I first moved to Boston in 1975. When I got here, the central part of the city had 28 screens in 20 theatre buildings, with 12 different owners. One chain was clearly dominant — Sack Theatres, with 12 screens in 8 theatres — but moviegoers had plenty of other choices. (note: I’m omitting porn theatres and screens from this count.)
Today, Boston has 32 screens in 2 theatre buildings, both built within the last six years. Both are owned by AMC, though they are legally required to divest one of them.
So we now have more screens, but fewer choices. In 1975, a movie would never play on more than one screen of a multiplex, nor would it play in more than one theatre within central Boston. Today, a movie often plays at both of our remaining two theatres; furthermore, some movies play on two or three screens at one or both theatres.
In today’s paper, I see only 11 different movies playing on those 32 screens.
No, actually, in this particular case, it’s not a question of ‘product’.
This is the whole basis of this article, of this thread, of this discussion.
Let’s put it this way: You’re a retailer. You sell XYZ. You have for years. All of a sudden, there’s this newfangled way for people to purchase XYZ, called The Internet. They can buy XYZ cheaper than you can sell it. It’s not that they’re interested in another product. They simply prefer to purchase it online. They don’t have to schedule their time, they don’t have to pay for gas, they don’t have to worry about anything other than placing the order online.
This is an analogy that’s a parallel for the movies. It’s not that people are clamouring for different product, product that can’t be provided by cinemas. It’s the same product…only they’re not enjoying it in the theatres…they’re enjoying it in their homes.
Can you not see this?
This isn’t a question of box office receipts because I think you should be careful when you bring up these numbers in isolation. Firstly, Box Office Dollars do not equate to Tickets Bought. Take a look at the figures over the past ten years taking into consderation an ever-enlarging population as well as ticket price increases and then we can talk. Secondly, you need to look at how much ‘alternate’ revenues are increasing. If your revenue pie is growing (and nobody’s arguing that it isn’t), but a greater percentage of growth is being found in something other than ‘theatrical distribution revenue’, then you need to admit that the market is changing. And not in the same way it did with the advent of tv and people began staying away from nabes, when we saw a very dramatic, very sad closing of cinemas in the 50s. And not in the same way we did when we saw the advent of VCRs and the multiplex. This is a sea change…and we’re only at the very leading edge of it.
People have more choices these days. More choices in how to get their entertainment, how to see the movies they want to see. And the trend for home-viewing is increasing. Which is why a major cinema chain has decided to try to stem the tide and get people to see what they believe is the truth: that movies were never intended to be seen on small boxes.
But here’s the thing: movie theatre owners are at fault to a much greater extent for their woes than they’ve been willing to admit. They don’t control the product. But they do control the experience. And what people are telling them -by way of not going to the movies as much (and keep in mind here that you have to take into account the expanding population base, that ticket sales should actually be higher than they are, if longtime goers were still buying tickets at the same rate) as well as investing in home cinemas- is that it’s too expensive to go see movies at the cinema. And there are too many boors in the audience who talk and have phones that go off who aren’t dealt with. So people -generally a materialistic group in the first place- are choosing to buy something for their home rather than continually shell out $$$ for a potentially disappointing experience at a cinema. One of the few drawbacks for them is having to wait for the release. However…at the risk of flogging a dead horse…as the studios see more and more of the revenue pie coming from DVD sales, the lag-time between theatrical release and DVD release will be reduced. Until there will come a day (how soon this will be determined by the marketplace) when cinemas will no longer be the primary means of release. Opening Day/Weekend BO numbers will include DVD sales. More and more people will be choosing to view a new release in their home rather than go to a cinema. The landscape is changing, regardless of traditionalists such as yourself might want to believe.
What this will mean is a reduction in screen numbers.
Less cinemas.
And certainly less ‘cinema treasures’.
Until there comes a time when people crave that ‘big screen experience’ again.
But once you’ve closed a door, it’s very hard to get people thinking another way. Look at drive-ins.
Hollywood doesn’t care where it gets its revenue from. It’s not married to cinemas. It’s part of the tradition of film, yes. But it’s not dependent on movies being shown in a theatrical venue. It’s only dependent on making money. On bsns.
As for my ‘credentials’… Don’t think for a second that because you’ve spent your time in the biz that automatically gifts you with insight and knowledge. I’m reminded of two expressions: ‘Sometimes you can’t see the forest for the trees,’ and ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see.’
So; see you in fifteen years to sort out my proposed bet.
Going to the movies does not make you an expert ,working in bsns for years does.I have been an usher,ast mgr ,mgr,district mgr,projectionist,film booker and it all goes back to one thing PRODUCT.HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THE GREAT SUMMER BSNS THIS YEAR????
Famous Players just like Allen Brothers overexpanded and got sold. Innovative though and as a consumer, I could not care less if a big company goes out of business. I prefer renting dvds or go to the nabes. I rather let the Cineplexes, Empires and AMCs do the worrying.
My point is ‘Which cinemas do you think are going to go under as a result of closings due to 'over-screening’? It surely won’t be the multiplexes. It’ll be just like it is in Toronto, with either four or five of the Festival chain going under a quartet of theatres listed right here on this site, great old nabes. That’s simple ‘bsns’ logic. The multiplexes, the creatures that everyone loves to slam, but actually by and large offer up the best experience for the customer (cleanliness, reliability, choice), are the ones that are positioned to survive. It’s going to be a simple question of ‘How do we do it? VOLUME!’
Quite frankly I find the mud you sling at multiplexes to be quite humourous; you seemingly believe in the marketplace sorting itself out , and yet the multiplex is a great example of this: it’s simply bsns evolution. (And no, I’m not ‘new to the bsns’. I’ve been going to movies for over forty years, and I grew up in a neighbourhood that had both a nabe and a drive-in within a five-minute walk. I’ve seen just about everything unfold over that time, having lived on two continents and in three countries, having seen many beloved cinemas close and revel in the Unlimited card in the UK as mentioned in a previous post, above.)
The bottom line is that it’ll primarily be more of the cinema treasures that you revere that go out of business, not your despised multiplexes as ‘over-screening’ is sorted out by the marketplace. Which is why I think we need to have greater discussion as to ‘Why?’, not more derisive comments aimed at an aspect of presentation that simply isn’t going to go away. It’s not like anyone is going to be building single-screen palaces again, are they…?
The web site is Cinema Treasures …….Not shitty multiplexs with 20 screens we are forced to go to because we have no other choice.Over screening did not happen by single screen theaters ..Schmadrian are you new to the bsns ???
So if you feel this way, if you think that the US is ‘over-screened’, and won’t (apparently) cry when more cinemas close…what are you doing on this site? Or are your that famous superhero ‘Ultrapragmatic Guy’?!?
I think I’m gonna have a t-shirt made up: a picture of an old palace being demolished with the caption ‘The fact that theaters are closing is a good thing…’
Wowza.
And ‘back to showmanship’; care to explain that? I can’t tell you how much my curiosity’s been piqued…
THE BSNS MODEl IS CHANGING FOR THEATERES AS IT HAS OVER THE LAST 100 YEARS .Silent films to talk , news reels ,black and white to color ,scope,70 mm, stereo to thk ,popcorn and soda to full bars and reasturants..Theaters 2006 and on……….. DIgital pic ,back to showemanship, larger screens ….thats how i see it …..The fact theaters are closeing is a good thing the United States has been over screened since the 90s in almost every part of the country.I would call that a correction.
“The digital movie era is only beginning. It is in some ways a replay of the first shake-out of movie theaters in the 1950s when TV and urban flight was the threat. But this shakeout will happen over a shorter period of time.”
I agree completely.
I also agree that what we will more than likely end up with is (until nostalgia rears its kind head and there’s some kind of ‘revival’ some tweny years after the full effects of this shakeup and we see ‘restoration’ efforts to bring back the old-style experience) a small assortment of multiplexes and the odd ‘cinema treasure’ palace in most cities throughout North America. I’m sorry if I’m a Negative Nancy here, but I fear that the landscape we’ve come to know (and love, on this site alone) is about to change in the next decade unlike any previously. And not because nobody’s interested in movies anymore, that there’s another alternative. People are just as interested in movies. Except they’re gonna want to see them in their homes. Not everyone, but it doesn’t take ‘everyone’ to change things. It all comes down to the mighty dollar.
So start buying your lottery tickets; there’s gonna be some bargains out there for those richies with the inclination to own a piece of the past.
Movie Theaters could end up the way ‘legitimate’ theaters have. A relatively few large (and pricey) digital movie houses in Midtown Manhattan, LA, San Francisco, Toronto, London, Paris, etc. Some smaller digital theaters in the wealthier suburbs. Even today’s busy multiplexes may not be willing to shoulder the cost of upgrading 15+ screens to digital projection. We are in unchartered territory here.
The digital movie era is only beginning. It is in some ways a replay of the first shake-out of movie theaters in the 1950s when TV and urban flight was the threat. But this shakeout will happen over a shorter period of time.
I don’t think that the VCR hurt movie theaters in the 1980s that much because VHS releases of a film were usually 12-18 months after theatrical release. VHS was nowhere near DVD quality, a large screen back then was 35"and HDTV didn’t exist.
And that’s wonderful news for all cinema owners out there…
But really, the true test of this campaign -and any other that tries to woo people back into proper moviegoing- is how those other than the choir respond to being preached to.
I’d be curious to post this thread on a general discussion forum to see how broad the responses are.
To paraphrase this ad campaign, it doesn’t matter what Wal-Mart, Best Buy or any electronics store sells. Untill they make a 60 Foot TV that costs $1000, I know where I’ll be spending my Friday and Saturday nights!
“I have a home theater with the seats ,screen and curtain but what that takes away is time from watching tv not going to the movies.”
You are the exception to the rule. You’re not a model for the movie-goer that this campaign -and this discussion- addresses. They’re -and I’m- focusing on those people who by-and-large have decided or are deciding to make home cinema their default. This is not about watching tv.
(If it’s any consolation, I’m not the model, either, because I don’t own a television, wouldn’t watch movies on one if you paid me, and I see about 200 films at the cinemas each year.)
Yes, theatres will be around long after we’re gone. People do crave the communal experience, no matter how much they love their home schtick. Concerts, the theatre, sporting events, beaches, even malls prove that people at their cores crave something ‘larger’. Very little has changed since the days of the Romans at the Coliseum or Shakespeare’s offerings at The Globe.
So yes, theatres will be around long after we’re gone.
But there’s gonna be far less of them.
And the listings on this site of ‘Closed’ or ‘Demolished’ will only increase.
Substantially.
I appreciate your optimism. I do. And I admire it. I was there when VCRs came on the scene. And I remember how the industry screamed about home-taping, yadda, yadda, yadda.
But seriously; if you really can’t see the landscape having changed markedly with the advent of the internet, with iPods, with DVDs and with home systems…changed sufficiently to be able to recognize that this time, things have been accellerated far more than when VCRs came onto the scene…
Tell you what; let’s make a point of getting together in fifteen years to talk about this. And if things haven’t unfolded pretty much as I’ve set out, then I’ll be more than happy to buy you an evening’s worth of entertainment at whichever movie palace you wish, wherever. Including extra butter on your popcorn.
This is a great discussion. The sky is not falling. The united states is over screened and has been since the 90s.When product is bad bsns is bad good product bsns is good.if you have geat product and people stop coming then the sky is falling,ticket prices are at an all time high and are in no danger in changing.This summer is turning in a hugh boxoffice numbers thus far, if the sky was falling this would not be happening.When i say i dont get it i mean what are you doing wrong at your theater.You will have times sometimes ,years,when the bsns model needs to be changed ..ie jc pennys , sears, and theaters . I have a home theater with the seats ,screen and curtain but what that takes away is time from watching tv not going to the movies.I saw this reaction when video started .Theaters will be around long after we are all gone.
This is a great discussion. The sky is not falling. The united states is over screened and has been since the 90s.When product is bad bsns is bad good product bsns is good.if you have geat product and people stop coming then the sky is falling,ticket prices are at an all time high and are in no danger in changing.This summer is turning in a hugh boxoffice numbers thus far, if the sky was falling this would not be happening.When i say i dont get it i mean what are you doing wrong at your theater.You will have times sometimes ,years,when the bsns model needs to be changed ..ie jc pennys , sears, and theaters . I have a home theater with the seats ,screen and curtain but whtat that takes away is time from watching tv not going to the movies.
I don’t mean to be rude, but you’ve posted two comments in a row that suggest you don’t get it. WalMart is a fixed business where they’re in competition with the same essential model. Movie houses are in competition with something else entirely. It’s like comparing apples with apple juice. ((The exception here is online retailing, but we’re not talking an homogenous market. That is, not everyone has internet access, not everyone feels safe ordering online and many people prefer to see what they buy, have an innate urge to maintain their connection to ‘commerce’. This is why where online grocery shopping is available, people still want to ‘squeeze the vegetables’, ‘smell the fruit’. The other difference is that WalMart sells merchandise that generally fits more under the ‘Need’ category. A movie is a ‘Want’. It’s a luxury.)
WalMart is selling merchandise out of a location. Its variables are merchandise selection and variety, price, saleshelp, hours of operation, location, etc. They’re all -to varying extents- variable controllables, things that all other competitors are dealing with, too.
Movie theatres are ‘selling’ a cinematic experience. The seeing of a movie within a communal auditorium, with comfortable seats and concession stand items. But the prime reason that anyone goes to see a movie…the movie itself…is not a particularly controllable variable. There’s only so many choices from the distributors. And here’s the kicker: the movie theatres don’t even see ticket sales as their real source of profit: concession stand sales account for this. The price of which is right up there at the top of movie-goers' List of Complaints, people who have entered into their own personal deliberations about whether or not they want to keep spending money going to the movies at cinemas.
In ‘competition’ with the movie theatres is home viewing. Where there’s convenience. View when you like, pause the film, watch half tonight, half tomorrow in the afternoon, you can have dinner while you watch, you can chat with someone online while you watch, you can make babies while you watch…
North American society has become a cocooning one. People are making their homes their refuges, their sanctuaries. For many of these people, the experience of watching a movie in a cinema simply does not match the price or commitment of time. (Points well-made by DFC)
Take a look at any city’s cinema figures since WWII. The numbers of cinemas, of screens are dropping. Even with multiplexes being built, the number is dropping. This runs totally contrary to what you’re suggesting, that this is just part of a normal business trend, that things will change back given time, the sky isn’t falling…
Actually, the sky is falling.
Here’s the bottom-line: the studios, Hollywood, The Movie Biz people, they don’t care how they get their money. If the yearly income they bring in were to stay the same from 1990-2020, say at $30 billion, or even increase, but the sources of that income changed from 95% theatrical takings to 5% theatrical takings, do you think they’d care? If over the course of this 30 years the advent of home viewing (by way of the ‘cinematic tv’ and online access) replaced theatrical distribution, do you really think they’d care? Why should they, if they’re recouping their investment as planned, and people are just as eager to ‘go to the movies’…except their destination is not a cinema, with all of its inherent costs and commitments, but the ‘movie room’ in their home…as they ever were?
So this is what’s happening: more and more people are investing in home cinemas. As a result, having made this investment, they’re not frequenting movie houses as much. Therefore, there’s less movie house ticket revenue to go around. Therefore, cinemas are closing. (Witness the Festival chain in Toronto.) So we continually lose more cinemas, especially single-screeners. And because the costs of exhibiting a movie generally go up, people are less and less inclined to pay more to see movies at the remaining movie theatres, so more stay home and more cinemas close…until?
Until?
How do you turn the tide? Well, I’m a pronounced cinema fan and I’m not sure you can. I think you can stem it, but to do so, you have to go back to ground zero and take an objective look at the realities of how the average movie-goer feels about what’s being sold. What their complaints are. Whether they can be addressed. The truth is that it’s expensive to go the movies. The cost of getting there. The tickets. The food and drink. The babysitter. If the movie theatres are not providing an experience that makes this expenditure worthwhile, and people are content with an alternative (ie: home viewing), regardless that at the present time, you have to wait a few months before you can see a film, then more people will make the choice to have their movie experience at home. (Of course, if Hollywood continually erodes this ‘delay’, to the point where there’s mere weeks…or days…or there’s a simultaneous release, both theatrical and DVD, then you can bet your bottom dollar that less and less people will be going to the movies…and less and less movie houses will exist.)
This is why I’d like to see some healthy discussion as to what can be done to stem the tide, take a good look at what needs to be done across the board and in specific markets to get people more interested in seeing films the way they were meant to be seen. On the big screen.
dfc- i just dont get all the crying,every bsns is up and down walmart has times its down 5-10 % then up.I do not believe the the theatre bsns is in any danger ,changing yes as do all bsns,,,
The theaters are in a financial bind. They are expected to spend small fortunes to go digital. At the same time many ex-movie-patrons simply wait 3 months or less for a film to come out on DVD.
The theater experience has become a task for many. You have to drive into the city or to the local multi-plex. Then you have to park your car and wait on the ticket line. Popcorn and beverages are over-priced. Now you are seated and discover that many people don’t know how to behave in a movie house. Cellphones ring, people talk among themselves, etc. Theater owners can’t do much about that without risking lawsuits from ejected patrons.
So more and more people are buying those ever-cheaper HDTVs and watching movies in their nice quiet home theaters. The $20 DVD is cheaper than taking the family to the movies, especially with gasoline at $3.15/gallon. Maybe digital projection will give movie houses a second life. But what about the theaters that can’t afford to go digital?
Cineplex is not the first to do this type of advertising. Famous Players (who Cineplex recently bought) did this same ad with the same tag line in the mid 90’s.
Delving further into ancient history, Famous Players-Nathanson greatly expanded their holdings in the early 20’s with the acquisition of the Allen brothers theatre chain. The Allen brothers were grossly overextended and forced into bankruptcy. FP gained ownership of the entire chain of theatres for mere pennies on the dollar.
Odeon expanded into the western Canadian market in 1945 merging with Morton theatres to form Odeon-Morton. The Morton name eventually vanished. I recall that there was a lot of Rank organization product shown so it must have been after the merger with British Odeon.
The fast shuffle that Cineplex pulled with the Toronto Pantages/Imperial/Imperial6/Pantages/Canon theatre (how many names can one theatre have?) is well known.
Interesting that where once upon a time Famous Players and its affiliated companies had a stranglehold on film exhibition across Canada and Odeon was the new kid on the block, the new kid is now the major player.
I first moved to Boston in 1975. When I got here, the central part of the city had 28 screens in 20 theatre buildings, with 12 different owners. One chain was clearly dominant — Sack Theatres, with 12 screens in 8 theatres — but moviegoers had plenty of other choices. (note: I’m omitting porn theatres and screens from this count.)
Today, Boston has 32 screens in 2 theatre buildings, both built within the last six years. Both are owned by AMC, though they are legally required to divest one of them.
So we now have more screens, but fewer choices. In 1975, a movie would never play on more than one screen of a multiplex, nor would it play in more than one theatre within central Boston. Today, a movie often plays at both of our remaining two theatres; furthermore, some movies play on two or three screens at one or both theatres.
In today’s paper, I see only 11 different movies playing on those 32 screens.
No, actually, in this particular case, it’s not a question of ‘product’.
This is the whole basis of this article, of this thread, of this discussion.
Let’s put it this way: You’re a retailer. You sell XYZ. You have for years. All of a sudden, there’s this newfangled way for people to purchase XYZ, called The Internet. They can buy XYZ cheaper than you can sell it. It’s not that they’re interested in another product. They simply prefer to purchase it online. They don’t have to schedule their time, they don’t have to pay for gas, they don’t have to worry about anything other than placing the order online.
This is an analogy that’s a parallel for the movies. It’s not that people are clamouring for different product, product that can’t be provided by cinemas. It’s the same product…only they’re not enjoying it in the theatres…they’re enjoying it in their homes.
Can you not see this?
This isn’t a question of box office receipts because I think you should be careful when you bring up these numbers in isolation. Firstly, Box Office Dollars do not equate to Tickets Bought. Take a look at the figures over the past ten years taking into consderation an ever-enlarging population as well as ticket price increases and then we can talk. Secondly, you need to look at how much ‘alternate’ revenues are increasing. If your revenue pie is growing (and nobody’s arguing that it isn’t), but a greater percentage of growth is being found in something other than ‘theatrical distribution revenue’, then you need to admit that the market is changing. And not in the same way it did with the advent of tv and people began staying away from nabes, when we saw a very dramatic, very sad closing of cinemas in the 50s. And not in the same way we did when we saw the advent of VCRs and the multiplex. This is a sea change…and we’re only at the very leading edge of it.
People have more choices these days. More choices in how to get their entertainment, how to see the movies they want to see. And the trend for home-viewing is increasing. Which is why a major cinema chain has decided to try to stem the tide and get people to see what they believe is the truth: that movies were never intended to be seen on small boxes.
But here’s the thing: movie theatre owners are at fault to a much greater extent for their woes than they’ve been willing to admit. They don’t control the product. But they do control the experience. And what people are telling them -by way of not going to the movies as much (and keep in mind here that you have to take into account the expanding population base, that ticket sales should actually be higher than they are, if longtime goers were still buying tickets at the same rate) as well as investing in home cinemas- is that it’s too expensive to go see movies at the cinema. And there are too many boors in the audience who talk and have phones that go off who aren’t dealt with. So people -generally a materialistic group in the first place- are choosing to buy something for their home rather than continually shell out $$$ for a potentially disappointing experience at a cinema. One of the few drawbacks for them is having to wait for the release. However…at the risk of flogging a dead horse…as the studios see more and more of the revenue pie coming from DVD sales, the lag-time between theatrical release and DVD release will be reduced. Until there will come a day (how soon this will be determined by the marketplace) when cinemas will no longer be the primary means of release. Opening Day/Weekend BO numbers will include DVD sales. More and more people will be choosing to view a new release in their home rather than go to a cinema. The landscape is changing, regardless of traditionalists such as yourself might want to believe.
What this will mean is a reduction in screen numbers.
Less cinemas.
And certainly less ‘cinema treasures’.
Until there comes a time when people crave that ‘big screen experience’ again.
But once you’ve closed a door, it’s very hard to get people thinking another way. Look at drive-ins.
Hollywood doesn’t care where it gets its revenue from. It’s not married to cinemas. It’s part of the tradition of film, yes. But it’s not dependent on movies being shown in a theatrical venue. It’s only dependent on making money. On bsns.
As for my ‘credentials’… Don’t think for a second that because you’ve spent your time in the biz that automatically gifts you with insight and knowledge. I’m reminded of two expressions: ‘Sometimes you can’t see the forest for the trees,’ and ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see.’
So; see you in fifteen years to sort out my proposed bet.
Going to the movies does not make you an expert ,working in bsns for years does.I have been an usher,ast mgr ,mgr,district mgr,projectionist,film booker and it all goes back to one thing PRODUCT.HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THE GREAT SUMMER BSNS THIS YEAR????
Famous Players just like Allen Brothers overexpanded and got sold. Innovative though and as a consumer, I could not care less if a big company goes out of business. I prefer renting dvds or go to the nabes. I rather let the Cineplexes, Empires and AMCs do the worrying.
My point is ‘Which cinemas do you think are going to go under as a result of closings due to 'over-screening’? It surely won’t be the multiplexes. It’ll be just like it is in Toronto, with either four or five of the Festival chain going under a quartet of theatres listed right here on this site, great old nabes. That’s simple ‘bsns’ logic. The multiplexes, the creatures that everyone loves to slam, but actually by and large offer up the best experience for the customer (cleanliness, reliability, choice), are the ones that are positioned to survive. It’s going to be a simple question of ‘How do we do it? VOLUME!’
Quite frankly I find the mud you sling at multiplexes to be quite humourous; you seemingly believe in the marketplace sorting itself out , and yet the multiplex is a great example of this: it’s simply bsns evolution. (And no, I’m not ‘new to the bsns’. I’ve been going to movies for over forty years, and I grew up in a neighbourhood that had both a nabe and a drive-in within a five-minute walk. I’ve seen just about everything unfold over that time, having lived on two continents and in three countries, having seen many beloved cinemas close and revel in the Unlimited card in the UK as mentioned in a previous post, above.)
The bottom line is that it’ll primarily be more of the cinema treasures that you revere that go out of business, not your despised multiplexes as ‘over-screening’ is sorted out by the marketplace. Which is why I think we need to have greater discussion as to ‘Why?’, not more derisive comments aimed at an aspect of presentation that simply isn’t going to go away. It’s not like anyone is going to be building single-screen palaces again, are they…?
ps. lots of other points made in the post before but you chose only to pic out the closeings?
The web site is Cinema Treasures …….Not shitty multiplexs with 20 screens we are forced to go to because we have no other choice.Over screening did not happen by single screen theaters ..Schmadrian are you new to the bsns ???
longislandmovies:
So if you feel this way, if you think that the US is ‘over-screened’, and won’t (apparently) cry when more cinemas close…what are you doing on this site? Or are your that famous superhero ‘Ultrapragmatic Guy’?!?
I think I’m gonna have a t-shirt made up: a picture of an old palace being demolished with the caption ‘The fact that theaters are closing is a good thing…’
Wowza.
And ‘back to showmanship’; care to explain that? I can’t tell you how much my curiosity’s been piqued…
THE BSNS MODEl IS CHANGING FOR THEATERES AS IT HAS OVER THE LAST 100 YEARS .Silent films to talk , news reels ,black and white to color ,scope,70 mm, stereo to thk ,popcorn and soda to full bars and reasturants..Theaters 2006 and on……….. DIgital pic ,back to showemanship, larger screens ….thats how i see it …..The fact theaters are closeing is a good thing the United States has been over screened since the 90s in almost every part of the country.I would call that a correction.
“The digital movie era is only beginning. It is in some ways a replay of the first shake-out of movie theaters in the 1950s when TV and urban flight was the threat. But this shakeout will happen over a shorter period of time.”
I agree completely.
I also agree that what we will more than likely end up with is (until nostalgia rears its kind head and there’s some kind of ‘revival’ some tweny years after the full effects of this shakeup and we see ‘restoration’ efforts to bring back the old-style experience) a small assortment of multiplexes and the odd ‘cinema treasure’ palace in most cities throughout North America. I’m sorry if I’m a Negative Nancy here, but I fear that the landscape we’ve come to know (and love, on this site alone) is about to change in the next decade unlike any previously. And not because nobody’s interested in movies anymore, that there’s another alternative. People are just as interested in movies. Except they’re gonna want to see them in their homes. Not everyone, but it doesn’t take ‘everyone’ to change things. It all comes down to the mighty dollar.
So start buying your lottery tickets; there’s gonna be some bargains out there for those richies with the inclination to own a piece of the past.
Movie Theaters could end up the way ‘legitimate’ theaters have. A relatively few large (and pricey) digital movie houses in Midtown Manhattan, LA, San Francisco, Toronto, London, Paris, etc. Some smaller digital theaters in the wealthier suburbs. Even today’s busy multiplexes may not be willing to shoulder the cost of upgrading 15+ screens to digital projection. We are in unchartered territory here.
The digital movie era is only beginning. It is in some ways a replay of the first shake-out of movie theaters in the 1950s when TV and urban flight was the threat. But this shakeout will happen over a shorter period of time.
I don’t think that the VCR hurt movie theaters in the 1980s that much because VHS releases of a film were usually 12-18 months after theatrical release. VHS was nowhere near DVD quality, a large screen back then was 35"and HDTV didn’t exist.
Chris:
And that’s wonderful news for all cinema owners out there…
But really, the true test of this campaign -and any other that tries to woo people back into proper moviegoing- is how those other than the choir respond to being preached to.
I’d be curious to post this thread on a general discussion forum to see how broad the responses are.
To paraphrase this ad campaign, it doesn’t matter what Wal-Mart, Best Buy or any electronics store sells. Untill they make a 60 Foot TV that costs $1000, I know where I’ll be spending my Friday and Saturday nights!
btw, longislandmovies:
“I have a home theater with the seats ,screen and curtain but what that takes away is time from watching tv not going to the movies.”
You are the exception to the rule. You’re not a model for the movie-goer that this campaign -and this discussion- addresses. They’re -and I’m- focusing on those people who by-and-large have decided or are deciding to make home cinema their default. This is not about watching tv.
(If it’s any consolation, I’m not the model, either, because I don’t own a television, wouldn’t watch movies on one if you paid me, and I see about 200 films at the cinemas each year.)
Yes, theatres will be around long after we’re gone. People do crave the communal experience, no matter how much they love their home schtick. Concerts, the theatre, sporting events, beaches, even malls prove that people at their cores crave something ‘larger’. Very little has changed since the days of the Romans at the Coliseum or Shakespeare’s offerings at The Globe.
So yes, theatres will be around long after we’re gone.
But there’s gonna be far less of them.
And the listings on this site of ‘Closed’ or ‘Demolished’ will only increase.
Substantially.
I appreciate your optimism. I do. And I admire it. I was there when VCRs came on the scene. And I remember how the industry screamed about home-taping, yadda, yadda, yadda.
But seriously; if you really can’t see the landscape having changed markedly with the advent of the internet, with iPods, with DVDs and with home systems…changed sufficiently to be able to recognize that this time, things have been accellerated far more than when VCRs came onto the scene…
Tell you what; let’s make a point of getting together in fifteen years to talk about this. And if things haven’t unfolded pretty much as I’ve set out, then I’ll be more than happy to buy you an evening’s worth of entertainment at whichever movie palace you wish, wherever. Including extra butter on your popcorn.
This is a great discussion. The sky is not falling. The united states is over screened and has been since the 90s.When product is bad bsns is bad good product bsns is good.if you have geat product and people stop coming then the sky is falling,ticket prices are at an all time high and are in no danger in changing.This summer is turning in a hugh boxoffice numbers thus far, if the sky was falling this would not be happening.When i say i dont get it i mean what are you doing wrong at your theater.You will have times sometimes ,years,when the bsns model needs to be changed ..ie jc pennys , sears, and theaters . I have a home theater with the seats ,screen and curtain but what that takes away is time from watching tv not going to the movies.I saw this reaction when video started .Theaters will be around long after we are all gone.
This is a great discussion. The sky is not falling. The united states is over screened and has been since the 90s.When product is bad bsns is bad good product bsns is good.if you have geat product and people stop coming then the sky is falling,ticket prices are at an all time high and are in no danger in changing.This summer is turning in a hugh boxoffice numbers thus far, if the sky was falling this would not be happening.When i say i dont get it i mean what are you doing wrong at your theater.You will have times sometimes ,years,when the bsns model needs to be changed ..ie jc pennys , sears, and theaters . I have a home theater with the seats ,screen and curtain but whtat that takes away is time from watching tv not going to the movies.
longislandmovies:
I don’t mean to be rude, but you’ve posted two comments in a row that suggest you don’t get it. WalMart is a fixed business where they’re in competition with the same essential model. Movie houses are in competition with something else entirely. It’s like comparing apples with apple juice. ((The exception here is online retailing, but we’re not talking an homogenous market. That is, not everyone has internet access, not everyone feels safe ordering online and many people prefer to see what they buy, have an innate urge to maintain their connection to ‘commerce’. This is why where online grocery shopping is available, people still want to ‘squeeze the vegetables’, ‘smell the fruit’. The other difference is that WalMart sells merchandise that generally fits more under the ‘Need’ category. A movie is a ‘Want’. It’s a luxury.)
WalMart is selling merchandise out of a location. Its variables are merchandise selection and variety, price, saleshelp, hours of operation, location, etc. They’re all -to varying extents- variable controllables, things that all other competitors are dealing with, too.
Movie theatres are ‘selling’ a cinematic experience. The seeing of a movie within a communal auditorium, with comfortable seats and concession stand items. But the prime reason that anyone goes to see a movie…the movie itself…is not a particularly controllable variable. There’s only so many choices from the distributors. And here’s the kicker: the movie theatres don’t even see ticket sales as their real source of profit: concession stand sales account for this. The price of which is right up there at the top of movie-goers' List of Complaints, people who have entered into their own personal deliberations about whether or not they want to keep spending money going to the movies at cinemas.
In ‘competition’ with the movie theatres is home viewing. Where there’s convenience. View when you like, pause the film, watch half tonight, half tomorrow in the afternoon, you can have dinner while you watch, you can chat with someone online while you watch, you can make babies while you watch…
North American society has become a cocooning one. People are making their homes their refuges, their sanctuaries. For many of these people, the experience of watching a movie in a cinema simply does not match the price or commitment of time. (Points well-made by DFC)
Take a look at any city’s cinema figures since WWII. The numbers of cinemas, of screens are dropping. Even with multiplexes being built, the number is dropping. This runs totally contrary to what you’re suggesting, that this is just part of a normal business trend, that things will change back given time, the sky isn’t falling…
Actually, the sky is falling.
Here’s the bottom-line: the studios, Hollywood, The Movie Biz people, they don’t care how they get their money. If the yearly income they bring in were to stay the same from 1990-2020, say at $30 billion, or even increase, but the sources of that income changed from 95% theatrical takings to 5% theatrical takings, do you think they’d care? If over the course of this 30 years the advent of home viewing (by way of the ‘cinematic tv’ and online access) replaced theatrical distribution, do you really think they’d care? Why should they, if they’re recouping their investment as planned, and people are just as eager to ‘go to the movies’…except their destination is not a cinema, with all of its inherent costs and commitments, but the ‘movie room’ in their home…as they ever were?
So this is what’s happening: more and more people are investing in home cinemas. As a result, having made this investment, they’re not frequenting movie houses as much. Therefore, there’s less movie house ticket revenue to go around. Therefore, cinemas are closing. (Witness the Festival chain in Toronto.) So we continually lose more cinemas, especially single-screeners. And because the costs of exhibiting a movie generally go up, people are less and less inclined to pay more to see movies at the remaining movie theatres, so more stay home and more cinemas close…until?
Until?
How do you turn the tide? Well, I’m a pronounced cinema fan and I’m not sure you can. I think you can stem it, but to do so, you have to go back to ground zero and take an objective look at the realities of how the average movie-goer feels about what’s being sold. What their complaints are. Whether they can be addressed. The truth is that it’s expensive to go the movies. The cost of getting there. The tickets. The food and drink. The babysitter. If the movie theatres are not providing an experience that makes this expenditure worthwhile, and people are content with an alternative (ie: home viewing), regardless that at the present time, you have to wait a few months before you can see a film, then more people will make the choice to have their movie experience at home. (Of course, if Hollywood continually erodes this ‘delay’, to the point where there’s mere weeks…or days…or there’s a simultaneous release, both theatrical and DVD, then you can bet your bottom dollar that less and less people will be going to the movies…and less and less movie houses will exist.)
This is why I’d like to see some healthy discussion as to what can be done to stem the tide, take a good look at what needs to be done across the board and in specific markets to get people more interested in seeing films the way they were meant to be seen. On the big screen.
dfc- i just dont get all the crying,every bsns is up and down walmart has times its down 5-10 % then up.I do not believe the the theatre bsns is in any danger ,changing yes as do all bsns,,,
The theaters are in a financial bind. They are expected to spend small fortunes to go digital. At the same time many ex-movie-patrons simply wait 3 months or less for a film to come out on DVD.
The theater experience has become a task for many. You have to drive into the city or to the local multi-plex. Then you have to park your car and wait on the ticket line. Popcorn and beverages are over-priced. Now you are seated and discover that many people don’t know how to behave in a movie house. Cellphones ring, people talk among themselves, etc. Theater owners can’t do much about that without risking lawsuits from ejected patrons.
So more and more people are buying those ever-cheaper HDTVs and watching movies in their nice quiet home theaters. The $20 DVD is cheaper than taking the family to the movies, especially with gasoline at $3.15/gallon. Maybe digital projection will give movie houses a second life. But what about the theaters that can’t afford to go digital?
Movie bsns ia alive and well EVERY bsns has its ups and downs ..This summer seems to be up…..
RE: The Ad
Can I get a, “Hell, yeah!!!” I expect one of the US theatre chains to do a similar ad campagign ASAP.
And nobody bought it back then, either…
:P
I’d be curious to see a discussion about a) why people don’t frequent movie houses and b) what can be done to bring them back.
Cineplex is not the first to do this type of advertising. Famous Players (who Cineplex recently bought) did this same ad with the same tag line in the mid 90’s.
Delving further into ancient history, Famous Players-Nathanson greatly expanded their holdings in the early 20’s with the acquisition of the Allen brothers theatre chain. The Allen brothers were grossly overextended and forced into bankruptcy. FP gained ownership of the entire chain of theatres for mere pennies on the dollar.
Odeon expanded into the western Canadian market in 1945 merging with Morton theatres to form Odeon-Morton. The Morton name eventually vanished. I recall that there was a lot of Rank organization product shown so it must have been after the merger with British Odeon.
The fast shuffle that Cineplex pulled with the Toronto Pantages/Imperial/Imperial6/Pantages/Canon theatre (how many names can one theatre have?) is well known.
Interesting that where once upon a time Famous Players and its affiliated companies had a stranglehold on film exhibition across Canada and Odeon was the new kid on the block, the new kid is now the major player.