Internet 'killing cinema', says director Ridley Scott

[radio667]

from scotsman.com .......... THE Hollywood director, Ridley Scott, warned yesterday that new technology is killing off the big-screen experience. The Oscar-winning County Durham-born movie mogul said mobile phones and computers threatened movie-making on an epic scale.

He insisted that the best way to experience great film was still in a cinema with a big screen and state-of-the art acoustics.

Scott launched the attack at the prestigious Venice Film Festival, where he unveiled a newly remastered version of his 1980s sci-fi classic Blade Runner.

He said: "People sit there watching a movie on a tiny screen. You can't beat it, you've got to join it and deal with it and also get competitive with it. But we try to do films which are in support of cinema, in a large room with good sound and a big picture."

However, Scott admitted: "I'm sure we're on a losing wicket, but we're fighting technology. While it has been wonderful in many aspects, it also has some big negative downsides."

Former Edinburgh Film Festival director Mark Cousins said Scott's prognosis was too gloomy. He pointed out that the death of the big screen had been predicted in the 1920s with the start of "talkies" and in the 1950s with the rise of TV. And he said that cinema attendances had begun to rise in the past five or six years after a long decline.

Mr Cousins said: "We still go to big cinemas at weekends collectively, but we also watch movies individually at home with our big TVs and sound systems."

He added that the message was more important than the medium. Mr Cousins said: "I take the view that content is king - it's the story and it's not what format it presented on. That has always been the case."

And he added: "There has been an increase in more specialist movie houses and the types of films which are doing well are documentaries, which never used to be the case, while animation is making a comeback."

But Mr Cousins said: "There is a sense of something big about to happen when people go to a cinema. At home, it's not as exciting as submitting yourself to something else and taking a risk, which is why going to the movies is still so exciting."

Scott is also the producer of the new Brad Pitt western, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, which was shown in Venice.

Scott said the Pitt film was "a wonderful, dramatic and historic piece", but added that films of that calibre were becoming rare in "dumbed-down" Hollywood. And he urged the industry to invest more in original work and stop relying on remakes of previous films to boost profits.

He said: "I'm not criticising Hollywood because I work there; I partly live there. But I'm saying this is the way it is, commerce is taking over art. Commerce has become the most important thing in the firm industry."



Ridley Scott

[PsxMeUP]

There was a restructuring of the screening industry in the 90's. Large movie megaplexes were built and small local cinemas were closed down. Now there are more cinema rooms in the US than there should be (I believe 32 000 in a market than should have 25 000 or so). The result: a lot of empty rooms. But that doesn't hurt the box office. Movies are still breaking records.

[DeadMeatGF]

I agree with alot of what Ridley Scott's saying, but the only reason that the technology is having such an impact is the same as it is with music - the soaring costs.
I would never watch a movie on a phone, but unless I know for a fact that the film's going to be excellent I simply cannot afford to go to the cinema any more. I can scrape together the £7 or so to get in, but when kids' tickets get the pitiful discount of £1 it's sudden;y almost £20 to go and watch. Frankly, why bother when the DVD will be out for £13 in 3 months? - I can then watch it any number of times, with a whole load of extra features to enjoy.
Additionally, burly security guards checking that you have no food or drink of your own mean you either dehydrate and starve, try and smuggle snacks in like some kind of criminal or pay the extortionate prices - £3 for a medium soda and about the same for the popcorn
Suddenly the trip's costing me nearly £50 - that is not a trip with any value, is it?
A week's camping holiday, with free amusement park entry & rides every day only cost me £200 - a bit better than 8 hours of cinema ...

[PsxMeUP]

Sorry, but technology isn't killing the movie industry. The current structure of the industry is…

Cinemas have to jack up the prices of food and drinks because that's where most of their profits come from. Studios take something like 70-80% of receipts during the first couple of weeks of a movie's release. After that the cinemas start to take a larger share of a film's money, but by then a lot fewer people go see the movie. If we want to reduce the cost of tickets and popcorn, we have to start making a habit of not watching films during the first couple of weeks of their release. The screening (exhibition) industry is being raped by the studios. They have a cartel on how much money they take from their movies. Some, like George Lucas, go even further and demand more than the usual 70-80% of profits. When his new Star Wars 2 & 3 came out his demands we so high a lot of theaters boycotted them. It's sleepers like Titanic that theaters love. They start out with a fizzle then pick up steam as the weeks go by.

The movie industry is quite literally stuck in a vicious circle. Studios take all the risks so they are bleeding theaters; theaters take it out on viewers; viewers aren't going to theaters as they should (lots of flops with the occasional mega-blockbuster); this forces the studios to be very cautious and go with proven formulas (cliches and remakes).

This will only end once theaters are owned by the movie studios, that way they'll keep all the profits (plus make money on food and drinks). With fewer risks they won't be so inclined on always releasing the crap we've been seeing.

[HortonsWho]

This past summer, ending Labor Day, was the highest grossing summer ever at more tha $4billion. And the 5th highest ever in attendance.

[DeadMeatGF]

Originally Posted by PsxMeUP

Studios take something like 70-80% of receipts during the first couple of weeks of a movie's release.

I don't know what it's like where you are, but if that's the case why is it impossible to find a cinema showing films more than a couple of weeks old?
All I'd do to counteract that is show new films on a single screen (if at all) making it virtually impossible to see them, and have the older ones that make me the most money on multiple screens once the charges lowered.

[PsxMeUP]

Not saying attendance is lower. It's breaking records all the time. That's because there are plenty of screens out there. Too many of them. They can't fill to capacity. Not because people aren't going to theaters, but because there are too many movie complexes. I've had the misfortune to face these numbers. I was in the theater service industry for a while.

As for why don't they show new movies on one screen for a couple of weeks? No clue. Maybe the studios also demand that a certain percentage of rooms show their films when they sign with any given chain. Or because there is a certain momentum new movies have that you can't replicate once a film has been out for a few weeks - a momentum you have to take advantage of, even if might not like it, like your friends go see the movie without you, the story gets spoiled, reviews influence your interest in it, new movies come out (and they always do, which might also be a studio strategy).

[JoystickMonkey]

I think people should stop whining when external factors like the ability to watch a movie on a handheld device ruins your idea of how a movie should be viewed. It's simply a different way of receiving media.

Now, on the other hand, plenty of people are running out and buying 40+ inch high def flatscreens, so someone must be interested in the cinematic experience.

[cooloola]

Scott's way of thinking is horrifyingly wrong, I think that we all think that watching a movie in a theater kicks the living crap out of watching a movie on tv or on a phone or whatever other medium, so the blame shouldn't be put on these new medias but on cinemas since people are being turned away.

[Mathlete]

Originally Posted by radio667

He insisted that the best way to experience great film was still in a cinema with a big screen and state-of-the art acoustics, watered down soda, and expnsive candy

fixed

[Angel_Mapper]

Originally Posted by radio667

from scotsman.com .......... THE Hollywood director, Ridley Scott, warned yesterday that new technology is killing off the big-screen experience.

Funny, I thought the crappy movies, endless remakes, and five hours of commercials before the movie were killing off the big screen experience.

[DeadMeatGF]

Originally Posted by Angel_Mapper

Funny, I thought the crappy movies, endless remakes, and five hours of commercials before the movie were killing off the big screen experience.

[Manticore]

Originally Posted by Angel_Mapper

Funny, I thought the crappy movies, endless remakes, and five hours of commercials before the movie were killing off the big screen experience.

Yes that could have a lot to do with it.

Originally Posted by radio667

He insisted that the best way to experience great film was still in a cinema with a big screen and state-of-the art acoustics.

Yep, some movies that come out I just have to see on the big screen. I'll just steer clear of the popcorn from now on.

[DeadMeatGF]

Originally Posted by Manticore

Yep, some movies that come out I just have to see on the big screen.

Some people don't have the right idea, though:
A guy I work with watched a low-quality camcorder rip of Transformers (needless to say he didn't enjoy it much) - but paid to go and see the Simpsons movie ... go figure ... !