From IMDB: "The head of the National Association of Theater Owners charged Tuesday that both the owners and the studios could be earning a lot more money if the studios did not rely on an outmoded release schedule. John Fithian chastised the studios for failing to provide attractive movies throughout the year, noting that April and September are "virtually empty," because studios save their prime product for summer or the winter seasons. "They look at their calendar and wait for May and say, 'OK, now we can open our tent-pole movie.'" He said that if the studios hadn't tried to release the latest Spider-Man, Shrek, and Pirates of the Caribbean sequels all within three weeks of one another, the exhibitors "could have done at least another $50 or $60 million" -- particularly if the studios had decided to open at least some of them in April. "A good movie will be successful no matter when it is released," Fithian said"
I agree with this in most part. It is a bit silly to have three of the biggest movies of the year open within three weeks of each other. Despite what the studios may think most people don't see every movie they want to because of time, money etc. By releasing them so close together many people would have to choose between them.
There are however seasonal considerations. Obviously kid's films will likely do better when the kids aren't in school. The weather affects movie-going a lot, people tend not to go out as much when it's cold.
On the other hand, Cloverfield and 300 last year showed that a good movie played off season can do big business.
I remember when the redone versions of the first 3 Stars Wars movies were released in 1997. Theatres were very happy since George Lucas released them in February I think it was. It brought in a ton of business in what is normally a quiet time.
Some of this is irrelevant to Western Film. Between being 2nd run and subject to the student cycle we often get big movies at slow times for other theatres. However we also run into problems. Certain times of the year attendance drops no matter what's playing because the students are busy with school work. There's also things like Juno, at the rate it's going I might not be able to play it until well into exams. Last year I didn't get 300 until the last few days of exams. Most of the students had already left.
5 comments:
It always irritates me that Oscar movies always come out in December-February, leaving me very little time to see them all before the actual show (as was the case with 'Atonement' and 'Blood' this year.) I agree with the whole blockbusters during the summer pattern because people have a lot more time to go to the movies = more money... but when all the blockbusters come out within weeks of each other it's just downright irritating... evening them out would be a better move for everyone (except, of course, the frustrated moviegoer who finds his movie sold out but instead settles for the next big movie on his list.)
I remember thinking "how refreshing" when I left the theatre after watching both examples you cited (more so with 300).
Part of the reason the Oscar type movies tend to come out at the end of the year is because of the Oscar eligibility . A movie has to come out in 2007 to be eligible for an Oscar in Feb 2008. Many films come out at the end of the year to be fresh in the mind of the Academy voters. In some cases a film will play for one week in LA and One week in NY, the bare minimum to qualify.
This practice does have merit, there are many films released early in the year that don't get consideration. A lot of people thought Zodiac should have got more attention last year.
i realize that's why they do it... but it's just a little off-putting... i mean, last year, for example, little miss sunshine came out in september, and still was up for all the big awards (granted, they probably didn't expect it)... or even michael clayton this year (which didn't deserve a single one of its nominations for anything) came out in october and was still considered... if major movies can be spread out as of, say, october, it would make the rush to see everything all the less stressful.
It's also about the public's perception of films. In general the public seems to like lighter movies in the summer and the heavier stuff in the fall/winter. It may be a case of chicken/egg syndrome where people created an association between times of the year and types of films since they were being presented that way. In general the more arty type/independant films that do come out in the summer tend to fail, one of the most famous examples being Cinderella Man. Although there's also the factor of being crowded out by the blockbusters both in terms of getting screens and people spending a limited movie budget on the bigger films.
I had always complained about having month almost without movies to watch and other month were there are so many that I have to choose between them because the budget is limited. I find it very stupid.
Post a Comment