Loach attacks "closed off" cinema screens

Law Abiding Citizen would have been at your Cineworld.

My local cinema isn't showing Cop Out (which I really wanted to see). Instead it's showing that Streetdance 3D (how the **** can it be in 3D? Is George Sampson going to jump out of the screen and make all the 10 year old girls scream after him? Pathetic).

I realise the audience for Streetdance is much bigger than the audience for Cop Out (I shouldn't think it's going to appeal to anyone over 40 or anyone under 15). Most of the people going to see it will likely be Bruce Willis fans, wanting to see him in anoher decent action role for once.
 
Most of the big cities do have art house cinemas now but I do take his point.
Some of the absolute dross you see in the multiplexes you just know is only there because of who it is who owns the distributors.

I mean, when you see things about American Football or Thanks Giving or other stuff that we have zero interest in, it really shows up the system at it's most corrupt.

Even the cinemas know they'll only be playing it two to three weeks but they're obliged to do it anyway.

Crazy.
 
What a self contradictory opinion. So I guess americans shouldn't have to watch slum dog millionaire because they generally don't care about india either right?
 
You have hit the nail spot on the head. I went to see Cop Out (thought it was great fun), not because I fancied the film, but because I'm a 30 year old Bruce Willis fan and wanted to see him in it.
 
What your argument relies on is an assumption of real pent up demand for independent cinema on opening day/week, at local cinemas. This is the assumption that lies behind all the false outrage. But the reality doesn't support it, where there are independent cinemas they are not making money hand over fist, because if they were, they'd be spreading like cancer all over the country. But hey, whats facts when you got outrage right? Esp when it comes to sneering at the "low" tastes of others.



You make the massive and unfounded assumption that it scales based on a single example that does nothing of the sort. It probably doesn't scale, or else as i said, the independence cinemas would be so successful they'd inevitably expand all over the uk. Either independence cinemas are spending their massive cash take on brand new rolls royces every week instead of expanding to meet market demand or theres a giant hole in your theory.



You are one to talk of sources, your entire assumption on rigged box office assumes that the big companies give the big chains lousy contract deals. So the independents must be better on this aspect by default. If independents are giving independent theatres lousy deals, why isn't loach speaking up eh?



Your outrage is based on a perception of being denied something you are owed. A conspiratorial view essentially, which assume great injustice as there is assumed market simply being thrown under the bus. The independents however don't have to perform at blockbuster levels for success, they simply have to make money. You don' t seem to like to look reality in the face because the market has spoken, its very hard for independent cinemas to stay open, there are no audience for indi films knocking down your doors to see films as one would assume based on your view of the world. Loach and you could get together with investors of like mind to open independent cinemas to test your theory. If what you are saying is true, all your business would succeed beyond your wildest imaginations. Go ahead, talk is cheap. Why isn't loach jumping on this golden opportunity instead of whining about it?




I'm saying they are business people, and have learned over decades of lessons from the market. They are not leaving money on the table as you are claiming. If they are, its a massive business opportunity for you and mr loach to jump in and fill that gap.




The business has market history to work with, and so they know when to bet big, and when to bet small. Loach is pissed he doesn't get the big bet, well too bad. If he can't turn that small bet into a rolling word of mouth big win he really has nothing to stand on. Like it or not, you fail to acknowledge the actual market we are dealing with, where there are thousanRAB of independent films made, and the filtration process starts LONG before it gets anywhere near even an independent cinema. Are you going to claim film festivals and distributors are depriving you of access to all films ever made?



Apparently you have the "communist" ideal of fairness, where your idea of fairness is arbitrary, based on edict by benevolent dictator instead of tested on the market. The big film studios get their big bets because they have a history of success, they are known quantities and have done their own filtration process during the production, and will back their own films, its imperfect, but its far better than finding 1 good independent film in a sea of a thousand by random chance. Why would you as a theatre owner invest countless screens on something without big money backing it. How could you pretend that's not a rational business decision. Their filter works as well as any other, big films cost big, and have every chance to fail big as well, there is no rigged guaranty of profit even if they open on many screens, but their backers support their films, and that justifys the theatre owners giving them more of a chance. Its a business model that works, and is why megaplexes survive, while independent theatres are far more rare. But of course snobs have a patronizing view of others and decry their low tastes, so basically you have to argue that they are being tricked into watching what they watch when they could follow you instead right?


Anyway, if you'd like to test your fairness theory, you and mr loach are free to do this. Start an independent cinema and apply no filters at all, let the flood of indi/regular films in and lets see how your business fares. Mr loach knows hes just b.s.ing, its a cynical game some of these indi types play to gain press and cast themselves as the underdog to gain sympathy and support. Its nothing more than a different type of marketing. Just as when they try to cast the fact that their film cost almost nothing to make as a positive, when the consumer doesn't get a discount on his ticket price regardless. Its just a different type of spin.
 
I'm just saying loach doesn't have a point. He's had every opportunity, far more than most indi film makers to succeed, but most of his films are marginal, failures, or simply forgettable. Hes not had one trainspotting among his works. Its rather arrogant of him to believe that people should watch his films, never mind being outrage at a supposed conspiracy keeping him away from supposed success. He's just another "artist" looking to point the finger of blame anywhere other than himself.

As I said, his outrage and fear over the future is just bs. There are more avenues for film than ever before, more word of mouth/marketing opportunities with the internet and ever cheaper production/distribution and of course the home dvd/bluray market as well. Never mind the countless channels on pay tv we have now. Now consumers have access to online shops like amazon/ebay where a vast catalog of film is available at a click, no longer are you limited to what the shop keeper chooses to fit on his shelf. Film makers have countless more opportunities now than in the past, those that fail to take advantage of them deserve to fail. Those that fail have no right to complain. The lamenting of this or that indi production being pushed aside by the big corps has been repeated for decades now. Its just never rang true, and is just essentially "we are outsiders, arent we cool" marketing spin at this point. It just comes down to a lot of bad excuses for failure.
 
Streetdance 3D has had much better reviews than Cop Out. My local Vue is showing Four Lions and Streetdance four times a day but Cop Out only three times, so they must expect less local interest in Cop Out than in most other films.

I find most films I want to see get shown either at the Vues or the local independent cinemas, but actually the independents are increasing unadventurous in their programming. For example the Gate is showing Bad Lieutenant at the moment, which is on at the Vue as well.
 
Pocatello:

There are two posts from a thread (on Cinema prices) back in February.





FYI - I have no axe to grind on either the quality of films, Independent Cinema or Independent Theatre. I would quite like to see a British movie industry prospering - I can't imagine I'm the only one. However, as far as I'm concerned a film is a film - whether it's foreign, Independent or from a major movie company.

My issue (apologies for repeating it yet again, but you don't seem to get it) is that the big movie studios dictate what is being seen in cinemas up and down the country. It's got nothing to do with public taste, or market forces. And it should have...
 
A lot of this is easily fixable. It looks like I'm having a pop at Cineworld but all the chains of cinemas are as bad as each other.

Cineworld have leaflets of showtimes. Each one is specific to the venue as it has the map of how to get to it. Considering you can only pick them up in the venue I'm guessing they worked that out already.:rolleyes:
Anyhow, why can't they put on that a list of forthcoming films that will not be shown at that venue. That way people know to look at other branches or if need be a different company.
That will save people holding on for the film on the off chance it opens later than elsewhere as has happened with Four Lion which got a few screenings last week and is now gone.
A full listing of films and venues being shown could be put in the magazine.
Every cinema chain's website could post in advance where a film is or isn't going to be shown. They know further than just 2 weeks ahead where films are going to be shown, so why not do that? The Odeon website are selling tickets for Twilight that opens in July. So that shows they know what film and the times are on that week well in advance.
Tooth Fairy s due to open on Friday. The Odeon, Vue and Cineworld have any details of that on their website at the moment as being shown in any of their cinemas. Does that mean it's completely cancelled?
The Vue are listing the Thomas the Tank Engine film opening months away in a whole host of venues but strangely not Greenwich (the O2) for some reason. Why that is the only film they are promoting so far in advance when they aren't doing it for Potter or Narnia I have no idea.
The point is I now know well in advance if I want to see that film don't bother waiting for it to go to the O2 venue because it's not happening. Why can't all three of their websites do something similar for all the films? It would be useful to know that I don't need to go and see a film at a different one of their cinemas in the first week of August when it's opening in my local one in the fourth week in August.
This doesn't help with each venue showing all the main films at least once or twice but it does help me to know I need to look elsewhere.

As I said easily fixable. Start a policy of clearing all the screens of the current listings one or two days every fortnight and show all the films on a set day (make it the day when that venue takes the least money) as an single showing day. And better promotion which films are and will be showing at which cinema and when well in advance not just a week or two.
If you fancy seeing the film The Losers due to open Friday give up, as according to all of their websites, like Tooth Fairy they aren't showing it anywhere in the country, or {Rec]2 or Space Chimps 2 either.
Apparently the only film opening in the country this week is Sex in the City 2.
I think it's safe to say all their promotion departments suck.

Support the film industry. Why? They obviously don't care enough to even try.
 
I'm sorry Pocatello but at what point in his original statment did Ken Loach say anything about HIS films? At no point does he mention anything about his own films he simply talked about british cinema in general. Personally I am not a massive Loach fan, I haven't seen as much of his work that I probably should so I don't know if he is a genious or a failure but it is not about him. You have said twice about him being a artist not really getting anywhere so it would appear you are not a massive fan, and thats fine, if you are not a fan you are not a fan but it seems you are attacking his statement about cinema because you are not a fan.



Surely though if these films are not shown in a major outlet people are going to find it very difficult to find them to begin with? If you don't even know the films exist how are you meant to know they are out there? Without advertising these films are simply dead. Look at what happens with the MPAA. And being able to view them on Pay TV? One of the few channels out there (in the UK atleast, being in the UK I can't say what it is like for other countries) who try to show films you wouldn't normally see is Film 4 and even they are starting to go downhill. I would agree that Sky Movies Indie shows some good films but most of what I see advertised is films you would see on any other channel and not really pushing boundries, Sky Movies Indie looks to show films that are good but they are nearly given as much screen time advertising wise as most hollywood blockbusters.



Again, in this context you are talking about films after they are shown and so people need to dig them out and hunt them down. If a film did not get press because people who were in charge of marketting or getting these films did not feel it was worth they would become straight to DVD but to say that that is a failure or they deserve to fail I feel is not correct.
 
Cinemas are hardly likely to start publicising which films they aren't going to screen so you can go elsewhere. It's so easy to find out where a film is being shown, just use the Time Out web site for example, or findanyfilm.com, and it will tell you the cinemas showing each film in order of distance from your location.
 
Your evidence is some forum posts claiming to be a manager? If the chains were so hard up with poor deals, as I said, the gap in the market would be filled. If the indi films were relegated to the smaller screens in the cinemplex then they'd always be artificially full, well are they? In my experience they are almost never full, even on weekenRAB.

You seem to assume the market is rigged because it goes with your idea of disliking big business, its the easy answer, the boogey man to point the finger at. This ignores market forces, and independent chains who test your theory and reveal it to fail the test of reality. If big chains and big movie companies rip each other off then the small indi's would have a field day, providing comfortable profits for both the cinema and the filmmakers. Every showing would be sold out, as each cinema catering to a much larger population of customers from a wider area. It should be a cash cow business...yet it isn't. Thats the harsh reality you are ignoring.
 
From what position would he be speaking? He's a relatively obscure filmmaker complaining about the system keeping him down. Of course he's talking about mostly himself. He's arrogant enough to think he's entitled to an audience. He can't explain his lack of success any other way apparently. I'm attacking him based on his record, he has not justified his claim that he and his ilk deserve any better treatment than they have received. I simply do not see genius denied, but someone resentful of lack of success and looking for blame. That or its just more cynical spin, cast self as underdog or undiscovered/denied genius.... its just the same old game the indi sector been playing for so long. The outcast card is always a nice one to throw out there for sympathy.



Why are they entitled to advertising? Do tell please. There are over a thousand indi films made in the west alone per year, that is a low estimate i bet. Never mind foreign films, over a 1000 films are made per year in bollywood alone. So just how are all those supposed to promote themselves in the uk? On government subsidy? Surely not the private sector, theres not enough money in the world for that. Like it or not this type of argument is based on selective amnesia, forgetting how vast the selection of films out there really is, and how filters are applied at EVERY level, including those that are not democratic at all. Even indi films are culled by unelected judges at film festivals, and before that culled by the festival organizers during the approval/selection process. Never mind the distributors. How does a film get to be known? It has to build word of mouth and it has to be good. I'm sorry, thats the only way, no regular person is going to sit through thousanRAB of films or their promotional material a year to cull this for themselves, its just not realistic in any way.

I just disagree with the entire premise of worry over the situation. Its better for small film than it has ever been in the past. You can read from sources all around the english world with a few keystrokes, message boarRAB, review sites, the most niche interests are catered for with the internet. The argument about niche interest not being catered for is pretty much moot at this point. If a film totally fails, it probably means it wasn't very good in the first place, its hard to blame anyone now that you can put up websites and trailers on the internet for almost nothing.




People dig and hunt down their interest ALL the time, whether its music or books or movies. People do that because its part of the joy of the hunt for good entertainment, because everyones got different interests/tastes. Its like claiming that all books and music must require a million dollar tv campaign in todays market to succeed, it doesn't follow. Did people start reading harry potter because the tele told em to? Or because others said it was good? I'm just saying, in todays market of free information and general obsessiveness of the internet on most any niche subject, theres no reason to fail other than you want to fail, or are mediocre. If the likes of loach think they are entitled to iron man level audiences, they are chasing a phantom, it wouldn't matter how much advertising you gave loach, his audience isn't that big regardless. So the argument is flawed from the start.
 
Here, we have two Cineworld's within walking distance of each other. There's no reason they cannot be promoting each other, as there are different films showing in each cinema. I'm sure this case is repeated around the country... or maybe people would be willing to drive an hour when they see a film they fancy showing in a neighbouring town.
 
From what people are saying in this thread, i'm glad i live in Sheffield. Our Cineworld has 20 screens and shows practically all the latest releases, regardless of anticipated popularity.

'[REC]2' is on five times a day from today, as is 'Four Lions'.

When 'Let The Right One In' and 'Moon' were out, they had 3 showings a day (maybe more upon release) for at least a month. They actually increased performances of the subtitled version of 'The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo' due to the demand for it.
 
But there is the dilemma. Why would I go to another of their chain when I'm expecting it to be on at my local one?

Yes I can look else where but doesn't that lead to the same problem for these companies? Why would I wait to see it at my local Odeon if i see it's on earlier or at an more convenient time at an Vue Cinema.

I used findanyfilm.com
I put in Tooth Fairy. I put in my post code and I got a hit. It's showing in Leicester Square. So now I know it's not being shown in Bexleyeheath, Croydon, Thurrock, Greenwich, the O2, West Quay. If I want to see thsi film I have to travel 8.3 miles into the centre of London to see the film.

Interestingly enough it opens on Friday but I can see it today-Thursday. I then clicked for the next 7 days and it's nt showing anywhere at all with 50 miles of my postcode.

I tried the Losers and got this....

Looks like The Losers, directed by Sylvain White is not available to book in the cinema yet. The film will be released nationwide on 28/05/2010. To avoid having to keep checking back why not sign up for a free film alert using the form below. We'll let you know as soon as it's available to book.

Not any better than the cinema chains own websites really is it?

As for Time Out I looked at their website and it listss all major capital cities. How will that help me finding out whats on in Ipswich, Birmingham, Manchester etc?

I'm on mailing lists for 5 or 6 theatres and I know months and months in advance some of the shows that are on. The dates, times and ticket prices.

Yes I can scour lots of sites for info on the off chance I could find it or I could say sod it and watch illegal copies as it's easier.
I found another site that mentioned Death at a funeral opens nationwide as of Friday. Maybe, but not in an Vue, Odeon or Cineworld apparently.

Let's just face it. The cinemas are shocking at promoting what they are showing, where, when and how long for. Not only to us the customers but to other websites, media outlets and anyone else.
 
Slumdog Millionaire was playing in something like about 12 screens in America before there started to be Oscar buzz about it.

The idea that Americans are normally in the slightest bit interested in what goes on outside their borders is absurd. As reflected by what usually end up getting shown in their cinemas 95% of the time.

I think it's only right we should return the compliment myself.
 
Who votes for the oscars? The people? Like it or not stuff is filtered at some point by someone else. The critics and guild voters and festival critics got behind the film based on its merit, that is sometimes what it takes. If slumdog opened in 1000 screens it would have done no business at all before falling off to nothing, you have to build word of mouth as I said. You don't try to sell some small film the same way you sell iron man. As I said, the people who are interested in foreign film whether in america or uk generally aren't the type to line up on friday night for every new film. You can't sell them or pretend they are the same as other audiences.

Seems like you are arguing for more close minded and nationalistic cinema selection which is an odd thing when you are trying to point fingers at the americans. It sounRAB like a certain type of bias is just showing its head, and consistency doesnt matter when that is in effect.

Slumdog sold over 2 million in the US.
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2008/SLUMD-DVD.php

You didn't even get the number of screens right, it started at 10, then went to 614 screens, eventually expanding to 2943 theatres.

But don't let your antiamerican bias be swayed by facts now ok?
 
If you're on the mailing list for your local cinema then you'll know that they send the emails with the coming week's listings a couple of days in advance. So you will get the film times for Death at a Funeral on Wednesday or Thursday this week. As for the Time Out and findanyfilm sites, they will tell you where a film is being shown on the day you check, and (as far as I know) they work for any postcode - if you want to know when a film is on in Ipswich, enter an Ipswich postcode.
 
So essentially what you are saying is that because you don't like his films and because you don't see him as a genious he has no right to air an oppinion on the state of british cinema? What would happen if someone like say Tarrentino who started out on an indi and did well said the same thing? Would you say that if Miyazaki released a film that did not do well not because he makes bad films (I believe Spirited Away to be one of the best animations I have ever seen not withstanding Akira) but because a cinema feels that having a movie in subtitles will mean a lack of audiance that this would be a failing?



No-one has the right to advertising that is not what I am saying, what I am saying is that if the british cinemas continue to keep doors shut on indie films its likely they would never get any kind of press so ultimatly they would struggle to make it out there in the first place. You can call this a failing on the part of the film makers I just for one don't believe that is it.



Sorry to harp on about this but again, if something is not out there to be seen how are people going to know about it and know to search in the first place? I would agree that indie films are being treated with a certain level or regard. I agree that films like Blair Witch would not have done nearly as well in 1990 than in 1999 mainly thanks to the internet campaign it had but something like Ring? I would never have known that existed expect I saw it on the Radio Times website when it was shown on Film Four and I thought it looked interesting, now when I mention the ring most people mock me because they didn't like the US version and don't even know the original exists.




I don't think we are ever going to agree on this but I don't believe that was what Loach was saying, I believe you are putting worRAB into his mouth but lets just say he is upset that his films have done badly and he is bitter about this and ultimatly feels the need to blame the lack of screeings etc then lets again take Loach just for a minute out of this equation entirley, what if a film critic had said this? Would you feel the same way?
 
Back
Top