|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Author
|
Topic: Fox plays hardball with AMC
|
Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler
![](http://www.film-tech.com/ubbmembers/889.jpg)
Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001
|
posted 06-27-2002 07:11 PM
All of us Film-Techers know that Loews does not play any 20th Century Fox pictures in Manhattan. This ban has been in effect over 3 years (since before Star Wars Episode 1) because Fox played hardball on terms with Loews. That hasn't been much of a problem lately since the AMC Empire and in most cases the UA Union Square want Fox product to play in a showplace theater.Now Fox is playing hardball on terms with AMC. Fox has demanded 100 percent of the surcharge for online/phone orders. As a result AMC has not sold online/phone tickets to Unfaithful or Minority Report -- and made its reasons known to the public on the AMC website. AMC has gone one step further: It no longer promotes Fox pictures in the e-mail newsletter for the Moviewatcher club. No mention of Minority Report last week, no mention of Like Mike this week or next. Wonder who'll be the first to blink?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"
![](http://www.film-tech.com/ubbmembers/1171i.jpg)
Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 06-27-2002 07:52 PM
There was a long period when I worked for AMC during which time they did not play Paramount movies because of a stand-off similar to this one (I don't recall what the terms were).The battle actually predated my stint with the company. AMC definitely did not blink and, eventually, Paramount mellowed out. That's a lot of screens they'd have to kiss goodbye. I know a lot of folks on this site don't have many kind words for AMC but I think we should support them in this endeavor in whatever way(s) we can. Their motives don't include us, but we will all be affected directly or indirectly by the outcome of this "fight."
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Dennis Benjamin
Phenomenal Film Handler
![](/ubbmembers/1137e.jpg)
Posts: 1445
From: Denton, MD
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 06-27-2002 08:56 PM
Those "firm terms" will bring out the venom within the motion picture industry. Marketing VPs and Film Buyers usually don't bluff on thoses things.I.E. Cobb Theatres with New Line's "THE MASK" Regal Cinemas with New Line's "Rush Hour 2" Interestingly enough Regal did not open "RUSH HOUR 2" nationwide and it still was one of the top grossing movies of all times......
------------------ "Running through life at 24 frames per second"
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
![](http://www.film-tech.com/ubbmembers/248b.jpg)
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 08-24-2002 06:18 PM
My understanding at the time was that Fox wanted a percentage of the gross for concessions sales during ST-Ep1. Of course to an exhibitor, that isn't one small step for distributorkind but one giant leap into exhibitor anathema. Loews rightly saw this as a prescedent that could never be reversed. To refuse to play what was the hottest title of the moment I thought was an amazing show of huge steel nuts. I heard that during the corporate meeting, when the terms were put down on the table, the Loews exes thought it was a joke and everyone was laughing. When they realized that the Fox guys were serious, the got up and walked out. From the very beginning, distribution has tried very hard to go up that road of wanting a percentage of concessions. I believe they even took NATO to court over it and lost (I think it was Disney -- surprise, surprise -- who brought the challenge). But this is only hearsay. The argument being, no one is coming to your theatre to buy popcorn -- they come because of our picture and so we are entitled to a portion of those sales. Sure is a good thing the ruling went in NATOs favor or the whole economic picture would be very different today. As for Fox getting into it with AMC, Fox had better watch its butt because if AMC hunkers down and refuses to play Fox product, Fox is going to be in big trouble in NYC. Having no play on either side of the street in both the Loews E-Walk or the AMC Empire in Times Square has got to be a major blow to Fox, both in revenue and prestige. Frank
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
![](http://www.film-tech.com/ubbmembers/248b.jpg)
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 08-25-2002 04:09 PM
Good point Rich. But don't most first runs open at 90/10? Nowadays I think 70/30 is a good deal for a big title! I just don't quite understand how exhibition got into this mess in the first place. After all, without theatres the distribs wouldn't have any place to show their pictures. Suppose just one large chain decided they wouldn't play any picture at any percentage higher than 60/40 or any picture with a minimum of say more than three weeks. If that chain represented 30% of the screens across the country, seems to me that would be one huge loss for any distrib's opening weekend. And as we all know, they seem to almost irrationally and compulsively focused on those first weekend numbers. If they loose one chain, that would devastate their positioning in those stupid weekend tallies -- who's number one in BO sales. If a second chain were to do the same, wouldn't that would be a tremendous amount of power shifted to exhibition? And what if NATO got all its members to adopt the same guidelines, just like the MPAA member studios seem to have all gotten together and now make deals all with the same terms. I could never understand why it is that distribution gets to dictate the terms when exhibition certainly wheels enough power to at least be able to negotiate terms and not just accept whatever is handed to them. In the old days, distribs saw theatres as their life blood. Use to be, the neighborhood theatres would be able to negotiate terms based on the business they did. The distrib's booker had all the BO statements on file and could see what kind of business the theatre was doing and would determine terms many times dropping percentages based on that business. Although I came into the business after this had stopped, there were the stories you heard about some companies selling product to older theatres flat and with low guarantees just to keep the theatre afloat -- they knew that it was important to have theatres to play product in even a theatre was going through a slump. Distribution and exhibition were partners. Them days are over. Ah, buying pictures FLAT....what a concept! When I started, you could occasionally get a picture flat if you were playing a double bill from the same distrib. But that was long ago in a galaxy far far away. Frank
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|