If you’re looking for some lazy Sunday reading, James Berardinelli’s take on the state of the multiplex, 3D and the release window is a good summing-up of the slow decline of the movie theater over the last few years. Here’s an open thread.
Reader Interactions
41Comments
Comments are closed.
WereBear
He’s a good reviewer: ie, I agree with him most of the time, so he’s a good index to what I like.
Daddy-O
I work in an art house movie theater. We’ve had a Paul Giamatti movie called “Win Win” for over two months, and it’s STILL selling hundreds of tickets every weekend day.
My two cents’ worth.
DecidedFenceSitter
I’m not a huge movie goer, I see maybe 3 movies in theaters a year (take 2 hours out of my day to go somewhere and pay 10+ dollars a ticket? HA!) – but this reminds me that if I want to catch Thor on the big screen I need to do it soon, locally I have to drive 30 minutes to find a theater where it is 2D.
Villago Delenda Est
Interesting, because it mirrors one of the most glaring problems in our society today: the disconnect between the elite and the masses. Cameron wants people to “experience” his movies the way he intends, but he has no clue that his intentions are totally lost when his movie hits the multiplex. Cameron won’t go see the movie down at the mall to understand why the multiplex experience turns people off, nor do the MBA trained monkeys who run the multiplex chains.
Pretty much how no one in the Village comprehends the economic distress out in the provinces…they’re immune from all that, to include medical bankruptcies, housing value collapse, and everything else.
Which is why I will cheer when they finally get the comeuppance they so richly deserve, with tumbrels working overtime to deliver them to their just desserts.
J.W. Hamner
I’ve got nothing on movies, but yesterday was brutal from a New England sports perspective. I was at USA-ESP, and that was so thorough a slaughter it’s hard to identify pieces. And then the Bruins-Canucks? Yikes.
PeakVT
@DecidedFenceSitter: I usually hit a matinee when I actually drag myself out to a theater. Cheaper, and fewer squealing pre-teens. /getoffmylawn
PurpleGirl
I went to see X-Men First Class yesterday. I liked it. It is a prequel and it works in telling the background story. As my movie-going friend and I now tend to buy tickets through the machines, we buy “senior” tickets and save a few bucks. (We are in shooting distance, as it were, of being seniors, though.)
Mark S.
I think I’ve seen about three movies in the theater in the last five years.
WereBear
Many years ago, I saw Lawrence of Arabia in 70 millimeter in one of those old Deco movie palaces with an excellent sound system and a full house.
That was an experience. And I’d be glad to shell out three or four times the current movie prices to have it again.
It’s not just that I agree with Mr Berardinelli about the inadequacy of the multiplex experience. It is also that when they conclude their audience is 13 years old, and make movies for them; they are not going to tempt me into the theater.
The Ancient Randonneur
The new GOP House majority was able to pass a bill to repeal the health insurance reform legislation only a few days into the new Congress. Why is their “small government” solution taking so long to get passed? Shouldn’t it only be a page or two long? Wasn’t the goal to make legislation short enough so Tea Party members can actually read the whole thing in less than one Congressional term?
@J.W. Hamner: Yep. Tim Thomas had a tough night in goal.
Joel
I agree with premise, disagree on the details.
Arthouse theaters have the worst screen sizes, acoustics, seat comfort and amenities, yet typically are successful. That’s because they market an experience that you don’t get at the soulless megaplex. Maybe if the megaplexes diversified a bit, they could pull more customers.
aimai
We hardly ever go to movies anymore but we did go to see the new Woody Allen, because we are going to Paris this summer. We saw it at our local art theater and it was packed. But after reading the recent criticism at Roger Ebert’s site of the quality of the films being shown and the lack of care in screening things I realized that my entire experience of going to movies had been really off for years.
The print, or the way the film was shown, was off. Rather than looking beautiful and golden, as Paris actually does, the entire thing was greyed out. There was no difference between the sky on an obviously sunny day (you could see the light and the clouds) and on a grey and rainy day. In both cases the sky was the same white/grey. Similarly, nothing had been done in the way of filtering to bring out the golden tones of the stone, or the color of the water.
I think I’ve been spoiled by the interesting color and tone and lighting effects possible now on blu ray and even a regular high quality tv show. Rather than seeing something in the movie theater that I can’t experience at home (other than size of the picture) I am seeing an image that is degraded, fuzzy, and indistinct and badly lit.
I’d also like to say that its galling that you can’t determine in advance which horrible theater you are going to be stuck in–is it one that is barely bigger than a home movie theater? Is it one in which the chairs are offset from the screen so that there is no true center to the image and sitting to the left or right of the screen puts you askew? Or are the seats in the front half so far down, relative to the screen, that you have to slide halfway down and tilt your head back in order to take in the entire picture?
Its nuts that the architecture of the movie theater itself is so poor that only a few seats, and those different from room to room, can get you a halfway decent view of the action.
aimai
Amanda in the South Bay
I’m tired of Hollywood not having any original ideas. Yet another X-Men movie? On top of the trilogy and the Wolverine movie? Didn’t I also hear about remaking Spiderman yet again? And lets not get started on the bazillion Batman reimages.
I just want an action/drama/scifi/fantasy movie that is 1. Not a pre-existing comic book and 2. Movies that aren’t prequels/reimages/sequels of movies that came out in the past decade.
jeffreyw
Old Fart speaking here. Movies suck anymore. Nothing good since the weekly serials. Hi Ho Silver! Away!
Breakfasts have been getting much better, so there is that.
Bmaccnm
@Daddy-O: I saw “WinWin”at the local indy theater (are you talking about the Hollywood?). I liked it just fine- a beer to sip and a look at middle class mid life morality. No explosions, no titties. I’m tired of titties and explosions as the basis for movies. I don’t watch movies at multiplexes and I don’t watch them on TV. I wait till they get to the Hollywood. What does that say about me?
PurpleGirl
The theater I went to yesterday is a 9-screen multiplex. They have an elevator to the second floor which does work. I’ve stopped going to one theater which hasn’t fixed it’s escalator to the upper floor and I can’t walk up the stairs. One important thing about the theaters I do go to is the cleanliness of the restrooms. Also the thickness of their walls so I don’t hear what is showing in the next room over. I go to the movie theater because I like a larger screen for first time viewing.
Daddy-O
@Bmaccnm: @Bmaccnm: I’m in St. Louis, and I work at a Landmark Theatre–which I would guess is what the Hollywood is, but not here. New York? Don’t say if you don’t feel comfortable.
It says you have taste, brains and you must be happy!
KXB
Part of it is just aging. I think most people went to movies regularly on weekends starting in college and through most of their 20s, because that was the cheapest night out that was available. Now, in my late 30s, I go to the movies maybe 3 times a year. Usually it is for someone’s birthday, or everyone is gathered for the holidays and just needs a day out of the house.
Over the Memorial Day weekend, I thought it was time to catch up on some foreign films. I saw the Israeli war film “Beufort” – dull, lifeless, with monotone dialogue delivery. After that, it was “Hiroshima Mon Amour” – the old fifties French film that I read much about, but never saw. This was quite good – just follows a couple over 24 hours. Not a lot happens, and the script is written more like a play than movie, but quite deserving of its praise.
The cost to rent? Zero – they were from the library. Add in my Netflix subscription and as many snacks and drinks as I want from my fridge – theaters are really going to have to work hard to drag my skinny ass back to the theater.
PanAmerican
Last few years? Average weekly attendance has been in decline since home radio units became affordable. the industry has always plowed far too much money into exhibition. Up market presentations, be they palaces, wide screens or IMAX, have never worked at the box office. Cinephiles are a thin slice of the pie. Not many movie goers give a rats ass about quality in presentation.
Swellsman
I checked out X-Men: First Class on Friday, and boy! was that a dumb movie. I mean, dumb even for comicbook movie standards. I understand the critics are liking it, but that can only be because the movie has a nice 1960’s look to it. The plot, the characters and the entire story are just ridiculous.
Here are a whole lotta reasons why that thing was a spectacular fail.
Bmaccnm
@Daddy-O: I live in the People’s Republic of Portland. The Hollywood is a restored Art Deco movie house from the 20’s. Movies cost $6.00 and they sell beer. A good mix of foreign films, oldies, indies, and better quality newer Hollywood releases. It’s one of the things I like best about living here, although Portland is lucky to have a good new-release cineplex and several good 2nd run theaters. I realize that many cities don’t have a Landmark, or a Hollywood, and almost no suburbs have such a thing. I wouldn’t go to a suburban mall cineplex if you paid me to. If that were my option, I’d choose Netflix. But I find I like the surprises available at an art house. That said, I’ve had some of my best surprises on long-distance Mexican buses.
Kathy
The last movie I saw in a theatre was Oscar-winner The King’s Speech. My husband and I enjoyed it immensely. Having said that, there was nothing innovative, ground-breaking, or extraordinary about it. The studios used to make a dozen or more of these each year. Solid productions with with compelling stories, top-flight actors, and competent production values. Movies that adults could go to without feeling they were slumming.
I look at the list of movies at my local theatre and feel no desire at all to attend. Quite the opposite, actually. I’m most likely, now, to go to something with my grandkids and even the majority of those evoke little interest.
Guess this cinephile has turnedinto an old fuddy-duddy.
p.s. Bernardinelli is my most-trusted reviewer.
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
@Amanda in the South Bay:
this is my complaint too.
they get a steady near zero percent of my entertainment dollar now. oddly, i know people who disagree with my taste in movies, culture, politics, etc who also give them zero percent as well.
all of this fantasy/retro/high concept built-in franchise movie making seems like a choice to not divide the audience for a film in half, or into thirds, by the time they show the preview trailers. what they end up doing is making insipid movies that appeal to less people than if they made choices.
i can handle movies i don’t like, i don’t see them. i would like just a few that i would want to see, i am sure even people who wouldn’t be at the few i would choose feel the same way.
/offmylawn
Tim, Interrupted
I am a huge movie fan. Overall, LOVE the movie theatre experience, or USED to love it. A simple list of what has ruined it for me:
Cellphones
Texting
Audible talking
General rudeness
I suppose I am now an old fart, but my god people have gotten brazen about treating a movie experience as if they are sitting in their own basement in their underwear. On a number of occasions I have directly but not aggressively challenged cellphoners/texters/talkers during the screeening; sometimes it is effective, sometimes it is not. On two occasions I was threatened with physical violence. So then I have to go search for an usher, blah blah blah…of course now the movie is ruined.
And even if there is no audience rudeness, I find myself distracted by a certain uneasiness/anticipation that there WILL be audience rudeness. Ruins the experience.
There’s a nice arthouse theatre over in Cambridge that I used to go to a lot, but even they have gotten slack about these things.
Cinemaplex staff in general are indifferent to the behavior of the audience, otherwise there would be an usher on duty in every single screening. A LIVE announcement about texting/talking/phoning would be made, warning of a zero tolerance policy that would meet an infraction with immediate ejection from the theatre.
Better yet, theatres would BLOCK cellphone/device signals once the previews begin; they just don’t have the balls yet to do it.
Bottom line: I used to go to at LEAST 4-6 movies a month, sometimes more. I haven’t been to a theatre in at least six months now. I watch netflix, etc. But I do miss the theatrical experience. Though for me, I wouldn’t care if I was the only one in the auditorium; I just like the physical atmosphere. There are millions like me, although studios seem to still make lots of money on big opening weekends.
Elie
I saw Bridesmaids at a local theater and thoroughly enjoyed being in a theater filled with people howling with laughter.
I am also very fortunate to live near a town that has a great theater that screens B movies, indies and quite a few documentaries along with selected popular releases. The Pickford also carries sci-fi, Kurasawa, movie shorts and other festivals. Its a treasure that was expanded and is supported by the community, recently expanding through memberships and donations.
I love seeing good movies with other people… the community experience I find good and can enhance the experience of the film.
I also agree with many that the general multiplex experience has degraded in recent years with way too many silly or bad films…. its not uncommon for me to be unable to find anything that I would like to see playing at any of the theaters (except for the Pickford)
Bloix
Berardinelli doesn’t mention the endless loop of ear-splitting commercials at the multiplex. Nowadays home is the place to see commercial-free movies.
Rommie
@Swellsman: I didn’t like X-Men First Class that much either – it was too slow too many times, and I couldn’t shake the impression of Singer gleefully mucking up the storyline to render the prior movies invalid.
I couldn’t define what my real beef was, until I watched the RedLetterMedia guy’s review of Revenge of the Sith a couple of days ago. X-Men FC is about the characters of Magneto and Prof. X, but they are both such giant tools, waving around their toolbags for most of the movie, that I don’t give a crap about them in the end. Hugh was right!
As far as theaters go, I loved Avatar in IMax 3D. It was also a singular event, as most movies just aren’t made for that environment yet. Cameron may end up being too far ahead of the curve, and the system falls apart before everyone else catches up.
Tokyokie
I’m somebody who probably sees at least 50 movies a year in theaters, and yes, the experience has grown worse over the years. Yet I still go, I suppose hoping to see something that captures the magic of seeing movies at the old theater in my hometown, yet knowing it’s not likely to occur.
I don’t catch a lot of movies at the mall multiplexes. Part of that is a result of my vow from a few years ago to never again see a movie in a theater that’s based on a comic book or an old TV show. (I’ll cut movies based on graphic novels slack on a case-by-case basis.) But part of that’s the crowds; I’ve grown weary over the years of snarling, “I didn’t pay 10 bucks to hear you talk,” to idiots who think they’re in their living room. (Seeing movies in Tokyo was generally pleasant — once you swallowed hard and paid the $20+ for a ticket — because the audiences are uniformly polite and the screens are huge. And the crowds in Hong Kong are even ruder than those in the States; a few years back, I saw the great Chinese director King Hu introduce one of his classic films at the Hong Kong International Film Festival (it was, I believe, his last public appearance), and some lout on the front row took a cellphone call and gabbed with his outside voice, drowning out Hu’s remarks.) But today’s multiplex theaters are better than those of from the 1970s and ’80s; stadium seating, great sound systems, as compared to the shoebox auditoriums with the ski-jump aisle down the middle and the crappy projection and sound.
Several years ago, before the advent of home video, I caught a campus screening of a 16mm print of John Ford’s The Searchers, and in a couple of scenes, the lighting or sound equipment is visible at the top of the frame. My buddy thought it was some sort of brilliant postmodern statement that Ford was making, but I explained how back in the day, every theater had a projectionist who’d do a technical screening late at night before the movie started screening for audiences so he could make the proper adjustments to ensure that the film was shown to the best possible effect, and that would include tinkering with the scrims around the screen’s periphery to mask out “bloopers” like that (which directors of that era wouldn’t bother to reshoot, because they knew the projectionists would cover for them). Alas, a 16mm print shown at a college wouldn’t get such treatment.
And sadly, with the decline of professional projectionists, no films do. Because multiplexes couldn’t afford to have a separate projectionist for each auditorium, they gave rise to the platter projection system. Instead of switching projectors between reels of film, the entire movie will be spliced into a single, massive reel. Unfortunately, the resulting reels are so heavy and unwieldly that they have to be placed on their side, on either side of the projector lens, rather than above and below the lens. And the problem with that is that the heat from the projector lamp will give the film a tiny electrostatic charge, and that attracts dust particles. When the reels are upright, they don’t collect a lot of dust, but when they’re on their sides, they do. And when that tiny spec of dust is run through the projector the next screening, it will scratch the emulsion. And so, if you don’t see a movie soon after it comes out, the print will look like it was packed in sand before being shipped. But hey, the theater isn’t having to pay a union guy for each auditorium.
Digital projector systems, of course, eliminate these problems (and studios’ expense of striking thousands of prints, a major expense for a movie opening everywhere on Earth the same week). Except the image is dimly lit and the colors all have the de-saturated look of Antonioni’s Il deserto rosso, only not on purpose. But hey, the studios save a bunch of money.
Yet I persist in going to theaters. Must be because I never developed a taste for alcohol.
cleek
@Joel:
in my area, the main difference between the environments at the megaplex and the art house theaters is that you can buy beer and wine at the latter.
it makes a big difference.
Elie
@Bloix:
This too. Oviously related to theaters having bottom line pressures that they didn’t used to have.
Most larger cities/towns have specialty theaters that show cool films without the commercials. In Chicago, the Music Box is a local landmark and shows great indie and foreign films and are independetly owned. Hopefully folks support these types of theaters.
Tokyokie
My experience is that the crowds at the art houses generally don’t spoil the film by talking or using their cellphones throughout. But then, something with subtitles is going to draw a more sophisticated crowd than the latest Stan Lee-inspired effort. I like the movies and the crowds at the art houses a lot more than those at the multiplexes, and if that makes me elitist, so be it.
Kristine
@jeffreyw: I baked my first loaf of bread yesterday. I twitched around with the flour a little too much–substituted most of the bread flour with white whole wheat–so the loaf didn’t puff up as high as it should have. But it’s still tasty.
Walker
The rudeness of theater goers is what largely turns me off. And I am not talking about the multiplexes (though the “seat kickers” are certainly much worse there). The worst talkers I have ever had to deal with are middle-aged to older women in art house theaters. These people treated the art house as their own private living room.
And indeed, that is one of the things that really sucks about the theater. You cannot talk about the movie while it is going on, which makes it a very private experience. The home theater has really shown us a lot of the things we were missing.
This is why my wife and I are fans of the drive-in. We have two quality drive-ins within 30 minutes drive of us. You sit in the car and enjoy it over your radio speakers, but get to talk to each other. The concessions are super cheap and better quality than the multiplex concessions. An all around better experience.
Amanda in the South Bay
A couple of years ago I went to one of those fancy pants indie arthouse theatres in Oakland that served pizza and beer, and had couches and all that to sit on. I sorta enjoyed the atmosphere, it definitely had urban hipster vibe all over it (and for once in a good way). The movie itself, though, felt a bit mediocre.
jwb
@Tim, Interrupted: How much do you know about the history of film exhibition? I ask, because if you knew anything about it, you’d know that people have been complaining about audience behavior since nearly the beginning.
Janeane The Acerbic Goblin
@WereBear:
I saw a restored 70mm print of 2001: A Space Odyssey years back at the Music Box Theater in Chicago. The theater was very crowded and noisy just before the movie started (people on cell phones, teenagers being teenagers, etc., etc..). I was prepared for the worst.
When the movie started, the audience was absolutely rivetted and respectful by Kubrick’s masterpiece, which still stuns in its profoundity and mystery.
One of the main problems today is that they don’t make films that even have half the ambition of Kubrick’s work. They constantly give us a steady diet of junk food movies, and that can kill you.
Janeane The Acerbic Goblin
Berandelli picked on DeMille’s The Greatest Show on Earth, saying it’s considered one of the worst Best Picture winners. I’ll grant him that it was DeMille’s lifetime achievement award (like Scorsese winning for The Departed, or Pacino winning for Scent of a Woman, far from their best), but I actually enjoyed it very much.
I think one of the absolute worst Best Picture winners is The English Patient. It was one of the most boring motion pictures I’ve ever seen. Kenneth Branagh’s film of Hamlet was made the same year, and I saw that a week before English Patient. Hamlet blew it out of the water, yet Hamlet got minimal Oscar nods (adapted screenplay, costume design).
Karounie
I go to first-run movies in theaters because I have a school age child (Movie Theater 3D How to Train Your Dragon was almost as satisfying as Avatar.) When googling my local to see what was playing there next week, I saw several entries on the place having bed bugs, and a little browsing showed that most of their competitors also had reported infestations. Add that to Bernardinelli’s list o’ gripes.
We won’t stop going – just attending friends’ birthday parties would send us there regularly. But I think we’ll wear bathing suits under our clothes and stop at the laundry room on the way back to our apartment.
skippy
i hate people who sit next to or behind me and take off their shes to watch the movie. i don’t need to see or smell their stinky feet while i watch a film. i also hate people who talk i. their normal voice during the previews. my wife have, more than oncw been told upon aking people to not talk lodly during the previews, “well, i’m not talking during a movie.” as if they get to decide when it’s rude and when it’s not to talk during a presentation.
also, 3d is pointless. it doesn’t look like 3 dimensions, it looks like those stereoptic diaramas, with different layers of flat pictures in front of each other. plus the picture is much darker than normal.
unless the movie is a big event film, we tend to wait a few months and rent it on netflix. with our 46 inch hd tv and bose sound system, the experince is cheaper and often more relaxing.
and, for the record, x-men first class was excellent.
Daddy-O
@Tim, Interrupted: I hope you read this little tip, Tim, because it will undoubtedly help the next time someone interrupts your movie:
Be bold. Walk right up to whomever is talking, phoning, texting or farting in your general direction, and tell them this:
“I work here. Today’s my day off, and I came in to see this movie. If you don’t stop [talking/texting/fill in the blank] right now, I’ll have to ask my manager to kick you out.”
Works EVERY time. And nothing else does, including actually TELLING the manager, because by the time you get back to the theater…you know the rest.
Good luck. It’s great fun to watch their reaction, too!
Daddy-O
@skippy: Skippy, as a movie theater ‘professional’, I have to chime in and tell you that there’s nothing wrong with talking during the previews and commercials…but once the feature starts, they’d better shut up.
Use the above method. If you’re not afraid (and you shouldn’t be–it’s pretty foolproof, unless you’re confronting someone you already know), it’s a hoot, and very gratifying to find something that WORKS.
And the resulting cheers you’ll get from your fellow QUIET movie-goers is worth every bit of nerve you’ll need to pull it off with a straight face!