Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Apparently it is OK for 150-300 people be crammed into a narrow sealed metal tube with wings for hours as long as they are wearing a mask, but must sit 200m apart in theatres and cinemas for 90 minutes thus making them unviable.


(Yes the 200m is an exaggeration but I?m trying to make a point)


I?m all for social distancing, but the double standards considering what the creative industries are going through is shocking. The airline lobby has deeper pockets of course.

The rules affecting the creative industries are awful but I think for cinemas the biggest issue is the lack of films being released to draw customers in. It's a vicious circle as movie companies don't want to release anything as they fear it won't recoup the revenue - Bond being the classic example - they need packed cinemas to get a return on investment.

RoundTable Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Apparently it is OK for 150-300 people be crammed

> into a narrow sealed metal tube with wings for

> hours as long as they are wearing a mask, but must

> sit 200m apart in theatres and cinemas for 90

> minutes thus making them unviable.

>

> (Yes the 200m is an exaggeration but I?m trying to

> make a point)

>

> I?m all for social distancing, but the double

> standards considering what the creative industries

> are going through is shocking. The airline lobby

> has deeper pockets of course.



Much of Air Travel is essential. Going to the Cinema is Not.


When I say Essential I mean for Airlines to survive.

If Airlines go under then there would be no air travel when the Virus is over.


Airlines cost Billions of pounds to maintain and rely on aircraft being in the air and Not on the ground.

The economy needs air travel.

I suspect Picturehouse is more viable as it has smaller venues and it's clientele is not just motivated by "blockbusters".


Also, this leak of the letter is part of the, understandable, lobbying the creative industry is doing to the government for more help.


So hopefully it won't come to the temporary closures that are being discussed as it is in no-ones interests for 5,500 being made redundant (even if the expectation is that they would be re-employed when the cinemas are able to reopen).

This is an excellent idea. Would be great too for kids getting to see a wider range of films not just whatever is trendy at the time. And make the tickets affordable. I looked up a ticket for the cinema in Victoria and it is ?18 per adult, so I declined. For families who have seen a reduced income ?18 a ticket is bonkers (it is bonkers anyway but even more so now).






Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The rules affecting the creative industries are

> awful but I think for cinemas the biggest issue is

> the lack of films being released to draw customers

> in. It's a vicious circle as movie companies don't

> want to release anything as they fear it won't

> recoup the revenue - Bond being the classic

> example - they need packed cinemas to get a return

> on investment.

The papers today are also suggesting that it is the paucity of good quality (i.e. likely to be popular) new releases which is precipitating the announced closures - Tenet didn't do well for instance. Maybe the poor weather will encourage more attendance (if there's anything decent to watch) - but it's a bit of a chicken and egg situation - without good films audiences won't come - if audiences aren't coming there's no point in releasing good films.

Cora Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> With so few places as the bad weather draws in

> couldn't the cinemas show ongoing old classics -

> twice the shows but half the audience? I know it's

> the bigger picture for the organisation but would

> be so sad to see it go....



East Dulwich currently listing some classic Hitchcock amongst others so hopefully staying open?


HP

Cora Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> With so few places as the bad weather draws in

> couldn't the cinemas show ongoing old classics -

> twice the shows but half the audience? I know it's

> the bigger picture for the organisation but would

> be so sad to see it go....



Odeon is doing this soon, ?5 tickets to see 80s classics like Dirty Dancing and Back to the Future on the big screen

kford Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Cora Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > With so few places as the bad weather draws in

> > couldn't the cinemas show ongoing old classics

> -

> > twice the shows but half the audience? I know

> it's

> > the bigger picture for the organisation but

> would

> > be so sad to see it go....

>

>

> Odeon is doing this soon, ?5 tickets to see 80s

> classics like Dirty Dancing and Back to the Future

> on the big screen


Matinees - I'm not a great cinema goer so may have little idea here but they were really popular once

Wasn't the ?5 a ticket model how Peckhamplex operated until it too closed a couple of weeks ago?


I think a large proportion of the public are now completely petrified of doing things like going to the cinema. They have been scared witless by the government and the mayor that they will die if they leave the house.


Even showing old classics to a cinema with 2 guests inside is not a viable way to do business.

I don't know - I'm not that scared but when I go to the pub I like to stand at the bar not sit alone at a table.


Maybe some kind of similar thing is happening and people don't like the new normal. Maybe I should try a pint alone in the corner of one of the quieter pubs - if this isn't going away. We all may have to get used to this :(

Cineworld and Picturehouse are losing more money by keeping them open for the few people who are coming in to watch classic films than to close.


It 'should' save their business to keep it closed for now, but the fear is that the studios will move to the streaming model where they can charge more than a cinema to the customer direct to watch on their tv.

worldwiser Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Most reliable sources show Tenet having done

> extremely well. Especially in the UK so I don't

> know why people are saying otherwise.



When we went to see it (in ED) there were only two other people there.


I realise that's rather a small sample 🤣

The whole concept of streaming directly to a customer by the studios is half the reason cinemas declined back in the 80s when films were available on VHS so people put off going as renting it was cheaper then going to the cinema

After a few years technology changed in the cinemas and people fell in love with the big screen again so numbers went up again.


If the studios go down the path of streaming then whilst convenient for some, the cinemas won't survive after this pandemic which will result in a lost revenue stream for the studios (people who go to the cinema are often tempted to buy and rewatch the film at home after)


Today "the Batman" and Dune movies followed bond by delaying their launch dates which is another reason cinemas are temporarily closing their doors as there aren't enough good new films to draw the audiences in. Can't blame the Studios for their decision as they need to recoup the production costs but by the same token they aren't doing enough to maintain the cinema chains through the next 6 months.


Let's hope and pray that the Picturehouse chain and peckham plex have the good fortune to weather this situation as I for one miss the big screen experience.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I have been using Andy for many years for decorating and general handyman duties. He always does a great job, is very friendly and his prices are competitive. Highly recommend.
    • Money has to be raised in order to slow the almost terminal decline of public services bought on through years of neglect under the last government. There is no way to raise taxes that does not have some negative impacts / trade offs. But if we want public services and infrastructure that work then raise taxes we must.  Personally I'm glad that she is has gone some way to narrowing the inheritance loop hole which was being used by rich individuals (who are not farmers) to avoid tax. She's slightly rebalanced the burden away from the young, putting it more on wealthier pensioners (who let's face it, have been disproportionately protected for many, many years). And the NICs increase, whilst undoubtedly inflationary, won't be directly passed on (some will, some will likely be absorbed by companies); it's better than raising it on employees, which would have done more to depress growth. Overall, I think she's sailed a prudent course through very choppy waters. The electorate needs to get serious... you can't have European style services and US levels of tax. Borrowing for tax cuts, Truss style, it is is not. Of course the elephant in the room (growing ever larger now Trump is in office and threatening tariffs) is our relationship with the EU. If we want better growth, we need a closer relationship with our nearest and largest trading block. We will at some point have to review tax on transport more radically (as we see greater up take of electric vehicles). The most economically rational system would be one of dynamic road pricing. But politically, very difficult to do
    • Labour was right not to increase fuel duty - it's not just motorists it affects, but goods transport. Fuel goes up, inflation goes up. Inflation will go up now anyway, and growth will stagnate, because businesses will pass the employee NIC hikes onto customers.  I think farms should be exempt from the 20% IHT. I don't know any rich famers, only ones who work their fingers to the bone. But it's in their blood and taking that, often multi-generation, legacy out of the family is heart-breaking. Many work to such low yields, and yet they'll often still bring a lamb to the vet, even if the fees are more than the lamb's life (or death) is worth. Food security should be made a top priority in this country. And, even tho the tax is only for farms over £1m, that's probably not much when you add it all up. I think every incentive should be given to young people who want to take up the mantle. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...