I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping... • Hacker News Board

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#161

Post by timwiseman » Thu, Dec 29, 2011, 9:24 PM UTC

superchink wrote: post #156

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

7.89 for movies? What? Where? I'm guessing this data is skewed by the low prices of rural and suburban centers that are underpopulated. Here in the urban world where most of the population lives, movies start at 11 or 12 dollars and then there's a 3D surcharge of a couple bucks. When my gf and go to the movies here in Chicago its about 30 dollars before any snacks. Toss in a few bucks parking too. Oh, want to order o…

The prices he lists are “…adjusted to 2010 dollars…” based on the linked calculator. EDIT: Please ignore this comment. See reply below. Sorry for missing the point here.

2010 was last year (Ok, it will be the year before last in a couple of days, but...), inflation is not sufficient to effect it that much when compared with this year.

Like the grand-parent, this does not fit with my experience. When I got to a new release I usually pay around $13 per person at a decent theater in Las Vegas, and up to $18 per person for Imax 3D.

But the other thing that may skew the results is budget or "dollar" theaters that show older releases. I frequently take my kids to those for around $2 per ticket.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#162

Post by dons » Thu, Dec 29, 2011, 9:25 PM UTC

msluyter wrote: post #34

I think Alamo Drafthouse in Austin is doing it right: 1. Food & beer/wine served with movie -- convenient and much preferable to overpriced popcorn. 2. Cellphones must be turned off. 3. They take talking seriously, and preface each film with a strongly (and amusingly) worded statement to that effect. 4. No babies allowed except on specified baby nights. 5. Creative and fun special events, such as quote-alongs, sing-a…

Nitehawk in Brooklyn and Living Room in Portland doing similar things.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#163

Post by nhebb » Thu, Dec 29, 2011, 9:27 PM UTC

waterlesscloud wrote: post #44

MikeCapone wrote: post #30

I was sure he was going to say that it was partly because every movie now seems to be a sequel or based on a comic book. It's so rare to find a mainstream 100% original movie anymore it seems...

Top ten movies for 2011- 1. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 2. Transformers: Dark of the Moon 3. The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 4. The Hangover Part II 5. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides 6. Fast Five 7. Cars 2 8. Thor 9. Rise of the Planet of the Apes 10. Captain America: The First Avenger Yes, every single one is a comic book or a sequel. That's why they get made, they're what people…

Seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy. If most of what they make are movies in these genres, that's what people will see. I don't even rent many movies any more, and I used to rent a lot! There just isn't much that's interesting, and i have pretty low standards when it comes to action / guy-flicks.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#164

Post by killnine » Thu, Dec 29, 2011, 9:28 PM UTC

ChrisLTD wrote: post #25

killnine wrote: post #20

What does it take to have movies that are in theater streamed to your home? Would you not watch more movies at theater prices if you could watch it on your couch at 12:01am Friday morning? I think the problem is at the theater, the companies get $12/person, $12 PER person. How can we come up with a solution where they still get their dollars, but I don't have to leave my couch to go sit in a dirty, loud theater to wa…

I'd pay double, maybe even triple the regular price of streaming rental (~$5) to see movies at home on the day of release.

Same here. And we're speaking from an individual point of view. Now imagine a four, five person family weighing that price versus the sum price of four, five tickets, 3D glasses, candy, popcorn, and drinks

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#165

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Dec 29, 2011, 9:28 PM UTC

superchink wrote: post #156

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

7.89 for movies? What? Where? I'm guessing this data is skewed by the low prices of rural and suburban centers that are underpopulated. Here in the urban world where most of the population lives, movies start at 11 or 12 dollars and then there's a 3D surcharge of a couple bucks. When my gf and go to the movies here in Chicago its about 30 dollars before any snacks. Toss in a few bucks parking too. Oh, want to order o…

The prices he lists are “…adjusted to 2010 dollars…” based on the linked calculator. EDIT: Please ignore this comment. See reply below. Sorry for missing the point here.

[deleted]

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#166

Post by watmough » Thu, Dec 29, 2011, 9:32 PM UTC

rjd wrote: post #158

steauengeglase wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better question. Can you remember the plot of the last 5 movies you went to see?

Yep, I believe the majority of films I have ever watched has this plot: The protagonist is put into a situation where he is drawn from a position of security and is force to embark on a journey to resolve the situation. The journey exposes the protagonist to a foreign environment and they must learn how to deal with the new situation. Often given tools to master their destiny. After some time the new situation goes b…

In romantic comedies...

  - Lonely woman meets strange man,
  - Man drags woman around,
  - Woman is *mildly inconvenienced*, this is key, causes conflict,
  - Situation is somehow happily resolved.

Not sure about everyone else, but I am sick of movies where the likes of Jennifer Aniston spend too hours boggling at mild inconvenience.

Gahhh. No wonder I haven't set foot in a movie theater for years.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#167

Post by superchink » Thu, Dec 29, 2011, 9:34 PM UTC

timwiseman wrote: post #161

superchink wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The prices he lists are “…adjusted to 2010 dollars…” based on the linked calculator. EDIT: Please ignore this comment. See reply below. Sorry for missing the point here.

2010 was last year (Ok, it will be the year before last in a couple of days, but...), inflation is not sufficient to effect it that much when compared with this year. Like the grand-parent, this does not fit with my experience. When I got to a new release I usually pay around $13 per person at a decent theater in Las Vegas, and up to $18 per person for Imax 3D. But the other thing that may skew the results is budget…

I just realized that I misread the comment, and for that I apologize; I totally missed the boat with my reply.

I actually agree that the average ticket price is way below what I'm used to paying here in Los Angeles. At the same time, I suppose that's the point, to take into account both the high and low ends of the pricing spectrum.

That said, I'd gladly pay $7–8 for a movie!

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#168

Post by watmough » Thu, Dec 29, 2011, 9:35 PM UTC

bradly wrote: post #51

The problem is movies have become too expensive to make. When a movie cost 100-200 million dollars to make, studios believe that to be successful they must make, or more typical take, a brand and develop a movie around that brand. Studios need a brand that ideally people already know that they can franchise into a cartoon, plush dolls, a theme park ride, and 3 sequels in hopes to try and get the 150 million back. Thi…

Yes, totally agree. There's a dead feeling that comes with movies that have been made as commercial vehicles, rather than as pieces of art.

Sometimes the results aren't too bad, Batman, Ironman etc., but other times they are just phoning it in.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#169

Post by vacri » Thu, Dec 29, 2011, 9:39 PM UTC

superchink wrote: post #156

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

7.89 for movies? What? Where? I'm guessing this data is skewed by the low prices of rural and suburban centers that are underpopulated. Here in the urban world where most of the population lives, movies start at 11 or 12 dollars and then there's a 3D surcharge of a couple bucks. When my gf and go to the movies here in Chicago its about 30 dollars before any snacks. Toss in a few bucks parking too. Oh, want to order o…

The prices he lists are “…adjusted to 2010 dollars…” based on the linked calculator. EDIT: Please ignore this comment. See reply below. Sorry for missing the point here.

The price in 2010 in 2010 dollars is listed as $7.89. drzaiusapelord isn't complaining about previous years.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#170

Post by phaus » Thu, Dec 29, 2011, 9:39 PM UTC

jonhohle wrote: post #153

ChrisLTD wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually find it very difficult to watch Jurassic Park these days. The CG has not aged well at all. With Ghostbusters, the effects look terrible in a few scenes (the claymation dogs spring to mind), but it's not so jarring in the context of a comedy.

> The CG has not aged well at all. Really? I look to Jurassic Park as what CG should look like in movies. The opening reveal of the brontosauruses is still amazing, especially when you think of when the movie was made. What hasn't aged well? Other movies from the mid-to-late 90s, on the other hand, have not aged well. Many of these used CG for the sake of having CG and did not take any care of ensuring it integrated…

No one is disputing how awesome it looked when it first came out, but the same thing could be said for quake 1. As our eyes adjust to the ever increasing details in movies and games, what used to look awesome begins to look awful. Here is the scene with the Brontosaurs While it seemed photo-realistic when it first came out, it now looks choppy, grainy, and artificial. Most low-budget T.V. shows have better CG now. But that's just the way computer animation works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJlmYh27MHg