Contractually obliged to show Gigli!

According to this article, theaters are “contractually obliged to show Gigli for two weeks.”
It notes that “most have already relegated it to the smallest screens at multiplexes.”

I don’t know how theaters operate (maybe someone here does) but maybe they sign contracts where they get a movie for a minimum amount of time, but have to take it for a specified maximum amount of time. So even if no one is in the theater, they still have to show it.

I see a way to recoup some money here. You could rent out your theater for parties, wedding receptions, bingo, etc. Real cheap. The only stipulation is that “Gigli” has to be playing on the screen at the time.

Yes, that is exactly right. The reason why we see so many multiplexes nowadays is this exact reason. Small theatres with only one screen can’t afford to tie up their one screen with one movie for 2-4 weeks (or whatever the contract dictates). If the movie they get bombs, it could really kill their business as they have no choice to show this movie for the contracted time. A multiplex can afford to show a bomb on one of their screens, they’ve got other screens to draw people in.

If I could find my old economics book, I could give you the exact numbers, but a theatre makes virtually all of their money on the concession stands so all they need to do is get people through the door. Noone would come through the door if their only screen is showing something noone wants to see.

These multiplexes should cut their losses an hold “Gigli MST3K” nights. $3 admission, don’t dim the lights all the way (more socially condusive that way) and you can heckle all you want provided you aren’t making a mess and aren’t being heard by people in the other screening rooms. They’d make something off the movie at least, and it’s good PR to the hipster, eno, and geek crowd.

I was totally disinterested in this movie before all the bad publicity but ever since everyone’s been dogging it so bad, I’m actually intrigued.

I know the feeling, Aesiron… but I’ll stay away just to make sure I don’t encourage the making of more movies like this.

On first release films the distributor can even specify how many times a day a movie is to be shown which is why many smaller places can’t afford first runs of blockbusters.

Heck, imagine being a movie critic, and being contractually obliged to see Gigli.

Man… I worked at the Coronet during Phantom Menace. That 1200-seat theater looks mighty big when there’s six people in it. We had to keep Phantom Menace forever, and we couldn’t accept passes of any sort before eight weeks.

The Coronet is one of the few single-screeners left in the City, and they’ve been having a tough time of it for that very reason–it’s impossible for them to get the great bookings every week, which is why they have to play what movies they get for a month minimum. The last movie I saw there was Reign of Fire and it was like a ghost town (though I actually liked the film).

9:55 PM show at Hoyt’s Theaters at Potomac Yards in Northern Virginia… BE THERE!
:smiley:

I heard a reviewer talk about the contractually obligated problem this morning. Theaters are obligated to show moives for a certain number of days but there is nothing to say how many times a day they need to show it. All they need to do is show Gigli once a day and they meet their obligation.

Straddling it over midnight would be an option then :slight_smile:

Or showing it at 5am - does anyone really go to the movies then? :slight_smile:

A 5 a.m. showing would be a good idea were it not for the fact that you’d still have at least one ticket-taker, concession person, usher, and projectionist on hand. I don’t think too many theater employees would be crazy about having to work an early morning shift to help show a crappy movie no one wants to see (unless, of course, they were paid double-time or better).

I don’t know if this is still done, but usta be if several chains in a city were vying for exclusive opening week rights they would not only have to bid for how much of the gross they were willing to give up (and for how many weeks) but they might also have to make such deals as: “Ok, we’ll book you exclusively for the next PIXAR release, but you have to also agree to book our next 3 features starring Richard Simmons as a leading man.” There was a chain in San Francisco that had a stranglehold on all the Disney bookings, but because of it they also got stuck with all the bad, bad, bad things Disney/Touchstone would on occasion come up with (the Ernest movies, etc.)

A sordid business indeed.

The way a lot of theaters get around the contract bookings is to run something as a split screen, meaning either run it with something as a double-feature, or have, say, a kids movie run the afternoon shows then the other for the evening shows.

Many theatres in larger markets enjoy a ‘house allowance’.
Let me try to explain this.

Lets talk about the Mega-12-plex. It has 12 screens. These screens are sometimes refered to as ‘houses’. So for each house a house allowance is set. It may 12 hundred dollars, or maybe 6,000 dollars. This is supposedly the ammount of money it takes to break even in that market for that size house. (remember that some of the Mega-12-plex houses hold 140 people and some hold 600) Anyway the theatre takes this money off the top of the ticket sales. They get this no matter what. Now a distributor does not pay more if they don’t make the house allowance but the theatre pays the distributor nothing if the house allowance is not made.

Plus the distributor wants to keep the film in the theatre so Ben Affleck isn’t embarrased that his film only held one week. They probably do want to work with him or J-lo or the producer again sometime in the future. (believe it or not) And the studio will try to keep thier good will.

Seeing it tomorrow! :smiley:

Me too JohnT!

  1. The “rent the screen out to a party while Gigli plays in the background” idea in the OP still requires that the patrons buy tickets to the movie, most of the money going to the movie company.

  2. You can’t do a $3 MSTK thing since the theater has to pay more than that to the movie company per ticket sold. You can only show a movie at a significantly reduced price at the end of the “first run”.

Just keep in mind that as far as the movie theaters are concerned, the money is in concessions. Almost all ticket money, esp. the first few weeks, goes elsewhere.

I was thinking more like “No, no-one wanted to see it. Oh yes, *of course[/i[ we showed it. Honest.”

Or even “Hey, you really want to see that film? There’s a discount if you go to the non-5-am showing”

I’m aware it’s impractical, but I thought it was funny.

I notice that no one has posted a review of Gigli on Bad Movie Night yet.

I wonder if that’s because (A) not too many people post there any more, or (B) none of the members have made the Supreme Sacrifice of going out and seeing this movie themselves.