What is the point of seeing movies in the theaters when my local video store can have them available for rental by the end of March (Something’s Gotta Give is an example of this.)? Where I live, the matinees are $5.50 and the evening showings are $8, I think (I haven’t been in years). But wait four months and you can rent it for $3; wait a year or so and get it for $1.
Am I supposed to pay for the experience of seeing the movie with other people and on a large screen? I’m sure that is part of the fun of a much-anticipated “spectacle” movie like The Return of the King. But they seem to be creating a circle here. I can see where TPTB are thinking, “You loved the movie in theaters; now enjoy it in your own home!” and are eager to get it to consumers even faster than before. But if the turnaround is that fast, why should I bother going to see it in the theater?
First, I think just about any movie is improved by seeing it in a theater, not just the spectacle ones. So that’s one reason why I might see a movie in a theater even if I know I’ll be able to see it for less if I wait a couple months and rent it.
Also, not all movies have that quick a turn-around. The LotR movies, for example, take about a year to get from the big screen to DVD. If it’s a movie I really want to see, I’m not going to want to wait that long. Plus, I don’t know (although I suspect it wouldn’t be hard to find out) which movies are going to come out really quick, and which are going to take forever.
Lastly, a lot of movies are so disposable, if they wait too long to release the DVD, no one is going to care. Who the hell is going to remember Something’s Gotta Give a year from now? Publicity is a short-lived beast. Once the film is no longer doing business in theaters, the longer they wait to release the DVD, the harder it is going to be to move that product once it hits the shelves.
Okay, but…wouldn’t you think their big-deal Christmas releases with big-name stars would be the ones they figure you can wait for? I mean it’s Jack Nicholson we’re talking about. Or does that mean nothing to anyone but me?
As far as big honkin’ movies like RotK, I thought part of the scheme was to purposely delay the DVD release to build up anticipation. I just thought they would do that kind of thing will all movies, not just the ones with lots of techie behind-the-scenes details.
I’ve also noticed there is a much MUCH quicker turnaround for movies to be on TV now. When I was a kid, it was like 5-10 years before a decent movie would come to TV. Then with cable it was around 2-3 years. NOW it seems to be around 6 months for cable, 1 year for NETWORK TV. I don’t understand why people will go to the movies anymore either, especially with all those ::shudder:: other people there! It’s been a good year or two since I’ve even RENTED a movie! I can’t even remember what the last movie I rented WAS. (The last movie I saw in a theater was Seabiscuit if I remember correctly.)
" I can see where TPTB are thinking, “You loved the movie in theaters; now enjoy it in your own home!” and are eager to get it to consumers even faster than before. But if the turnaround is that fast, why should I bother going to see it in the theater?"
Well, studios don’t necessarily care whether you see a movie in the theatres or on video. What they care about is getting your money!
The movie business has long since resigned itself to the fact than a large proportion of people won’t go to the theatres and will only see movies on video. So it wants to get the video into people’s hands as soon as that’s the profitable thing to do. And after fiddling around with release dates for a decade or two, they’ve figured out that the optimal wait time is about 6 months for the average movie. That’s long enough for a typical movie to be gone from theatres, but not so long that people forget about the flick entirely. (One advantage of a quick video release is that it keeps advertising costs down.)
Big flops often hit video faster than 6 months, while big hits that stay in theatres for months sometimes are held back longer.
As for why people still go to theatres: for most folks it’s a bigger screen, better sound and a more sociable experience … plus it’s a chance to get out of the freakin’ house. The last point is especially important one of the core audiences for theatrical movies: teenagers.
Bigger screen: So? I’m not blind. I don’t need a big screen.
Better sound: So? Better than what? Who cares if you can hear a candy being unwrapped in THX?
More sociable experience: Is that some kind of joke? People need to shut the hell up and NOT be sociable at the movies. I get enough of people in everyday life, I don’t want to have to endure them while I’m trying to watch a movie that isn’t worth $2, much less $9.50.
Well, but the point I’m so clumsily trying to make is: movie theater tickets are more expensive than video rentals, so aren’t they making more money by keeping it in the theater longer? Shouldn’t they encourage that, if they can? Then they can make money off tape rentals forever (well, not forever, but you know what I mean).
They go to all the effort and expense of making a movie, and then it has maybe four weeks to catch on in theaters before the studios’ next opus rolls out. Jeez, guys, slow down!
You said you don’t go to the theater and said you don’t understand why people still go to the theater, Wumpus gave some good solid reasons why some people go to the theater. The reasons are still valid for a lot of people even if they don’t work for you.
I’m a happy theatergoer. I saw 117 movies in the theater in 2002, 130 movies in the theater in 2003, and I’ve already seen 45 movies in the theater so far this year. I’ll continue going to the theater until I can’t move well enough to get out of the house. I love seeing movies in the theater, even though we have a huge screen (4’x7’) and 1100 DVDs. I rarely have a bad experience at the theater with people talking or bad presentation. The only thing that’s bothering me nowadays are the stupid red anti-piracy dots.
My main reason for preferring the theater, other than that I like the extra big screen and the total immersion, is that I want to see good movies asap. I don’t want to deprive myself of something wonderful, such as Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (which I’ve seen 3 times already). When a film comes out that I’ve been anticipating, I’ll see it as soon as I can. Certain directors are “opening day” directors for me. If I love a film I’ll see it in the theater multiple times too, if time and finances allow.
This is trivial, but I’m also an awards show junkie and I like it when I can make informed guesses about the movies nominated. This last Academy Awards, I’d seen every film nominated for all the regular awards (not including Foreign Language, Documentary and the Short films) except for one (I didn’t see Brother Bear, which was nominated in the Animated category). It’s not important, it’s just a personal preference.
The social experience doesn’t matter much to me. I’ve seen many a beloved film when I was the only one in the theater. However, sometimes watching a movie with a crowd can be fun, such as certain comedies.
I love the short wait times for DVDs. It means that the movies I loved in the theater will be in my collection that much faster, and I’ll be able to see the ones I missed that much faster.
When watching Gandolf enter Denethor’s chamber in Minis Tirith and those heavy doors close behind him, there’s a big difference between the sound coming from behind you and the sound coming from a little pair of TV speakers in front of you. Unless you have surround sound at home, you’ll be missing out on the feeling of being immersed in the movie.
“Well, but the point I’m so clumsily trying to make is: movie theater tickets are more expensive than video rentals, so aren’t they making more money by keeping it in the theater longer? Shouldn’t they encourage that, if they can? Then they can make money off tape rentals forever (well, not forever, but you know what I mean).”
Ah, but you don’t make more money keeping the movie in theatres forever. You make more money quicker by 1) convincing everyone who wants to see the movie in theatres to go see it as quickly as possible, and then 2) releasing the video version as soon as as the theatre run has stopped bringing in revenue.
The studios have developed a system to get people into theatres sooner rather than later. They prefer this for a couple of reasons. One, time is money. Suppose that one million people go see a movie during its theatrical run. The studio would much rather have all one million people go see the movie opening weekend and then have no one go see it in the following weeks than have a hundred thousand people go see it each week for ten weeks–the reason being that if the studio gets all its money up front, it can bank the money and earn interest. Two, the studios don’t get all the money from the price of a movie ticket: they split it with the theater owner. The studio gets a higher percentage of each ticket earlier in the theatrical run; later on, the theatre owner gets a higher percentage. So that’s another reason studios prefer that viewers go see a movie right when it opens.
How do you convince people to go see a movie on opening weekend? You open the movie simultaneously across the country–it opens everywhere on the exact same day (fogeys like myself can remember a time when that was not so; back in the pre-video era even big blockbusters would open gradually around the country over a periods of months.) You open the movie wide, on many, many screens, so there’s no chance people will be turned away opening weekend. And you spend a lot on promoting the opening of the movie, so that everyone knows it’s coming out.
Having convinced the theatrical viewers to go see the movie sooner than later, the studio then waits until the movie stops earning significant amounts of money in theatres. Again, that’s usually no more than six months. Then, having squeezed the theatrical audience dry, you release the video version, and reap your profits from the folks who can’t be convinced to go to the multiplex.
(There are exceptions to this process, e.g. art house movies. But the big Hollywood movies usually operate this way.)
