Indian Cinema Chain Sued By Film-goer Over Lengthy Pre-film Ads (theguardian.com) 55
The Guardian: For some, the adverts that precede the start of a film are the bane of a trip to the cinema; for others, they are a useful buffer as you stand in the popcorn queue. But for one man in India, the lengthy marathon of cinema advertising was so infuriating that he took the matter to the courts -- and won. Abhishek MR, a 30-year-old man from the southern city of Bangalore, had booked a trip to the cinema with friends in December last year to watch wartime drama Sam Bahadur.
But while the scheduled time he had booked the ticket for was 4.05pm, he had to sit through 25 minutes of adverts for upcoming features and commercial items such as homewares, mobile phones and cars before the film actually began. Having planned to return to work straight after the film, Abhishek MR was angered by what he felt was a costly disruption to his life. He filed a lawsuit against PVR Inox, India's largest cinema multiplex chain, stating that: "The complainant could not attend other arrangements and appointments which were scheduled for the day and has faced losses that cannot be calculated in terms of money as compensation." Bruce66423 adds: Great outcome -- and only 25 minutes of garbage punished. Note that Indian cinemas also make patrons sit through 15 minutes of adverts in the middle of the film.
But while the scheduled time he had booked the ticket for was 4.05pm, he had to sit through 25 minutes of adverts for upcoming features and commercial items such as homewares, mobile phones and cars before the film actually began. Having planned to return to work straight after the film, Abhishek MR was angered by what he felt was a costly disruption to his life. He filed a lawsuit against PVR Inox, India's largest cinema multiplex chain, stating that: "The complainant could not attend other arrangements and appointments which were scheduled for the day and has faced losses that cannot be calculated in terms of money as compensation." Bruce66423 adds: Great outcome -- and only 25 minutes of garbage punished. Note that Indian cinemas also make patrons sit through 15 minutes of adverts in the middle of the film.
15 minutes of adverts (Score:3)
"Indian cinemas also make patrons sit through 15 minutes of adverts in the middle of the film."
That used to be called the INTERMISSION.
so you could go to the bathroom, or outside to have a smoke, get more popcorn etc.
They even had the ushers come in with trays of sweets, icecreams etc for sale.
ALBATROSS
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
That used to be called the INTERMISSION.
INTERMISSION used to have an ad for the concession, if that. My local theaters in Santa Cruz county used to just show the word "INTERMISSION" and then bring up the lights. Only the drive-in had commercials, and they were the classic let's all go to the lobby commercials for the snack concession.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm always a little confused by people posting long lists like yours about why they don't like theaters. I'm confused because I never see any of this outside of ticket prices and pre movie ads. Where do you live where things suck so much and people are so rude that this is a constant problem?
I remember dirty theaters around where I live in the 80's but those haven't been a thing for eons and the last movie disruption I had by a fellow patron was my own drunk friend yelling at the screen because he was angry
Re: (Score:3)
RIPD came out in 2013 btw
Re: (Score:2)
> Where do you live where things suck so much and
> people are so rude that this is a constant problem?
Anywhere in the US where there is not an Alamo Drafthouse?
I will occasionally consent to go to another theater if others want to see a mattanee showing of movie that's not playing at the Alamo. But The Alamo is the only theater in which I will ever actively make plans to see a movie or choose if I'm the one making the plans or choice of venue. And it's the only one I will go to if I'm going to have
Re: (Score:3)
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that obviously Indian movie patrons are OK with this, or they wouldn't go to the movies.
The intermission "ad break" is not something a US movie goer, paying as much as $15-20 to see a movie would tolerate, but what are Indian movie-goers paying for their movie tickets? I bet there are movie houses in India that don't run ads in the middle of the movie, but their tickets are much more expensive.
In the US, when we had intermissions in movies they were typically found
Re: (Score:2)
In the US, when we had intermissions in movies they were typically found in three hour long movies
Three hour movies have mostly disappeared as the theaters want more showings for additional revenue. There are the occasional exceptions. The Brutalist (a 3.5 hour film) has an intermission. I believe my local art house theater still has the intermission when they show Lawrence of Arabia.
... but back then they hadn't invented the 44 oz soda to last thru an entire 3 hr movie, LOL.
After consuming the 44 oz soda, many may need that intermission....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that obviously Indian movie patrons are OK with this, or they wouldn't go to the movies.
If they stopped going in large enough to numbers things might change. I’m guessing the ad revenue helps keep ticket prices lower, so a widespread boycott would result in higher prices, turning off movie patrons, and driving so e theaters out of business.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that obviously Indian movie patrons are OK with this, or they wouldn't go to the movies.
But that is an argument by ignorance fallacy. I take it that you do not live in India and speak to movie patrons. I do not live in India and talk to movie patrons either however I am not assuming they are okay with it. Just because neither of us know, we cannot assume one conclusion over the other.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember watching Scarface at home on a cable box (back in the day) and at some point the movie stopped and Intermission appeared on the tv. We had no idea what was going on. Weren't expecting a break. But it was nice to have.
Re: (Score:1)
I wish US movies would have mid-way breaks. Due to health reasons, being dehydrated causes problems for some of us older folks: we need restroom breaks. When I was a kid I could just avoid drinks to keep my bladder empty.
But I do agree starting the flick very late is false advertising and/or a defective product: one is paying for a movie, not wasted time watching ads.
Or at least state the lead-in time and break time so one knows when to enter and exit.
Previews (Score:3)
I like the previews of upcoming films, but could live without the advertisements.
Often the previews tell me "this is something I have no interest in", but sometimes they alert me to something I wouldn't have though of seeing. And other times, I get to see cool special effects on the screen without spending time on actually watching the movie.
I don't think I've ever been tempted to buy anything from on-screen advertisements, however.
Re: (Score:2)
I like the previews of upcoming films, but could live without the advertisements.
Often the previews tell me "this is something I have no interest in", but sometimes they alert me to something I wouldn't have though of seeing.
I don't think they're relevant anymore. Now we can go to the theater's web site and watch previews for everything playing and even for upcoming releases. But, yeah, in the 80's and 90's that's how you decided what movies to see next. And you had to call the theater on a wired phone and listen to a recording of showtimes.
I wish they'd publish the start time, when the movie actually begins, and when it ends. I'd drop my kids off at their seats to watch the previews while I get popcorn.
Re: (Score:2)
Most cinemas also have posters and screens in the foyer or even the outside of the building which advertise upcoming movies too, so you've already seen there before you actually enter the movie hall.
But yes, this is the key point:
I wish they'd publish the start time, when the movie actually begins, and when it ends. I'd drop my kids off at their seats to watch the previews while I get popcorn.
If you know the start and end times then you can plan - eg what you're going to do after, how long to pay for in the car park etc.
The 15 minutes break in the middle of the movie can be a good thing, it gives you chance to go to the toilet, get more food or drinks, stretch your legs
Re: (Score:2)
No it doesn't. Movie theaters have multiple projectors that can be timed to start just before the reel on the other projector is finished so that there's no gap in the movie as you go from reel to reel. The only time you can tell when there's a change is if the projectionist is careless and that's very rare.
Re: (Score:2)
While it's possible to have multiple projectors and timing them to cut over, a lot of places didn't have that.
Re: (Score:2)
Most cinemas also have posters and screens in the foyer or even the outside of the building which advertise upcoming movies too, so you've already seen there before you actually enter the movie hall.
The poster isn't the same as seeing the clips from the actual movie.
And, my local theatre doesn't even have the posters any more. I don't know why, but I suspect that changing the posters once a week required an actual human, and their goal is to remove all humans from the movie theatre operations (except for the refreshment stand).
Re: (Score:2)
Sure many places no longer have posters, now they have screens hanging in the foyer which show the movie clips.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you can "pull" the latest trailers on theater websites, but having the trailer "pushed" to you typically would expose you to something you might not have picked if you visited a theater websites.
A movie trailer may underwhelm on a cell phone display, but on a huge cinema screen it may come alive.
Yes, I can find a book on an online retailers website, but in an actual book store I'll be exposed to many other related or otherwise interesting books I might also be interested in, but never knew they existed
So he sat thru 25 minutes of ads and trailers? (Score:1)
Having planned to return to work straight after the film, Abhishek MR was angered by what he felt was a costly disruption to his life. He filed a lawsuit against PVR Inox, India's largest cinema multiplex chain, stating that: "The complainant could not attend other arrangements and appointments which were scheduled for the day and has faced losses that cannot be calculated in terms of money as compensation."
So, he sat thru 25 minutes of ads and trailers, and that caused him to somehow suffered incalculable losses? Really?
Was he held hostage at the cinema? Was he not able to walk out before the film was over? Does he not have a watch or cellphone so he could manage his time?
He prioritized watching the movie over returning to work when he planned to, that's it.
What is the real claim here? "Sure, I expected some ads/trailers, maybe 10 or 15 minutes, but when I was forced to endure TWENTY FIVE MINUTES of ads and t
Re: (Score:3)
You are being dense.
Theater says movie starts at 4:00. It does not, it starts at 4:25 because of 25 minutes of ads. Ergo, false advertising.
What's not mentioned in the summary is if he sued to get any money back or receive any money; the "incalculable non-monetary damages" part of this would indicate that he did not.
America has always had a long history of annoying consumers suing to force companies to correct false or misleading claims. That's why we have kids cereal boxes with disclaimers at the bottom
Re: (Score:1)
Theater says movie starts at 4:00. It does not
That's also not what they said. What they said was that showtime was at 4:00. The movie was "always" (for decades) preceded by ads, for other movies. Now they also include other ads.
I think all of that is a shit show and theaters everywhere should be required to tell you how much bullshit will precede the actual film, but it's still not actually fraud. It's just shitty.
Re: (Score:2)
You are being dense.
Theater says movie starts at 4:00. It does not, it starts at 4:25 because of 25 minutes of ads. Ergo, false advertising.
No, I'm not.
Did he honestly expect to walk into the movie and see no trailers/ads? Was he only expecting a 15 minute ad break in the middle of the movie?
As I read this story, he expected some trailers, but not 25 minutes... OK, what did he expect? 5 minutes? 10 minutes? His lawsuit is because of the delta between his expected amount of trailers and the actual amount of trailers he watched, not that he watched any trailers/ads.
Let's also identify what he was doing, he left work, went to the movies, and plann
Re:So he sat thru 25 minutes of ads and trailers? (Score:4, Interesting)
He expected to see some trailers, but then sued after realizing that he was being misled all along about the start time of the movie.
What is hard to understand about that?
Him leaving work and seeing a movie, expecting to return afterwards is really irrelevant. It's really a simple question, here or in India. Does a patron have a right to expect that the movie they are paying for should start at the advertised time? I, and this guy, would argue yes. Otherwise, it's essentially fraud or certainly false advertising..
What if the theater started the movie 2 hours after "showtime" rather than 25 min? or 45 min? What about 3hrs? 6 hours? a day? a week?
Answer this question.
Is there a point for you at which the time the actual movie starts after the advertised showtime constitutes fraud or some other form of false advertising?
If the answer is yes, for *any time period*, then we, you, I, and the Indian court system are arguing about what that time should be, and the court system has already decided in favor of that man.
If not, well then, send me 1000$, and I *promise* you I will send you back 1 million dollars in the not too distant future.
Re: (Score:2)
He expected to see some trailers, but then sued after realizing that he was being misled all along about the start time of the movie.
What is hard to understand about that?
If I follow your argument, he knew the movie wasn't going to start at the time on the ticket, but his assumption about how many ads/trailers he'd see proved wrong. He got £500 because his assumption was wrong.
Him leaving work and seeing a movie, expecting to return afterwards is really irrelevant.
No, it is a key part of the lawsuit - he got the money because he wasn't able to return to work when he expected to. He didn't sue because he missed his bedtime because of the trailers, he was late/missed work and that's why he got £500.
It's really a simple question, here or in India. Does a patron have a right to expect that the movie they are paying for should start at the advertised time? I, and this guy, would argue yes. Otherwise, it's essentially fraud or certainly false advertising..
What if the theater started the movie 2 hours after "showtime" rather than 25 min? or 45 min? What about 3hrs? 6 hours? a day? a week?
Answer this question.
He bought a ticket for a show, the show included trailers/ads, they ran longer than he thought, so his response is to sue? If he wanted to "fix" this perceived problem, he would have sued to change business practices, but he didn't, he sued for "waste of time".
If my local theater just ran endless trailers (call it an hour), I'd walk out and ask for a refund, I wouldn't call a lawyer. And if enough patrons walk out, business practices will change.
Is there a point for you at which the time the actual movie starts after the advertised showtime constitutes fraud or some other form of false advertising?
If the answer is yes, for *any time period*, then we, you, I, and the Indian court system are arguing about what that time should be, and the court system has already decided in favor of that man.
If not, well then, send me 1000$, and I *promise* you I will send you back 1 million dollars in the not too distant future.
Oddly, nothing in this case changed anything he (or you) are complaining about.
I guess theaters may, in response, trim the number of ads before a movie to something more reasonable, but nothing in this story says theaters will change the practice of saying the show starts at one time, then playing trailers ads for some period of time before the movie starts - the "start time" on the "ticket" won't change, and won't reflect the time the actual movie starts.
Re: (Score:3)
He got about £500 and lawyer fees, so yes, he sued for money.
It's noted in the linked-to story, but who reads that? We just trust the /. Editors to make every effort to include every salient point in TFS. So we don't have to waste our time actually researching a topic before we declare our authoritative opinion on the matter and impugn any that disagree with us...
Apparently "wasting" 25 minutes of his time was worth £500 plus legal expenses.
Re: (Score:3)
in his defense.. if movie is stated to be 90 minutes.. and you show up at 7pm to watch it.. you would reasonably expect to be done and out by 9pm. because of the excessive ads, the movie runs into 9:15... it's a very bitter pill to swallow and walk out right when the final scene of the movie is about to hit because the theater got greedy with excessive adverts.
Imagine paying a premium to watch a movie in a theater and still get 40 minutes of ads with it... there shouldn't be any effin ads... and definitely
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly this, advertise the movie starting at 19:25 not 19:00, if someone turns up early and watches trailers that's their choice.
A lot of car parks require you to buy a ticket and estimate how long you'll be there, if the movie overruns you're faced with the choice of buying extra time up front (which you might not need), risking a fine, or leaving the movie early to avoid a fine.
Re: (Score:1)
Don't confuse the Indian moviegoing experience with that of an American moviegoing experience.
I suspect the Indian theater goers don't really pay a "premium" to see a movie, their ticket cost is very likely subsidized by the ads, and if the Indian population was really upset by the ads, a theater chain would offer premium, ad-free, movies with higher ticket prices.
It may also be that in Indian culture the theater is an air conditioned space that people go to to get out of the heat, and the added ads and tra
Re: (Score:2)
My assumption was based on the fact he was suing.. if the ticket prices are highly subsidized and the norm is to have 40 minutes of adverts in a movie (before+during)... this likely wouldn't have happened (him suing). But you're right, the experience are definitely very different between north america and Indian theater experience. Sadly, getting to see too many ads seems to be common across the hemispheres. .
Re: (Score:2)
Blimey - hyperventilate much?
"Incalculable" doesn't mean infinite. It just means he can't (or chose not) to put a specific number to it. Perhaps he is leaving it to the discretion of the court, if and when they find in his favor.
Say he put down a number like: $100 is the economic value of
Re: (Score:2)
The court did not order the theater to change the practice, it simply awarded him money for his time in this case - the industry will not do anything, really. This has been the norm in India for decades, and there has been exactly one lawsuit - apparently the consumers in India accept, if grudgingly, accept this practice.
Truth in Advertising (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Movie starts 19:25, doors open 19:00 - simple, if you're early you have somewhere to sit and have to watch some ads.
Re: (Score:2)
Theaters offer a show, and the show includes trailers, and the show starts at the time on the ticket.
You didn't buy a ticket to a movie, you bought a ticket to a show. In America, I've not seen advertisements (as distinct from trailers) after the stated time on the ticket, before, yes, but not once the "show" starts.
When I buy a ticket for a concert, it never starts at the time on the ticket - is that a problem too?
Re: (Score:2)
Theaters offer a show, and the show includes trailers,
Do you know why they are called trailers? Because at one point they were shown after the feature.
Re: (Score:2)
> When I buy a ticket for a concert, it never starts at
> the time on the ticket - is that a problem too?
Yes,. It is a problem too. And you obviously never made it to any date of the biggest concert tour in the history of concert tours.
I attended multiple shows of The Eras Tour in multiple cities. And Taylor Swift did not lie in her advertisements or goof off and get drunk or high before her sets. Nor did she inundate us with ads or trailers or anything similar. There were two times given. One wa
Re: (Score:3)
Abstractly this is fraud and the existing laws cover that.
Realistically the Courts always side with the corporations so the politicians need to leave judges no way out.
One human lifetime ago being a lawyer was neither required nor encouraged for being a judge.
Then the lawyers got control of the Courts. Now the Courts further enrich the highest-paid lawyers by default regardless of statute or Constitution.
You have a 3% chance of a Constitutional abuse even being taken up by the Supreme Court and that's afte
Re: (Score:2)
Abstractly this is fraud and the existing laws cover that.
Yet, oddly, the Indian court didn't find fraud, they found the theater wasted people's time.
Realistically the Courts always side with the corporations so the politicians need to leave judges no way out.
One human lifetime ago being a lawyer was neither required nor encouraged for being a judge.
Then the lawyers got control of the Courts. Now the Courts further enrich the highest-paid lawyers by default regardless of statute or Constitution.
You have a 3% chance of a Constitutional abuse even being taken up by the Supreme Court and that's after you've spent years and millions getting it there.
We have a deep structural problem that 98% of the time mocks the fabled Rule of Law.
Nice how you fold your issues with US legal system into an article about the Indian legal system...
I haven't been to a movie in years (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Some theaters are oddly cheap. They opened one here at a mall about 10 years ago and we saw Nosferatu last month and tickets were $6 each.
But its a good thing (Score:2)
Coming films. (Score:1)
People need to know!
Re: (Score:2)
Mid-film ads? What?! (Score:2)
The moment cinemas in my area start doing mid-film ads is when I stop going to cinemas altogether.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't move to India, problem solved.
Re: (Score:2)
Movie theaters are dinosaurs (Score:2)
...and they deserve to die
In the beginning, they were necessary because of the tech of the time
Today, there is nothing pleasant about the theater experience, and it's getting worse
Re: (Score:2)
Yet, oddly, people still go to the theater - perhaps they are looking for something different from you.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, any product or service that is useless to you personally should not exist. What time does the nurse come by with your meds?