my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Landmark forced to share pictures in SF (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Landmark forced to share pictures in SF Mike Croaro Master Film Handler Posts: 394 From: Millbrae, CA Registered: Apr 2005 posted 10-21-2006 01:04 PM                     Hi Folks: Interesting to see Landmark Theatres losing their "exclusive" right to exhibit films in San Francisco. This started a few years ago with UA Galaxy and AMC Kabuki & 1000 picking up a picture here and there. The UA failed for the most part and closed about a year ago. AMC has picked up steam since adding their "AMC Select" branding of arthouse films. Just a few weeks ago Century/Cinemark opened the San Francisco Center Cinema and plays arthouse and mainstream films. Since openeing the Century has opened a number of high profile arthouse films and has shared the run with the theatres on the West side of town (AMC Kabuki & 1000, Bridge, Balboa, UA Vogue). I assume this trend will continue. Films also play the South end of SF at the Empire & Stonestown Twin theatres. Example: In years past a film like "Last King of Scotland" would play exclusivly at the Embarcarder, Bridge, or Clay. Presently it is playing at the Century SF Centre / Landmark bridge / UA Stonestown Twin. It must be hard for Landmark to lose their iron clad grip on the arthouse industry in San Francisco. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out and how each of the theatres are affected. One sidenote: I don't like theatres that show BOTH mainstream and arthouse films. When I go to see an eclectic film like "49 UP" I don't want my mindset is disruped by boisterous kids at the same cinema to see films like "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" or whatnot. Mike [ 10-22-2006, 10:54 AM: Message edited by: Mike Croaro ]  |  IP: Logged Dennis Benjamin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1445 From: Denton, MD Registered: Feb 2002 posted 10-21-2006 03:45 PM                        I would guess that their 'exclusiveness' was just a coincidence. I think all the other theatres just made the decision that they wanted a piece of the "Arthouse" pie in that particular market. Seeing how Landmark was doing so well with it - they wanted in on the action.  |  IP: Logged Eric Hooper Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 532 From: Fort Worth, TX, USA Registered: May 2003 posted 10-22-2006 12:43 AM                     I was told by Frank Lee, the operator of the Presidio and Four Star that he couldn't run Brokeback Mountain because Landmark 'had the exclusive on it in San Francisco'. I'm glad someone's finally giving Landmark a run for their money. Most of their theatres are really outdated, with bad sound and sketchy presentations. (Sorry Carl.) Not that that UA Stonestown Twin is any better... But Century sure does a good job at their CineArts locations. But I'm sure it will only be time before Cinemark screws it all up.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 10-22-2006 07:29 AM                        Mainstream cinemas usually "lose-their-focus" on art-house films after a time. I think this is because there are times where their circuit bookers feel pressure to make room for just any 3 mainstream films.......usually dogs. Louis  |  IP: Logged John Joseph Fink Film Handler Posts: 60 From: West Hartford, CT Registered: Feb 2006 posted 10-22-2006 07:43 AM                        Here's how Cinemark is going to screw up Cinearts: Cinemark has a policy against showing unrated movies. Where I read a quote from them in regards to that I sent them an e-mail, I wrote "surely a large, national chain must own an art house or two, therefore you'd likely have to make an exception to play a movie an unrated documentary like the Enron movie?" - they said "we rarely make that exception" - the film I had read their quote about was The Passion Recut, which they were not making an exception for. Cinemark strikes me as a chain thats too conservative to carry anything that is truely art house, sure they may play a cross-over type, but I doubt you'd ever see 49 Up, anything from a company like Strand Releasing, Kino or New Yorker Films, or anything that is sexually expicit at a Cinemark CineArts location. And those are the kinds of movies that Landmark and independently owned art houses and not-for-profits gladly show.  |  IP: Logged Jesse Skeen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1517 From: Sacramento, CA Registered: Aug 2000 posted 10-22-2006 01:59 PM                     quote: John Joseph Fink Cinemark has a policy against showing unrated movies Well gee, what did they do before 1968?  |  IP: Logged Steve Scott Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1300 From: Minneapolis, MN Registered: Sep 2000 posted 10-22-2006 02:13 PM                     Maybe the same will happen in Minneapolis, someday.  |  IP: Logged Bill Gabel Film God Posts: 3873 From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 10-23-2006 10:39 AM                     In the Los Angeles market, Laemmle Theatres had to share product with Landmark and also Cineplex's Beverly Center for many years. It all depends on how the studio wants to release the picture and how many screens in a select area too. "Brokeback" only opened on around 69 screens on it's break and opened alittle wider every week after.  |  IP: Logged Eric Hooper Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 532 From: Fort Worth, TX, USA Registered: May 2003 posted 10-23-2006 02:38 PM                     Frank told me he couldn't run Brokeback during the entire four month run as long as it was at the Embaracadero. Once it came out on DVD, and it left the Embarcadero, Frank could finally show it at his Four Star theatre (a few weeks after it had already been out on DVD).  |  IP: Logged Scott D. Neff Theatre Dork Posts: 919 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Oct 1999 posted 10-23-2006 03:55 PM                        quote: Jesse Skeen Well gee, what did they do before 1968? Luckily they didn't get started until the 80's. Though I do wonder what the larger chains would do if somebody trotted out a list of all the questionable films they played back in the day when they were small upstarts.  |  IP: Logged Steve Scott Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1300 From: Minneapolis, MN Registered: Sep 2000 posted 10-23-2006 03:55 PM                     It was years ago that Reading apparantly made a deal with Landmark between their Minneapolis & NYC locations... Landmark got the indies & limited releases in Minneapolis & Reading got them in NYC. Or so I'm told.  |  IP: Logged Eric Hooper Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 532 From: Fort Worth, TX, USA Registered: May 2003 posted 11-01-2006 10:03 AM                     For the first time ever, a movie will be playing at both the Landmark Embarcadero and the AMC Van Ness. The Queen is opening at AMC Van Ness this weekend, while continuing on it's three screens at the Embarcadero.  |  IP: Logged Ky Boyd Hey I'm #23 Posts: 314 From: Santa Rosa, CA, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-09-2006 12:40 AM                       As the Dylan song goes "the times they are a changin" or something like that. Anybody heard when the Sundance Cinemas renovation of the Kabuki is to be completed (or started for that matter)? Originally the theatre was supposed to close after the SF International Film Fest in late April/Early May and re-open in November. Well its now November and though I haven't dropped by, it doesn't seem like anything has happened judging by the bookings. On another interesting note, the weekend gross on The Last King of Scotland actually went up this past weekend (11/3) when the film moved from the Century SF Centre 9 to the AMC Metreon. Not good news for the SF Centre. Meanwhile the pic also continues to perform well at the Bridge.  |  IP: Logged Mike Croaro Master Film Handler Posts: 394 From: Millbrae, CA Registered: Apr 2005 posted 11-09-2006 07:09 PM                     Hi Ky; Folks: Why did the Century 9 come off of the picture so quickly? It couldn't have been doing that bad?! I would have thoguht they would have played it longer so as to impress the studio. Mike  |  IP: Logged Eric Hooper Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 532 From: Fort Worth, TX, USA Registered: May 2003 posted 11-14-2006 06:07 PM                     Because they wanted to show Borat, Babel, and Santa Clause 3 instead... Ky, the Bridge canned Last King Of Scotland the day after you posted, replacing it with Babel.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.