Vue Cinemas: How to deal with problem patrons

Dealing with disruptive moviegoers: A letter from Vue Cinemas

February 22, 2012 By Noel Mellor In Articles

As some of you may be aware, I recently published an article adressing what is clearly a growing problem for movie fans and called for representatives from the cinema industry to come forward and tell us what they plan to do about it. Disruptive moviegoers is a topic that continues to cause much debate among bloggers, podcasters and frustrated film lovers, so I was keen to get a dialogue going with those who might actually be able sort it out.

Copies of my ‘Letter to the UK cinema industry’ were sent to to Rupert Gavin (CEO of Odeon & UCI Cinemas), Stephen Mark Wiener (CEO of Cineworld Cinemas), Tim Richards, Alan McNair and Steve Knibbs (CEO, Deputy CEO and COO of Vue Cinemas), Justin Ribbons (CEO of Empire Cinemas) and Karen Fox (GM of UK Theatres for Showcase Cinemas). This week, I recieved the first of what I hope will be more responses from these people, step forward Kate Gardhouse, Customer Services Manager of Vue Cinemas:

Dear Mr Mellor

I am writing further to your letter to Tim, Steve and Alan here at Vue regarding the behaviour of other customers ruining a night out at the cinema.

We love cinema, that’s why we work here and many of the team here, including Tim, Steve and Alan, have worked in the industry for many years and therefore do appreciate and empathise with your comments. Dealing with antisocial behaviour in the screen can be a balancing act for our teams as removing people from the auditorium can often cause more of a disturbance for the audience; therefore to start with it is our policy for staff to make regular checks to both ensure the film presentation but also the behaviour of the audience. We then generally do give people a warning if they [are] caught talking, texting etc however our terms and conditions do reserve us the right to take a “zero tolerance” approach depending on the disturbance and also a one out, all out tactic for groups.

Furthermore, we also offer over 18s screening[s] which [restrict] those under 18 from attending, regardless of the film certificate. While a small premium is charged in addition for these shows for the reassurance of additional checks and a more stringent approach the performances almost become self[-]policing as it appear[s] that only true film fans are attracted to these shows.

Could we do more? Possibly and to this end we are very engaged in listening to our customers and responding to their feedback. We are very aware that this issue is more acute in some of our cinemas more than others and it is through the feedback we receive that we can ensure that we direct our resources to a more targeted approach. In this vein, you mention that you have suffered on numerous occasions from inconsiderate customers and I would appreciate it if you could let me know specifics so that we can investigate this further.

I note from your website that you have cut up your Cineworld pass, so [while] you are reconsidering I enclose some complimentary tickets – please come and give us another go I am sure your experience will be more enjoyable. Also, if you want to talk to us, and other Vue Film Fans, join us at Vuepoint (vuepoint.com) or give us feedback on our main website, myvue.com/feedback – we really like hearing from all our customers, listening to their opinions, good and bad or if you just want to contact me again directly, please feel free.

With kind regards

Kate Gardhouse

Customer Services Manager

First of all, I’d like to give Vue some points for at least acknowledging receipt of the letter and taking the time to respond – something which, as yet, its competitors have failed to do. It is a little disappointing, however, that the letter was so quickly passed down from Tim Richards, Alan McNair and Steve Knibbs (the CEO, Deputy CEO and COO of Vue Cinemas respectively), to someone more specifically in a customer services role. I shouldn’t really be surprised, but it’s a shame none of the above ‘empathised’ enough with our collective grief to ask their secretaries to draft something up that they could sign.

As a writer – and someone who works in the field of online marketing and PR – I’m also a little troubled by the effort that was put into the content of the letter itself. I don’t expect everyone to live up to the kind of editorial standards I would employ on behalf of a client and perhaps I’m being a little pedantic, but by all accounts this reads quite horribly. I have inserted a few (square bracketed) amendments so it at least makes sense, but I would urge Vue to be a little more cautious over what they put out in future when attempting damage limitation upon their brand – particularly when from a place like Eat Sleep Live Film which, to be fair, has a dedicated readership and a relevant online network.

So what do we actually learn from the letter regarding current policies at Vue theatres and how staff are trained to deal with incidents of troublesome punters? Well, not very much I’m afraid. We’re told removing patrons is something it avoids due to the “balancing act” of not creating more problems, but that “generally” staff will give people a warning and the cinema can “reserve […] the right to take a zero tolerance approach”. All in all then, staff are told not kick people out as it will cause a disturbance, but they can warn people if they happen to catch them in-the-act of being disruptive. To me, this makes the likelihood they ever enforce their “one out, all out tactic for groups” a little unlikely.

One point I was very keen to make (apologies if I wasn’t clear enough) in my letter was that the age of the people who cause the problems is surprisingly not those of the younger demographic. Let me reiterate in case I was vague: “These infuriating morons, one might think, would fall within the category of rowdy teenagers or rambunctious children. However, in my experience it is more often than not those who one would think might ‘know better’ that perpetrate these insufferable crimes.” Unfortunately, in her response, Ms Gardhouse appears to have completely ignored my point and used the opportunity to sell me on the (apparently more costly) “over 18s screening[s]” Vue offers.

Not only do these (presumably limited) screenings offer me no solution whatsoever based on the points I have raised, the fact they exist suggests that Vue Cinemas is not only aware there is a problem to be tackled, but it has chosen instead to use it as a way to create more revenue. Briliiantly, I’m then told that although these screenings allow me to pay extra for a “more stringent approach” (seemingly their existing approach is not stringent enough), I don’t even need them, as the shows are “self-policing”. Now, correct me if I’m wrong here, but isn’t the issue that nothing is being done to police movie screenings in the first place? I don’t want to ‘police’ the films I go to see, regardless of how old the people are around me or whether they’ve paid a couple of extra quid for the pleasure of being in my company. The short answer is… I want YOU to do it.

I suppose one of the positives to be taken from the letter, if there are any, is that there’s a forum to voice their opinions about these issues (Vuepoint and the feedback section of the Vue website). However, while I encourage everyone to use these to record every incident where they have cause for complaint, the fact that this rather unconvincing letter is all I received by way of an assurance that things will change leaves me with little faith in their potential for influence.

One thing I was perhaps foolishly hoping for was a response that might make me feel a little better about the whole situation – but if anything, this letter has made me a little more annoyed. I know cinemas give away complimentary tickets like spoons at an ice-cream eating contest because they help pull people in to buy the over-priced concessions that keep them in business. I also know that offering me a couple is a goodwill gesture that is probably standard practice in these cases. But I didn’t raise this issue to get a couple of free tickets, I raised it because I want the cinematic experience to be better for all film fans who’ve had to suffer the discomfort I have. I doubt very much the directors of Vue who “love cinema” so much have sat through a film they’ve been waiting for months recently wondering whether or not they should say something to the couple behind them who’ve yattered through the first half of it. They are welcome to correct me if I’m wrong.

But ignoring all of this, the fact Vue used these tickets and this letter as a way to try and prise me away from Cineworld is perhaps the most disgusting trick – especially after it did absolutely nothing to convince me that its policies were any more focused on tackling disruptive patrons. The image used on my previous article of my cut-up Unlimited card wasn’t real, it was intended to illustrate and emphasise the point I’ve now reached as a film fan (if Ms Gardhouse had read it properly, she may have picked up on this). Vue Cinemas and readers of Eat Sleep Live Film, you have my most sincere apologies if this wasn’t made clear enough in my original piece, so for the sake of clarity – the photograph I have supplied for this article is 100% real.

I sincerely hope this isn’t the last response I receive and I assure you I have no intention of just ripping apart anything that comes through my letterbox from any of the cinemas kind enough to reply. But please, could you at least read my concerns and the frustrated comments of those who have added to my article and try not to belittle this issue with the mouldy carrot of free passes? Thanks.

http://twitter.com/Downwithfilm Down with film

Wow just shameless promotion by Vue there,did they even read your original article??
Garry McConnachie

That response is typical of businesses nowadays – make an attempt to acknowledge your complaints by saying, in essence, absolutely nothing that will assure us they are taking the issue seriously while at the same time trying to sell their product as a sort of ‘one-upsmanship’ over a rival chain.

Not surprising but downright disgusting behaviour.
http://myfilmviews.com/ Nostra

It’s sometimes indeed an annoying fact of visiting cinemas. Over in the Netherlands the biggest chain (Pathe) always flashes up a text at the beginning which gives a number you can send a text to with the kind of disturbance and they will look into it. It seems to work as generally the audience is quiet and doesn’t use phones. If I had a choice I would love to watch movies alone at the cinema as it seems to be the only way to be sure you can enjoy it and not be distracted. But then what would be the difference from watching it at home. I’m afraid the days of a shared experience aren’t as magical anymore as they once were….
http://twitter.com/ianloring Ian Loring

Right…

I used to be an employee of Vue’s and so I’ve got a few things to say about this BUT I would very much say that I think every cinema chain is just as likely to be guilty…

Back when Vue started the Over 18′s shows with the release of Quantum of Solace, it was a massive deal for the company, generating an awful lot of publicity and a fair bit of extra revenue through the extra charge for the ticket. Back then, there were Over 18 shows every week AND a member of staff was in the screening throughout, ensuring that even if there were any problems as unlikely as that was, there would be someone there to address them.

Fast forward 3 and a half years and the situation is very different. Over 18 shows are only usually put on when there are big releases and there is no longer an additional staff member, thus taking away a large reason why a premium was added, staff in screen means another staff member has to take their place on floor. Now, the premium is still there for a “premium” experience and it could also be said that the average screening likely has less people in than one which would be open to anyone, thus the company recoups some lost revenue but overall, the potential quality of an Over 18′s show would have been superior some years ago.

The point raised about wanting a balance between peace and not disrupting the performance is also an interesting one. Screen checks at the company’s sites are pretty well enforced in all fairness. Especially during my later period with the company, staff members were actively telling people to put their phones away and be quiet in a way I’d not seen previously BUT if managers want to sort problems out, they would happily interrupt a show (though preferably in trailers or right at the start) to sort it out. Sometimes, dealing with disruption comes down to the luck of the draw as to when a more proactive manager who wants to actually sort the problem out would be in.

The problem here is that the higher-end managers generally work day shifts as from a back-office POV that’s when they are most needed. However, on an evening or a weekend, often Team Leaders would be left in charge. These folks aren’t paid as much as managers, often don’t work as many hours and MAY not care quite as much about getting these problems sorted. Again this is luck of the draw.

I’m assuming Ms/Mrs Gardhouse hasn’t heard of our site. That’s absolutely her perogative and I’m the first to admit we are not the biggest site in the country but given the amount of time and effort Noel put into his words to her, this rather condescending PR line delivered response is a disappointment. I would LOVE for one of our peer UK sites, to also send something along these lines and see if the response would be the same. But hey. at least Vue have got back to Noel. As he says, that’s something.

http://twitter.com/mrbonturcode Bradley Porter

Well I had to deal with Kate Gardhouse a fair deal when I was a Team Leader at Vue. She’s a corporate puppet like most of the upper management in the chain. Monkeys trained to repeat after whoever “me” is at the time. As Ian’s said below/above… Over 18′s used to be a big deal, the films were carefully selected to offer an alternative to noisy films popular with youngsters. Harry Potter, He’s Just Not That Into You, Quantum of Solace etc… and they were twice a week on a Sunday afternoon and a Tuesday Evening with staff members assigned to shifts the lengths of the film to do spot checks and piracy checks. But Vue isn’t concerned with the movie going experience. Most actions passed down were about prioritising the customer spend at the retail stands, and if anything got in the way of that then it was discarded. The price of the cinema ticket contributes very little, if Vue could work out a way to just sell the food they would. It’s a far cry from the days of Warner Village. I was a Team Leader who cared about the film going experience and as Ian can surely attest, took the time to kick disruptive people out of screens, to try and solve technical issues with the presentation and help people to find the right films. I couldn’t have given a shit about the popcorn or bundle deals. Since leaving Vue under less than savoury circumstances, the chain is still the nearest cinema to my home (Camberley & Basingstoke) and in the last 3 months Hugo & Extremely Loud… have been shown in the wrong aspect ratio (which they claim to be unable to fix until the next screening), The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo was ghosting and the xenon was clearly dying, The Muppets had a base scratch running through the whole film on the left hand side and in Woman in Black not only were the house lights on for the first half an hour but the screen was filled with noisy teenagers on their phones and talking to each other across the screen. Multiple customers asked them to be quiet and complained to staff and nothing was done. The staff came in and looked around for 10 seconds and left. One kid belched and the others thought it was hilarious for a good five minutes. I can tell you now, most staff members at Vue don’t like confrontation and won’t do anything about a customer being disruptive unless they see it themselves. It was a horrible chain to work for as far as being a lover of film goes. They’d regularly cancel screenings of smaller art-house films if there weren’t many tickets sold to accommodate a more popular film and then just comp off the poor souls who travelled far to see the film they were dying to see that nowhere else was showing. It’s a double edged sword though, the customers nowadays are just as bad as the chain, the cinema has become a communal living room experience.

Dog Strangler

I believe the best way to address the audience is through that massive screen they’re plonked infront of. Orange manages to market itself while at the same time tells people to switch off their phones, the use of big name actors and a funny narrative helps to get this message across. Why can’t somebody take a vested interest in telling inconsiderate pricks to shut the hell up(I’m thinking the cinemas or studios themselves, all of which stand to profit from muting these morons).

I’d sooner tell somebody to shut up if they were using their phone because it is deemed socially unacceptable. The screen says so, Orange and their ensemble of Hollywood stars say so, and because I have their backing, I’m happy to say so too(not that I’ve ever had to because its never actually happened to me.. maybe the Orange ads are to thank for this) Make talking in cinemas socially unacceptable too. Not by getting cinema staff to say so, they ain’t cool enough to pay attention too. Get some Hollywood hot shot or an M&M to tell these bozos straight(I’ve already got a few narratives written in my head, if anybody’s interested I’ll happily post one).

I realise this only helps in getting the message across to the audience and firstly you need to get the message across to the cinemas themselves. If only they could take a vested interest in keeping their customers happy. Maybe if you sent them some M&M’s they’d start taking you seriously.
http://themoviewaffler.co.nr/ The Movie Waffler

To be honest as much as disruptive patrons annoy me, since the chains went digital it’s the shoddy presentation that annoys me a lot more, wrong aspect ratios, deafening sound, lights being left on or turned on before the end of the movie, 3D films not being projected brightly enough etc. The big chains have used digital to cut down staff numbers and us film-lovers are bearing the brunt.
Daniel Portillo

For some time I have been irritated by the behaviour of other cinema patrons. It would be easy to label these people as young chavs but as you alluded to in your letter, they span a wide age range and often seem to be the kind of people that you would assume knew better.

For me, it’s probably easier to list the (few) occasions when an audience has been well behaved than hasn’t although my experience of seeing “The Woman In Black” a week ago in Cineworld Cardiff was by some distance the worst experience I’ve ever had at a cinema. Quite often I’ve left a multiplex intending to write to the respective head office but never ended up following through with it. I fully intended to this time although the response you got makes me think it’s an exercise in futility.

So I’ve decided to vote with my wallet. I have vowed that I’ll never set foot in a multiplex cinema again. For me, it’s independent/art-house cinemas or waiting for the Blu-ray from here on.
Daniel Portillo

As for the response to your letter? One word: appalling. It is the worst kind of stock/generic tick-the-boxes half-arsed effort imaginable. If they had at least wanted to be seen to addressing its concerns (without really doing so) the CEO or DCEO could have responded with something well-written. Instead, they pass it down the line to someone that doesn’t even seem capable of writing a comprehensible letter.

If these companies can’t be bothered to employ people to police their auditoriums to ensure quiet and phone-free behaviour, they don’t deserve our money. Personally, I hope these multiplexes go down the pan. I for one won’t miss them.
Nigel Scott

To be fair to Cineworld Cardiff, there have been 2 occasions in the past 6 months or so when I’ve been watching a film there and someone has complained to staff about noisy audience members and the perpertrators have been frogmarched out as a group