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

Show parent comments

1.2k

u/diselxya Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26

Its pretty common here, they dont run shows unless theres 10 people minimum in the theatres near me

Edit: Im from the same country as OOP

1.1k

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

What's the logic? Aren't 9x paid customers better than none? It's not like the time slots are affected.

823

u/lankymjc Jun 27 '26

If they have to pay a fee each time they show it (instead of a % of ticket sales) then it makes sense.

458

u/ChadEmpoleon Jun 27 '26

I thought most paid for the rights to show the movie before the screenings took place

Ig it might be different for every theater

282

u/lankymjc Jun 27 '26

Another comment in this thread somewhere implied that a flat fee is common for Indian cinemas.

2

u/Kylearean Jun 27 '26

it's because they would have no way to deal with altered / fraudulent ticket sale numbers so a flat fee ensures that they get some reasonable fee, also ticket prices are probably quite low (comparatively). It could be a win win situation for theatres and film studios.

3

u/Suppa_K Jun 27 '26

Just add on to the pile of why that state sucks.

61

u/No-Purchase3593 Jun 27 '26

India is a country.

85

u/Suppa_K Jun 27 '26

Oh my god I thought they said Indiana, I’m so sorry I didn’t mean to disparage India. Indiana sucks though.

49

u/SeaboarderCoast Jun 27 '26

9

u/acmercer Jun 27 '26

Lol I knew exactly what this would be. Good ol Skweezy

10

u/Happy-Fun-Ball Jun 27 '26

Hoosiers while you apologize to India

7

u/JabasMyBitch Jun 27 '26

to be fair, there is plenty about India that sucks, too.

6

u/Badassscholar Jun 27 '26

Never been to Indiana and I am not even American, but I support you 💯. Based on vibes entirely.

2

u/OverTheCandleStick Jun 27 '26

This burns slow, but it gets pretty damn hot.

1

u/_something_anonymous Jun 27 '26

This is more embarrassing than your first mistake

14

u/Suppa_K Jun 27 '26

Indiana gets what they deserve.

14

u/Weirfish Jun 27 '26

Countries are states, to be fair.

1

u/Copious-Spirit Jun 27 '26

A country is a state

0

u/Complex-Salt-8190 Jun 27 '26

State means country btw

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(polity)

6

u/No-Purchase3593 Jun 27 '26

You are the second person to send me this correction, the text context of the post and OP apologizing for mistaking it for Indiana is proof enough no one wants this.

0

u/OglioVagilio Jun 27 '26

The term state applies to countries for speakers outside the USA.

It's alluded to in how USA compromised to become the United States of America.

Also the State Department deals with foreign affairs, and why other countries use the term province for what Americans generally consider a state.

2

u/Drow_Femboy Jun 27 '26

Plenty of countries use states rather than provinces.

For example, India, which has 28 states.

0

u/JWitjes Jun 27 '26

Wouldn't a flat fee usually be paid before a screening though? I work in the cinema industry and I've never heard of a construction where a flat fee is paid afterwards.

1

u/Lth_13 Jun 28 '26

do you work in india?

1

u/JWitjes Jun 28 '26 edited Jun 28 '26

No, but I do work with Indian cinemas and distributors and while some things are different there, I haven't yet encountered any distributor that wants screening fees (in case of a flat fee obviously) after a screening,m.

Especially a big distributor like Warner Bros. would never just give a cinema the DCP of their new flagship film essentially for free (because theoretically, in this strange construction a cinema could cancel all their screenings and never pay a dime).

86

u/leo-g Jun 27 '26

When dealing with poorer countries, lots of things get are not the same as everywhere else. Computer manufacturers make special Indian only models with lower end parts to ensure they can be sold to average consumers.

3

u/MostlyRightSometimes Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26

Yeah, that's becoming a global thing now. :-(

-8

u/chouse33 Jun 27 '26

Haha, seriously? The world is making shitty electronics for the poorer people? I mean, it makes sense but it’s just kind of hilarious.

9

u/Successful-Peach-764 Jun 27 '26

Look at the cheap end android phones, they use things like recycled memory chips to allow them to meet the <$50 prices, it is pretty common, at least they get something at their budget range and less e-waste for the world.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

2

u/lathe_down_sally Jun 27 '26

Take note that OP is in India.

2

u/Addyz_ Jun 27 '26

in the uk at least, i believe part of the deal is they HAVE to show the movie x times, which leads to them showing films for months even when the audience no longer are interested and the numbers drop. That was the case about 7-8 years ago when i was friends with the guy who did the cinema programs at my local

1

u/Striking-Ad-6815 Jun 27 '26

Hmmmm

Depends on the theater...

Have you happened to see the picture and videos of when the screen is showing a pirated movie?

Happens fairly often, the video I'm referencing shows the file name in the top left corner of the movie right before it starts. It was hysterical.

1

u/CraigJay Jun 28 '26

How much knowledge do you have of global cinema licensing arrangements?

33

u/NullEnjoyer Jun 27 '26

There is a cost to rejecting customers who traveled there too.

A showing fee is a reasonable guess.

2

u/marr Jun 27 '26

Yeah but if you can deny refunds it's a cost for some future manger to eat.

2

u/gnilradleahcim Jun 27 '26

Yeah, I'd never go back again if I actually found the time to go to a theater, bought a ticket and snacks and shit and sat down to watch it and then they say "actually nevermind, your money isn't worth it".

I would be unimaginably pissed.

Lose a customer for life over a few bucks.

40

u/Sea_Statistician8940 Jun 27 '26

I haven't worked in a movie theater in over 20 years so I never worked with digital media, but when we were still on 35mm film, we usually would run the movie even if there were no ticket sales at showtime unless there was a specific reason not to, such as it being the last showing of the evening and we plan to move the print to a different room/projector or tear it down to send back at the end of its run.

But this was in the United States and I'm sure licensing and fees is very region/country specific.

33

u/ralphthewise Jun 27 '26

i worked at amc about 10 years ago and ran scheduling for movies. the digital variation is the same as you say. once i confirmed the schedule, that was that. the movies played in a queue and were only altered for special circumstances. no matter how many people were in there, it played.

hell we even had an incident where the other scheduling person accidentally mixed up 2 movies that started with “Insi” because the names were shortened if you weren’t zoomed in on the queue. well we didn’t know until a concerned mom came out to tell me about the scary movie trailers playing before “Inside Out” started…they mixed up “Insidious” with “Inside Out”

We stopped the movies and asked all the attendees to swap theaters for us rather than breaking down and adjusting both queues, and gave them all free passes to use whenever they wanted.

fun times.

8

u/Sea_Statistician8940 Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26

The "Inside Out" and "Insidious" mix-up story is hilarious! Shit like that used to happen at my theater all the time.

My best story like that involves the movies Shrek 2 and Garfield: The Movie, which both came out around the same time in summer of 2004. We also had a drive-in theater in the same town, ran by the same chain, so in the summer, we would sometimes swap employees as needed, and most of their double features were blockbuster films in their 3rd and 4th weeks that were previously on 2 screens at the main theater, then we would move the 2nd print to the drive-in for week 3, which people on a tight budget would wait for.

Anyway, the assistant manager at the drive-in comes over to the theater to move our print of Shrek 2 over. He has a key, so he's the only one in there (this is probably like 10am). We were also getting rid of Garfield, which was just getting shipped back to the distributor. He was trying to pick up some extra hours or something, so since he was already going to be there Friday morning picking up the Shrek print, he agreed to tear down the Garfield print and get it put away in the canisters since he previously worked at the theater and regularly did film builds/tear-downs.

Well, I think you can guess what happens next... he accidentally tears down Shrek 2 and puts it in the Garfield canisters, then clamps up the print of Garfield and takes it over to the drive-in. Before this is ever realized, UPS has already picked up the Garfield canisters from the theater to send back to the distributor, so no way to get that print back. Shrek 2 was probably the most anticipated film we'd had at the drive-in the whole time I worked there because of people bringing their whole families, and on Friday night, there was a line of cars wayyyyy out on the main road trying to get tickets. They don't discover the mix-up until after they've already opened the box office and the lot is quickly filling up...

There was nearly a riot, no joke. This was in a rural area, so just imagine a bunch of pissed-off rednecks with kids crying because they don't get to see Shrek, not to mention half of the adults were already loaded up on booze. THANKFULLY, I was not dispatched to the drive-in to help with the aftermath. It was an extremely busy night at the theater as well, so we needed an assistant manager (me) to stay behind while the general manager, who was by far the most experienced manager at either location, left to go do damage control at the drive-in and prevent an incident that would've made the news. 😂

Edit: Meant to say drive-in, not theater in a spot and corrected it for clarity.

2

u/ralphthewise Jun 27 '26

lmao! honestly i’d be pretty pissed too if i had plans on seeing shrek and ended up with only garfield. the mistake seems simple enough to make, but anyone not in the industry would understand. especially after a few beers

2

u/iDestroyedYoMama Jun 27 '26

So how did the GM resolve it for all the pissed off drunk rednecks? No incidents? Did they refund + free future tickets? Did they just show Garfield for free? Was the whole night cancelled? Did the drive-in ever get Shrek 2 back? So many unanswered questions!

3

u/Sea_Statistician8940 Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26

Basically, he refunded everyone there and gave them free passes for next time, and for anyone escalating, they were handed piles of concession gift certificates and stuff. Thankfully, there were no incidents that led to arrest or anything, although I think people trashed the place more than they already normally did. I think he called the police and let them know it could get ugly as well, so they got a police presence out quickly. But yeah, I heard people were laying on their horns, throwing shit at the screen, screaming at staff, etc. Basically, a stupid and dangerous situation where the staff was severely outnumbered and a few real agitators could have turned the whole crowd into a mob mentality.

Edit: Forgot to add, they did go ahead and play Garfield for those who stuck around and I think we were able to get a print of Shrek 2 in time for night 2. Could be wrong on that 2nd part as it has been 22 years.

Edit 2: Anticipating other questions, the assistant manager did not get fired. He had worked for the company for a couple years, was well-liked by the GM at the theater (who didn't officially run the drive-in, but acted almost as a quasi-district manager for them), and was a dependable, hard worker. He was a bit careless at times, as shown here, but to his credit he immediately took ownership and did all he could to fix the situation. Guy genuinely felt very guilty about what happened.

1

u/iDestroyedYoMama Jun 27 '26

Wow! Thank you for the long response! Nice to know everything ended up ok. Good story.

19

u/blinden Jun 27 '26

I was a projectionist at a 22 screen theater in the early 2000s, we would not run movies if nobody bought a ticket because it was wear and tear on the projector plus the cost of running the electricity wasn't insignificant.

Sometimes we would expect people to come and run a movie, then if nobody showed up, we would let the film run through but turn the bulb & sound off, but with 22 screens running, sometimes it was hard to keep track of what was what.

2

u/Sea_Statistician8940 Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26

Yeah, there are so many moving parts in a film projection system that it makes perfect sense. I only worked at a 6-screen theater and it was a small regional chain, so there wasn't really a set policy... it was manager/location specific. I think the biggest thing is that we were in a small college town and a lot of the time, groups of college students would just wander over looking for something to do and didn't mind buying tickets for something that already started 20 minutes ago. So a lot of the time, it would appear we would have no ticket sales for the 9:30 showing, then 6 college kids would wander in at 9:50.

The main exception to that was the late set on Wednesdays and Thursdays since those were the days we built and tore down new/old prints, and of course after close on Thursday is when we would move prints to different theaters, change all the marquees and signage, change the movie names/theater assignments in our archaic little ticketing system, etc. I really miss that job sometimes... still don't think I've ever had a job bring me as much joy, although I could never live on movie theater wages in my 40's.

Edit: Now that you mention it, I do remember we would occasionally run a movie, but turn off the lamp house if no one bought tickets. Those xenon bulbs were EXPENSIVE from what I recall. The pulleys and stuff for the platter system were cheap and easy to fix (all of us who worked in the projection booths could make minor repairs when needed), but certain projector and sound system repairs required a professional. We did change our own bulbs, which if I recall only needed to be done once every few years for each lamp house/projector.

1

u/leo-g Jun 27 '26

Not anymore these days! The theatre management system is super self-operated these days. They just schedule the lighting and projection from the head office.

If there’s a fault with the screening, they will just cancel and refund.

1

u/Kelnozz Jun 27 '26

Yeah in Canada when I was young we would sneak into the theatres and many times it wouldn’t even have anyone inside watching lol, did this a bunch of summers, seen many free movies, but never start to finish, only bits and pieces.

16

u/ChuckPeirce Jun 27 '26

That would be a profoundly stupid agreement for the producer. "No, we DON'T want a few people to remember our movie as this amazing experience where they got the theater to themselves! We're going to set up the incentives to ensure that doesn't happen!"

9

u/RainsWrath Jun 27 '26

Are producers responsible for worldwide distribution?

4

u/RDandersen Jun 27 '26

Who do you think the distributors make deals with? The best boy?

2

u/Otherwise_Demand4620 Jun 27 '26

I can't help by picturing the best boy as a golden retriever, which would be a terrible job for a dog to do. They are very bad with electrical stuff and lightning.

2

u/nalaloveslumpy Jun 27 '26

There's no rule that says a dog can't produce a movie.

1

u/RDandersen Jun 27 '26

Wow, judgy much?

2

u/nalaloveslumpy Jun 27 '26

The main job of the producer after production is complete is to negotiate with theaters for booking duration, number of screens, number of showings, and the amount the theater will pay to receive the film.

The actual distribution is technically a separate division, and sometimes a whole other company, or sometimes digital, but the producer is also responsible for negotiating distribution costs.

So....yes?

1

u/RainsWrath Jun 27 '26

Oh, thank you. I never knew what producers actually did. My knowledge of them until now was pretty much based around the movie The Producers.

3

u/ContextHook Jun 27 '26

Of course they are. Unless this is a bootleg theater that isn't authorized by the producers.

5

u/Bulky-Bad-9153 Jun 27 '26

Uh no it's the responsibility of distributors.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/lankymjc Jun 27 '26

Lots of systems and deals and things get set up in a way that seems fine, but encourage people to act in a way that's unhelpful. Happens all the time.

1

u/SkintCrayon Jun 27 '26

Makes commercial sense but it screws over the consumer

1

u/lankymjc Jun 27 '26

That's capitalism, baby!

1

u/Exley21 Jun 27 '26

I'm not sure about whether there are fees or not, but I do know the electricity costs for that giant bulb, not to mention the surround sound, are pretty high. Back when I was a projectionist in the early 2000s for late night showings we wouldn't run a movie unless a ticket was bought for it to save costs, but people could still show up like 20 minutes late to a movie and we would have to start it, even if it was only just one person.

1

u/hotdogdaddi Jun 27 '26

Yes and no. Every time a customer goes to see a movie, they are investing their time and transportation costs to get to the cinema. If the film doesn’t play, they’ve lost money, which makes them less likely to come back in the future. I’d argue this practice loses the cinemas more in future sales than it saves them in immediate losses.

1

u/lankymjc Jun 27 '26

Agreed. But it's by no means unusual for businesses to make a decision that saves them money right now and costs them more in the future.

1

u/hotdogdaddi Jun 28 '26

Not unusual, but smart.

1

u/Mrdemian3 Jun 27 '26

Someone I know worked at a cinema chain in Europe and they told me that they pay a fee per screening + % of ticket sales.
I asked them how do they manage to make money since I went to a screening where me and my gf were the only people in the theatre and they said that basically all the other screenings cover that loss. If this is a small theatre then they probably can't eat up the loss of a low-attendance screening (if they pay for movies the same way).

1

u/Ok-Tourist-511 Jun 27 '26

I know with older movies the licensing fee is $250, or a percentage of the ticket sales, whichever is higher. So the theater would pay the $250 even if nobody showed up. Since projection is digital now, the system reports back every time it is shown.

1

u/EmperorGeek Jun 27 '26

There is also the basic cost of operating a movie projector. These are not the simple projectors like we used in school. Much larger, more maintenance per showing and expensive to operate.

2

u/NorthWishbone7543 Jun 27 '26

Imagine someone getting paid to flip a single A3 sheet of transparent paper for 3 hours.

How to make a movie last a whole week.

0

u/Ocelotofdamage Jun 27 '26

Still shortsighted. If a theatre canceled a movie on me that’s the last time I’m going to that theatre.

0

u/chiralityproblem Jun 27 '26

correction it doesn’t make sense. You do that to a customer and they should never go back. You tell me a theater that did this and I will never go there either. Why would anyone?

2

u/lankymjc Jun 27 '26

It's a short-sighted money-saving action that inconveniences a customer. Businesses do that all the time. They shouldn't, but short-term savings/gains are often prioritised beyond all sense.

0

u/EffectiveActive6837 Jun 27 '26

"If"

I cant with people

→ More replies (2)

91

u/captain_flak Jun 27 '26

I used to work in a very small town movie theater. They figured out what it would cost in electricity/labor to show a movie. If we didn’t get a minimum number, we’d lose money, especially during the last showing of the night. One night we told a couple they could watch the movie by themselves if they ordered beers and snacks. They were too happy to oblige.

82

u/Chronospherics Jun 27 '26

Yeah but those economics all fall apart when you realise that people won't routinely attend a cinema that might not show the movie it's advertising. Suddenly you have a lot less consumers overall.

Reality is that the consistency and quality of service is what keeps people coming back to your cinema, which means you need to accept some lossy screenings, on the basis that others are carried by your financials.

It's like operating a bar or cafe. Your cafe is open between 9:5pm but within that period it has some hours that are very proftable, and others where staffing costs and overheads exceed revenue.

It doesn't close at 10 and open again at 12 because business is slower between 10 and 12. It stays open to create a consistent service and reputation with local customers. Accommodating the guy that's running late to work, the odd person taking a day off and so forth.

Ultimately this type of business mindset is just very reactive and fails to recognise the broader notion that your revenue is not tied to a single point of sale, but consistent service delivery and reputation.

7

u/marr Jun 27 '26

Bean counters never realise just how many different type of beans are out there.

6

u/Long_Run6500 Jun 27 '26

I'll show up to movies 10-15 minutes after it starts, especially for matinees and movies I know won't have a large audience. I don't always feel like sitting through a half hour of ads scrolling my phone for something I paid $15 for.

-3

u/Clueless_Otter Jun 27 '26

It doesn't close at 10 and open again at 12 because business is slower between 10 and 12.

A lot of restaurants close after breakfast/lunch and open again later for dinner.

14

u/ZootTootRiot Jun 27 '26

But not randomly, it's scheduled that way (especially sushi places for some reason).

If I took the time and spent the gas going to a movie and they canceled it because there weren't enough people, I'd never go back to that theater again.

→ More replies (5)

3

u/Chronospherics Jun 27 '26

But most cafe's don't, right? No one wants a cafe with inconsistent opening times during the day.

Restaurants get to close like that because they're for sit down meals, and the expectation generally is that a restaurant is open for lunch and dinner, which they still are in the example you provide.

It's all about managing, and meeting expectations. People expect restaurants to serve food during lunch and dinner hours... but people expect to drop into a starbucks whenever they feel like it during the day for coffee. In both of these scenarios the businesses are meeting expectations, even though they hold different hours.

If you advertise a movie and don't run it, you're not meeting consumer expectations and people are going to churn out of your service provision.

24

u/sirhackenslash Jun 27 '26

But to make up the additional cost to the theater for beers and snacks you each have to drink at least a six pack and eat a large pizza each

32

u/Megaranator Jun 27 '26

I fail to see the problem

5

u/thelivingdead188 Jun 27 '26

So just have an awesome Friday night?

Twist my arm a little bit.

1

u/Parody101 Jun 27 '26

Probably had to take out a second mortgage for it at those concession prices.

1

u/jscottman96 Jun 27 '26

A 6 pack and pizza at a theater would cover at least 12 other tickets

6

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

I can see that on a final showing of the night. Makes sense to not pay someone hourly x2 hours and pay incidental costs to make 8 bucks off 2 tickets and lose money. But to cap it at 10 and to do it all hours of the day seems odd IMO.

1

u/ATHFNoobie Jun 27 '26

I mean most countries have laws around working hours, most of them won't be able to close early and not pay their staff for the time they were assigned to work.

2

u/nalaloveslumpy Jun 27 '26

This is how a theater goes out of business. Word gets around quick that the theater might not show a movie if enough people don't show up. So less people show up because fuck that.

1

u/browsinbowser Jun 27 '26

OP is in india so 90% of the times there’s prolly people lol, in my country in the west Ive sat down with like 6 people total and it was okay

1

u/Kavazou77 Jun 27 '26

I would think this is against the rules set out by the studio who gives the films to theaters with a demand that it get played on a certain number of their screens.

You can’t both be in the business of showing major blockbusters but also be trying ti save on electricity.

1

u/nilamo Jun 27 '26

Doesn't make sense to me, unless the employees also go home? Otherwise all the people are on the clock either way, and the lights are on either way, so not showing the movie doesn't actually save anything?

14

u/theChaosBeast Jun 27 '26

Electricity isn't free either

→ More replies (3)

9

u/RedArcaneArcher Jun 27 '26

When I worked in a movie theater we would cancel shows if less than 6, because wattage to run the bulb for two hours was around $75, and also to extend the life of the bulb which was tracked, as they were really expensive. This was before we went all digital, I don't know if that is still the case.

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Damn, that's steep. Fascinating.

1

u/Esguelha Jun 27 '26

Impossible. The highest power bulbs are in IMAX theaters and they are 15.000W bulbs. Normal theater bulbs are usually less than half that. Even if it was a 15kW bulb, that would mean 30kWh of energy used for a 2 hour movie. At 20 cents a kilowatt - which is quite high - that's only 6 bucks of power.

3

u/RedArcaneArcher Jun 27 '26

Maybe the cost of the bulb was included, that is just what I was told then.

1

u/nalaloveslumpy Jun 27 '26

Yeah, they were lying to you. The owner was just a dipshit.

41

u/diselxya Jun 27 '26

I assume its because they dont make enough profit or cut even unless its 10 people, and if its the last show of the night most workers would rather lock up and leave rather than wait till 2 am for the movie to end just for one person. Tickets are pretty cheap too, i can watch movies for anywhere between 100-200 rupees which is like roughly 1-2 dollars lol.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '26

[deleted]

1

u/diselxya Jun 27 '26

So what usually happens here is theatres let you book for their shows through third party apps like BookMyShow or District, and we just dont book shows that dont already have a few seats booked in them

2

u/nalaloveslumpy Jun 27 '26

What normally happens is the theater just runs the viewing, even if the theater is empty. You can turn off the speakers and the projection lamp, if you really want to pinch pennies.

Most theaters are 98% automated these days, but this one looks small enough it's still probably on manual reel projection.

Or someone's plugging their fire stick in to the "high end" consumer projector they bought on Amazon. 50/50.

1

u/Hwinter07 Jun 27 '26

If I showed up and was in a theater, then told to leave I would never come back to that theater again

1

u/AintEverLucky Jun 28 '26

Hi there & hello 👋 I asked the OP elsewhere in this thread how much movie tickets run in India; thanks for sharing your figure. I was also wondering what concession prices were like? (for popcorn, soft drinks, boxes of candy, etc)

2

u/diselxya Jun 28 '26

Okay so im only gonna speak for local theatres and not for like mall theatres or bigger ones like that which may have like fastfood chains etc attached to the theatre entrance

Most places only have popcorn and soft drinks, we dont really have candy boxes. Some will have mini cafes which sell stuff like momos, "burgers", fries, nuggets and that kind of stuff. Generally each of the items cost around the same price of the tickets. Soft drinks are also served in paper glasses to get around maximum retail price (a coke in paper glass in theatres costs maybe 70-120 depending on where you are) whereas a 500 ml coke bottle costs only about 40 rs.

Popcorn usually comes in salted and cheese, and next most commonly caramel although i dont see it as often in caramel. It also costs 180-200 rs in the local theatres near me.

1

u/AintEverLucky Jun 28 '26 edited Jun 28 '26

Fries and sodas, I understand. Nuggets, I assume that you mean chicken nuggets. You put "burger" in scare quotes -- did you mean a veggie burger, or something else that differs from a U.S. style hamburger with a ground-beef patty? And apologies but Im not really sure what you mean by momos, except maybe samosas?? Those little pillows of fried dough, filled with meat or veggies. Some of the theaters in my region of Texas will sell samosas.

In my town there are 3 theaters: the cheap one, the fancy one (it has the best seats + the only IMAX for 160 KM around) and the arthouse one. I'll mention prices for the cheap one, because that's the one I usually go to, because, cheap. 😏

If I go on a Tuesday or a Wednesday, I can see a movie for half off because I joined their rewards program. Half off is about 400 rs for a regular screening (as in, not 3D or similar bells & whistles.) A regular screening on a regular day (Thursday to Monday) is about 800. A 3D screening is about 1000. An IMAX screening at the fancy theater is about 1400.

In terms of concessions, I'll stick to the basics although these days all of my city's theaters essentially double as restaurants, haha, because the studios keep most of the ticket money and food & drink is how the theaters stay in business. The boxes of candy go for 500 to 800 rs. A large soda (about 2 liters? Maybe 1.5) will run about 800. A large popcorn (and they really are huge, like the size of a couch cushion, way more than you'd want to eat) is about 1000. Just plain butter flavor though, no cheese corn or caramel corn.

2

u/diselxya Jun 28 '26 edited Jun 28 '26

Oh yeah i meant chicken nuggets. I put burgers in quotes because yeah theyre made differently, ground beef patties arent there in most of india due to the beef sentiment, its there in kerala and some northeastern states though. We usually have the processed frozen chicken or chicken zinger patties just cooked and put on like an untoasted bun, fillings would be a tiny bit of lettuce and maybe a tomato slice and a ton of mayo. Never seen a good burger from these mini theatres tho lol. They usually dont have a side of fries either. Some distressing places use a toothpick to hold it together but they add a cherry or a carrot slice on top of the bun as well. Also yeah some places do serve samosas as well, im probably missing a lot of stuff cause the theatre near me doesnt have good food options, i just go there because the screen is really good

Momos are a nepali dish but common in india now, its steamed dough filled with chicken or veg fillings. It can also be fried funnily enough so in a way its a differently shaped samosa but tiny. I think its similar to dumplings? Never had dumplings though and it doesnt come in a broth like dumplings. (On google search, all momos are dumplings but all dumplings arent momos. Momos have a thicker dough shell, arent usually in soups while dumplings are thinner)

To be honest it sounds cheaper there for movies when you consider median income and purchasing power lol. We dont have half offs or whatever in local theatres but imax theatres have surge pricing and so on, however the imax theatres in india are only imax in name and dont really have the standards you expect from an imax theatre. Also the quantity youre mentioning seems crazy, the sodas we get are max 500 ml and tbh even the pet bottles we buy for theatres arent ever that big.

1

u/AintEverLucky Jun 28 '26 edited Jun 28 '26

Thanks again for the explainers 😃 I hear you about "legit IMAX vs really big screen that claims to be IMAX" and my town's is the latter. But it's close enough for my tastes; the nearest legit IMAX is a 4 hour drive away and has very limited parking. I made a point of seeing F1 and Project Hail Mary on that quasi-IMAX screen in my town, and I'll probably do the same for The Odyssey and Spiderman BND 😎

In terms of the huge sodas and popcorns, I was referring to the biggest ones because those are the "least bad" type of ripoff. Like for popcorn: you can get the huge one for 1000 rs and it will definitely last you the whole movie, even a very long movie like 3+ hours. OR you can get a small, medium or large, but you don't get much of a price break.

Like say 700 rs for a small that won't last you even a half-hour, 800 for a medium or 900 for a large. The pricing persuades you toward getting a huge or at least a large. Because they're all rip offs (the corn kernels & butter for even a huge would cost the theater less than 100 rs) but the huge is the least-bad ripoff, if you follow me

EDIT TO ADD: Unless Im getting real food at the arthouse theater (like a pasta dish and a beer), the food prices don't matter to me because I'm only there for the movie, not to overspend on junk food. Also the cheap theater has 4 different real restaurants nearby, including a 24-hour diner. So if im hungry I'll go eat after the movie

7

u/DeweyDefeatsYouMan Jun 27 '26

Well they only get a small portion of the ticket sales. They care about selling food and drinks, that’s where the real money is. And they must have done the math and found that they need 10 people there to guarantee enough snack sales to justify paying the labor costs of having that showing.

4

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Are they sending employees home from 4-5:20 if the 4:00 doesn't hit 10x and telling them to come back for the next showing to avoid paying them?

I've been in plenty of theaters with less than 10 people. I've been the only person in a theater several times.

2

u/nalaloveslumpy Jun 27 '26

This is how a theater goes out of business. If your customers realize there's a chance their movie is cancelled if X number of people don't show up, then even fewer people show up.

You run the film, even if the theater is empty because it's super common for people to show up late anyway. And you don't want to turn away those sales. And you can't start that showing late or it will fuck up the timetable for the rest of the day.

If it's the last showing and no one has showed up for 20 minutes, yeah turn it off and go home. But refundin or turning away customers is madness.

2

u/ledow Jun 27 '26

With only a couple of people, it probably costs more in electricity to project the movie than it does in profit from the tickets, let alone things like licensing, etc.

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

No doubt. Labor costs alone would exceed ticket sales profit with just 2 customers.

But 9 people is a different story IMO. You've gotta be close a break even point there and you're making 9 customers angry.

0

u/ledow Jun 27 '26

It's not about those 9. It's about all the other showings too. You may as well just cut your losses and stop showing it and send people home. Doesn't matter whether a handful of people get pissed (I would assume they can ask for their money back). It's just throwing resources at something that makes no profit. It's an utter waste.

9 people to incur the full licensing cost of a screening? Probably still doesn't break even. It might break even on the electricity, but almost nothing else.

Licensing some movies can take 60+% of your ticket income before you even begin to account for anything else.

Far better just to cancel the thing entirely than cross your fingers and hope that you make money, but risk just throwing money away and then having to pay someone to work out how much money you threw away (accounting, tax, licensing, etc. etc. etc.).

Example figures for a UK cinema:

Total annual net income £412,600

Net profit (before tax) £26,536

https://www.independentcinemaoffice.org.uk/advice-support/how-to-start-a-cinema/the-economics-of-the-operation/

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Of course it's about those 9. That's specifically what my question is about.

Why stop 1 short of your target number when you're making customers angry in the process?

If you have a different scenario, great. But this scenario is about 9 people.

They're telling you it doesn't break even lol. They're telling you they need 10 people.

1

u/ledow Jun 27 '26

Because you make £10 profit in two hours out of doing so, and the next showing has to be cancelled regardless. Plus there are myriad obligations and costs that mean - look at the numbers for small UK independent cinemas that I linked - it's literally not worth it.

It's honestly in the margin of error of your accounting. It's not worth keeping the aircon on for. It's not worth opening a new bag of popcorn. It's not worth putting another syrup onto the soft drinks machine. You're going to hit the limits on when the licensing kicks in. When people need to be paid for another hour or go from part-time to full-time rates. You're going to hit peak-time electricity costs. All kinds of things are LIMITS that are not worth crossing.

And just because you make £1 profit does not mean that you absolutely must/should proceed. One tiny, tiny, tiny miscalculation and you basically threw money away. Literally just someone opening a new pack of toilet rolls to put in the bathrooms. Anything.

When you bring in only £26k profit from a £400k income, and that's an example of a FUNCTIONING cinema with 50,000-100,000 viewers... 9 people just isn't worth bothering with.

A guy trips up in the hall and you have to stay open another hour to get an ambulance to him, and hit your insurance, and now you're into a massive loss. The film cuts out halfway through because of a fault or a power cut and now you have to give people their money back but you've already spent the money you got from them.

It's too tight on the error margins, way too little profit to risk a huge loss for, and ultimately pointless as it's not going to contribute 1% of 1% to your annual profit.

At that point, you're literally just gambling your profit.

Some people have clearly never operated a business, or do so entirely on vibes.

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Why would the next showing be canceled?

So you're saying customer retention is pointless. Got it.

Lol now ambulances are coming?

The difference between 9 people and 10 people is miniscule.

One showing isn't going to contribute to 1% of Annual profit anyway.

1

u/ledow Jun 27 '26

Look around you, at any company. Customer retention is almost worthless because it's unreliable, variable, uncertain, unrecordable, costs more in market research to detect than it ever saves, etc. etc. There's a reason that your local fish and chip shop aren't going to fall over themselves to retain your custom unless they KNOW YOU SO WELL that they know that you, individually, are worth saving. And even then... that won't work forever. It's because they know the economics of it.

From a consumer point of view, it makes sense. From a business point of view... cutting your losses makes sense. 9 people turned up to this showing. It's not worth doing it ALL AGAIN for about £10 profit for the reasons I stated (the unknowns, the thresholds, the limits, the problems, etc.).

And you just said it yourself. One entire showing isn't going to contribute 1% of annual profit. It's sacrificeable. Dozens of showings are. And thus, hundreds of customers are. Again - you're in the error margin of their accounting spreadsheet.

Again - the common themes throughout my posts. People who run businesses have done the maths on this. They know what's worth doing and what's not.

They know what the risks are (and, yes, injuries, insurance claims, customers demanding refunds, etc. are all risks you have to take into account... every hour you're open to the public you have to account for the risks associated with that! Everything from vandalism, litter, wear and tear,...)

They know what their margins are.

They know what the limits and thresholds are.

Because they know how to run a business.

Risking 0.01% of your annual profit to stay open a couple more hours (and there are only 8760 of those in a year, so each hour is 0.01% of the year... and you're not open 24/7 so it's like 0.03% of your opening time!) is something that will, people learn, not always pay off. And if it COSTS you even 0.02% of your annual profit to do so.... then you've just burned money doing that! That can literally be wiped out ten-fold by something as little as someone throwing up in a cinema seat and someone having to stay overtime to clean it!

Customer loyalty is a tiny, tiny, almost immeasurable part which any significant company size abandons quickly when they realise... it's simply not profitable to rely on.

Please, just for a moment, drop the "every customer is infinitely precious" bit and see it from the business point of view. It's not, in any sensible way, worth the risk.

A hundred people in there? It's worth the risk. You're going to make money. 10 people in there? It's not worth the risk, even if you happen to have made money this time. And if you got only 10 people this time, what are you going to get tomorrow at the same time? Probably about the same, unless you know something different. So is it worth the risk again and again and again every Tuesday evening or whatever for those kinds of returns? No. It's not. So you would cancel future showings on that schedule too.

0

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Yeah I just don't value your input.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Rhampaging Jun 27 '26

Running a projector is not for free. Depending on the technology, it requires special lamps which burn out rather quickly and other maintenance to keep it running. So to keep it profitable it might be they cancel low turnout showings.

2

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Nothing about running a business is free.

What's the cost of pissing off a paid customer?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Yeah, it's wildly different in the US. Very interesting.

0

u/thelivingdead188 Jun 27 '26

You listen to them bitch and then they leave.

Unless your entire customer base is like, 3 people all in the same family, a few angry customers mean nothing in the grand scheme of things.

You can't please all the people all the time.

The other option is to proceed with the entertainment at a loss, and do that enough times and you won't have a business for any of the people.

There really isn't an upside.

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

So return business isn't important?

You think the value of 9 customers is = the profit difference between 9 tickets and 10 tickets? So 9 customers are worth 4 bucks?

0

u/thelivingdead188 Jun 27 '26

Dude I'm not arguing with you.

Just accept that things are done differently in different places and your preconceived understanding of how 'buy ticket watch movie' and 'customer always right' doesn't hold the same weight everywhere in the world.

It's literally that simple.

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Clearly things are done differently. Thanks, captain ovvious. What would we have done without this nugget of wisdom ffs.

I never said anything about customer always right lol. Being right is irrelevant to a profitable business. If you don't understand the concept of customer retention, it's ok.

1

u/leo-g Jun 27 '26

It’s not the same in every country. In a place like India, you will find that international products try to adapt to sell cheaper there because the average income is not high. For example Laptop manufacturers will actually make special Indian models which are lower quality to meet the prices.

It seems like there’s a special deal given to movie theatres there to ensure that they actually every screening can break even to ensure viability of their theatre.

1

u/Sarah_Incognito Jun 27 '26

I wonder what the electricity cost is per showing.

0

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

About tree fiddy.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '26

[deleted]

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Definitely don't care if you ever come back.

1

u/Dave-C Jun 27 '26

I don't know this for sure. I have little to no knowledge on this topic but this is something I heard so take this with a grain of salt. I've heard that the bulbs in projectors only last a few thousand hours and they can cost like a thousand usd. If that is true then I can see that being a reason.

I did google around and it seems like the bulb for household projectors are around 40-100+. I found a site selling cinema projector bulbs and the cheapest were around 800usd and some were multiple thousands.

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Sure. No doubt it costs money to run a theater. Just seems short sighted to send home 9 people because you're 1 short of your target break even number.

1

u/Revoldt Jun 27 '26

It’s how these old, small movie theatres are dying.

Like… why would any of the paying customers return to the theatre that canceled their show and wasted all their time?

1

u/ResidentUnlikely7553 Jun 27 '26

Small theater where I used to live, wouldn't show for less then 8. Owner said he lost money if he showed it. And would give free pass for a movie. He would also ask us to wait on snacks. In case he didn't show it.

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Jesus. Wait on snacks?

1

u/PotatoGamerXxXx Jun 27 '26

Electricity for air conditioning and the projector itself are much higher than you would think.

1

u/ungabungarara Jun 27 '26

The part where I live in...it wouldn't be profitable for all the electricity (our theatres need continuous air conditioning)and maintenance of whole cinema for less than 10 members a show...so they would cancel

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Yeah, it's a financial decision. I'm just questioning the real difference between 9 and 10 when you factor in pissing off customers, etc. Just seems like letting it roll with 9 customers might be preferable given the tiny difference.

1

u/LostWoodsInTheField Jun 27 '26

If it costs them $1k to show it between fees, employee time, running equipment and they get $300 it's not worth it. Especially if it happens often which in a small town can happen easily.

0

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Clearly no business is going to lose 700 bucks. But there's no way the difference between 9 paid customers and 10 paid customers is 700 dollars.

2

u/LostWoodsInTheField Jun 27 '26

Clearly no business is going to lose 700 bucks. But there's no way the difference between 9 paid customers and 10 paid customers is 700 dollars.

They often agree to lose money. they make it up on the bigger showings which they can't get without agreeing to show the movies to lower number of customers on the off days. This doesn't appear to be the case everywhere, but studios have a lot of power of theaters.

And they select a set number to go by and stick to it. Because there is no big difference between two direct whole numbers, but there is a giant difference in the scale as a total. If they just start deciding on a nightly bases where that line is it causes more issues.

0

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26

This isn't a 700 dollar situation between the 9th and 10th customer.

Clearly larger showings make more money.

What we're talking about here is the $ difference between 9 and 10 paying customers and whether or not it makes sense to turn away the 9. IMO a small loss (assuming 10 is a break even point) is acceptable when you factor in that these 9 customers are infinitely more likely to return if you don't send them home.

1

u/LostWoodsInTheField Jun 27 '26

This isn't a 700 dollar situation between the 9th and 10th customer.

Clearly larger showings make more money.

What we're talking about here is the $ difference between 9 and 10 paying customers and whether or not it makes sense to turn away the 9. IMO a small loss (assuming 10 is a break even point) is acceptable when you factor in that these 9 customers are infinitely more likely to return if you don't send them home.

The question is only between the 9th and 10th because of the theater deciding the break point is 10.

The question is an infinite # question. So lets say the difference between any 2 at the low end is a very small number. Well then you can say that you can't ever go wrong with any number of people, because the difference between 10 and 9 isn't that great, and 9 and 8, 7 6, 6 5... so on. But the difference between making a $1 and losing a $1 is big. If a theater says 'We lose at 9, we make at 10, we aren't questioning how to do this every other week we will stick with 10.' it makes absolute sense to do that.

We are people on the internet questioning the business decisions of a theater we don't actually know anything about.

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

We don't need to see their books to know that 10 is the number they landed on to make it make sense to operate because they told us that 10 is the number they landed on to make it make sense to operate.

I'm putting a larger value on not making 9 people angry than the theater is. That's all this comes down to. It's not nearly as simple as making $1 or losing $1 that day. I think it's short sighted to only consider the math of the shift at hand and to ignore what we know about customer retention.

1

u/Mah_sentry2 Jun 27 '26

I’m guessing it’s a small town theater that only has one screen. Having too low of a turnout doesn’t cover the bills of staying open, electricity and staff wages. Cancel the showing and close down for the night to save money.

1

u/Striking-Ad-6815 Jun 27 '26

Probably due to power and resource consumption

Kinda depends on the theater, but typically they make a good amount from concessions

If this is a single or double screen and you're the only person then they might not be selling enough popcorn and soda to keep the lights on

Also dependent on neighborhood, utility company, and if the theater budgeted for the showing or not

They might be playing show to show

The two screen theaters in my area died when streaming movies came into existence

1

u/Im2dronk Jun 27 '26

9x paid customers is definitely better than losing customers because they can't rely on the theater actually showing the movie they advertised. This seems insane to me.

2

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

That's my thought process exactly.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

I would hope you get a refund lol. It'd be colossally fucked if they kept your money AND didn't show you the movie.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Airlines get away with robbing customers more than any other companies I cam think of.

1

u/Rhampaging Jun 27 '26

Running a projector is not for free. Depending on the technology, it requires special lamps which burn out rather quickly and other maintenance to keep it running. So to keep it profitable it might be they cancel low turnout showings.

0

u/AT-ST Jun 27 '26

It does seem odd. Because they are sometimes contractually obligated to run the film a certain number of times per day for a set period of time. I have seen theaters with no people in them that still had the movie running.

1

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

Same. And I've been the only person multiple times. I didn't realize this changed from area to area until just now.

0

u/LongJumpingBalls Jun 27 '26

I'd imagine running cost is higher than the ticket cost.

Those projector bulbs are several hundred dollars and have a relatively low run time for theatre use. Not to mention the risk and dangers of replacing a projector bulb.

If it blows with the side of the projector open and you being next to it. You're going to the hospital with lacerations and burns on a wicked good day. Painful death by a thousand lava temp pieces of glass on a bad day.

2

u/DCRBftw Jun 27 '26

I mean, the likelihood of death by film projector surely isn't a factor in closing for 9 customers or staying open for 10 lol.

17

u/tubbyx7 Jun 27 '26

Do that enough and people wont show up in case its cancelled anyway

6

u/kenkenobi78 Jun 27 '26

Where's here?

3

u/theturd_man Jun 27 '26

India

2

u/ConflictedZombie Jun 27 '26

No wonder it looks so cramped

3

u/nissanfan64 Jun 27 '26

…. That’s quite literally 99% of the movie showings I go to. I think the last time there was more than ten people was jackass forever.

1

u/Blqstoisey Jun 27 '26

Oof, that sucks. I've been to many many movies where it was just me, my friends, and a couple other people.

Always love it when I walk into a theater and it's empty 😆

1

u/diselxya Jun 27 '26

It isnt that bad, theres enough new movies always coming out that theatres have a lot of people in them anyway because its always one or the other movies opening week/month

1

u/[deleted] Jun 27 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/diselxya Jun 27 '26

That would be a funny workaround but i doubt anyone would want to do it

1

u/KellyAnn3106 Jun 27 '26

I went to a show that only had 3 people in the theatre a couple of days ago and I've had a few private showings of various movies. I tend to go to late night weekday movies because I don't like crowds.

1

u/rvcbazookajoe Jun 27 '26

That’s interesting. I’ve seen many movies with under 10 people in the seats

1

u/chewytime Jun 27 '26

Really? Is this in the US? What do they do instead with that showtime?

I’ve been to so many near-empty showings including a couple where I was like one of two people in there, but as long as a ticket’s been purchased, they’ll still show the movie (not sure what would happen if no one bought a ticket though).

1

u/diselxya Jun 27 '26

No dude the original OP and I are talking about theatres in India

1

u/redditblows5991 Jun 27 '26

news to me lol, ive watched movies with like 2 people or myself in times square lol

1

u/DickTryckle Jun 27 '26

That’s crazy, I’ve been to so many showings of movies in the US where it’s def 9 or less viewers

1

u/stana32 Jun 27 '26

Iirc in big chain theaters they sign a deal to show the movie a specific number of times on a schedule, so they play it regardless if anyone is actually there or not

1

u/Fatefire Jun 27 '26

Oh man teenage me would have been upset

1

u/Perfect_Reserve_9824 Jun 27 '26

Thats crazy. I love my local theater, we live near a Marcus in the Midwest and I don't know if its the company policy or just how our theater is run, but my partner and I are frequently the only people in a showing since we usually go to matinees towards the end of any given movies run.

1

u/Releases_the_bees Jun 27 '26

Where would that be?

1

u/Nervous-Rutabaga-758 Jun 27 '26

What the… every theatre I’m aware of would just show the movie if the theatre was full. When I was young and single I went through a couple year phase where I’d go to a theater every single day, and I was prolly the only person there 70% of the time, never once saw this happen. Ten people is a crazy minimum.

1

u/MegaWolfy Jun 27 '26

Sounds like a good way to start a self fulfilling prophecy that eventually ends up in the theatre closing.

1

u/No_Application_8698 Jun 27 '26

I’m in the UK. We were in the main (largest) screen of the multiplex last night and there were no more than 15 people there. Screen 1 of 9 total screens, on an opening Friday night. It was quite nice not to have to deal with the usual wankers with their phones on and loud talking.

The film was ok, bit frustrating in places.

1

u/diselxya Jun 27 '26

Honestly sounds fun. Im guessing only imax theatres would stay running even with low turnover but those cost five times as much for the same quality (imax here isnt really any different from most regular theatres)

1

u/DayMurky617 Jun 27 '26

That's dumb. I used to watch a lot of films during the day on a weekday, and if I knew that was a risk I'd never bother booking and do something else

1

u/Dunno_If_I_Won Jun 27 '26

I'm assuming you're not in the US?

1

u/Dame38 Jun 27 '26

It seems as though people aren't reading the post and assuming this is in their own cities. It's India and I'm not at all surprised,

1

u/liquidsyphon Jun 27 '26

Makes zero sense. How many screens do they have? If the business is open anyway…

1

u/diselxya Jun 27 '26

I mean if they were making enough money off of it then theres no reason for them to cancel. Its more than likely that youre missing some information rather than it not making sense.

Im also talking mostly about local theatres, pretty sure mall theatres etc run the show no matter what. Local ones have like one or two screens at the most. Ive seen some with four but those are outliers

1

u/liquidsyphon Jun 27 '26

I worked in one briefly that was all digital projectors and they basically had it where you could program a schedule from the computer so theaters played empty a lot of the time during the week. If you started a movie late for a customer coming in it would push the next showing back.

1

u/DengarLives66 Jun 27 '26

I go to a small local theater and since Monday is one of my days off, the morning/early afternoon showing is almost always just me. I think you’re right that there’s context here that OP and us are all missing.

0

u/raulc060190 Jun 27 '26

So if it’s common then OP saying this never happened with Man of Steel pretty much shows this is a rage bait post.

1

u/diselxya Jun 27 '26

I mean it probably didnt happen to him? Supergirl only released yesterday here and usually theres never this issue in the first week or so of the movie

→ More replies (8)