Our theaters look good on paper (big screens, stadium seating, digital projection) but they actually suck. The screens have marks on them, the clocks shine brightly onto the screens, the screens in the digital auditorium have a weird texture to them (reminds me of a high gain screen), and the seats are horrible. Sometimes they play the movie in the wrong aspect ratio!

I prefer my 7.1 136" 2.35 scope experience at home. The only reason I go to the theater is because I don't want to wait for certain movies to come out on Blu-ray.

Done.

The cinema. Nothing else will ever compare.

I see, on average, between one hundred and one hundred-fifty films (or so) in theaters per year. While I do enjoy watching movies in my home, and watch a few a week, nothing can compare going to the theater.

I almost always go to matinee viewings, so my cost, as well as my exposure to any tenuous elements, is limited.

I'll take home over theater anyday. I rather be in my house quietly watching a movie than with a bunch of animals munching on popcorn, pulling out bright cell phones and whispering. Not to mention crying babies. Many theaters suck.

That is a lot of money for what has to be at least some terrible movies.

that has to be at least 700 bucks per year. That's too much for my taste.

Theater.

Saw The Hangover a couple of weeks ago and had a blast, in part due to the energy and laughter of the crowd.

I'm another that used to go at least once a week but now only go for the big, event type movies.

Cost is one factor, general movie behavior is the other biggie. I know that being at home no matter how fancy a screen you have could replicate the experience of sitting in the dark with a hundred strangers, but unfortunately now most of those strangers are talking and texting.

Same.

It is true that some of us do have misanthropic (marked by a hatred or contempt for humankind) tendencies but given the experiences that many of us have had while simply trying to enjoy a movie, it is completely understandable.

This closely resembles nearly every theater experience I had prior to my decision to just stay home and wait for the DVD release. Don't get me wrong, I love the big screen but the hassle of it all was just too stressful for me to enjoy the movie. Seriously, I actually skipped going to the theater to see the new Star Trek movie because the the thought of having to deal with it all gave me a headache. It just isn't worth it to me.

ANNOYANCES:
1. Cell Phones
2. Babies
3. Talking
4. Kicking
5. Tapping
6. Munching
7. Playing music
8. Playing games
9. Having sex (yes it happened)
10. Getting up during the movie

I considered it but thought it might be more interesting if is was boolean question because it would force the user to choose which one was more important to them. Giving an option of "Both" would have been way too easy.

I prefer movies at home, but there is something special about a movie theater that a home movie cant capture. That said, I only go to a movie theater a few times a year for the big releases (i.e. Dark Knight, Transformers 2, Star Trek, etc.) and even then I go to the Imax theater if possible.

I see as many movies as invisiblegt and 50-60% of mine are free via preview screenings and yes, alot of them are bad. I'd say 60% are just mediocre, 25% are horrible and the last 15% are good to great.

this is why I go to matinee movies, less people is good.

Depends on the movie. Comedies, Thrillers and Horror movies I like better at the theater due to audience reaction. Save for my most recent trip, it has been years since somebody was disruptive at a theater I've been in. Grindhouse wouldn't have been the same sitting at home.

Also big action flicks on the big DLP or IMAX or IMAX-lite rock. It sucks so many people have bad experiences but I'm glad mine have mostly been great. Plus despite having a fairly decent setup of my own (106" DLP Mitsu projector on a High Power (glass beaded?) screen), stuff like Star Trek just wouldn't be the same.

Midnight screenings are usually the best imo, especially opening night since the people there are people who actually WANT to be there.

I like keeping tabs on the walkouts as well, it's always a good novelty. The last movie I saw in theaters was Bruno, a woman walked out with her two daughters right after the spinning penis sequence. I chuckled.

My home

I definatly think the theater is a much better experience (even taking into account the selfish people). However, due to costs (time and money) I see very few films in the theater any more.

Depends on the film or event for me. If it's some type of epic sci-fi, action or fantasy flick (with a possible IMAX or 3-D option) then I may consider a theatrical viewing within two-weeks of the release date. Otherwise, it's wait for the DVD or Blu-ray.

So far this method has save me a pretty good chunk of change so I can expand my film collection and upgrade my HT components.

To date, the LOTR Trilogy still ranks as the best theatrical experience I've ever had.

I might go to the theater once a year. Just not worth it for all the same reasons already mentioned. Mostly because people suck.

I am extremely content waiting and watching the movie at home.

Theater. Things are weird sometimes (people yelling at each other, crying babies during Bruno, etc.). But people get way too bent out of shape over the glow of a cell phone and stuff.

Plus, I hate being at 'home' and would get rid of it if I could.

I think a lively audience can be of great help. The most fun I've had in a theater recently was watching Drag Me To Hell where everyone seemed to be on the same page and loving it, it certainly adds to the enjoyment. I don't want to sit in a silent room at a movie like that.

I strongly disagree. I'd say that 7 or 8 times out of 10, I'm disappointed at the presentation at the theater, usually in the audio department, though not always. Not loud enough, not enough bass, no surround sound, etc. The very few times a year I go to the theater, I'm always dreading the opening credits, waiting to find out just what the presentation will be lacking this time.

Nope. Life in front of my 125.5" 1080p projection with 7.1 surround is completely sweet. The real clincher is that most films are MADE for home video now. The theatrical presentation is normally truncated in some way.

Still go to the theater to see "event" movies or stuff I can't wait to see, but I am more and more waiting for the BD given it will look and sound better than most of the theatrical presentations I've seen and I see it in the comfort of my own HT.

Waiting to watch the movie at home has another advantage. You get to read reviews and see if the movie tanked at the theaters rather than taking the risk of going in blind with little more than a hyped up trailer to go on.

Theater. It makes it more of an event. Watching a movie at home even if I had an actual theater in my house is just spending the night home at home (as opposed to a night out).

Yeah, your right. Christopher Nolan wants you to watch "The Dark Knight" on a small HD screen with fairly low resolution as aposed to IMAX or DLP or even 35mm. Your correct, film makers want you to see there work on smaller screens at lower resolutions. Thats why Chris filmed with IMAX, so it could later be lowered to a relativly low resolution on a small screen. WHAT YOU SEE IN THE THEATER IS ALMOST ALWAYS WHAT THE DIRECTOR WANTS YOU TO SEE. IF IT WASN'T HE WOULD NOT HAVE RELEASED IT. UNLESS IT'S A TV MOVIE, IT IS NOT MADE FOR THE HOME. IF IT WAS, THEY WOULDN'T SPEND ALL THIS MONEY FOR IMAX AND 35MM CAMERAS. THERE WOULD BE NO POINT IN HIGH RESOLUTION CAMERAS IF WHAT YOU SAY WAS TRUE.