How to save the movie theater industry: allow pot smoking and texting!

[Leo Enticknap]

Surely they could have waited until April 1 to publish this?!

Texting, Weed and Sing-Alongs: Four Radical Ideas for Bringing New Audiences to Movie Theaters

It’s time for moviegoing to get a makeover.

From selling pot along with popcorn to offering cellphone-friendly screenings, cinema owners could soon overhaul the way their customers watch films. These changes, many of them once considered sacrilegious, may give the box office a much-needed boost.

And there are plenty of people out there to entice, given that the majority of Americans these days aren’t regular moviegoers. While the U.S. population has grown steadily over the decades, there haven’t been many recent innovations drawing newcomers to the multiplex. The current crop of amenities are mostly luxe offerings that make the experience more expensive, like Imax or dine-in theaters, which could be a tough sell if the economy continues to teeter. Thanks, tariffs! Below are four ways theater owners could revive attendance.

Lighting Up Profits

Imagine how much better “Barbie” or “Deadpool & Wolverine” would be if you could see it with a bud?

Take Kev Jones, who was smoking a joint outside the AMC Times Square on a March weeknight before a screening of “Mickey 17.” “It helps to loosen me up and puts me in a sci-fi frame of mind,” he says, taking a big hit. “But honestly, I smoke before every movie.”

Jones, a member of AMC’s Stubs A-List, which allows moviegoers to attend several screenings a week for a flat fee, is a frequent guest, and he says he would come more often if he could buy and smoke pot at the theater. “How fun would that be?” he says. “They have a bar here so that people can relax and enjoy a drink. I’d love to relax on my own terms.”

Under New York law, marijuana became legal recreationally in 2021 and began being sold through sanctioned dispensaries in 2022. No movie theaters are allowed to sell weed, but according to Taylor Randi Lee, press secretary for the New York State Office of Cannabis Management, things could change.

“At this time, cannabis can only be sold at legal, licensed adult-use dispensaries or legal, licensed adult-use microbusinesses,” she says via email. “For theaters to serve recreational marijuana at their establishments, they would need either an events permit or consumption lounge license. New York State does not have either yet but plans to in the future.”

Selling weed could bring fresh revenue and new customers to theaters and set the path for other cannabis-friendly states to follow suit.

Feel Free to Text

Jessica Garcia, a college student in Michigan, loves movies but can’t remember the last time she saw one in a theater. “I just like streaming things and sitting on the couch with my phone and snacks, second screening,” she says. “If there’s a boring part, I’ll just jump on Instagram or TikTok quick until things get going again.”

Although cinephiles might object, if movie theaters want to attract younger audiences who refuse to give up their devices during the two-hour running time of most films, they might need to stop banning phones.

But it’s going to be a tough sell. Alamo Drafthouse makes a phonefree environment a major part of its advertising. AMC CEO Adam Aron canceled a plan to test cellphone screenings in 2016 after facing a blistering online outcry. “NO TEXTING AT AMC,” he tweeted. “Won’t happen. You spoke. We listened.” He also issued a full-page statement and retraction to the press, just two days after raising the idea.

While the idea might not appeal to purists, cinemas need to attract younger folks to keep theaters in business. So maybe it’s time to find some middle ground on iPhones. That could mean hosting select screenings that allow texting. That way, second screeners could enjoy themselves at the theater, while serious moviegoers would know to stay away. Another possibility is in-theater partitions that allow guests to text while not bothering other customers, which was tested by Megaplex Theatres last year.

Theaters are already struggling to prevent audiences from reaching for their devices. How much longer can they keep up the fight?

More Than Movies

Want to help Elphaba reach that high note in “Defying Gravity”? You and a dark room of strangers could have done that at the popular “Wicked” sing-alongs that theaters hosted last winter. And cinemas aren’t just offering that kind of enhanced blockbuster experience to bring in crowds beyond die-hard movie lovers. They’re also offering screenings of older films that include previously unreleased material. The goal is to find alternative types of content at a time when studios aren’t making as many movies. As part of that effort, cinemas are broadcasting sports events and concerts.

One company, Fathom Entertainment, has been a major force in bringing special events and alternative types of programming to theaters. Owned jointly by the big three American multiplex chains — AMC Theatres, Cinemark Theatres and Regal Cinemas — Fathom started as a way to engage audiences during times of the week when theaters are less busy. Last year, the company’s best-performing release was the 15th-anniversary edition of the animated movie “Coraline,” which ran in a season filled with opera performances, boxing matches and even episodic TV shows such as the religious series “The Chosen.” Ray Nutt, the company’s CEO, points to that show as an example of the sense of community movie theaters can deliver, given that people could have watched it for free at home.

“Coming out of the pandemic, everybody wanted to gather communally somewhere, and they wanted to be shoulder to shoulder,” he explains.

Nutt says the company is hoping to expand by offering even more live content. Those experiences have the potential to reintroduce lapsed theatergoers to the joy of the multiplex.

“Fathom was built as a Monday-through-Thursday business just to put butts in seats when the commercial product was slow,” he says. “That was years and years ago, and we’ve evolved. This is a growth sector of the business, no question about it.”

Increasing Accessibility

Making movies more accessible to people with disabilities or developmental differences isn’t just the right thing to do — it’s also good for business. According to the nonprofit Autism Speaks, one in 36 children and one in 45 adults in the U.S. have autism, but cinemas haven’t done enough to tailor the experience to them. That’s changing — slowly. Regal and AMC are among the theaters offering sensory-friendly screenings, which dial down the volume, turn up the lights and permit quiet chatter to make customers on the autism spectrum more comfortable.

Open captions are another way to bring in audiences who aren’t able to fully enjoy the current theatrical experience. These subtitles are essential for attendees who are deaf or hard of hearing, but such screenings are inconsistently offered. A 2022 New York City law mandates that open captions be shown for at least 25% of all screenings, with a directive to stagger show times throughout the week. Other cities are considering similar measures, which makes sense, given that an estimated 48 million Americans have some level of hearing loss. That’s a lot of potential moviegoers.

If everyone in the theater is as stoned as Bob Marley on a good day for getting stoned, how are they going to be able to read the OCAPs?!

[Ryan Gallagher]

Pro tip, just get baked before going in. Most of my college friends did go to movies high, especially IMAX. Devices encouraged and singing is really the only new idea here. LOL, and singing engagements should be pretty obvious to book special screenings for, Wicked just goofed by not offering any opening weekend.

Plus “smoking” is such an antiquated delivery method, are there cinemas in Amsterdam and other fully legal locations that sell edibles at the candy counter?

[Ryan Gallagher]

Making movies more accessible to people with disabilities or developmental differences isn’t just the right thing to do — it’s also good for business. According to the nonprofit Autism Speaks, one in 36 children and one in 45 adults in the U.S. have autism, but cinemas haven’t done enough to tailor the experience to them. That’s changing — slowly. Regal and AMC are among the theaters offering sensory-friendly screenings, which dial down the volume, turn up the lights and permit quiet chatter to make customers on the autism spectrum more comfortable.

On a technical level, I'm also VERY curious about these AMC "Sensory-Friendly" screenings. Lights and OCAP I understand... but are they actually turning down a mix? How do they preserve dialog levels? Are they just turning down everything but C channel? If it's not a specific sensory friendly intentional mix coming from the film-makers... i'm not sure how they get away this this and claim to honor the artistic intent?

Of course there is a workable range, studios historically go louder on every fully seated premiere I've worked than I would comfortably go to a minimally sold show full of many older generations (not enough bodies to take the edge off). Maybe AMC just determined to use the lower end of that range and call it sensory friendly?

Personally I think allowing cell phone use during a film is a false assumption that the previous lack of it is in fact keeping any of that generation away, but the autism spectrum comments might be more relevant.

[Frank Cox]

I haven't watched a movie in any theatre other than my own in decades but it's my understanding that many theatres play their movies too GD loud, to a point that some people actually bring ear protectors with them when they go to a show.

So turning those down a bit won't hurt anyone's "artistic intent".

[Ryan Gallagher]

I haven't watched a movie in any theatre other than my own in decades but it's my understanding that many theatres play their movies too GD loud, to a point that some people actually bring ear protectors with them when they go to a show.

So turning those down a bit won't hurt anyone's "artistic intent".

My experience might be colored by adjusting fader levels for a 1300 seat theatre with a balcony. The range where dialog sounds acceptable/natural everywhere is actually quite small. It is rarely at 7.0, but when you find the best fader level, to my ear my ability to go much above or below that is fairly small. Turning down to “sensory friendly” levels on the master would just ruin quieter dialog/scenes in the farther reaches of the house.

[Randy Stankey]

My experience might be colored by adjusting fader levels for a 1300 seat theatre with a balcony.

Just a thought... Would creating some kind of "size factor" for determining fader/volume levels be helpful?

In other words, set the size of a "reference auditorium" for which the fader should be set. Then, if your theater is a different size than that reference, multiply/divide the reference fader level by some factor that varies by auditorium size in order to get a new fader level for your auditorium.

It wouldn't always be perfect but, when we get all those letters that say, "Set your fader to 7" we wouldn't be making our volume levels ear-splitting loud.

In other words, if your auditorium is 70% of the size of the imaginary, reference theater then you would multiply the fader level of "7" to get 4.9. (Round up to "5" if you like.)

I don't know. It's just a spitball idea.

[Ryan Gallagher]

Just a thought... Would creating some kind of "size factor" for determining fader/volume levels be helpful?

In other words, set the size of a "reference auditorium" for which the fader should be set. Then, if your theater is a different size than that reference, multiply/divide the reference fader level by some factor that varies by auditorium size in order to get a new fader level for your auditorium.

It wouldn't always be perfect but, when we get all those letters that say, "Set your fader to 7" we wouldn't be making our volume levels ear-splitting loud.

In other words, if your auditorium is 70% of the size of the imaginary, reference theater then you would multiply the fader level of "7" to get 4.9. (Round up to "5" if you like.)

I don't know. It's just a spitball idea.

I get where you are headed, but I don't really think that is the fundamental problem? But I'm also not familiar with how heavily engineers use imaginary reference rooms or screening rooms. Maybe there is something to the idea.

From my less experienced perspective, In theory if everyone is tuning their room properly it doesn't matter what size it is? The reference level should be close to the same, there are some compromises made during the tuning process depending on the room size and system, but the end result should be that 7.0 is 7.0 and produces approx the same spl and aims for the same response curve in every room? (Ideals are not always reality of course).

We are lucky that our room gets tuned every year before SXSW. And we are always in the 6.5-7.3 ballpark after listening to most features, unless their mix was done for near-field TV, stereo etc and requires more adjustments.

But equally so, I expect there are rooms that get tuned far less frequently, and for some reason or another 7.0 is more commonly screaming loud subjectively?

[Randy Stankey]

You're right. I was mostly ruminating.

When I set up the system at Mercyhurst, I calibrated it with the fader set at 7. During a movie, the system ran between 6 and 7. It would go as low as 5 if somebody complained and wanted the volume turned down. It was a fight to get it dialed in, that way, but we did it. I suppose we could have redone the calibration a hair bit lower but we didn't think it was worth the trouble.

I didn't want it to be a rule or anything. Just a formula.

If you want to change kilometers to miles, you could multiply your measurement by 0.62 but most people don't want to do that because they don't like arithmetic. If you told them to just multiply their measurement by six then move the decimal over one place. Most people could practically do that in their heads. Most of the time, we don't really care about the 0.02 kilometers that we rounded off but, if you needed to know and you know how to do basic multiplication, you can do it in your head.

My idea works along those lines. Instead of doing a lot of work to figure out the difference between a large and a small auditorium and do a lot of calculating, maybe we could come up with a few numbers that, when put together, give you a close estimate of where your fader should be.

It might also be a good argument against anybody who says that you MUST play with the fader at 7. You can tell them that your "Auditorium Factor" is 0.70 so that means you have to turn the volume down to five.

[Ryan Gallagher]

You're right. I was mostly ruminating.

...

It might also be a good argument against anybody who says that you MUST play with the fader at 7. You can tell them that your "Auditorium Factor" is 0.70 so that means you have to turn the volume down to five.

That last part of it is a good idea, something to offer in defense of playing blockbuster action movies slightly lower if your audience is of a sensibility and age to prefer that.

But really nothing beats a human with a decent ear screen testing them in the rooms they will play, studios should not be so stingy with keys, or issue a screen test DCP and key that unlocks only snippets for dialing such things a week in advance. Certainly can't trust the film's trailers to be representative. But that involves a level of trust I don't think they are willing to extend to operators.

If an auditorium design causes certain seats to be considered "best" that are not in the calibration sweet spots, and are the only seats occupied on lower attended events, perhaps the fader will always warrant some correction, or one needs to re-consider where they put the mics during calibration. Our front balcony is actually our film club VIP location, but we are always tuned for where the creatives are going to sit during festivals/premieres, which is definitely not there!

I've even had film-makers set a level after I had already independently given it a shot... they thought 7.0 sounded fine (but it was a jump scare horror-comedy movie), they learned I had been inclined by 7.3, and they gave some more a listen and were sold on 7.3. The next film from the same studio they didn't even bother tech-checking, they just trusted me I guess. (Or had somewhere else to be. LOL).

EDIT: I say all that coming from a rep/classics house that does a bunch of premieres and only shows each movie once (max twice) per season.... I have the luxury of rarely (if at all) getting those modern projection letters that say what the fader must be set at. So I just use my best judgement, and our keys tend to be a bit more forgiving too! (well from some studios during festivals).

[Ryan Gallagher]

On the Screen Test DCP idea... an alternative to that would be to just publish three timecodes that are considered good audio references:
- Subjectively "Natural" dialog.
- Subjectively "Quiet" dialog.
- Subjectively "Shouting/Loud/Screaming" dialog.

Easier for them than distributing something specific to the different audio formats. But again, that implies they admit they want people to listen and be empowered to deviate from reference levels. But it sure would speed up the guess work when people do take the time.

Also it's crazy that any film that is not standard Flat or Scope doesn't also include a framing chart! They all should, just make it a thing.

[Brad Miller]

On a technical level, I'm also VERY curious about these AMC "Sensory-Friendly" screenings. Lights and OCAP I understand... but are they actually turning down a mix? How do they preserve dialog levels? Are they just turning down everything but C channel? If it's not a specific sensory friendly intentional mix coming from the film-makers... i'm not sure how they get away this this and claim to honor the artistic intent?

My solution has been to setup a second set of calibration settings. This is easy to do in QSYS and some other processors. We don't run the surround or subwoofers at all during a sensory friendly show. We just drop the sub altogether and mix the surrounds into the stage at a low volume just so flyovers and other sounds moving in and out of the surround zone don't seem awkward. Also mixing the center channel's level a bit hotter helps since for a sensory show we will go from playing normal presentations which play at 7 down to about 4.5 for a sensory show (with trailers even lower). This keeps things overall toned down and still maintains dialog intelligibility.

That being said I'm kind of surprised the sound mixers of Hollywood haven't convinced the studio heads that they need to make a sensory mix. Since most theaters won't have the capability or a "sensory mode" setup along these lines in their sound systems, it would actually be a legitimate argument (unlike the whole "pay us more to near-field remix and destroy the soundtrack for blurays and streaming" scam).

Perhaps that hasn't happened because the studio heads realize that would just make one more damn DCP version to have to make and spend money on to make KDMs for and that version might accidentally get played on normal shows. Then again perhaps they predict that the sound mixers would end up constantly pushing the line on those sensory shows and start re-EQ'ing to make things sound louder when it's actually not registering as such on whatever mixing levels ended up being standardized on. I defer to the whole trailer level fiasco from 20 years ago (or whenever that was) as a good example of this. Back before that big standardization/limiting push I ran features at 7 and trailers at 4 and coincidentally I still find those same settings today work very well because the ads and trailer presentation should never, ever, EVER be louder or "more impressive" than the feature.

*Keep in mind my above comments assume a good room with proper acoustics, really good speakers like QSC or JBL, baffle wall, careful speaker aiming and a careful calibration that isn't auto-EQ'd or "dialed in to make a perfect line".

[Ryan Gallagher]

My solution has been to setup a second set of calibration settings. This is easy to do in QSYS and some other processors. We don't run the surround or subwoofers at all during a sensory friendly show. We just drop the sub altogether and mix the surrounds into the stage at a low volume just so flyovers and other sounds moving in and out of the surround zone don't seem awkward. Also mixing the center channel's level a bit hotter helps since for a sensory show we will go from playing normal presentations which play at 7 down to about 4.5 for a sensory show (with trailers even lower). This keeps things overall toned down and still maintains dialog intelligibility.

That being said I'm kind of surprised the sound mixers of Hollywood haven't convinced the studio heads that they need to make a sensory mix. Since most theaters won't have the capability or a "sensory mode" setup along these lines in their sound systems, it would actually be a legitimate argument (unlike the whole "pay us more to near-field remix and destroy the soundtrack for blurays and streaming" scam).

Perhaps that hasn't happened because the studio heads realize that would just make one more damn DCP version to have to make and spend money on to make KDMs for and that version might accidentally get played on normal shows. Then again perhaps they predict that the sound mixers would end up constantly pushing the line on those sensory shows and start re-EQ'ing to make things sound louder when it's actually not registering as such on whatever mixing levels ended up being standardized on. I defer to the whole trailer level fiasco from 20 years ago (or whenever that was) as a good example of this. Back before that big standardization/limiting push I ran features at 7 and trailers at 4 and coincidentally I still find those same settings today work very well because the ads and trailer presentation should never, ever, EVER be louder or "more impressive" than the feature.

*Keep in mind my above comments assume a good room with proper acoustics, really good speakers like QSC or JBL, baffle wall, careful speaker aiming and a careful calibration that isn't auto-EQ'd or "dialed in to make a perfect line".

That answers a lot of my curiosities on the "sensory friendly" attempts. Yeah an intentional mix would be the cinema agnostic way to do that!! The approach and goals makes sense, attempt to preserve relative dialog but offer an overall reduction in boom/bang/pop, which, combined with the flashing brightness, is probably the parts the sensory sensitive people are most wishing to avoid. I doubt it is the dialog or the musical score these audience members complain about, just everything else that makes an action movie these days (including the editing style). LOL. But once you drop everything else, dialog probably has a alternative sensory level too (relative to the rest of the ST).

I'll never get to run one here, being that we only do one screening for most films. But for 1st run plex it makes sense and a possible way to accommodate another audience more inclusively.

Too bad it seems hard to combine them with the OCAP screenings, I bet that particular audience still loves the booming sub frequencies.

[Brad Miller]

Oh, and I almost forgot the reason why I read this thread there. Having managed theaters myself, I cannot imagine having to deal with the complaints from customers about the STENCH floating around the room from the pot being smoked. (Clearly that article was written by a big time pothead because every person I've known that smokes pot daily seems to be immune to being able to smell that nasty shit.) I also can't imagine having to deal with a customer complaint from one of the potheads.

Let's be honest here, the ones who would feel the need to smoke during a movie are the ones that smoke every single day, not once a week or a couple of times a month. Their brains are fried already, but dosing them during the movie would just bring them to that point where they can't even form intelligent sentences. At that point they aren't even watching the movie.

And no I'm not talking about the ones that smoke only occasionally. I am talking about the daily smokers that have damaged their brain closer to the levels of a post-lobotomy patient. It's the latter that is the problem.

I've dealt with that nonsense from people I have known outside of work (the kind who can't make it through a 2-3 hour movie without taking a break to smoke) and they are so far gone mentally that there would be no possible way to deal with whatever nonsense they were trying to convey when they spoke to other audience members or if they tried to complain to the management. The managers of theaters today have enough on their plate to deal with. Forcing them to deal with a bunch of potheads on top of everything else is not even funny theoretically.

*Disclaimer, no I am not against letting people smoke if they want to. Legalize it, that's fine, but if the cinema industry wants to see just how fast they can commit suicide, openly invite the potheads to get baked inside your facility. Go ahead, watch what happens.

[Randy Stankey]

I wouldn't allow smoking of any kind in my theater. (If I owned one.)

Smoking hasn't been allowed in theaters for decades or, at least, as long as I can remember. I guess, back in the day, some theaters allowed it but I don't remember a time when it was allowed. The old Warner theater in my town has a smoking lounge, near the restrooms but even they didn't allow smoking in the auditorium, during a movie. That theater was built in the 1930s, so THAT'S how long it's been since people could openly smoke during a movie.

It doesn't matter what "substance" is being smoked. There are just too many things to go wrong. First, there's the smell... the smell of whatever... I don't care if you are smoking cherry flavored vape juice. It is rude to subject others to the smell of your smoke, especially when there's nowhere else for either party to go. Everybody has to sit in the same room, in the same seat, for two-plus hours. It's just wrong. Some people even have asthma or some other respiratory problem that makes breathing uncomfortable when the air is filled with the smell of "stuff." It is absolutely unfair to let some people do a thing that might make other people sick. Our job, as theater operators, is to make our business comfortable for EVERYBODY, not just a few.

Whether a person likes or dislikes the smell of some "smoking material" isn't the only concern. It's super rude to exhale smoke in front of others who are trying to watch a movie. If I was sitting at home, I would be pissed off by a person who continually exhaled plumes of "vaporous matter" in front of my while I was trying to see the screen. I wouldn't care whether it was the world's best bourbon whiskey pipe tobacco, a Cohiba cigar, a Dunhill cigarette or unicorn fart-scented vape juice. It's not about the smell or anything. I just don't like watching a movie through an ever-growing bank of fog. Again, it's rude and unfair to smoke in a public theater. To top it all off, it's not very nice to watch a movie while other people are flicking their lighters in the dark. (Cue the "Don't Flick Your Bic" PSA trailer! )

What about the risk of fire? What about burn marks in your upholstery? Who's will have to clean up the ashes, cigarette buts, cigar stumps and the roaches? Sure! Let's make some minimum wage, usher do it! Why not? They don't have enough to do, right?

If you let people smoke weed in your theater and somebody comes in, gets loaded, tries to drive home then creams a bus load of school children, what's going to happen? It's a sure thing that somebody's going to come to your theater, asking questions about why you "allowed" an intoxicated person drive a car. Bars can get in trouble for serving people booze and letting them drive drunk. It's not very different than letting somebody get stoned in a theater.

I could write a book about all the reasons why smoking of any ilk shouldn't be allowed in theaters and I'm sure that others could, too. There's just no good reason to allow it. What about the screens getting yellow from the smoke? What about your air conditioning filters needing changed more often? What about the funk of stale smoke that would permeate the entire building? No, no, no, just NO!

Besides, why can't people do like we used to do when I was in college? We went into the front of the theater, bought our tickets then went out back, behind the dumpster or sat in our cars to get smoked up before going back inside to watch the movie. It's a time-honored tradition! Right?

Just about the only reason to allow smoking weed in a theater is increased concession sales. (i.e. Making profit from people getting the munchies by selling overpriced food.). There's ethical concerns, there. This isn't the same as putting free peanuts and popcorn on the bar so that people might buy more beer. People are getting something for free in exchange for the extra beer that they might buy. In a theater, they aren't getting anything in return for their extra expenditure and there there isn't any other source of snacks.

When it comes right down to it, there's only one reason to allow smoking weed but there are a dozen or more reasons why it shouldn't be allowed.

As far as I am concerned, it's a non-starter!

[Ryan Gallagher]

Nevermind the double standards it creates for nicotine smokers, which is still legal, but whom have long been banished from indoor public spaces.

Ignoring 2nd hand concerns, and contact highs, just the affects on building HVAC equipment filters is reason enough to avoid,

That said there are certain classics you could easily sell out on 4/20 if you made it a pot celebration event, but you’d really have to consider the aftermath for a quick buck.