Bad Movies to Blame for Box Office Slump 416
macklin01 writes "The LA Times is reporting that box office executives are finally fessing up and taking the blame. Poor box office receipts over the summer weren't caused by surging fuel costs, changes in audience preferences, or anything else. As Slashdot readers might have put it (and as it comes out in the article), 'It's the movies, stupid.'"
Is this Lucas's fault? (Score:4, Interesting)
If only... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:it's their mess, hope they clean it up (Score:2, Interesting)
Evolution and progress are hardly the same thing. Evolution is change that occurs due to selective pressures, resulting in individuals/creatures which are better suited to the environment in which they find themselves. Depending on the metric which you use, evolution may or may not result in "progress" e.g. when civilization crumbles, selective pressures will shift toward individuals who are able to survive under those conditions, which while progress in one way, probably means that the anorexic/obese computer nerd will no longer exist (probably not progress from another perspective).
Re:it's their mess, hope they clean it up (Score:5, Interesting)
The Circuit City DIVX fiasco proved that you're wrong. There was no chance that the studios would leave billions of dollars on the table just to spite the pirates.
Movies (Score:2, Interesting)
well.. (Score:3, Interesting)
But now, despite their unending denial it's:
- ridiculous prices for tickets
- ridiculous prices for snacks
- picture quality that hasn't improved much since about the mid 70's (sound quality *has* improved)
- filthy theaters
If the movie makers want to claim they made bad movies this year, I'm not going to disagree - they did. But that's only part of it. Do the analyis:
One trip to the non-matinee movies for my family, plus a large pop, large popcorn and some candy for each, plus parking: ($8.50 ticket + $3 pop + $2.50 popcorn + $2 candy + $1 share of parking) x 6 = $102.
36" widescreen Toshiba hi def tube = $1600
Toshiba progressive scan DVD player = $200
(hooking it to the stereo I own)
= $1800.
So for the price of 18 trips to the movies, PLUS Deducting the intangibles:
- the convenience of watching in my own home
- the ability to pause/rewind/stop and chat about whatever I want whenever I want
- the ability to have whatever snack I want, in any quantity
- the ability to have as many friends over as I can stuff into the room
- to watch in my underwear and bathrobe if I want
- to watch at whatever TIME I want, and interrupt to go do something if I want
- to sit in my comfy chair, and exercise whatever odious personal habits I choose
- the ability to (via Netflix) see pretty much whatever movie I want, not juse what the studio suits think I should be watching.
I don't think there's any doubt - film industry pricing DROVE the development of home theater, now they have to live in the world they created. Nice job guys, you eat your young, too?
Partly. (Score:5, Interesting)
Part of the reason they're 'fessing up is because movies like March of the Penguins were actually doing better than "blockbuster" titles like Fantastic Four. (Per screen, on release, March of the Penguins actually did make more money than Fantastic Four. It has now made more money than Fifth Element, in total, according to some articles.) It is hard to keep claiming that it's someone else's fault when even a French wildlife documentary can outsell multi-million dollar projects from Hollywood.
I think the other part of the reason is that the RIAA is starting to take a turn for the worse in the courts, and the MPAA wants a backup plan in case this spreads to their own lawsuits. In other words, if a movie does crap and fileswappers cases get kicked out, then they can now say "well, we TOLD you the script for that specific movie was no good!" It also didn't help the MPAA when eDonkey started talking about quitting. If there are no fileswapper companies to blame, it's going to get harder for them to push responsibility onto others.
(After all, they've known for HOW LONG that other people's movies were selling just fine? They were having a downturn for how many YEARS before fuel costs shot up? But it was only very recently that fileswapper cases stopped doing well, and only in the last week that eDonkey talked out quitting.)
Will this get Hollywood to make something worth watching? Uh, no. What it'll mean is that they'll spend even MORE on public relations to persuade people that the next movie is worth seeing. That's the usual corporate reaction - why change things, when you only have to convince people they're changed?
Perspective from a SIGGRAPH talk in LA (Score:3, Interesting)
One of the speakers (can't remember his name) was discussing some of the current issues with the current box office, and number one on his list was bad movies. That was followed up by high ticket prices, high concession prices, poor theater experience (bad theaters ?), short time between theater release and DVD release, and people changing their spending habits. (Oddly enough, no mention of piracy from them)
They seemed to be really big on getting digital and 3d technology into theaters as they felt it would get people back into theaters. The equipment can be expensive and ticket prices might have to be increased to help offset the costs, but these people seem to really think that it'd bring back people to the theater. I thought maybe in the short term...but maybe it's just another fade ?
The demos they showed can be pretty impressive (especially ones originally intended for 3D instead of being converted from standard 35mm to 3D) but I don't know if it'll help in the long term to bring people back. It is pretty compeling to see this stuff, but I don't know if I'd wear 3D glasses for 2 hours...
I think it would be nice... (Score:2, Interesting)
They really only have two effective ways to "reduce piracy", the way they are doing it now-still steep prices and ridiculous laws and DRM schemes, or something different like "let's get real" prices and making the experience more pleasant all around. Get rid of the adversial mindset they have with their potential customers would be a good start methinks. Well, that and content as in the article, but that's really a huge variable anyway,along with being a market red herring, there's no easy way to classify taste or what people want, when you get down to it, every movie is a certain genre or niche market product, so it will have that x-number of potential customers only and that's it.
Re:The "bad movies" fallacy (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:/.er blaming the wrong people as usual (Score:3, Interesting)
The movie industry is a bunch of asshats because they demand all this really annoying restrictions and extend copyright way beyond where it should be(Citizen Kane should be public domain...geez, you studios abused the poor guy, make tons of money off of him, and yet still want more!) They also constantly try to re-sell us the same stuff on a gazillion different formats
The pirates are asshats because they seem to think that they somehow have an innate "right" to entertainment, that the rest of us subsidize, and then of course complain about the quality of the stuff they pirate...
Or as I like to say... (Score:3, Interesting)
If anyone is really interested in the modern (Score:5, Interesting)
He is a self-professed cinephile, but he seems to really hate the whole corporate moviegoing experience, but loves some of the interesting independent places he has found. Ones that actually offer a REASON(a good environment) for going to the cinema
Plus he smuggles a whole Thanksgiving dinner into a theatre!
Re:Trailers are to blame... (Score:3, Interesting)
The best trailer I've seen this year? The one for "Flight Plan" with Jodie Foster. Havn't looked at any reviews yet, but if they're not horrible then I plan on going to see that in a few days. The trailer gave me enough to kinda know what it's about, but left me with no clue of the details of anything past what looked like the first 15-20 minutes of the movie. Assuming the director and writer had even a half-functioning brain, the movie ought to be able to hold my interest and surprise me a few times. Perfect.
It's not JUST the films, it's the experience... (Score:3, Interesting)
The entire experience of going to the movies is just awful, one brutal and unsophisticated marketing blugeon after another.
Screw it - it'll take a hell of a movie to get me back into the theater again and it won't have penguins: it'll have decent writing, a plot, an understanding of cinematography and editing and it won't substitute CGI for any of these things. Most of all it will understand Fowler's Law: "When anything is possible, nothing is interesting."
Re:DUPE (Score:3, Interesting)
Personally, I welcome this change, as it implies that Americans are becoming more cultured (yes, I'm an optimist), or at least that we'll get better movies. And it is the industries admitting that piracy isn't the only thing hurting their bottom lines.
Although I do think price needs to be addressed, as I can have the movie forever on DVD for cheaper than seeing it in the theater on a date (2x$8 + popcorn + sodas + parking), but I think that the theater has a bit of a cultural value to it, and I think that the "see it while it's cool" aspect works in the theaters' favors.
Re:You win the WTF prize (Score:2, Interesting)
If you need your car fixed, you take it to a mechanic. You discuss what needs to be done and what it'll cost, and once the job is done, so is your business relationship. He doesn't do the work for free and then charge you a few bucks every time you use the car; what you need from him is his skill at diagnosing and repairing car trouble, so you pay him directly for that. If he wants to get paid again, he finds another car to fix instead of trying to squeeze more money out of the work he already did.
What I need from the movie industry in general is their skill at crafting movies. I'll happily chip in to fund the production of something I think I'll like, but I don't want to pay anyone else to give me a copy of it once it's finished; I can copy bits and burn DVDs myself. Paying directly for the production, rather than paying after the fact for a copy, makes intuitive sense and as a business model it's completely immune to piracy.
Re:The "bad movies" fallacy (Score:3, Interesting)
VHS was copyprotected (Score:3, Interesting)
This was intentional. It was actually a feature of the platform that was touted to the studios, and one of the reasons why studios chose to put our more movies on VHS than on BETA. You'll notice, if you do the same experiment in BETA you get basically the same image generation after generation. This is one of the reasons why TV was (and largely still is) on a BETA-derived standard. But the rest of us were pushed away from that standard, largely because VHS included this inherent copyprotection.
If the DVD standard hadn't included encryption, I wouldn't be surprised if we were on a WMP standard for video, just because that's what all of the movies would be released on.
Re:it's their mess, hope they clean it up (Score:1, Interesting)
I mean lets look at the past.. How many times has the industry been caught "price fixing"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_fixing [wikipedia.org] which is a felony?
here's a link to one settlement http://ag.state.nv.us/agpress/2002/02_0930b.pdf [state.nv.us]
Sorry, IANAL but isnt there a ruling that if you abuse your copyright you risk losing it? I suppose price fixing is not abusing it?
Industry is more then willing to accept the terms of any contract up front, but then want to revise it over and over again when it suits them.
I recall reading that mickey mouse was suppose to be turned over to the public domain. However, disney still makes a pile of cash off it so they apply for an extension of the copyright. This extension is granted and something which should now belong to the people is still off limits. Didn't the people live up to their end of the deal? They granted and enfoced exclusivity for the terms of the contract. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law [wikipedia.org]
Next, how much money do these people think is "fair" for their work? I never watch "lifestyles of" because it just infuriates me to see how for a few months of work, they earned MILLIONS of dollars.
As they say, if you dont beleive in something, boycott it. i cant tell you when the last time i went to a move was. I just dont see why i should hand over a decent chunk of cash for some sequal/prequal (starwars) or remake of a TV show i watched as a child (dukes of hazard). maybe if they came up with new original material and stop rehashing things people would go more often?
So called "IP" is overpriced (Score:4, Interesting)
We have so many outlets for entertainment right now that the sheer volume means I can never get to a significantly fraction of movies, books, records, video games or web sites.
And when there is too much of something, prices will fall. Not quickly, as copyright laws work to keep prices high. But fall they will.
Yes, there is a lot of sucky bands, movies, books, but the amount of material out there means there are a lot of genuinely good entertainers out there, yes, even with RIAA affiliated labels. But because there is so much material, I think the amount of material means the market is segmented and its harder to differentiate from the pack.
But again, in that kind of environment where there is a lot of decent entertainment readily available, prices will fall. Its inevitable, even in the face of lawsuits, new laws, technical hurdles. It's as inevitable as gravity.
Re:Lets see (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course, I didn't moan about the price while I was doing it; sure, it's expensive, but I don't go very often (hard to when you're the parent of a young child), so I like to make the most of it.
Re:I'm not completely sure about this (Score:3, Interesting)
Because it's not quality of *individual movies* that counts, it's quality *overall*. Yeah, Batman Begins was a good film, but all the films released around it were crap, and people had been trained to expect that all movies were crap - especially Batman ones - after the last two. Same with Star Wars; Yeah it might have been a good movie, but the thing is, when the previous two were crap, people are going to expect the third one to be crap - and again, all the other movies released at the time were crap.
There's the occasional gem in the huge pile of crap Hollywood is churning out, but people can't be bothered paying out for every single crap movie at the box office just to find the one shining gem of celluloid glory, and that's the reason for the slump. As the chances of any given movie you choose to see being a stinker go up, the people willing to take that chance goes down. That's the reason for the slump affecting even the occasional gem of a movie.
Re:Content is the Key (Score:3, Interesting)