|
Originally Posted by milo bloom
I saw a lot of quotable comments in this thread to add my two cents to, but I like this one, especially the last line. As is mentioned in the Politics forum quite often, the economy is not a zero sum game. Before DVD I saw the Star Treks, the occasional family outing, and that's about it. The rest was rental, and we rented quite a bit. I realize the studios had a piece of that, but not what they have today. Now, take a look at my DVD collection in (link in one of the lines in my sig), I would never have seen this many movies in the few years I've been collecting DVDs. The thinking that DVDs are killing movies is just shortsighted.
In theory, I can agree that a film print will be better than a DVD, but it just never lives up to that potential to my eyes. I've seen prints only a day or two old that looked like garbage. I've got DVDs with problem transfers sure, but at a much lower ratio than my theater experiences. As for the theater experience? One of my fondest memories I"ll hold onto forever is going to a revival theater a few years back and seeing Raiders of the Lost Ark with my father. (No he's not dead, but still...). We had always both been big fans of the franchise, and it was just me and him, and a respectful crowd that was really into the movie. Of course it still wasn't flawless, there was a line down the middle of the screen from where the print had been scratched for a good chunk of the movie. So what's the tradeoff? There are problems and advantages to both, but DVD has been kicking butt and taking names, and instead of rising to the challenge, the theatre folks are whining to the umpires about technicalities. I can't bring myself to feel sorry for them. Milo: A quick note here...I never stated that DVDs are "killing moveis"...the argument is that they have an impact on the industry. And yes, they are killing the cinemathic experience in many small town areas where the only product being distributed is the few big names of the day. I also see that part of this discussion has veered off in the opposite direction at this point questioning the popularity of DVD between those (like myslef) that favor the theater experience. My stance is that DVD with all of its benefits has also brought a great deal of limitation(s) to the selection of films that are being offered for theatrical distribution (this is probably a good place for those who want to discuss the quality of the films being made by Hollywood). Pro-B |
Originally Posted by Tarantino
...and the industry has done nearly nothing to acknowledge this fact or embrace this fact. Instead, they continue to churn out bad product and raise prices.
What'd they expect was going to happen? = J Pro-B |
Originally Posted by Josh Hinkle
How? Do you have to pass through a candy detector? I've never seen any theater that asks you to empty your pockets, or open you backpack or purse.
I mean yeah if you have a burger king combo the usher might notice it and throw you out. But who the fuck eats whole meals during a movie anyway. They aren't going to notice if the skittles are from the concession or Rite-aid when your sitting in the dark and eating them. |
^ = rotfl
|
Originally Posted by joliom
I actually saw a woman with 4-5 kids bring in a large Pizza Hut pizza, chicken wings and juices boxes (I'm not kidding). She had paper plates and napkins and stuff in a bag and she made a sort of picnic for her kids. The best part was she created this giant mess and made absolutely no attempt to clean it up, just left all her trash for the ushers. And the movie she brought her brood to? The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Now that's class. Welcome to the modern theater experience, folks.
:up: :up: |
I just read all 9 pages.
My opinion, is that the theater experience is truely something special. I remember seeing The Last Crusade when i was a kid at the Buena Park mall, and it was awesome! Watching the DVD these days doesnt provide anywhere near the same experience. However, i do NOT go see movies like i did when i was younger. Ive seen maybe 4-5 movies a year, if that. Of the movies i saw, were: King Kong (Midnight showing) Munich (noon matinee) The Producers (2pm matinee) Harry Potter 4 (Midnight showing) And thats pretty much it. That gives you an idea that i go to selected showings for good experiences. I know if i were to go see Saw 2 at a 9pm showing on a friday night, id have a MUCH MUCH worse experience, so i avoid it completely. I like DVDs a lot, and i just recently (6 months or so ago) upgraded to a 42" Hitatchi Plasma. Im insanely excited for Blu-Ray and patiently await it!! I also agree COMPLETELY with a lot of the talk so far regarding crap movies comming out. Not sure what the studios are expecting with really bad movies getting pumped out one after another, do they think that if they just put out more quantity, people will just watch something out of the crap? Next movie im going to be seeing is X-Men 3. It will be a midnight showing with a great and excited crowd in the biggest theater and best sound possible. I know better then to try a peak time showing thats packed to the brim with casual people who dont care about the movie as much as i do to enjoy it. I'll also be seeing Scary Movie 4, The Da Vinci Code, and maybe the new Pirates of the Caribbean. End result, movie theater experience IS better, but all the moons have be alligned properly for it to happen. Otherwise, definetly home theater time!! |
Originally Posted by joliom
I actually saw a woman with 4-5 kids bring in a large Pizza Hut pizza, chicken wings and juices boxes (I'm not kidding). She had paper plates and napkins and stuff in a bag and she made a sort of picnic for her kids. The best part was she created this giant mess and made absolutely no attempt to clean it up, just left all her trash for the ushers. And the movie she brought her brood to? The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Now that's class. Welcome to the modern theater experience, folks.
|
Originally Posted by pro-bassoonist
So, I suggest you do some research first before you claim that there has been no effect on the industry whatsoever.
Ciao, Pro-B BUT, my argument is that home theaters have become part of the cinematic experience and Hollywood doesnt get that. So, to say that its "killing" cinema is crazy. Also, in my area, they are building theaters right and left. Literally, they are just finishing an AMC (I think its amc) in the Southlake area here in DFW. A Rave theater just opened up close to me within the past year. They are still popping up all over! If they were losing money, this wouldnt be the case. I am positive that people's movie libraries have significantly grown with the emergance of DVD. Hollywood is no less popular now. I would bet they are even more popular. Face it though, businesses models MUST evolve and anticipate change. The movie industry is no different. For the Academy to make comments like they did, just makes them sound desperate. I guess thats not suprising since they are so out of touch anyways. |
Originally Posted by Feathers McGraw
My movie spending is *not* decreased. My theatre attendance is.
|
Originally Posted by joliom
God, I wish they'd bring back drive-ins. That would get me back into the "theater" experience big-time. The drive-in gives you back some of the control you lose going to the local mega-plex, restores some of the comforts of home, and still leaves you with more of a larger-than-life experience that you don't get at home if you aren't fortunate enough to afford several thousand dollars worth of home theater equipment. Granted the sound isn't as good, but who cares- it's way more fun.
Another thing I wish these big megaplexes would do is show more classic movies on occassion. Why not throw Indiana Jones in one of those 20 theaters for a couple weeks? Do some event nights. Other than a few places in NY and LA and some University theaters and small arthouse places, nobody does this. I live in one of the 10 largest cities in the U.S. and the only old movies we get are when they do theatrical re-releases like Star Wars and the E.T. anniversary edition that get nationwide openings. Shit, I would gladly fork over some money to go see The Terminator or Doctor Zhivago at a good theater. |
Originally Posted by Giles
here in DC, the AFI shows alot of older films and special engagements - they also showcase 70mm films on a continual basis, which is a real treat. Loews (now AMC) in Georgetown has recently been showing themed films on Thursdays - which is fun to reexperience the films on the big screen.
|
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
Unfortunately, there is no Lowes any more. :(
;) |
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
God damn DVDs!!
;) I believe AMC bought them. ;) Nice try though. |
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
And that's really sad. You should be able to enjoy it in the movies. That's were it was meant to be seen.
I use to be extremely passionate about the theatrical experience (like some of you), but the changes in the patrons and overall cost has seriously diminished my vision of this great past time. DVD has helped me "adapt" or "cope" with changes and it has reformed the way we watch movies. |
Originally Posted by Abob Teff
Somebody who tells you that seeing a movie on the big screen in a crowded theater is a "social" experience is wrong. It is a communal experience, and the created atmosphere that whole auditorium full of tense, frightened people provides can add immeasurably to the movie going experience. |
Originally Posted by MovieExchange
I'm sort of surprised that no one has mentioned that this could be a slap at Mark Cuban and his idea of bringing movies to DVD at the same time that they're in the theater. I don't think the idea will ever work, but you know that theater owners are probably pretty scared right now.
I've been waiting for simultaneous home video and theater releases since back in the dingy ol' VHS days. It's coming . . . soon. And not just on some also-ran digi-feature by Steven Soderbergh. |
Originally Posted by joliom
God, I wish they'd bring back drive-ins.
$5.25 for adults with kids 11 and under free. Two features. FM sound. We bring our soccer chairs and a cooler of drinks. Pop corn in the Whirlypop, as the microwave stuff tastes awful after sitting for some time, and bring PSP and DS for the time between flicks. Now if I could just get them to play some classic flicks.... |
Originally Posted by Feathers McGraw
His point is that "the industry" is more than just theatres. Pointing out 3 theatres closed near you is irrelevant to his argument, because it's only a small part of the industry.
His argument simplified (figures made up): Old days: Theatre revenue $100, dvd revenue $0 Nowadays: Theatre revenue $70, dvd revenue $40 You see the theatre down -$30 and closing 3 in your neighbourhood, he sees $110 > $100. I definitely lean towards RockStrongo here. I personally make the decision to see many movies at home, instead of the theatre, for numerous reasons, cost, convenience, small theatres. Not *every* movie needs the big screen, and only certain ones make the cut. My movie spending is *not* decreased. My theatre attendance is. |
Originally Posted by candyrocket786
No it's not.
I use to be extremely passionate about the theatrical experience (like some of you), but the changes in the patrons and overall cost has seriously diminished my vision of this great past time. I could have a bunch of actors in my backyard singing and dancing. Doesn't mean it's better than a broadway show. |
Originally Posted by RockStrongo
I agree with others. This line sums up just about everything. Brilliantly put.
|
Originally Posted by Cygnet74
i have an HD projector, a 9ft 16x9 screen, 7.1 sound, and bass shakers mounted into the couches. so when i threw an oscar party last night, and the president said movies were meant to be seen in a theater, on the big screen with sound all around, we all laughed.
|
Personally I'm one of the people that does both, sees movies in theatres, then I decide whether or not that movie is worth a purchase on dvd.
The quality of theatres are terrible though. I'm lucky, I live in Tallahassee, Florida, we have about 4 theatres. Tickets to go see a movie ($7) are low compared to most big towns where they could cost 12 bucks. What I hate about theatres are the overpriced drinks, stale popcorn, and that mother that thinks it's a great idea to bring their 1 year old to the movie so they can cry the whole time. Maybe if we got nice digital projectors and fancy reclining seats I would go to the theatres more often (I've been to a theatre like that in Orlando and it was amazing). However, Tallahassee has one of the greatest things ever invented, a dollar theatre. When the new releases get taken out of the big theatres like Eastern Federal and AMC they go to the dollar theatre. I've seen some amazing movies there like Walk the Line and the Aviator and many more. All movies are only a dollar unless its a tuesday matinee, in that case its only 50 cents. The theatre isnt super nice but for a dollar I can deal. I <3 dollar theatre. It's especially good for very bad movies like: You Got Served, Doom, Alone in the Dark. Me and my friends went to see these for only a buck and since they're weren't any other people in the theatre we went on to tear these movies apart. |
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
Just because cost has gone up and the people suck doesn't mean that movies aren't supposed to be seen on the big screen.
They should JUMP at the chance to profit in this new wave since theaters will be in EVERYONE'S home. You take away driving, crowds and sticky floors. At some point, theaters COULD go the way of the drive-in. People would only go to them for novelty/nostalgia. In this information age, at some point, you should not have to drive to a theater to see the latest movie. Change is happening, but bigger changes are coming. Hollywood needs to start thinking like Cuban. |
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
Just because cost has gone up and the people suck doesn't mean that movies aren't supposed to be seen on the big screen.
I could have a bunch of actors in my backyard singing and dancing. Doesn't mean it's better than a broadway show. I said it was an excellent substitute to the theatrical experience Substitutes, by definition, exist to offer the customer comparable qualities and services of an existing name-brand product. |
Originally Posted by digitalfreaknyc
I wouldn't say "brilliant." He loses points for horrible grammar. ;)
should we start calling you 'The Grammar Queen' - ;) |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:09 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.