind to credit my arguement.

[Angus]

There are a whole hoast of reasons, among them are the proliferation of large screens in the home with good sound systems, and the crap:decent ratio of new releases. Also in many locations it is now in real terms more expensive to go to the cinema than it was just 20 years ago.

Why spend £30 taking the family to see a film at the cinema, when you can buy the same film on DVD in a few months for half that and watch it on your 52 inch plasma? I understand that is a compelling argument for not going to the movies often. However, I still believe most people do understand seeing a real film is an experience that you cannot emulate at home (unless you have super 8 or 16mm package movies!).

[brokenflashlight]

... However, I still believe most people do understand seeing a real film is an experience that you cannot emulate at home (unless you have super 8 or 16mm package movies!).

It's because seeing a film in a large, public setting is a shared experience among complete strangers. It enhances the overall movie experience. There's nothing better than seeing an amazing film in a theatre full of people you don't know, while at the same time sharing a certain connection with them just by sitting in the same theatre.

[kentek]

I especially enjoy the $9 popcorn and the coke syrup on the floor. Then I really know that I'm in a theater.
Cloud of sarcasm just went over!
:arrow:

[reflex]

It scares me that everyone I know ... now spends $5000 on a fancy widescreen TV, stereo and HD DVD player.

I get your point, but that's a MIGHTY fancy TV (and/or other gear) at that price!

Agreed, although you can hit the $5000 mark pretty easily with a projection system.

My parent's generation did just fine with a single 19" color TV and perhaps a VCR from the late 1970s onwards, yet my TV sits above a rack of "vital" gear.

[marc]

This could hurt film in the long run (Or should I say Short Run and there after?). With low attendance and movies not getting the expected return on investment, video starts looking like a more viable option for financial reasons in terms of aquisition. And if most of what is out there is crap, that is more reason to produce it as cheaply as possible. On the other hand, with globalization and the proliferation of the internet, we have seen growth in what is a more pluralistic society. Technology has also made this possible to a large extent as many have said that there has never been a better time to be an independent filmmaker than in the last ten years. Maybe what we will start seeing is the end of the "Hollywood Empire" and maybe cinema releases will be more about the little guy with independent films being released to a greater share of the market. This however, still shows the very real threat of video becoming the format of choice due to the shifting economy of the movie business. Also, if big budget Hollywood films start to decline, you will see less indiscriminate spending on film by those that used to have the "big money hose". And with a decline in film sales, it's survival as an aquisition format will seriously be threatened.

[David M. Leugers]

To say that Hollywood used to make these tremendous movies that motivated audience markets and now they only make crap is so oversimplifying the equation...

Yes and no. What is your equation? One of the real problems is that there is such a lack of choice when it comes to most areas. We are victims of the multi-plex scenario. I have many, many screens within driving distance of me, yet there are only about 12 different films showing. Each multi-plex is showing the exact same films. None of those businesses ever take a chance showing a small independent film let alone a foreign made film. The point for me is that the majors make a dwindling list of films each year that appeal to me. There are still some very good films being made, the number of them AVAILABLE to be seen on the big screen near me has steadily dropped over the past few years to a noticeably bleak level. For the first time in my life, going all the way back to the late 1950's I have not frequented movie theaters with zeal. This past year I have gone to see 5 films. I liked them all, but 3 of the viewings were marred by obnoxious and rude people. Twice I had to actually yell at people to shut up so I could hear the film. Like Rick related, the people in the seats are becoming a big negative in the theater going experience. Still, if I have a passion to see a film, I go. It's just that I have found less and less that brings me in. Your mileage may vary.

David M. Leugers

[Angus]

I have to say that in my case, the gear below and around my TV is "vital"...not in the sense of lifegiving but in the sense that, for twenty years, I have dreamed of a time when I could have a large, flat, widescreen TV capable of displaying 1000 lines of resolution and capable of progressive scan...decent surround sound and a record/replay medium of near broadcast quality.

And now, for not much money...I have all that. So I'm trying to persuade the spousal unit that we need blu-ray now

[Mitch Perkins]

Twice I had to actually yell at people to shut up so I could hear the film.

Man that's hard to do eh? I did it for the first time in my life during Inland Empire. Unfortunately the film wasn't worth the bad feeling that resulted from chastising strangers. ~:?)

I have to admit, it makes me chuckle to picture you doing that; you seem so patient and reasonable...kinda wish I had some footage of that. ~:?)

But be careful - these days you never know who you're talking to...

Mitch

[themagickite]

i think in recent years TV shows are often much more interesting than their cinema counterparts

IMO heroes is miles ahead of all the super hero movies made in the last few years.

with TVs getting bigger, TV shows can be shot more like films, with more than 1 wide shot per episode. and 16:9 being the new standard helps quite a bit too.

As much as I love Heroes (the acting, idea and cinematography/overall aesthetic look) the story is pretty damn close to Watchmen which is amazing, and a movie is in the works. Wonder how that will turn out. Either way I like both stories, but Watchmen the graphic novel is a masterpiece.

i don't know watchmen but i do think that heroes is very similar to the x men stories more so than the x-men films IMO (though i have to admit i'm painfully lacking in x-men exposure too). but from what i have seen (some of the cartoon and the 3 films) the movies took out all the interesting time travel stories and all the cool mutant fighting giant robots, at least heroes puts the first one back in.
the movies are just about the big stars and expensive special effects that portray the characters and their powers rather than the other way round.

of course it's not all about aspect ratio and screen size, but i don't think i'm being shallow by pointing it out. the form of delivery the end product will take and how it will be viewed plays a massive part of deciding how it's made. so as the home theatre experience becomes more like the cinema experience and DVD releases play a bigger part of how films are made, then TV shows will become more and more like films.

[DriveIn]

That's simply crazy talk. I'm picky and there are 6 or 7 things I'd LOVE to see in the theaters right now, and that's living in Austin, TX, not NYC, where I used to be able to see stuff that was never bound for smaller markets.

To say that Hollywood used to make these tremendous movies that motivated audience markets and now they only make crap is so oversimplifying the equation...

Last movie I saw in NYC was Brubaker when it was first released (1980?). Now I live in a small rural town with a nice old theater on the main street and hardly ever go to the movies anymore. Last time I did go these past two years the popcorn was $2 for a large box, and admission was $4.50. Last movies I saw in this small town were Who Killed the Electric Car and Waitress. Not your usual mainstream movies

[David M. Leugers]

Man that's hard to do eh? I did it for the first time in my life during Inland Empire. Unfortunately the film wasn't worth the bad feeling that resulted from chastising strangers. ~:?)

I have to admit, it makes me chuckle to picture you doing that; you seem so patient and reasonable...kinda wish I had some footage of that. ~:?)

But be careful - these days you never know who you're talking to...

Mitch

Yeah, I don't know what comes over me anymore! My wife has started to cringe whenever she sees me getting pissed off at people ruining the film experience. You are right about not knowing who or what one is dealing with... another reason that must enter my brain when I try to decide if it is worth it to go to the theater. The last experience (No Country for Old Men) was typical. The five jerks came in fifteen minutes into the film talking just below a shout. Sit right by me and continue talking for several minutes, ignoring the many shhh's being directed at them. Feet up on the seat backs, cell phones on... I wish I had a photo of the look on their faces when I yelled at them. It was as if they were completely at a loss to know why I was yelling at them... I was at a loss to know why they were there... I guess if I have to chill out and just accept the behavior, then I really don't want to be there. But I can't miss a film by the Cohen Brothers. 8)

David M. Leugers