Welcome to the new Film-Tech Forums!
The forum you are looking at is entirely new software. Because there was no good way to import all of the old archived data from the last 20 years on the old software, everyone will need to register for a new account to participate.
To access the original forums from 1999-2019 which are now a "read only" status, click on the "FORUM ARCHIVE" link above.
Please remember registering with your first and last REAL name is mandatory. This forum is for professionals and fake names are not permitted. To get to the registration page click here.
Once the registration has been approved, you will be able to login via the link in the upper right corner of this page.
Also, please remember while it is highly encouraged to upload an avatar image to your profile, is not a requirement. If you choose to upload an avatar image, please remember that it IS a requirement that the image must be a clear photo of your face.
Thank you!
I do think the studios are more liberal these days with regard to how many days you are open.
They indeed are. I checked in on this earlier this year after I had noticed a few single screens over here were getting anything they wanted and only playing weekends. Studios are very much less concerned about weekdays. I had inquired about weekend only shows because I myself am thinking about converting over into a weekend only theater. I told my booker that I would increase my show times on weekends by double and eliminate all the single shows during the weekday. He said "that would be very good".
So as I take it, they'd rather you bulk up on weekends vs a thin week wide schedule. Im sure they'd prefer round the clock shows, seven days a week. But that's not happening in a town of 1400.
Movie studios should open their eyes to the world they at least partly created themselves. Consumers are used to stream what they want whenever they want, but in the cinema, there is no such flexibility. Anno 2024, that's completely bonkers, especially since nobody wants to watch the drivel they're pumping out anymore.
Movie studios should open up their big back-catalogue and allow movie theaters to create a much more diverse programming. That includes both access to hot, new content and repertoire titles. The entire concept of "the booker" as the middle-man is an outdated concept in the age of end-to-end automation. Delivery is already 100% automated for many venues, why do I still need humans to arrange for a "booking"?. Why not having exhibitors license and pay for their content use via a content portal? Cut out the middle-man, provide a better service to both the "end user" and the exhibitor, earn more money...
They may be more liberal today, but the First theater I ever worked in, located in Pentwater Michigan, was only ever open Thursday through Sunday. And this was back in 1971 and I would have been in 11th grade later that year. Since I was staying the summer on the other side of the sizable Pentwater lake, I took one of the rowboats to work and back. And to boot, the theater was only open late Spring through early fall. To be honest, it was run more like a drive in than a theater. Not sure how they ever got away with that. Anyway, it opened in 1930 and closed in 1986, and had 350 seats. It's called the Hancock Building today and has been repurposed. There were Simplex Standards and some even earlier RCA sound reproducers, but can't remember the model. Fun days, but looking back it sure had a pretty short yearly schedule. Perhaps this sort of thing was more common back then...
Movie studios should open their eyes to the world they at least partly created themselves. Consumers are used to stream what they want whenever they want, but in the cinema, there is no such flexibility. Anno 2024, that's completely bonkers, especially since nobody wants to watch the drivel they're pumping out anymore.
Movie studios should open up their big back-catalogue and allow movie theaters to create a much more diverse programming. That includes both access to hot, new content and repertoire titles. The entire concept of "the booker" as the middle-man is an outdated concept in the age of end-to-end automation. Delivery is already 100% automated for many venues, why do I still need humans to arrange for a "booking"?. Why not having exhibitors license and pay for their content use via a content portal? Cut out the middle-man, provide a better service to both the "end user" and the exhibitor, earn more money...
You are making too much sense! With digital delivery, there is no reason that a theater can't have an account and a website where they select what they'd like to play and when they'd like to play it. Then, they agree to the terms (or have a process to negotiate terms when applicable) and get a file delivered.
Needing a middle man is a relic of the era when distributing a film was a somewhat complex logistical exercise and communication was limited to phones and later fax machines.
2024 will be our 50th anniversary of our "Summer Classic Film Series" (Which is slowly morphing into just "Classic Film Series" with engagements that fill calendar holes throughout the year also). Those wiser than me in booking decided to kick it off early last week with the "touring" event: "The Princess Bride - An Inconceivable Evening with Cary Elwes"..
1300 Seat theatre sold out for 3 consecutive nights. If you are gonna go big go big.... He came to town a day early to participate in a private donor/advisor cocktail party we mounted at Troublemaker Studios because Rodriguez is friend of both Cary and the theatre and we have a smart development team.
Definitely could have booked even more screenings!
I think the M&G ticket upgrade was north of 200$, and I swear half the audience paid for it based on the post show line to get upstairs.
Re: Spaceballs
The idea that a distributor would insist on a theater playing a movie even though (virtually) no one was in attendence is beyond stupid. Policies like that contributed to the demise of many grand theaters over the years. So sad.
I can maybe understand their concern over the fact that the 70MM print was "specially provided," but the theater owner had already found another place to run it. The idea that the distributor would prevent the theater from showing their subsequent films is beyond idiodic. It's literally cutting off their nose to spite their face. Never mind all of the customers in the region who were deprived the ability to see their movies in what sounds like a really great theater. Mark, is that 900 seat theater still in operation? If so, I'd love to know where it is.
Re: Movie A
Again, cutting off their nose to spite their face. So goddamn moronic. You were playing both titles! You were making them money and serving your customers. And since the Roxy appears to be the only theater within an ~80 mile radius, the distributor was also saying "fuck you" to moviegoers living in the area, leaving them simply unable to watch their movies at all.
It's maddening that something so incredibly beloved by so many people (moviegoing) is such a total unmitigaged clusterfuck. Where's the story of a distributor that yanked its titles from a cinema that blasted exit light across the screen? Where's the story of a distributor that yanked its titles from a cinema that piped the wrong audio into an auditorium? Or a milliion other presentation fuck-ups?
Re: The Princess Bride
Kudos to you and your theater, Ryan. It's tough to find a new release that would sell 1300 tickets three nights in a row.
At 10:45, Killers of the Forest Mooon (Par) is in their premium 245-seat auditorium w/ a 60-foot-wide screen. 17 tickets sold.
At 3:45, Barbie (WB) is in the premium auditorium. 2 tickets sold
At 7:00, Oppenheimer (Uni) is in the premium auditorium. 12 tickets sold.
Together, those 3 films have sold 31 tickets.
At 12:20 The Matrix has sold 46 tickets in a small 78-seat auditorium with a tiny (fixed-width) screen.
image.png
Of course, all four films might sell more tickets today, but anyone else wanting to see The Matrix will be stuck in some pretty undesirable seats. The last time I sat on the front row of a theater that small, I was close enough to be distracted by screen perforations.
Meanwhile, at other Alamo locations, they are showing The Matrix on their premium screens. They even brag about it.
THE BIGGEST MOVIES. THE BEST PRESENTATION.
EPIC Sunday is a monthly series that features both tried-and-true classic epics and newer titles that are large in scope and visually spectacular. These films need to be experienced big and loud and are always presented in our Premium Large Format auditoriums.
Why is Westminster booked differently? It's painfully and consistently obvious that they would make more money if they showed classics on their biggest screen.
You can't argue that Paramount dictated that only KotFM must play on the premium screen, because it's sharing it with WB and Uni titles.
You can't argue that Universal dictated that only Opp'r must play on the premium screen,because it's sharing it with WB and Par titles.
You can't argue that Warner dictated that only Barbie must play on the premium screen, because it's sharing it with Par and Uni titles.
You can't argue that Alamo has a policy against playing classics on their biggest screens, because it's playing on their biggest screens at multiple other locations.
You can't argue that the demand to see The Matrix was a surprise, because that exact title has drawn large crowds in Westminster in recent days, recent months, and recent years.
I accept the sad truth that (most) distributors and exhibitors don't give a shit about their audiences or presentation quality, but I struggle to wrap my head around the idea that they don't care about money.
All I can see here is a pattern of continuing incompetence.
It’s awards season and Barbie and Oppenheimer are both in rereleases, hence the studio undoubtedly wants them on big screens. They may be flexible on sharing since both titles are out on video now. Either way, WB is undoubtedly not making any such requests or demands for The Matrix.
It could be as simple as a clueless or scheduler making decisions too.
Everyone here loves to say this, but the data has shown again and again that either it simply isn't true or it simply doesn't matter.
. . . and ironically, less than 12hrs after I made that post, my manger came up to me while
I was on a break and informed me about how they had just committed our big auditorium here
for an exclusive two week minimum run of an upcoming release. Last year we didn't get
the AVATAR flick in 3D because management/bookers were unwilling to tie up our
'big house' for the number of days & shows the distributor demanded. I know of at least one
SF theater owner who was 'blacklisted' for a while several years ago when a studio 'checker'
caught him making an unauthorized auditorium move.
This isn't my area of expertise. I can't explain what Alamo does, and every market has different
dynamics. But as I said in my last message, their front office analyzes every thing about a ½
dozen different ways, and they are very good at pinching pennies. Trust me, if they found their
current booking policies were loosing them any money, things would be changed very quickly.
You seem to be very passionate on this issue and losing a lot of sleep over bookings at Alamo
Westminster. . so have you tried asking THEM why things are the way they are? As I said
earlier, local managers at Alamo don't have little control over what they play and what
auditorium it winds up in. Maybe try e-mailing Alamo owner Tim League. He's not a
bad guy and I've known him to respond to personal e-mails. You'd have a lot better chance
of getting an accurate answer about your Westminster concerns from someone at Alamo
who actually is involved in operations, than what you're getting by all of us speculating here. . . . i'm just sayin. . .
I should have been more precise. I apologize. My quote should have included the bold text I have added here:
Everyone here loves to say this, but the data has shown again and again that either it simply isn't true or it simply doesn't matter, at least much of the time.
Obviously my statement is true, because classic films (and other special events) often do displace new releases on the largest screens.
It should go without saying that if you've got one of only eighteen 5-perf 70MM prints in the entire country for a highly anticipated blockbuster release, yeah, that should stay on the biggest screen. (Or the sequel to the highest grossing film of all time.)
I did try reaching out to Alamo, a bunch of different ways. I never got anywhere with them.
I had better luck with Harkins. After lots of urging from me (and maybe other factors?), they started showing classics on their biggest screens back in the late 2010s (to great success). Then, when they reopened after the pandemic, they mysteriously stopped. I resumed my urging (using data to back it up), and they've finally started back up again.
Tomorrow night, they are showing The Godfather on their premium screens. Below is what it looks like at one of their biggest locations.
Tonight, the new release showing on the premimum screen tonight has sold 7 tickets. Tomorrow night, The Godfather has sold ~125.
Here in Colorado, the numbers for The Godfather aren't as good.
It's only sold a dozen tickets, but it's still doing better than tonight's new release, which has sold two (circled). (Those others seats aren't for sale - broken recliners.) image.png
I don't buy your blind faith that whoever is making decisions about Alamo Westminster knows what they are doing. Businesses make poor decisions all the time (including Harkins' random decision to not resume showing classics on their biggest screens after the pandemic).
I'm not losing sleep over it (I've got my 50+ year old bladder for that), but I am bitterly sad about the state of moviegoing. It's one of my favorite things in the world. I want to see the (very few) decent cinemas still in operation make as much money as possible, so that they succeed and flourish. And if that means I get to revist my favorites the way they were meant to be seen, even better.
PS: I enjoyed seeing both a new release (Three Thousand Years of Longing) and a classic (Sorcerer, in 35mm) on your biggest screen a few years back while visiting my brother.
Heads up to QT fans in AZ, CO, OKC and SoCal - Harkins will be showing Pulp Fictionon their 70 and 80 foot wide CineXL screens next Tuesday.
This is occuring during the second week of Dune: Part 2's release, despite the fact that studio contracts require that big new releases must be shown exclusively on premium screens for two weeks.
Incidentally, starting tomorrow, Harkins is also running one or two matinees for Kung Fu Panda 4 on their premium screens every day, then switching to Dune: Part 2 in the afternoons and evenings.
Kudos to Harkins for providing opportunities for their customers to see multiple titles on their premium screens.
Harkins Theaters is showing Spider-Man (2002) on their premium screens tonight, somehow bumping a new title from that screen only three days after its release.
In Colorado, that single showing of Spider-Man appears to have sold more tickets than all of the showings of twenty other films all day long, combined. The only other title with more than 20 tickets sold is a 3:45 showing of another classic, Shrek 2, on a fairly small screen.
I glanced briefly at a few other locations, and it appears that they are seeing similar numbers.
All eight live-action Spider-Man films are playing on Mondays over the next few months. Unfortunately, only the first three are on the biggest screens.
At least Harkins is providing fans with a "spectacular" experience for the first three. And they are making a hell of a lot more money than they would otherwise as a result.
Discouraging news: Warner Bros. just jacked their price for classic movie rentals by about 250%. To be fair -- they dropped the price during the height of Covid, and now they are apparently back to their "normal" price, which is too high for a typical birthday party screening. And their price is not much different from most of the other studios. The only studio still offering a decent price (for now) is Universal.
To make matters worse, our booker told me yesterday that studios are apparently considering not allowing DVD/BluRay screenings due to the amount of theaters playing movies without licensing them. (Which is pointless -- they're still going to keep doing it, so why stop the ones who are willing to play by the rules from doing it?) He said they are probably eventually going to move to licensing streaming versions only.
It makes no sense. Those old movies are just gathering dust sitting there. Why not let them generate some cash? We booked about two dozen Warner movies for private shows over the past year. This year, thanks to their new prices, we will book zero of them.
That's great to see, but I'm not sure he really gets it. Some cinemas are better than VOD, SVOD, and physical home media. Some cinemas are absolutely inferior. Classics need to be shown on the former, otherwise it's a waste of time. Why would anyone pay to watch a movie on an inferior screen when they can watch it at home on a superior one?
Without that important detail, most of the distribution and exibition industry is stuck in an endless self-fulfilling prophecy when it comes to classics.
... people don't bother to go to classics, therefore we won't bother to put classics on the biggest screens, therefore people don't bother to go to classics ...
Next weekend, ALIEN is getting a 45th Anniversarly re-release. The trailer invites you to "Experience the groundbreaking masterpiece as it was meant to be seen."
Sadly, it's being shown on embarrassingly small screens. Hardly "as it was meant to be seen." It's such a missed opportunity, especially considering that the only new releases are a tennis rom-com and a homey biopic.
There continue to be a few examples where theaters seem to get it right.
On Monday, Harkins is showing Spider-Man 2 on their massive CINE XL screens, and they have sold hundreds of tickets at each location. They've just added late shows at each location and a mid-day showing at one. (Most other chains have Spider-Man 2 on crappy little screens.)
This weekend, Harkins is alternating two brand new releases on their CINE XL screens (Abigail and The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare). Based on tonight's ticket sales, they may not sell as many tickets to those two titles allweekendlongas they will sell for Spider-Man 2 on Monday.
Alamo's Northern Virginia locations also get it right with their EPIC Sunday series. Classics on their biggest screens = large crowds.
Yeah, the booking terms are every bit as asinine as the rest of the booking terms in this ass-backwards industry. But since cinemas make their money on concessions, they should at least book titles that will draw more people. And that means showing classics frequently on the biggest screens.
*The usual caveats occur. This all applies to markets of a reasonable size, not indies serving small rural communities.
On a personal note, ALIEN is one of my all-time favorite movies. In 2020, I took my daughter to see it for her very first time at the AMC Orchard 12.
Something was wrong with the audio. I'm 95% sure the right and center channels were swapped. Most dialog came from the right side of the screen.
Red light from the aisle lights lit up the bottom corners of the screen.
The auditorium featured a smallish constant-width screen without any masking. Black bars were projected above and below the picture.
I was excited to introduce my 12-year-old and one of her friends to ALIEN on "big" screen. I should have just shown it to them on my home theater.
Tweet
Comment