Hollywood to implode...according to Spielberg

[Gabe99]

/film:
AMC Considers Charging More Money For Tickets To Big Tent Pole Movies

Remember when George Lucas and Steven Spielberg predicted Donald Trump would win the election and the United States would fall into a post-apocalyptic state of hell? Okay, maybe that wasn’t exactly what happened.

A few years back, the two legendary filmmakers predicted that some huge megabudget movies would come crashing to the ground causing an implosion of the Hollywood movie industry that would probably result in movie theaters moving to the “Broadway model” with moviegoers being charged more of a huge tentpole film than a smaller dramatic film.I don’t think we’ve hit the implosion point that they theorized about (although this Summer had its fair share of box office bombs), but big movie theater chains like AMC are beginning to consider this variable ticket price model.

The CFO of AMC Entertainment Craig Ramsey made comments during the MKM Partners Entertainment Leisure and Consumer Technology Conference suggesting that variable pricing might be in the future for the AMC Theatres cinema chain, citing the company’s acquisition of a European theater company that already does so:

They [Odeon & UCI] are further advanced in variable pricing, where tentpole movies are priced up on release. That’s something we’ve talked about in the U.S. We expect to learn a lot with what they’ve done. We think it will position us to start having those conversations about pricing opportunities in the U.S.

Spielberg and Lucas predicted this move in 2013. The director of Indiana Jones and E.T. theorized, “You’re gonna have to pay $25 for the next Iron Man, you’re probably only going to have to pay $7 to see Lincoln.” Lucas added, if that happens, the bigger movies will play in theaters much longer, and smaller projects will go towards TV. “I think eventually the Lincolns will go away and they’re going to be on television,” Lucas said. Spielberg added “As mine almost was. This close — ask HBO — this close.” You can watch a video containing their comments here.

American movie theater chains have been aggressively raising the price of movie theater admission, through the guise of upgraded technology like 3D projection, Dolby Atmos sound or large IMAX-scale screens. AMC has been very successfully pushing their more luxury theater going experience AMX Prime which involves reclining seats and more.

But the big question is will audiences pay more for a big budget Hollywood spectacle without a substantial upgrade to the experience? I think that lowering the cost of indie and lower budget films could perhaps drive more people to the cinema, but I don’t believe they are discussing creating a lower tier of a ticket, but rather introducing a higher level to the mix.

 

[Octoberist]

Spielberg isn't perfect, and he sometimes is a part of the problem of the Hollywood machine. Maybe it's due to money and business (I do yours, I'll do mine. repeat.) sometimes it's due to hubris, or maybe it's him not being totally self aware.

But, he wasn't far off the mark on his predictions..

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Theater chains better watch it because if they start pricing things too high, people will stop going and will wait for video/tv or resort to piracy.

 

[Neno_Kos]

Theater chains better watch it because if they start pricing things too high, people will stop going and will wait for video/tv or resort to piracy.

Tickets are already expensive. People dont go watch anymore movies in cinema cause they just like watching movies in cinemas. That's why you have only blockbuster or "events" movies this days making a bank. And that's why you see good original smaller films bombing or not making well enough. Or like majority of them you dont even see anymore low budget movies or indie movies getting in theater chain screenings.



Going today in cinema more than 3x times a year is something what most people dont do. Today going in cinema is rather expensive like going into classy restaurant. People rather wait a couple more months to watch majority of the movies on TV. I usually go on GOOD year 4x times into cinema. I make schedule to see what's coming out, I read reviews I see trailers and if I am not hyped hyped hyped for the movie I just dont go see it cause I can't afford it. And even when I am going I wait for discount day. I this year watched Deadpool, BvS, Civil War and Warcraft. I would surely loved to watch more that, but that isnt happening.

Now just imagine if they tickets become more expensive. For who do you exactly doing movies? Upper class? So you are making movies for 1% of population?

There is another problem. Movie budgets are today already too expensive. Why are budgets this high? If your budgets arent that high you could keep or lower ticket prices. Your movies would be more secure from possible bombing on box office and you would likely make more money if more people could afford to go into cinema. But that aint happening.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Spielberg isn't perfect, and he sometimes is a part of the problem of the Hollywood machine. Maybe it's due to money and business (I do yours, I'll do mine. repeat.) sometimes it's due to hubris, or maybe it's him not being totally self aware.

But, he wasn't far off the mark on his predictions..

I get why he is doing another Indy or Ready Player One. It's because it helps him make other smaller films. But Lucas will be right where paying for a film will be like going to a Broadway show. It's becoming more event driven where theaters will invent newer ways to get people to go to the movies. 4D is next. Families already spend over a hundred dollars on a film when you factor in everything. Theaters aren't going to dial down their prices anyway.

 

[Ivan Drago]

Spielberg da gawd saying it like it is (best living director).

I still don't think Spielberg should waste his time with Indiana Jones anymore, he's moved on as a director and a person.

Crystal Skull is proof of that.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

I can't speak to the other issues and I can't claim to have incredibly deep insights into the financial realities of Hollywood movie making but... I kind of have always felt that there should be some kind of price spectrum given that these films do not all have the same budget or intentions. It has always struck me as strange that I spend the same amount to see a film with a budget in the hundreds of millions of dollars as I do a comedy or drama that has a budget of under forty million dollars, if that.

 

[Teelie]

This idea is a sure way to see blockbuster movies die and cause a notable decline in Hollywood movies. You know they will keep the current ticket price for low budget/indie movies and then further raise the price on high budget ones. They won't give you a cheaper ticket than you already pay and the audience is already in decline because ticket prices are expensive as it is.

 

[ehh]

I'm fine with paying extra for 3D, IMAX, 4DX or whatever, but I don't think the film's budget should determine the price of tickets.

Deadpool cost $58M. CA: Civil War cost $250M, over 4x the budget of Deadpool.

So am I going to find myself paying $10 for Deadpool and $35 for Civil War? Should we take marketing budget into consideration? Ticket prices already vary from theater to theater from city to city...

Usually if I want to see a smaller independent or art-house film, I'll go to a smaller theater that focuses on those types of films and I'll usually pay a bit less anyway.

 

[Hurm...]

If they substantially raise ticket prices for blockbuster releases, I think they will see a major decline in people going to the cinema. I don't think that many folks are interested enough in 3D, moving seats, etc. to warrant a large ticket price jump. Fundamentally, I think people just want to go to the cinema and see a movie - all the other bull**** is not as crucial to them. I could be wrong, but I think they'll shoot themselves in the foot.

I think there should be some serious polling done on what people are willing to spend on a theatre trip before they do this.

They really want to do everything to make me lose interest in going to the cinema, huh?

 

[Wildcard]

You'll definitely see a decline if they follow through with this b.s. strategy. Nobody wants to pay more just because the budget is larger. They need to start being more reasonable with budgets.

For instance, maybe not pay one actor $50 million while most of the others barely get $10 million.

A better idea would be regulating budgets better instead of increasing ticket prices.

 

[terry78]

That practice of just getting paid in accordance to how much the movie grosses seems fair.

 

[jmc]

What determines what film gets classified as a tentpole film? This is where you get into a sticky situation.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Spielberg da gawd saying it like it is (best living director).

I still don't think Spielberg should waste his time with Indiana Jones anymore, he's moved on as a director and a person.

Crystal Skull is proof of that.

Spielberg very cleverly and clearly distanced himself from Crystal Skulls, placing the emphasis on Lucas seemingly 'dragging' him into it and SS, through loyalty to a friend, went along with it. The next one, without any Lucas involvement will be better.

 

[BeserkerHilf]

You know what? I'm just about done with this ****. I've been advocating for theaters to implode for awhile now and I say this as a lifelong filmgoer. My wife and I got to movies all the time (2-3 times a month), and they're killing their own business. We went to see Fantastic Beasts in Dolby Cinema and they can't even get something as simple as LED track lighting figured out!

Here are pictures I took:

I tried to get the manager to dim the lights (not turn them off), and he told he wouldn't and that we were welcome (8 of us...15 minutes into the movie) to get up, leave, and see it at a different screening. Totally unacceptable to allow this **** to skate by.

 

[Ivan Drago]

Spielberg very cleverly and clearly distanced himself from Crystal Skulls, placing the emphasis on Lucas seemingly 'dragging' him into it and SS, through loyalty to a friend, went along with it. The next one, without any Lucas involvement will be better.

Sure, but Spielberg still deserves his share of blame for that movie, he was clearly going through the motions. And he didn't even want to do that movie, he himself said he had moved on and matured from Indiana Jones, but he still did one anyways.

While Spielberg is still a great filmmaker making good movies, he's not the same filmmaker he was in the 80's. The Indiana Jones Trilogy, especially the first two movies, where done by young men not afraid to get their hands dirty.

Spielberg is now a grandpa with his youth behind. It's clear his interest's in filmmaking now lie elsewhere.

 

[chamber-music]

You'll definitely see a decline if they follow through with this b.s. strategy. Nobody wants to pay more just because the budget is larger. They need to start being more reasonable with budgets.

For instance, maybe not pay one actor $50 million while most of the others barely get $10 million.

A better idea would be regulating budgets better instead of increasing ticket prices.

No leading actor earns $50 million. Salaries for the world's highest paid film actors currently range from $20–30 million, but an actor can earn substantially more by deferring all or part of their salary against a percentage of the film's gross, known within the industry as a "profit participation" deal.

Robert Downey Junior is making a ton of money with these Marvel movies because he has a deal incorporating box office bonuses and back-end compensation.

 

[dark_b]

I think this belongs here.

Disney Lays Down the Law for Theaters on ‘Star Wars: The Last Jedi’
https://www.wsj.com/articles/disney...heaters-on-star-wars-the-last-jedi-1509528603

 

[terry78]

Spielberg knew.

 

[terry78]

Though I agree with that largest auditorium thing.

 

[TheVileOne]

I recall wasn't there an issue with Canadian theaters and George Lucas over Attack of the Clones, and the Canadian exhibitors basically said, "Up yours Lucas!" Like Lucas had specific edicts about Attack of the Clones that Canadian theaters refused?

I mean this was about 15 years ago, so I don't remember all the details.

 

[jmc]

Can someone post the full text? It says I need to subscribe.

Edit: Never mind, found the cliff notes. This is a BS move by Disney. Theatres are struggling as it is and now the Mouse is wanting to take more away from them. I really hope they fight back.

 

[Teelie]

This is a bad move on Disney's part. Allowing so much control in the hands of so few.

 

[dw4000]

Allowing so much control in the hands of so few.

What do you mean by this?

As far as I can tell this is a smart business decision on disney's part. They have leverage in these negotiations and are beholden to investors to meet growth projections. Disney and Star Wars shouldnt be responsible for subsidizing theater chains for periods of low attendance. Movie Theaters just arent a sustainable business, they continue to lose intrinsic value as competition increases and tech improves/cheapens. The only reason they are even in business now is because distributors are probably afraid of another anti-trust lawsuit if they launch their direct to home vod services for first run. Theater chains need to offer something unique to the consumer otherwise they will eventually be a thing of the past.

 

[jmc]

Disney taking a bigger slice of the pie isn't going to help the situation for themselves. This is what doesn't make sense, if you keep squeezing eventually something is going to burst.