There are currently 20 Picturehouse cinemas in the UK, but following the recent Competition Commission report, three of those are under threat. The Commission have found a “substantial lessening of competition” in Aberdeen, Bury St Edmunds and Cambridge since the Cineworld takeover.
Toby Miller spoke to Picturehouse programmer Madeleine Mullett shortly after the takeover. She has worked for City Screen Picturehouses for the past 13 years, and has been programming for them for the last eight. She knows that there is a healthy appetite in Cambridge for world and independent cinema. Since she began programming for the Cambridge Picturehouse, she has been striving to broaden audiences even further, bringing in 70mm films, cult cinema and late night screenings – the kind of experience you won’t find in a multiplex shoebox.
“The wonderful thing about City Screen is that we’ve always programmed cinemas differently.”
“Each cinema is totally different,” said Madeleine. “The wonderful thing about City Screen is that we’ve always programmed cinemas differently. We programme films for our customers, so each cinema has its own feel, its own tone. It’s always about expanding and developing audiences.”
The Cambridge Arts Picturehouse has a glowing reputation for its world and arthouse cinema. “I want to stretch and develop new audiences,” said Madeleine. “Developing audiences takes about six months to a year before word gets out and people come on a regular basis.” News of the Competition Commission’s report has emerged less than six months after we welcomed our new curator – so are our high hopes to be dashed?
The Competition Commission have suggested the sale of either a Cineworld cinema or a Picturehouse cinema in Cambridge. Meetings will be held with the Competition Commission to look at alternative solutions, and the final decision will be made shortly after the Cambridge Film Festival.
Written responses to these provisional findings need to be sent no later than Tuesday 10 September 2013, to:
or
Inquiry Manager
Cineworld/City Screen merger
Competition Commission
Victoria House
Southampton Row
LONDON
WC1B 4AD
You may wish to express your concerns to Cambridge’s MP Julian Huppert:
Read Managing Editor Jim Ross’s original response to the takeover
This is a bit scare-mongery. The fact is these cinemas must be sold. There is absolutely no suggestion that they should or must be closed. That’s just silly. They are successful assets. Why would they be shut? The second point is, rather than badgering the poor Competition Commission, who have made a perfectly sensible decision, we must simply tell Cineworld flat that it is their anonymous site at Clifton which must be sold and hands off the Picturehouse. That’s a decision for them. It has nothing to do with the CC and they must be pressured to make it correctly. If there is a threat to the Picturehouse it comes from Cineworld and nowhere else.
Why “must they be sold”? I’m yet to see a convincing argument beyond conjecture that ticket prices in Cambridge (which has a city centre VUE!) have been directly affected, or will be. Perhaps ‘threat of closure’ is an immediate reaction out of fear (but it would close in a sense – it wouldn’t be the same cinema, now, would it?), but they are plenty of people questioning the CC decision being “perfectly sensible”? They can’t all have no logic behind their opinion. There is no reason to believe if the Arts was sold (and it *would* be the Arts, let’s not delude ourselves) a cinema of similar outlook would be continue in its place. Or that it would even continue as a cinema.
I see no sense in being complacent about it, I’m sure the ‘poor’ CC can cope with emails offering opinions for goodness sake.
I’m not suggesting being complacent about it at all. But it’s important to get riled up about the right thing. Cineworld gobbled up a much loved small cinema chain. I hoped the Competition Commission would reject the whole deal wholesale: we have too few people making decisions as to what films get shown in UK cinemas. Unfortunately they haven’t. They have focused on a few specific sites. Now there is an opportunity to diversify cinemas in those towns a little bit. This does not suit Cineworld so they make it about Picturehouse but they are a firm with a janus face: they are both the “multiplex shoebox” and the very nice Arts cinema. They shouldn’t be allowed to hide behind the figleaf of a regulator if it prevents them taking responsibility for their business decisions. A decision to sell the Arts Cinema (perhaps to the Curzon group) rather than Clifton to the Odeon group would perhaps be bad for Cambridge. But it is the Cineworld group who needs to understand this not the CC. I wish we had more independent cinemas. Breaking up big chains is a very crude way of getting them but it is one way.
I agree on most points you’ve put forward on the initial deal – but the deal happened, we can’t turn back time. There is an illusion that the Arts competes directly with the Clifton site – is that really true? I don’t think so. Given the manner in which the Arts is programmed (versus other PH venues), the main competitor for the Clifton site is VUE in the Grafton. There are not only two cinemas in Cambridge.
I’m not sure why you’re that convinced someone like Curzon would take on the Arts site, if a sale of the site happened? i.e. the buyer would be a cinema operator, let alone one with a similar programming approach. I’m sure it would be more bottom-line profitable as a bar or nightclub – why are you so certain an independent operator would have the comparative resources or will to take it on?
The Cam Cineworld will pull in more money, it will remain. That’s where folk watch Movie 43 and Grown Ups 2. I don’t think anyone is suggesting, if it comes to a sale, that Cineworld should not be leaned upon heavily. In the same manner as you recommend airing grievances to CW, I think it *is* complacent to simply say “Good job!” to the CC – when I think many folk would agree the logic of these recommendations need far more scrutiny.
Quite so – if sold, a cinema doesn’t always remain a cinema, just as a pub doesn’t always remain a pub. Look at the Dog and Pheasant and the Fleur De Lys – gobbled up and converted into flats like everything else. Wouldn’t you like a luxury apartment, handy for the station and John Lewis, with a crepuscular view of girls in miniskirts falling over in the gutter? http://cinematreasures.org/theaters/19963
I think there’s still a debate to be had over whether the Commission’s decisions and recommendations are sensible, though. Given the potential ramifications to the festivals held at the Picturehouse and other events and cinema culture in the city, is it not a bit silly in itself to accept the recommendations without further scrutiny or debate? After all, it is the Commission who have invited opinions, it’s not unsolicited “badgering”.
I haven’t noticed any improvement in the programming – quite the opposite, in fact. The Arts Picturehouse has always shown 70mm classics and cult films.
They have increased in number, I’d say. I think this purely out of the number I’ve cursed myself for missing compared to before. I certainly wouldn’t say the programming is *worse* since the takeover – do you have an example of what you mean?
The point to made here is that Cineworld have no say at all in programming the Arts Picturehourse, or any Picturehouse. The Arts Picturehouse changed programmer because Tony Jones stepped down to concentrate on the festival. One had nothing to do with the other.
The World’s End
Man of Steel
The Great Gatsby
Alan Partridge
as four examples.
How is that different from Cineworld?
Madeleine Mullett said, “Just because you’re an arthouse member or an aficionado, that doesn’t
mean that you don’t want to sometimes see those great big quality films.
And it is about choosing the quality mainstream particular for each
cinema. They don’t get block booked into a region like the ‘plexes do,
the chains. We actually pick and choose specific titles for specific
cinemas. So again, it is down to quite detailed curating of films around
the audiences that we have in each cinema.” I’m surprised to hear you think the programming has gone downhill! Please do let us know what you’re referring to… it’s all valuable feedback and I’m sure MM would take it on board.
You don’t think you’re subject to a bit of confirmation bias here? Those aren’t, but you’re ignoring a huge swathe of the Picturehouse programme – and these would have been shown pre-takeover for various reasons (on the other hand, would you expect the 2013 APH to show Sex And The City 2? I certainly wouldn’t). None of this is evidence of a decrease in the quality of programming as you implied (“…quite the opposite in fact”).
I’ll tell you what is different from Cineworld, though, off the top of my head (I’m glossing over so many one-off screenings) – and this doesn’t include stuff that got a limited run at Cineworld (e.g. Only God Forgives, The Paperboy). In 2013:
-All sorts of things I can’t remember fully (MGM musicals, South American road films, screenings of stuff related to Human Rights Watch festival (eg Call Me Kuchu, Camp 14 etc)
-Anything involving a Q&A
-Time Bandits remaster
-Akira anniversary
-From Up On Poppy Hill
-Blackfish
-Frances Ha
-The Enigma of Kasper Hauser
-Dial M for Murder 3D revival
-Stories We Tell
-Much Ado About Nothing
-The Iceman
-The Act of Killing
-Populaire
-Mud (was maybe briefly at CW, not sure)
-In The House
-Gatekeepers
-Babeldom
-Post Tenebras Lux
-The Spirit of ’45
-Beyond The Hills
-Lore
-Side By Side
And now on the flip side, films in the top earners in the UK & Ireland this year, at time of writing, *not shown* at APH (although there may have been one or two ‘Big Scream’ showings of kid ones):
-Despicable Me 2 (#1)
-Iron Man 3 (#3)
-Monsters University (#5)
-The Croods (#6)
-Star Trek Into Darkness (#7)
-Fast & Furious 6 (#8)
-Wreck-It Ralph (#9)
-The Hangover Part III (#10)
All got huge Cineworld runs, several times a day. That’s in the top 10. I would keep going (Die Hard 5, The Wolverine, Oblivion, blah, blah), but it gets increasingly pointless.
So no – those *four* films you highlighted were not different – but all those above are.
Zero hours contracts?
I spotted that – I don’t know what it means either?
There’s no debate. The Commission’s recommendations clearly are not sensible. Whatever anyone says, the worst case scenario is the closure of the APH, or, if sold, a shift of its programming to something more ‘commercial’ under the new management. So, duplication of Cineworld in a more convenient, city-centre location. Currently, everyone is well catered-for in the city, Cineworld allow the APH to do what it does best, both cinemas serve different (but overlapping) audiences and employ a good number of people. The APH is also the base for the UK’s third film festival and everybody’s happy. The Commission’s recommendations put all that under threat, and serve the interests of nobody except on-spectrum, zero-empathy “computer says no” legislation enthusiasts with OCD. Or psychopathic librarians. Or Nazi admin assistants.
The fact programming will shift to a more commercial outlook if APH is sold seems to be lost on a lot of people, it *will not* have the same approach *nor* would CW be able to pick up the slack.
I wonder whether the Commission would pay attention to a petition from Picturehouse members and others who regularly watch films there in Cambridge, saying whether they are happy with the competition and the ticket-prices…