2011 didn't seem that good.

A

Aspiring Mogul

The New York Times is saying that the executives are getting more and more alarmed at the poor showing the movies have. This may be due to the global economy, but the youngsters are going to video games instead of movies, and that's worrying too.

I think there will always be a market for stories, as opposed to games, and they should know that, in this uncertain time, people will not spend as they would otherwise.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Traditional Movies (90-120 minute formats, 3D,etc) will never be as immersing an experience as the modern video game. Hopefully they'll always stay around (which they probably will, but the big change is in how we ingest them) but video games are here to stay, and are only getting better as the tech becomes available to small startups.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I don't think video games are what's taking a toll on poor showings. I think it's stuff like Netflix and On Demand. I only go to the show now when there's something I really want to see on the big screen. (Like how I went and saw Mi4 last weekend) A lot of films I just wait until they come out on On Demand, order them for 5 bucks and watch them in my home theater. Much easier. Not to mention the huge variety of content on Instant Que has to lure families and whatnot to just finding a movie on that instead of going out.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Monsanto is a corn-giant. Corn is in pretty much everything you eat, and even in much of the gas that powers your car. Monsanto is a very powerful force in our nation, with lobbyists that dictate the actions of our elected officials.

A couple years ago, I remember an occasion when Monsanto released their quarterly profits reports. In the same span of time, the movie "Avatar" more than tripled their profits. And that's before DVD sales.

Hollywood can cry me a river.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Aspiring Mogul said:
What has Monsanto to do with this OP?
Click to expand...

I'm saying that Hollywood is doing just fine, by comparing them to a non-Hollywood-Corporate Giant, like Monsanto. I thought that was clear.

Even with all of their recent budgetary woes, if California were an independent nation, their GDP would be in the worldwide top-ten.

Seriously, Hollywood can cry me a river.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Aspiring Mogul said:
Good point about netflix, but, if revenues increase through netflix and the like, then the execs should be happy, because their movies are still generating money.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, I think studios are a fan of Netflix at this point. It gets more people watching their stuff, and Netflix pays them for the right to do so.
But Netflix IS hurting the industry of actually going to the show. Initial box office revenue and attendance go way down because of Netflix, but in the long run Netflix is also making the studios money, yes.
So I suppose we could say Netflix is just hurting theaters like AMC much more.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm seriously wondering if 3D with the 3D glasses just don't have the appeal with the general public that the industry gambled it would. I've heard that now 4 pairs of 3D glasses are being given for free if people buy 3D TVs. That can be affecting the big screen too.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Modern Day Myth Prod. LLC said:
I'm seriously wondering if 3D with the 3D glasses just don't have the appeal with the general public that the industry gambled it would. I've heard that now 4 pairs of 3D glasses are being given for free if people buy 3D TVs. That can be affecting the big screen too.
Click to expand...

I recently purchased a Vizio 65 inch 3D TV. It came with 4 glasses. Honestly, I personally think 3D technology just hasn't hit it big yet. Once it goes down in price, it'll be everywhere. Just like Blueray. Remember when Costco was selling Blueray Players for 500 bucks and the movies themselves at 50 bucks a pop? No one thought that would catch on either. Once the price went down, everyone switched.
But yeah, I do agree the ability to have that technology at home hurts theaters.

I have no doubt 3D will become standard technology in most TV's within the next 3-5 years, once the price is right
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The Studios will eventually get their act together, and come up with a industry-wide plan to stream first-run movies to America's living room (Premium VOD). The price of HDTVs and surround sound technology has tumbled, and finally ubiquitous. I wouldn't want to be a theater owner these days, because that venue is going the way of the drive-in.

All this change makes my head hurt ...


_Rok_
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I feel like I'm taking crazy-pills! Did ya'll just completely ignore the points I made? Box-office receipts are down, but Hollywood is still going strong, and turning some pretty mean profits. The state of the industry is strong! Last time I checked, people still like going to movies! There is no chance in hell that movie theaters could become obsolete, not in the foreseeable future.

Yeah, lots of people prefer watching a movie on DVD. It's also true that lots of people prefer American cheese over cheddar. Watching a movie at the theater is a better experience, hands-down, and A LOT of people feel that way. Especially the 18-24yo demographic, and they are the ones who drive the industry.

Hollywood is fine.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
For a few years ticket sales have been down while revenues have been up - with the difference coming from higher admission prices for 3D and, to a lesser extent, Imax. My guess is we're seeing the effect of people tiring of either 3D itself, or of paying more for 3D - or probably some of both. As Cracker Funk said though - they still aren't hurting, they're really only slightly down compared to the record revenues they've been posting for the past few years.

I'm sure netflix has had some impact on theatrical attendance, video games too, but I doubt it's possible to pin things on any one technology. The fact is there's a finite amount of attention each of us have, and there's many, many more options for spending that attention than there were just a couple decades ago.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tickets sold:
1930: 4.7 billion.
2011: 1.25 billion.

Tickets in 1935 cost $0.20-$0.25 ... that's $3.80 in today's dollars. (corrected)

Going out to the movies has been in decline for a long time. Sure, the studios make lots of money through new revenue streams like 3D pricing, DVD & TV sales (selling the same old stuff, just in different ways). The international market also brings in a nice chunk of dough. But none of this does anything to help the domestic theater business. Now since studio mucky-mucks actually want to turn a buck in US theaters, they go for the elusive blockbuster to drag us away from our HDTV/DVD/Netflix/iPad/laptop/iPod/iPhone/XBOX. I almost see the logic behind all these 3D movies ... almost.

Blockbusters, franchises, remakes, sequels, and prequels. The same old pablum re-envisioned with today's stars ... in three dimensions.

Man, I feel like I look in my avatar. Someone please calm me down. Tell me there is hope. Tell me there's room left in this business for angry old men.

_Rok_
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
_Rok_ said:
Tickets sold:
1930: 4.7 billion.
2011: 1.25 billion.
Click to expand...

Those numbers are suspect, to say the least. There weren't that many movie theaters, back then. Plus, people were poor. Going to a movie used to be a really special event -- suit & tie kinda night. Nowadays, people do it when they're bored. I don't know your source, but I'm afraid I don't buy these "statistics", not even slightly.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The 1930s & 1940s were the golden era of Hollywood. It was the place to go, and everyone went.

Hells Angels (1930) took in $8 million at the box office, or $105m in today's dollars. You need to sell a ton of seats at $0.25+ to earn 8m.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top