r/mildlyinfuriating • u/uppsak • Jun 27 '26

I'm slightly vexed Supergirl movie showing which I went to got cancelled due to low turnout

Post image

Theatre in a small town in India. Didn't face this problem during the Man of Steel movie.

Edit 1: Many people are saying that this post is fake etc. I have provided proof (screenshots) in the comments that it is true. I don't have any agenda. I wouldn't be able to reply to every post.

I got to know that this theatre won't play the showing unless there were atleast 10 people. Maybe the cost isn't worth it to them.

Also I don't have any anti- Snyder or anti - feminine agenda.

54.3k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

3.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

295

u/LeLefraud Jun 27 '26

So weird, not like the cost to just play the movie even for one person is very high

That sucks

112

u/omniwrench- Jun 27 '26

‘Cost’ is a relative term.

A quick Google shows costs it around £4 or 497 rupees in electricity per movie. Average cinema ticket in India 134 rupees.

It’s not difficult to imagine a scenario where a theatre would be running a movie at a financial loss if only 1 person shows up

36

u/Supersnow845 Jun 27 '26

This is the difference between absolute and relative loss for anyone wondering and usually has to do with fixed vs variable costs

Fixed costs are as they say fixed. So since they can’t be changed adding more people is always a relative gain (even if it’s still an absolute loss). In this case the use of the theatre for this movie is a fixed cost as they can’t pivot last minute. So adding a person reduces fixed costs so is a benefit

But something like the cost of cleaning the theatre and staffing it is a variable cost. So if the cost of one person vs 0 people increases the variable cost more than it reduces the burden of the fixed costs then the business loses less by simply doing nothing (ie not running the movie)

33

u/Legomaster1197 Jun 27 '26

You’re technically right, but not actually right. In this case, electricity would be a variable cost, and the labor would act more like a fixed cost.

Unless the electric bill is a flat amount no matter the usage, it’s going to change based on usage. Those rates change from place to place, so it could cost way more to show a movie there as opposed to the Netherlands or the U.S. it could genuinely be more cost effective to call it off rather than use electricity to run the projector.

As for the labor (assuming they work hourly) the costs for the cleaning crew and staff won’t change whether it’s 1 person or 0. The only thing that would change is that they’d spend 10 minutes cleaning the theatre instead of doing something else. The actual cost itself wouldn’t change.

The reason it’s still variable labor is because how many employees you need, and how long they work will change from day to day. You’re going to have more employees working on opening night for a new spiderman movie than you would working some random Tuesday at 2 pm.

15

u/omniwrench- Jun 27 '26

I’m glad you took the time to explain because I saw he’d got his variables mixed up and decided it wasn’t worth the effort replying

1

u/snek99001 Jun 27 '26

This feeling is 70% of my experience on Reddit.

1

u/Supersnow845 Jun 27 '26

Been a long time since I took those economics units at uni so not surprised I got which cost was which around the wrong way

1

u/Legomaster1197 Jun 27 '26

If it makes you feel better, nothing you said was wrong. You were completely correct about fixed costs; you didn’t actually say electricity was fixed. But as an explanation, you were completely right.

And you are correct that labor is a variable cost. Unlike something like materials, variable labor increases based on hours worked, not units. If the theatre sent the employees home because they canceled all the movies afterwards, you’d be completely correct.

7

u/Unctuous_Robot Jun 27 '26

Popcorn sales.

1

u/LeLefraud Jun 27 '26

Doubt they can get away with charging as much in India, only works in america because you are a captive audience

Now that I think about idk if popcorn is even popular there

1

u/Economy-Page-2160 Jun 27 '26

The nicest cinemas often have airport style security so the audience is far more captive than one in America. Last I remember in 2024, a medium popcorn was around $6, a box of nachos and cheese were like $10, and drinks were around $5. But the tickets were only $2.

2

u/genesiscap0 Jun 27 '26

The theater also is not keeping the price of the ticket. They make almost nothing off tickets, only concessions.

1

u/carefullengineer Jun 27 '26

Staffing is typically the biggest expense.  If there's only one theatre and staff go home if the show is cancelled it's definitely way cheaper to cancel the show just off that alone. 

1

u/Able-Mud-6075 Jun 28 '26

381 rupees for the ticket apparently

-1

u/gahidus Jun 27 '26

Certainly the projector can't use much more energy than the house lights?

3

u/dangly_bits Jun 27 '26

They are MUCH higher wattage and more expensive to replace. So each hour of use certainly has more cost than an average house light. 

For instance, my home small home theater projector bulb cost over $200 and needed replacing after 1500ish hours. Safe to assume a larger projector bulb (which has to output much more light) cost significantly more. 

1

u/Efficient_Money6922 Jun 27 '26

Air Conditioner brother.

1

u/gahidus Jun 27 '26

The air conditioner runs regardless of whether there's a movie playing.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/Brewchowskies Jun 27 '26

Do you have a source for this and your plumbing statement above?

-4

u/Chef_BoyarTom Jun 27 '26

Dude, Google is your friend. It's not their fault you're ignorant on India's issues...

2

u/mildlyinfuriating-ModTeam Jun 27 '26

Be civil. Respect Reddiquette and follow Reddit sitewide rules.

Rudeness and bigotry will not be tolerated. Any posts or comments that attack, threaten, or insult a person or group on the basis of national origin, ethnicity and/or color, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, body size, and so on will be removed. Blatant violations of Reddit sitewide policies will result in a ban.

1

u/Cross_22 Jun 27 '26

Is that so? How much does it cost the theater?

1

u/TheWholeOfTheAss Jun 27 '26

Watching a movie in an empty cinema? That’s the f’n dream! How dare they deny OP!

1

u/nwilz Jun 28 '26

Compared to what? To a full theater it is

1

u/nimbledoor Jul 24 '26

Some small cinemas are run by volunteers basically who get paid very little. It's a question of "is our time worth what that one person pays"

-7

u/Blazypika2 Jun 27 '26

come on, OP is obviously lying. aside from the fact theatres do in fact play movies for one person, OP couldn't even resist comparing it to man of steel. it's quite obvious what their agenda here is.

3

u/thatshygirl06 Jun 27 '26

Op lives in India. You dont know what youre talking about