[NEWS]: Regal Theaters to Show Turner Programs

1 view
Skip to first unread message

James Anatidae

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 6:34:02 PM1/8/03
to
http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/2003/20030108.html#4

Regal Theaters, the nation's largest movie chain, has signed a deal with
Atlanta-based Turner Broadcasting to show 20 minutes of content from the
Cartoon Network, TNT and other Turner networks as a "pre-show" in 375
theaters in top U.S. markets, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported
Tuesday. Terms of the deal were not disclosed, but the AJC said that Turner
will pay Regal for the content, which will be delivered to theaters via a
new digital technology. In a statement, Brad Siegel, president of general
entertainment networks for Turner Broadcasting, said: "The partnership gives
our networks a national platform to market their programming."

---

Oh joy. So now it's going a total of something like 45 minutes 'till we get
to the actual film?


Rick

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 6:35:04 PM1/8/03
to

"James Anatidae" <pars...@citcom.net> wrote in message
news:avicgu$57ji$1...@news3.infoave.net...

I definitely won't be going to any Regal Cinemas.


Dalroy

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 6:39:40 PM1/8/03
to

Unfortunately the closest theater to us is Regal, but if this
is true we'll drive a bit longer and go to the even nicer theater
that's a little farther away.

Dalroy

Ronald O. Christian

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 6:42:48 PM1/8/03
to
On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 18:34:02 -0500, "James Anatidae"
<pars...@citcom.net> wrote:
>Oh joy. So now it's going a total of something like 45 minutes 'till we get
>to the actual film?

So, don't leave home until the start time. By the time you get
through the snack line, it'll be time for the show to actually start.

The local Regal shows exactly the same number of commercials and
trailers for almost every film. I know I have a safe extra ten
minutes before the film starts, which I conspire to spend in the
lobby.

Or, I guess we could finally call it quits. I wouldn't lose any sleep
over that.

But this leads to an important question -- Films are continually being
trimmed for running time so they can stuff more showings into a day.
Now that they're front-loading 45 minutes of unrelated content, what
does that do to the number of showings? Or, are they going to cut an
*additional* average 30 minutes from the feature?

If they've really got an extra 20 minutes to fill, why not use the
time to show the director's cut instead of the reader's digest
version?


Ron (well, not for dumb and dumberer, but you get the idea...)
-
"I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow
for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only
that which they defend."
http://roc85.home.attbi.com

Rick

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 6:48:06 PM1/8/03
to
"Ronald O. Christian" <ro...@europa.com> wrote in message
news:ijdp1vomhle8ir0mc...@4ax.com...

> Or, I guess we could finally call it quits. I wouldn't lose any sleep
> over that.


I find that as I get older and it becomes more of a pain to find
babysitters, I only go to the theatre for movies where the visuals need to
be seen on a big screen to be fully appreciated.
Everything else gets watched on DVD.


Dalroy

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 6:52:33 PM1/8/03
to

Well, I think that any movie, regardless of special effects
is always better on the big screen with the good sounds in
modern theaters. Not that I don't enjoy watching my DVDs
but it's always better in a theater. Even a movie like
Adaptation is better on the big screen and it had no real
effects.

Dalroy

Jason Travis

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 7:19:28 PM1/8/03
to

> Oh joy. So now it's going a total of something like 45 minutes 'till we
get
> to the actual film?

I'd prefer some cartoon network/adult swim stuff even with commercials as a
preshow rather than those damn slides. "unscramble this oscar winning
actor: MOT ANHKS"

That's IF it's is *truly* a preshow during the time the audience enters the
theatre, and at the correct movie starting time we get actual previews
(hopefully minus commercials) and the feature. Movies have always had
cartoons and apparently newsreels back in the ol' days.


Sean O'Hara

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 7:10:36 PM1/8/03
to

Depends upon how it's presented. I'll be annoyed if they run it
after the scheduled start-time, but I wouldn't mind if they use
it to replace those annoying slideshows with all the trivia and
word-scrambles. You know, if you get to the theater early, you
can watch an episode of the Powerpuff Girls, or maybe Sealab 2021
for R-rated films.

--
Sean O'Hara
Donnie: Why do you wear that stupid rabbit suit?
Frank: Why do you wear that stupid man suit?
--Richard Kelly, "Donnie Darko"

Dalroy

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 7:34:43 PM1/8/03
to

I don't know, I like the slide shows with just some music.
Let's you talk to the person you're at the movies with until
the real stuff starts. If they're running cartoons and other
programming it's hard to be social until the movie starts.

Not that the slide shows are great - just that they don't
interfere with discussing great world events or other
trivia before the show!

Dalroy

Derek Janssen

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 8:52:25 PM1/8/03
to
James Anatidae wrote:
>
> http://us.imdb.com/StudioBrief/2003/20030108.html#4
>
> Regal Theaters, the nation's largest movie chain, has signed a deal with
> Atlanta-based Turner Broadcasting to show 20 minutes of content from the
> Cartoon Network, TNT and other Turner networks as a "pre-show" in 375
> theaters in top U.S. markets, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported
> Tuesday. Terms of the deal were not disclosed, but the AJC said that Turner
> will pay Regal for the content, which will be delivered to theaters via a
> new digital technology. In a statement, Brad Siegel, president of general
> entertainment networks for Turner Broadcasting, said: "The partnership gives
> our networks a national platform to market their programming."
>
> Oh joy. So now it's going a total of something like 45 minutes 'till we get
> to the actual film?

And, um....<pause>...Ted?:
Did the fact that "Powerpuff Girls Movie" actually made *less* money
than "Treasure Planet", with an even shorter run in theaters, give us,
oh, maybe a slight HINT about the wisdom of still trying to
piggyback-sneak Cartoon Network product down a mainstream audience's
throats after ten years, in the hopes that maybe this time, they'll
really, *really* be won over?

Derek Janssen (y'know, maybe just a little HINT??)
dja...@rcn.com

Bob

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 10:33:50 PM1/8/03
to

Rick wrote:

Yes, I remember the cost of baby sitters. I thank the Deity that my kids are
the perfect age.
Grown, gone, and supporting themselves.
Bob

Dawn Taylor

unread,
Jan 9, 2003, 12:34:21 PM1/9/03
to

Sean O'Hara wrote:

> James Anatidae wrote:
> >
> > Oh joy. So now it's going a total of something like 45 minutes 'till we get
> > to the actual film?
>
> Depends upon how it's presented. I'll be annoyed if they run it
> after the scheduled start-time, but I wouldn't mind if they use
> it to replace those annoying slideshows with all the trivia and
> word-scrambles. You know, if you get to the theater early, you
> can watch an episode of the Powerpuff Girls, or maybe Sealab 2021
> for R-rated films.

That was my thought. If I'm gonna get to see a "Dexter's Laboratory" cartoon or
something from 'The Brak Show," I'm all for it.

Beats the hell out of those gawdawful "Find the Coke" puzzles and local ads.

Dawn

Derek Janssen

unread,
Jan 9, 2003, 1:59:04 PM1/9/03
to
Dawn Taylor wrote:
>
> Beats the hell out of those gawdawful "Find the Coke" puzzles and local ads.

Besides, get tired doing the same joke every time:
"Oh, that's not a *real* shot from 'Pearl Harbor'--It only has FOUR
bottles of Coke in the scene!"

Derek Janssen ("A TRUE Jerry Bruckheimer would have six, minimum!")
dja...@rcn.com

Kenneth Crudup

unread,
Jan 9, 2003, 2:28:25 PM1/9/03
to
In article <3E1DB29B...@clackamasreview.com>,
dta...@clackamasreview.com says:

>Beats the hell out of those gawdawful "Find the Coke" puzzles and local ads.

If I ever catch that "Fandango" guy out on the street, he's *dead*.

-Kenny

--
Kenneth R. Crudup Sr. SW Engineer, Scott County Consulting, Los Angeles, CA
Home: 3801 E. Pacific Coast Hwy #9, Long Beach, CA 90804-2014 (562) 961-7300
Work: 2052 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92606-4905 (949) 252-1111 X240

Norman Wilner

unread,
Jan 8, 2003, 10:10:33 PM1/8/03
to
"Dalroy" <dal...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3E1CB9C1...@comcast.net...

You do know that there's just the one Nicolas Cage, right?

Norm Wilner
Starweek Magazine/Metro Toronto
www.zap2it.com/movies/videodvd


Dalroy

unread,
Jan 10, 2003, 2:48:11 PM1/10/03
to

Yes. But, that's a pretty minimal effect. Perhaps I
would have been more clear in my meaning if I'd said big
ticket "sf style" special effects. You know, like big bombs
going off in James Bond flicks, or big spaceships and things
that are more impressive on the big screen.


>
> Norm Wilner
> Starweek Magazine/Metro Toronto
> www.zap2it.com/movies/videodvd

Dalroy

Graham

unread,
Jan 11, 2003, 11:41:12 PM1/11/03
to

--

"James Anatidae" <pars...@citcom.net> wrote in message
news:avicgu$57ji$1...@news3.infoave.net...

couldn't you ( those that are close to a Regal ) simply boycott them and
then write a few letters to Regal people stating how you think that the pre
movie stuff is a bit OTT and that you wont go back until they
reconsider..This is of course after the new 'content ' has begun and you
think that the pre movie "entertainment" is ruining your enjoyment.In the
letters, mention DVD and videos a lot :)

gra
>
>


Mack Twamley

unread,
Jan 12, 2003, 10:37:10 AM1/12/03
to

"Graham" <hu...@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
news:3e20f2e8$1...@news.alphalink.com.au...
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh, sweet Jesus! next, are they going to cut out running the feature and
just run commercials and trailers?
Went to a Regal yesterday for "About Schmidt"... for which I could write a
four word review ("nothing you wanna know")...and was subjected to eight or
nine commercials, and another half dozen trailers, all shown with
ear-splitting volume. I'd like to propose a federal law prohibiting
exhibitors from charging admission to any film where commercials are shown
before the feature, and prohibiting exhibitors from running trailers at a
volume any higher (even ONE decibel) than the feature film. That oughta
cool it out.


Rufus T. Frazier

unread,
Jan 13, 2003, 3:47:07 AM1/13/03
to
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 07:37:10 -0800, " Mack Twamley"
<mack...@dslextreme.com> wrote:

>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Oh, sweet Jesus! next, are they going to cut out running the feature and
>just run commercials and trailers?

They'll continue to increase the number of commercials until a large
percentage of the paying public says "ENOUGH!" From what I've
seen, the trigger point is having the commercials within the movies.


> Went to a Regal yesterday for "About Schmidt"... for which I could write a
>four word review ("nothing you wanna know")...and was subjected to eight or
>nine commercials, and another half dozen trailers, all shown with
>ear-splitting volume. I'd like to propose a federal law prohibiting
>exhibitors from charging admission to any film where commercials are shown
>before the feature, and prohibiting exhibitors from running trailers at a
>volume any higher (even ONE decibel) than the feature film. That oughta
>cool it out.
>

Sounds good to me. I don't think the commercials are helping the movie
producers so I would expect them to be on the consumer's side on this.

Ronald O. Christian

unread,
Jan 13, 2003, 10:40:49 AM1/13/03
to
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:41:12 +1100, "Graham" <hu...@alphalink.com.au>
wrote:

>
>couldn't you ( those that are close to a Regal ) simply boycott them and
>then write a few letters to Regal people stating how you think that the pre
>movie stuff is a bit OTT

Online Regal comment card:

http://www.regalcinemas.com/corporate/comments.html

Tell them how you feel.


Ron

Ronald O. Christian

unread,
Jan 13, 2003, 10:46:52 AM1/13/03
to
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 07:37:10 -0800, " Mack Twamley"
<mack...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>Oh, sweet Jesus! next, are they going to cut out running the feature and
>just run commercials and trailers?

It appears to be running that direction. The question, of course,
becomes: Who would pay for that?

Another thing to consider: Shortening the films and including more
and more outright commercials and TV programming pleases (let's be
gracious) very few movie-goers. On top of that, they've raised ticket
prices again. In a down economy, why would one adopt policies that
only serve to piss off one's patrons? Is Regal trying to commit
suicide? Insurance fraud? Are they managed by former government
bureaucrats?

>[...] and prohibiting exhibitors from running trailers at a


>volume any higher (even ONE decibel) than the feature film. That oughta
>cool it out.

I don't think that would help. It's not that the commercials and
trailers are necessarily louder, it's that the dynamic range of the
audio is severely compressed. In other words, every sound in the
commercials is as loud as the loudest sound in the feature film.

Giftzwerg

unread,
Jan 13, 2003, 11:17:28 AM1/13/03
to
In article <v1pfvt3...@corp.supernews.com>, jayct...@yahoo.com
says...

> Movies have always had
> cartoons and apparently newsreels back in the ol' days.

You mean, presumably, back before a movie ticket ran $9.00.

Speaking for myself, this will probably represent the straw that breaks
the camel's back; I'm already livid at sitting through commercials to
get to the something I spent *nine fucking dollars* to see.

Memo To Theater Owners: I'm at my limit. One more annoyance, one more
penny in price, one more commercial, one more whine and I'm going to
stop attending your theaters altogether, even for the few types of films
where a theater offers some benefit (blockbusters and comedies,
mostly...) over my home theater gear and I'm still buying your tickets
in the first place. I don't want commercials, I don't want cartoons, I
don't want *anything* except what I came to see.

--
Giftzwerg
***
But more revealing of the mindset of today's left is
[Joan] Didion's belief that somehow open discussion
has been curtailed, censored or chilled after 9/11 by
a cadre of right-wing bullies. This is simply hooey.
The First Amendment still exists. Those legions of
leftists who occupy such establishment heights at most
American university faculties and the nation's newsrooms
and editorial boards, not to speak of the hyper-liberal
foundations, can still say whatever they think. But these days,
they've actually got to endure criticism, opposition and
occasionally ridicule as a consequence. They don't like this.
They're used to writing their opinions to universal applause,
prizes, sinecures and pliant reviews. Sorry to spoil the
party, Joan. But debate in wartime is often a tough and
grueling experience. Stop whining and start arguing."
- Andrew Sullivan


Bob

unread,
Jan 13, 2003, 7:15:36 PM1/13/03
to

Giftzwerg wrote:

> In article <v1pfvt3...@corp.supernews.com>, jayct...@yahoo.com
> says...
>
> > Movies have always had
> > cartoons and apparently newsreels back in the ol' days.
>
> You mean, presumably, back before a movie ticket ran $9.00.
>
> Speaking for myself, this will probably represent the straw that breaks
> the camel's back; I'm already livid at sitting through commercials to
> get to the something I spent *nine fucking dollars* to see.
>
> Memo To Theater Owners: I'm at my limit. One more annoyance, one more
> penny in price, one more commercial, one more whine and I'm going to
> stop attending your theaters altogether, even for the few types of films
> where a theater offers some benefit (blockbusters and comedies,
> mostly...) over my home theater gear and I'm still buying your tickets
> in the first place. I don't want commercials, I don't want cartoons, I
> don't want *anything* except what I came to see.
>

Although I am in substantial agreement with your position, I sure wouldn't
mind Bugs Bunny once in a while.
Bob


Graham

unread,
Jan 14, 2003, 12:05:04 AM1/14/03
to

--

"Ronald O. Christian" <ro...@europa.com> wrote in message

news:qen52v0tn0fndhdeg...@4ax.com...


> On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:41:12 +1100, "Graham" <hu...@alphalink.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >couldn't you ( those that are close to a Regal ) simply boycott them and
> >then write a few letters to Regal people stating how you think that the
pre
> >movie stuff is a bit OTT
>
> Online Regal comment card:
>
> http://www.regalcinemas.com/corporate/comments.html
>
> Tell them how you feel.
>
>
> Ron


or get all your mates together and have a mass phone in to your local Regal,
asking what is played pre show etc.If they get 20-30-40 calls a day asking
about whats on before the movie, the manager is going to pass that on to his
bosses..

gra


Liam Devlin

unread,
Jan 14, 2003, 12:11:30 AM1/14/03
to
Ronald O. Christian wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 07:37:10 -0800, " Mack Twamley"
> <mack...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
>>Oh, sweet Jesus! next, are they going to cut out running the feature and
>>just run commercials and trailers?
>
>
> It appears to be running that direction. The question, of course,
> becomes: Who would pay for that?
>
> Another thing to consider: Shortening the films and including more
> and more outright commercials and TV programming pleases (let's be
> gracious) very few movie-goers. On top of that, they've raised ticket
> prices again. In a down economy, why would one adopt policies that
> only serve to piss off one's patrons? Is Regal trying to commit
> suicide? Insurance fraud? Are they managed by former government
> bureaucrats?

No, this is private sector, definitely.

Rufus T. Frazier

unread,
Jan 14, 2003, 3:07:18 AM1/14/03
to
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 15:40:49 GMT, Ronald O. Christian
<ro...@europa.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:41:12 +1100, "Graham" <hu...@alphalink.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>couldn't you ( those that are close to a Regal ) simply boycott them and
>>then write a few letters to Regal people stating how you think that the pre
>>movie stuff is a bit OTT
>
>Online Regal comment card:
>
>http://www.regalcinemas.com/corporate/comments.html
>
>Tell them how you feel.


Thanks Ron ! I'll be e mailing this to all my friends!

Rufus T. Frazier

unread,
Jan 14, 2003, 3:09:10 AM1/14/03
to
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:15:36 -0800, Bob <chil...@ix.netcom.com>
wrote:


>
>Although I am in substantial agreement with your position, I sure wouldn't
>mind Bugs Bunny once in a while.
>Bob

Well, as long as it was directed by Chuck Jones, anyway.
The only other director who might do him justice would be Mark
Dingdal.

>

djspade

unread,
Jan 14, 2003, 7:59:56 AM1/14/03
to

"Graham" <hu...@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
news:3e239b82$1...@news.alphalink.com.au...

> or get all your mates together and have a mass phone in to your local
Regal,
> asking what is played pre show etc.If they get 20-30-40 calls a day asking
> about whats on before the movie, the manager is going to pass that on to
his
> bosses..
>
> gra

So long as the message to the bosses *isn't*....."Hey, all people want to
see is the stuff we show before the movie. Let's quit showing the movie and
just show the other stuff instead!"

Doug & Mike


Ronald O. Christian

unread,
Jan 14, 2003, 10:31:00 AM1/14/03
to
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 07:59:56 -0500, "djspade" <djs...@tc3net.com>
wrote:

No, that would be fine. Then we'd all stop going, Regal would close,
and maybe they'd open a real theater in it's place.

Bob

unread,
Jan 14, 2003, 10:50:27 AM1/14/03
to

"Rufus T. Frazier" wrote:

No argument on that, either.
Bob


djspade

unread,
Jan 14, 2003, 7:19:14 PM1/14/03
to

"Ronald O. Christian" <ro...@europa.com> wrote in message
news:p8b82vsk27hoqouo9...@4ax.com...


> No, that would be fine. Then we'd all stop going, Regal would close,
> and maybe they'd open a real theater in it's place.
>
>
> Ron


Touche! Now if we just had a few million sitting around......

Doug & Mike


Bobster123

unread,
Jan 25, 2003, 5:01:16 PM1/25/03
to
>From: Bob chil...@ix.netcom.com
wrote:

>> Memo To Theater Owners: I'm at my limit. One more annoyance, one more
>> penny in price, one more commercial, one more whine and I'm going to
>> stop attending your theaters altogether

I saw ABOUT SCHMIDT at a Hoyt's last night- $8.75 for a ticket, $9 for a medium
popcorn and soda, countless commercials and trailers before the movie finally
started. Made me wonder why anyone bothers going to the movies anymore.

Back in the "old days" (which was the 1960's/1970's for me), my local theatre
kept a continuous show running- when the feature ended they would show a short
subject, cartoon, two or three trailers, some theatre ads, until it was time
for the feature to start again. I realize they can't do this now (due to one
projector and platter systems), although digital projection may change that.
What bothers me, though, is that the countless commericals/trailers are shown
when the feature is scheduled to start. It's gotten to the point where I
purposely arrive at the theatre 10 to 15 minutes late, because I know it will
be at least that long before the feature starts.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages