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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » SWEENY TODD Too Expensive for Marcus (Page 1)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: SWEENY TODD Too Expensive for Marcus Mark Lensenmayer Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1605 From: Upper Arlington, OH Registered: Sep 1999 posted 12-20-2007 08:10 AM                     Marcus Theatres are electing not to show SWEENY TODD due to the price quoted by the distributor, Paramount Pictures. No details were given. Columbus Dispatch article here.  |  IP: Logged Frank Angel Film God Posts: 5305 From: Brooklyn NY USA Registered: Dec 1999 posted 12-20-2007 09:05 AM                        Hmmnm....it's about time. Get a couple more chains to join suit and there goes the dictatorial power of the studios. What would a studio do if they could only open a picture in half the number of screens they usually bank on for their huge opening weekend? Seems to me if a consortium of the big theatre chains and owners were created (I mean one where they actually acted together in concert....like the studios have in the MPAA, not the spineless, wussy NATO), such a group could demand a lot more from the studios than theatres do now. The very first thing such a consortium could do was simply say, if a studio doesn't agree that they will not release a title until x number of months after 80% of all theatres have finished playing it, they will not book it. Period. How different than the totally one-sided deals which theatres have to live with presently, where the studio can pretty much demand anything -- like a theatre must play a picture for so many weeks even if there are no patrons buying tickets. Imagine a world in which the distributor has to sign the THEATRE'S Master Contract rather than the other way around. All it would take, my friends, are theatre owners with a set of balls and enough smarts to know how much power they really have. Let's see Paramount make their 100 million opening weekend for SWEENY TODD if they are relegated to distributing it to cable outlets and DVD rental stores, because it doen't meet the Theatre Owner's Consortium guidelines.  |  IP: Logged Mitchell Dvoskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1869 From: West Milford, NJ, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 12-20-2007 10:09 AM                     Seems to me if a consortium of the big theatre chains and owners were created That would be illegal. It has happened in the past and the theatres got fined for anti-trust violations.  |  IP: Logged Scott Jentsch Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1061 From: New Berlin, WI, USA Registered: Apr 2003 posted 12-20-2007 10:11 AM                        According to Box Office Mojo, Sweeney Todd is set to open on 1,000 screens this weekend. I wonder if that is less than they were originally planning? Here in Milwaukee, Marcus has made a lot of hay about not carrying the movie. It made the news outlets, and the non-Marcus theaters in the area (all four of them) are happily selling tickets to those who want to see the movie either because they always wanted to or they got interested as a result of the announcements by Marcus. One theater that I work with was getting calls on Tuesday morning, asking if they were going to be showing it. I got their showtimes fast-tracked through the update process so that they would have that information online as quickly as possible.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 12-20-2007 10:24 AM                     Frank...check out the law on Collusion. Wikipedia where defintions are subject to popular vote... "In the study of economics and market competition, collusion takes place within an industry when rival companies cooperate for their mutual benefit. Collusion most often takes place within the market form of oligopoly, where the decision of a few firms to collude can significantly impact the market as a whole. Cartels are a special case of explicit collusion. Collusion which is not overt, on the other hand, is known as tacit collusion." A Cartel (also illegal) is: "A cartel is a formal (explicit) agreement among firms. Cartels usually occur in an oligopolistic industry, where there are a small number of sellers and usually involve homogeneous products. Cartel members may agree on such matters as price fixing, total industry output, market shares, allocation of customers, allocation of territories, bid rigging, establishment of common sales agencies, and the division of profits or combination of these. The aim of such collusion is to increase individual member's profits by reducing competition. Competition laws forbid cartels." Now you may say..."BUT that is what the STUDIOS are doing!" Yeah, prove it. Form an oranization that sets prices and it is easy. If you have a bunch of independant people coming to same result, that is something different. If Wal-Mart sells a widget for $3.94 and the store across the street drops their price on the same widget to $3.94 (from $4.50)...did they collude or did the other store just want to try and stay in business? Now if you can prove that Wal-Mart and the other Store had a meeting to "set prices" that would be to their economic advantage (siffle competition that would lower prices), then that would be illegal. So if all if the theatre owners were to, on their own, come to the conclusion that they need to have 50/50 boxoffice splits (from day one) with 1-week minimum guarantee play dates, not release the movie to other avenues [home video]for 1-year....etc or they wouldn't book the films...then the studios would probably move in that direction (or cut out theatre exhibition all together). But it would REQUIRE all to independantly to come to such a conclusion and that no one caves...it is this caving that has gotten exhibitors into their current situation of very poor boxoffice deals. One person will always give up a percent or so here and there when drives the market into the studios hands...they have the goods YOU want. There are not that many studios...it is easier for them to effectly get their price. Now Regal and AMC would not need to collude since they are such massive entities unto themselves. Either one or if both independantly came to the conclusion that they wanted better terms, they have a much greater liklihood of getting it (and probably do) because they talk with much more screen power...losing either one would be a huge market loss.  |  IP: Logged Jeremy Weigel Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1062 From: Edmond, OK, USA Registered: Mar 2007 posted 12-20-2007 10:47 AM                     The theatre chains/owners wouldn't necessarily have to "collude", but rather adopt the same policies and practices as their competition(once one or two of the big chains decide to flex some muscle) seperately and independently; much like the studios do when they draw up their master contracts. As for a chain not picking up a major release, I remember when Regal didn't open (if memory serves) "The Prince of Egypt" on the break. The numbers were dismal and the studio quickly renegotiated.  |  IP: Logged Jack Theakston Master Film Handler Posts: 411 From: New York, USA Registered: Sep 2007 posted 12-20-2007 03:28 PM                     quote: Steve Guttag One person will always give up a percent or so here and there when drives the market into the studios hands...they have the goods YOU want. This is the problem, right here. There's no way that independently, all of the major chains are going to get defensive. And even if they did, there's always going to be one guy that cracks under the pressure.  |  IP: Logged Charles Caron Expert Film Handler Posts: 188 From: Billings MT, USA Registered: Jul 2005 posted 12-20-2007 09:40 PM                     Apparently Carmike is not breaking Sweeney in any of its Montana theatres...Interesting...  |  IP: Logged Brad Allen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 688 From: Evansville, IN, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 12-20-2007 09:57 PM                     I'll bet it's because they didn't feel it would perform as Paramount expects. There is so much blood letting & head chopping in the film that many will find it hard to stomach...based on what I've heard from those that have screened it.  |  IP: Logged Allison Parsons Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 630 From: East Peoria, IL Registered: Oct 2004 posted 12-20-2007 11:26 PM                        We, Carmike, didn't get it either. Well my theater didn't get it, I can't speak for the other Carmikes.  |  IP: Logged Brad Allen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 688 From: Evansville, IN, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 12-21-2007 02:58 PM                     By the way the terms from Paramount are no differant than they wanted for Bee Movie. Paramount as of this past Monday was only making 1200 (35mm) prints. Sounds like a lot of spin from Markus.  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 12-21-2007 03:27 PM                    quote: Brad Allen I'll bet it's because they didn't feel it would perform as Paramount expects. I feel the same way about HD-DVD.  |  IP: Logged Blaine Young Master Film Handler Posts: 477 From: Kirkland, WA, USA Registered: Sep 2006 posted 12-21-2007 05:46 PM                     Actually, I'm surprised that it's opening as wide as it is. I believe it was originally targeted to open only on a few screens in NY/LA, but then decided to open it up wider. The screen count from boxofficemojo indicates 1249 theaters. We got a single print. Sold out a midnight show last night.  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 12-21-2007 07:59 PM                        quote: Brad Allen Paramount as of this past Monday was only making 1200 (35mm) prints. Sounds like a lot of spin from Markus. That may be... but I've known of times when we've been asked to decide whether we want a particular film because the studio orders the initial print run based on those choices. If we had said 'no', we wouldn't have been able to change our minds and would have had to wait until after the initial break. Whether this is normal, I don't know... but it does happen, and not infrequently. Might Paramount might have done their print run based on initial commitments from the exhibitors?  |  IP: Logged Ross Oba Expert Film Handler Posts: 181 From: Kailua Kona, HI Registered: Oct 2005 posted 12-23-2007 08:37 PM                     Although it isn't listed on Box Office Mojo, Sweeney Todd is supposed to expand to 2000+ theaters on Jan. 11 according to Paramount Progress.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

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.