Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Gotta limit Americans' ability to know the world exists beyond what they're told.

I used to go the cinema a lot. But my salary is static and the cost of cinema isn't.

Going back to the impact of streaming?

We’re hardly hurting for content. Like the days of Cable/Satellite, far from all of it good. But there’s almost always something new to watch. And of pretty much cinematic quality.

Now I know it eventually crashed and burned, but think the production quality of Game of Thrones, especially in its heyday. We just didn’t have that sort of stuff before.

Streaming has also kind of done away with “We Need A Minimim Of X Episodes For Syndication”. Which, again not universally, has meant slicker shows with less abject filler. The writers need only write the main story, with perhaps a bit of fleshing out.

It’s a very different discipline, falling somewhere comfortably between traditional Cinema and Telly. As in, you can now write and make a 6 hour Epic, broken up into 6-8 episodes. And we the audience seem to have a growing appetite for it, even as those making it continue to refine it, and studios start to get to grips with “more isn’t always better”.

But some of the wild west mentality of the early days of streaming are gone.

They are now closer to the cutthroat world of broadcast.

I was watching a program yesterday about Peacock, NBCs streaming platform and them canceling shows that were already filmed, due to poor ratings.

It takes time for the tiger to change its stripes. Evolution isn’t a swift process.

The expansion of streaming to studio specific services feels kind of inevitable. And I think it’s also inevitable many will fall away.

Disney+ I expect to survive, because the House of Mouse bought so many properties before launch. Certainly I watch it far more than Netflix.

I also forgot my conclusion. With a wealth of streaming offerings, I feel less compulsion to go to the cinema to see something of cinema quality that’s new. And I’ve the double benefit of many classics at the touch of a button.

The_Real_Chris wrote:
I used to go the cinema a lot. But my salary is static and the cost of cinema isn't.

This is an excellent point, and one I feel most “why cinema is dying” articles downplay. Unfortunately, I think the studios have trapped themselves in a place where they are pricing their audience out but can’t just cut prices to affordability and assume the audience they’ve lost will return.

I random dream (that I will never act on) is to go buy one of those 1-screen movie theatres in a rural town, live above it, and run the theatre. Or possibly a drive-in where I live at the premises.

It will never happen, but I can dream about it.

I’d love to do that too. A lottery win dream, when money is no object, and passion can be everything.

Streaming bundles are becoming pretty common. We've ALMOST reinvented cable.

Kinda?

Cable/Satellite not only tied you to a bundle, but also a minimum term contract (at least in the UK, natch I can’t accurately speak for anywhere else).

Streaming? Sure things are getting more spread out. But so far, I’m not aware of any with any more than a month’s contract.

It is a pain in the balls to be sure, but there’s so far sod all apart from pretty mild inconvenience in the grand scheme of things to do one or two per month, consume all you want to consume, the leave that particular table. Rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat.

I’m not having a pop at anyone, because whichever deity you do or don’t believe in knows I’m lazy there, but streaming is only as expensive each month as we the individual allow it to be.

And yes, I’m aware and make use of discounted annual subscriptions, but that’s not the same as “you must subscribe for at least 12 months”.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Evolution isn’t a swift process.

Unless you're a Pokemon master and you want to be the best there ever was.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Going back to the impact of streaming?

We’re hardly hurting for content. Like the days of Cable/Satellite, far from all of it good. But there’s almost always something new to watch. And of pretty much cinematic quality.

Now I know it eventually crashed and burned, but think the production quality of Game of Thrones, especially in its heyday. We just didn’t have that sort of stuff before.

Streaming has also kind of done away with “We Need A Minimim Of X Episodes For Syndication”. Which, again not universally, has meant slicker shows with less abject filler. The writers need only write the main story, with perhaps a bit of fleshing out.

It’s a very different discipline, falling somewhere comfortably between traditional Cinema and Telly. As in, you can now write and make a 6 hour Epic, broken up into 6-8 episodes. And we the audience seem to have a growing appetite for it, even as those making it continue to refine it, and studios start to get to grips with “more isn’t always better”.

The other thing with streaming, which Disney seems to have embraced more than others, is the ability to vary episode length icy more than broadcast TV. Have a nice self-contained 35 minute episode? No need to pad it out with a B-story. Need an hour to really explore something deep or interesting? No need to cut it down to 45 minutes.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:
I used to go the cinema a lot. But my salary is static and the cost of cinema isn't.

This is an excellent point, and one I feel most “why cinema is dying” articles downplay. Unfortunately, I think the studios have trapped themselves in a place where they are pricing their audience out but can’t just cut prices to affordability and assume the audience they’ve lost will return.

I don't think it's really the studios that are the main force in pricing people out, that's more down to the cinemas and the general economy of how much space (and energy) costs in this day and age.... otherwise if the actual print and licence to show it was the major cost element cinemas would never had had the incentive to convert themselves into those annoying multiscreen places where they franticly try and cram as many screens as they can into what used to be an attractive, spacious cinema

I seem to recall Lucas pushing for more money per ticket when the prequels came out causing an instant price increase. Yes, costs are increasing to keep theaters open, but the studios also played a role.


On a different note, Sinners has expanded to more than 150 more theaters. It’s a rare movie that plays on more screens in its fourth week of wide release than its first.

 Jadenim wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Going back to the impact of streaming?

We’re hardly hurting for content. Like the days of Cable/Satellite, far from all of it good. But there’s almost always something new to watch. And of pretty much cinematic quality.

Now I know it eventually crashed and burned, but think the production quality of Game of Thrones, especially in its heyday. We just didn’t have that sort of stuff before.

Streaming has also kind of done away with “We Need A Minimim Of X Episodes For Syndication”. Which, again not universally, has meant slicker shows with less abject filler. The writers need only write the main story, with perhaps a bit of fleshing out.

It’s a very different discipline, falling somewhere comfortably between traditional Cinema and Telly. As in, you can now write and make a 6 hour Epic, broken up into 6-8 episodes. And we the audience seem to have a growing appetite for it, even as those making it continue to refine it, and studios start to get to grips with “more isn’t always better”.

The other thing with streaming, which Disney seems to have embraced more than others, is the ability to vary episode length icy more than broadcast TV. Have a nice self-contained 35 minute episode? No need to pad it out with a B-story. Need an hour to really explore something deep or interesting? No need to cut it down to 45 minutes.

Very true. Not always used wisely like (a 25 minute episode just doesn’t satisfy me in itself), but again another relatively new development it’ll take time for writers to adapt to and fully embrace.

Sinners is in my area, for a 9:15 showing on a single screen. So far, I have been unsuccessful in lobbying my wife to go see it.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I seem to recall Lucas pushing for more money per ticket when the prequels came out causing an instant price increase. Yes, costs are increasing to keep theaters open, but the studios also played a role.

I think you're thinking of when he refused to put Attack of the Clones of film, which forced theaters to move towards digital projectors.

 Easy E wrote:
Sinners is in my area, for a 9:15 showing on a single screen. So far, I have been unsuccessful in lobbying my wife to go see it.

Have you tried saying to her

[whispers from stage left]

What? Really? Actionable? Grounds for divorce?

[whispers from stage left]

Ooh, that does sound nasty

[whispers from stage left]

I’ll….I’ll get my coat.

[exits thread right, but not too far right]

 Jadenim wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Going back to the impact of streaming?

We’re hardly hurting for content. Like the days of Cable/Satellite, far from all of it good. But there’s almost always something new to watch. And of pretty much cinematic quality.

Now I know it eventually crashed and burned, but think the production quality of Game of Thrones, especially in its heyday. We just didn’t have that sort of stuff before.

Streaming has also kind of done away with “We Need A Minimim Of X Episodes For Syndication”. Which, again not universally, has meant slicker shows with less abject filler. The writers need only write the main story, with perhaps a bit of fleshing out.

It’s a very different discipline, falling somewhere comfortably between traditional Cinema and Telly. As in, you can now write and make a 6 hour Epic, broken up into 6-8 episodes. And we the audience seem to have a growing appetite for it, even as those making it continue to refine it, and studios start to get to grips with “more isn’t always better”.

The other thing with streaming, which Disney seems to have embraced more than others, is the ability to vary episode length icy more than broadcast TV. Have a nice self-contained 35 minute episode? No need to pad it out with a B-story. Need an hour to really explore something deep or interesting? No need to cut it down to 45 minutes.

It's more than that. With streaming series, you don't have to build your storytelling around scheduled commercial breaks. Well, in the US at least...not sure how those work in other countries.

Having said that, let's not act like streaming revolutionized *everything*. Premium channels existed long before streaming that had series that didn't need to play by broadcast rules.

 Easy E wrote:
Sinners is in my area, for a 9:15 showing on a single screen. So far, I have been unsuccessful in lobbying my wife to go see it.

Did you tell her it has not one but two Michael B Jordans? There’s some romance, although it is also a horny movie. And the music is fantastic.

Depending on if she shares your political frustrations, some of the action may also be cathartic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I seem to recall Lucas pushing for more money per ticket when the prequels came out causing an instant price increase. Yes, costs are increasing to keep theaters open, but the studios also played a role.

I think you're thinking of when he refused to put Attack of the Clones of film, which forced theaters to move towards digital projectors.

Maybe. I remember tickets jumping to roughly twice the price of a book (back when MMPBs were cheaper), and it causing some ruckus. He got the blame at the time.

Final Destination: Bloodlines is going to surpass all the previous films in the franchise very quickly. It made more than 50 million domestic and 100 million worldwide in its opening weekend. So, look for lots of nostalgia/legacy horror movies over the next few years.

Sinner is still gaining theaters, holding really well week after week. Thunderbolts, not so much.

The Weeknd’s new movie, Hurry Up Tomorrow, is a bomb. Some have dubbed it this year’s Megalopolis.

AMC are expanding half-price Tuesday to half-price Tuesdays and Wednesdays in mid June.

To be fair to Megalopolis..... it never even came to many areas. I never had the chance to see it on a big screen, and I am still kinda' pissed about it.

Surprisingly, Sinners has survived into a fourth week here. I saw it the last night of week three, expecting it to be the last showing; but it is still here and even expanded the number of viewings. It has been in the Luxury theatre the whole time too.

My wife was interested in seeing Thunderbolts* this weekend when it was raining, but just lost interest the closer we got to show time. Her quote was, "It will be on D+ in a few weeks anyway....." Another sign that streaming is actually bad for the movie industry.

I love the cinema, and don't mind paying to go. But the real issue isn't the price, it's the behaviours of others in the cinema. This has pretty much stopped me attending; it's been months since the last time I went when I used to go regularly.
Cinema etiquette seems to have died as a thing.

grahamdbailey wrote:
I love the cinema, and don't mind paying to go. But the real issue isn't the price, it's the behaviours of others in the cinema. This has pretty much stopped me attending; it's been months since the last time I went when I used to go regularly.
Cinema etiquette seems to have died as a thing.

It might just be a location or show time problem.
I hardly ever go to a movie during peak show times. Most things I've seen opening weekend in recent years have been on Thur evening about 7/8pm, earliest showing Sat morning (because there's gaming to be done later ), or late afternoon/evening Sunday.
Virtually no audience issues.

Other stuff I'll catch a week or so later & the crowds will have moved on.

The big theater near me that always shows the indie films is the same one where every mainstream audience texts and shouts the whole film. But the crowds for Neon films and such are perfectly well behaved there.

But down the street is the theater where all the old people go. That’s where we watch the big mainstream movies, because is olds don’t text.

Snow White is ending its run with less than 90 million domestic, a shockingly small number. That’s less than Captain America 4’s opening weekend, and about half as much as Snow White and the Huntsman made domestically.

On the other side of things, Sinners had 41 consecutive days earning more than $1million.

Sinners keeps moving up in the lists for highest grossing Horror and R-rated movies. Meanwhile, 28 Years Later had a slightly disappointing opening weekend but a very positive hold for its first Monday, better than M3gan’s hold.

The real story is Pixar’s newest film, Elio, bombing hard. It had Pixar’s worst opening ever, and its first Monday worse than Elemental’s second Monday.

Bride Hard also dropped this last weekend, to less than $1 million. That has to hurt.

Must go see 28 Years Later. Well I say must. Might be one better suited to home viewing.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Must go see 28 Years Later. Well I say must. Might be one better suited to home viewing.

Hopefully it's more intelligent than the last film, which everyone's brain was destroyed by the stupid virus.

---

I just saw an ad for M3GAN 2.0 - WTF is this movie supposed to be? The first one was a cringy horror-comedy, this one made me do the dog head tilt and say, "Huh?" at the sceeen.

It’s Campy Terminator 2. As a big fan of Adam West Batman and The Apple, I’m quite looking forward to it. Hopefully it will be as ridiculous as it looks.