I demand a refund!

[Camera Obscura]

Well, not really about refunds, but more in the general vein of "supporing the industry", or more like "supporting the crummy theaters in town".

My town hasn't entered the modern age of the multiplex yet, but there is a magnificent old Art Deco theater (one of only two more or less intact pre-war theaters in the whole country) that was just saved from becoming another anonymous chain store in the early '90s and that is owned and run (his father is still officially the owner and 'in charge') by someone I've known since childhood, so we're basicallly on friendly terms. They also run a small arthouse venue and since a couple of years, they've taken over the other two remaining theaters in town, so they're the only ones left in an agglomeration with some 400.000 people.

Obviously, this theater has some special meaning for many folks, including myself, but it's still a pretty crummy affair, but what's really annoying, is that every screening has an intermission, even if the film is barely 90 minutes long. They want to sell drinks, obviously. Furthermore, they're not especially adventurous in the films they're showing, which I can perfectly understand. It's a small town and with something like 9 or 10 screens in total (half of them really small) you can't take too many risks, so the offering is mainly your average mainstream fare or solid arthouse hits (IB, The Reader, Life of Others, Gomorra), films I can easily watch in one of many infinitely more spacious and comfortable multiplexes in nearby The Hague or Amsterdam, where I am half the week anyway.

Now, the main cinema has great atmosphere, it's pretty unique, and the building should be cherished, but as far as basic presentation standards and customer service are concerned, the whole operation is pretty appalling. So much so, it's become something of in-joke in town. Unsuspecting customers from out of town never come back and since there is no competition, service seems to be getting worse instead of better, but asking for a refund never crossed my mind, really. You pretty much know what you're getting, so rarely anyone complains. I did tell the owner many times that if he would quit the intermissions and add some kind of restaurant to the place (which many smaller cinemas in The Netherlands do to compete with multiplexes), I would definitely frequent the place more often, but instead, 9 out of 10 times I'd rather watch the film in some anonymous multiplex in another city than go through the ordeal (so to speak) of bad seats, substandard presentation and a lousy offering of food and beverages. If a multiplex would open here, I would probably stop going alltogether.

Point is, the place is sub-standard in any way, but since there is no competition in town, it seems he still makes some healthy profits (although margins are slim to none for the films itself, so I hear, but apparently they manage), but when a multiplex opens (plans from Pathé circulating for years), he's toast, or he'll just have to adapt. I'd hate to see this beautiful theater close its doors, but as a customer, supporting something that is only driven by nostalgia can only go so far.

[MichaelB]

Now, the main cinema has great atmosphere, it's pretty unique, and the building should be cherished, but as far as basic presentation standards and customer service are concerned, the whole operation is pretty appalling. So much so, it's become something of in-joke in town. Unsuspecting customers from out of town never come back and since there is no competition, service seems to be getting worse instead of better, but asking for a refund never crossed my mind, really. You pretty much know what you're getting, so rarely anyone complains. I did tell the owner many times that if he would quit the intermissions and add some kind of restaurant to the place (which many smaller cinemas in The Netherlands do to compete with multiplexes), I would definitely frequent the place more often, but instead, 9 out of 10 times I'd rather watch the film in some anonymous multiplex in another city than go through the ordeal (so to speak) of bad seats, substandard presentation and a lousy offering of food and beverages. If a multiplex would open here, I would probably stop going alltogether.

And few would blame you. My two local cinemas have annoyingly (but understandably) conservative programing, but they also have low prices and impressively high presentation standards given that they're right out in the sticks. Conversely, the place I used to run had extremely adventurous programming, low prices (especially if you watched everything in a double or triple bill), but variable presentation standards. In fact, we tended to operate a two-tier system regarding print quality - our audiences were fussier at weekends, so there was a certain quality threshold we'd try not to drop below (we kept detailed records of all prints that passed through our portals), whereas our regular weekday matinee audiences were much more tolerant, knowing that the choice was between screening a grotty print of that particular title or nothing at all.

But that was the early 1990s, when the only competition was from VHS or television, neither of which paid much attention to the stuff we showed. I'm really not sure we could have got away with it in the era of DVD or digital projection, where audiences have much more of a choice and are much more clued-up technically, and therefore more inclined to complain. Which is why the venue in question still exists, but ten years ago they changed their policy across the board: it's now one of the most luxurious cinemas in London, with customer service to match. Unfortunately, this also meant that prices went through the roof and programming became far more conservative, but that's an almost inevitable by-product.

[HerrSchreck]

...and I still fail to see where a case has been made that allowing a patron to use his ticket for the screening following the one that occurred immediately following the time frame of the purchase (assuming an on-site purchase) is abuse of some kind. It's not like going to a Broadway show where the rules of general admission do NOT apply, and when buying months ahead of time you look at a floor plan to see precisely where your seat will be, and thereby have all the time in the world to ponder the issue of whether or not you find your proximity to the stage to be acceptable to your own temperament as a spectator.

There are in fact events that come up during a show, and there are architectural anomalies in various theaters I've been to, which can be an absolute hindrance to even a basic enjoyment of a show. There are some screening rooms in NYC where there are pillars that you can find yourself thrown behind... and even in the best of perfectly centered seats, you can find yourself seated behind a giant with an even more giant head of hair (and a non-existent sense of self-awareness of his physical effect on spectators to his rear), with no place to find relief in a packed house... thereby nixing well nigh the entire screen from the line of sight and formally ruining the show.

As DVD releases have increasingly come sooner and sooner upon the heels of theatrical circuiting... and as screens have shrunk smaller and smaller, and ticket prices have grown more and more expensive, even in shit flop theaters-- far beyond mere adjustments for shrinking dollar- values along the timeline-- people have a right to expect a decent experience for what they pay for, and theater managers recognize that there are here and there legitimate barriers to that experience. The spirit of what we're talking about here is very similar to the law which governs eating establishments-- that says that you may sit down in a restaurant, order a meal, and if, when that meal comes, you are in any way dissatisfied with it you may get up and leave without paying (provided you haven't eaten more than a mouthful or two); there's no need to indulge the kitchen with a second attempt at the original dish, nor accept an invitation by the maitre'd to order anything else to your heart's delight from the menu at no additional charge... you may simply get up and leave without further obligation. You are not required to keep things that turn out to be that which you did not want, or expect, when purchased. This is why stores have return policies.

What I've been talking about, incidentally, is far more gentle and mutually considerate-- not a refund, just an ability to use your ticket at a subsequent show.

[skuhn8]

People just have to ask for having a refund, and they have it.

They will always find something to complain about.

In Europe, we go to movies, and we have plenty of shit happening during the screenings.
But still, we don't need refunds, and we still go to the theaters where we sometimes have problems with sound, cropping or out-of-focus.

What is the difference between Europeans and Americans ?

For me, it's juste that they can have a refund, based on a fear to lose customers. So you give them. Simply.
Or are we just too stupid to take advantage of theaters-runners that would so easily give refunds ?

Yes, in most instances if you demand a refund you will get it in the US. That's a positive, a strength--business taking care of its customers...but there's more reasons not to demand a refund such as movie's over, go home, to the pub, to your significant other's bed, to alley with a bag of glue. Most people don't go alone--do you really want to drag your date around looking for management? If alone do you really want to ruin your personal experience doing so? But more to the point: the cases that I believe you are really trying to get to the bottom of--some idiot conservative housewife in the Badlands accidentally winding up in a showing of Boogie Nights and then wanting her money back--is so rare that I'm sure the pimple faced usher is happy to comply for the privilege of retelling the tale for years to come.

I find the whole idea of a customer knocking customer-friendly practices rather bizarre. tenia, just what is your problem exactly?

[Camera Obscura]

Or perhaps French cinemas' guiding principle is David Brent's philosophy from The Office. "Sometimes the complaints are false".

[tenia]

I find the whole idea of a customer knocking customer-friendly practices rather bizarre. tenia, just what is your problem exactly?

It just seems to me that it's kind of exploiting the fact that you just have to find a nice way to put 'I want my money back !' for really having it back. It seems more as exploiting some flaw in the system saying that 'The Customer rules', so, yes, I rule, so give me my money back or fear the possibility that I could just stop going to your theaters anymore.

Of course, it looks like a huge generalization, and I apologize about that, but, as I said, I went to some screenings where they were some troubles. It didn't ruin my screening, didn't make me want to ask for a refund, and especially didn't make me want to stop going to the theaters anymore.

I know it's only plain customer-service, social marketing and everything.

But on the other way, it looks to me that the theaters managers are kind of giving away their money just for being nice, and in fact, they're just "exploited".

That was my point, just that.

I don't really think that stopping giving all these refunds and everything would change a lot.

But, I'm not a theater manager. That's just my point of view.

[Brian C]

You keep using that word, "exploited." I do not think it means what you think it means.

[MichaelB]

It just seems to me that it's kind of exploiting the fact that you just have to find a nice way to put 'I want my money back !' for really having it back. It seems more as exploiting some flaw in the system saying that 'The Customer rules', so, yes, I rule, so give me my money back or fear the possibility that I could just stop going to your theaters anymore.

But none of the real-life scenarios mentioned in this thread really fit that, do they? I've been on both sides of the divide, and I can assure you that when I asked for a refund from the Curzon Soho I certainly didn't stop going there (it's hands down one of the best venues in London), and neither did anyone try that threat when applying for a refund from me.

Of course, it looks like a huge generalization, and I apologize about that, but, as I said, I went to some screenings where they were some troubles. It didn't ruin my screening, didn't make me want to ask for a refund, and especially didn't make me want to stop going to the theaters anymore.

Yes, but most of the examples here are ones where the screenings were ruined. As Skuhn8 says above, walking out of a screening and demanding a refund is a pretty drastic step, especially if you're with a date - it's not something I do lightly.

I know it's only plain customer-service, social marketing and everything.
But on the other way, it looks to me that the theaters managers are kind of giving away their money just for being nice, and in fact, they're just "exploited".

Again, I can't see any of the scenarios mentioned above supporting that interpretation. And there's no way I'd have given refunds myself for frivolous reasons - such as someone watching 85% of the film before deciding they didn't like it. On the other hand, the truly sweet little old lady who walked out of Salo because "I don't think it's my sort of thing" was refunded without any hesitation!

[skuhn8]

I find the whole idea of a customer knocking customer-friendly practices rather bizarre. tenia, just what is your problem exactly?

It just seems to me that it's kind of exploiting the fact that you just have to find a nice way to put 'I want my money back !' for really having it back. It seems more as exploiting some flaw in the system saying that 'The Customer rules', so, yes, I rule, so give me my money back or fear the possibility that I could just stop going to your theaters anymore.

The ability to exploit a situation doesn't mean that its being frequently exploited. Amazon seems to be doing fine despite the fact that a jerk could receive a package and then claim not to have in order to get a freebie sent out. There's a degree of trust and dignity involved. And furthermore, the cinema scenario isn't anonymous. You're going face to face and need to be able to stand up to your call to action. Most of the incidents we're talking about are legitimate cases where management probably knows full well that something didn't go right.

As for seating dispensation: yeah, it's about both the concessions and having a smiling return visitor. I saw Goldeneye in the lousy front row corner seat the day it came out; I actually liked the movie but had a very unpleasant cinema experience which I associate whether fair or not with that cinema. You come back the next day to watch the film you're probably even more likely to splurge on refreshments now that you have a warm feeling for the establishment. You learn that in retail: you don't want the customer to leave your establishment empty-handed. It's like that test they did where some guy went from department store to department store with a brand new shirt that he'd bought somewhere else, but asking for an exchange or refund. It's amazing how many stores recognized that it wasn't their product but took it back anyway. When asked after the fact one store manager said he just didn't want to customer to go back to the store where he got the item. It looks ridiculous but the overall confidence of the consumer pays off in dividends. I live in a country now--Hungary--with deplorable customer service. People cannot wait to leave the store. Plan your shopping, get the item and bolt after paying. Don't linger: you have store security ogling you like Black Peter, surly staff who you know will roll their eyes when approached, and if something breaks or is defective--FUCK YOU. Unhappy consumers; shittier economy.

[tenia]

For Brian C, I mean 'exploited' as 'taken advantage of'. Wasn't sure though if the word was used this way.

Thanks for your answer skuhn8 !

As you've seen, I have a pretty naive way of all this, and yeah, for your story about the shirt, I find this quite ridiculous. What could possibly a customer coming again think ? 'Oh well, I'm coming back, cause I will find another way to save money on their back !'

As for the sweet little lady walking away from a Salo screening. She should have paid more attention to what she's going to see, not picking randomly. it's like all that people bitching about how bad movies are nowadays, as they're all bad without exception, the same kind of way I was generalizing here. But when they tell you the movies they've seen lately, they're so bad without exception, it's like they're doing a contest to avoid good movies.

What I'm saying is that they're a part of responsability of the customer in all this.

But I think I just found all your reasons to ask for a refund lightlier than they actually are.

But thanks for again for taking the time to answer me anyway.

[MichaelB]

As for the sweet little lady walking away from a Salo screening. She should have paid more attention to what she's going to see, not picking randomly.

There you go, jumping to conclusions again. Actually, she'd been to virtually all the previous screenings in our Pasolini retrospective, so this was hardly virgin territory - but I can readily see why Salo might have been a bit too much.

And the mere fact that she'd been a regular visitor made me even more inclined to be nice to her - not because I was afraid of her (a hilarious notion in itself), but because I had a policy of treating regulars with particular respect. Which is one of the reasons they kept coming back.

[tenia]

As for the sweet little lady walking away from a Salo screening. She should have paid more attention to what she's going to see, not picking randomly.

There you go, jumping to conclusions again. Actually, she'd been to virtually all the previous screenings in our Pasolini retrospective, so this was hardly virgin territory - but I can readily see why Salo might have been a bit too much.

And the mere fact that she'd been a regular visitor made me even more inclined to be nice to her - not because I was afraid of her (a hilarious notion in itself), but because I had a policy of treating regulars with particular respect. Which is one of the reasons they kept coming back.

Of course, there's always the context. She also seems to nicely admit that it wasn't her type of movies, just not waving her arms and yelling for having her money back.

But even so, she probably either knew it would be a difficult movie and made her choice, or she didn't know and she should have read about the movie. But, anyway, did she walked out after the whole movie, or just after a short time ?

And, when I said "afraid of customers", it's more afraid of them not coming again to your theaters than anything. 'Ohhh, bad guy, me won't come again"

But anyway, it seems that I'm making a fuzz of something not that big at all, and that in fact, you're not so easily giving a refund. I was just thinking that it was easy in the USA to have one, and that, at a point, people would take that for granted. Sorry for the waste of time.

[Matt]

The Tree of Life: NO REFUNDS

[Roger Ryan]

NO REFUNDS

The Main Art Theater in Royal Oak, MI has a sign as well that reminded viewers that there would be "no refunds for THE TREE OF LIFE after the first 20 minutes". This, apparently, is a theater policy for all films, but the cashier said the theater added the sign specifically for TREE because there had been more walkouts than usual. The cashier then attempted to persuade us to stick with the film. I told him we were already sold on it and would not be asking for our money back!

[jojo]

NO REFUNDS

You wonder just how experienced some of these filmgoers actually are. Their reaction to it is almost like this was so much more bizarre and obtuse than anything they've ever seen in their lives, they could not bear it any further than 20 minutes. Tree of Life ranks far, far, down on my "Would this be WTF for casual viewers?" list.

[mfunk9786]

I totally love that sign, though. I wish I worked there and had the opportunity to quietly point to it each time someone squawks at me as they emerge from the theater.

[matrixschmatrix]

Attention: you are a cretin.

[Tom Hagen]

I didn't think asking the theatre for a refund was something that people actually did or that theatres actually considered. Whiney people should be required to go ask the filmmaker for their money back, ala South Park and Mel Gibson.

[knives]

Well I was given a refund once (without asking) because ten minutes into Tokyo! I got a call for a family emergency and had to leave.

[Brian C]

You wonder just how experienced some of these filmgoers actually are. Their reaction to it is almost like this was so much more bizarre and obtuse than anything they've ever seen in their lives, they could not bear it any further than 20 minutes. Tree of Life ranks far, far, down on my "Would this be WTF for casual viewers?" list.

I worked with a guy who thought The New World was just the worst thing he had ever seen in his life. Talked about it for days afterwards, with evident seething disgust.

Anyway, I dunno. It is what it is. It's not like it's just Malick - all the years I worked at movie theaters, the three I remember spawning the most requests for refunds were:

1. The Blair Witch Project, which surprisingly few people knew was shot with a handheld video camera
2. Bringing Out the Dead
3. Little Nicky, with Adam Sandler

Some movies radically defy audience expectations in ways that are hard to predict or understand.

[Tom Hagen]

Haha I could understand a "no refunds" warning for PDL or that interminably long (and unfunny) Judd Apatow movie, but not Little Nicky. The latter is like the Platonic form of a stupid Adam Sandler film. I guess I owe the mainstream more credit now and then.

[Brian C]

Haha I could understand a warning PDL, but not Little Nicky. The latter is like the Platonic form of a stupid Adam Sandler film.

... but with Satan. As far as I could tell, that was the problem - people expecting typical Sandler shit and getting devil stuff thrown in their face.

Not like it triggered mass walkouts or anything, but it happened enough that it qualified as a phenomenon. I had to talk to some old woman on the phone who was VERY angry that we would even play it, luring in unsuspecting God-fearing folks like herself. I tried explaining that we show all types of movies so that people with all different tastes could choose for themselves, but she was having none of it. I finally offered her a couple passes to 102 Dalmatians, which she accepted with some suspicion. But she took a chance on the G-rated movie, and was actually quite appreciative afterwards.

[mfunk9786]

I got a refund twice. Once was during a 7 PM opening night screening of The Grudge (a mistake on a few different fronts, but I had been enamored by Gore Verbinski's The Ring and foolishly expected all American J-horror remakes to hit its highs). The theater was full of young teenagers who took to screaming as if on a rollercoaster, and then proceed to laugh at and tease one another loudly for doing so for as long as a few minutes after each big scare. I had grown so frustrated by the end of the film (particularly because an employee was in the theater for most of the screening and didn't once see anything wrong with anyone's behavior) that I couldn't not join the refreshingly long line of people wanting their money back at the end of the screening.

The second time was during a very late screening of True Grit, also at a multiplex, in a nearly empty theater with four very Better Luck Tomorrow-y tough-guy young Asian men sitting the perfect amount of rows in front of us for maximum irritation when they proceeded to have their cellphones out and unobscured, at full brightness, for the entirety of the screening. They were completely ignoring the film from the beginning, making me wonder why they were even there. Making matters worse, I left the theater midway through the movie to track down an employee, who acted as if I was some sort of maniac for actually taking issue with this - no one came into the screening room. After the movie was over, there was a very Phantom of the Opera feel to the then-empty multiplex, but I was so overwhelmed with rage that I refused to leave the premesis until I a) found someone, anyone, still there and b) demanded my money back. I got so frustrated throughout this process, which involved being escorted to the labyrinthine offices upstairs via elevator by a cleaning person and being told through a loudspeaker to "go downstairs and wait." by a disimbodied voice that sounded baffled that there was still a customer in the building, despite the fact that the film had just ended. Once someone finally came down, I was so blinded with rage (I am capable of being a bit of an angry person if I find the situation frustrating enough) that I explained to the Lynchian trio of three-piece-suited managers standing quietly right aside one another that came downstairs that a refund wasn't satisfactory enough, and I wasn't going to leave the premesis until they showed me some sort of legitimate disappointment in how dreadful my filmgoing experience was. The best they could come up with was a terse "I'll get you a second pair of tickets, hopefully that'll be enough." Every light in the theater was dimmed by then, and it was almost 2 AM at that point on the night before Christmas Eve. Still worth the time and effort when I look back at it thanks to the satisfaction of putting those folks running the multiplex into a strange position. I'm not quite Pacino in Dog Day Afternoon, but it was still fun.

And Tom, if someone asked for a refund after or during Punch-Drunk Love, I'd most likely ask them to leave my theater and ask them to never come back.

[Tom Hagen]

I took my then-fourteen year old sister and her high school boyfriend to see PDL when I was home from college in 2002. I went to see a PTA movie, they went to see an Adam Sandler movie. Needless to say, I failed to expand anyone's horizons that particular day.

[Roger Ryan]

I once witnessed a customer at Blockbuster demanding a rental refund for SYRIANA - "I only watched 10 minutes of it and couldn't follow what was happening. Why would a studio even allow someone to make a film like this? Who wants to see something they can't understand?" I believe the store offered her an additional rental free. The aspect I like most about SYRIANA is that the seemingly disparate threads aren't tied together until the last 10 minutes!

A note of clarification regarding the Main Art Theater's "20 minute" policy: The theater assumes that 20 minutes is an acceptable time to determine if you are enjoying the film or not and it prevents an abuser from watching the majority of the film then demanding a refund. I don't see anything wrong with the policy. I doubt many people take advantage of the refund (who wants to waste time watching less than 20 minutes of a film and leaving?), but it consoles return customers who feel they have to like everything they pay money for.

I should also point out that the Main Art mainly shows films that won't be booked in mainstream multiplexes, so I would assume it's audience it attuned to experiencing more challenging fare. Still, I imagine there are those who wander in to see a sweet domestic tale starring Brad Pitt and Sean Penn and think someone spliced in a couple of reels from some crazy-ass science-fiction film.