|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
Author
|
Topic: Lost that moviegoing mojo
|
Pravin Ratnam
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 844
From: Atlanta, GA,USA
Registered: Sep 2002
|
posted 12-30-2008 04:22 PM
I turned 40 recently. I realized one sad fact. I do not feel the same thrill I did earlier in my life at going to the movies. In the 90s, there was a time when I would watch nearly 2 movies a week on the average in theaters(average boosted by the nearly 3 movies a week I would watch in the summer). I would watch all kinds of movies back then - indie movies, foreign ones, action, silly comedies, even the genial bland ones. Sometimes, I would even stay past my movie and walk into the next auditorium and sample a part of a bad movie out of plain morbid curiosity(example: Batman and Robin). Earlier this decade, that number fell to one a week. But over the last couple of years, I am having a hard time watching movies in the theater on a twice a month basis. This was a decent summer, so I watched 12 movies during the summer. Though at other times, it is down to once a month and sometimes I go just because a life's worth of moviegoing habit built in a sense of obligation for me to go watch.
I have become content watching movies on my 60 inch HD screen despite the pan and scan atrocities(2.35 movies modified to fit 16x9) of HBO and Starz. Showtime at least shows OAR. Now I got a PS3. So I will start renting discs again. In a couple of years, 70 inch LCDs should become affordable and I will upgrade my TV at that point.
There are many reasons for my decreased moviegoing habit 1) Just natural aging. We have seen it all. Variations of the same theme over the ages. I actually have a hard time sitting still in a movie theater over an average movie that i would find perfectly fine on TV. In the 90s, I would sit and enjoy such movies in the theater. Now I get very restless if the movie is just OK. That was something I would feel in the past only for bad movies.
2) Worse projection standards in theaters. Better home theater quality. HD has really made me prefer to watch genial movie comedies and small dramas at home. Also borderline movies with stars , i can safely watch at home while multitasking. This multitasking thing is a big key for me. 3) The decline of indie theaters in my area. I think Madstone was the last hurrah in that regard. Landmark has a couple of theaters but they are too far away for me to attend unless the movie is great. 4) My peer group has been totally domesticated. They are more into what is good for their kids. 5) There are still talented filmmakers out there, but not all of it is in the movies. I think pay cable has picked up the slack for TV series that are movie like. (Example: I love Dexter).
6) Shortening video window: Anyway, I might go watch Slumdog Millionaire or Benjamin Button today. haven't decided yet. As badly as I want to see them, the shortening video window makes me not have to wait too long if I don't see it. Plus, if you do not catch a movie in the first week, frequently they get shunted to the small auditoriums in most theaters.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott Norwood
Film God
Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 12-30-2008 07:26 PM
This has been pretty much a dud year for movies, based on what I've seen. There are three 2008 releases that I really liked (Wall-E, Man on Wire, and Encounters at the End of the World). A few others were decent (Wendy and Lucy, Sita Sings the Blues, Diving Bell/Butterfly, The Counterfeiters, In Bruges, a few others). Pretty much everything else just bored me to tears.
Agreed that classic screenings are far more interesting. Fortunately, there are several venues nearby that regularly screen older titles. Unfortunately, titles that should do well can suffer due to poor promotion. The reissue of "The Godfather" played for a week at an AMC house with no advertising. Too bad.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jesse Skeen
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1517
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 12-31-2008 09:06 PM
The problem is that the big companies seem to have completely lost the concept of the "experience" part of going to the movies. A lot of recently-built complexes have common-width screens, which really shouldn't be done. People can already watch letterboxed movies at home, when they go out the widescreen movies should look BIGGER.
If I may be so bold, I think small auditoriums (with under 200 seats) simply should not be included in new complexes either. The effect of many of these is like being shoved into a broom closet, and it says that you're a loser for choosing the movie playing there- the people seeing the "cool" movie got the bigger auditorium, but at least you got to pay the same price they did. If there isn't enough business to warrant playing it with a larger seating capacity, don't bother playing it at all- I'll just wait til I can watch it at home.
An ideal theater is one that people will want to go to REGARDLESS of what movie is playing there- even if there's nothing but crap out, at least they'll know it's being presented the best it can be, and the theater itself should be reason enough to go out. At the end of the movie, customers should be thinking "I can't WAIT to see another movie here!" instead of the usual "let's get the hell out". I don't know what it will take for the powers that be to realize this. They seem to think they're doing everything right as long as not too many people complain about anything, and whenever shows play to an audience of zero they blame it on the movie- it couldn't possibly be that their screens are too small, prices too high or their general presentation is sub-par.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justin Hamaker
Film God
Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 12-31-2008 09:36 PM
I think a fair of the blame for the lost magic of the movies has to fall back on the customers. People have become so used to watching movies in the comfort of their living rooms, that they have forgotten the etiquette that goes along with watching movies in a shared environment. The talk and text on their cell phones, they talk to each other, put their feet up as if it's a recliner (I admit that I'm sometimes guilty of this one). And when confronted, many have the attitude of "I paid my $10, I have a right to watch the movie".
I almost never get a chance to see a movie with the crowds on opening weekend. I'm either watching by myself late at night or I'm going on the weekdays when it's not very crowded. When there is a good movie on the screen, I find I'm not so critical of all the other things. Last night I went to the Rialto theatre in Santa Rosa to watch Doubt and The Reader. Both movies were on relatively small screens and for The Reader I could hear the projector chatter the whole time. But I enjoyed both movies and plan to visit this theatre again.
I can honestly say that I'm more concerned about the quality of the film than the quality of the presentation - as long as it's not distractingly bad. I can't recall ever deciding to skip a movie in the theatre just because it might look better on my TV at home.
Probably the biggest change in my movie going habits is I'm more selective about what I watch. The last 6 movies I paid for were Doubt, The Reader, Frost/Nixon, Milk, Slumdog Millionaire, and The Boy in the Striped Pajamas. But I'll still go see somethings I'm less interested in just to pass the time.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Monte L Fullmer
Film God
Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted 01-01-2009 02:06 PM
quote: Justin Hamaker fair of the blame for the lost magic of the movies has to fall back on the customers
But, if a theatre owner can have the right tact and knowhow, he can bring those customers back by rejuvinating that magic in his cinema.
But true though: we're in a different generation of the industry now were the majority of our prospective customers really don't know what the definition of "theatre magic" is.
They're used to the "McCinema" form of operation: get them in, show them the movie, and get them out and repeat the cycle for the next set.
Also, in the "McCinema" form of operation is the "McJob" work atmosphere: staff that are almost in a 'robotic' form of customer service to the patrons: deadpan attitudes and appearances.
Booth personnel with the same attitude: built the print, thread the machine, push "PLAY" and walk away without having a clue on ensuring what is presented on the screen.
Dang! "Ronald McDonald" really set the tone for our workforce these days....
Oh, and a "HAPPY NEW YEAR to all!" -Monte
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 01-01-2009 03:36 PM
It is exhibition and Hollywood's fault. That is, between the two, they've taken the profit out of actually showing the movie so the exhibitor HAS to worry mostly about the concession stand.
As a result, the whole theatre environment has changed. The theatres are not ushered anymore...which has taught the most recent generations that it is okay to talk and be disruptive.
The Theatres themselves are also pretty piss-poor. Not that they don't have up-sides but "pre-show entertainment" isn't one of them. Stadium seating was an outgrowth of inept auditorium designs with piss-poor sight lines. A well designed theatre doesn't have sight line problems, slope-floor or stadium. If you are going to do a stadium...DON'T have people walk down to the front of the theatre and then CLIMB their way back. The lack of such luxuries like curtains move the cinema experience closer to something less special...they are part of the atmosphere. Speaking of wall coverings...acoustic treatment...DO IT...the RT60 should be proper and the STC isolation should be high (in excess of STC-70 with STC-75 being a better goal). Projection and Sound...whats cheapest isn't normally what is best....it the big picture, it translates to the overall experience.
One of the things I learned early on in my career was that EVERY theatre is an ambassador to the industry...a failure at any theatre, even if it isn't in your chain, sends a negative impression about the entire industry...not just about that one bad theatre.
Hollywood...STOP REMAKING MOVIES THAT WERE ALREADY GOOD...write NEW ones. And they have to be good stories BEFORE you start adding effects and crap. Shoot the movies in the best format of the day (whatever the day may be). Right now, it is 65mm, not 35mm and not digital. The higher the quality of the original, the better it is going to look for all time...not just on the release date. Cheapening out on production, hurts the movie. I've rarely seen where over-paid actors really helped the movie, particularly long-term. Sure there are some high-power talent that can pull-in extra grosses but look at some of the highest grossing films of all time...they don't necessarily have high-power actors in them (especially not high-end actors when the movies were made....think Star Wars...The three main characters were practically nobodies when it came out...the biggest actor in the film, Sir Alec Guiness was NOT the draw in that film).
For me, movies used to be fun escape. The shows, by and large, were well presented in interesting theatres. Nowadays, they seem to be just something to do if all else fails. There are exceptions, of course.
As to Jesse's 200-seat rule. That one I disagree with. Some of the best auditoria in the world are quite intimate. Seat count also does not necessarily convey theatre size. I'll put Silver III (AFI/Silver) up against many an auditorium many times larger. Technically, it is very good though it is only 75-seats. I'll put Silver II at only 200-seats (the bottom of Jesse's seat count) against about 99% of the theatres out there. I wish it had a curved screen...but that is my personal preference.
Steve
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chad Souder
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 962
From: Waterloo, IA, USA
Registered: Feb 2000
|
posted 01-01-2009 04:01 PM
Do you think some of it is your tastes and standards just changed? I swore I would never like coffee when I was young - or classical music. I also used to think it was a good idea to get in line hours before the Pantera concert so I could fight for 2 hours to keep on the front rail, ending up drenched in sweat and beer and unable to hear much for three days. Not so much any more.
I don't watch as many movies as I did before, but its not because of the theatres. Like you said, Pravin, its largely variations of the same movie. 30 years ago, you probably saw variations of older movies too, but you were just seeing them for the first time, so to you they weren't variations.
I think another reason may be that you have more money as an adult. Movies are relatively cheap entertainment, but as you establish a career, you have money for new hobbies. I like guns and like to shoot - something I didn't have the money to support until the past few years. I still enjoy movies, but am very selective. I'd rather go hunting than sit through an Adam Sandler picture.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 6 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|