Killing the golden goose: Exhibitors raise 3-D ticket prices sky-high

I heard this was happening last week, but I have to admit that I couldn't believe my ears. Why would exhibitors, now that people have been flocking to see movies in record numbers, largely thanks to the soaring popularity of 3-D movies, want to kill the golden goose by raising prices for 3-D films, some by increases as much as 26%?

According to an in-depth story in the Wall Street Journal, a 3-D Imax movie at New York City's AMC Loews Kips Bay will now cost $19.50, up from $16.50. At an AMC theater in Danvers, Mass., a Boston suburb, 3-D ticket prices are going up 20% from $14.50 to $17.50. Ticket prices at local L.A. theaters are also going up, often by at least as two extra dollars a ticket.

According to the Journal, prices will take effect today at many of the biggest theater chains across the country. Why the steep price hike? Exhibitors say that film tickets are a bargain. One exhibition vet that I spoke to said that, adjusted for inflation, ticket prices aren't much different today than they were in the 1980s. He compared that to the ticket prices for sporting events, in particular Major League Baseball and NFL games, which have skyrocketed in recent years, as have tickets for Broadway shows, which now average close to $100 a pop.

On the other hand, the business of overpriced Broadway tickets is hardly worth emulating, since Broadway theaters are littered with the corpses of shows that quickly opened and closed, unable to generate sufficient ticket sales at such steep prices. As for Major League Baseball, the top tickets have skyrocketed in price, but the lower-end tickets have remained relatively inexpensive, allowing for fans to still see a baseball game without having to mortgage their home. At Coors Field in Denver, for example, my wife and I took our son to a game and sat out in the center-field Rockpile bleachers when we had a few hours between plane rides. The total ticket cost? $9. We might have been far away from the action, but it cost us less than you'll pay to see "How to Train Your Dragon" this weekend, that's for sure.

For now, I suspect the prices will be accepted by most moviegoers, since we're still in the "shock and awe" phase of 3-D moviegoing. But if Warners' "Clash of the Titans' " quickie 3-D conversion turns out to be a bust and moviegoers start becoming more wary about the tidal wave of 3-D films rolling into theaters over the next year, I fear that the price hike will create a backlash.

In the long run, I think it's always better to have customers who think they're getting a great deal than customers who think they're being ripped off, even if the ones who think they're being ripped off are paying an extra 20% at the box-office window. After all, the customers who start believing that they're being ripped off are customers who won't be coming back as often.

But what do you think? Are you willing to pay another extra $2 or $3 to see a 3-D movie? Or are you going to be a lot more willing to pick and choose which films you see? Let me know in comments below.

Photo of 3-D moviegoers by Alex Berliner / Berliner Studios/BEImages.

Comments

[steve]

i guess it's like when tower records jacked the price of new, "hit" cds to 20 bucks a pop back in 2000. since movie theaters are going to be pretty much obsolete in 10 or 15 years, the industry is trying to make as much as possible while it still can. can you blame it?

besides, anyone who is willing to pay to see junk like a remake of "clash of the titans" deserves to be ripped-off!!!

[Ladyli1]

Let the backlash begin!! Why on earth would these people stifle some thing is just now gaining traction? Yes, for now on I'll just go to the "must-see" event films (like "Tron" later this year) and forgo all others unless it has great word of mouth from trusted sources. I will no longer say "Might as well see it in 3-D since it's ONLY a couple of bucks more."

[Larry Verdugo]

I was charged $17 to see Avatar and and extra $3 to see Alice. I was hesitant about seeing the latter but went on a whim. Since the movie was as uninteresting as I suspected, from now on I probably will not give into my impulses. I'm rather tired of the only available 3-D fare, anyway, e.g., animation, sci-fi, etc.

[John]

If the studios begin abusing the public with faux 3-D, converted features..count me out. We were blessed with creative genius with "UP" and "AVATAR", fun with "FINAL DESTINATION" "...MEATBALLS" ... who wants to pay more to see poorly made, badly created films. Look back at the 50s how the studios killed that golden goose. I refuse to see "CLASH OF THE TITANS" after viewing that debacle "ALICE IN WONDERLAND".

[Angie]

You are so right! We couldn't believe the price for tickets for "Alice in Wonderland" 3-D ($3 over the matinee price)--and the 3-D elements of that movie were very disappointing. I will definitely be choosy about what films to see in 3-D in future.

p.s. "Clash of the Titans" looks even more pathetic than the terrible original. Bleah.

[Joseph Montemarano]

Charging a premium is ridiculous.
I saw Avatar which is the finest example of today's true 3-D technology. The picture was sharp, much sharper than a regular movie for sure. And yet it reminded me of the ultra sharp picture I get with my HDTV. So I can rent any blu-ray and watch in the privacy of my home for about $5 or I can spend $40-$50 (2 tickets, snacks and parking) to go to a theater and deal with the crowds and the people talking and texting during the movie. Now they want to raise the already high prices? I'll pass.

[Rip off]

Ridiculous. 3-D ticket prices (and regular tickets for that matter) are already too high in Los Angeles. I'm already very picky about what I see in the theaters, mostly foreign and indie films now, because I'm tired of flushing money down the toilet on crap like STAR TREK. If I wanted to watch CW actors, I'd stay at home and watch the boob tube.

Definitely skipping CLASH, just not into DRAGON - the little dragon looks awful. And heck, now that the windows are closing on DVD, I can wait - those I get free from the library anyhow (we got a great library system here folks, get 'em shipped from any library to the one close to you for free, they get most of the new releases, and you get 'em two days for free, much better than BBV). Free is a lot better than $19.50 a pop.

Ridiculous - you are totally right PG, the audiences are going to turn on 3-D and quit coming if they continue to raise prices. This ain't live theater folks, you can't charge an arm and a leg and a first born. At one point, Blockbuster said they wanted to charge upwards of either $10 or $15 per rental - and look what that mentality and their current business model has gotten them.

[john]

i will never pay extra for a converted 3d movie, also why would theater owners want to sell less tickets at higher prices and in result sell less snacks...idiots

[thepack4]

Typical Hollywood move...screw the customers who are now flocking to movies...as for me and my family...NO, we are done going to movies in theatres...DVD's, Netflix, 3D is no big deal and $20 for a movie ticket? Are you kidding! $60 plus snacks and parking is approx $85.00 for 3 to go to a movie?! Not on your life Hollywood! You have just lost an audience of 3 + friends...this won't last long...greedy basdrs!

[Film Lover]

The problem is that every studio is now doing cheap, quickie 3D conversions on their tent poles resulting in shoddy product. I paid a premium on ALICE and had a horrible experience. AVATAR was a true 3D movie, but to charge extra for something like CLASH OF THE TITANS, which will look only half as good, is ridiculous. Because of the lackluster 3D FX in ALICE, I would certainly think twice about paying $17 per ticket on CLASH. And if CLASH's 3D effects are just as bad... theaters will experience a HUGE drop off on the next lousy 3D title. We're in a recession. The public at large is not going to spend $20 per ticket to take the family to the movies. Way to kill your gimmick. By the time TRON LEGACY and YOGI BEAR hit this Christmas, no one will care about 3D anymore.