Hunting for a kid-birthday present, I noticed that all of the Indy toys that were released before the movie as part of the promotional run-up were pretty aggressively discounted at Target this weekend. Granted, this isn't something I often pay attention to (department store toys) but I was a little surprised to see they were already being given the clearance treatment while the film is still in theaters and before the Blu-Ray and digital download release.
You might be seeing kids are not buying toys, as they prefer to play on their phones. Adults buying toys are very selective.
These toylines only exist for adult collectors. Kids don't care about toys based on their parents childhood heroes.
My young nephews don’t buy any toys, outside of the occasional Lego toy. They are more into buying video games and texting. Lol
Bingo. My daughter likes toys to some degree, but she's never really
connected with toys. Like, she has some Barbie dolls she plays with, she has a few of those Star Wars Barbies (Forces of Destiny) that I bought her, some of the Star Wars Mission Fleet toys, and Legos. She had in the past a whole mess of Peppa Pig toys and some Bluey toys, and while she plays with them here or there, she's mostly into playing pretend with a wand and cape and sword and whatnot. Hell, she plays more with her army of stuffed toys/animals than she does with any kind of figure.
Other kids get into Lego or Minecraft, but I think the days of action figures ruling the toy aisles are over. And as has been stated, these toys are primarily for adult collectors, and if they don't show, well...the toys collect dust.
I have no idea if this is actually a smart tactic, but if you are a collector, maybe snap up some of those bargain basement priced Indy toys and stick 'em in a vault somewhere. If they aren't selling well, then the bulk will be trashed and now your "poorly received" toy is a "rare collector's item." Or something. I dunno. Maybe just collect stuff if you think it's cool.
I don't think kids have ever been as much into miniature-type toy lines (as opposed to costume-type toys) when the setting of the show is old. Star Wars had futuristic spaceships and robots and stuff. With Indy you just have a guy with a bullwhip and some generic henchmen. I don't see Indy toys being very thrilling to kids unless they had an ancient temple playset or something with booby traps and stuff.
Au contraire! Some of my favorite toys EVER were the Star Wars Micro Collection from the early 80s. I still wish I'd gotten a Snowspeeder and Millennium Falcon and the other half of the Death Star playset. I had the whole Bespin and Hoth lines (except for the tripod gunner that you had to mail away for).
Indiana Jones as a toyline has a long history of flops. As popular as the character and films are with Gen X, the toys just never sold all that well, with adult collectors only getting into the vintage Kenner line decades after the fact. Add in the mixed reception of Indy 5 at the box office and that's the reason you're seeing product heavily discounted. I'm of the opinion that even kids of the 1980's would have responded better to role play toys rather than action figures of Indy.
Yeah, the Kenner toys were eclipsed by their own Star Wars line. I tend to think that the reason was that Star Wars was a lot more family friendly than Indy was, and the prime target market for Indy was a little too old for action figures.
I think most people just don't care to go to the movies anymore. Okay, your movie theater may be packed at times, but that doesn't mean all are anymore. And as far as movies that they advertise as "must see in the theater", oh baloney, I can do without it. I remember here on this forum when Maverick came out 'you have to see this in a theater, you have to see this in a theater, you HAVE to see this in a theater, you HAVE to see this in a theater!!!'.....Well, guess what, I didn't see it in a theater, I watched it at home and I am just fine with that. Personally, unless I am on a date I will never step foot into another theater for as long as I live. They could be showing actual footage of the return of ****** and I'd still just wait to stream it.
yeah... cramped bus-station style seats with a conspicuously sticky floor, $20 popcorn to watch 30 minutes worth of perfectly-well-color corrected and perfectly framed commercials only for the feature to start and find the projection or sound is just "off" or maybe that's just the glare from the person two rows down constantly checking their phone. Meanwhile, a perfectly respectable Dolby Digital / Dolby Vision experience can be had within the comfort of your own home.
Though, I live in a cultural desert, we don't have any of the chain theaters with premium seating, visuals, sound and full menu of food. That might alter the calculus but only a little. Not to mention my teenagers watch full series on their phones, so they could care less about a giant screen.
For me and my family, when COVID hit we basically stopped going to the theater except for films we really cared about. There weren't any more "bored on Saturday morning let's just go see a movie" days. So when something came out that we really felt deserved seeing in a theater, we masked up and went.
Nowadays we're still in the same habit, just without masks.
Hell, we didn't even make it to Guardians of the Galaxy this year because we just couldn't muster the drive to make it a priority.
I know everyone isn't in the same boat, but I do wonder if overall theater attendance is still down post-plague.
Lately films that I'm only passingly interested in barely even get a chance when they hit streaming.
I'm in pretty much the same boat. We went to see MI:7, and that's our first trip to a theater in a year. We're planning on seeing Oppenheimer and Dune, and that's it for the year. It has to be a pretty compelling movie event to bring us out. Otherwise, that's what streaming is for. You don't even have to wait that long anymore. I just caught the latest Transformers movie on Paramount+. I watched it because in the 90's I was a Beast Wars fan. Otherwise I wouldn't have bothered; the Transformers movies are incredibly dumb, though the robot fights are fun.
Your experiences all pretty much mirror my own. I was an infrequent theater-goer before the pandemic. I'd go maybe 2-3 times a year at most, and that was usually only for big spectacle movies. Star Wars trilogy films, most of the Marvel movies, etc. By about 2019, though, I was going far less frequently, including skipping Marvel films. When I went, I pretty much only went to one theater: Studio Movie Grill about a 20-ish min drive from my house in West Philly. The tickets were pricy, but (1) you could order dinner to eat while you watched, and (2) the higher price pretty much kept out the riff raff. Plus the seats were way more comfortable because they had to incorporate space for eating. IF I were to go back to a theater, that's where it'd be.
But then the pandemic hit.
There were people in my life with various medical conditions to where, even if I was going to not worry about my own safety (I did, though), I just didn't want to risk going to the theater. I did other risky things, but they were for much more important purposes. Stuff that
needed to be done, not just stuff for my own entertainment. Plus, because I knew I'd be masked and I wasn't going to take my mask off for any reason, I knew it wouldn't make sense to go to my favorite theater if I wasn't going to actually eat dinner there. And the prospect of going to a "normal" theater and sitting amongst people texting and surfing their phones? Just so I can see a bigger picture with louder sound? Nah. Hard pass.
I actually
loved the whole "We're releasing it immediately to streaming" model, but I know that the entire industry is still geared around a theater release. I was happy, though, to pay full price for both Shang Chi and Black Widow, because I wanted to encourage more of that practice. The notion of "You
have to see this in a theater"? No, no I don't. I really, really don't. I have a nice 54" plasma TV. One of the last of the old Panasonic plasmas. I have surround sound at home. I can pause and go take a leak. I already paid for the beer, and it was cheaper than what I'd get at the theater. And frankly....your movie isn't special enough to warrant me going to the theater. Sorry, it just isn't. You've got big sploshuns? Rah rah. I don't care. You've got IMAX? Meh. Last IMAX movie I saw was on a planetarium screen for Inception and to this day I have no idea who was shooting at whom because the screen was
too goddamn big. I'll pass. You've got 16:4503 anamorphicatronicstereophinic quadravision at 409 FPS? Nope. Still don't care about your gimmicks. Avatar in 3D gave me a headache anyway. Plus it probably just looks like videotape anyway and not like a proper movie.
I have a hard time these days thinking of what would actually get me back to the theaters and honestly...it's a tough call. It'd probably have to be something I connect with emotionally, AND where I wasn't remotely concerned that it couldn't live up to what I want it to be, AND where I actually think that the theater experience would be
so much better than the home one I've crafted for myself...and that's hard to come up with. The only other thing I can think of is going to a film that I genuinely want to support...but even then I'd rather just buy it on streaming for the same price I'd pay for tickets.
And maybe there are more folks like me than studios thought.
I cannot figure out why they thought it was a great idea to release Haunted Mansion in July. This would have done so much better if they released it around Halloween.
They have a history of this. See also: Hocus Pocus. Perennial Halloween fav amongst Millennials, but it premiered in June or July. It's just bonkers to me. RELEASE YOUR SPOOKY THEMED MOVIES DURING SPOOKY SEASON, YOU KNUCKLEHEADS.