The big movie studios have no soul, this much is certain. They’d rather make a generic knockoff of a proven moneymaker than spend money to take chances on a new intellectual property. That’s why there’s a million romantic comedies, cliched action movies, sequels, straight to DVD sequels, and remakes.
In this last decade, they seem to have become infected with the reboot bug. It took Superman 20 or 30 years to be remade, yet now they’ve already abandoned the one made a few years ago with Brandon Routh for another reboot coming soon. It seems to be the standard fare in these big summer blockbuster comic book movies. There’s at least 3 Punisher movies, Batman was remade about a decade after Joel Shumacher flushed it down the toilet, a recent X-Men reboot, Star Trek, Hulk, and Spiderman.
I think the next logical sequence of this reboot mania is simply rereleasing old movies. But I wonder why it hasn’t been done yet. Surely whatever company owns the rights to Gone With the Wind could rerelease it in theaters maybe once a decade. I know Disney occasionally does that with theaters and DVDs. The original Star Wars was released again when the prequels came out, and I think just this past summer some theaters did a Lord of the Rings marathon due to the Hobbit being announced.
But there are lots more movies that I would think would attract a big audience if they were rereleased. And when I say rereleased, I don’t mean only in select theaters, on a few screens. After all, the production is done, the product is shot, and you don’t need to hire a crew or build sets anymore. Just get your marketing team to drum up some word-of-mouth for the Godfather. Or Jaws. Or Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind. Or whatever movie was big just a few decades ago. I don’t see how this would require much of a risk. Surely a studio would rather bank on a proven product than yet another Jennifer Aniston rom-com. Theater owners should be happy to be able to run “special” screenings of Blade Runner, or ET. Because despite most of these movies having been available for home video for decades, I’d still go watch Jurassic Park or Independence Day in the theaters again and I think a lot of people would. The only question is why the movie studios don’t seem to agree?
I disagree. I’d never go to a theater to watch something I already had on DVD and that goes double for blu-ray. The only time I went to a theater since I got Netflix was to see Avatar and I wouldn’t have gone to see that if the DVD had been out.
I think the number of old movies that genuinely benefit from the “big screen” is relatively small. Things with spectacular (for the time) special effects might be worth it, but otherwise I know I’m going to drop about $30 for two tickets + soda/popcorn to see something at the movies, and I’m not willing to do that for something I can see on HBO or buy on DVD in the bargin bin at Walmart.
Agreed that re-releases have only seemed to be “worth it”, from the studios’ perspective, for certain big-screen action movies with strong followings (i.e., LotR, Star Wars). Even though Independence Day did very well in the theaters in its time, I don’t see it having the big enduring fan base to support a re-release. Too many people have good (or at least passable) home theaters now, and can get access to all of those movies for a few dollars.
OTOH, one of the AMC theaters near me has a “Premium” cinema as part of their multiplex – a separate lobby leading to a single screen with luxury seating, better food, alcoholic beverages, etc. (and a premium ticket price, of course). They tend to show older films, usually for one night only. Their line-up for the next week:
Yeah, we’ve got a few theaters here that do that, as well. Guess it depends on where you live. Much less likely to be the case in Bumfuck, Nowhere, I’d imagine.
If you can get it from a rental store on DVD then it is highly unlikely that you will get big numbers by showing again on the big screen. I know many cinemas sell out showings of classic films, but that will be one cinema, a studio will want to release across many cinemas, and the numbers just wont be there.
That said, I would pay quite a price to be able to see Saving Private Ryan on the big screen.
They used to do this–certain theaters would be “revival” houses and show “old” movies of various ages and desirability–they would have different movies every day. As far as I know video rental stores (remember them?) killed that business model in most places.
Disney used to be a major practitioner of this. They had their inventory of animated classics that got major theatrical re-releases every decade or so. As far as I can tell, home viewing releases have killed off this practice (although Disney continues it for their home releases).
Anyone know what the last Disney animated feature was that got a big re-release in theatres?
I’d be willing to pay quite a bit to watch the original Star Wars movies in an actual movie theater, and I think a lot of other young people who never saw the originals on the big screen would do the same thing. I know they’d never put the original Star Wars films on the big screen, though, just the “special editions.”
This is actually one of my dream jobs that will never happen and even if it did, I probably couldn’t make money off of it.
I’m still in love with the movie going experience, you know with a crowd. How awesome would it be to see the Blues Brothers or Caddyshack on the big screen. Yeah you could watch them at home, but it would be so much more fun to see them with a beer in hand at a real theatre with 75 other people.
That would be my dream business venture and when the local 4plex closed back in 2008, I did look into it. And no, I couldn’t make money.
Cineplex does this. MASH played last week. Their classic movie series is $5 admission. Not all locations participate. I wish the local one did, but at least they play the Met Opera series. There are some good movies coming this fall. If they didn’t fall on a week night, I might make the drive to the next city to their participating cinema to check it out.
Untrue. There isn’t a movie that doesn’t look better on a theater screen than on DVD.
For instance, even something as unassuming as Road to Morocco is much better on the big screen; it was designed to be that way. There’s a scene where a fly is tickling Bob Hope’s nose; even on the biggest TV, you can’t really see what’s happening, but in the theater, it’s all quite clear.
The issue is simply that Hollywood believes that the audience isn’t interested in seeing movies in a theater that they can see on DVD. And they may be right, if people have the same attitude as you do.
I forget what they are doing to it exactly (conversion to 3D?) but The Lion King is being re-released in theaters soon. It’s not exact a revival, but it’s not like it’s really new or a remake.
I have a projection system with a 92 inch screen and 5.1 surround sound. I have big screen anytime I want it. Actually I might dig out my Saving Private Ryan DVD. I’ll probably just watch the first 20 minutes.
The Summer Film Series at the Paramount Theater here in Austin shows Gone With The Wind every year, along with a selection of other classic movies…Casablanca and Lawrence of Arabia (in 70mm) also are shown pretty much annually. I don’t think it’s a terribly big money making operation even here in a town full of film buffs.
I recently read an interesting factoid. HDTV fans talk about standards like 480, 720, and 1080. But the image resolution of film on a theatre screen is the equivalent of around 4000. The image resolution of an IMAX film would be around 7000.
The relevant standard is the resolution of my eyeball. I have trouble even telling the difference between an upscaled DVD and 1080P. Someone was talking about standards past 1080p and I said, “I don’t care unless they are giving me an eyeball upgrade.”
I could see this happening more in the future as digital projection becomes more prevalent. As I understand it, the physical copying and distribution of a film can be quite a significant expense so if if this is removed or greatly reduced, it could make re-releases more potentially profitable.
And another example - Jurassic Park is being re-released in UK cinemas later this month in advance of a Blu-Ray release. I feel like it’s my Star Wars in many ways - I was 10 years old when it first came out, it’s of earliest cinema memories and it’s like it’s my movie anchor for the whole of my childhood - any film from the 80s and 90s is classed in my mind as “Before Jurassic Park” or “After Jurassic Park”. Can’t wait :D.