Movie theaters? DOOMED?

[RobertScorpio]

A friend of mine who just happens to work for Sony told me that he believes, with in 10 years, many first run movies, and I mean big movies, will be available in your own home. The push for this is coming from a growing public weary of spending big bucks for movies, and then having to contend with babies, fighting, or the one thing I hate, talking to the people on the screen as IF they can hear you..I hate that!!!...

And the growing fact that many people spend big bucks for home entertainment (screens and sound systems) that make their movie going experience not so special as it once was..

The question is price. How much would a person(s) be willing to pay for a new release movie. He thinks it will be in the area of 200$....

I can tell you, right now, I would pay 200$ in a heartbeat. My four friends, close friends, could all come over. I would put it up on my new DLP/projector (which i got for 3600$ so I need to justify getting it still to my wife) and project it up on my wallmounted 100 inch screen...they would all contribute their own $$$ and bring their own food, drinks (and I don't mean coke!). I would pay that $200 to escape the throng of morons that populate the theaters I go to...

How much would you be willing to pay to see, oh, the GREEN LANTERN movie, or IRONMAN/AVENGERS movie coming down the pike..at home?


Rob

 

[Smiley]

Why pay $200 to see a movie at home? Wait four months and rent it for $5 or less. Movie theater problems are nothing new, although cell phones have added to the potential annoyances. I think your friend's opinion is nuts.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Why pay $200 to see a movie at home? Wait four months and rent it for $5 or less. Movie theater problems are nothing new, although cell phones have added to the potential annoyances. I think your friend's opinion is nuts.

I forgot about cellphones..good point.

I think he, they, believe that enough people (Trek fans are in this boat) would never wait 4 months to see a new trek movie. He's right. Oh, some will say they will wait; but they wont. Thats why TREK has such big openings...

Rob

 

[Chris3123]

Even $50 is way too much just to see a movie. Heck, it's even too much to buy a copy (at least for the currently available home viewing mediums).

 

[OmahaStar]

No way. I can pay four dollars to see a new-release movie before noon on any Friday, Saturday, or Sunday, and the people who misbehave in theaters aren't even awake yet. They go to the evening showings (for the most part), where I can avoid them.

 

[tharpdevenport]

A fool and his money are soon parted. And fools comes a dime a dozen, and just'a love partin' with their money. Oh yeah.

 

[RobertScorpio]

A fool and his money are soon parted. And fools comes a dime a dozen, and just'a love partin' with their money. Oh yeah.

Ill remember that when I'm sitting in my home, with my 5.1 and my plasma while some kid is pooping his diaper three seats down from you while some dude to your left debates Kirk as to whether or not to go to warp...wink wink

Rob

 

[Neroon]

General topics like this really belong in the GTVM forum. Watch your step while I send this over to the balcony.....

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I almost never go to theaters anymore; I can usually wait till a movie comes out on Blu-Ray. It's only if it's really special, such as ST XI, that I have to see it in a theater at least once.

I certainly wouldn't pay fifty bucks to see a first run movie, be it in a theater or at home. I'm not *that* desperate.

 

[Spot's Meow]

If I'm not willing to pay $10 to see a new movie now, why the heck would I be willing to pay $200? I don't see movies in the theater anymore because I don't have the time, it costs too much, and you can just see it a few months later for an insanely cheap price through Netflix. Offering $200 home releases would change none of those things for me.

 

[ManOnTheWave]

There was a similar thread not long ago based on the rumor that SONY was planning on selling packages for $40. For the price tag, you get the movie streamed into your Bravia system (which seems to have rampant motherboard defects) while in it's in first run. A copy of the DVD will be mailed to you when released. I'll say now what I said then. No. It's too expensive, and it removes one from the theatre experience of going out and seeing it "on the big screen." But mainly, it's still too expensive. Pay $200, no.

 

[Captain Shaw]

I would not pay $200 to watch a film no matter where it is being shown.

 

[Mistral]

$200? No way. But I'd pay theater prices ($14) to watch a first run at home. As long as I could pause it. I don't go to theaters for 3 simple reasons:

No Beer.
No Smoking
No pausing to run to the bathroom.

With so many "epic" movies running close to 3 hours, those circumstances don't work for me.

 

[Starbreaker]

$200 is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[judge alba]

I sure wouldn't pay 100 smackers plus to watch a film I'd wait until it was on dvd or blu ray and get it for £20 tops

 

[caisson2delta]

There is no way that I'd spend $50, let alone $200 to see a movie. I don't usually go in the evening time, unless it is on some off night during the week. Most of my movie going issues deal with it usually being too cold in the theater and having to hear the girlfriend bitch about it.

Certain films need to be seen on the big screen and that's just how it is. Most decent movies I can wait to see, with a few exceptions. Any decent science fiction, action, fantasy, etc. have to be seen, by me, in the theater. It wouldn't be the same for me to see it at home.

 

[Captain Craig]

If I'm not willing to pay $10 to see a new movie now, why the heck would I be willing to pay $200? I don't see movies in the theater anymore because I don't have the time, it costs too much, and you can just see it a few months later for an insanely cheap price through Netflix. Offering $200 home releases would change none of those things for me.

This almost is my exact thought.
My caveat is that there are SOME movies I deem worthy of $10 to spend to go see thus supporting said franchise with my financial vote.
I'm not sure where the OP lives but he seems to have a higher degree, or lower tolerance, of the troublemakers.

If this "idea" in the OP really is floating around it only means that EVERY movie I see will be post DVD release. The reason some movies/franchise are worth it is because while my 33" screen works fine some movies are just made for that BIG SCREEN experience, bigger than even the plasma screen at the OP's house.

 

[trekkiedane]

It's not the BO that bothers me, it's the perfume people seem to shower in before leaving their homes.

 

[Guy Gardener]

This is so funny. The illegal option often already allows criminals to see dvd-ish quality releases weeks to months before they're released in the theatre for free, which is naughty and bad.

I suppose 200 dollars per movie is a small price to pay to avoid fines and jail time? But then if they want to fine you 3 million dollars and send you up the river for 40 years for just a little bit of counterfeiting, odds are you'd be be answering the door mostly with a machine gun in one hand.

Old joke.

Q. How many copies of Microsoft Word did Bill sell in China?
A. One.

The only people that are going to CONSTANTLY spend 200 dollars on a brand new movie are pirates, who will mass produce the bugger and resell it for 10 bucks to half a million people who will resell it for 5 bucks to a few dozen people who will then post it on the internet for free.

Seriously, if you want to watch a movie alone, how much does it cost to hire out a theatre?

200 bucks?

 

[Supreme Admiral]

-Wag my finger-

I wouldn't pay that 200 dollars! I love go to movie theaters. Period!