DVD killing Theaters? (Drive-In and Seated) (1 Viewer)

[Adam Lenhardt]

Me too. When I was home for the summer last year, I went to the drive-in as much as I could - maybe five times - and it was a bittersweet experience. I grew up with drive-ins, my parents in the front, my mom smoking and me in the backseat in my pajamas heading peering out from between the two seats watching the movie from the space beneath the rear view mirror. Off to the left, the glow of the concession stand building was warm and comforting.

By contrast, the times I went to the drive-in last year, it was run down, the ground riddled with potholes. The paint on the concession stand was chipped and peeling, the panels that made up the giant screen clearly differentiable by the darkened moist areas at the edges of each. The concession stand itself, which used to have a smiling face working at each stop along the line, now had a person working the entire grill and one working parttime on the cash register between restocks. Truly a dying form, and a truely sad loss.

 

[Jeff D Han]

Drive-ins- The last time I went to a drive-in was
20 years ago (Police Academy 2). A couple of years later,
the drive-in was closed. I don't think any drive-ins exist
in the Philadelphia area anymore. The drive-in used to
be on RTE 202 near RTE 1- don't remember what it was
called. We tuned in the audio with the car AM radio.

DVD killing theaters- I don't go to the theater often.
The prices are too high, especially for refreshments,
and you take pot luck with the audience. I'd rather not
hear screaming children, cell phones, etc.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Drive-in theaters began disappearing around here long before the first appearance of DVD's in the marketplace. It began happening in the mid-80's, as the land was more valuable for other purposes. The two that I used to frequent are now shopping centers.

Oh, well, I rarely watched the movie in those days anyway.

 

[Ron-P]

Never liked drive-ins but I'd say the indoor/seated theaters are what killed off drive-ins, not TV or DVD.

When I was a teen I went to the theater almost every weekend, now, like Rutgar posted above I see nearly 99% of movies on MY big screen. Heck, I can buy a dvd cheaper then two of us going to a theater.

This entire year I only have 2 movies in mind that I "might" go out to the theater and see; Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Corpse Bride, everything else can wait for dvd and these might wait as well.

If I had several million at my disposal I'd open up a 21 and over multi-plex with a bar, lounge and smoking room. No kids, no teens and you can drink and enjoy your show. Oh yeah, the theater would be constructed out of a material that would block cell phones / pager signals.

Hey, any inverstors out there?

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

hah it's funny you mention it because my sole drive-in experience to date was in a beachside theatre in a small summer vacation town just off the coast. I guess it's the old-fashion family atmosphere that's brought about by the seasonal tourism that allows these establishments to survive. I wish there were drive-in theatres neatby, I did an internet search last summer but unfortunately every single one within relative distance shut its doors for good within the past 5 years.

As for heading out to the theatre, I've seriosuly held back in the past few years and agree that costs are a prime reason. I could end up spending less money to watch better films on an equal setup in the comfort of my own home, among my own crowd of friends, with my own conveniences (food, drinks, etc). I still appreciate the experience of leaving the house to make an evening event out of movie watching, but to be honest I don't think the majority of films being made today are the type fitting this environment. The last movie I saw on the big screen was Wes Anderson's The Life Aquatic and the next outing will probably be for the new Batman, Willy Wonka or Tim Burton's Corpse Bride. I really think it's not just the theatres and home video market, but also has a lot to do with the type of films being made.

Being that Im fortunate enough to live in a culturally rich city, there are many smaller indie movie houses and specialty theatres that screen foreign and independant films that otherwise don't get wide distibution, as well as documentary films, festivals, etc. Whenever I hear about a classic movie screening (most recently I was able to catch some of John Hustons classics like The Maltese Falcon, Treasure Of The Sierra Mardre & Key Largo at a month long retrospective at Le Cinematheque), I'm always in attendance! For me, the grand scope of Hollywood's golden age films brings so much energy and excitement to the screen that it adds much of the impulse and appeal to the theatre experience. I can only imagine what it must have been like for movie-goers in the 40's and 50's at the height of Hollywood's studio output, to head out for a night at the cinemas. I get so excited when given the chance to partially relive the delusory nostalgia when these films make their way to festivals and screenings from time to time in my area. I also jump at the chance to catch screenings fo classic animated Hollywood shorts on the silver screen as well. The most fun I probably ever had in a theatre was last year at a Fleischer Popeye screening in a smaller projection room at Le Cinematheque where a packed and enthusiastic house piled into the dark and crowded room to laugh and share smiles and introduce siblings and friends to the greatness of the epic and entertaining film productions from a lost era... this is what the teatre was intended for!

I'm not pretentious when it comes to movie watching and will just as quickly switch from a Welmman, Welles or Hitchcock classic to Ernest Saves Christmas and equally enjoy with obvious distinction, but some movies just weren't meant for a theatre environment. Growing up in the early 80's, going to the movies was the center of one's evening, it was the event of the night. Nowadays, it just seems like a way to pass an hour or two. I remember the sheer excitement of seeing big budget films like Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Back To The Future, Raiders Of The Lost Ark, E.T., The Empire Strikes Back, A Nightmare On Elm Street, Jurassic Park, etc. These were all fun Hollywood films that were meant to be screened and enjoyed by an audience together on a big screen, with a bag of warm crunchy popcorn in a theatre environment where everyone could feed off each other's emotions. They aren't necessarily the artistic culmination of quality filmmaking, but they are undoubtedly great movies that are intended to entertain an audience! That just rarely exists today. Not every film should be an epic adventure, but I just don't see what I'd be missing out from watching Napoleon Dynamite w/ my girlfriend on my home projection screen on a Saturday night over paying $12 CAN tosee it a few months earlier in the theatre. It seems that if it's not the production of unnecessary remakes, lackluster sequals or the ten billionth rehashed tweenage comedy flick aimed at 13 year old dunderheads, the direction of Hollywood has taken a major shift towards funding and distributing the type of filsm that never would have gotten similair exposure ten years ago. That's not a bad thing, I quite enjoy the resurgence of the structurally complexed and introspective indie aspired filmmaking seen today in directors like Charlie Kuaffman, PT Anderson, John Malkovich, Wes Anderson and the many newcomers who have been given spotlight in everything from documentary films getting commercial wide distro to the many hard edged realistic melodramas from likeminded artists that are popping up everywhere on screen nowadays. This is great. But it doesnt necessarily make for fun theatre experience, these films touch you on more personal levels that dont necessarily need to be shared with an audience. That's one of the main problems I feel. By removing the variance and divergency and in sticking to formulated assembly, Hollywood has taken much of the fun out of the theatres. They're giving audiences less reason to pay the high admission costs. The home video industry is consistently pumping out more product of higher quality and at a higher rate with wider variety and there's just not much motive to look elsewhere for evening entertainment anymore.

 

[Kain_C]

As said before, annoying patrons (are younger people getting MORE damn intolerable?), bad A/V equipment, and outrageous prices are the culprit. Also, technical glitches. Around here, you cannot go to a Wynnsong/Carmike theatre without getting SOME kind of snafu like dropped sound, out of sync sound, upside down image, or something. And I do not exaggerate. Your chances of encountering a problem are much greater than experiencing a problem-free movie going experience. My friend swore off attending a theatre of this chain entirely.

But we finally got us a stadium seating theatre that so far seems really nice. Good equipment and so far no problems.

Tomorrow, we go to another town to see "A Very Long Engagement".

This year, I have Sin City, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Batman Begins, Episode IV, and a few others to get me in a theatre seat.

 

[Jim Barg]

Sounds like my childhood experience with drive-ins. By the time my mother had discovered the joy of taking my siblings and I for a night out at the local drive-in, the only one left in Rochester was near death. I distinctly remember seeing stuff like Gremlins 2, The Rocketeer and Hudson Hawk there. Loved the movies, but the theatre was utter crap.

I suggest going to the Vintage Drive-In in East Avon when it reopens in a couple of weeks, Adam. Built in 1997, it's a three-screener with good-sized concessions and a vintage arcade. I always try to make it out there at least once or twice a summer.

 

[Rob T]

I've only been to the drive-in once.
I usually go to the big theater in my area and they lowered their ticket prices a while back so it's pretty nice now.

I do like watching stuff on my own HT setup though.

 

[Everett S.]

What's happened to 70mm?

We used to go every week, but the presentation is really awful now days. There are very few projectionists left,
theatres now use 16 year olds with very little training.
I have not been to a theatre for over three years! We used to go to Washington D.C. to see films in 70 mm many times. Also when in New York city we would go to see movies in 70mm, last one we saw was True Lies at the Zeigfeld. We used to go see old movies too, but all those have closed due to video. We have a ten plex in our area, but when "Chicago" was playing I went up to the boxoffice to ask if they had stereo sound the cashier said she did not know. She did not bother to ask anyone, So that was that! We have never been to the movies since then. We had just moved to the area, had heard in the food store that it was a poor theatre, but thought we would give it a chance. Any way we are going to New York this spring and will be seeing a few Broadway shows, but have been reading the N.Y.paper over the past few years & there have been no ads saying in 70mm so this will be the first time we will not be also going to the Movies when in New York! Sad :frowning: We have over 900 DVD's and a hi def tv & sat.

 

[Jim Barg]

The rising cost of 70mm film and cameras. The advent of digital sound, recreating what used to be a rare sound mix.

None of the new multiplexes built over the last 10 years are equipped with 70mm-ready projectors, at least in my neck of the woods (they all have stereo sound, though!). It was fairly common in Rochester to have at least two or three 70mm engagements during the summer, up til about 15 years ago. I think the last one might have been Dick Tracy...

It's a dying format. Which is a shame, since I do wish more studios would take the chance on it for big projects. Peter Jackson wanted to shoot Lord of the Rings in 70mm, but it was cost-prohibitive.

 

[john mcfadden]

Well when a dvds release makes more money in its first 3 days of release than the entire theatrical run . Then i think that is a YES !


I just took my family out to see "ROBOTS" at a matinee for 3 tickets . $20.00- AT A MATINEE !!!!!!

Film was out of focus , asked to someone to fix it they made it worse.

Was in a tiny theater, 40 seats total......no im not kidding .

Oh and of course 2 drinks a popcorn and m&ms ...$21.00

I thank god that i have a local drive in theater that opens in the spring and has stayed open as late as December!
Always a double feature --(sometimes a triple feature) at the same price $7.00 for adults -- children under 12 $ 4.00 children 4 and under free.

If your near the Delaware area check out The Diamond State Drive in Theater in Felton Delaware ....Delaware's only drive in .

www.dsdit.com

 

[Barry_B_B]

Went to see Hostage last weekend at an AMC theater in Towson, MD. Cleaning crew must have been on strike, since the floors were filthy with straw and candy wrappers, popcorn, etc. The smell reminded me of my forays into adult theaters back in the 70's (no kidding). Sound was too low and weak for an action flick; my wife was the one asking, "where's the bass?". Only heard 6 cellphones go off, but that was enough to awaken the baby seated a few rows back. Cried a good 5 minutes, probably trying to tell the parent it didn't want to see an "R" rated movie at night and would rather be in bed. Fortunately, anything we missed was replayed blow-by-blow thanks to the young woman behind me who seemed to be auditioning for BET/MTV, take your pick. Very young staff did not seem interested in complaints. Will try another theater for Episode III, but won't set foot in one until then. Thankfully the tickets were a gift.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

We've got three drive-ins around Cincinnati, and they all do very big business in the summer. Most weekend shows sell out. We usually go once or twice a year.

 

[Ted Todorov]

I don't know about Drive-Ins, but it is demonstrably not true of regular movie theaters.

Locally (in NYC) sellouts are common. Even with old movies -- I was recently at a sold showing of the 1966 Masculin, Feminin. When it comes to new ones I had to brave a massive line to get into the sold out & SRO showing of Claire Denis L'Intrus -- I haven't been in a mob like that since my last rock concert so I guess it was appropriate that Lou Reed & Willem Dafeo were sitting in front.

Lots of new movie theaters have been built lately in NYCs outrageously expensive real estate market.

Nationally a new box office record gets set practically every year.

Conclusion: far from dying, movie theaters are thriving as never before.

Ted

 

[RomanSohor]

I will be seeing The Hitchhiker's Guide in the theater, and a few that my fiancee will make me go to with her I'd much rather buy a $15 DVD and watch it on my big screen at home. I am constantly notice the surroud sound collapsing to the speakers at the front of the theater, sitting in gum, being scared someone is going to "bust a cap in me"

ugh.

 

[clayton b]

I'm starting to believe that the studios actually want the theaters to die out.

DVD has more and more power in the movie industry. Sequels are being greenlit not on the strength of what they made in the theater, but how much money they made on DVD. The Punisher, Daredevil, The Hulk, all those films disappointed at the box office, but then made major cash in the home video market. As a result, there's a sequel in the works or at least talk of a sequel in the works for each one of those films. 10 years ago they would have been written off as disappointments and forgotten. Take someone like Kevin Smith. A major player over at Miramax, despite the fact that he's never had a film make more than 30 mil at the box office. But he's made Miramax a crap load of money off his DVDs.

The studios in general have to be aware of the fact that even the large chains aren't consistently providing the public with a decent movie going experience. Yet they do nothing. Why? Well a film like Jay and Silent Bob Strikes Back makes less than 30 mil at the box office, but then makes close to 100 mil on DVD and video, well which is more attractive? With the theatrical run you're sharing the profits with the theaters, on video once you've covered your costs it's all gravy.

I think the writing is on the wall. And it's sad really, I'm willing to bet it's going to take 30 years or so before the average person can afford a home theater set up that can equal a properly focused 35 mm image. Not to mention the fact that when the movie theater experience is good, it's alot better than the home theater experience. There's nothing like experiencing a comedy with hundreds of laughing patrons, or a horror film with hundreds of gasping patrons.

 

[Rutgar]

Oh I was quite alive during those times and believe me, I have no illusions as to how bad drive-in's were. I miss them about as much as I miss 8-track tapes. I always prefered what we called "walk-in's" as opposed to "drive-in's".

 

[Peter Overduin]

I'm not sure DVD is killing thaeters. Certainly, terrible film making is. Since last fall, there are less than half a dozen films that could be called compelling, and not many more that were even entertaining.

Even TV suffers from increasingly lousy programming...a show about a blind cop? Give me a break. Hollywood seems for the most part to be out of energy and the ability to think original. Certainly in 2004 anyway. Hopefully 2005 will be different but the number of comic book movies slated for release this year does not bode well.

Perhaps a more relevant question would: "Are studios committing suicide for DVD?" Knowing that DVD now eclipses, for many films the box office gross. Theatrical releases are merely vehicles to get to the DVD. If its big, sounds great and is visually stunning the DVD will sell...who cares about the box office?

 

[ScottAndrew]

Count me in with those who don't go to the theaters because of people who talk. I think the theater would be a great way to get out of the house once in a while.
What makes it so frustrating is that on the rare occasions when I do go, most people get it. We pay, we sit in silence, we watch. Characters on the big screen talk. We listen. It's simple.
It's just that one in twenty who thinks the theater is a good place to have a conversation. Or who thinks that talking in a low voice is whispering. Or thinks that their small child who, understandably, can't be quiet for two hours won't bother anyone. Or, my favorite - the insecure person who's afraid that everyone won't know he got the joke, so he laughs an unnatural, extra-loud laugh for the benefit of those around him or repeats the punchline. Thanks, we heard it when the guy on the screen said it.
It seems obvious that theater chains are not interested in attracting my business, or that of anyone else who just wants to watch the movie without distraction.

 

[clayton b]

I will agree that TV is dying, and it is a painful death to witness. That's due to reality tv shows however. It's just easier and cheaper to point the camera at a bunch of people willing to make idiots of themselves on national tv than it is to hire writers, actors, build sets, and such.

But I think there's still just as much good cinema out there as ever. Sure there's a lot of crap, but hey, there's always been alot of crap in the theaters. It's just that nobody remembers the bad films. In 1946 there was great films such as It's a Wonderful Life, Gilda, My Darling Clementine and others. 1994 saw such memorable films as The Shawshank Redemption, Pulp Fiction, and Forrest Gump. Heck that was only 10 years ago and I have to think to remember the bad films released that year. This year we had memorable films like The Incredibles, Million Dollar Baby, and The Aviator. Sure we were subjected to a lot of crap like Aliens vs Predator, but 50 years from now people won't recall those films. They'll probably remember The Incredibles and Million Dollar Baby, and probably The Aviator however.

Honestly, you can look at just about any year and be hard pressed to find 10 truly memorable films released in those 365 days. Usually it's just passable filler and sometimes even barely tolerable crap that shows throughout the rest of the year.