posted 12-22-2003 04:30 PM                    

quote:

---

Longer movies, bigger drinks and no intermissions equal a new kind of epic struggle in the theater: one bowl to rule them all, and in the darkness bind them

Peter Hartlaub, Chronicle Staff Writer

While it's good versus evil on the big screen in "Lord of the Rings: Return of the King," there's an even more epic struggle between man and nature going on in the audience. The One Ring to Rule Them All is a powerfully tempting force, but it doesn't compare to the strain of sitting through a three-hour, 20-minute movie without taking a whiz.

For moviegoers, the struggle to avoid a bathroom break becomes more difficult each year: Feature films are getting longer, concession drinks are getting bigger and intermissions have been extinct since the early 1980s. But the problem has reached epic proportions with the final film in the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, which is not only one of the longest feature films in recent years but also one of the most anticipated.

"I was trying to hold on," said 19-year-old Jetta Martin, who went to the first showing of the film on Wednesday at the Grand Lake Theater in Oakland, but she bolted when Frodo the hobbit was in peril at the end of the second hour. "I put my faith in Sam and went to the bathroom."

Much like Samwise Gamgee, the bravest hobbit in the film, Martin kept her composure in the face of adversity. She race-walked efficiently to the women's room and got back to her seat in less than two minutes.

Others attending early screenings of the films haven't been so cool, to the point where the "Lord of the Rings" fans are easily distinguished from patrons of other movies.

Most burst out of the theater squinting, with slightly frenzied looks on their faces, breaking into the same half-walking-half-running dash that kids use when chasing each other at a swimming pool with a particularly strict lifeguard. For the lucky few, a bathroom is close. Others face despair, forced to get directions from an usher, travel long hallways and even climb stairs to complete their quest.

"There are all these factors in your mind," said Crispin Boyer, a 32-year- old fan who succumbed to his urge during a "Return of the King" preview screening in San Francisco last week -- scurrying to the bathroom near the end of the third hour. "I don't want to miss the movie, but I really had to go. Essentially, biology took over."

Boyer and Martin are among many Bay Area "Lord of the Rings" fans who have been waiting their whole lives for a movie version of one of their favorite books. While it may be no big tragedy to take a few minutes off from "The Green Mile," a bathroom break during "Return of the King" becomes a pisser of the highest order -- not unlike having to take out the trash in the middle of losing one's virginity.

To make matters worse, the "Rings" trilogy may be the most pee-inducing series of films in the history of cinema.

The first two films were nearly three hours long and filled with images of running water. "Return of the King" is more than 20 minutes longer and includes an hourlong centerpiece action sequence that generates excitement like few other films before it -- making the big-finish battle in "Braveheart" look like the knife fight in Michael Jackson's "Beat It" video.

While the urinary crises that ensue can't be totally eliminated, they can be mitigated. The bladder-challenged should sit near an aisle, know where the bathroom is located before entering the screening and say no to that super- sized Cherry Coke. Finally, when there's no turning back, it's a matter of picking the right point in the movie to leave.

"You have to pay real close attention to the narrative," said Chris Gore, editor of the movie Web site www.filmthreat.com. "You have to choose your bathroom breaks wisely."

Gore should know. Born with only one kidney, the Los Angeles critic often takes bathroom breaks even in short movies -- and not surprisingly has become a steady advocate for the return of the intermission.

That's not an option in Bay Area theaters showing "Return of the King."

Grand Lake Theater owner Allen Michaan said exhibitors sign contracts promising not to disrupt the film print by adding anything beyond trailers in the beginning.

"As an exhibitor, I'd rather see an intermission," Michaan said. "People would buy more food."

The last intermission in a mainstream movie bisected "Gandhi" in 1982. The breaks were discontinued so more screenings could be packed into the day. Also, multiplexes were emerging in the early 1980s. Intermissions make it hard to keep track of multiplex patrons -- who could take advantage of the extra traffic to sneak into several movies without paying.

For a long time the disappearance of intermissions wasn't much of a problem. But in the past half-decade, the amount of 180 minutes-plus movies seems to be increasing to a level not seen since the early 1970s.

The biggest blow for the peanut-bladdered masses came in 1997, when "Titanic" was released. Even at a bloated 194 minutes, the movie still became the top-grossing film of all time, taking in close to $2 billion worldwide -- and dispelling the notion that long films are money risks.

"It's getting impossible to see these films without getting up and at least stretching your legs," said Gore, who suggests that multiplexes should offer some showings of movies like "Return of the King" with intermissions and some without.

A choice would have been welcomed by Julius and Aeneas Abate, ages 14 and 10, who sealed their fates when they consumed a liter of Coke and a 20-ounce diet Vanilla Coke between them before a recent screening at Metreon in San Francisco.

They bolted out of their seats shortly after the biggest battle was over ("We found a spot where nothing good was happening," Aeneas said), and felt no shame about their decision.

Back at the Grand Lake, Jetta Martin said she's been dying to see the movie, but had no choice when nature called. Her mother, 52-year-old Catherine Erin Macklin, quickly argued the point.

"You could have held on," joked Macklin, who read the books in the 1960s and wasn't about to miss a minute of the film. "It all depends on what you're made of."

---

posted 12-22-2003 05:14 PM                    

quote:

---

The last intermission in a mainstream movie bisected "Gandhi" in 1982.

---

posted 12-23-2003 04:15 AM                       

quote:

---

Warner dictated that the prints of Gods and Generals could not be split into two, but I'll bet a large amount of people did it anyway.

---

and lucas dictated "episode 2" would not play on film. we split it up, largely over static concerns (we didn't have filmguard then). that did make moving it easier, though, and we move prints twice weekly, in general.

starting the second have was awkward with the music starting up a couple minutes before the first image. when it played upstairs, i would turn off the curtain breaker when starting part 2, then turn the breaker back on and manually open the curtain at just the right time. downstairs there's no curtain breaker in the booth so there was a nice blank screen and customers thinking there was something wrong. beautiful.

carl

posted 12-23-2003 10:21 AM                    

quote:

---

"Gods and Generals" had a printed-in intermission

---

quote:

---

Warner dictated that the prints of Gods and Generals could not be split into two

---

What could possibly be the logic behind this?

I suppose the directors' argument that an intermission would destroy the flow of their story could be valid, but it seems to me just vanity. The greatest (long) movies of all time ("Gone With the Wind", "Lawrence of Arabia", etc.) didn't suffer at all... in fact a properly designed intermission point heightens the sense of drama.

Pravin makes an excellent point about "Lord of the Rings". If the theatrical release isn't the 'true' version, who cares about the flow of the story? Or perhaps extra scenes are nowadays just a marketing gimmick. Enough with this business of 'extended' or 'special' or 'New and Improved!' editions. Why can't directors be content with one edition? Multiple editions make storytelling into a farce. It would sound incredibly silly if painters, sculptors, writers and poets all decided to come up with 'special' and 'extended' versions of their works. Why do filmmakers think it perfectly acceptable, even required? The next step would be to sell a complete set of all footage shot so consumers could create their own versions. "Yes, I have the Christopher Seo version of 'Return of the King', though it's not as good as the Brad Miller version...."

posted 12-23-2003 11:47 AM                    

quote:

---

It would sound incredibly silly if painters, sculptors, writers and poets all decided to come up with 'special' and 'extended' versions of their works. Why do filmmakers think it perfectly acceptable, even required?

---