Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Movies Losing Popularity at Box Office 795

andyring writes "Without the slightest mention of piracy, the MPAA said box-office revenues declined by 8 percent last year. About 40 percent of the decline came from the U.S. Now if only they'd realize that the decline is from movies sucking more than my shop vac." It's been a while since a film warranted spending the money to watch it in a room full of strangers.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Movies Losing Popularity at Box Office

Comments Filter:
  • Summary inaccurate! (Score:3, Informative)

    by Jerry Coffin ( 824726 ) on Thursday March 09, 2006 @07:50PM (#14887105)
    According to the summary, the US was responsible for 40% of the drop. According to the story, the US was respnosible for 40% of the sales. The story says sales dropped 6% in the US but 7.9% worldwide -- so the US was actually responsible for about well under 40% of the drop.

    OTOH, whether it's 6% or 8% doesn't make all that much difference in the end -- this is something like the fifth year running that movie sales have dropped...

  • by johnlcallaway ( 165670 ) on Thursday March 09, 2006 @07:53PM (#14887130)
    I only go to movies that have a very large visual or audio appeal, or something I really want to see. Or I am really bored. Why??
    • Kids go to matinees. Being in the same theaters as a bunch of rug rats suck.
    • Evening shows cost $9 (or more). Have to get a keg o'Icee, another $4.
    • Have to go with daughter or girlfriend, and pay for their move and stuff. Another $13-$18. Total so far, around $30.
    • Netflix costs less than $20/month and the food is a lot cheaper, and I can drink beer or tequila instead of an Icee.
    Just because I can afford $30/week to go to a movie, doesn't mean I want to pay it.
  • by futuresheep ( 531366 ) on Thursday March 09, 2006 @07:54PM (#14887133) Journal
    It costs me close to $70.00 by the time I'm done with paying for:

    *Crap to eat

    It costs me approx. $15.00 for a DVD.

    To add to that my home theater looks and sounds great, the seats are more comfortable, we can pee when we want, and the drinks are a hell of a lot cheaper. We haven't been to a theater in over three years now when before the munchkin we used to go at least once a month. Sure, there was the initial investment in the home theater, but we're past breaking even on that now.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 09, 2006 @07:56PM (#14887147)
    As Roger Ebert pointed out [suntimes.com], the "Box Office Slump" is an myth. 2005 Box Office sales only appear down when compared to 2004, because 2004 saw the release of "The Passion of the Christ", which brought thousands of customers who otherwise do not visit the movie theaters.

    The fact is, 2005 was the second or third best year for film revenue in history.

  • by vettemph ( 540399 ) on Thursday March 09, 2006 @08:01PM (#14887188)
    >spending the money to watch it in a room full of strangers.

      spending the money to watch it in a room full of assholes.

  • Re:duh (Score:4, Informative)

    by vertinox ( 846076 ) on Thursday March 09, 2006 @08:08PM (#14887239)
    The only movie i've looked forward to seeing lately is V for Vendetta and thats becuase its by the W brothers

    You mean brother and sister?
  • Re:Home Theaters (Score:2, Informative)

    by expressovi ( 952511 ) on Thursday March 09, 2006 @08:09PM (#14887250)
    I would disagree...I am in your category of young people and I can tell you that the theater is the last place you will see me and my friends. Also to the general public a home theater is 5.1 surround sound. In my case 5.1 and a mitsubishi projector. With some paint and creativity my basement is how I want my movie experience to be. With the price of DLP projecters lowering it's easily becoming more affordable to buy one of these than say a rear projection t.v. which until recently had on of the worst vewing angle of any t.v.'s I had viewed.
  • by layer3switch ( 783864 ) on Thursday March 09, 2006 @09:52PM (#14887886)
    The story of a man... will change everything... from a decadent time... a war torn nation... love for his country... BUT it will never be the same...

    blah blah

    Simple fact is that movie-going is no longer a past time activity. It's becoming more and more a privilege to be entertained rather than being entertainment for the common man/woman/child/old people.

    I can take the crowded theater, high price of pop corn, sticky floor, crappy seat, and the guy/gal sitting behind me talking on the phone. However what I cannot take are;

    1) treated like 2nd class citizen with empty center seats for higher prices
    2) double and triple gated entrances to theater seating, treating everyone like little kids sneaking into movies
    3) "Piracy is illegal" message then FBI Warning right after, treating everyone like criminals or just plain ignorant
    4) Remake of Remake of Remake of another Remake of the original from 1942
    5) high price tickets forcing me to make a decision between films

    Going to movies used to be "entertainment", a mindless fun and/or enlightment, now it's a chore, a responsibility, a time taking investment.

    I used to go to movies every week, watching at least 1 or 2 movies (paying every penny), regardless of its critical acclaim from so called "experts". Now, first I have to check out box office number and reviews (watch what's worth money).

    Then I have to put up with checking with 2 to 3 different ticket checkers to get into the seat. If that is not enough, now I have to put up with long public annoucements and commercials that tells me "stealing is bad" message. Ironically yet another message telling me to buy food and drink with highway robbery prices.

    If insulting is the way to inform the public, then this one tops the chart. A bright red seats in the center of theater for even higher price with its own popcorn and drink stand. Even more insulting when those seats are totally empty.

    Especially ironic when the movie we are watching is either about main characters being compassionate criminal, murderer, or rebel.

    The movies portays breaking the rule and going against authority is cool, and movie threater chains to label movie-goers with 2nd class ignorant citizens is perfectly fine, but when the box office doesn't do well, it's not entirely because movie sucks, maybe and MAYBE people like myself don't want to be in such place. After all, if I'm going to be insulted and annoyed, I rather be insulted and annoyed at home watching the movie on cable or DVD.
  • Seriously.. (Score:3, Informative)

    by StikyPad ( 445176 ) on Thursday March 09, 2006 @10:24PM (#14888033) Homepage
    I was thinking about watching a movie the other day. Since I didn't have anything particular in mind, I went to imdb.com to see what looked good. This is what I found about the top 10 movies.

    1. Family Reunion 2.8/10 Family Comedy/Drama (Worst 100: #61)
    2. 16 Blocks 6.8/10 Crime/Drama/Thriller
    3. Eight Below 7.4/10 Family Adventure
    4. Ultraviolet 4.0/10 Superhero/SciFi/Something
    5. Aquamarine 2.0/10 Kid's Comedy
    6. The Pink Panther 4.7/10 Family Comedy
    7. Block Party 7.6/10 Documentary/Real Event
    8. Date Movie 2.8/10 Comedy (Worst 100: #57)
    9. Curious George 6.9/10 Family Comedy
    10. Firewall 6.0/10 Crime/Drama/Thriller

    Two of the lowest 100 rated movies ever.

    I really have no desire to see any of those movies, at least not in the theater. I'm not really interested in the family/kids movies, so that rules out half of them. I'd rather watch Dave Chapelle's Block Party on video so I can skip music I might not like. I'm not going to watch a movie rated below 5, so that rules out Date Movie and Ultraviolet. That leaves Firewall (and we all know how accurate the technical aspects of THAT movie are gonna be) and 16 Blocks/The Gauntlet/Escape From NY/LA/Whatever. Yeah... pass.
  • ya so? (Score:2, Informative)

    by Dr Floppy ( 898439 ) on Thursday March 09, 2006 @10:27PM (#14888049)
    If Hollywood is going to be putting out crap like
    • Ultraviolet
      • (worst movie I have ever seen and probably will ever see) its no wonder that they are losing $. They are following the record industry down the crapper by putting out the same old sh*t, movie goers get tired of the same effects and loopy actors. Give us new faces with talent and give them a good script written by original writers.
  • Check Out Firefly... (Score:2, Informative)

    by WiseWeasel ( 92224 ) on Friday March 10, 2006 @12:28AM (#14888580)
    Check out the TV series Firefly, now available on DVD. It's by the same guy who did Serenity (many of the same actors as well), but much, much more interesting and fun to watch (for the most part). I hadn't even heard of it when it aired, and only found out about it when Serenity came out on DVD and people were talking about it in the blogosphere... Definitely worth checking out...
  • Re:Why Movies Suck (Score:3, Informative)

    by networkBoy ( 774728 ) on Friday March 10, 2006 @01:30AM (#14888772) Journal
    the only thing that movie had in common with the book was the title *just like "I Robot"*
  • Re:Why Movies Suck (Score:3, Informative)

    by BrynM ( 217883 ) * on Friday March 10, 2006 @03:48AM (#14889127) Homepage Journal
    Like the other poster said, the rights to Peter Pan belongto the Children's Hospital. Here's [gosh.org] some info.
  • Re:Why Movies Suck (Score:2, Informative)

    by stanmann ( 602645 ) on Friday March 10, 2006 @09:50AM (#14890133) Journal
    Well they were anyway. Now that she's Dead [sfwa.org] I'm not sure.
  • by Gulthek ( 12570 ) on Friday March 10, 2006 @10:07AM (#14890236) Homepage Journal

    Serenity was by the same guy who made Firefly, not the other way around.

    And how can you be a slashdot reader and not have ever heard of Firefly?

  • Re:Why Movies Suck (Score:3, Informative)

    by KlomDark ( 6370 ) on Friday March 10, 2006 @10:51AM (#14890526) Homepage Journal
    Last I heard about Ringworld was 1) SciFi had the rights and put it on hold. 2) The Titanic guy had the rights, and put it on hold.

    Nobody's got the balls to do it. I dunno if today's tech is really up to the task of rendering the ringworld. Sure, there's some fan art out there, but it doesn't look anywhere movie quality. Doing the rendering at 1 pixel per 100 miles^2 kicks the numbers up to so many zeroes it's crazy, let alone at 1 pixel per 1 mile^2 which just looks like a marble factory.
  • by anaesthetica ( 596507 ) on Friday March 10, 2006 @12:35PM (#14891205) Homepage Journal
    3) A liquor license, even just wine-beer, for R-rated evening showings after 8pm. I'd love to be able to drink a cold one while I'm watching a movie in a room full of grownups. I already have a local theater that does this with second-run films, but I'd love it if I could get this kind of service in a first-run show with a kick-ass sound system.

    There was a 'premium' theater near me in Owings Mills, MD that had this kind of setup. They served nice food and had an alcohol license. It was 21-over only to get into the theater. They had nice big wide leather seats that reclined, stadium seating, areas between the seats where you could set down your drink and food tray. Guess what? It went out of business and was bought by the AMC chain. Now it's normal and profitable. There aren't enough adult-only crowds to make a 'first class' theater worthwhile.

Karl's version of Parkinson's Law: Work expands to exceed the time alloted it.