High Tech killing the movie industry?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Jd1680a
Jd1680a

5960

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 38

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By Jd1680a
Member since 2005 • 5960 Posts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85VVM77-l7I

High tech as being computers that connect to the internet and video games are causing the movie industry to collapse under its own weight. The idea of $50 movie tickets is suggested by George Lucas as a way to avoid movie studios from losing too much money in their movies.

One thing is immediately wrong, is a movie studio requires to be make $1 billion for a high budget movie to be a success. That is not true, it requires at least twice the cost of production for the movie to be successful.

In 1988, the movie industry said the VCR would kill the movie industry.

If high tech technology is killing the movie industry, how come that didn't happen ten years ago when the internet and video games were already popular? Apparently the idea of all studios losing a ton of money didn't stop all the major studios in spending $200 million on one or two movies this year.

Thoughts?

Avatar image for SaintLeonidas
SaintLeonidas

26735

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By SaintLeonidas
Member since 2006 • 26735 Posts

Thoughts? I think you are giving too much weight to the words of a moron (aka George Lucas).

Avatar image for cain006
cain006

8625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 38

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By cain006
Member since 2008 • 8625 Posts

I get what he means - there's not much of a reason to go to the movies if you have a good TV and sound system. If theaters up the quality a lot somehow and make the experience something you can't get at home then maybe they could up the price a bunch.

Avatar image for LittleMac19
LittleMac19

1638

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By LittleMac19
Member since 2009 • 1638 Posts

He ruined kotor II so George Lucas can just shove it.

Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

23010

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By mattbbpl
Member since 2006 • 23010 Posts

@cain006 said:

I get what he means - there's not much of a reason to go to the movies if you have a good TV and sound system. If theaters up the quality a lot somehow and make the experience something you can't get at home then maybe they could up the price a bunch.

What the theater really buys you is expediency. It's the same reason why hard back books command a higher price.

While the higher quality has some play in it, the main reason people pay extra for these mediums is because they don't want to delay the experience.

Avatar image for comp_atkins
comp_atkins

38662

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By comp_atkins
Member since 2005 • 38662 Posts

meh. pay actors a bit less and your movie will be profitable again...

Avatar image for Master_Live
Master_Live

20510

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

#8 Master_Live
Member since 2004 • 20510 Posts

They will adapt or die. And that is that.

Avatar image for bob_toeback
bob_toeback

11287

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#9 bob_toeback
Member since 2006 • 11287 Posts

We could always make cheaper movies... but I think the fact that there have been record grossing films, recently, shows that people are still going to see these things. I dunno, it seems that there will always be something that's a "threat" much like television was to film, back in the day.

Avatar image for ShepardCommandr
ShepardCommandr

4939

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#10 ShepardCommandr
Member since 2013 • 4939 Posts

@Master_Live said:

They will adapt or die. And that is that.

Avatar image for Dogswithguns
Dogswithguns

11359

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#11 Dogswithguns
Member since 2007 • 11359 Posts

A movie ticket $7.00 + a bucket popcorn and a drink $25 = $42.. screw that.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#12 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

No.

If anything technology is helping the movie industry. Now every dweeb with a digital camera has the resources to make a movie. You don't need to spend thousands of dollars for film and film equipment anymore. Plus with the internet it is stupidly easy to get exposure for your film thus not requiring millions of dollars for a marketing campaign.

Avatar image for StrifeDelivery
StrifeDelivery

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13  Edited By StrifeDelivery
Member since 2006 • 1901 Posts

Just having a hard time seeing it really.

You have the box office sales (including worldwide). Eventually you have DVD/Blu-ray sales to peak up interest in the movie again, couple that with movie rentals (redbox, netflix, on-demand). Then, you have HBO/Cinemax/etc. that pay to use the films, and then finally cable TV such as USA/TNT/FX/etc. If anything, the movie industry has tons of avenues of constantly making money, especially over long periods of time with a single film.

"High-tech" such as PC/consoles/internet have allowed people to stream movies/shows with greater ease and apparently more desire to do so. While it is nice to see studios combining formats (blu-ray with dvd and "ultraviolet") it still doesn't help with said movie to buy is sometimes priced $25-30.

Avatar image for lamprey263
lamprey263

44503

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#14  Edited By lamprey263
Member since 2006 • 44503 Posts
Loading Video...

Avatar image for WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77

12605

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 WhiteKnight77
Member since 2003 • 12605 Posts

One reason why blank video tape didn't get axed is that the manufacturers agreed to pay a fee to the movie industry that was charged to the end user for the ability to tape said movies instead of having to buy a high dollar movie from the studios (that could run upwards of $60 or more for a movie). People who bought video tapes paid for the right to do so. With video tape, any other copies did not have the fidelity that the original had. Even if you rented a movie, there was technology that helped to prevent copying of tapes.

Unfortunately, there is no fee for internet users that are paid to either the recording industry or the movie industry and digital copies are a true copy that doesn't have any degradation unless there is some sort of DRM that prevents copying to begin with. I can see a marked increase in movie ticket prices. Will it be $50, I doubt it, but if it does, I do see a decrease in the number of people going to see movies at the theaters or even buying the DVDs as they too will be expensive and people will balk at buying them.

Avatar image for dave123321
dave123321

35553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 dave123321
Member since 2003 • 35553 Posts

What was the last movie you bought, wk?

Avatar image for sammyjenkis898
sammyjenkis898

28392

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17  Edited By sammyjenkis898
Member since 2007 • 28392 Posts

@Dogswithguns said:

A movie ticket $7.00 + a bucket popcorn and a drink $25 = $42.. screw that.

This is the only thing that you should scoff at, and it isn't a necessity for the movie theater experience. $7 for a movie ticket? Yeah, that's not something to object.

Avatar image for dave123321
dave123321

35553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 dave123321
Member since 2003 • 35553 Posts

A drink and popcorn run me 10 total. That's with free refills for both

Avatar image for WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77

12605

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 WhiteKnight77
Member since 2003 • 12605 Posts

Dave, the last movie I bought was MIB III I believe and that was on Blu-Ray DVD. The last any type of entertainment I bought was Lost In Space season 1 and LIS season 2 part 1 as I already had part 2.

I maybe have been to 4 movies in the last 4 years in the theaters. There really isn't anything I want to see due to being rehashes of something I have already seen or comic book based movies that never really drew my interest even when I was younger or even at this time. I can't see paying money to see garbage (my opinion) or wasting money to drive to them when I can buy movies I do want to see (usually older movies) from Amazon cheaper and have them delivered to my door.

Avatar image for dave123321
dave123321

35553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 dave123321
Member since 2003 • 35553 Posts

The last two movies that I watched after buying them were Ben Hur and The Ten Commandments.

Avatar image for dave123321
dave123321

35553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 dave123321
Member since 2003 • 35553 Posts

I think there have been many worthwhile theater experiences in the last four years. Just have to know where to look. Try asking sammy for some advice on that end.

Avatar image for Bardock47
Bardock47

5429

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 Bardock47
Member since 2008 • 5429 Posts

Movie tickets will be 50 dollars if they want to kill the industry. Just look at Catching Fire, that movie cost alot to make and is your standard blockbuster. It is making tons and tons of money. This is all on standard ticket prices (and Imax as well) so I doubt that film is dying; this is just Lucas either speaking rather greedily or making a completely moronic prediction. Most likely it is the latter.

Not to mention, streaming services and Dvd/blu-ray releases make money.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#23 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

@WhiteKnight77 said:

Dave, the last movie I bought was MIB III I believe and that was on Blu-Ray DVD. The last any type of entertainment I bought was Lost In Space season 1 and LIS season 2 part 1 as I already had part 2.

I maybe have been to 4 movies in the last 4 years in the theaters. There really isn't anything I want to see due to being rehashes of something I have already seen or comic book based movies that never really drew my interest even when I was younger or even at this time. I can't see paying money to see garbage (my opinion) or wasting money to drive to them when I can buy movies I do want to see (usually older movies) from Amazon cheaper and have them delivered to my door.

Sucks for you. There's plenty of films out there worth seeing. Maybe if you'd stop being lazy and research?

Avatar image for dave123321
dave123321

35553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 dave123321
Member since 2003 • 35553 Posts

Aljosa is also a good source of movie recommendations, wk

Avatar image for dave123321
dave123321

35553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25  Edited By dave123321
Member since 2003 • 35553 Posts

Expand your horizons

Avatar image for BluRayHiDef
BluRayHiDef

10839

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#26 BluRayHiDef
Member since 2009 • 10839 Posts

@Aljosa23 said:

No.

If anything technology is helping the movie industry. Now every dweeb with a digital camera has the resources to make a movie. You don't need to spend thousands of dollars for film and film equipment anymore. Plus with the internet it is stupidly easy to get exposure for your film thus not requiring millions of dollars for a marketing campaign.

Oversaturation weakens profitability, so technology is hurting the industry.

Avatar image for dave123321
dave123321

35553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 dave123321
Member since 2003 • 35553 Posts

Do you feel oversaturated, blu?

Avatar image for Jd1680a
Jd1680a

5960

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 38

User Lists: 0

#28 Jd1680a
Member since 2005 • 5960 Posts

According to box office mojo, North American ticket revenue would most likely break yet another record and probably tie overall ticket sales from 2012 year. Ticket sales have been steady from 1.2-1.5 billion for 15 years now, even with the advancement of technology.

People who back the movie industry seems to exaggerate numbers to cause shock. It is the entire movie industry dream for everyone to get back into the theater like it was in the early 80s, so that way they could make $2 billion for each movie. Selling movie tickets for $50 would not improve things and would more then likely cut revenue by 50%, assuming if only 10% of movie tickets were sold.

Even with the internet and a cheaper method to watch movies like The Red Box. I would still go out to the theater to watch a movie I would like to go see. The Hobbit 2 is coming out next week and I am very excited to see that movie. The overall experience of watching a movie in the theater with the huge screen and excellent surround sound cant match what I got at home.

Avatar image for LoG-Sacrament
LoG-Sacrament

20397

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 33

User Lists: 0

#29 LoG-Sacrament
Member since 2006 • 20397 Posts

there's been a perceived conflict between theater and home theater for decades and decades. real theaters have been trying to sell that one obvious feature that makes them better than home viewing and TV technology has been getting closer anyway. the renewal of 3D has been the latest attempt and then 3D TV's came out. it can be a silly cycle.

some movies are just better to watch at home (i like the quiet and controlled environment of home to watch a bergman), but real theaters offer a different overall experience that's better for other movies. i mean, there's nothing quite like sitting down in a theater that smells like heaps of cheap butter and watching an exploitative tarantino movie while also watching people being exploited.

that's not to say that real theaters shouldn't focus on the quality of delivery (on the contrary, simple things like not skimping on projection bulbs would be nice. theater owners are just cheap). however, studios shouldn't be surprised if they spend hundreds of millions to dispassionately assemble what marketing tells them and then audiences receive it dispassionately.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#30 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

@BluRayHiDef said:

@Aljosa23 said:

No.

If anything technology is helping the movie industry. Now every dweeb with a digital camera has the resources to make a movie. You don't need to spend thousands of dollars for film and film equipment anymore. Plus with the internet it is stupidly easy to get exposure for your film thus not requiring millions of dollars for a marketing campaign.

Oversaturation weakens profitability, so technology is hurting the industry.

Implying that I or anyone else here cares about profits.