Comments on: The Quantum of Customer Service

By: Hazel

Hazel — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:27:49 +0000

I don’t think it’s true that people are still going to the movies as much as they want – the fact that people are still shelling out $12.50 a ticket to see the big films like HSM3 and TDK means that they’re willing to go above and beyond for certain movies, not that the prices (and services) aren’t driving people away. How often have you heard someone say, “It was an okay film – it’s worth seeing, but wait until it comes out on video”? I personally hear that a lot.

By: Siwi

Siwi — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 09:11:37 +0000

Agh, cruelly exposed–I’ve spent hours and hours on this blog, but I have some kind of weird podcast-resistance. Perhaps I will try to finally overcome it!

By: Matthew Wrather

Matthew Wrather — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 03:22:28 +0000

I’m originally from LA, so I love the Bridge and the Arclight as much as anyone. Growing up in Santa Monica, I did most of my blockbuster moviegoing at the AMC, Mann, and Cineplex (later Loews) on the Third St Promenade…

But I would also regularly hit up the Monica, the Royal, the Nuart (Rocky Horror at midnight on Saturdays), and the NuWilshire (sadly now a shoe store or something) — art houses, none of which qualified as luxury accommodations. (They’ve been much improved since I was a teenager.) When I moved to New Haven for college, I started going to the York Square Cinema, where broken seats, leaks, and movies canceled on account of the film snapping were regular occurrences.

My point, other than name-dropping and establishing some movie snob bona fides, is that — customer service complaints be damned — there is a strain of film culture that actually treasures how shitty the experience can be. Having the most godawful uncomfortable circumstances guarantees that dilettantes and the weak self-select out of the experience, leaving only the true priesthood.

By: lee

lee — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:18:54 +0000

A google search for “premium movie theater new york” yielded no discernible results:

http://www.google.com/search?q=premium+movie+theater+new+york&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGGL,GGGL:2006-45,GGGL:en

By: Matthew Belinkie

Matthew Belinkie — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:41:12 +0000

Siwi -

Thanks for commenting! Take a listen to today’s podcast if you get the chance. We talk about the trend of fancy-smancy movie theaters, and whether people are willing to pay more for a “premium” experience. Hey, anyone know if New York has any place like that?

- Matt

By: Siwi

Siwi — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:17:39 +0000

A danger… of harm? Clearly I need to invest in some sleep to go with my blog-surfing.

By: Siwi

Siwi — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:14:44 +0000

I have actually developed a movie-theater-preference that impacts my choices, but it took several technical problems with poor service in a row and the fact that it’s located on the same 3 blocks as two other same-company theaters I can choose instead (which, wtf). But this with the convenience shopping and the airline prices, this makes a lot of sense.

Even the theater I’m trying to avoid had to actually mess up the experience of the movies as well as the customer service for me to say no more. And in the year since I said it, I’ve actually been back once, because they were showing what we wanted to see when we wanted to see it.

Is there a path that would reverse this and make customer service more important? I live in LA, so when we’re feeling especially committed to our movie-going experience we go to the fancy, expensive, assigned seating, no late-comers allowed theater. But I suspect it may take cities full of movie nerds before that is a real danger of harm to other theater models.

By: Matthew Belinkie

Matthew Belinkie — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 06:12:48 +0000

Wade -
Yeah, they were playing it on a whole mess of screens, but everything was sold out. I don’t really blame them for not getting us into the next showing. To do that, they would have had to bump THOSE people, so it compounds the problem. Besides, if the projector was really broken, that probably meant they lost one or two MORE showings that same night – accommodating all those people wasn’t an option. But they could have, for instance, given us all free cardboard standups for old movies. Beverly Hills Chihuahua would go great in my living room.
- Matt

By: Wade

Wade — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 05:03:58 +0000

They didn’t even give you the option of switching out your ticket for the next showtime? If it’s AMC or Regal or Carmike or any of the big chains, chances are the big event movie’s going to be playing on more than one screen opening night. Now, I get that people are already buying tickets for those other showtimes, so no everyone can choose this option, but they oughta at the very least give you a raincheck for another showing that same night. If I went through the trouble of getting a group together to go see the big event movie opening night, I’m gonna see it by hook or by crook!

By: Gab

Gab — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 16:41:16 +0000

Gah, airlines. I was charged for water on my way to Washington in August. Water.

I had a really long post, but I’m working on reducing my circumlocution and rambling nature lately. Ahem.

Basically, I think the airlines are in trouble more because of the global economic crises going on, whereas movie theaters are losing profits because Hollywood isn’t making good movies as often nowadays. In the past, like during the Great Depression, people still went to the movies, but they aren’t now. Yet if you look carefully, it’s clear they *are* willing to go, but only for certain movies- the huge openings for TDK and, yes, HSM3, for example. I don’t know a person that doesn’t go because they think the movie ticket is too expensive, but I *do* know plenty of people that have cut down on their flights because of the cost of airline tickets.

Tangent: Given all of the st00pid bailouts going around, should Congress give one to airlines? Their last one was in 2001, I believe.