Badmovies.org Forum

After everything is said and done, Revenge of the Sith will probably rake in $380 million domestically. When you factor everything in, Star Wars made good considering the popularity of dvds and Netflix, and people staying home and renting movies instead of going out to the cinema. And also consider the rise in pirated dvds. Hell, practically the opening day of Sith, one of my coworkers aquired a bootleg dvd of Sith which he alledges had good sound and picture. I came damn close to turning him in to the FBI. And I still might.

That being said, word on the street is that this summer (or year for that matter) could be one of the weakest at the Box Office in recent years.

Which is strange considering the favorable word of mouth some of these movies are getting. Apart from Sith which should be cruising towards $350 million (domestically) by Sunday, Batman really has not been performing all that well.
Sure it's been out for only a few days, it hasn't been setting the Box Office on fire.
Maybe the critics and Batman fans are loving the movie, but Joe Public seems to be burned out on Batman (or superheroes in general).

And in a matter of a couple weeks, it'll have to compete with War of the Worlds (which some of the early reviews are loving it). Even at that, the last several years haven't been too good for Spielberg at the Box Office. I think his last mega blockbuster was Jurrassic Park. Did the Terminal, Catch Me If You Can, Minority Report, A.I., Saving Private Ryan, and the Lost World make over $300 million (domestically)? No. And in these days, $300 million is considered the beginning of blockbuster numbers. Plus many studios consider $400 million the real goal (nobody is ever going to reach Titanics numbers anytime soon).

The other big movies this summer are Fantastic 4 and Charlie  & Choc. Factory, neither of which will be massive hits.

Narnia and King Kong might not even set the Xmas holiday season on fire even with all they have going for them. Narnia has its reputation in the literary world and the movie looks like they made it to be a cross between LOTR and Harry Potter.
King Kong might be a  "flop" for Peter Jackson. I'm sure it'll be a very good movie but not enough to get people to flock to see it. It's got the red hot Peter Jackson's name on it, but seriously, all things being considered- are people interested in King Kong? We all know the story, and this movie should have great fx and acting, but apart from that many of the people I've talked aren't too interested in a movie about a gigantic gorilla. But time will.

And wasn't there suppose to be a Harry Potter movie this year? Hasn't his appeal been waning a bit at the b.o.?

I agree with what you're saying about how these expected blockbusters aren't exactly knocking up Titanic-like numbers [like you said, noone expects that]

But at the end of the day they are still making an absolute heap of money.

Also, I too have a similar feeling about King Kong, even though I love both King Kong and Peter Jackson.  This is his baby, this movie, from what I remember, so it should be good, but I can't shake that 'nobody is really that excited by it' vibe I'm feeling.

i'm going less to movies because how quick they hit video anyways - and it's cheaper to watch them at home and alot of people have elaborate home theater systems. ticket prices are going up so much that i usually don't wanna pay for a movie unless i think it's gonna be really good. used to i would just go see ANYTHING, but that's when daytime prices were $3. The more they keep raising ticket prices to offset the lack of sales, they are actually creating more of a problem in people going less BECAUSE of the ticket prices

Everytime i see a celebrity buy a $200,000 dress or purchase yet another $9 million dollar home i can't help but be reminded that i helped pay for that.
maybe it's time actors took a pay cut



Post Edited (06-18-05 09:25)

I don't see many things in the theater....basically anything that I think the size/sound will really make a difference, which isn't much.  They are too expensive for what you get these days.

It's funny, as much as I love movies, I only see 2 or 3 movies in the theatre. Some  movies beg to be seen on the big screen, likee Star Wars or LOTR.

But what are the price of tix these days, $8.50 or $9.50 or something?

Matinees are like $6.50 or if your lucky $4.50.

I feel guilty admitting this, but I used to movie hop at those 20 screen multiplexes.

aLAN - i think theaters should allow you to watch as many movies as you want on their screens for one price. In the old days they allowed you to at least sit through YOUR movie as many times as you like (at least this is the story my mother told me of when she was younger) Or why not at least have double features, where you can pay a flat price and watch two movies once in awhile. Movies are hardly fun anymore, they're getting ridiculous with cost and there are no perks - you have to sit through endless amounts of commercials.

It should be like 6 flags or something, you pay a flat price and stay all you like. Now to tell you the truth if I had a theater i might have an option like that one day a week - you pay say $20 but you can stay ALL Freaking day and watch all the movies you want as many times as you want. the reality is most people don't have the stamina to sit through one movie let alone spend all day at the theater, it would just be for the few, the proud, the cinemafreaks

US Box office may be down but since the big money for films is in home video, cable and TV rights, overseas releases, it's just that the intial theater release is a smaller (and yes, shrinking) piece of the pie.

I've read the growth that the theater grosses had the past few years was due to the increase in ticket prices rather than more people going to the theater, that dropoff in butts in the seats is finally catching up to the theater owners. Also last year had a juggernaut of a film like "The Passion of the Christ" to pull in people who didn't usually go to movies (remember all those church groups buying blocks of tickets) or bring people back for multiple viewings. Other than a "Star Wars" flick, Pixar CGI family movies, or another "Titanic" to bring in the teenage girls over and over, theaters have a hard time getting the repeat business for the same flicks like they used to. Between rising ticket prices, the damn ads and the annoying trailers (I've seen the damn trailer for "Madagascar" so many times when I go I feel like I've already seen the movie - and I only go to the theater about once a month lately), the quick turnaround with nationwide 3000+ screens releases, the quickier trip to the second bargain theaters ("Kicking and Screaming" is already on at the bargain theater here), piracy, and the "I'll catch it on DVD in four to six months" syndrome, theaters just hold less appeal than they used to.

Yeah, I'm getting the whole "I don't like going to the Cinema anymore" vibe of this thread, and i didn't think is should go down without a dissenting opinion.

I still love going to the theater.  I'm a student, so I pay $5.50 at the locat screens, and I don't think that's a bad price for what I'm getting.  Even if i didn't care for the movie (which doesn't happen all that often, since I'm pretty picky), it's still not that much of a drain on my finances if I only go once a week.  I love the experience of the massive screen, the rows and rows of seats, and the way the THX demo at the start of the film makes my ears bleed just a little.

The commercials don't even bother me - in fact, I enjoy them, since they usually have higher production value (or at least are a bit weirder) than the ones I see on the TV.  Plus, once the commercials are over, they don't interrupt the movie again, which is a hell of a lot better than what I can say for movies on TV.  I also get to see trailers for upcoming movies (I almost cried when I saw the Serenity trailer.  So... So beautiful...) in all their big-screen grandure, rather than watching them on a lil' 2 1/2 inch window online.

Also, the screen is a hell of a lot bigger and the sound is (at least at my local theaters) a hell of a lot better than anything I could get without spending $10,000 to set it up.  My TV has a 14" screen - it doesn't matter if I have a 5 channel surround sound system (I don't, but if I did, it wouldn't matter) when the screen I'm watching the movie on is tiny.  Even when I had a 51" widescreen HD TV in my room, it still didn't compare to the magnificance that is the massive screen of a theater; I went out to the movies even with that monster in my room, just 'cause movies are better there.

Yes, movies are more expensive, but if you hit the matinee, they're still chaper than a lot of McDonalds value meals, and, chances are, are a lot better for you.

Now, if you want to get me on board complaining about something, we could talk about how much a damn bucket of popcorn and a coke costs at the cinema.  I really think that the popcorn should cost less than the movie, but maybe I'm just asking too much.  What makes that worse is that I only really want to eat popcorn when I'm at the theater.

And then there's the occasional jackass who doesn't set their cell phone to vibrate when they go into the movie...

blue - depends on where you live, ticket prices range from city to city. I could equally argue the downside for me of movies:

I hate the megaplexes. I can never find good parking, i have to hike the south 40 just to get from the concession stand to my theater room, the theater rooms have fewer seats to accomodate for more theater rooms (meaning they're often more crowded), i hate going up and down stairs to my seat..minor complaint but it's dangerous with the railing and all that down dead center. If something is wrong with the sound or picture, you gotta hike a half a mile to complain to a theater worker and miss half the movie. Commercials don't belong in a theater, i don't care how good they are. I go to the movies to get away from commercials, if they want to advertise a product let them do their endorsements in the movie. I don't wanna be sold a showerhead when i'm eating my milk duds. And yeah, i'm against clearchannel radio stations and for the most part when i had cable i only watched movie channels that had no commercials (thus no censoring/editing). I'm a big dvd nut now that i just have regular tv. I cannot stand commercialism

Food is expensive, food is SO expensive there i haven't bought any for years and years. If i can go to the dollar store and get two boxes of candy for a dollar vs paying $3.50 for a tiny box at the theater, which do you think i am going to do? Yeah that's how theaters make thier profit (and i do buy it if i go to my local small theater) - and oh what $$ they make with a 700% profit from each tub of popcorn.  And the older i get the more places my paycheck has to go, i can't go and spend it like i used to at the movies, particularly when they've gone up in price. And hollywood has churned out ALOT of crap lately, i'm so over the remakes and sequels and prequels and unoriginality that often has me leaving the theater wishing i had back my money...because it was the kind of movie i would never pay to see again or i'd rather shell out a measly $4 at the video store.  I miss the small theaters, there's only one i know of around here and I still love going. The seats were recently redone so they're cozy, the theater rooms are old fashioned looking with the long drapes and even on a busy night there are plenty of seats so that you aren't bumping elbows with a candy chomper. The seats are close enough so yeah..i can stick my foot up on the seat armrest in front of me. Frankly i don't care for the seats at the newer places, the headrests are too high and some of them don't allow you to lean back and you're staring straight forward

It seems like the only time i really enjoy the theater experience anymore is when the movie is really worth seeing. The ambiance is dead for me - to me the big megaplex theaters are the equivalent of cinema malls.

Oh, yeah, Susan, I can completely dig where you're coming from.  I wasn't arguing with anyone, that's for sure.  I just wanted to offer a dissenting opinion.

I'm living in Prescott, Arizona right now, and there are only two theaters, both with several screens and sadium seating.  I like stadium seating because I'm short - and God knows I've had to endure more than a few movies cranning my neck around the tall guy with big hair (can anyone explain to me why tall people always sit in front of short people in theaters?).  

The commercials don't bother me because all I really have to do to miss them is show up five minutes late for the movie.

sometimes i wish drive-ins would make a comeback

It's come up on here a few times, but what about the drive-in?

That's the only way we get to the movies anymore.  We've been to a 'regular' sit-down movie one time in over three years, and that was for Master and Commander.  

The movies they are releasing nowadays just have not seemed worth it to get a babysitter.  With the drive-in, we can take are kids.  And it is a gas.

Oops, I should have read this other post!

Yeah, with the drive-in the movie is almost a secondary reason for going. You're outdoors, out of the city, and in the fresh air. It's almost a festival atmosphere, with people setting up lawnchairs, families going off the to the playground or playing catch until it gets dark. You can sneak in any food you want, bring a picnic or enjoy the kind of concession food you don't get at the cinema - greasy burgers, onion rings, corndogs, etc. And on top of that, they still have double features, and all-nighters with four or five movies on the long weekends. And with radio sound, you don't have to worry about getting a good speaker.

At least that's the way it is here.

You'd think with the sort of rolling rec rooms people are driving around in these days, the drive-in would make a big comeback. I mean, compact cars were as much to blame as anything for the decline of drive-ins (not that I didn't see my share of movies in my buddy's Omni), but now, big, comfy vehicles are back. I think it would make a comeback - the remaining drive-ins around here are certainly busy - if not for the problem of the land. Too far from the city, and it's harder to find or you can't get the zoning. Governments are a lot more reluctant to allow anything but a farm in the country these days (at least they are here). Too close to the city, and the land is worth too much. You just can't afford to buy acres of prime development land for a seasonal business. That's what happened to the drive-in I went to from childhood to about age 19 - the city grew out to it, and the owner saw a quicker profit in selling it to a developer. It's actually changes in the real estate market and land-use planning that are killing the drive-in.



Post Edited (06-20-05 06:51)

I hear people refer to raising ticket prices, but really...  They've been stable as far as I can tell for the better part of 20 years.  As in, stable with inflation.  There was a huge rise in ticket prices in the decade following Star Wars, but after that I don't see the huge increase..  You can still see matinee showings for $5.50-$6.50 around here, which is like $1-$2 more than a rental.  

And I still have yet to meet someone with  100+ foot screen in their house.

Weak box office this year I think has more to do with how bad the films have been.  THey're also comparing it to last year, where the Passion of the Christ brought a lot of folks who don't go to the movies normally out.

I haven't been going to see movies lately but I liked Hitchhiker's Guide all right. Star Wars sucked less than the others but still sucked. It relied on yoda kicking ass and r2 whooping it up. Question: Why did that cattle prod thing crack the windshield of a seemingly sophisticated spaceship and yet the ongoing battle outside didn't do a thing to it?

I almost get the feeling that hollywood is trying to make their lost audience feel guilty. ("Pull your weight movie viewer! We have to actually pay all these pretty so-called stars to recite these crap scripts. You know you want to see anything with j low or brad pitt") House of Wax with a trust fund amateur porn floozy. Yeah, I've been waiting for that one for so long.

I have to laugh at their astronomical projections of the numbers they lose to pirating. Their arbitrary and bloated estimations of downloaded copies also assume that every single download represents 1-infinity of people who would have otherwise paid to see the crap they throw at us. I don't know any pirates and if I did they couldn't pay ME to take The Honeymooners, Longest Yard, or Monster-in-law.

Anyway, it's all forgettable movies made by nameless hacks. I think I'll write a personal thank-you to George Romero for having the ambition at his age to bring one of his visions to light. Zombies, Dennis Hopper, guns, and apocalyptic mayhem. That's art.

I think originality in Hollywood is dead and will stay dead for awhile. Just look at all the movies that are out or are coming soon. A good portion are either a remake or a comic movie. Batman Begins was great but not original idea.  Hollywood even remakes Japanese movies that are not even that old. As long as someone else did it Hollywood remakes it. Its just as lazy as useing CGI for every little effect.

_____________________________
"We Greeks created democracy! You also created homos!"-Ghost World

I have seen far fewer theatrical releases so far this year than I have in any year as far back as I can remember.  I think I may have seen only 1 movie in the theater since January 1.  There just aren't a lot of movies out there that interest me.  Although, SITH, BATMAN BEGINS, LAND OF THE DEAD, and FANTASTIC FOUR are on my "to see" list.

Amazingly, at the other end of the spectrum, I am on a personal record setting pace for DVD purchases this year.  Since January 1, I have already spent over $1,000 at Deep Discount DVD, and I'm not sure how much more I have spent at Circuit City and Best Buy . . . probably at least $150 - $200.  Am I becoming reclusive?

On the other end of things, I have and will attend the movies more often this year than I have since 1990 and before.  There are quite a few movies that have been released so far and more to come this year that I "need" to see on a big screen. Ah, go figure.

(hanvn't read the other posts yet so I don't know if this has been asked.) When did the slump start anyway? Around what time and what movies?

Dave, it was all because of you. You went and posted that question to us and we all had to sit here and wait for your updates...who was going to leave their computer and go to the movies when we had a story like that to hang on to? Now that it is over, the movie industry will be ok as we can all return to our normal existence.

Seriously, I hear about these slumps every year but this year looks to be a good one for movies as far as I'm concerned.
One of the big problems that I see is technology. When I was a kid, it seemed like some movies stayed in theaters for weeks on end and some even seemed to go for a few months. I started to think about this and it seems to me that since VCRs and all weren't available back then, people wanted to see the movies in the theater, some for numerous viewings. Now we have cable, dishes, VCRs, DVDs. These things are taking away from the movies because many people are willing to wait. Some that aren't willing to wait will go to the theater but then not go to see it a second time since it will be available in a few short months. This coupled with higher prices to see a movie is what's hurting the industry. I think someone touched on this earlier but this is where I see the problem and it most likely isn't going to get any better. So as far as when did it all start, it's basically been happening for years but it's getting more noticeable with each passing year.

Thing is...the only ones really impacted are the theater owners.  The movie producers and distributers still make the money from DVD rentals and sales and cable showings, etc...

Fearless Freep wrote:

> Thing is...the only ones really impacted are the theater
> owners.  The movie producers and distributers still make the
> money from DVD rentals and sales and cable showings, etc...
>

I think that's true too. But also, I've been renting fewer and fewer new releases.

I went from living around 30 screen airplane hanger megaplexes to 5-1 screen theaters. I'm really picky when tickets hit 7.50+. But I'm picky at $1 theaters too. I don't care if chains have to close down. They have too many screens to fill and IMO that's led to all of these pointless wonders being made. I think producers know that even cheap crap will break even because they're guaranteed screen time which floods the market.

Independent theaters pick their movies carefully. I've got a theater nearby that has an actual guy there who calls out when the movies will be playing there during the trailers. This theater has a nifty website and newsletter. They recently ran classic horror films like Black Cat, Exorcist, and some others in  conjunction with a film course at a community college. Another theater  recently had Army of Darkness. They also help smaller films like Bubba Ho-Tep and others before they're noticed by chains affiliated with distribution companies that passed them up in the beginning. The atmosphere is better and usually reflects the town. The service is friendlier and knowledgable. Better snack bar prices and choices.

It's about time the bubble bursts. Maybe smaller theaters with low overhead will see more profits and others put out of business by multiplexes will be renovated.