Could COMMON SENSE Save Hollywood?

Published on June 4, 2006 By Gideon MacLeish In Misc

I heard this idea tossed out on a radio call in show the other day, but, sadly, it wasn't pursued as much as it should be.

With box office revenues declining in Hollywood, it seems that they could save their own skins by emplying a more common sense approach to the release of their movies. No matter how sophisticated our home entertainment systems get, there will always be an appeal to the theater because it gives us something to do, someplace to go to socialize.

And while theaters are enjoying the successes of their big releases (The Da Vinci Code, XMen 3, the Break-up), their "B-List" releases will be headed to video in short order, without making a good return at the box office.

So, why not offer bargain prices on those B-List releases in the movie theaters? I sure would not want to pay as much to see a Martin Lawrence flick, for example, as I would a Tom Hanks flick. There's a substantial difference in the quality of acting between the two. But if I were guided by the fact that it was two bucks cheaper to see the Martin Lawrence flick, I might be persuaded.

Like many other Americans, I love my movies (and was thrilled when the theater in the town nearest us reopened). But I don't love the cost, and, while I will certainly shell out full price when the next Narnia release comes along, I'm going to be a little more begrudging of my cash if Will Ferrell decides to do an Anchorman 2 (nothing personal, Will, but Aslan trumps Ron Burgundy). But it might be a different story altogether if the budget were a primary consideration.

Comments

Texas Wahine

on Jun 04, 2006

That's a neat idea.

It costs us between $23 and $45 to go to the theater (ouch!). It's something we really enjoy, and we typically go at least once a month. We'd DEFINITELY go more often if we had the option of going to reduced price movies.

(Right now, it's costing us a fortune: Over the Hedge, then XMen 3, Cars this Friday, then we've got Nacho Libre, Superman, and Pirates of the Carribean...yikes!)

What you're proposing will never happen, though, because even B list celebs have such egos that they'd never go for it.

-----

on Jun 04, 2006

Here it's around 7.75 for the ticket. Then there is the candy (3.50+), popcorn (3.00+), and the soda (2.50+). (Plus extras) It may not be as expensive as other places, but, with it being the only cinema in town...it sucks. I usually rent movies.

I agree, though...too many egos. (Some one oughta pop there bubbles...)

It drives me nuts to see "actors", behave the way they do. It makes my blood boil to see, so called "actors," say, "I act because i love to." Yet they walk around as if they have some sort of immunity to...well, everything. I noticed a lot of that in the more recent actors.

B'ah! (*IF* I ever 'make it' in directing...I never want to be like that. If i do...y'all have permission to smack the shite out of me.)

Anywho...

~L

AvantiTexan

on Jun 05, 2006

This is actually a pretty good idea. I do see that the prices will have to go down in the future, but I don't necessarily think that it will be based on the acting.

I loved the line - Aslan trumps Ron Burgundy!

I can't speak much for that states, but here in Italy the pirating of movies is rampant. One person goes to see the movie in the theater, said person films it, copies it and gives the copies to friends. The friends watch it until the film comes out on DVD. Once on DVD, one friend in the group buys it and copies it for all the rest.

The less and less there are of people that go to the cinema, the higher the prices will be.

kingbee

on Jun 05, 2006

theatre operators are free to charge what they want. studios are forbidden from setting ticket prices.

if studios really believe theatre operators to be their major market, they'd negotiate something which might enable theatres to offer several price tiers as you suggest. it would likely work to the studios' benefit in more ways than one by providing yet one more way to ensure net profit participants never get paid.

Dr Guy

on Jun 05, 2006

I'm going to be a little more begrudging of my cash if Will Ferrell decides to do an Anchorman 2

Actually, any amount of money for a Will Ferrell flick is too much! He and Pauly Shore are nails on a chalk board to me.

-----

on Jun 05, 2006

Actually, any amount of money for a Will Ferrell flick is too much! He and Pauly Shore are nails on a chalk board to me.

"HEY Buuudy...gonna work on my tannage..." LOL

The only two movies I like pauly shore in are Jury duty, and that one about him going to the girls house, some farm.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!