Showing 376 - 400 of 564 comments
Cinematour shows the address as 4425 14th St W
“Scott, my understanding is that the studios have gone back to a roughly 50-50 split of the gross (not 90%). Also, it doesn’t matter what a "content provider” thinks of their film, if the theater chain doesn’t like it, they can decline to book it."
Sadly I don’t think either part of this is entirely true. Perhaps if a theatre were to hold a film long enough it might average out closer to 50% rental, I think the 3-6 week run most films get nowadays probably leaves things closer to 60-65%.
While a theatre chain can decline to book a film, often studios will use their next big film as leverage for chains to book the crappier films. ie. if you play this one you really don’t want, we’ll go easier on terms with the next big one. In my experience, theatres with nearby competition can’t afford to cherry pick the best films either because the studio usually plays the “play this crap or else you won’t play the good picture” card. While most of my experience with film booking comes from the mid-late 90’s… I don’t imagine much has changed except for those booking zones with multiple mega-plexes that just day & date each other.
Maybe Rialto Cinemas can take it? :o) Or the folks that run the Vogue.
I haven’t read everybody else’s comments in detail, but I find that the writer was writing more out of irritation that exhibitors make it difficult for the “content providers” to make as much money as possible. There was a clear underlying tone of bitterness about how the exhibitors won’t pay the agreed upon rental terms etc. etc. and he didn’t seem to take into account that the theatres shouldn’t be required to pay 90% of a crap gross for a crap film just because the “content provider” thought it was the best movie ever made.
While I do agree that as the new generation comes into themselves fewer of them will be interested in going to the movies as regularly as we are currently used to. However I think that there always existed a group of people that just don’t go to the movies and I don’t think that this group will increase in size enough to really hurt the industry.
What I do see is that people already try to avoid the typical theatre environment with teenagers kicking the seats, crying babies, cell phone users etc. In the process of avoiding this environment people are going to the niche theatres with smaller crowds that allow more personal interaction with your own group. What I don’t understand is why on Earth somebody would want to interact DURING the movie? Personally if I had a device that allowed people to talk to me from across the country while we watched a movie together, I’d gouge my ears out.
If somebody out there still has pictures of this place, I’d love to see them.
Judging from the Google satellite view, it appears that there was a 6-screen addition at some point. Its relation to the rest of the shopping center would lend itself to being turned into retail so it’s not surprising that only 12-screens are being used in the new project.
The theatre he’s talking about is in Morgan Hill.
Did anybody read the article though? He supports tearing down a theatre built in the 50’s because it’s “no grand movie palace” and replacing it with a modern theatre. I’m sure that theatre was grand and palatial to those who grew up going there and just because it’s not gilded in decoration doesn’t mean there isn’t some sort of significance to the building.
70mm at a NEW multiplex is unlikely but if it’s their flagship they may have installed some used 70mm projectors that were sitting around in case the home office brass feels like doing something unique.
As far as multiplexes not having 70mm screens don’t be so quick to judge. Many of the Century Theatres around here in Northern California are still equipped to play 70mm, not that they’ll ever have the chance to do so again.
It’s a Tinseltown, I’m sure it looks quite similar to every other Tinseltown built.
Cinematour has these photos.
I thought this was an old Wometco… interesting, didn’t know it was GCC.
I’ve found that some of the Cinema de Lux theatres weren’t all that deluxe, especially when they were originally just regular Showcase Cinemas. It seems National added the food court and turned a few auditoriums into “Directors Halls” and poof — de lux! If Fallen Timbers was new built as de Lux it’s probably in overall better shape with newer more refined fixtures that fit better into the upscale theatre concept.
As for Rave closing some of the bars, I’d bet there were a number of locations that had them added because National was way into the concept but were likely losing money because National forced the concept on the location. Also I’m sure National retains the rights to “Chatters” and Rave just hasn’t come up with a suitable replacement name/menu yet.
Regal shows that the 7-13 is their theatre now but doesn’t mention the 1-6. Did they just up and close that?
This link is to the October 4, 1952 issue of Boxoffice where the construction and acoustic panels of the Cinema Shoppers World is discussed. There are some photos.
This theatre was recently demolished.
I would be interested in finding a modern chain complex that has subdivided a theatre for more screens. It seems unless space is an issue that most chains nowadays will choose to add on instead of divide.
The Chinese in Aurora isn’t really that unique of a design.
And thus begins another year of corrections stating another chain owns it. To me, the theatre is still just the Plaza 5… whomever owns it should be represented in the chain listing and not the name of the theatre… but that’s just me.
It’s not alawys up to the theatre operator as to whether or not another theatre is built. I’m sure nobody wants to make one of their own theatres obsolete but when a retail developer announces they’re putting a theatre in, they’re going to do it with or without you. So even though opening a new 20-plex may have hurt Century’s own Berryessa, it was likely Century do it (and get the money) or let another chain come in and get the money. Either way you’re screwed as a theatre operator and in the process, yes… we waste a building.
News coverage with the Santa Barbara News Press.
That’s the one.
Is the address listed above correct? I thought this theatre was downtown, not on El Camino.
Colony Square was actually originally operated by Mann Theatres until they sold all their Colorado theatres to Colorado Cinemas LLC.
Why did Maya gut the theatre? It already had stadium seating, just need new seats and a thorough cleaning. Unless all those rumors I heard about structural instablity were true…?