Advertised Show Times

[Ryan Gallagher]

I guess we will let the market decide (which is probably a good idea). Louise and I went to see "A Complete Unknown" this evening. Great movie! We arrived 15 minutes before the published showtime and sat through 40 minutes of crap before the movie started. We won't be going back to that theater again...

I love the principle, and by no means is this a topic worthy of government regulation/law, but letting the market decide seems to be how we end up in these messes in the first place, with publicly traded profit seeking cinema corps looking for every way to pad revenue or cut costs, at the expense of patron experiences and providing decent jobs to their communities. (which also applies to Mike's recent experiences too).

The retail side of the mall being thriving shocks me a little, but I expect higher-end malls in regions with surviving working class middle income families still hang on. Seattle has a good bit of that despite it being a fairly expensive city for cost of living. That or maybe people just live in it now. ;-)

It somehow feels both innovative and depressing, end stage capitalism vibes.

[Harold Hallikainen]

I love the principle, and by no means is this a topic worthy of government regulation/law, but letting the market decide seems to be how we end up in these messes in the first place, with publicly traded profit seeking cinema corps looking for every way to pad revenue or cut costs, at the expense of patron experiences and providing decent jobs to their communities. (which also applies to Mike's recent experiences too).

I hope that market forces would move us away from the audio/video assault of patrons as they wait (forever) for the movie to start. Our local nonprofit theater does run ads before the trailers. The ads are on screen stills with low level background music. Patrons can visit with each other, and the ads to get noticed (you hear several laughs when a humorous ad appears). And the trailers are appropriate for the audience. The trailers we saw before "A Complete Unknown" were all "action movies" with lots of people being shot or blown up. Loud and violent. Not one advertised movie was one we want to see. And before the trailers is some inane preshow with trivia quizzes and repeated reminders that we could have an ad here (wow!).

So.. is this what the market wants? Or can something else gain an audience?

[Ryan Gallagher]

I hope that market forces would move us away from the audio/video assault of patrons as they wait (forever) for the movie to start. Our local nonprofit theater does run ads before the trailers. The ads are on screen stills with low level background music. Patrons can visit with each other, and the ads to get noticed (you hear several laughs when a humorous ad appears). And the trailers are appropriate for the audience. The trailers we saw before "A Complete Unknown" were all "action movies" with lots of people being shot or blown up. Loud and violent. Not one advertised movie was one we want to see. And before the trailers is some inane preshow with trivia quizzes and repeated reminders that we could have an ad here (wow!).

So.. is this what the market wants? Or can something else gain an audience?

I think to break from entrenched practices some larger player is going to have to make a concerted effort to go in a VERY different direction, and experiment with a more audience approving/enticing preshow, or other presentation values, different enough to separate themselves from the competition. Without a big change the "market" won't perceive there to be a difference and lump them all under a shared complaint, even if some are slightly better than others. The last shift of this nature I feel like was full kitchen food service (which granted not everyone considers an improvement).

Locally owned smaller cinemas would do well to distance themselves as far as possible from the flailing larger industry, in whatever way they can? Get out of their ad contracts? Switch back to advertising local businesses and community events. Many already do a pretty good job as you point out, and may in fact be the last ones standing if the cost of upgrading technology doesn't kill em all.

[Mike Blakesley]

Locally owned smaller cinemas would do well to distance themselves as far as possible from the flailing larger industry, in whatever way they can? Get out of their ad contracts? Switch back to advertising local businesses and community events. Many already do a pretty good job as you point out, and may in fact be the last ones standing if the cost of upgrading technology doesn't kill em all.

Thing is, we (smaller operators) NEED the larger industry. If there isn't a good healthy market of "big" theaters, the studios certainly aren't going to do anything to keep a bunch of small-profit tiny operators in business. We'll be reduced to running the latest streamer off of a Fire Stick or something if the chains don't survive.

The NATO independent theater owners committee (ITOC) had a meeting with Disney last year in which they tried to convince them to start allowing their older movies to be booked for matinees, single shows, etc. They compiled statistics to where Disney could easily make an additional $30-40 million in free money every year if they would just unleash their vault. They wouldn't even need to provide DCPs -- theaters could run blu-rays if necessary. Disney's response? "That's not enough money to bother with."

[Ed Gordon]

Should theaters have to tell us the real movie start times?

The Colin McEnroe Show discusses:

State Sen. Martin Looney has proposed a bill in the Connecticut legislature that would require movie theaters to publish the actual start times of movies, rather than the time all the commercials and trailers and ads for concessions start. This hour, a Nose-ish look at, well, that bill and the effects it would have on movie theaters and movie going. Plus: the art and history of movie trailers, themselves.

You can listen to the podcast at:

https://www.ctpublic.org/show/the-co...ie-start-times

GUESTS:

• Allan Arkush: A contributor to Trailers from Hell; he worked in the trailers department for Roger Corman
• Stephen Garrett: Founder of Jump Cut
• James Hanley: Co-founder of Cinestudio at Trinity College
• Sam Hatch: Co-hosts The Culture Dogs on WWUH
• Martin Looney: President pro tempore of the Connecticut Senate and the state senator serving Hamden and New Haven
• Shawn Murray: A stand-up comedian, writer, and the host of the Nobody Asked Shawn podcast
• Kevin O’Toole: Co-hosts The Culture Dogs on WWUH
• Lindsay Lee Wallace: Writes about culture, health care and health equity, and other stuff, too

[Mike Blakesley]

To get ahead of this apparently growing "movement," theaters should start putting forth an estimate of how long their preshow is. Rather than say "the feature starts at 7:25," they should say something like "Our feature will be preceded by approximately 20 minutes of pre-show content. In courtesy to other moviegoers, please arrive no later than 10 minutes after the posted start time."

It's kind of like the ratings. If we get ahead of the "problem," then the government won't feel the need to legislate the issue.

Also, any theater running 20 minutes or more of preshow after the start time should be ashamed of themselves, as should any theater that mixes "ads" with the trailers.

[Steve Guttag]

I suspect that "approximately" won't fly as legislation language. I suspect that if there were to go for some sort of preshow accommodation, the language would be of the form: "the advertised feature must start no later than 10 minutes after the listed start time.

As a patron, I would want a definite: "Our posted show time is when our previews for upcoming features start. No other advertisement will presented after that time. Our typical preview length is 5-10 minutes."

If theatres took that policy, this legislation effort would never have happened. You can't get those words into legislation. The legislation's goal is to protect the consumer, not the business. As such, it will be crafted to commit you, the theatre to getting them in and out based on the running length of the movie and without any consideration to preshow. I think most moviegoers WANT to see previews but they don't want to drown in them. Keep it to 3 or 4, at most. And if it was in legislation, it would unbind the theatre from a studio contract, with respect to running the absurd amount of trailers.

[Ryan Gallagher]

Should theaters have to tell us the real movie start times?

The Colin McEnroe Show discusses:



You can listen to the podcast at:

https://www.ctpublic.org/show/the-co...ie-start-times

GUESTS:

• Allan Arkush: A contributor to Trailers from Hell; he worked in the trailers department for Roger Corman
• Stephen Garrett: Founder of Jump Cut
• James Hanley: Co-founder of Cinestudio at Trinity College
• Sam Hatch: Co-hosts The Culture Dogs on WWUH
• Martin Looney: President pro tempore of the Connecticut Senate and the state senator serving Hamden and New Haven
• Shawn Murray: A stand-up comedian, writer, and the host of the Nobody Asked Shawn podcast
• Kevin O’Toole: Co-hosts The Culture Dogs on WWUH
• Lindsay Lee Wallace: Writes about culture, health care and health equity, and other stuff, too

I gave that show a listen over breakfast this morning, enjoyable treatment of the subject. Thanks for sharing it.

[Scott Jentsch]

Also, any theater running 20 minutes or more of preshow after the start time should be ashamed of themselves, as should any theater that mixes "ads" with the trailers.

Here in the Milwaukee, Wisconsin area at least, Marcus and AMC both show about 20 minutes (16-21 minutes) of pre-show/ads after the scheduled start time. I build it into my timing, so I can arrive at the theater at or just before the showtime, get my concessions, and take my seat before the movie begins.

I just assumed that all theaters do this, so it would be interesting to hear otherwise.

Given the current distaste in federal government for any kind of regulation that doesn't result in business or personal profit, I can't imagine legislation like this getting past the "making noise" point.

[Harold Hallikainen]

You can listen to the podcast at:

https://www.ctpublic.org/show/the-co...ie-start-times

This doesn't work in my Chrome browser. There is a player, and pushing the play button turns it into a pause button, but the timeline does not advance, and there is no audio. Serving an audio stream is not that hard! Just use the <audio> tag.

[Frank Cox]

I occasionally have people (who have apparently never been here before) come in 20 minutes after the show has started and say, "The movie hasn't started yet, right?"

Um, actually it started 20 minutes ago.

[Ryan Gallagher]

You can listen to the podcast at:

https://www.ctpublic.org/show/the-co...ie-start-times

This doesn't work in my Chrome browser. There is a player, and pushing the play button turns it into a pause button, but the timeline does not advance, and there is no audio. Serving an audio stream is not that hard! Just use the <audio> tag.

My chrome played it, but also had the no timer advance bug.

[Ed Gordon]

My chrome played it, but also had the no timer advance bug.

I use Firefox. It plays perfectly, and you can skip using the timeline.

[Randy Stankey]

It's not necessarily the browser that you use. It could be the extensions that your browser uses to play videos and the MIME-type associations (set inside your browser preferences) that trigger those extensions. It could also be the version of Java/JavaScript that your computer uses. Most websites use Java/JavaScript to execute code on your machine. If the website is sending your computer code/commands using a different version of Java than you are using, malfunctions can occur. Then, there is the question of the video player that the web content uses. They can, via Java, download a completely separate video player applet to your computer. They can also instruct your computer to use the pre-installed video apps or extensions, already on your computer.

The bottom line is that playing video via the internet is like going down a rabbit hole. You never know what hare-brained scheme some other A-hole is going to try to use.

Then, there is the hare-brained shit that I do on my computer that screws things up. If I am doing 3-D renders using my GPU, playing of video at the same time will be like shit. If I do the same render with the graphics card turned off and only use the CPU, the computer will run slower but video will still play. The video card, which is supposed to process video, is being used up by computing a big render and there's nothing left over for the video I want to watch. Okay, this is an old computer and the video card isn't as powerful as current ones. One should expect things like this when using old machines.

Bottom line: It's not just the browser you use but, also, a dozen other reasons that might make video play badly on your computer.

[Harold Hallikainen]

On online video, HTML5 has a very simple video tag that just works. No JavaScript needed!

On theater start times, here's another article:

https://www.fox61.com/article/news/p...b-bf7365dbeaa3

Connecticut bill requiring start time disclosures for movie theaters receives opposition

Senate Bill 797 would require Connecticut movie theatres to announce the exact start times for films or face a $1,000 penalty for non-compliance.
Author: Chris Charbonneau
Published: 11:02 PM EST February 22, 2025
Updated: 11:02 PM EST February 22, 2025

CONNECTICUT, USA — During a General Law Public Hearing held this week, state Sen. John A. Kissel (R-Enfield) voiced strong opposition to Senate Bill 797.

The proposed bill would require movie theaters in Connecticut to announce the exact start times for both feature films and previews. Theatres that don't comply would face a $1,000 penalty.

Kissel argued that the bill, which seeks to regulate the advertising of scheduled movie times, creates unnecessary burdens for local theaters and distracts from more pressing issues that face the state.

“In my 33 years serving this district, not one constituent has ever raised this as a concern,” Kissel said. “Meanwhile, we have movie theaters working hard to provide entertainment for families, and this bill would do nothing but create unnecessary challenges for them.”

The elected official also criticized the proposed fine, calling it excessive and out of touch with the realities of small businesses. He emphasized that Connecticut's theaters, which are facing significant challenges, should not be burdened with additional regulations.

“At a time when we should be supporting small businesses, this bill does the opposite,” Kissel added. “We shouldn’t be making it harder for them to operate.”

Kissel concluded that lawmakers should prioritize meaningful legislation that addresses the real concerns of Connecticut families, rather than focusing on issues that have not been raised by constituents.

“This is a solution in search of a problem,” he said. “Let’s move on and tackle the real challenges facing our state.”