Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
Things my home theatre has:
1) Better sound
2) Better picture
3) Cheaper and better snacks
4) Communal experience with people with whom I want a communal experience
5) Thirty minutes closer to my home...oh, wait....
6) I can go without being accosted my creepy men who don't understand the movie they are watching and threaten to beat me up.
BTW, this is me:
Again, do I just live in an outlier? Because I've almost never had sound or picture problems at my theater. Or people threatening to beat me up.
I also don't *have* a kick-ass home theater like some of you do; my options are limited to my parents' downstairs HD TV (and it's just GOOD, not an incredibly expensive flatscreen) and my upstairs TV. Ergo, the theater can be just as, if not more, satisfying in the picture and sound departments.
Or you could just sneak it in. The point is the proximity.
Over-priced junk food that's really close to me is still just over-priced junk food.
I dunno, dude, sneak in an apple.
I rarely get concessions for myself. At most, it's usually candy to share with a friend.
I mean, even a small bottle of Dasani is $4.50. I didn't realize it had become that ridiculous.
Hey, you're the one who's all, "My god, there's a CONCESSION STAND right next to the theater!!!" like that's some huge point in favor of the theatrical experience.
Would you rather there not be?
I'm confused as to what alternative you're arguing for.
His kitchen!!!
Am I the only person who virtually NEVER eats snacks in the movie theater? Maybe once or twice a year I'll get a popcorn, but only if I know I absolutely cannot sit another two hours without something in my stomach. Otherwise, there's no upside for me. It's too noisy, WAY too pricey and often a fucking greasy mess.
It is a sine wave. It has always been a sine wave. It will probably always be a sine wave.
Was 2011 a bit soft? Sure. It wasn't terrible, though. As stated above, everything in moderation tends to work well. I'd wager that the majority of this board, as commited enthusiasts of movies, occasionally goes overboard. It is what we do. Combine that with growing up (and everything that entails), and you get to feeling like things were better in ... .
The competition for our interest and time had exponentially grown in the previous half-decade. Gaming and online social interaction has exploded. Television has improved to a ridiculous degree (I am as excited for Justified as I am for any film in 2012, and I love Batman and LOTR). I get trailers for any and every movie imaginable on my fucking PHONE. The big Hollywood money is probably chasing too many similar experiences, but there is still a tremendous amount of diversity in what is being made and released.
So I didn't find a movie to be passionately in love with in 2012. So what? Every time I think I'm not going to feel like I did when I first saw Raiders of the Lost Ark, I get blindsided by an cinematic experience I could not have had when I was 10. Sometimes, growing up pays off.
Hollywood will do what it has always done. Respond to the shifting interests and tastes of popular culture. The only major difference now is the worldwide audience base. Some years will be slow, and some will be electric. That is what makes being a film fan worth sitting through Sherlock 2. The surprise.
Everything is different, but the same... things are more moderner than before... bigger, and yet smaller... it's computers.
San Dimas High School football RULES!
Would you rather there not be?
I'm confused as to what alternative you're arguing for.
I'm not arguing for an alternative, I'm disagreeing with your assertion that it's some kind of factor in still going to the theater. Better presentation? Yeah! Great sound? Yeah! Concessions within fifteen feet? Um, okay.
Am I the only person who virtually NEVER eats snacks in the movie theater? Maybe once or twice a year I'll get a popcorn, but only if I know I absolutely cannot sit another two hours without something in my stomach. Otherwise, there's no upside for me. It's too noisy, WAY too pricey and often a fucking greasy mess.
At home I can airpop popcorn and use real butter and sea salt. It's not even a contest
For big opening weekend movies, my local theater will temporarily place a couple of its employees in your movie's auditorium to sell more concessions. It all feels really silly to me.
I dunno, dude, sneak in an apple.
And why not some celery too? Maybe a nice crunchy head of lettuce or a bag of carrots?
For big opening weekend movies, my local theater will temporarily place a couple of its employees in your movie's auditorium to sell more concessions. It all feels really silly to me.
Yeah, I've seen that too. The poor kids stand there either filled with false hope that we'll leap up and start buying, or with a dead-eyed stare knowing they're wasting their time.
At least they've stopped sending staff in to collect for the Will Rogers campaign.
At least they've stopped sending staff in to collect for the Will Rogers campaign.
Oh man... that sounds more awkward than Tommy Lee Jones' line-readings in those ads before the movie.
I've never had to sit through staff coming to collect for those.
It was mostly in the late 70s/early 80s, when theaters had only two to four screens and they had enough staff to do it. But boy did it get awkward. It was a great way to guilt people into donations though.
It was mostly in the late 70s/early 80s, when theaters had only two to four screens and they had enough staff to do it. But boy did it get awkward. It was a great way to guilt people into donations though.
They did that when I was growing up at the mall. I loved it. You want to talk about a communal experience, there was one. I'd like to think it would be harder for some of these cads to talk and text it up if first we had to - together - engage each other as human beings in the act of charity
growing up at the mall.
I immediately read that as a single clause. Hehehehehe
I imagine some of you guys complaining about noisy, disrespectful audiences holding doilies and wearing top hats and monacles.
Audiences are never going to stop making noise. Most of the time, that adds to the experience! Movies are a communal activity - they really weren't meant to be consumed alone. Sometimes it's worse than other times, but it's never going to change.
Are you serious? The audience making noise adds to the experience most of the time? Are you under the impression that people are complaining about audiences laughing too loud at comedies or yelling during scares in horror movies? Or applauding during a particularly awesome action scene?
Just installing cellphone jammers in theaters will do wonders.
This is nothing new, it happened in the 60s/70s when Hollywood's go to formulas stopped working. Only this time they have sequels, prequels and reboots to keep the lights on...but it's an illusion...they have no control. It's like sand slipping through their fingers and it's much worse than it appears. The star system is toast, it has been for a while. Concept is king and really always has been.
The key to solving this is new blood. You have the same voices making the same mediocre movies and that's why people don't go to the movies. They go to see big budget tent poles, sequels, prequels and reboots because of the familiarity, but eventually Hollywood is going to run out of stuff to cannibalize and then what? Plus the tentpoles cost so much, they're risking the studio every single time out.
It's sad to say, but the VOD stuff may be the only way to save the studios.
Except this boils down to the same thing it always has... the studio do not want to manage, staff, and oversee the production of 20 $10m production on the gamble that one will explode into a huge success, when they can just go with 1 big brand and make it into 1 $200m dollar that requires fewer people, less stress, less division of efforts across the board and will probably break even at the very least. They'll fight tooth and nail against any major change that fractures their effort.
Except this boils down to the same thing it always has... the studio do not want to manage, staff, and oversee the production of 20 $10m production on the gamble that one will explode into a huge success, when they can just go with 1 big brand and make it into 1 $200m dollar that requires fewer people, less stress, less division of efforts across the board and will probably break even at the very least. They'll fight tooth and nail against any major change that fractures their effort.
This is completely true and as much as I hate it with every fiber of my being from a film loving creative standpoint, in the current environment of the GFC-that-won't-go-away, it's not entirely unreasonable from a business position.
The thing is too it's not just the economy, hell it's not even three or even four things that you can point to and say "this is why this is happening. I honestly believe there are so many factors at work; economic, technological, cultural, generational - all playing their part in what is a deep shift in viewing habits, spending habits and what people think of when they decide they wish to be entertained.
Yes audiences have become hopelessly fractured thanks to the internet, a wider array of entertainment options from online, to gaming to the rise of great TV and so on. Yes that same internet has changed the very notion of word of mouth, making feedback instantaneous and global and yes those younger people online have a completely different notion to what constitutes 'watching a movie' than many of us do.
It's all changing. The viewers and their habits and tastes, the way entertainment is delivered entirely, the vast array of choice in that entertainment and the tightening economy making it all that much harder to financially prioritize.
So the studios see this tsunami of issues coming at them - any one of which could hurt the industry if not prepared for - and surprise, surprise, they completely panic. They're the deer caught in the headlights at this point, tied to their old alliances to the brick and mortar theater chains, unable or unwilling to get out of the way as the car barrels down on them. So they pull up stumps, essentially go into siege mode and start pumping out nothing but the very safest of business propositions - over and over again.
Thing is a couple of big performers this new year will not stop this tide - If anything, Avatar has done Hollywood a bit of disservice, fooling it seemingly into assuming this is a slump or a phase, they're refusing to see the future being built around them while they huddle in a shack with their clockwork and steam engines.
Things are going to change drastically - and the new model is going to force itself on Hollywood if it can't wake up to the 21st century and get with the program.
It was mostly in the late 70s/early 80s, when theaters had only two to four screens and they had enough staff to do it. But boy did it get awkward. It was a great way to guilt people into donations though.
In the mid 90s I was both the guy that got the money for the Jimmy Fund and the guy that would sometimes go in to the theater to sell concessions. collecting money for the Jimmy Fund was fantastic fun. Some great back and forth with the audience. For a while we sold little hearts for two bucks. That was good fun as well. Selling concessions in the theater was.. less fun. Candy would sell, but for some reason no one wanted my stale popcorn and pre-poured sodas.
Am I the only person who virtually NEVER eats snacks in the movie theater? Maybe once or twice a year I'll get a popcorn, but only if I know I absolutely cannot sit another two hours without something in my stomach. Otherwise, there's no upside for me. It's too noisy, WAY too pricey and often a fucking greasy mess.
Yeah, I almost never eat or drink in the theater either. Shit's a rip off and a distraction.
I think the relative decline in movie quality is due to the massive, massive improvement we've seen in TV in the last 10-12 years--especially in dramas (but comedies also deserve a mention).
Why go to the movies to see an "adult" drama when I can catch Mad Men, Downton Abbey, Breaking Bad, or a whole other host of excellent television on cable? I laugh more on a random episode of Parks & Rec or Community than I do in a whole 2 hour "comedy" of late.
TV is putting movies to shame.
I don't think those shows get big enough ratings to account for them "stealing" eyeballs from movies though, do they? I wouldn't have thought a significant amount of the general public are caught up in Breaking Bad or Parks and Rec.
They're sure as fuck not watching Community, THE GODLESS BUFFOONS!
Yeah, I almost never eat or drink in the theater either. Shit's a rip off and a distraction.
I don't think those shows get big enough ratings to account for them "stealing" eyeballs from movies though, do they? I wouldn't have thought a significant amount of the general public are caught up in Breaking Bad or Parks and Rec.
They're sure as fuck not watching Community, THE GODLESS BUFFOONS!
Yet I have friends who won't go to the movies, barely buy any entertainment and yet will happily spend a day or two doing nothing but catching up on shows the likes of Breaking Bad or Boardwalk Empire or what have you.
Of course, thats the elephant in the room isn't it - these people aren't paying for any of these tv shows, simply watching them.
From the laymans point of view, why spend $50 each on a night out at the cinema when you can order a pizza, open a beer and sit in front of limitless hours of free entertainment?
I imagine some of you guys complaining about noisy, disrespectful audiences holding doilies and wearing top hats and monacles.
Audiences are never going to stop making noise. Most of the time, that adds to the experience! Movies are a communal activity - they really weren't meant to be consumed alone. Sometimes it's worse than other times, but it's never going to change.
Y'all can keep your home theaters to yourselves. Nothing beats a giant multiplex with sound so big my scrotum shakes, seats that recline, a concession stand right outside, the biggest screen imaginable, and the feeling that I'm sharing in an experience with everyone around me. Of course most of those people are going to be douchebags - might as well leave Planet Earth.
I agree with everything you said.....except for the people. Matinees are gold to me in that respect.
Yeah but you have cool friends.
Everyone else is watching Twilight and Grown Ups.
Aka "Satan's Double Feature".
Yeah but you have cool friends.
Everyone else is watching Twilight and Grown Ups.
Aka "Satan's Double Feature".
But those viewing habits now are bleeding into the mainstream - at least here in Melbourne. For example, my best mates new girlfriend - the very last person you'd think of as 'geeky' in any way - has just discovered the wonders of being able to get entire seasons of Gossip Girl to watch at her leisure. Other people I know - people I work with who again are a long way from geeky - are bringing in hard drives and swapping movies, tv, constantly. Watching free shit is all they do these days.
There's a real groundswell going on here that I think even us net-based cinephiles fail to appreciate the enormity of sometimes.
Except this boils down to the same thing it always has... the studio do not want to manage, staff, and oversee the production of 20 $10m production on the gamble that one will explode into a huge success, when they can just go with 1 big brand and make it into 1 $200m dollar that requires fewer people, less stress, less division of efforts across the board and will probably break even at the very least. They'll fight tooth and nail against any major change that fractures their effort.
Yes Renn, you are right.......until they have enough flops that they lose 100 million on their 200 million budgeted picture and never recoup their losses. Business follows profit, that is the way it always is. There will always be a market for a big exploding summer picture. But when the marketplace is filled with nothing but big budget explosions, vapid star driven rom coms, douchbag comedies that have been sanitized so that they are not even funny, sequels and remakes galore. Then perhaps the audience will tire, less people will go to the theatre, the studios will lose money and the paradigm will shift.
This is why I have been screaming negativity about 3d since I went to see Thor over the summer, It was offered twice a day in 2d, and 50 times a day in 3d...the 2d screening was packed btw. Asking me to drop nearly 50 bucks to see a matinee with my two kids (and this is smuggling in snacks, god help me if I go to the concession stand), to see Thor is just ridiculous. I am better off financially than the average family guy, and I can only afford to take my kids to the movies a few times a year. The high ticket prices force me to be more selective. I think this is happening across the board. People are rebelling at the quality and the cost of movies.
But this does not mean that movies will die, I am serious when I say that there will always be a market for quality entertainment. It is just that the studios will have to adapt. And if they die, then new studios will arise to take their place, new studios who may be more willing to make 10 20 million dollar pictures in the hopes of having 2 breakout hits.
TV is the perfect example. Everyone was talking 10 years ago about the death of television. If you are talking about network television then you are right, network television has become a truly disgusting wasteland. But cable has more than picked up the slack. The fracturing of the audience has actually led to more people getting the type of entertainment that suits them. No one has HBO for movies anymore, just as no one turns on MTV for music.
As channels like IFC gain traction perhaps we will see more thoughtful, interesting 70's style films. These films may not make it at multiplexs, but who is to say a chain like Starbucks might not install a 70 inch home theatre and sell tickets for 5 bucks a piece and 2 drink minimum for an indy premier? I dont want to go off on too weird a tangent, but the architecture for an underground movie movement is in place. With word of mouth spreading like wildfire these days through the digital media, we are ripe for all kinds of new ways to view movies to emerge.
This is completely true and as much as I hate it with every fiber of my being from a film loving creative standpoint, in the current environment of the GFC-that-won't-go-away, it's not entirely unreasonable from a business position.
The thing is too it's not just the economy, hell it's not even three or even four things that you can point to and say "this is why this is happening. I honestly believe there are so many factors at work; economic, technological, cultural, generational - all playing their part in what is a deep shift in viewing habits, spending habits and what people think of when they decide they wish to be entertained.
Yes audiences have become hopelessly fractured thanks to the internet, a wider array of entertainment options from online, to gaming to the rise of great TV and so on. Yes that same internet has changed the very notion of word of mouth, making feedback instantaneous and global and yes those younger people online have a completely different notion to what constitutes 'watching a movie' than many of us do.
It's all changing. The viewers and their habits and tastes, the way entertainment is delivered entirely, the vast array of choice in that entertainment and the tightening economy making it all that much harder to financially prioritize.
So the studios see this tsunami of issues coming at them - any one of which could hurt the industry if not prepared for - and surprise, surprise, they completely panic. They're the deer caught in the headlights at this point, tied to their old alliances to the brick and mortar theater chains, unable or unwilling to get out of the way as the car barrels down on them. So they pull up stumps, essentially go into siege mode and start pumping out nothing but the very safest of business propositions - over and over again.
Thing is a couple of big performers this new year will not stop this tide - If anything, Avatar has done Hollywood a bit of disservice, fooling it seemingly into assuming this is a slump or a phase, they're refusing to see the future being built around them while they huddle in a shack with their clockwork and steam engines.
Things are going to change drastically - and the new model is going to force itself on Hollywood if it can't wake up to the 21st century and get with the program.
Yeah, I agree with this. I see it as an avalanche of change they are nowhere near prepared for, because they're too greedy and generally incompetent to cope. They're Harvard MBAs not visionaries...they have no idea what to do with this stuff. It's the filmmakers who end up being the harbingers of change.
But those viewing habits now are bleeding into the mainstream - at least here in Melbourne. For example, my best mates new girlfriend - the very last person you'd think of as 'geeky' in any way - has just discovered the wonders of being able to get entire seasons of Gossip Girl to watch at her leisure. Other people I know - people I work with who again are a long way from geeky - are bringing in hard drives and swapping movies, tv, constantly. Watching free shit is all they do these days.
There's a real groundswell going on here that I think even us net-based cinephiles fail to appreciate the enormity of sometimes.
Oh yeah, you're absolutely right that people are watching stuff at home more but my reply was specifically to Spook's thought that the decline in movies is "due to the massive, massive improvement we've seen in TV in the last 10-12 years".
My point was that it seems like a lot of the good TV stuff doesn't make it because not enough people are watching it and so we lose things like Community and Arrested Development before their time. Meanwhile Mad Men and Breaking Bad tick along into fifth seasons but don't seem to get seen enough to account for the decline in movie sales or originality. But I didn't say that people aren't watching stuff at home instead of going out to the movies.
I don't know enough to comment on the relative merits of Gossip Girl. At least not publicly.
Am I the only person who virtually NEVER eats snacks in the movie theater? Maybe once or twice a year I'll get a popcorn, but only if I know I absolutely cannot sit another two hours without something in my stomach. Otherwise, there's no upside for me. It's too noisy, WAY too pricey and often a fucking greasy mess.
At home I can airpop popcorn and use real butter and sea salt. It's not even a contest
Yeah, but you aren't going to annoy yourself, so of course it isn't a contest. It's not even in the same ballpark.
Note to fellow patrons who do decide to indulge: Please open up your chip bags and candy wrappers and other noisemakers BEFORE the movie starts. Then, proceed to stuff your faces.
As good as the ratings for stuff like Mad Men might be, they pale in comparison to the cheap reality shows that bring in huge viewerships. TV is kind of in a weird spot, because it's still disposable enough to be "something I just left on" no matter what the show is, and because the Nielsen system is seen as outdated by just about everyone. It's worth noting, btw, that Gossip Girl regularly draws much lower numbers than Telemundo.
With the studios, it's the safety I was talking about before. They don't want to pull in new, curious viewers, they want to play to their base, hence the ongoing marketplace repetition. But their base is dwindling, and they're hanging on for dear life, hoping against hope that the base can be strengthened and increased. The question is, how many Green Lanterns and Cowboys And Aliens is it gonna take?
(let's be apocalyptic - Twenty more)
The question is, how many Green Lanterns and Cowboys And Aliens is it gonna take?
Which will be the 21st centuries answer to Cleopatra I wonder....
Which will be the 21st centuries answer to Cleopatra I wonder....
I think it will be a good sign if AVENGERS and SPIDERMAN both fail, given what those films represent
Probably the Cleopatra remake.
That's not a real film is it, they aren't really going to do that are they?
To Harley, I had been lukewarm on The Avengers until I watched the Russian trailer just now. Now my Nerd Sense is tingling!
Just watched it as well. Cool, but I kinda want to see group shots of the team in action. Seems like the trailer alternates between group SHIELD meetings where they interact and solo action scenes where they don't.
Actually, it's down by 4%, at least domestically. Not only should this number be reversed, given inflation...
But what if you factor in the state of the economy? It's not bouncing back nearly as fast as others have predicted. Living in central FL (where the economy is based on tourism and real estate) and the unemployment percentage was among the lowest in the States, I don't see a ton of disposable income flying around (granted, diversified Disney ain't hurting here).
As good as the ratings for stuff like Mad Men might be, they pale in comparison to the cheap reality shows that bring in huge viewerships. TV is kind of in a weird spot, because it's still disposable enough to be "something I just left on" no matter what the show is, and because the Nielsen system is seen as outdated by just about everyone. It's worth noting, btw, that Gossip Girl regularly draws much lower numbers than Telemundo.
With the studios, it's the safety I was talking about before. They don't want to pull in new, curious viewers, they want to play to their base, hence the ongoing marketplace repetition. But their base is dwindling, and they're hanging on for dear life, hoping against hope that the base can be strengthened and increased. The question is, how many Green Lanterns and Cowboys And Aliens is it gonna take?
(let's be apocalyptic - Twenty more)
Right now I sort of see movies as stuck between the two extremes of comics and video games. Comics have exemplified the pandering rut for decades (with a few notable, and respectable exceptions), while video-games, despite a reliance on franchises to bring in the big numbers, have in recent years been able to drastically broaden both their audience and the type of content they offer via initiatives like Facebook/mobile gaming, smaller download titles on the consoles, motion controls etc. etc. Now obviously movies don't have quite the same flexibility in terms of content (I don't think Smell-o-vision is making a comeback), but they certainly have the distribution options availible. The question now is, as you said, how long they try and hold on to an aging and shrinking customer base. Someone mentioned the 10 $10 million dollar movies versus the big $200 million gorilla, and I can see the rationale, but I'd certainly be interested in an XBLA-esque service that delivers quality, smaller scale movies directly without the stigma of a direct to video/TV movie release.
But ultimately, it's always been a cyclical thing. We've just been through the 00s, and the trends that defined film in that decade are in the process of playing out. When cinema starts to morph into whatever it'll become in the 10s, things will pick up again.
This. Will the studios go bust again like they did decades ago, paving the way for a larger slate of small studio projects and an influx of indie product (via studio distribution)? Of course they will. I don't know how soon though. Regardless, things are on the verge of change. Anyone that thinks streaming services and VOD are going to fully (or even mostly) replace the theatrical movie watching experience is a moron. Television didn't kill it. Home video didn't kill it. These won't either. What they WILL do is cause the industry to shift its focal points again in different directions. What worked in the 00s isn't working anymore now. We are entering a new decade and from that a new set of trends will emerge. If past decades are anything to go by, the new trends will likely start to crop up over the course of the next two or three years. Once that happens, Hollywood will be a boomin' again and cranking product out.
Until then, we just have to gain (most of) our enjoyment from smaller fair that is either independently made or have budgets low enough to not be fucked with in the studio system.
SSDD - Same shit, different decade.
Hollywood is going down hill in terms of quality but the people making decisions are making so much money they don't care. It's a business after all, even a business that markets and sells art is still a business. Plus I think we overstate the speed at which Hollywood is going downhill. There's just too much competition in the way of quality tv and video games for cinema to ever claw its way back to the level of power it had in the nineties. That's why the focus on quick and easy bucks, remakes, reboots and board game movies.
The dream machine has probably got another fifty years or so in it before the technology allows people to create films that rival the big budget blockbusters at home. Talented movie makers who say screw you Hollywood, I'm not making your Guess Who or Gummi Bears movie before you let me direct my student script, I can make my own vision in my basement and sell it to the whole flipping world for a price I decide and make 100% of the profit. Sure we're talking about a lot of YouTube quality content, but look how high quality some of the most popular web shows and web films are now compared to five years ago. Look at the CGI short film Rosa. Hell I'd buy that on Bluray.
The 20th century was about theatrical film, the 21st century will be something else.
