Discuss: Should Summer Movie Season Begin in April?
Filed under: Action, Box Office, Distribution, Exhibition, Family Films, Summer Movies
After the disappointing box office of both Speed Racer and The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian last month, it's apparent that May was too busy a month for all its blockbusters to succeed. Last week, Eric D. Snider initiated a discussion about Caspian's release date and many of our readers agreed that it should have been released in December, or any other month, for that matter. Couldn't it have been a success in February or October, too? As part of an initially popular franchise, you'd think it could stand to be released anytime of the year. Earlier today, I responded to an interview in which two cinema industry honchos argued that big movies should be released 12 months in the year. Or, at least, the summer movie season should begin earlier, in April. Imagine, the first blockbuster of the year being released on Easter weekend. Or, when Easter is in March, April Fool's Day weekend. Unfortunately, the month doesn't have any Monday holidays with which to capitalize on a three-day-weekend release, but a two-day weekend didn't seem to hurt Iron Man's enormous opening.
One commenter on my earlier post noted that moving the summer season up to April will only make that month the busiest release month, just as May is currently. But there's a good chance Hollywood will recognize, after May 2008, the benefits of staying spread out. Plus, Memorial Day weekend will continue to be prime real estate, so tentpoles might be better spread out, as they should be according to their name (imagine going camping and placing all your literal tentpoles in one corner).
What do you think? Should the summer movie season begin earlier? Or is it just fine as is? Or did you think it actually began on April 18 with the release of the fantasy martial arts flick The Forbidden Kingdom?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-05-2008 @ 4:45PM
Kelsey said...
The lesson Hollywood needs to learn from Iron Man is that no matter what time of year it is, people will go and see a good movie in theatres.
Sigh. It would be nice if Hollywood learned that lesson.
Reply
6-05-2008 @ 4:47PM
GL said...
Yup
6-05-2008 @ 5:07PM
mira said...
To expand on that:
Some times of the year are just more appropriate for certain movies. Horror movies are best around Halloween, date movies work best around Valentine's Day, etc. Prince Caspian probably would have done better in December because that's when the more serious fantasy films are released. The first Narnia movie came out in December. So did Lord of the Rings. Putting out action films in the summer is a good idea because school's out, it's hot out, and people want to have fun at the movies.
But when five or six blockbuster movies are put out in consecutive weekends, I know I would be choosier about which ones I want to watch. In this case, it's just as important to have good reviews and a good ad campaign. The most critically acclaimed action/superhero movies of recent years were, for the most part, successful at the box office too. The reason I saw Iron Man was because it looked like a good movie, and the reason I didn't see Speed Racer or Prince Caspian was because they didn't seem to be worth nine dollars each.
So if a studio is putting out a blockbuster movie in the summer, they should be sure that it stands up to the competition from a critical standpoint as well. Otherwise, just dump it in a spot in spring or fall when there is no other competition. A lot of bad movies become hits this way.
Reply
6-05-2008 @ 5:11PM
kevjohn said...
Good one, Kelsey!
It certainly wouldn't hurt my feelings if they decided to spread out the summery goodness a bit throughout the year. I just checked firstshowing's list of upcoming releases (http://www.firstshowing.net/schedule2008/#jun) and there's 7 films I definitely want to see coming up in the next 4 weeks, and 2 more maybes. And that trend continues on through August.
My entertainment budget is about to take a serious pounding in the coming months. Maybe I can find a second job somewhere writing pithy comments for websites.
Reply
6-05-2008 @ 7:06PM
Tigerlily said...
I think both Iron Man and 300 proved it doesn't matter what month you release a film. With the cost of gas, ticket prices, and the sad fact that most films are really not very good, I know I really have to think about what to spend my movie dollar on. And, too many "big films" at once is a problem when money is tight, as pointed out above.
I completely agree with everything Mira says, some films just really are more appropriate for certain times of the year. I do know there is that "award season" mentality to release dates as well. Hollywood is always afraid to release a film to early in the film year for fear it be forgotten when Oscar time comes around. I think we're starting to see changes in this thinking as well.
Spread it out! I'd like good films all year, not just a deluge at Christmas and summer. :o)
Reply
6-05-2008 @ 9:42PM
Synonymous said...
Where I live (the Northeast U.S.), we were still digging out from the winter snowfall in April. I don't think it's wise to chance fighting the weather as well as other films.
It doesn't matter when the start of the summer movie season is; it's always going to be crowded, because it's the first month, and everyone's jockeying for the first taste of blockbuster revenue before the audience gets saturated. Heck, I'm already done in by August; I can't stand a five-month blockbuster season.
I think we're overreacting a bit to the recent underperformances of Speed Racer and Prince Caspian, which have already been decently explained; the former was just a giant miscalculation, and the latter was better suited for the Christmas season, where moviegoing is more of a feel-good family event, part of the holiday. If the talk of strike turkeys turns out to be true next summer, we might not be so enthusiastic about extending the season then.
Reply
6-06-2008 @ 9:17AM
Bhist said...
Sure. That way we can get the Fall movies earlier. Right?
Reply