News › Friday, June 24, 2005 - Herbie vs. Land of the Dead vs. Bewitched
I'm not going to put up the visuals for any of these three box-office contenders. In fact, I'm regretting even mentioning them. OK, I'm not being entirely honest - I wouldn't mind seeing Will Farrell on the big screen, and Romero's films never lose their style. But it's all "been there, done that" anyway, and since the rant is going to be exactly about that, let's not over-advertise any of these "instant-classics". 17-week-long slump, you say, I think it's about to become 18-week-long.
Film industry has been analyzing itself recently when week after week it couldn't brag about smashing records and beating last year's success. Forget for a second that 2004 was in big part about a handful of controversial films - The Passion, Fahrenheit 911, and I think that's it. Controversy brings in people who normally would not visit movie theaters - whether they like the movie or not. The tremendous success of these two (and a couple of others that came outta left field and walked away with 100s of millions at the box office) was the reason why 2004 was a big year. But let's put that aside for now. The industry analysts want other reasons - we'll provide them.
How about increasing ticket prices? If your attendance drops 8 percent, but your ticket revenue only drops 4 percent year after year, you may want to stop bringing ticket prices up every few months. Maybe then people would think twice about spending an evening with kids at the theater. But, if you just have to make ends meet, you poor studios and underpaid ac-tors, then I guess you have every right to demand higher prices. We all know you guys work very hard, and those L.A. villas don't pay for themselves.
OK, so we cannot successfully argue about ticket prices. How about theater owners stop with all the pre-show advertising? Poor guys, you have unreasonable deals with the studios where the bulk of your box office goes away (big thanks to FOX, Lucas, Gibson, Dreamworks, Disney and a few others who have made it a standard procedure to rob theaters and force them to seek revenues elsewhere). No wonder that when you walk into a movie room you can spend 10-12 minutes just watching ads before anything worth your 10 bucks begins. Oh, wait, first there's previews - at least the trailers have become better recently, I have been looking forward to many of them. But still, I am in the theater to see a movie, I can easily do without the trailers. And I can definitely do without the ads.
While we're sympathising with theater owners, how can I not mention the prices of popcorn and a bottle of joice or water? C'mon, you got to meet ends, but do I really have to drop 50-70 bucks if I bring three people in to see a movie (10-12 for tickets, and a few snacks, do the math). The last time I checked, I could buy (read: OWN FOR ETERNITY) about 3 good DVDs for that kinds money. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. Snacks are an important variable in a theater experience, and if you want your popcorn to be just oily enough, you'll cough up 8 bucks for a bucketful. Too bad they don't pause films when you need to run out for a minute to relieve yourselve of some of these wonderful snacks.
So the argument against high ticket prices, abumdance of pre-show ads and expensive snacks have all failed. Let's go back to the DVD argument. Why would I spend so much money this weekend if I can wait 4-5 months and get the same movie (plus extras, interviews, deleted scenes) for about 25 bucks? The studios are rushing DVD releases, to rake in even more dough, so fast these days that I don't really feel like I missed the theatergoing experience if many new releases are still playing in movieplexes when I buy them for my collection. I do feel a little out of touch with society when I cannot afford to see that big blockbuster the very first day when it opens. The ads make me feel unworthy, if I don't see the movie right away. You know, those ads you see on highway signs, buses, bus stops, tall buildings, radio commercials, TV spots, sports arenas, and the previews of other films. All those ads ordering you to bring your family (and take along 50-70 bucks) for 3 hours of entertainment. Damn, these ads can be so convincing. I wonder who pays for all that advertising - I hear TV spots are expensive, and radio commercial breaks are difficult to book. Here's a crazy idea - how about releasing a movie and then stopping the ad campaign? Or, how about releasing it slowly, building word-of-mouth (every movie deserves an audience, so there's gotta be word-of-mouth, right), and then opening the ad campaign? I wonder if it would work, and keep movie costs down. I wonder if any big movies have done that recently (Ray, Hotel Rwanda, Crash, Million Dollar Baby, Millions, Kung-Fu Hustle). Perhaps the studios wouldn't have to worry about those revenues if every one of their movies didn't cost 30-40 million extra just to advertise. After all, why advertise a good movie, if people are going to come and see it.
Which takes us to the last argument (which I'm sure is going to be weak, like all the others) - where did all the good movies go? You wanna know why you have a 4-month long slump at the box office? Well, take a look at the calendar. 17 weeks ago Hutch came out (Will Smith in his first comedic role, remember, he was playing a date doctor). Lemme comment for a second that this guy should have a comedy out every year - he's charismatic, funny, has a great sense of timing, and if the poor guy wasn't typecast as an action hero after Independence Day, he would know what projects to pick. Not that his other roles were not funny, but Will Smith is consistently bringing people into theaters, and is consistently starring in good, entertaining movies. Yes, I'm even including Wild Wild West in that list.
Ok, back to Hitch, which came out in mid February. You still wanna know why you have a slump? Here's a short list of "big" movies that came out since then: Son of the Mask (74), Constantine (100), Man of the House (40), Cursed (35), Be Cool (53), Hostage (52), Fever Pitch (40), A Lot Like Love (30), XXX 2 (70), Kingdom of Heaven (130), Monster-In-Law (60). This takes us up to mid-May. The figures in brackets - movies' budgets. Add them up and you'll get almost three quarters of a billion. Plus advertising campaigns. How many of them would you want to see, when they're available for rent? How many have you seen in theaters? I hope this answers any questions you may have had about the slumping box office.
STOP RELEASING CRAP! And if you just can't help it, at least charge us less for our wasted time. Start charging less for crappy movies, maybe even bring in the stars to personally apologize to filmgoers. That would bring in hordes of people. The good movies are still out there - not more than before, not less. You have to seek them out - in reruns, at film festivals, during the 10-12 days when they are offered in multiplexes before a big blockbuster moves in and squeezes out better, less popular movies. The problem is not lack of good films, it's the abudance of horrible, unnecessary, wasted films that just squander talent, and money, and turn people away from theaters.
If the studios cannot drop prices, if movie houses cannot stop bombarding us with annoying ads, at least give us good movies, or keep them around longer. Otherwise, I'll just get my film fix in the DVD outlets.
Enjoy the selection at your local theaters, folks.
Posted by Charlie on Friday, June 24, 2005 (17:15:44) (312 reads)
Associated Topics
"Friday, June 24, 2005 - Herbie vs. Land of the Dead vs. Bewitched" | Login/Create an Account | 0 comments
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.
The logos and trademarks used on this site are the property of their respective owners
We are not responsible for comments posted by our users, as they are the property of the poster(s)
Home
Latest News
News
Community
Fuel For Life Diesel Perfume Contest - $3000
