I'll preface my entire comment with this: in my 20s, I was a "go to the movies 2 or 3 times a month" sort of person. In my 40s, I barely go to the theatre at all. I think the last movie I saw in...
I'll preface my entire comment with this: in my 20s, I was a "go to the movies 2 or 3 times a month" sort of person. In my 40s, I barely go to the theatre at all. I think the last movie I saw in the theatres was the Mario movie. The phenomenon of people not going to see things anymore is one that is of interest to me, as I'm a part of it, so I watched this with some interest. I think this is a good video and gently urge people to watch it, but for the sake of discussion, here are the seven things:
Premium Video on Demand
Streaming
The theatres themselves being kind of bad
People being jerks
The economy
Piracy
The movies themselves not being that great
I tried to relate to each of them, and I can see a case for all of them, although some of them are pretty same-y. 1, 2, 6 all boil down to "it is easier to watch movies at home than ever before" which I think is true. 3, 4, and to some degree 5 boil down to "the experience of going to the movies is no longer that great" which I agree with. When I think back on the last three trips to movies, 2 of them were not good experiences - there were technical issues with the theatre, which was uncomfortable, and there were rude audience members. It really left me with the feeling of "why am I spending $140+ to go the movies when it's just not fun" (note: I have a family of 5).
I think that the seventh reason - movies aren't as good anymore - is perhaps not that fair. I think that there are definitely great years for movies and worse years for movies, and maybe this year is a bit disappointing. However, even in years with must-see blockbusters, there are some movies that are great and some movies that are not. When I was younger, the less good movies just faded away, and we didn't really think of them, or feel particularly bad about having just seen them. Now it feels worse to see a mediocre movie than it did 20 years ago; if I went to see a movie I'd give 3/5 stars when I was 25, I still had a good night. Now if I go see a 3/5 movie, I'm pissed at how much money I spent. The movie itself isn't the issue; it's the ridiculous cost that is the problem.
I think there's another item that got missed, and I'm not sure if it's actually a universal thing or not, and it actually closely relates to points 1, 2, 6 above. My home theatre experience is drastically different than it was 20 years ago. Back in those days, I had a not particularly big TV, a DVD/VCR combo, and a broke-ass couch that wasn't super comfortable, not particularly great microwave popcorn etc. Now things are different - we have a big TV with a very good sound system, a comfortable couch, a popcorn popper, great snacks. Heck, we have a secondary comfortable couch with another big TV that has a good sound system in another room if people want to watch different things. Heck, we have personal computers that show movies in 4k with great headphones. Heck, I have a projector with great sound and lawn chairs if want to watch outside. I think a lot of people have also updated and upgraded their home theatre solutions so that with video on demand, streaming, and piracy, we have a better, cheaper time at home.
To me, I think that's one of the main issues - theatres haven't pivoted or made anything better. They're not comfortable, they're not better than going out, they don't sound balance well, the snacks suck, and the experience just isn't good. If they made an effort to make things better, then more people would come.
I'd start going back to theatres if they did the following:
actually get rid of rude people or disturbances
have comfortable seating
have a bar service
have great concessions not just shitty reheated fast food and bad popcorn
actually do decent sound engineering, not just turn the volume up to "shake walls and give headaches"
Unfortunately, people frequently seem to blame movies instead of the crap experience that going to a theatre can be.
Maybe unpopular opinion, but imo these are mutually exclusive. I don't think people should eat at all in movie theaters. There's nothing more distracting than someone going to town on food in a...
actually get rid of rude people or disturbances
have great concessions not just shitty reheated fast food and bad popcorn
Maybe unpopular opinion, but imo these are mutually exclusive. I don't think people should eat at all in movie theaters. There's nothing more distracting than someone going to town on food in a movie. I've been to Studio Movie Grills and Alamo Drafthouses which are more like what you describe, and they're honestly more like themed restaurants than movie theaters. I would never watch a movie I cared about there.
The nice part about stageplay theaters is that most of them don't allow food in the seats. Drinks OK, but please no cans.
Tbh I wish theaters around me charged more for concessions and made them shittier so people would stop buying them.
Huh, different from my experience. I've been to a place called Flix Brewhouse which has food and in-house drinks served during the movies. It's never been distracting to me. It probably helps that...
Huh, different from my experience. I've been to a place called Flix Brewhouse which has food and in-house drinks served during the movies. It's never been distracting to me. It probably helps that they don't clump seats directly together and require people to show up I think 30 minutes beforehand to have time to place orders (seriously, they won't let you in after that). So food is served fairly early, and finished fairly quickly.
I guess this is just a personal taste thing. That said, movie theaters mark up concessions because they're the main source of income. Last I checked, they don't make much if any money off the ticket sales, so food is pretty much all they've got. Would be nice if the popcorn didn't give me a stomach ache every time though...
I don't think they are mutually exclusive except in the context of movie theater seating, where you are uncomfortably clumped up next to somebody you don't know, so you have to deal with whatever...
I don't think they are mutually exclusive except in the context of movie theater seating, where you are uncomfortably clumped up next to somebody you don't know, so you have to deal with whatever bullshit they are doing.
A long time ago (late 90s early 00s) in Vancouver I used to go to an independent second run theatre that had a series of couches with coffee tables and/or side tables. It was a much better experience all around; the couches were comfy, there was a decent place to put your stuff, there was service before and after. It was an overall pleasant experience, and while this was before the era of common mobile phones, I don't think a small screen would have actually been problematic. It's been a long while so the details are a bit lost to the fog if time, but I think that there were 20-25 little seating areas that could handle between 2 - 8 depending on which one you picked. It was great, and the pizza and wings were fantastic. I would go to a theatre like that where I wasn't packed in with people I didn't know, and I don't think any of the concessions would be particularly problematic.
I agree that I don't really want to watch or hear the person next to me eating and slurping their food and drink.
My wife and I recently discovered Alamo Drafthouse in our city. It has all of the things you listed (I suppose sound quality is subjective but I find it to be fine). It reignited going to the...
I'd start going back to theatres if they did the following:
My wife and I recently discovered Alamo Drafthouse in our city. It has all of the things you listed (I suppose sound quality is subjective but I find it to be fine). It reignited going to the movies for us. We've seen 4 movies this year after going multiple years without going to the theater.
Alas, I don't think there are any in Canada, but they do look pretty great. I could certainly see myself attending if more theatres were like that, from what I've read online.
Alas, I don't think there are any in Canada, but they do look pretty great. I could certainly see myself attending if more theatres were like that, from what I've read online.
I think fundamentally the market size for theaters is simply shrinking. There is no magic thing they can necessarily do to turn around. It just has to find its new level of size. There is still a...
I think fundamentally the market size for theaters is simply shrinking. There is no magic thing they can necessarily do to turn around. It just has to find its new level of size. There is still a future for cinema, just somewhat smaller than it used to be. I personally think they have something to offer I can't get quite the same at home. A more immersive and focused experience. Doesn't have to be much more than that. That I don't go more than 5-10 times a year has more to do with time constraints than price.
We've clearly begun reaching the price limit, have passed it in some cases, for at least a portion of the potential moviegoer consumers. So raising prices, and the same goes for concessions, isn't...
We've clearly begun reaching the price limit, have passed it in some cases, for at least a portion of the potential moviegoer consumers.
So raising prices, and the same goes for concessions, isn't the answer no matter how desperate the theater chain MBAs are to "restore revenue to previous levels." MBA logic would say "if fewer customers, raise price to maintain revenue", which they usually do and then usually proceed to act surprised that (surprise!) higher prices equals lower interest.
The old joke is Good, Fast, Cheap, pick two. If prices are at or past the limits, they can't keep jacking up price looking to bring in customers; they need to push the ticket price down some since they've gone too far.
Fast they can't do much about, except perhaps yank all their advertising that people complain about (not at all uncommon to find people pissed about showing up for a 10pm start only to find that the actual movie doesn't hit the screen until well after 10:30 due to ads and trailers (which are just ads, except they're more 'fun' than ads for soda and the local dentist shop and so on).
Any MBA that proposed giving up revenue (reducing advertising) would be made fun of by the other MBAs, and we can't have that. They worked really hard to get their bullshit MBA degrees, and it's not fair for them to be laughed at by the other MBAs so clearly the half hour plus of advertising won't be going away. So Fast isn't really useful for the theaters.
That leaves Good. They need to enhance the experience. Getting control of the audience might work. They're terrified to do it because it'll affect their labor levels (poorly paid people without training are reluctant to enforce civility standards out of fear of backlash from embarrassed customers who get singled out for talking or otherwise disrupting a show). They also think they might piss off the disruptive customers and drive them away from coming back. The question here would be which is the bigger faction; the asshats who talk and screw around on their phones but will pay for a ticket to do that, or the annoyed people who don't want to pay for a show if people are gonna talk and screw around on their phones.
So to find that part out, some chain is going to have to try enforcing civility and see if it works. Alamo Drafthouse kind of is, has been, but they're pretty small on the national scale. So it's not exactly a huge sample size when you're AMC or Regal with several thousand screens you're pondering the most profitable strategy for. I've been hoping for a while for Drafthouse to expand near me, but they haven't. Like Microcenter, there is a non-zero number of people who wish they lived near a Drafthouse, but don't.
Theaters seem to think "Good" is only in the hands of the studios. As in, "if only studios would make more Good films, more people would want to come." Which, to be fair, isn't inaccurate; a very popular blockbuster film definitely drives traffic to theaters. But studios don't exactly set out to make unpopular films, so that's a whole unique discussion that's unlikely to have any real traction on the theater issue.
So short of theaters getting into the production side themselves (which there's really no reason they couldn't, especially at modest budget levels like would be needed for a solid comedy or adult drama) they need to figure out other ways to make Good even Gooder. Ways to offer more value and enhance how Good the deal offered to moviegoers is. People could buy a ticket, but they inevitably ask "but what do I get for my money?"
Well, aside from the movie itself, the theaters could look into souvenirs and take-home stuff. And make that a major priority, a serious thing they always have working.
For example, Deadpool & Wolverine has a special snacks bucket that I assume is being sold only through theaters. Similar souvenir items go for around $20 to $25, and they simply cannot cost any sizable fraction of that to produce; probably, at most including shipping to theaters, a few bucks. Lots of profit.
So there's a whole souvenir area theaters could get into. When I was young, just about every fast food place, especially in summer and around holidays, had souvenir tie-in items that were often connected to a movie. Special toys, collectible glasses or plates or something, things like that. Stuff a marketing department can think up, and a business department can arrange to have made somewhere for pennies on the dollar and shipped in to be marked up several orders of magnitude before being sold as a package deal for a movie ticket, or as an extra purchase once you've already bought that movie ticket.
A fast food place might have four different glasses back in the day, each from the movie, but four different glasses. All four made a set. Not every restaurant had them all, and definitely not all at once; they'd stagger the release. So you were encouraged to come several times and get the meal that came with the glass so you'd have all four.
Theaters could figure out a "slate" of "similar" films that'll be releasing over the year, or over a season. Come up with some array of collectables that work together. An array of glasses or plates, a poster collection, photo books, trading cards, I don't know. Something. Something that each movie has one item of, and if you see (buy a ticket package for each) all the movies and buy each item you have the whole collection to show off.
They could even get clever, nerdy, with the concept and come up with something Voltron-esque (short version; five lions get snapped together and form one robot dude). It doesn't have to be super nerdy like lions making a guy, but anything you can stand or cram together (once you have the pieces) that forms a vase or a diorama or a continuous poster or whatever, it would scratch that collectible itch lots of people have, which would encourage them to Go Buy Theater Tickets.
These days, in addition to random souvenirs and toys, they could offer posters, t-shirts and hats, or even digital stuff (special phone backgrounds or ring tones and stuff like that). Want a super cool and "rare" piece of digital art from Dune to be your phone background? Gotta see it at a theater offering a package that includes the download link for that art.
Further, theaters could get with studios and work out a package deal for the DVD or even a Paid digital download. Rather than buying only the ticket, you're getting the ticket (watch movie now) plus a copy of the DVD/Bluray (shipped on release) or the digital link (watch again when the movie's digitally available) for your money.
Theaters could even lean into the only strategy they seem to understand - exclusivity - and work out those deals to offer customers of the package (people who bought a ticket package that includes a disc or link) early release or early access to the at home version. Maybe the theater packages will drop the digital link three days early, and ship the discs early, so by having seen the movie on the big screen you can have it for home sooner than those waiting for the at home release as their first view.
And yes, whenever it drops in any form, it'll be available via pirate channels. But it would anyway, so that doesn't really impact this decision or strategy at all.
Studios might be interested since they could consider it all part of their marketing efforts. They shell out for lavish marketing to get butts in seats at the theaters upon release. Then they usually do some more marketing when the discs come out. They could combine those efforts, and drive disc (or download) purchases through the theaters, giving theaters a small piece of those early consumers. They'd have concrete pre-order data (the package deal) upon movie release, rather than needing to wait and rely only on market research to guess at how many people might be waiting to run out and buy a disc.
I just feel like there are a lot of highly paid MBAs and executives at theater chains who are sitting around like bumps on logs. With their heads up their asses, doing nothing to address their changing industry. Every time the issue of low wages (but high executive pay) comes up people will inevitably protest "no, you just don't understand; executives are paid to be leaders and craft strategies. That's why they're paid so much."
Okay. I mean, bullshit, but okay. If they're really worth the money, come up with something. AMC and Regal have options, they're just not availing themselves of any they could turn to. They seem to just want everyone to decide to come back, without needing to be convinced or coaxed to do it.
"I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it further."
Darth Vader, Empire Strikes Back.
Theaters can alter the deal. They've been altering the deal. Mostly for the worse. Making it worse. For more than a decade now. Perhaps it's time to alter it for the good? Maybe that might work? But what do I know? I'm not a MBA, so clearly it's not possible someone who isn't could have the vision or leadership acumen to see a gold brick road theaters could follow their way out of their self-dug hole on.
I'm really tired of sensationalist headlines like this. Nothing is being killed. Theaters are simply being outcompeted, because, turns out, people much prefer watching stuff at home for a variety...
I'm really tired of sensationalist headlines like this. Nothing is being killed. Theaters are simply being outcompeted, because, turns out, people much prefer watching stuff at home for a variety of reasons. I don't see the point in "saving" them, especially since they are mostly ultra-expensive places that don't have much to offer.
Edit: On a related issue, video essayists surely have taken to the whole "turn a non-issue into a sensational problem for money" strategy of the old media. The title and premise are perfect for this. Create a problem by playing on a strongly emotional metaphor, then even talk about how to act! You have to act, don't you?
Yes, I agree - as mentioned by another post earlier, the competitive option of at home viewing has become a superior experience at a lower price. Movie theaters will have to adapt - where I live,...
Yes, I agree - as mentioned by another post earlier, the competitive option of at home viewing has become a superior experience at a lower price. Movie theaters will have to adapt - where I live, the subculture themed smaller theaters are still booming as a hipster kind of outing. Some will live and others will make way for a better economic use of the space (in my city one of the theaters became a giant Asian spa). The production studios will still make money on content.
I am one of those who don't go to cinema much anymore. My average would be probably less then once a year. Why I don't go to the cinema? Well, I have some ideas... With so much streaming platforms...
I am one of those who don't go to cinema much anymore. My average would be probably less then once a year. Why I don't go to the cinema? Well, I have some ideas...
With so much streaming platforms and stuuf like TVs or projectors and audio becoming more affordable, why would I want to? The thing is I have 2011 Panasonic plasma TV with built-in speakers, so why don't I nejoy movies on th big screen in cinema?
My wife likes romance type movies or thrillers, while I love sci-fi but hate comics inspired movies (all he Marvel thing), it's obvious we won't go to the cinema together. My movie oriented friends are not available everytime and we all have to compromiseon the movies we wat to see together.
When I go to local cinema (multi-hall) programme, I hardly find anything I would like to watch. This happens like 90% of the year. The current movie production is mediocre (from my limited point of view) with really good movies being kinda scarce (hard to find, not-plenty). I'd rather watch some old movie than go to cinema for the sake of going there.
Which gets us to price. I was in cinemaon Dune part 2. I haven't seen part 1, so I bought Blu ray of it that very day and watched it right before going on part 2. I paid SEVEN euros for the Blu ray and I paid EIGHT for the cinema. Why would I want to pay more for the cinema when I can wait a year or two and buy Blu ray for me to keep forever and watch whenever I want and do it even cheaper? I know, big screen. I'd rather save money and buy it later to see it on my TV anytime I want.
These are my points.
But I have to add that I gladly paid for the Dune part 2 in cinema! It is one of those stand-out movies that people should watch in the cinema. And also buy later. I've also been on Ford v. Ferrari (Le Mans '66 in EU) and on Ferrari movies which were also great and I bought the former and will buy the latter as well. I've also been on Australia when it launched in like 2008 and even though it did fit my wife's style more, it was one hell of a great movie!
I'm not going on Garfield: The movie (but I'm going to buy it for the kids later) or hundredth instanceof anything Marvel (which I'm not byuing ever) though. Themovie must really stand out for me to pay for the cinema. Yes, I know - 8€, why are you even mad about such a low price? Principles.
I'll preface my entire comment with this: in my 20s, I was a "go to the movies 2 or 3 times a month" sort of person. In my 40s, I barely go to the theatre at all. I think the last movie I saw in the theatres was the Mario movie. The phenomenon of people not going to see things anymore is one that is of interest to me, as I'm a part of it, so I watched this with some interest. I think this is a good video and gently urge people to watch it, but for the sake of discussion, here are the seven things:
I tried to relate to each of them, and I can see a case for all of them, although some of them are pretty same-y. 1, 2, 6 all boil down to "it is easier to watch movies at home than ever before" which I think is true. 3, 4, and to some degree 5 boil down to "the experience of going to the movies is no longer that great" which I agree with. When I think back on the last three trips to movies, 2 of them were not good experiences - there were technical issues with the theatre, which was uncomfortable, and there were rude audience members. It really left me with the feeling of "why am I spending $140+ to go the movies when it's just not fun" (note: I have a family of 5).
I think that the seventh reason - movies aren't as good anymore - is perhaps not that fair. I think that there are definitely great years for movies and worse years for movies, and maybe this year is a bit disappointing. However, even in years with must-see blockbusters, there are some movies that are great and some movies that are not. When I was younger, the less good movies just faded away, and we didn't really think of them, or feel particularly bad about having just seen them. Now it feels worse to see a mediocre movie than it did 20 years ago; if I went to see a movie I'd give 3/5 stars when I was 25, I still had a good night. Now if I go see a 3/5 movie, I'm pissed at how much money I spent. The movie itself isn't the issue; it's the ridiculous cost that is the problem.
I think there's another item that got missed, and I'm not sure if it's actually a universal thing or not, and it actually closely relates to points 1, 2, 6 above. My home theatre experience is drastically different than it was 20 years ago. Back in those days, I had a not particularly big TV, a DVD/VCR combo, and a broke-ass couch that wasn't super comfortable, not particularly great microwave popcorn etc. Now things are different - we have a big TV with a very good sound system, a comfortable couch, a popcorn popper, great snacks. Heck, we have a secondary comfortable couch with another big TV that has a good sound system in another room if people want to watch different things. Heck, we have personal computers that show movies in 4k with great headphones. Heck, I have a projector with great sound and lawn chairs if want to watch outside. I think a lot of people have also updated and upgraded their home theatre solutions so that with video on demand, streaming, and piracy, we have a better, cheaper time at home.
To me, I think that's one of the main issues - theatres haven't pivoted or made anything better. They're not comfortable, they're not better than going out, they don't sound balance well, the snacks suck, and the experience just isn't good. If they made an effort to make things better, then more people would come.
I'd start going back to theatres if they did the following:
Unfortunately, people frequently seem to blame movies instead of the crap experience that going to a theatre can be.
Maybe unpopular opinion, but imo these are mutually exclusive. I don't think people should eat at all in movie theaters. There's nothing more distracting than someone going to town on food in a movie. I've been to Studio Movie Grills and Alamo Drafthouses which are more like what you describe, and they're honestly more like themed restaurants than movie theaters. I would never watch a movie I cared about there.
The nice part about stageplay theaters is that most of them don't allow food in the seats. Drinks OK, but please no cans.
Tbh I wish theaters around me charged more for concessions and made them shittier so people would stop buying them.
Huh, different from my experience. I've been to a place called Flix Brewhouse which has food and in-house drinks served during the movies. It's never been distracting to me. It probably helps that they don't clump seats directly together and require people to show up I think 30 minutes beforehand to have time to place orders (seriously, they won't let you in after that). So food is served fairly early, and finished fairly quickly.
I guess this is just a personal taste thing. That said, movie theaters mark up concessions because they're the main source of income. Last I checked, they don't make much if any money off the ticket sales, so food is pretty much all they've got. Would be nice if the popcorn didn't give me a stomach ache every time though...
I don't think they are mutually exclusive except in the context of movie theater seating, where you are uncomfortably clumped up next to somebody you don't know, so you have to deal with whatever bullshit they are doing.
A long time ago (late 90s early 00s) in Vancouver I used to go to an independent second run theatre that had a series of couches with coffee tables and/or side tables. It was a much better experience all around; the couches were comfy, there was a decent place to put your stuff, there was service before and after. It was an overall pleasant experience, and while this was before the era of common mobile phones, I don't think a small screen would have actually been problematic. It's been a long while so the details are a bit lost to the fog if time, but I think that there were 20-25 little seating areas that could handle between 2 - 8 depending on which one you picked. It was great, and the pizza and wings were fantastic. I would go to a theatre like that where I wasn't packed in with people I didn't know, and I don't think any of the concessions would be particularly problematic.
I agree that I don't really want to watch or hear the person next to me eating and slurping their food and drink.
My wife and I recently discovered Alamo Drafthouse in our city. It has all of the things you listed (I suppose sound quality is subjective but I find it to be fine). It reignited going to the movies for us. We've seen 4 movies this year after going multiple years without going to the theater.
Alas, I don't think there are any in Canada, but they do look pretty great. I could certainly see myself attending if more theatres were like that, from what I've read online.
I think fundamentally the market size for theaters is simply shrinking. There is no magic thing they can necessarily do to turn around. It just has to find its new level of size. There is still a future for cinema, just somewhat smaller than it used to be. I personally think they have something to offer I can't get quite the same at home. A more immersive and focused experience. Doesn't have to be much more than that. That I don't go more than 5-10 times a year has more to do with time constraints than price.
We've clearly begun reaching the price limit, have passed it in some cases, for at least a portion of the potential moviegoer consumers.
So raising prices, and the same goes for concessions, isn't the answer no matter how desperate the theater chain MBAs are to "restore revenue to previous levels." MBA logic would say "if fewer customers, raise price to maintain revenue", which they usually do and then usually proceed to act surprised that (surprise!) higher prices equals lower interest.
The old joke is Good, Fast, Cheap, pick two. If prices are at or past the limits, they can't keep jacking up price looking to bring in customers; they need to push the ticket price down some since they've gone too far.
Fast they can't do much about, except perhaps yank all their advertising that people complain about (not at all uncommon to find people pissed about showing up for a 10pm start only to find that the actual movie doesn't hit the screen until well after 10:30 due to ads and trailers (which are just ads, except they're more 'fun' than ads for soda and the local dentist shop and so on).
Any MBA that proposed giving up revenue (reducing advertising) would be made fun of by the other MBAs, and we can't have that. They worked really hard to get their bullshit MBA degrees, and it's not fair for them to be laughed at by the other MBAs so clearly the half hour plus of advertising won't be going away. So Fast isn't really useful for the theaters.
That leaves Good. They need to enhance the experience. Getting control of the audience might work. They're terrified to do it because it'll affect their labor levels (poorly paid people without training are reluctant to enforce civility standards out of fear of backlash from embarrassed customers who get singled out for talking or otherwise disrupting a show). They also think they might piss off the disruptive customers and drive them away from coming back. The question here would be which is the bigger faction; the asshats who talk and screw around on their phones but will pay for a ticket to do that, or the annoyed people who don't want to pay for a show if people are gonna talk and screw around on their phones.
So to find that part out, some chain is going to have to try enforcing civility and see if it works. Alamo Drafthouse kind of is, has been, but they're pretty small on the national scale. So it's not exactly a huge sample size when you're AMC or Regal with several thousand screens you're pondering the most profitable strategy for. I've been hoping for a while for Drafthouse to expand near me, but they haven't. Like Microcenter, there is a non-zero number of people who wish they lived near a Drafthouse, but don't.
Theaters seem to think "Good" is only in the hands of the studios. As in, "if only studios would make more Good films, more people would want to come." Which, to be fair, isn't inaccurate; a very popular blockbuster film definitely drives traffic to theaters. But studios don't exactly set out to make unpopular films, so that's a whole unique discussion that's unlikely to have any real traction on the theater issue.
So short of theaters getting into the production side themselves (which there's really no reason they couldn't, especially at modest budget levels like would be needed for a solid comedy or adult drama) they need to figure out other ways to make Good even Gooder. Ways to offer more value and enhance how Good the deal offered to moviegoers is. People could buy a ticket, but they inevitably ask "but what do I get for my money?"
Well, aside from the movie itself, the theaters could look into souvenirs and take-home stuff. And make that a major priority, a serious thing they always have working.
For example, Deadpool & Wolverine has a special snacks bucket that I assume is being sold only through theaters. Similar souvenir items go for around $20 to $25, and they simply cannot cost any sizable fraction of that to produce; probably, at most including shipping to theaters, a few bucks. Lots of profit.
So there's a whole souvenir area theaters could get into. When I was young, just about every fast food place, especially in summer and around holidays, had souvenir tie-in items that were often connected to a movie. Special toys, collectible glasses or plates or something, things like that. Stuff a marketing department can think up, and a business department can arrange to have made somewhere for pennies on the dollar and shipped in to be marked up several orders of magnitude before being sold as a package deal for a movie ticket, or as an extra purchase once you've already bought that movie ticket.
A fast food place might have four different glasses back in the day, each from the movie, but four different glasses. All four made a set. Not every restaurant had them all, and definitely not all at once; they'd stagger the release. So you were encouraged to come several times and get the meal that came with the glass so you'd have all four.
Theaters could figure out a "slate" of "similar" films that'll be releasing over the year, or over a season. Come up with some array of collectables that work together. An array of glasses or plates, a poster collection, photo books, trading cards, I don't know. Something. Something that each movie has one item of, and if you see (buy a ticket package for each) all the movies and buy each item you have the whole collection to show off.
They could even get clever, nerdy, with the concept and come up with something Voltron-esque (short version; five lions get snapped together and form one robot dude). It doesn't have to be super nerdy like lions making a guy, but anything you can stand or cram together (once you have the pieces) that forms a vase or a diorama or a continuous poster or whatever, it would scratch that collectible itch lots of people have, which would encourage them to Go Buy Theater Tickets.
These days, in addition to random souvenirs and toys, they could offer posters, t-shirts and hats, or even digital stuff (special phone backgrounds or ring tones and stuff like that). Want a super cool and "rare" piece of digital art from Dune to be your phone background? Gotta see it at a theater offering a package that includes the download link for that art.
Further, theaters could get with studios and work out a package deal for the DVD or even a Paid digital download. Rather than buying only the ticket, you're getting the ticket (watch movie now) plus a copy of the DVD/Bluray (shipped on release) or the digital link (watch again when the movie's digitally available) for your money.
Theaters could even lean into the only strategy they seem to understand - exclusivity - and work out those deals to offer customers of the package (people who bought a ticket package that includes a disc or link) early release or early access to the at home version. Maybe the theater packages will drop the digital link three days early, and ship the discs early, so by having seen the movie on the big screen you can have it for home sooner than those waiting for the at home release as their first view.
And yes, whenever it drops in any form, it'll be available via pirate channels. But it would anyway, so that doesn't really impact this decision or strategy at all.
Studios might be interested since they could consider it all part of their marketing efforts. They shell out for lavish marketing to get butts in seats at the theaters upon release. Then they usually do some more marketing when the discs come out. They could combine those efforts, and drive disc (or download) purchases through the theaters, giving theaters a small piece of those early consumers. They'd have concrete pre-order data (the package deal) upon movie release, rather than needing to wait and rely only on market research to guess at how many people might be waiting to run out and buy a disc.
I just feel like there are a lot of highly paid MBAs and executives at theater chains who are sitting around like bumps on logs. With their heads up their asses, doing nothing to address their changing industry. Every time the issue of low wages (but high executive pay) comes up people will inevitably protest "no, you just don't understand; executives are paid to be leaders and craft strategies. That's why they're paid so much."
Okay. I mean, bullshit, but okay. If they're really worth the money, come up with something. AMC and Regal have options, they're just not availing themselves of any they could turn to. They seem to just want everyone to decide to come back, without needing to be convinced or coaxed to do it.
Darth Vader, Empire Strikes Back.
Theaters can alter the deal. They've been altering the deal. Mostly for the worse. Making it worse. For more than a decade now. Perhaps it's time to alter it for the good? Maybe that might work? But what do I know? I'm not a MBA, so clearly it's not possible someone who isn't could have the vision or leadership acumen to see a gold brick road theaters could follow their way out of their self-dug hole on.
I'm really tired of sensationalist headlines like this. Nothing is being killed. Theaters are simply being outcompeted, because, turns out, people much prefer watching stuff at home for a variety of reasons. I don't see the point in "saving" them, especially since they are mostly ultra-expensive places that don't have much to offer.
Edit: On a related issue, video essayists surely have taken to the whole "turn a non-issue into a sensational problem for money" strategy of the old media. The title and premise are perfect for this. Create a problem by playing on a strongly emotional metaphor, then even talk about how to act! You have to act, don't you?
Yes, I agree - as mentioned by another post earlier, the competitive option of at home viewing has become a superior experience at a lower price. Movie theaters will have to adapt - where I live, the subculture themed smaller theaters are still booming as a hipster kind of outing. Some will live and others will make way for a better economic use of the space (in my city one of the theaters became a giant Asian spa). The production studios will still make money on content.
I am one of those who don't go to cinema much anymore. My average would be probably less then once a year. Why I don't go to the cinema? Well, I have some ideas...
These are my points.
But I have to add that I gladly paid for the Dune part 2 in cinema! It is one of those stand-out movies that people should watch in the cinema. And also buy later. I've also been on Ford v. Ferrari (Le Mans '66 in EU) and on Ferrari movies which were also great and I bought the former and will buy the latter as well. I've also been on Australia when it launched in like 2008 and even though it did fit my wife's style more, it was one hell of a great movie!
I'm not going on Garfield: The movie (but I'm going to buy it for the kids later) or hundredth instanceof anything Marvel (which I'm not byuing ever) though. Themovie must really stand out for me to pay for the cinema. Yes, I know - 8€, why are you even mad about such a low price? Principles.