Hundreds More Movie Theatres Close As Attendance Plummets (hollywoodreporter.com) 131
Long-time Slashdot reader destinyland writes: It seems like it's inadvisable to sit in a movie theatre during a pandemic. Thousands of theatres still tried showing movies this weekend — but the number of open theatres is dropping, perhaps because the number of people actually buying tickets appears to be plummeting.
For example, there were 2,154 movie theatres open in America this weekend, according to The Hollywood Reporter — roughly 40% of about 5,449 theatres (according to figures they cite from the American media measurement/analytics company Comscore). But the previous weekend there were 2,800 locations still open — over 50%. "Heading into the weekend, 646 movie theaters in the U.S. closed down again virtually overnight amid an alarming surge in COVID-19 cases, according to Comscore. There were also 60 cinemas reclosures in Canada, meaning that in the span of several days, the North American box office lost 706 locations compared to a week ago... Factoring in Canada, the total number of theaters open in North American dropped from 3,096 sites over the Nov. 13-15 weekend to 2,390 theaters..."
But those figures don't tell the whole story. In that same week the box office dropped "as much as 50 percent" — bringing in a nationwide total somewhere around $5 million, the lowest figure since they started re-opening in August. In fact, the #1 film in America — the campy body-swapping horror film Freaky — pulled in a total of just $1.2 million. "The average gross per complex, with 60 percent of these having eight or more screens, was around $4,000 or $500 per screen," reports IndieWire. If you estimate a ticket cost around $10, that comes out to a total for the entire weekend of just 50 people at each screening. "That can't even cover operating costs, especially with half of the revenue going to film rental." (And they also report that some movies did even worse. Jackie Chan's new movie averaged $291 per theatre.)
It could be a chicken-and-egg effect. Movie theatres are reluctant to release their best movies to limited audiences — but then audiences have even less reason to go to the theatres. But another possibility is that millions of people who used to go to the movies decided that it just wasn't worth the risk during a surging pandemic.
For example, there were 2,154 movie theatres open in America this weekend, according to The Hollywood Reporter — roughly 40% of about 5,449 theatres (according to figures they cite from the American media measurement/analytics company Comscore). But the previous weekend there were 2,800 locations still open — over 50%. "Heading into the weekend, 646 movie theaters in the U.S. closed down again virtually overnight amid an alarming surge in COVID-19 cases, according to Comscore. There were also 60 cinemas reclosures in Canada, meaning that in the span of several days, the North American box office lost 706 locations compared to a week ago... Factoring in Canada, the total number of theaters open in North American dropped from 3,096 sites over the Nov. 13-15 weekend to 2,390 theaters..."
But those figures don't tell the whole story. In that same week the box office dropped "as much as 50 percent" — bringing in a nationwide total somewhere around $5 million, the lowest figure since they started re-opening in August. In fact, the #1 film in America — the campy body-swapping horror film Freaky — pulled in a total of just $1.2 million. "The average gross per complex, with 60 percent of these having eight or more screens, was around $4,000 or $500 per screen," reports IndieWire. If you estimate a ticket cost around $10, that comes out to a total for the entire weekend of just 50 people at each screening. "That can't even cover operating costs, especially with half of the revenue going to film rental." (And they also report that some movies did even worse. Jackie Chan's new movie averaged $291 per theatre.)
It could be a chicken-and-egg effect. Movie theatres are reluctant to release their best movies to limited audiences — but then audiences have even less reason to go to the theatres. But another possibility is that millions of people who used to go to the movies decided that it just wasn't worth the risk during a surging pandemic.
Movie Theatres (Score:4, Funny)
Talk about going down with the ship!
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. The real news here is that movie theaters still exist. Who knew?
Re: (Score:2)
People who leave their basement for at least 5 minutes a year know that.
Re:Movie Theatres (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Movie Theatres (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Have you been in a TV shop recently? Or seen a video projector?
Re:Movie Theatres (Score:5, Insightful)
I have been to a TV shop recently, and a large screen TV costs more than a movie ticket. In fact a great many movie tickets can be purchased for the price of a single TV set.
Unless the movie is a flop, or has been out of theaters for many years, buying the movie on some physical media or renting it from some streaming service will cost more than a single movie ticket. It will likely cost more than two or three movie tickets.
Having once been a teenager I can recall wanting to go to the theater to socialize with other teenagers, and do so far from parents and younger siblings. One easy excuse to do this was to go to a movie, which was usually followed or preceded by other activities that could have also been done at home such as consuming a meal.
There's a monetary aspect to choosing to go to a movie as opposed to doing so at home, as well as aspects that hove nothing at all to do with money. Failing to understand this is demonstrative of an ignorance or lack of recollection of how young humans behave.
Re: (Score:2)
I have been to a TV shop recently, and a large screen TV costs more than a movie ticket. In fact a great many movie tickets can be purchased for the price of a single TV set.
True, but you're not paying "per person", the popcorn is much cheaper, you can drink beer, you don't need to pay gas money and spend an hour driving and parking, you can pause it to go to the bathroom, etc., etc.
Going to a theater costs much more than just the price of a single ticket. Not many people could afford to go to the cinema every single day but lots of people have big TVs.
Having once been a teenager I can recall wanting to go to the theater to socialize with other teenagers, and do so far from parents and younger siblings.
That would be about the only reason I can think of to go to a theater these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Like everything in America nowadays, it's necessary to pick a side. And then fight to ensure your side wins. No compromising.
Re:Movie Theatres (Score:5, Insightful)
That would be about the only reason I can think of to go to a theater these days.
Or, you're not a very social person and you don't to accept that other people are? The former is fine, but assuming everyone is identical to you is an odd assumption.
Watching a good movie in a full cinema is a unique experience that is simply not replicated at home no matter how big the screen nor how cheap the popcorn. I like going to the cinema. It's nice to go out and do something. Go out for a drink or two a film and a meal. Also if going to meet friends, then we can meet in a central location rather than someone's house minimizing the longest journey. That sort of thing.
Also, it means I don't need to waste space uglifying my living room with a screen for the few times I really really want a big screen (usually I use a laptop which can be easily put away when I'm not watching anything). Screens don't really look nice when not on.
the popcorn is much cheaper, you can drink beer,
I don't live my life for bargain popcorn and you can drink beer at my two closest cinemas, the closest being a a fancy expensive one and the second closest being a cheap one.
Re: (Score:2)
While I can acknowledge the appeal to some, I think in general the number of people that the experience appeals to has been dwindling, and its inevitable that eventually the number will be below what is required for profitability.
Eg, I'm sure there are some people who like the experience of drive-in theaters. Heck I'd like to go to one once or twice just for the experience (I've technically been when I was really, really young, but the drive-in in my down closed when I was 4). That doesn't change the fact
Re: (Score:2)
Watching a good movie in a full cinema is a unique experience that is simply not replicated at home no matter how big the screen nor how cheap the popcorn.
I heard there was a gadget that can generate the sounds of people coughing, talking, munching, talking on phones, etc., all in 3D and mix it into your surround system.
The effect of neighbors constantly switching on their phones and lighting up the theater with their screens is still tricky to reproduce though, as is people getting up and walking around or arriving late and wanting you to stand up so they can get past and sit down.
Re: (Score:2)
The effect of neighbors constantly switching on their phones and lighting up the theater with their screens is still tricky to reproduce though, as is people getting up and walking around or arriving late and wanting you to stand up so they can get past and sit down.
I guess people round here are better behaved on average?
I mean you still get a few addicts, I mean real addicts and I don't mean that in a light hearted way. One of the cinemas I used to visit regularly had very effective cell phone blocking tec
Re: (Score:2)
Watching a good movie in a full cinema is a unique experience that is simply not replicated at home no matter how big the screen nor how cheap the popcorn.
Sure the modern experience can be replicated. Borrow phones from a dozen of your friends and scatter them around the room.
Re:Movie Theatres (Score:4, Informative)
Why can't you talk to people at your house?
Dude Iiterally explained this already. I said:
Also if going to meet friends, then we can meet in a central location rather than someone's house minimizing the longest journey.
Why is half of slashdot so incredibly invested in the idea that if they don't like cinemas then no one can?
Re: (Score:2)
Why is half of Slashdot so incredibly invested in the idea that if they don't like cinemas then no one can?
A solitary and nerdy personality might find it difficult to imagine enjoying a social occasion such as watching a film at a cinema. I admit that this was my reaction when I read the headline. There is also a possibility that some nerdy people are worse than average at imaging how others feel about things.
Similar remarks may be made about attitudes to home working. It suits the quiet solitary types, like me, but is a major pain for extrovert sociable types.
Re: (Score:3)
Because if your friends are sp lazy to come to your house that they think it's worth an infection then get better friends.
Are you determined to be an idiot? Cinemas existed before covid and will exist after it's no longer a major concern. And it's not even like it makes a difference right now anyway. My friends can no more come over than we could visit a cinema togther.
And in non covid times, yes, I could get boring friends who are complete doormats as you apparently like, but I prefer interesting friends w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now you're being daft.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't about the cost. It's about the experience.
I pay to see a movie in the theater.
I do not pay to:
1) Sit in a room full of people who will not shut the F up
2) Sit in a room full of people who play with their phones the entire show
3) Sit in a room with those who bring their heathens with them who cry / talk / scream / tantrum or run the isles the entire show
4) Deal with the buzzing speaker that the theater is too cheap to fix
I have a full 7.1 setup at home. I can watch it at any time on my own ter
Re: (Score:2)
I have been to a TV shop recently, and a large screen TV costs more than a movie ticket. In fact a great many movie tickets can be purchased for the price of a single TV set.
Taking a family of four out to the movies pre-Covid for an evening show cost me over fifty dollars before popcorn. Buying a tub of popcorn and a couple drinks to share cost another twenty. It doesn't take too many outings to break even on a 65 inch 4K set. ($478 at Best Buy this week).
I still (or did) go to the theater for spectacular movies but I learned to wait till they are out for a good while. I got sick of teens answering their texts and checking their Snachat all during the movie. The worst ex
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen a video projector. As much as I want to put in dual 8K Christie projectors in my house they don't fit.
Whatever you think about the biggest, nicest screen on your fanciest shop in town, it still doesn't remotely compare to a Dolby Cinema or an IMAX Laser Cinema.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it's very different. You're talking about something completely indistinguishable in a double blind test in terms of quality. No one has shown they can reliably tell an MP3 from an SACD.
But about the only person who can't tell the difference between a Dolby Cinema and watching a movie on even the best TV at home is Stevie Wonder, and even then only if you actually mute the soundtrack.
Some people don't like or appreciate quality that is true, but please don't bring audiophile bullshit into it. MP3 wo
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen a video projector. As much as I want to put in dual 8K Christie projectors in my house they don't fit.
Whatever you think about the biggest, nicest screen on your fanciest shop in town, it still doesn't remotely compare to a Dolby Cinema or an IMAX Laser Cinema.
Who do you think makes those Cinema projectors? Christie and Barco are the two largest vendors. Dolby doesn't make projectors and IMAX is a configuration of projection. 8K Christie projectors are basically what a new theatre would use (but probably the 20k lumens version and you probably had the 8k lumens version). You can absolutely own the same type of projectors that movie theatres use (but it probably isn't very practical). The hardest part would be the 240V power. They use a ton of power so they
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed why did you think I specifically mentioned a Christie 8K laser projectors? I think you missed my point, so let me rephrase:
Whatever money you think you can spend in your own house won't get you close to a Dolby Cinema. There's more to a cinema than going out and buying some good gear from Amazon.
Re: Movie Theatres (Score:2)
Agreed, some movies HAVE to be seen on a big screen to get the full effect. I donâ(TM)t care if you you have a 100 inch Oled with Atmos speaker setup, it will not give the same Oomph as an IMAX
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you ranting about fake IMAX when the GP's point stands? The last IMAX I saw was Sully at Air & Space in DC, and it was fantastic. I would pay again gladly for that sort of film.
The need for small-town popcorn-and-sticky-floor theatres has probably past, so now it's game on for IMAX-like experiences.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Some people" doesn't appear to be a business-sustaining population, though. Remember how the theater chains were caterwauling around the middle of the year (with lockdowns raging everywhere) because the movie production houses were planning to offer their premium titles direct on VOD to cater to people who _physically could not get to a theater_ ? If your business is unsustainable without an exclusivity period for the goods you resell, it says something about your product. So yes, sure, people do like going to watch movies on a big screen, especially the super-duper-huge screens. Some people even like 3D, which history suggests is never going to be a real thing in the home (absent some amazing technological revolution). But the fact that the theater chains don't think they can survive if tier 1 movies are released to VOD day-and-date with theatrical release suggests that for the majority of people, investing in a nice home theater system or even just a bigger TV is good enough for enjoying the first-run releases. (Financially, it makes huge sense - you can spend a few thousand on home theater stuff and once you figure in snacks and ticket prices and parking and ... you'll be breaking even in no time).
So that "theater experience" isn't truly what the mass market wants, it's a boutique experience that only a few people really want to pay to enjoy - and it's made to _appear_ mainstream by artificial exclusivity periods. Spiking theater attendance numbers reflects not a desire to go to the theater, but a good advertising campaign for the new-release movies that coerces people into seeing them as soon as possible after release - the only place to do so being in a cartel viewing room.
Hollywood started straight-to-stream because the movie houses were shut down, not because it wasn't viable. Witness the stupidity of trying to sell the new Bond to streams for $600 million, which it would have cleared easily in theaters unless it was a bomb. Remember they get basically 100% of the ticket price and theaters have to live off their concession stands.
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh. This is exactly what I'm saying. Hollywood went to stream at that time because there were no open movie houses. The movie houses still caterwauled, because they exist only on that exclusivity period and once you break the illusion that "movie theaters are desperately desired by the general public", it stays broken forever. They keep talking about how theaters survived the pandemic in 1918, bu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In deference to Yogi Bera, "Nobody goes to the theater anymore--it's too crowded."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since there isn't a single point in time where we're likely to be able to declare it "safe" [...]
I would disagree. Declarations are easy to make and governments make them all the time. Whether you believe/accept those pronouncements is something else...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I also enjoy watching movies on a big screen, but it's becoming something I do less and less and the years go on. With home theaters getting better and better every year, and the cost of concessions and movie tickets going ever higher, I just don't find it worth it to go to the movies for the vast majority of movies coming out. There's only a couple movies a year that really make it worth it to spend $20-$30 going out to the theater. This is especially true for families going to the movies. As a family we
Re: (Score:2)
The attraction of viewing a movie in a theater (rather than in your home) was the crowd. Watching something with hundreds of people and everyone reacting to it together. Often fol
Re: (Score:2)
It's not the size of the screen. A 50 ft diagonal screen viewed from 120 ft away will appear the same size to your eyes as a 50" TV viewed from 10 ft away. They both occupy 23.5 degrees of your field of view (diagonal). The only difference the screen size makes is how far you have to focus to see the screen (at the same FOV).
On point, more or less.
If the pandemic kills off the theaters, my hunch is it'll be replaced by video conference movie-watching sessions. You and a bunch of friends watch the same movie at the same time, but you're also able to all hear and talk with each other during the movie in MST3K fashion. We're already seeing this in live streaming services like Twitch and YouTube (although the audience there just types messages that everyone sees). Some film/TV show streaming services even time index the comments people type as they're watching, and replay the comments at the appropriate time them whenever someone else watches. So you get to experience the audience reaction even though you didn't all watch it at the same time.
There will need to be some impressive tech in place to keep the movie front-and-center while the group response is strong enough to register but not so strong as to interfere. My GF does "horror movie night" with a rotating group of friends and acquaintances, which moved to virtual during Covid., The past two times have been when we've been hanging out together, so I got to share in the fun. The videoconference prior to and after the movie are reasonable facsimiles for the in-person
Re: (Score:2)
If the pandemic kills off the theaters, my hunch is it'll be replaced by video conference movie-watching sessions. You and a bunch of friends watch the same movie at the same time, but you're also able to all hear and talk with each other during the movie in MST3K fashion.
My friend circle which spans three time-zones in the US has been doing that for 6+ months now via Zoom. We do a Friday night drinks get-together and someone screen shares a movie.
With the rise of movie streaming this year, all it will take is one company to code up a party pack and then it would be legit rather than our hack.
Re: (Score:3)
Especially for the smaller theaters, one could conceivably rent out the theater, with big screen and fancy audio and access to new releases and whatnot, to private groups of whatever 'small' size is dictated by applicable regulations and local risk tolerance. I suspect that, for any price people would be willing to pay, the theater would lose money overall once rent/lease and capital depreciation and stuff
Re: (Score:2)
Also despite a lot of Slashdot grumpy old men. A lot of people actually go to share the experience with other people. When there is a joke, and a lot of people in the audience laugh at it, or when the bad guy is defeated the audience applause, you feel more connected and invested into what is going on. Because the Movie becomes a communal activity.
Yes there will be posts, I HATE CROWED and when these People Applaud or Laugh at a Joke I miss the next few words... (Note most of the movies, put a pause in s
Re: (Score:2)
Also despite a lot of Slashdot grumpy old men. A lot of people actually go to share the experience with other people. When there is a joke, and a lot of people in the audience laugh at it, or when the bad guy is defeated the audience applause, you feel more connected and invested into what is going on. Because the Movie becomes a communal activity.
I remember back in the day, watching Austin Powers alone on PPV, and wondering why the hell anyone thought it was good. Fast-forward a few years, and a residency colleague of my then-spouse wanted to go see the sequel. We agreed, but at the time I jokingly called it a "four-beer movie", as in, that's how many beers you'd need to have to enjoy the movie. Well the joke was on me, because when watching it on opening night in a packed theater, with everyone laughing uproariously to the humor, I found the mov
Re: (Score:2)
Plus, you get to watch the movie with realistic sound at realistic volumes, so if a mortar round in a war movie lands 20 yards away, it sounds and feels like a mortar round landed 20 yards away, sans actual injuries of course. And while home theater can do some great audio, it can't do it like t
Re: (Score:2)
Some people enjoy watching it on a very, very large screen.
I used so, but now there are too many distractions in the form of bright and noisy phones.
Chicken and egg problem here (Score:5, Insightful)
Did the state have a role? Perhaps. But Hollywood itself didn't help.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely agree. And I've been wondering as well, are the blockbuster studios not considering that if everybody's delaying, there's going to be major competition when the far fewer, surviving cinemas, open their doors safely? It's a lose-lose situation, but it looks like they're holding on to their imaginary cash cows for an imaginary time where cinemas will be open and everybody will choose to see their film instead of all the other delayed ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Did the state have a role? Perhaps.
My state said movie theaters couldn't be open for the entire summer, which is where they make the bulk of their money. Then they allowed them to reopen a couple of months ago, with the caveat that they could be closed again at any time in the future. I'd say that is more than a "perhaps."
I'm not saying they shouldn't have been closed, I am saying that the forced closure absolutely had an impact on their business.
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine that the megabucks blockbuster model of film making will come to an end, for lack of funds. I do not know how much of a top film's revenue still comes from cinema ticket sales, but I gather this is still what makes the big money. I doubt that this money can be replaced by revenues from streaming, TV, etc.
Perhaps this might be a good thing. We might actually get films with good stories and proper acting, like in the old days before massive computer animation budgets.
Re: Chicken and egg problem here (Score:2)
Pandemic won't last forever.
There will be spring effect.
Also, cassette and vinyl use is flourishing in general, as well as stage theater.
At worst, cinema will be niche product for niche movies.
Their time is over (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've said this before: It depends.
No, I don't have a big screen TV--frankly, I don't want one. I don't want to install surround-sound in my home. It's not worth it when I can walk to a movie theater that has all those things.
That said, I don't go to the movie theater to watch the serious drama or cute romcom or fun comedy anymore. Because, as others have noted, it's not worth the money. The big screen and surround-sound system doesn't really add much compared to a plain 36" TV with stereo.
So the blockb
Catastrophy (Score:3)
Were are the kids going to play with their cellphones then?
Re: (Score:2)
Do you live in a particularly shitty part of the world where this is a problem?
Lockdowns (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Relevancy in the era of COVID (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You probably were doing drugs and only thought you went to a cinema but instead went to some indian restaurant and watched a bollywood musical on repeat.
Either that or you have astronomically shit cinemas.
Re: (Score:2)
My theaters upgraded. AMC theaters have plush powered recliners for all seats.
The quality is increasing in many. Go find one.
Re: (Score:3)
The quality is increasing in many. Go find one.
I'd have to go out of the county in order to find an improved theater, and that means a twisty narrow highway no matter which direction I go. For those people living in cities it might be viable, but people are leaving cities in droves.
Meanwhile, zero movie theaters let me pause if I need to take a bathroom break, or want to stop for a discussion. And the majority of them "feature" people fucking with their phones during the movie, sometimes actually taking a call. Fuck that noise.
Re: (Score:2)
Movie theaters of the last decade or two were already an unpleasant experience.
Maybe in your area, but that doesn't sound like the industry in general. What's a ticket line by the way, do you not buy and pre-book your seats online? Ticket stub? Are you sure you're talking about 5 years ago or 25 years ago?
Can't say I've been in a dirty cinema in the past 5 years. I do agree it sounds like the one you're talking about deserves to close and go out of business.
If Hollywood wants to stay relevant in this era, they are either going to need to start streaming the movies themselves
Cinema exclusive period was the last remaining bastion of content presentation which did not routinely get pirated in perfect qua
Re: (Score:2)
Movie theaters were transformed by the licensing arrangements made possible by digital distribution. It's always been true that exhibition fees put movie investors first in line to get paid, even before the movie theater, but now that's so efficient that the distribution company gets *all* the profits for the first two weeks a movie is out, after which, you'll notice, all marketing for a movie disappears. In a blockbuster movie ecosystem, that doesn't leave much for the exhibitor. So the theaters make t
On the fence (Score:4, Interesting)
There's a local dinner theater chain (three locations) which is a bit quirky, and the movie experience is slightly compromised by the eating arrangement, but back before 'rona I used to patronize it regularly. Was a chance to enjoy some decent-quality pub food while watching a 1st-run movie, and getting out of the house and out of my head. Back when the kids were little, was a two-fer: entertainment and I didn't have to make dinner.
Right now, I basically am not patronizing restaurants due to the inability to adequately distance, plus the length of time spent indoors at the mercy of ventilation of unknown quality. Stretch that risk profile out to be the length of a feature movie, and no thanks. I'll wait until things improve, I just hope the establishment will still be in business. Frankly I'm amazed it's still around. Even more amazed that people attend given where the 'rona numbers are going.
Then compare that to the fact that I impulse-purchased a 4K 55" TV from Target last month for a crazy price of $400. Biggest issue was how it fit in the built-in bookshelves, but once me and my teenagers made it work, it's pretty freakin' fantastic for the price. This wasn't even my main home theater screen (a 55" Plasma in the basement with a much better sound system). I'm now tempted to upgrade that puppy to something like 75" and go one notch up on panel quality. At that point I just need to hire a Personal Pub Food Chef...
It's sad to see... (Score:2)
I suppose that the end of movie theaters was inevitable and Covid just sort of pushed it over the edge. There are lots of practical reasons not to go to a movie theater but not everything in life is based on practicality. In some sense it doesn't even matter if the movie is good, it's the experience that makes it fun. Back in the day, that's what kids did on a date. Dinner and a movie.
Movie theaters are on the way out and restaurants, many of them anyway, are soon to follow. Sad times we are in.
Re: (Score:2)
"We don't even have to forgive the mortgage just automatically add missed payments on to the mortgage" - That is already happening, although it is only a temporary measure with the last stimulus package and is set to expire soon. Truth be told, the banks don't really want to foreclose. It puts them in the property management business and they would rather just be in the money lending business.
The problem is that now a lot of middle class people are now in the property management business. The allure of putt
Not chicken and egg... (Score:3)
It's a combination of negative factors...
Many people don't want to go during a pandemic.
There's less movies to see, so even many of those still willing to go won't bother if there's nothing they want to see.
Many theatres are closed anyway.
It's a combination of these effects, not one causing the others.
This is why lockdowns are good for the economy (Score:5, Insightful)
Lots of people cry about the economic damage caused by formal, enforced lockdowns, but for some reason completely ignore the fact that in the presence of a surging pandemic, people are going to stay home out of a normal and appropriate sense of self-preservation. This doesn't shut down the economy, but it produces a serious drag on the economy, running everything at maybe 80%, overall, but it goes on and on for endless months.
In contrast, a few weeks of truly hard lockdown results in maybe a 40% economy, perhaps a little worse, but it only lasts a few weeks, and it knocks the virus numbers down to a level where they can be kept down with testing and contact tracing. It can happen that the situation gets out of control again, particularly as seasons change and, therefore, behavior changes. The answer is to lock down again, get the virus under control, then figure out how to manage the new context. This approach allows the economy to recover to very nearly 100%. In some places in the world they are fully and completely open because they implemented aggressive controls and squashed the virus hard... those countries are going to reap economic windfalls from COVID-19, because they're surging economically while all of their competition is dragging.
All of the people who shout that we must not lock down to preserve the economy are completely failing to consider the economic effects of not locking down.
And that doesn't even consider the long-term economic effects of the portion of the labor force that is suffering long-term heart, lung and brain damage from COVID. My sister -- 45, slender, active, no underlying health conditions -- is now seeing neurologists and cardiologists to figure out how severe and long-lasting her damage is going to be. She got COVID two months ago and is still unable to work more than two or three hours per day (her employer is being fantastically-understanding and supportive, BTW), and it's unclear if she'll ever recover fully. It's equally unclear what kinds of long-term medical support she's going to need, especially as she ages, that she wouldn't have needed without that damage. That's just one anecdote, but there are hundreds of thousands like her, plus the tens of thousands of working-age people who have died.
Just letting the virus run has huge, and long-lasting, economic impacts. Worse than an occasional, short, lockdown.
Re: (Score:2)
All of the people who shout that we must not lock down to preserve the economy are completely failing to consider the economic effects of not locking down.
Yeah, here in NH the school districts are dialing back to remote, nominally to get through to the other side of the sh*t-show that will be the holidays. The reasoning is understandable given the current environment: it's not that the schools are having community transmission, it's that the community transmission is affecting the ability to run the school. Having staff and students in quarantine, the staff who live in neighboring towns suddenly having a child care crisis due to other schools pivoting to r
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Just letting the virus run has huge, and long-lasting, economic impacts. Worse than an occasional, short, lockdown.
That's certainly an argument if it weren't also a straw man. There is nobody asking to allow any virus to run through the population, leaving large numbers of people dead or permanently disabled.
I won't quote your entire post, but it's not April anymore. There's no serious argument being made that our only tool is lockdown. We know that masks help. A lot. We know more about the relative risks of various activities within the economy. As one Public Health official put it: "It's more like a dimmer than an on/off switch". So you're inferring quite a bit about what's meant by "lockdown". In November 2020 it means something different than April 2020. Or at least, it should.
There's been no recorded death from COVID-19 to anyone under the age of 10 years old in the USA. It's safe to open daycare centers, preschools, and grade schools.
See my post above. It
Re: (Score:2)
We know that masks help. A lot.
Actually we don't know that.
For reasonable definitions of "know", a lot of CDC officials and Epidemiologists would differ with you on that.
Re: (Score:3)
Anecdote warning:
My old man was a pathologist, with a specialism in tropical medicine and infectious diseases. Some short time after this all became global news, perhaps as long as two months after many of us here first became aware of it, the subject of transmission vectors came up in conversation. I mentioned some videos I'd seen showing high resolution high speed images of people coughing, sneezing, talking, shouting, etc. and the way the droplet clouds behaved over subsequent time periods: a few seconds
Re: (Score:2)
There's been no recorded death from COVID-19 to anyone under the age of 10 years old in the USA. It's safe to open daycare centers, preschools, and grade schools. Deaths and disability from COVID-19 for people aged 10 to 40 years is exceedingly small. People in this age group should be allowed to choose to go to school, work, socialize, and so on. We can certainly take precautions, make allowances for people that choose to stay home, and so on. A total lock down is unnecessary and unlikely to improve public health.
Ignores the fact those less at risk of COVID-19 death can (and do) get the virus, and are therefore capable of spreading it. They are also running the risk of long-term health issues resulting from the infection, including one that may be specific to children. Like the rest of the population, younger people with pre-existing health-issues are at greater risk, and are less likely to be aware of their heath issues.
Lockdowns are the desperation play, trying to slow the spread so the health-care system does not collapse. Infection numbers are getting out of hand, thanks to inadequate compliance to the recommended pandemic practices, and lockdowns are the consequneces of those failures to comply. If you look to countries who have successfully handled COVID-19, you find people complied with recommended practices, there was widespread and rapid screening, and isolation when infected was virgourously enforced.
Good to remember: if things get bad enough, in addition to large numbers of COVID-19 deaths, a surge in preventable deaths from non-COVID causes becomes a near-certainty. Not good news: hospitals triaging patients in the parking lot due to lack of room in Emergency wards is happening here in North America
One example: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada... [www.cbc.ca]
Likely eventually anyway? (Score:4, Insightful)
While we all bemoan the loss of this sort of cultural local icon, was it really just going to happen eventually anyway?
I mean, we've seen it in many industries; first large corporate chains come in with economies of scale and the better leverage they have with studios since they represent HUNDREDS of screens instead of 3, and annihilate the 'neighborhood theater' business. Every large city I know is dotted with such theaters either converted to something else, torn down, or limping along as some sort of little boutique art-house theater serving classic or artsy films to a particular audience that combines charitable patronage with entertainment.
Now - ignoring COVID for a moment - those chains themselves were desperately re-inventing themselves to cope with people being able to stream HD pictures (often relatively close to release date) in the comfort of their own home, with giant relatively cheap flatscreens (I saw a walmart deal for a 55" 4k for something like $150 just last week), your own bathroom, and a PAUSE button.
They were already losing that battle, badly. Oh, you'll cook me pizza and let me eat in the theater? (You mean, like I do at home?) Big comfy recliner seats (like I have at home)? I can drink booze while watching (like at home)? All for only $100 for a family of four? Really?
(This is setting aside the general slump in movie quality - both in actual quality, and in the re-engineering films for international consumption so less jaw-jaw and more "boom bang" that's easier to sell in polylingual market...)
I'm sure they all were melancholy when local blacksmithies - also once ubiquitous, and an iconic part of every small town - closed as well.
I'd say that in the same sense that COVID is basically killing people that were old/sick enough that they weren't going to live more than another 18 months or so, it's also merely speeding up the demise of this generally-doomed industry.
Many closed by government order (Score:2)
Interesting article, but, closure due to government edict has to be part of the discussion. The provincial government in Manitoba, Canada, for example, just re-instated theatre closures. Even in those places where theatres are open, people are generally aware of what is happening elsehwere, and that knowledge may be a consideration in the decision to go, or stay home.
The cinema experience is just YUCK (Score:2)
Sad times for the independents - as for the rest.. (Score:2)
Cinema attendance has been dwindling for decades - that should come as no great shock to anyone.
This pandemic is merely accelerating another trend.
I do, however, shed a tear for the independent cinemas out there - the ones that aren't involved in gouging you out of every penny they can.
The ones that truly *love* cinema - those bare bones operations that keep old theatres alive, have come up with novel and entertaining ways to keep cinema relevant.
I am hoping, that once this is over, they actually thrive and
Pretentiousness at an all time high (Score:2)
This hasn't stopped Hollywood loons from being more pretentious than ever.
Partly it's November, partly it's COVID (Score:2)
Early November is normally a slow period at the US box office. The October audience for horror movies is gone (most of them sink like a rock after Halloween) and the big Thanksgiving releases have not yet arrived. If it's an election year, there is the additional factor that people are focused on that rather than on movies. A lot of that 50% box office drop may have been caused by that.
Still, that doesn't account for theaters choosing to close. In a normal year, theaters would just weather the November lull
Re:Deciding? No, people were prevented from going. (Score:4, Funny)
Are people deciding to not go to movies? Or is it state governments preventing them from going?
Yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Also the Movie Theaters did very little early on to even try to keep themselves safe. When you build a business model around jamming as many people possible in a room for a few hours, you risk a big problem when you get a once in a hundred year pandemic. This is also true with the Airline industry. They found ways to Jam people together, their business model is so dependent on that when there is a need to spread people out the business model collapses.
Many businesses that had failed recently, failed be
Re: (Score:2)
This is also true with the Airline industry. They found ways to Jam people together, their business model is so dependent on that when there is a need to spread people out the business model collapses.
It's not just their "business model." It's also the flying public.
The airline industry is perhaps unique where, to the vast majority of the flying public, NOTHING is more important than the lowest fare possible (with non-stop flights a distant #2). Not meals. Not free liquor. Not legroom. Not a blank
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm fine with the lockdowns until a vaccine is "inevitable" (available).
Selfishly, I'd prefer no additional organ damage or mental damage.
We can let this be a culling of the old and infirmed (which it is already to some degree). Oh, and first line medical staff and fast food workers, grocery workers, etc.
Odds might be low if you are young, but odds of death overall have flattened at 2.1% overall for the US.
Skip the theater (closed space), go camping (open space). That's what I've been doing.
Re: (Score:2)
Selfishly, I'd prefer no additional organ damage or mental damage.
I keep seeing mention in Slashdot comments of some kind of permanent damage to people infected with COVID-19 but nothing to back it up excepting anecdotes. Just how common is this? I see no mention of this in the news happening to anyone. I've seen mention of this as a possibility and even then it's about people that already have some preexisting condition in which the COVID-19 infection made things worse. Maybe it was something about a person with diabetes that caught COVID-19 and now has kidney damage
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing I know is that I don't want COVID,
Here are a couple of links.
Brain Issues (and from a good source, small study):
https://www.nature.com/article... [nature.com]
Long term physical effects (CDC):
https://www.cdc.gov/coronaviru... [cdc.gov]
Re:Deciding? No, people were prevented from going. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure there is. The theatres aren't bringing in enough money to keep operating. If you have a business, that's about as logical as it gets.
As for why people aren't going to theatres, well, because. People are scared, obviously. People may be broke, too. People are discovering that they really can live through the Internet. People don't trust experts/polticians/society and are taking their safety into their own hands. Whatever. It doesn't matter anymore. Enough people have indefinitely bowed out of aspects of the economy that businesses structured around a certain amount of asses in seats are fucked, and no amount of talking about the problem is going to change that at this point.
Bottom line, if anyone wants theatres to operate regularly again, then the numbers of active Covid infections needs to fall and stay down, and that needs to happen because less people are getting it rather than someone just fucking with the numbers. Whether that's going to happen quickly enough to save those industries is the only open question, but it's not looking promising.
Re: (Score:2)
Theater attendance was already declining before Covid because ticket and concession prices were both up, but television prices were down. And while a theater has a better sound system than almost anyone has at home, even considered proportionally to the space involved, they often misuse it. It's occasionally turned down too much, and usually turned up too far, to the point where there is distortion both from the speakers themselves and from your overloaded hearing.
Today, a big 4k TV costs less than four or
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, definitely. I said "operate regularly again", not "operate indefinitely again". Like many other industries (*cough* hey there, television *cough*), the normal state would still be a slow death spiral of dropping demand, increasing prices, and shittier service until something eventually gives out. But I don't think even the most curmudgeonly of industry critics was expecting things to go down quite like this.
Re: (Score:2)
a slow death spiral of dropping demand, increasing prices, and shittier service until something eventually gives out
In my area, several movie theaters have taken the "increasing prices, better service" with food service and reclining seats that were spaced apart. YMMV.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure there is. The theatres aren't bringing in enough money to keep operating. If you have a business, that's about as logical as it gets.
And while income has stopped, government taxes and loan payments have not.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a very rare business that doesn't have expenses even when closed. Rent, electricity, heat, maintenance, financing, spoilage, etc. I'm sure most of them have done the math and took the approach that loses money as slowly as possible.
Re: (Score:2)