[Peter Suderman]
I'm a pretty big a booster of seeing movies theatrically, but these days even I tend not to go to the theater much except for early critics' screenings. The lines are too long, the time it takes out of a weekend is too much, and, especially at the big multiplexes, the crowds are busier talking and texting than watching the movie. Add even a moderately good home theater into the equation, and the reasons to head out to the movies are rapidly decreasing.
So I was interested to see Techdirt's Mike Masnick point to this Variety report on how some movie theater owners are finally reacting to competition from home theaters and looking at ways to add luxury elements to the theater-going experience.
Each complex will sport theaters featuring 40 reclining armchair seats with footrests, digital projection and the capability to screen 2-D and 3-D movies, as well as a lounge and bar serving cocktails and appetizers, a concierge service and valet parking.But the circuit will especially push its culinary offerings -- made-to-order meals like sushi and other theater-friendly foods from on-site chefs (a service button at each seat calls a waiter). Moviegoers will have to pay extra for any food they order, however.
The Burbank-based company's hoping to attract 10 million "upscale and affluent" consumers per year to its theaters that will be housed in high-end shopping centers and malls. Each complex will typically house eight screens.
This sounds like a step in the right direction; the last decade or so has certainly proven that stagnating businesses can be reinvigorated by adding a veneer of luxury. The problem in this case, though, is that you can't fully disentangle the theater-going experience from the movies that are being shown. So to attract "upscale and affluent" consumers, presumably adults, you'll also have to find films they're interested in seeing.
Right now, the biggest audience for films is suburban/exurban teenagers — kids who can't go to bars, but still need and want to get out of the house. Consequently, that's the demographic at which the largest portion of studio movies are aimed. Are that many adults really going to want to pay $35 — the cost of a ticket at one of these high end theaters — plus food, parking, babysitter, etc. to see the new Harry Potter film, or even, say, bland romantic comedies like Fool's Gold? No matter how nice the theater is, I kind of doubt it.
That's not to say the business model is all wrong; I think it's a good start. But anyone investing in a theater like this should also think seriously about partnering with filmmakers to produce films that will appeal to the same affluent, adult demographic. You could start with the indie divisions at the big studios—fare like Michael Clayton and No Country for Old Men might prove more successful in this sort of venue. But the first place I'd look would be the pay-cable networks. In specific, I mean HBO, which has been more successful at creating content that appeals to that upscale demographic than any other studio in the last decade. Were HBO to regularly put out theatrical films, this would be a classy way to expand its brand, and exclusive content from a known and trusted source like HBO would offer a compelling reason for those tough-to-reach upscale viewers to give luxury theaters like these a shot.
I'm sorry - the really big screen - and I don't mean a multiplex - is still bettr than anything else.
I'm lucky to have one in the Smith Opera House.
Seek out your local dollar theater, art house, whatever - and watch a REAL movie the way it was meant to be seen - BIG!
And then there's LIVE theater, which can be competitive on price with these fancy new movie palaces. That's fun precisely because it is different every time. And there's no way to duplicate it at home.
That HBO idea is pretty good. Remember that during the 70s some thought that movie theaters would go bust. That is, until a little movie named Star Wars came out.
Luxury movie theatres sound nice, but not really what I want.
I'd be happy to see a system that offered tickets I could pay for and print off at home that had a bar code I could scan for admission...the Home Show here does this, so why can't movie houses do the same thing for fast, easy admission with no lineups?
Secondly, I'd like to see adults-only showings of non-R-rated movies...so I could see G and PG-14 movies without a crowd of noisy kids or young couples lugging in their whiny babies and pre-school kids. I've seen little kids brought into serious adult-themed movies who simply couldn't be shushed...and preschoolers just don't _get_ Batman Begins or Superman Returns [to name a couple that were nearly spoiled for me].
The third thing I'd pay a little more for is a security presence that would actually MAKE PEOPLE SHUT UP during the movie, or get ejected. When I was a boy, back in the late Stone Age, an usher's flashlight beam had a very quelling effect, and it would be nice to see the return of the practice.
None of this stuff is rocket science, and I know it would make me far more willing to shell out for movie seats...esp. when the cost just of tickets for two is higher than the DVD that comes out a few months later.
HBO create theatrical films? Madness! HBO stands (or at least did once upon a time) for "Home Box Office".
Home!
That would be like turning on Music Television and not finding music.
David Anderson nailed half of it. Why would I pay that kind of money to be interrupted by ill mannered louts?
The other problem is the movies themselves. I'm not going to watch cartoons at an expensive theater even if the food is superb. So, what might we see? The Tom Clancy thriller where the Nazis are the bad guys, because we mustn't offend?
I'd rather go once to see The Phantom of the Opera live, again, than to see a dozen new movies in a movie theater.
The luxury seating is nice but all Hollywood really needs is today's 3D technology. Focus on finishing the digital upgrades and rollout 3D technology. Simple. Proven to increase the bottom line and audiences leave theaters like they are kids again. Win/win scenario.
-jim
www.marketsaw.com
3D Movies and Technology
The best theater I've ever been to makes it more of a social experience like going out to eat. They've got a full menu, beer, and waiters so it's like you are eating out and going to the movies at the same time. It sounds like it would detract from the movie (and some movies it might), but they do a good job of keeping the waitstaff out of the way and manages to make it an experience unto itself. I used to go there weekly just to watch Lost on the big screen with 100 other fans (that can quickly become friends). I don't know when and if I'll ever be able to enjoy a regular movie theater again.
Re partnering, it should be remembered that the decline of the movie business began not with the advent of television but a government order that studios divest themselves of their theater chains on antitrust grounds. The studios used to own the theaters, which created the "studio system." To provide product, they needed a massive amount of product--an A and a B film every week, roughly. (In those days, films were usually shown as double features plus a cartoon and a news reel.) Once studios lost their guaranteed outlets, they no longer needed so much output and we gradually moved toward the current system.
I have the Blockbuster movies by mail service. Herb Caen once said in his column that 'never have so many seen so little' referring to the large number of really bad movies that we get suckered into renting. It's even worse than bad TV with senseless plots, gross behavior, and even grosser stupidity.
Once in a while I manage to rent something really good, often from a indie or little known movie producer. Only on a rare occasion do we go out to a movie and are usually disappointed with the product, the bad behavior of others watching and talking, and most of all the extreme high prices. Watching a good flic at home with the comforts of my own bar, snacks and freedom to smoke is a way, way better experience.
Each complex will sport theaters featuring 40 reclining armchair seats with footrests, digital projection and the capability to screen 2-D and 3-D movies, as well as a lounge and bar serving cocktails and appetizers, a concierge service and valet parking.
But we already have digital projection and comfortable furniture, cocktails, and good food while watching movies...in our living room (and it's much cheaper than the existing, non-deluxe movie experience). Doesn't sound like a good bet to me.
if "Hollywood", stripped of their Theater chains, or not, would produce Films with content, People may not be staying away, from the Box Office, in droves..
This movie, as example, from 1981, 'Rollover', still gives insight into our Financial System.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0083006/usercomments
Is it, necessarily, the bestest Movie of All-Time?
No, but definitely something that is recognizable as Value, in exchange for the price of a ticket.
They'v been doing this in Mexico for years. It's a lot cheaper than equiv. $35 though.
To appeal to this demographic, they should also do assigned seating, like in Europe.
But the circuit will especially push its culinary offerings -- made-to-order meals like sushi and other theater-friendly foods from on-site chefs (a service button at each seat calls a waiter). Moviegoers will have to pay extra for any food they order, however.
Yeah, I can scarcely imagine just how much extra.
I love movies, and actually enjoy the theater experience, but I've seen exactly one movie in a theater in 2008 (Juno). Why?
Well, I have an HDTV and a surround sound system at home. If I stay at home, it costs me about $3 to rent the movie and if I want popcorn, I can get low quality microwave popcorn cheap or higher quality stove-popped popcorn even cheaper (though with more work.) There's something to the community experience at the theater--the enjoyment of laughing along with the rest of the audience, for example. Too bad that any such enjoyment is typically outweighed by people checking their e-mail, talking, generally being jerks, and if it's a kids' movie, the kids are even worse. And then parents bring their little kids to PG-13 movies that scare the kids and make them cry.
2 examples stand out for me. In L.A. one summer, I went to see AI when it came out in theaters. The seat I found was next to a mom and her kid, maybe 7 or 8. During some of the climactic fight scenes, the kid started screaming. I asked the mom if she could quiet her kid down, and she started swearing at me.
Another time, in Cleveland, I went to see King Kong (Peter Jackson version). Every time the movie got scary, this bizarre cry, like a combination of a scream and hyperventilation, came from the back of the theater. This got bad enough that I got up to see what was going on and to find an usher. In the back of the theater was a dad holding his clearly terrified 5 year old daughter. I went outside to ask the usher to do something about the screaming kid, and when the usher came back, he told me, "The girl's apparently got some mental problems, so we don't want to do anything and start a fight."
So the only reason to put up with the incredibly rude people and ridiculous prices (I live in New York now, so $11.50 for a movie, and another $10 for popcorn and a drink) is to not have to wait for months to see a good movie. But for me to care about that, there would have to be a movie I want to see. And so far in 2008, there hasn't been.
I don't really care how nice the bar and menu selections are, but if there were good movies and the theaters actually took their, "Please, no talking during the movie" messages seriously, I'd be happy to go more often. But for $35, without dealing with rude moviegoers...I can order my own Chinese food and mix my own drinks.
I don't really care how nice the bar and menu selections are, but if there were good movies and the theaters actually took their, "Please, no talking during the movie" messages seriously, I'd be happy to go more often. But for $35, without dealing with rude moviegoers...I can order my own Chinese food and mix my own drinks.
Brian, I couldn't agree more with your post. However, I thought everyone smuggled in their own snacks?
If I stay at home, it costs me about $3 to rent the movie and if I want popcorn, I can get low quality microwave popcorn cheap or higher quality stove-popped popcorn even cheaper (though with more work.)
Permit me to make a suggestion. Get an air popper for your popcorn. It makes a superior popcorn and it's healthier too.
I agree w/ MC in my area $35 will get you into a live concert, or local theater company (big traveling produtions are more like $100 for good seats) show. I if I'm spending that much I would pick the live show every time.
Another significant factor that I don't see mentioned here is that the delay between a movie appearing in theaters and appearing at home has shrunk tremendously.
It used to be, even in fairly recent memory, that if you wanted to see the Matrix, or Titanic, or Braveheart, or whatever film all your friends were raving about, you had to either see it in the theater with them, or wait a year. At that point, everyone would have forgotten about it, and be watching something else.
Now that gap has almost vanished. Wait a month or two and it'll be on DVD. Hell, it used to take a month just to get the buzz all worked up.
Here in Austin, we have the Alamo Draft House. It's not luxury - tickets are usually around $9. But they have built aisles between the rows for wait staff to serve food and there's a pretty full menu of beer, wine, drinks, appetizers, sandwiches, pizza, salads, and a few entrees.
In addition to movies, they have singalongs to cult classics and some live performances (air sex!). With food and drink, the total price ends up at $20-30/person.
Hate to racially profile here, but in my area it's the Hispanic family more than the suburban teenager who seems to be propping up the multiplexes. And that family seems to have no qualms with 1) bringing their baby to the 10 pm showing of Saw 34 and 2) letting it cry with no concern of it bothering the 100 other viewers.
Geoff, while you're correct that the theater-to-DVD window has shrunk considerably, your "month or two" figure is not all correct. A quick check of the DVDs coming out this week and the next shows theater release dates of mostly December and November with some outliers, mostly older. That's at least three months. Still considerably faster than the six months or more that was customary, though.
Is that $35 figure for a "high end" ticket correct? I simply can't fathom paying anything like that for a movie. Here in OKC, the fare runs around $7 but that requires you to sit through a plethora of commercials. For $35 a ticket, I'd expect a whole lot more than just "no ads." I'd expect food to be served and a much better and more comfortable seat for my old body. HBO certainly sounds better every day even tho it does mean supporting my local cable company.
I just don't watch that many movies anymore. I go to live theater and concerts, which start at $10 for the low end and go on up to around $100. And I use Netflix to watch DVDs of all the TV shows I missed when I was in graduate school. (Some of the new stuff too -- I love the new "Doctor Who.") A movie makes it into my queue about once in two or three months, and I NEVER go to the cinema.
Maybe there's something wrong with the format. When I sit down to watch something at home, I seldom have more than an hour. And for a night on the town, live events are simply more exciting. Movies are an awkward compromise, but I suppose I would pay more attention to them if I lived in a place without live theater.
There's one thing nobody's mentioned: sound. For the lowest audible tones to fully form - think explosions, for example - you have to have empty acoustic space equivalent to their wavelengths. If you don't, you don't hear them. You THINK you do, but you're only hearing the higher partials or overtones of the desired pitch, and your mind then reconstructs by interpolation the original sound. But it's only a simulation, and the difference between that and the real thing is instantly obvious when you hear it.
The clear, uninterrupted air space necessary to get those sounds, to get the full impact of the soundtrack, is at least 60 feet. Even small theaters are that big, but how many living rooms are? It doesn't matter how good your sound system is. If you don't have the throw room you don't get the full waveform. Just the simulation.
I'd be happy to see a system that offered tickets I could pay for and print off at home that had a bar code I could scan for admission...
Um. Fandango does this. Order at home, print out or pick up at kiosk at theater - theater's choice. In Japan you can do the whole thing via cell phone - you show your a bar code on your phone screen to the ticket taker.
As mentioned before, this is just an upscale verison of the Alamo Drafthouse model. They have pretty good food and drink at reasonable prices.
Nobody has mentioned one of the biggest advantages of watching at home... the ability to pause and go to a (clean) bathroom or rewind and watch something you missed.
Personally, I am only interested in seeing big blockbuster special effects movies in theaters. Comedies and other movies without a bunch of visual effects, I'm happy to watch at home.
I also like the Alamo Drafthouse. It's not too expensive, the food is fine, and the pre-movie shows are humorous. They also do things like have weekly LOST viewings and show vintage stuff. I just wish it were closer to my house.
STeve: I think you'll find that most people don't really care about that - and that many think that feature films are too damn loud already.
Back on the main topic, here in Portland, we have a small mess of theaters that serve pub food and microbrews, showing second-run or arthouse films, with inexpensive tickets.
A great win all around, if one wants to see films. (I don't, so I don't. But there's nearly nothing that theaters can do to get my business, so hey.)
Like several other well-written commenters, I actually quite like movies and I have a weakness for seeing them in theaters. As a life-long geek, the releases of the Lord of the Rings movies, for example, were special for me because I got to enjoy them with people like me who really wanted to be there. (Though not at midnight. I'm a geek who needs her sleep.)
But I have the same problem as many others: for $11.50 here in New York City (or $9 back in my Boston home) I am treated to other people's cell phone addictions and poor parenting. Who the hell brings eight children under age 10 to Pirates of the Caribbean at 11:15 p.m.? you would ask yourself... well, I can answer. It's those three women in front, and I'm tempted to kill them all.
If I go to a 3 p.m. Saturday showing of a PG-rated movie, I deserve what happens. But if I'm going to a 10 p.m. showing of a PG-13 or R rated movie, don't I deserve to be surrounded with, I don't know, NOT toddlers? Screaming babies and unneccessary cell phone conversations are an accepted part of my daily commute and life, but having them in movie theaters really sours the experience for me -- and I don't even mind the sticky floors, lines, or deafening over-the-top sound.
The thing not mentioned so far is the wretched quality of projection provided in many of the little multiplexes.
In addition to the ill-mannered patrons and high prices, you all too often have to put up with scratched prints, poor focus and a don't care attitude from the theater management.
And, locally, there seems to be some rule against ever cleaning the auditoriums.
We have 3 of these places in Dallas already, been here for years.
While decidedly less upscale than what this article is talking about, they're more popular with couples because they give you that intimacy factor-"dinner and a movie" means something different. Booths or cushioned executive style chairs are set up in groups of 2-4 each with a table.
And if you consider it from that perspective, its quite a good business model. We're not talking screaming babies and cursing mothers here. Low light, waiters and decent food with an intimate setting.
I should also mention the higher prices mean its less likely that the brats will be around bothering you. Parents of kids that young usually don't haul them out for expensive meals anywhere...meaning they'll stick to the multiplexes and leave the couples to their upscale dining.