Comments on: What Hollywood and the Movie Theater Industry Need is a Good Kick in the . . .

By: Lee Wilkins

Lee Wilkins — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 07:59:00 +0000

we have this in the UK, £10 with UCI Cinema per month gets you unlimited movies.

By: Bruce Anderson

Bruce Anderson — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 07:38:00 +0000

At present by paying cable "only" $39.99 (plus $10 in taxes that they really should pay for) per month I am the equivalent of the super fat man who spends every day gorging himself at the smorgasbord.

Tom, don't you know that businesses never pay taxes? It's all factored into the cost of their products and services. So if your cable company suddenly made noise about how they were now paying these taxes, your cable bill would mysteriously go up $10.

It's not right or wrong. It just is.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 10 Jul 2005 13:45:00 +0000

Interesting idea. Comment (FWIW): Hollywood get's 100% of the ticket, and has for as long as I followed it. (Projectionist, then manager: 78-95)

Affirmation: Yep, theaters are 7-11's with big pictures on shined on the back walls. So from an exhibitors' POV, monthlies make excellent sense. Hollywood--like any industry faicing iminent death--can MAKE this work if they want to.

And I loved reading about your explanation of the "why" for working there. My gig was special-venue theaters, where we got to see them 300 times. The good ones I can still watch. BTW, my record was 900+, doing 3 runs of the same film in 3 theaters. Actually bought a tshirt from that one to comemorate the ridiculousness of that record.

Everyone should work in a movie theater: it injects some reality into entertainment. You get jaded after spedning 3 hours counting Nerds at the end of a 14 hour shift...

By: Somebaudy

Somebaudy — Sat, 09 Jul 2005 10:44:00 +0000

er… there’s already something like you describe. In the theatres run by UGC in France and Belgium, you can get a card that gives you un limited access. For a flat fee you can see any movie you want as long as the card is valid.

There is no english-speaking web page describing it but the name of the card is “illimite” in France (ugc.fr) and “unlimited” in Belgium (ugc.be)

By: Janesvillean

Janesvillean — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 22:36:00 +0000

Hmm. Possible drawbacks. Lots of chains already have some sort of “season pass” program, but we all know they don’t work the first week a blockbuster is out and there are plenty of blackout dates. I suspect that theaters would quickly implement similar rules that would make a subscription just as inflexible. There’s a problem, you see — they have limited seats, and everyone wants to go out on Friday and Saturday nights. That’s why matinees are cheap — the theaters are empty. (But you know that.) Also, I strongly suspect that there would be a boomlet in subscriptions for the summer, maybe December, but not so much the other months of the year.

If subscriptions were to substantially change viewer habits, e.g. more people showing up on Wednesday night in mid-October, they might have a chance.

By: Brant Smith

Brant Smith — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 10:04:00 +0000

Brilliant idea from theater-owners' perspective, particularly for art houses where the audience loyalty is high (think about the financial problems of the Roxie in the Mission District of San Francisco).

But, not sure how the book-keeping would work from a distributor/filmmaker revenue share perspective. I suppose we could take a look at how Netflix does revenue sharing as well as perhaps some of the other subscription services out there (Rhapsody, etc.).

The link from Mike in the UK was particularly helpful. Curious to hear how it's going. $20 a month (or thereabouts) is a steep price, but then again, that's just the cost of two movies per month...Hmmmm.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 08 Jul 2005 09:26:00 +0000

A monthly subscription to the cinema? Why we already have this in the UK.

By: Brent

Brent — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 20:57:00 +0000

While I can totally sympathize with Dave regarding the monstrosities that are our fellow man, there are few things better in life than watching a great movie, with a great crowd that’s into every second of it. 600 total strangers sharing the same exhilarating experience, there’s something special about that.

I do like your idea about subscriptions to movie theaters since at this point, nothing I have at home can rival the experience of the big screen. But I’m not sure how exactly you could work out tickets for everyone who wanted them on demand. But someone else can figure that out.

By: Dave2

Dave2 — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 15:57:00 +0000

It’s not the cost that keeps me away from the theater… it’s the people.

People with screaming kids, people with mobile phones, people kicking the back of your seat, people talking through the movie, people being idiots.

People that don’t care that they are ruining the experience of going to the movies because they don’t have even a shred of common courtesy. It used to be that seeing a film with an audience was part of the fun… now it’s just an annoyance. I’d rather watch a DVD at home in peace and quiet.