Week Of May 8, 2006 - How We Watch Week - Mon / Wed / Fri

May 8, 2006

They could care less, they would care less, they do care less...

This is the uncomfortable fact that will most shape the future of the film industry in the decades to come.

There is an odd commitment out there to the notion that people are making choices the way they used to make choices. And so when there s a perceived threat to the theatrical box office, there is an endless stream of stories about people making choices other than going to the movies. Besides the fact that "The Slump" wasn't, at its perceived worst, a moment in which people weren't going to the movies, but an alleged sign that people would stop going to the movies in increasing numbers if the trend continued. But the story was misreported endlessly because… well, it got journalists and their editors hot.

In any case, the mantra became that people, especially teen boys, were busy making other choices. And the endless hum is that people will, or are, making other choices now. But the fact is that how we consume has changed and has changed forever. It's not about where we consume. It's not about what we consume. The future is about how much we can consume.

As a culture, this industry still has a dangerous habit of reacting as though the existence of something new and neat, and thus some interest in it, is equal to "it" being The Future. People will make the arguments that discount things we are used to in favor of things that are new without making the comparison real.

For instance, watching TV shows on iPods and the idea of monetizing reruns on an individual viewing basis is very interesting. Yet the same people who are touting this as The Future are also complaining that the theater experience is getting worse and worse and slowly becoming equal to or inferior to home viewing. Why "yet?" Because there is no debating that the iPod viewing experience is the worst possible viewing experience for anything that might otherwise play on a regular size TV.

The conceit of the video iPod is not quality… it's time shifting and ease of access.

The conceit of the DVD combines perceived permanent ownership and time shifting/ease of access. There was a distinct improvement over video when DVD came out and the magical shiny disc gave the illusion of permanent ownership that had faded from the video pitch years back when it became clear how easily broken or ruined videos were.

But the home entertainment experience is not one in which DVDs can or will remain distinctly different from other home delivery systems. Cable and satellite are now digital in most every market and will only get more so. Ironically, there is a lot more high definition programming, including movies, available by cable and satellite now than via DDV anyway. But the point was, the real distinction between DVD and everything else, at this point, is the absolute freedom to time shift. But that too will soon pass as the DVR becomes a standard part of the home entertainment culture. (This will happen many years before big TVs or home HD become standard.)

"I prefer to stay at home and watch movies if I can have a high quality experience there," is not something anyone with a brain can argue against. It is a preference. And it is a clear preference for people with children, who have busy jobs, who are over 35 and who are financially restrained. Obviously, there are many exceptions, but going out to the movies is an effort and staying home is relatively easy. But the argument for preferring that home experience really has nothing to do with movie quality. Bad movies are bad, regardless of venue.

Ironically, the correlation between perceived quality and box office has become less of a factor in recent years than ever before because of the shortened window and the emphasis on opening weekend. Outside of reviews, which have been swamped by an ever increasing marketing presence for every studio movie, there is no way for the audience to make an informed choice, except through marketing. Obviously, there are many quality movies that don't even target wider audiences. But on the studio side, I see no clear correlation, except for some occasional anomalies on either side, of quality having a strong effect on multiples of that opening weekend.

The choice of staying home and watching a rented or purchased DVD for a couple in their 40s after they put the two kids to bed is not the same kind of choice as "steak or chicken?" To make the choice to leave the house to go see a movie - which will, coincidentally, cost at least 10 times what the home rental cost, even with modest choices at the concession stand - also means planning, boundaries on the evening (God forbid the 8:30 is sold out and you have 15-year-old Lisa babysitting, who absolutely has to be home by midnight… waiting for that that 10p show is not an option), the stress of leaving the kids if they are not used to being left behind on weekend nights, and of course, the cost of the babysitter, parking, etc. The evening at the movies we had when we were in college - yeah… let's see two films back to back - leaving home at 6 and coming back at 2am after a late snack at the burger joint are not the way it is now. It is not just choice. It is not just quality. It is hard damned work to leave the house for any adventure in that situation. And something you pay more per ticket for - live theater or sporting events - or a dinner party with its own politics is more likely to get you out of the house than any movie, good, bad or indifferent.

It's basic math. If you are a single person in your early 20s and you sleep 8 hours a day and work 8 hours a day, you have 8 more hours to entertain yourself. If you are an adult with adult demands in your life, you have to fight to get any shred of those 8 hours as free time. And the less of it you have, the more you value it.

Now…

How do you fill your eight/seven/six/five/four/three/two/one hour(s)?

But it's an even bigger question than that now because you are now assaulted by entertainment options during those eight working hours as well. Fifteen years ago, you could read a newspaper at your desk or even in the bathroom, but there was no web. Maybe you were playing solitaire at you desk. But you weren't getting, at minimum, continually updated news, information flying in via e-mail, endless e-mail correspondence and indeed, a wide variety of filmed entertainment.

The entertainment industry has done so well in making entertainment available in so many venues in so many formats that as each of the new delivery systems matures just a little, it blends into the blur of opportunity. The idea that people are choosing against theatrical viewing is backwards thinking. Nothing that isn't brand new is part of negative choice anymore. (And of course, this is a discussion in the abstract.) What is required for every delivery mode of every kind of entertainment is an affirmative choice.

That is the future.

Perhaps by no coincidence, that is also the internet. In addition to creating a niche universe, the internet and other technological advances have given us so many choices that we now make affirmative decisions and, with a few exceptions, not passive ones about how we spend our entertainment time.

What is truly remarkable, so far, is just how much people are capable of consuming. Because regardless of the doom merchants, there are still massive numbers of people paying relatively large amounts to go out to the movies… and to buy DVDs… and to rent DVDs… and to do all that other stuff. The pressure on individuals to find entertaining ways to fill their free hours is no longer the same as it was just a decade ago. They have to want what you are offering. And they still want to go to the movies.

Why?

I'll try to address that on Wednesday…

READER OF THE DAY: Last week, Gary Dretzka wrote about The Proposiiton on MCN. It's also one of my favorites of the year. On top of that, Alex Cox, the director, write about the death of the western in The Guardian... which let to this from THE FISH...

First, he writes to Alex Cox: "Dear Alex, I just read your commentary in the Guardian about the death of the American western ("A bullet in the back"). I am a huge fan of Once Upon a Time in the West and have been for a couple decades. Strangely enough, when I saw the link to your article on the Movie City News website, I was looking for any-and-all information about the new Australian "western" The Proposition, which was written by Nick Cave (I'm a big fan of his music). I haven't seen the film yet. I clicked through to your article thinking you would make comment, but saw that you didn't. The film is coming to my town in a week -- I am wondering if you have seen it yet and what your thoughts are."

Alex Cox responds: "I saw a bit. Visually very stylish, very derivative (the opening an imitation of Pat Garrett & Billy The Kid), very sexist. Didn't watch the rest!"

E Me: Will you take Alex Cox's word for it?

Week Of April 3, 2006 - Life In the Bubble - Mon / Wed / Fri
Week Of April 10, 2006 - List Week - Mon / Wed / Fri
Week Of April 17, 2006 - Review Week - Mon / Wed / Fri
Week Of April 24, 2006 - Overlooked Week - Mon / Wed / Fri
Week Of May 1, 2006 - Mystery Week - Tue / Wed / Fri