Showing 476 - 500 of 736 comments
According to this article National is keeping sites in MA and NY: View link
They’ve closed and opened theaters in between in CT, adding screens to Buckland Hills, buying a 12-screen at Enfield Mall, and opening a Cinema De Lux in Millford. I can imagine the CT being an attractive target for AMC which only owns two theaters in the state. As for NJ? It’s anybody guess – Regal used to own a theater that National now runs, Cinemark has a single South Jersey screen, and Kerasotes is attempting to expand into the market. The only theater chain I can think of that actively also deals in real estate is Reading Cinemas (the owners of the Angelika) which would be a good fit as they also run high quality theaters. Should be interesting to see what happens.
Not that I know of – Cinemark I remember did play Brokeback in Salt Lake during that time. Now the gay community I read is boycotting Cinemark over COO Alan Sack’s donation to support Prop 8 in California – I can imagine in Salt Lake you may be out of options to see Milk… Larry Miller won’t show it, and apparently the boycott had led to protestors picketing Cinemark/Century Theaters. Hope there is an independent operator showing it in that region.
The response from above regarding Cinemark was when I had read they wouldn’t show the unrated Passion of the Christ recut (with less violence) because they don’t screen unrated films. I posed a question online to them “surely a chain of your size operates some art theaters where you may occasionally have to show an unrated film if one becomes an art house hit” and got the family friendly reply back. I don’t think they’ve changed since buying Century, which had a whole art house imprint they ran. Cinemark retained it but the choices probably have gotten more bland, and safe – trending towards considering Changeling an art house movie and not something like A Christmas Tale (which is unrated). UA before the Regal take over used to also not show unrated films, this is why distributer Lot 47 released LIE with an NC-17 rating verses going out unrated – they wanted it to play at the UA Union Square in NYC. (LIE also played at several National Amusements sites on Long Island and at Edgewater Multiplex).
I wonder if the brands would create a problem – there is also some nice synergy with the National and Viacom – MTV’s Movie House used to be filmed at The Bridge (I think they also do the same thing in Russia at their KinoStar De Lux). I have been to The Bridge in Philly which is a great theater: nice lounge, great atmosphere, well designed with corners to hide in – its what going to movies should be. It’s also extremely popular with the UPENN crowd – people get dressed up like they’re going to a club to see a film. It’s a great vibe (I understand LA’s is the same). There isn’t anyone who’s doing this kind of thing.
National has a loyal customer base: I’ve been to a few of their theaters in different states – in Seekonk, MA the box office attendant addressed regulars by name. There is a sense that National provides a community destination, tailored to each community they serve that I honestly haven’t seen with other operators. Regal is pretty generic aside from some programing differences, from Manhattan to Orlando, same for AMC.
As for a sale: Cinemark would be a very very bad thing. National for one isn’t afraid of the NC-17 rating and has always been progressive in its programing. Cinemark won’t run anything that is unrated or NC-17 rated because they feel those types of films threaten a “family friendly environment”….and Saw V is in 3 screens opening weekend.
Regal wouldn’t be a bad fit, they run some decent theaters, perhaps they could learn from National’s commitment to expanded concession offerings and VIP seating. Regal has played with the concept, and co-owns a view and brew type of theater chain.
AMC…maybe, but I think they’re still dealing with the Loews merger and they have debt. Others that I wonder about: maybe Reading Entertainment – they are a real estate company as well as a theater operator, they bought a good chunk of Pacific’s theaters, and they have a small east coast presence. This wouldn’t be a bad thing – especially down in South Jersey where Showcase at the Ritz Center could morph into an Angelika Film Center if that deal went through. Keratoses also seems hungry to grow, and they have been quickly (soon they’ll have an east coast presence), but I don’t know what shape their in. Who ever it is, I just hope they don’t screw up Edgewater Multiplex…or I might have to drive to New England for the National Amusements experience.
I imagine National being a tough sell because they along with Muvico have a history for being innovative. I haven’t heard AMC in the fray regarding buying National. I’ve heard that National will retain the New England and Russian locations, and sell off the rest of the chain including its UK operations (where they just launched Showcase: Cinema De Lux).
I agree with longislandmovies – I’m a movie addict and I’ve been to every major chain, although not perfect National is the best, General Cinema was a great chain too. AMC I’ve never really had a problem with aside from the insanity of the new Garden State (something always go wrong there, its never a quiet night at the movies). Often when I’m here I’m cursing myself for not having driven the extra 10-minutes to Edgewater Multiplex.
Where Regal and Cinemark will find challenges I think are operating the theaters to National’s standards. Even their older theaters (such as Showcase Cinemas East Hartford, now closed) were clean, in good repair, and had high standards for projection, service and comfort. NA also owns two drive-ins that operate on a seasonal basis, would Regal or Cinemark (which didn’t take Century’s Drive Ins) run them? It should be interesting, one thing’s for sure: we’ll be loosing one of the best theater chains around.
To quote Nelson from the Simpsons “ha ha” – its only a matter of time before we start seeing this type of thing at our mainstream multiplex, with clueless managers and staff who will insist there is no problem. As I’ve said film projection has only been around for the last 100+ years and there are theaters that still can’t get it right. It’s simple to flip on a switch, turn on a server and project digital, but when the big problems happen (like the above), it should be interesting to see how they manage. I say this because a certain theater I know of, and sadly still go to because its close just got a digital projector for Bolt 3-D, and while it looked fine, I’m sure its only a matter of time before they screw things up over there.
Not unusual, but unusual for Regal and AMC. I know Cinemark has second run houses and some affiliation with Starplex Cinemas, who are known for running discount houses. Concessions are where the money is. Are there any other known Regal Cinemas with a second run booking policy still operating? I thought most were sold or closed. AMC had a few in the Leigh Valley, PA years ago, but they’ve since closed or were picked up by others. AMC does have a few that have discount pricing structures, and have a few in the Hudson County area in NJ, that are first run with reduced pricing (around $8.50 for an adult verses $10.50).
Danpetitpas is right: theaters either go art house, porn house, second run or start to show Bollywood films. Second run seems like the best of those options for Anchorage.
One of the venues for this year’s Hartford International Film Festival. I’ll provide a few notes on the theater after my film Artery screens there, this Saturday at 12:15PM (not to put in a shameless plug or anything).
This theater is in the news again for banning Kevin Smith’s Zack and Miri Make a Porno – meanwhile when the NY Post asked the theater’s manager why they are showing Saw V he replied “no comment”.
I saw Zack and Miri in Toronto where it got major laughs, it’s often too funny to be truly shocking – I suppose the title is what bugged Miller the most: if a family is taking their kids to see the G-rated High School Musical 3 they don’t want to see the word “Porno” also listed at the box office, perhaps. If only Miller would take a stand and proactively ban bad filmmaking, like Disaster Movie, then I’d respect him. Unfortunately he’s banned two films that were good.
CinemarkFan – I never realized that digital had these capabilities. I know of incidents where 35MM prints were censored locally by operators (an explicit shot in Wayne Wang’s Center of the World was removed by a theater operator who felt it violated “community standards”). I’ve often wondered about that, especially with the types of films I can see in New York City – could a film with this content be shown at a theater in say, the Palin-belt of America?
I know certain theaters do have restrictions on their leases, perhaps forbidding them from showing an NC-17 rated film. Perhaps the greatest indication is if people show up: if there is no audience then why bother showing a film like this. But the control factor is scary as hell, especially when we have such groups as Cleanflicks that will censor films for you. My opinion has always been this: if your offended by the artists original work – the sex, the violence, the language – then you shouldn’t watch it, at all. This is why WalMart’s policy of only carrying “clean” CDs always baffled me.
I’m a firm believer in the filmmakers rights to show a film the way it should be shown. Often theaters fail at this by not framing the picture correctly, ect. Digital has its benefits because there is a certain consistency to it, but with that constancy comes artificiality, the image lacks the life of properly projected 35MM. Digital could make things more accessible or at least flexible in regards to the language point: digital films I assume could be more easily “open captioned” to allow for more special screenings for the hearing impaired. But I fully agree there is a slippery slope here, and control needs to reside with the filmmakers, when exhibitors stop trusting the studios and filmmakers that supply their pipeline and take decisions into their own hands, they ought to move into another line of business. With regards to Vicky Christina Barcelona, it should be known that the Rave chain didn’t carry this film at any of their sites, they are all digital. What if instead this had been the new Indiana Jones film? I bet they’d be scrambling to re-install a few 35MM projectors.
Actually, MikeRa, if you’d taken the time to look it up on IMDB you’ll find that Beowulf 3D was released on November 17, 2007 – this theater opened in May 2007, if my memory serves me correctly I think I saw it on the Sunday night of its opening weekend. I understand AMC has its policies, perhaps more education is required upfront (maybe a sign informing ticket purchasers that R-rated films require an accompanying parent or adult guardian and that IDs may be checked at the door). As I had said I don’t object to the enforcement of policies for films such as the Saw series, its the tone of their enforcement as a customer, one that is way over 17, that I had objected to – as well as the efficiency in enforcing the policies. Any business should offer quality customer service and on this front they didn’t really deliver. I hope the other theaters mentioned above had better systems than Garden State. (I’ve also seen the check ID at the door system, create long lines at Clifton Commons)
As for the MPAA, I agree with movie534 – without writing an entire essay on the subject the MPAA’s R-rating has become too broad, encompassing films like Slumdog Millionaire (which I saw in Toronto and was shocked to learn it had received an R-rating, because, it may be one that teens may want to see and there is no reason they shouldn’t be able to alone, a PG-13 would have been fair) and Saw. The MPAA system is voluntary, aside from a few states and jurisdictions where it is law (it is a state law in NJ, but I know Cedar Grove’s town laws require its cinema to enforce the guidelines). Without saying too much I’ll point you to Kirby Dick’s This Film is Not Yet Rated – a great example of just how stupid the system is. We do need a system and guidelines, but to me there is a clear distinction between Billy Elliot (also rated R) and Saw V, while Crossroads (a film with a horrible moral for young women: you should loose your virginity to a dangerous looking older dude because he drives a cool car) is PG-13. The R and the PG-13 ratings have become awfully bloated, while the NC-17, a perfectly good rating, goes unused because god forbid someone make a film exclusively for adults – those wackos over at Cinemark won’t show it.
I was at AMC Garden State 16 for Saw V last night – strange showing and I have a few notes on it: first was the crowds and the ID checks, which created a long than need to be line, they weren’t terribly efficient at this, and for what – an MPAA system that really doesn’t work. Secondly, I don’t know if there was a group making trouble, I didn’t notice them, but at least 5 of their relatively useless security guards came in and kicked them out, gladly they weren’t with little resistance, because if they didn’t I would have complained about this: you can’t ruin a movie experience for 400 other people to kick out 6. I say the security guards there are useless and I’ll cite two incidents: at a certain point in the theater’s history it was the subject of folks in the mall randomly pulling alarms, causing the staff to evacuate the theater. I see 5 films a week, and in 10 years of this habit, I’ve only ever been evacuated from a theater three times: the first at the Sunshine in Manhattan was an actual emergency. The other two were at AMC Garden State. Adult security guards stood by while 16-year olds in red AMC polo shirts lead the evacuation.
The second incident occurred at a 3-D showing of Beowulf, when I got up to complain about a guy on his cell phone and when I turned the corner I found it was a security guard. I stared at him and he said “can I help you” and I said “sure, you mind taking that conversation outside” and he said “I’m on the phone with my boss” – I said “that’s nice, I paid $14 to see this movie, I don’t need to hear you, take the call in the hallway” – the then replied “do you know who your talking to, I’m the security guard”. Stupid wannabe cop. (Meanwhile he had patrons sitting on the stairs, which is a fire hazard)
I complained to the management who offered up a free pass, what I really wanted those was an apology from the guard and an acknowledgment as to why what he did was wrong, AMC’s management said they couldn’t since they outsource security to a private firm, they took my info and I have yet to get a call back from the guy’s boss. I’m still holding that free pass.
I’m not in this targeted group, I consider myself to be a sophisticated movie goer, and I like theaters with good customer service (Edgewater Multiplex still is the gold standard in Northern NJ) – while I understand the company has its policies, its security guards and staff need to start treating their filmgoers like paying customers and not criminals, regardless of their age. If 16 years get fed up and decided to stop showing up, AMC doesn’t have a future. Its more of the tone of their interactions I object to than then their enforcement of policies.
But Digital still hasn’t been perfected yet? This is a loss for audiences. Smarter chains (like the unmentioned National Amusements) hasn’t opened “all digital” new theaters – their new builds are half digital and half film projection. While there are benefits to digital such as the picture is rock steady, so much quality is lost. I had the displeasure of sitting in the front row to a digital show at this year’s Toronto International Film Festival at AMC Younge-Dundas, and the picture quality compared to a front row showing of a film was lost. While digital film could be good for smaller films, making distribution more affordable (some small films already were sending theaters DVDs and DigiBatas), I think for the big hollywood studio film it’s a major loss, unless the film is computer animated. I understand this is a business but as advocates for the preservation of cinema, the experience of cinema (although on this site filtered through the lens of the actually experience of the buildings), projecting film in its intended form is important. I have given digital a try, and I will search out these independent theaters, with good projection, and support them when I can when the Digital Implementation Partnership starts converting the multiplexes and commercially owned art theaters I attend now.
Thankfully, I live in an area (NYC-metro area) with thriving NFP art theaters like Film Forum, and the Walter Reed Theater that will project a motion picture in the format the filmmaker had intended. So I don’t think 35 and 16MM will be gone altogether.
They are programing Bollywood films, which seem to be quite successful here. The theater itself was successful in part because of its location that they probably didn’t feel it was necessary to play this product (and I think Movie City, which is operated by Phoenix Adlabs Theater Management – itself a joint venture between Phoenix Theaters and Indian mega firm Reliance Media – is renting the theaters as they don’t let you use your credit card, Clearview Advantage card or passes for tickets).
Bollywood product usually will find its way into an over screened area in multiplexes that are underperforming, or are having a slow weekend. For a while it disapeared from North Bergen, and National Amusements dedicated a screen to it at Edgewater during slow periods. I’m sure the disappearance of Cineplaza and the Cineplaza programing at Columbia Park influenced Clearview to show more of it (they often will show the films on the largest screens on late on a Saturday night).
I just got back TIFF so I have a few notes on the complex: the box office for the theater is on the first floor, with an automated box office at the entrance of the theater, which shares the forth floor of the Toronto Life Center with Jack Astors Bar & Grill and Milestones. Screens 1-10 are on the forth floor of the complex, with Screens 11-24 (I think) on the sixth floor. The festival took over screens 1-10 so I can only comment on those, with the larger theaters you entered the theater on at the mid-point, with stadium seating both upwards and downwards. The smaller theaters had a few rows of sloped floor seating with stadium seating upwards.
The festival was using 1-10, and instead of using the large lobby inside for ticket holder lines, they created a single line out front in Young Dundas Square wrapping around the block, so much so at one point it touched Ryerson University, a long block away. The theaters are used in the morning by Ryerson University as classrooms, which explains why the festival didn’t have morning shows at AMC (they did at Scotiabank, where they took four theaters this year). I suppose getting back to that line issue TIFF could have used some of the unused space in the Toronto Life Center to create a better system. The mall is mostly filled though, with a basement floor connected to the PATH (therefore I could walk from my hotel to the theater, only having to go outside to wait in the ticket holders line). They still share films with Scotiabank with that theater having an IMAX screen that gives them a bit of an advantage over getting some hotter films (ie: Dark Knight). AMC shows move-overs from Scotiabank, art films that aren’t getting booked at the Cumberland, Varsity or Carlton for some reason, and some new studio films. Food options between the food court and the two restaurants that share the forth floor aren’t in short supply, since unlike Scotiabank this theater doesn’t have its own food court.
The Bell Lightbox is going to be amazing. I wonder what they will be showing on those five screens when the festival isn’t in town. I’ve heard the group plans to expand their programing which they currently show down at the Art Gallery of Ontario (where this year’s Wavelengths (experimental films) selections showed).
It’s very much in construction, I took some pics on Saturday and am going to send them into Cinema Treasures.
The Angelika Film Center does indeed have a location in Houston, TX.
Originally going to be part of the Crown Theaters chain. Crown Theaters has now been sold to Bow Tie Cinemas on the East Coast and Keratoses in the Midwest. I imagine if it seemed un-Cinemark, that might be why.
I would beg to differ with Christophersepp’s assessment of the new Garden State 16 – which has undoubtably larger, more comfortable theaters and bigger screens than the tenplex (aside from maybe Theater 1). Garden State 16 is a better multiplex, still a multiplex with its faults.
Most of the theaters AMC acquired from Loews were in poor repair long before AMC took the keys. With that said, there are a few they haven’t done much with. Palisades Center saw a new carpet and paint, but that’s the only modification I’ve seen. I’ve heard they did correct some sound problems in other markets at new Loews sites. The Plaza 8 still seemed to be in good shape – it reminded me of the National Amusements in Orange, CT, I suppose it was well constructed so it didn’t look run down. A few blocks down though, at the Meadows 6 – well that’s another story. Between the leaky roof, and the teenagers sneaking in through the front door from the outside, and the musty smells…it might be better off leveled. It’s a shame because they were once the flagship of the Loews chain. Sony ran the theaters pretty well, but when they got out and the investment bankers bought in the chain went to hell. Perhaps AMC knows it time is up, and they’re pulling out. The new theater will be built by Keratoses, a chain building momentum in the Midwest. I’ve seen pictures of their builds and can assess it’ll be pretty comparable to Garden State.
Noting is like seeing a big event picture in a 1000+ seat theater and I wish chains would bring this experience back. They have to some extent on a smaller scale by incorporating IMAX theaters in some builds, and Harkins has the Cine Capri theaters that have wider screens, but they lack the detail and the excitement of seeing a film at the Ziegfeld (then again the last time I was at the Ziegfeld was for the premiere of The Butterfly and the Diving Bell – so that on its own was pretty darn exciting).
Soon all 14 screens will be in one facility when Kerasotes brings their racist brand of movie going to the Meadows. Both AMC Loews sites are due to close at the end of the summer with Kerasotes Show Place 14 arriving for Summer 2009. It seems as if every regional, out of market chain aside from Pacific and Harkins have operated in the area with Columbia Park changing hands between Starplex, Cinemark, Interstate, Regal/UA, and now Phoenix. And of coarse we’ll have Muvico soon in the mix at in already over screened area, where neither AMCs or Columbia Park are charging full price for first run features. My guess is Kerasotes' notoriously wacky, racist and anti-teen policies, not to mention full price tickets, won’t put a dent in Columbia Park’s box office, and Muvico at Xanadu will be successful on its own groundbreaking terms.
I’m sure Clearview will find a way to screw up digital – projecting on film has only been around for what, like 100+ years – and they still have yet to master that.
It looks like after one week of general admission pricing Clearview has reinstated senior, children and bargain pricing. While I found it groundbreaking, the Clairidge otherwise is an entirely ungroundbreaking theater – sure it shows good movies but the venue itself is finally comfortable with the upgrades they did last year. Still my condolences to anyone who gets stuck in Theater 4 with its distorted views and awkward framing, at a price thats more expensive than AMC Loews Wayne which, while being unpleasant due to the security checks by the Wayne, PD and the crowds, does know how to frame a picture
In a movie that will surly piss off their core market (seniors) – I discovered today that Clearview has eliminated bargain pricing all together, now charging a general admission of $10.25, all ages, all seats, all times. This is sort of unheard of for a first run theater, it might be the first full price, non-luxury (Cinema De Lux, Lux Level, Muvico Premiere, ect) style theater in the country to do this (Hudson Mall for example is a first run, off-price theater charging $6, all seats, all times) – but what are the other alternatives for these kinds of movies? Wait for video or see it in the city.
I’m sure Clearview will find a way to screw up digital, I mean hell we’ve only had 35MM for over 100 years and they haven’t mastered that. I’m sure digital is idiot proof but those idiots will figure out a way to botch it. I saw Baby Mama at the Headquarters opening weekend (strangely on one of the smallest screens, so much for the number one movie in America that week) and complained twice about the framing, the film started half off the screen, they “corrected” it and we saw lights/boom mikes. Finally they got it right, but the first 10 minutes of the film was a waste.
Also they only had the upper concession stand open – on a Saturday night! Is Headquarters loosing its popularity to Rockaway?
This one is splitting films with Scotiabank (Paramount), which I was impressed by at last year’s TIFF (perfect for a film festival since you can survive all day with that food court). AMC though I noticed is getting some better bookings including this week Leatherheads and The Ruins, whereas Scotiabank is stuck with Shine a Light (on its IMAX screen) and some other indie film. I wonder what this will do – this is essentially the Toronto version of what happened on 42nd street in Manhattan with AMC Empire 25 and the Loews (now Regal) E-Walk. Not to mention the Varsity isn’t that far away, sharing a few of the more “upscale” titles (Varsity did share with Scotiabank as well), and The Carlton. If AMC elects to pick up more art product (they do at Empire), even on say 3-4 screens, could that spell the end for theaters like The Carlton and the Cumberland? (Then again would art film goers venture to Dundas Younge square which seems to scream “tourist hotspot”?) Also too the Bell Lightbox is schedule to open in for the TIFF in 2009 – with 5 screens that could, I assume, pick up some art bookings on a regular basis (and confirm what Toronto natives mentioned to me in line at TIFF: the festival is moving further South away from the Cumberland and former Uptown theaters). Personally I think 24 screens is way way too many, I thought AMC was getting away from these huge complexes? Cineplex LP seems to be building smaller and more luxurious theaters while AMC really hasn’t committed to such concepts as VIP seating, fine dinning, bars and expanded concession menus the way that Famous Players/Cineplex and in the US, National Amusements and Muvico have.