2010 Sees Horrible Movie Attendance

klunderbunker

Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
2010 closed as the second highest-grossing year of all time, but it still couldn't shake an air of disappointment. Not only did 2010 end with a whimper, estimated attendance was the lowest in 15 years.

The box office tally for 2010 was $10.57 billion, or around $30 million shy of 2009. That translated to an estimated attendance of 1.27 billion, which was off eight percent from 2010. 1995 was the last year to have sub-1.3 billion attendance. Since the modern attendance peak in 2002 (1.58 billion), attendance has been trending downward, but 2010 marked the second severe drop-off, following 2005.

In December, 2010 lost its slight gross edge over 2009. At $882 million, December 2010 was not only relatively low-grossing but also the least-attended December since 1993. With half-hearted attempts to recreate past December successes (Yogi Bear aping Chipmunks, Gulliver's Travels copying Night at the Museum, Little Fockers chasing Meet the Fockers), it was another month of missed opportunities. The only months in 2010 to decisively out-gross their 2009 counterparts were January, March, April and July, while normally big months May, November and December were particularly weak.

Hollywood often failed to offer an appealing slate of movies, and there were fewer movies made available than before. In 2010, 141 movies reached nationwide release (600 locations or more), down from 158 in 2009 and the smallest number since 2001.

The top-grossing movie of 2010 was a holdover from 2009: Avatar, which made $476.9 million of its $760.5 million lifetime total in 2010. The last time the top movie was from the previous year was in 1998, when Titanic dominated. One difference is that 1998 was a bigger year than 1997.

Toy Story 3 was the second-biggest movie in 2010, drawing $415 million. Alice in Wonderland ($334.2 million), Iron Man 2 ($312.4 million) and The Twilight Saga: Eclipse ($300.5 million) rounded out the Top Five. Those top movies accounted for $1.84 billion or 17.4 percent of the 2010 pie, whereas the Top Five in 2009 made $1.57 billion with a 14.8 percent share. 2010's Top Ten, which included titans like Inception ($292.6 million), Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 ($280.2 million) and Despicable Me ($251.1 million), tallied $3.12 billion, versus the $2.69 billion of 2009's Top Ten. 2010's list only began to run out of steam compared to 2009 at No. 11. That meant 2010 was a top-heavy year, further reflected in the fact that 25 movies made $100 million or more, compared to 32 in 2009.

The industry again relied on sequels, but sequels only go so far. Both 2010 and 2009 had about the same amount of sequels, and sequel business was steady: $2.62 billion in 2010 versus $2.67 billion in 2009. Each year had five sequels in the Top Ten, and each year had sequels accounting for around 25 percent of the overall box office. However, though movies like How to Train Your Dragon and Clash of the Titans will get sequels, the industry mostly failed at creating new franchises (nonstarters included Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, The Sorcerer's Apprentice and Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief), and 2011 will further rely on former glories.

Two areas saw growth in 2010, and both were intertwined. Animation business was up 16 percent over 2009 to $1.49 billion, while movies presented in the 3D illusion surged to $3.27 billion (an estimated $2.1 billion of which from 3D alone). All of the major animated titles of 2010 were shown in 3D, and the industry shoved 3D down people's throats in the wake of Avatar's success, adding enough screens to the point in December when several movies had simultaneous nationwide 3D runs.

All those 3D movies contributed to the gross, but they boiled down to more money from fewer people. The 3D premiums alone (the differences between 3D and regular ticket prices) accounted for an estimated $600 million of the total box office.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3038

In short, people weren't going to see movies last year. What are your general thoughts on why this happened, what this means, and anything else associated with this?
 
Prolly cause they decided to release everything in 3D, and everybody hates fucking 3D, particularly the extra $5 a ticket they charge, that and most movies hit DVD & Blu-Ray within a few months of the movie opening on the big screen, so why would I pay $9 to see a movie when I get a month worth of Netflix for the same price and have basically an unlimited supply of movies to watch from the comfort of my home
 
Really it's a money issue. It isn't like the films this year sucked ass, in fact I thought this was a fairly successful year filled with some really great films. But the problem is people don't have the money to see as many movies as they once could and the major addition of 3D films just plays into that. If people don't have the money to see 2dD movies then they sure as hell won't have the money to see a film in 3D.
 
I honestly don't find it that suprising. As a big movie-goer I don't remember being all that excited to see much this year. Obviously different people have different tastes, but I remember when I used to live down south I would have every other Friday off and I'd go see a movie that day. My schedule now is quite similar and I haven't seen a movie in awhile now. Last one was Harry Potter.

3D might have something to do with it. A lot of people don't like it, myself included. But I would hope people are smart enough to know there are 2D showings as well. But theaters are so expesive nowadays too that I'm sure people in this economy have to consider that as well.

I'm sure it's a combination of multiple things. Personally, I didn't think there was just that much to go see this year. The original article even states, this past year was strictly top heavy.
 
I think it was a mix of people not having the time or money to see a movie that was probably going to suck, and people not wanting to see "Mediocre Film Series Remake 4" over original titles.

It's gotten a lot easier to download and bootleg movies in good quality, and you get a free movie combined with the convenience of seeing it in your own home, with the ability to pause, or take a break.

2010 was basically the year of, "It's not worth it."
 
As far as the quality of the mainstream films in 2010 goes, I thought everything was very streaky. Some of the big time blockbusters were solid and they delivered, but there were a good amount of shitty and underwhelming mainstream films in 2010. I also think the 3D craze has a lot to do with this. I RARELY watch movies in 3D now a days, because a lot these films can be big rip-offs, and I'm sure a lot of people feel the same way I do. Saw 7 and Alice In Wonderland are the only two 2010 films I truly enjoyed in 3D. Most films might throw a couple of eye popping moments at you, but a lot of times, paying the extra money for 3D just isn't worth it.

Also, a lot of people might just wait to rent the movie on DVD or Blu-Ray. I know a good amount of people who don't like to go through the hassle of going to a movie theater(the long lines, the trouble of finding a good seat, parking, etc.) so renting the movie can be very convenient.

Whether they're legal or not, There are so many other cheaper and convenient ways to watch films now a days, and these methods are just going to become more accessible as time goes on.
 
Prolly cause they decided to release everything in 3D, and everybody hates fucking 3D, particularly the extra $5 a ticket they charge, that and most movies hit DVD & Blu-Ray within a few months of the movie opening on the big screen, so why would I pay $9 to see a movie when I get a month worth of Netflix for the same price and have basically an unlimited supply of movies to watch from the comfort of my home

I think the low gross sales are why there's so much 3D today. Studios know we can't experience watching a 3D movie on the computer, so they've decided to make as many as possible, just to give everyone an excuse to go to the theater, rather than downloading the movie or waiting for it to be released on DVD/Pay-Per-View. So far, like you said, it's hurting more so than it's helping.

Personally, I think the problem is ticket and concession prices. I mean, it's really shame just how much it costs you if you simply want to go to the movies, especially in the economy we're living in today. And heaven forbid if you want to buy some popcorn or some candy or soft drinks... by the end of the movie, you're spending at least $30, which is pathetic. You can buy 3 DVDs for that amount of money, or rent about 10 movies, if not more, for that amount.

Also, another problem is that taking a 'date' to the movies isn't the thing to do these days, either. Who wants to spend that much fucking money on a first date like situation? Nobody. You want to find something to do where you can get to the know person, while not spending an arm and leg to do so.

Moreover, another problem is cell phones and just the rudeness of the past two generations. It really makes the movie going experience not worth it when you constantly here cell phones go off, and people talking to one another acting as if nobody is trying to pay attention to the fucking film.
 
The first sentence explained everything.

It was the 2nd highest grossing year of all time, yet the lowest attendance in 15 years.

It tells me that a lot of people aren't willing to pay such ridiculous prices to go out and watch a movie, especially when we have almost the same technology available at home.

So yeah, they raise prices, people stop going, but they continue to gross because even with a low attendance, they still make their money off of overpriced tickets.
 
I don't find it surprising one bit at all. I completely despise 3D films, they just hurt my eyes. Although when I saw Tron it was fairly decent 3D not to mention a solid movie altogether. And yes they did really fail to make new movie franchises this year, it was sequel after sequel or just movie that had no cliff hanger or anything. I only went to the theaters three times this year (usually I go about 10-15 times) and all I seen was Inception, Tron & Paranormal Activity 2.
 
The first sentence explained everything.

It was the 2nd highest grossing year of all time, yet the lowest attendance in 15 years.

It tells me that a lot of people aren't willing to pay such ridiculous prices to go out and watch a movie, especially when we have almost the same technology available at home.

So yeah, they raise prices, people stop going, but they continue to gross because even with a low attendance, they still make their money off of overpriced tickets.

I think this pretty much says it all. A lot of people now have a big HD TV in their house and with blu ray now available on Netflix they would rather watch a movie in their own home than go out and overpay for one. Factoring overpriced snacks in with ticket prices I'm guessing it costs a family of four between $75-$100 to see a two hour movie. That makes a wrestling ppv sound like a good value.
 
I think the last time I saw a movie, and this is just me, I wasn't with anyone else, I payed $5.75 for the ticket (it was a early Sat. Matinee show), then for a small popcorn & med. Coke I payed another $9.50, so for one person to see a movie it cost me $15.25, last time I went to a movie with my GF, it cost me $38, had we gone a saw a 3D movie, you could add another $5 to that, that's just ridiculous, especially when we can just wait a rent the movie for $1 in a couple months and watch it in the privacy of our home
 
I agree with this. I think its all about the money, and people are finally sick of the gimmicks, and realize the gimmicks are what is costing too much, and we are not getting enough substance for what we are being charged. Especially when you consider the grossly negilgent ways in which so many classic shows are able to be mass produced at a sickening speed for the silver screen, Yogi Bear, Green Hornet, A-Team, Nightmare on Elm Street, Karate Kid, etc. I think its a matter of cashing in on that old saying "What once was old, is new again." Then you add in the modern technology of the 3-D boom, and its even more ways for studios to benefit, and have their actors/actresses benefit and get bigger paychecks no matter HOW horrible the acting, as long as they get the press and publicity from it. Its funny, because not that long ago, Rob Zombie, was in Kansas City for a concert he did with Alice Cooper, and he was asked about if he'd do anymore of the Halloween movies or in 3D, and he bluntly said "No way. That is a rip off for people, and it wastes money for them." Basically in so many words. I think with the advance in technology, and the lackadaisacal attitude, we are just not caring anymore, especially when you can get the movie to dvd like 5-6 weeks after it was released on the big screen. Besides, it may be a $3.99 for a week to rent it, but you will get more for your money, with the extras, and you can stop it when you want, and eat more than just the plain old popcorn and not have to listen to other people talking in the theater. That's my 2 cents on it.
 
Lowest in 15 years, that's really bad. That's not too hard to imagine, though, the films are usual on illegal dvds before the films hit the theatres and at a fraction of the cost of a trip to the theatre. The illegal copying of films are killing the industry, and they're trying to stop it but it's just impossible to stop that.

I used to go to the flicks all the time, I was obsessed. Now I've slowed down a little bit. The ones I've seen lately haven't been that good, they were ok but not worth rushing to the theatre to go see. A lot of the flicks I've seen, and/or advertised haven't really interested me. The writing for the films, the plot of most of these films have been really dull. With a number of films coming out this year, hopefully the industry will bounce back.
 
It's a mixture of the fact there are releasing most of the movies in 3d as what most people have said but it's also the fact that you can download the same movie and watch it for free. No transport, no lines and no people kicking the back of your seat. most of the cams you can download nowadays are pretty good quality.
 
I agree that money (or the lack of) does play a huge part in this. People are having to make sacrifices in many aspects of their lives. Entertainment and leisure activities are usually the first to go.

On a Weekday, it is around $8 to see a movie in the evening. On a weekend, $10 bucks for an evening movie. I don't consider these the ticket prices outrageous, but they are too high. Prices at the food counter are crazy. I usually don't get anything, maybe the occasional soda, but that is where they are gouging.

For me, I am not going to as many movies because I do not like dealing with rude and inconsiderate assholes. The last time I went to a movie I had the following issues:

1. Asshole #1 (probably a 15 year old) sits right in front of me, puts on headphones, and blasts music. I politely asked him to turn the music down. He refuses. I ask again. He refuses again. I rip ear buds out. Kid looks like he is going to crap himself. I get verbally reprimanded by my wife, but I kick the shit out of his chair for the entire movie.

2. Asshole #2 (guy in mid 20's). Talking on phone throughout entire previews. He neglects to turn phone off. Phone goes off 4 times during film. Since I have already been reprimanded by my wife I fight the urge to throw my phone at him.

3. Asshole #3 (car alarm going off in parking lot outside of exit for 25 minutes). Ok so a car alarm can't really be an asshole, but you get my point.

After this gem of a movie theater experience, it will be a while before I head back. I would prefer to watch a DVD in my den. My blood pressure can’t take the theater experience anymore.

And if you are wondering, the answer is YES. I do yell at the neighborhood kids when they go on my perfectly manicured lawn!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,834
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego
Back
Top