|
|
Posted by trike on 06/02/06 05:44
GMAN wrote:
> In article <e5mpmp$9rg$1@reader1.panix.com>, urban@panix.com (Michael Urban) wrote:
> >In article <1149106233.785832.46210@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> > <jeffy3@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>I was 13 when it came out and I remember that it played in a lot of the
> >>same theaters for more than a year. In fact, a special birthday cake
> >>poster was issued on the one year anniversary. Even TITANIC only
> >>seemed to play for maybe four months. A different world today, I
> >>suppose, with so many more screens.
> >>
> >
> >The big difference is, of course, home video. When the movie
> >is out on DVD within three months, the theatrical market
> >has to be short-lived. Frankly, I am glad I am not a theatre
> >owner in the present market.
> Why? The theaters make their money off the concession stands.
It's a sliding scale. The longer a movie is in theatres, the more the
theatre owners earn per ticket. One of the reasons why Hollywood is so
obsessed with the churn-and-burn of "openinging weekend and then out."
Since they generally lose money on each film released in theatres
nowadays, though, I'm kind of surprised this mentality still holds
true. The longer a film plays, the more prestige it garners, allowing
them to crow about that when it comes time to start really making the
profits.
Doug
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|