 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: "...sworn off going to the theaters." posted by clarkjohnsen on October 17, 2001 at 12:37:00:
Well, I think Dennis's point (it is "Dennis", right "late"?) is that a film that never makes theatrical release is, as the article says, being released to some non-broadcast TV net just drives the whole process in a bad direction. The theatrical audience gets narrower (and ultimately, smaller); the number of outlets continues to shrink. IOW, a "death spiral."Although I can't speak for him, I imagine Dennis would agree with you that theatrical releases are best seen in a big movie theatre, not in a "home theatre" (although I've debated you before about the degree to which being in a movie theatre full of strangers is a social experience. Yes, it's more social than being home alone in front of the toob; but that's not saying much.) The real issue is whether there is a choice.
Having said that, I have the good fortune to have one big, old-time movie theatre 2 blocks from my house and another 5-theatre complex that's a long walk or a 3-minute drive.
My "home theater" is a 13-year old 27 inch TV set and a VCR.
But I do have DirecTV.
Follow Ups:
Well I did use the phrase "socio-artistic," so I guess I'm guilty. But the truth is, a movie theatre full of strangers is a THEATRICAL experience and that's the very experience the creators of cinematic art want us to have.clark
I wouldn't push that conceit too far -- from the collection of posts here, that "intended experience" includes talking during the film, cell phones going off, your feet stuck to the floor with disgarded chewing gum and a sometimes screechy (and always too loud) sound system.I don't think the auteurs intended all of that.
I have to say that the DC film audiences apparently are pretty well-behaved if other inmates' comments are accurate. I've yet to hear a cell phone or a beeper go off or even talking during the film.
So I guess I should consider myself lucky.
But, you're right -- the scale of the film experience is what the director intended and you don't get that at home, no matter how good your HT system.
So, for some movies, where the scale is important, the theatre is a must, e.g. the Star Wars movies, SPR, Titanic, Out of Africa. OTOH, I don't think "You can count on me" would lose a thing on the small screen even though I saw it in a theater.
And now that I read that another Laura Linney flick is being released straight to "pay cable," I may have to add the Starz! package to my DirecTV subscription.
Hi Bruce,
yes, it's Dennis. Some weeks ago, I read an article in the WSJ. It was about how Hollywood forces theaters to show movies indefintely. They filmmakers desperately want to get the gross high enough to justify notice at the Oscars. This shuts out literally dozens of small movies; a few of which in earlier years would have been quite successful. The result is a nauseating predictability most years.
And most definitely I agree this is the beginning of a death spiral for theaters. No theater in Maine has a better sound system than what I have. The only one I go to actually has a very nice sound; but there is not much I want to go see. A couple years ago, Hollywood was hot; and I went to see movie after movie. But I think theaters must face the facts. I am not just a customer; I am a mortal enemy :)
I am not sure that's true anymore. I have to see the stats but movie companies are having record years and there are more movies released to theaters than ever before. As well, take a look around, there are more theater screens in a given city than ever before.Doug Schneider
Maybe in Canada, Doug. I dunno about the US. Just looking at my local movie page in the paper here in Wash, DC, it seems like there are lots of screens; but they all show the same things. The single-screen theater is having a hard time here; cineplexes are what's hot. In metro Washington a number of movie houses have closed recently; supposedly we're overbuilt.Might make for a good article, though!
there are fine cinemas in between. where i live (cambridge, ma) we're terribly lucky -- a world-class film archive (www.harvardfilmarchive.org) and an astonishingly well-curated repertory house (www.brattlefilm.org) are within walking distance, and a nine-screen landmark indie megaplex is two subway stops away. even in other areas, though, there is growing interest in somewhat offbeat film these days -- look at the commercial successes of a company like landmark.the real treasures, though, are outfits like the brattle -- theatres dedicated to film art, not film business. sure, it's a wacky rear-projection system, and a mono sound system, but the quality of the offerings make them worthy of my business. if you've got similar theatres in your area, it's worth paying them a visit. less annoying teenagers, too :o)
d.
Oh certainly, the single-screen theater is shrinking...but it sort of makes sense. It costs a lot to run a concession, have staff, have a projectionist, etc. Get more movies into the same place and you get economies of scale going. But the point is, there is actually more movies on more screens than ever before.Doug
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
