# We're just not going to movies the way we used to



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

From SF Gate:

*VIEW 
Blame the economy, the product, the theaters -- we're just not going to movies the way we used to*

The movie box office situation is getting serious. For 19 of the past 20 weeks, box office numbers have been down compared with last year's. There's a possible break this week with the success of "Fantastic Four," leading to the inevitable speculation that Hollywood has finally produced a movie this summer so flamboyantly and unmistakably horrible that it couldn't fail.

Still, with the big guns of summer already in theaters, there's little chance of something coming along in August to turn the season -- and the year -- around. That is, unless something crazy happens, like "The Dukes of Hazzard" rakes in $500 million -- or even crazier, like "Fantastic Four" has a good second week. 
So what's going on? Why are people staying home in droves?

FULL ARTICLE HERE


----------



## ibglowin (Sep 10, 2002)

Because they would rather watch them on DVD. Look at the revenues from DVD sales. They now account for more than 50%, much more than ticket sales.


----------



## rcbridge (Oct 31, 2002)

We create these wonderful home theater systems to eventually watch movies at home. Also with the price of tickets and popcorn with a family it adds up quick!!


----------



## mgusler (Aug 6, 2002)

I believe the drop off is due mainly to the quality of the product. A majority of new releases are remakes of old tv shows or poor remakes of good old movies (ie The Longest Yard). Why pay big bucks to watch 20 minutes of commercials followed by a mediocre (at best) movie?

Creativity has taken a back seat to the latest hit movie formula, and the public is voting with their wallets. When they produce movies that people want to see, the customers will return. People will always enjoy the experience of a night out at the movies. 

Movie makers are learning now that people have standards after all. They'll straighten up eventually, and ticket sales will too.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Although it's hard to imagine, the country must be running low on idiots. I have mixed emotions about that. :shrug:


----------



## toomuchtv (May 17, 2002)

Let's not forget that movie attendance is adversely affected by the lack of manners of a large number of movie-goers. Talking to each other, talking back to the screen, crying infants, ringing cell phones & loud phone conversations (so they can hear over the movie) all contribute to a very dissatisfying experience.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

> People will always enjoy the experience of a night out at the movies.


Nope. I'm 20 and been to about 10 movies in the theater in my life. Most recent two were Jackass and School of Rock since I was suckered into going.

I have no interest in sitting in a theater with dozens of other people, ringing cell phones, people taking, etc, when I can wait a few months and get the movie on DVD in the mail from Netflix and watch the movie in the comfort of my own home by myself.


----------



## mainedish (Mar 25, 2003)

Let's see. I take my wife and my two sons to the movies. Tickets run me about $30 bucks for all of us. We buy food. Another $20 bucks. We may or may not get good seats. We may have to watch 20 trailers before the movie starts. 
And as for the quality of the movies. HAHAHAHA. Some really bad films. Remakes or just pure garbage. How many family films come out a year? Not many. 
My Home Theater set up lets us turn off the lights after we buy the dvd (Most of the time $15 or so ) and watch it . Even my two shelties can watch it with us.


----------



## Spruceman (Nov 21, 2004)

My post in the "Horror Stories At The Movies ..." says it mostly for me. Add to that that the theatres themselves aren't that great nowadays. When I was a kid, the hometown theatre had 2,500 seats, a balcony, all kinds of decorations on the ceiling, spacious lobby with well-carpeted steps to a nicely furnished mezzanine and the balcony. And a large screen for CinemaScope. And since it was originally built for vaudeville, had a large stage. ( see www.levoy.org ).

Today most theatres have postage-stamp screens with less of a viewing angle than sitting close to a 32-inch TV. Hell, they could fit 10 of today's typical movie auditoriums (or is that "stalls?") in the space of one of the old movie palaces and have plenty of room left over.

Also add to the list in my other post is that at home I can rest my bare feet on my 130-pound shaggy-haired dog's back (or under him in cold weather), something not allowed in theatres. -- not to mention the comfort of being nude and wrapped in a blanket on the sofa while watching the movie.


----------



## jrjcd (Apr 23, 2002)

i tend to go see films these days that i might not find easily on dvd, such as ladies in lavender and mad hot ballroom...also far left of the mainstream films(not in the political sense, mind you) LIKE MARCH OF THE PENGUINS(WHO KNEW IT WOULD BE AS POPULAR AS IT IS)...between the cost of treats(which we don't get as often anymore) and the cost of getting there(at $2:50 a gallon, i have to think about going places now)and the relaxation of watching films on the widescreen in the comfort of my home, i can see how theatres are suffering...i am a firm believer in seeing films in their proper venue, but the alternate choices are that much better these days...


----------



## angiecopus (May 18, 2004)

i have been two 2 movies this year, Bewitched and Charlie and the chocolate factory,
i tend to watch more dvds than go see a movie.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

IMHO, while the costs, and the improved quality of modern TVs have something to do with it, the main problem is ...

THE PRODUCT. 

Hollyweird continues to crank out sequals, formula blow-em-ups, formula "chick flick" love stories, and, weirdest of all, movie-ized episodes of 60s and 70s sitcoms. All with the same old stars that have been in the public view for a long time (and are thus WAY TOO OLD to be the characters they are playing). 

Get some original stories, told well, by talented new actors, and all will be well.

Hollyweird has been playing it safe, not taking any risks, for 15 years, and it has come home to roost.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

IMO, It's a combination of factors, not the least of which is the product.


mgusler said:


> ...People will always enjoy the experience of a night out at the movies...


Some people perhaps, not all, and not always, as you say. Actually, aside from "date" flicks and kiddie fare, there's not much out there worth paying $20-$50 to see, and, based on the recent tailoff in attendance, Hollyweird has definitely (not definately) under-estimated the intelligence of the average move-goer.


----------



## zmark (Apr 18, 2005)

Spruceman said:


> -- not to mention the comfort of being nude and wrapped in a blanket on the sofa while watching the movie.


Who says you have to be at home to do that?


----------



## MikeSoltis (Aug 1, 2003)

With DVD sales being such a big chunk of change for the studios, I don't think they're going to change anything anytime soon. And people keep buying these weak excuses for movies, so why improve a product that keeps selling?

I had several movies I wanted to see this year, but will wait for the DVD or HD on the sub channels (HBO etc) for most of them.

I think the remake of the Manchurian Candidate sums up the biggest problem for me in modern movies...
In the original, you had to figure out what was happening, and it was set up rather well over a good portion of the movie.
In the remake, well the first part of the movie was HERE'S WHATS HAPPENING (in capital letters) because the movie watching public now must be too STUPID to figure it out for ourselves.

Not to mention who needs a script, we've got special effects/CGI/'hot' music/etc etc.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

It doesn't take long before the $17-at-Best-Buy per-movie cost overcomes the $3000 investment in a home theater when you rack up all those costs (tickets, gas, food, scheduling, kids, etc).

And if I don't like the movie, I can sell the disc on eBay. If I didn't want to buy it, I can netflix it.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

From ABC News:

*Movie theater owners fire back at studios*

Tired of being blamed for the box office slump, the nation's movie theater owners returned fire Thursday, accusing the studios of delivering sub-standard product.

"Here's what we know about 2005: The movies are not as good," said John Fithian, president of the National Association of Theater Owners.

FULL ARTICLE HERE


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

Mark Holtz said:


> From ABC News:
> 
> *Movie theater owners fire back at studios*
> 
> ...


It's the fault of both of them.

20 minutes of ads (fanta fanta wanta fanta..... BLAM!) Trailers good, soda and jeans ads bad.

Moldy smelling seats in rooms that are way too humid. Sound that is either way too loud or way too quiet. I won't go to a theater that doesn't have stadium seating (especially for a movie that I take my kids too). This is the fault of the theater owners.....

Unimaginative movies that have no appeal. Old TV show remakes are OK once in a while as a change of pace. When you have two a month coming out, it gets old. Summer movies should be events like Spiderman (1 & 2), Batman Begins, Star Wars, etc. The only movies doing better than expectations are R Rated comedies, as people can watch better movies at home that are 10-20 years old on cable/satellite uncut, than the PG-13 homogenous drivel that they are spewing out these days.

As for price, I'd pay $13 a ticket if they built a digital projection theater, with audiophile sound, better food, better seating (how about some love seats for the couples like they used to have). and an usher that would come through once in a while and eject the jerks who talk during the movie or flash laser pointers at the screen. Have the show start at the time it says in the newspaper and show ads and trailers starting 30 minutes before the start time (like they did in Europe when I was there 20 years ago).

Most of all, make better movies. I read through the Fall movie Preview in Entertainment Weekly and only the new Zorro movie and Firefly hold any appeal for me....


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

No matter how nice of a home theater system I have, nothing but nothing can take the place of seeing _Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith_ in a movie theater on some big-ass screen! It's even better if it's on the DLP digital screen.


----------



## mrschwarz (May 8, 2004)

There's plenty of blame to be spread around.

I read the full article and the theatre owners seem to want it both ways. They overprice themselves. As a benefit to paying higher prices we are forced to sit through the same inane and annoying commercials for each movie we see.

Going to the movies is now more expensive and less enjoyable than it used to be.

The current crop of movies is nothing to have a record-setting year with either. Hollywood needs a couple of hints:

1. An original idea for a movie would be nice. Remaking a lousy TV show from 20 years ago gets you a new lousy movie.

2. You can't make up for poor directing, acting, or screen writing by a lot of special effects.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

For the price of one DVD flick of choice, usually disounted at less than $15, I can take one or more friends to the movies without the hassle of traffic, parking, crowds and near $3/gal gasoline. My home theater offers plush, comfortable _"theater in the round"_ seating for up to eight, including three recliners, and over-sized floor pillows for the rugrats, plus custom dimmer lighting, and no screen reflections or other such ambient distractions, such as from opening auditorium doors and too-bright "Exit" signs. Plus, we can view the film again and again for free, and pause when necessary for popcorn and potty breaks.

Try doing _that_ in a theater, Moto. :whatdidid

I haven't 'gone out" to a movie in over five years, and I may never _'darken'_ the littered aisles of a traditional theater again. One doesn't go down to the local electronics store to watch tv through the window, then why on earth would you sit in the midst of a bunch smelly, unruly strangers, breathing in their waste carbon dioxide for two hours just to see the latest substandard Hollyweird offering, which, while silently wishing for your money back, you'll probably end up asking yourself why you bothered in the first place? :grin:

With prices for a decent home theater now affordable for most (mine cost around $1500*, including sound system and furnishings), there are hardly any reasons left to subject you and your family to the unhealthy conditions of such marginal public entertainment.

53" wide-screen RPTV: - $969 
5.1 sound system: - $200
DVD Player, progressive scan - $80
7-piece contemporary sectional sofa w/2 recliners - $200
1 contemporary leather recliner - $40
Not having to go out to the movies - PRICELESS 

*I'm very good at finding bargains.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

A much bigger screen is what makes me go to the movies. Nothing like watching a block buster action film in all it's glory up on that screen with a much better sound system . I go in the daytime matinees when the crowds are gone and it is like having your own private screening. OF course the price of gas has eaten up my excess spending money and I too ,am spending all of my time at home now. I might even have to cut back on my Dish programming come next month. 

Just love what GWBush has done to the economy and my personal finances.:eek2:


----------

