Theater vs. Home Theater?

[JSE]

After reading S Dog's recent thread, I was just curious how may people here still frequent the Movie Theater and to what extent? For me, I watch about 85 to 90% of new movies when they come out on DVD in the comfort of my own home. Over the last couple of years I have become more and more aggravated with the whole theater experience. Loud kids, cell phones, "talkers", frequent pee'ers, frequent fat arse eaters, smell, crowds, lines, etc. About the only time I go to the theater now is when I feel the movie would greatly benefit from the big screen and "big sound" of a big theater. Other than that, I would rather sit at home and watch a movie on my system in peace and quiet.

My wife forced me to go with her to see Shrek this last weekend and I almost strangled several kids and adults. I know it was Shrek and I should have known better than to expect peace and quite but, Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Half the little snot-nosed brats were not even watching the movie but rather talking and laughing and screaming at each other. And don't even get me started on the kids!

So how about it, how often do you guys actually hit the theater these days?

Jim

[s dog]

After reading S Dog's recent thread, I was just curious how may people here still frequent the Movie Theater and to what extent? For me, I watch about 85 to 90% of new movies when they come out on DVD in the comfort of my own home. Over the last couple of years I have become more and more aggravated with the whole theater experience. Loud kids, cell phones, "talkers", frequent pee'ers, frequent fat arse eaters, smell, crowds, lines, etc. About the only time I go to the theater now is when I feel the movie would greatly benefit from the big screen and "big sound" of a big theater. Other than that, I would rather sit at home and watch a movie on my system in peace and quiet.

My wife forced me to go with her to see Shrek this last weekend and I almost strangled several kids and adults. I know it was Shrek and I should have known better than to expect peace and quite but, Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Half the little snot-nosed brats were not even watching the movie but rather talking and laughing and screaming at each other. And don't even get me started on the kids!

So how about it, how often do you guys actually hit the theater these days?

Jim

Being a single person i go at least 2 or 3 times a month , But a lot of the times i go just to get out of the house and do something because i get bored setting round home by myself, Back in the married days i hardly ever went to the theater at all.

[GMichael]

With projectors in two rooms, 7.1 sound in one, and 6.1 in the other, who goes out to the movies? I'll skip the sticky floored, cell phone riddled, crazy kid and loud laughter filled theaters. I'll wait till they come out in 1080i on the HD channels. Thank you very much. If they start keeping these places clean and put in good sound systems, I'll give them another shot. I don't even mind the $5 sodas or the $6 popcorns if it was just enjoyable.

[topspeed]

I've got two little kids, so it's not like I have a choice. Admittedly, most of the movies I see are animated these days, but I still like to go to a theater to see movies that benefit from the big screen. Spidey 3 looked pretty darn amazing as we're fortunate enough to have a full digital theatre with DLP projectors. Sandman looked fantastic!

[PeruvianSkies]

There has been for over 50 years now a battle between home viewing and the movie theater. It started as TV vs. the Movies, then Color TV vs. the Movies, and then with the advent of home video it became an even bigger battle as now the screens and sound systems need to attract people. However, people have big screens and big sound systems at home...so why go to a theater? There is more to it than that folks....

Once upon a time the cinema was a thriving, enjoyable, family-filled, fun, and experiential time. It was for lack of better words: an event! A time to feast your eyes, ears, mind, and soul into the deep recesses of a glowing white screen. The love and passion for movies though is what is dying, which is a tragedy. I love cinema. I always have, always will. I love looking up at a huge screen with the deep, rich color and the truly 3-Dimensional experience that you get. I love being taken back into time or into a place that exists only in the imagination. However, there is a decline in that amount of 'good' movies that are being released. The love and passion has worn off and while people still flock to see SHREK 3 or SPIDEY 3, are these really that memorable? Life-changing? Are they just a quick 2-hour escape and then......what's next?

The great movies, the really great ones make a lasting impression. They are the ones that you talk about for days, maybe even go and see a few more times. They are larger than life. Movies like the original STAR WARS, INDIANA JONES, or THE GODFATHER. These are movie events that people just soak up. In the years to come the movie industry needs to keep up with the standards of excellence in both the actual films and the presentations of film. Instead they spend millions of dollars promoting movies that flat-out-suck. They market to death these movies, even try merchandising the oddest things, and then wonder why people would rather sit at home. Hmmm.

There are only a handful of recent films that I recall being 'movie events'. That is, movies that people talked about, buzzed about, and sometimes event went as a whole group. I can't recall anything post-2000 except LOTR, but the 1990's had a few. They were:

JURASSIC PARK (first DTS film and wow did it ever ROAR)
TERMINATOR 2 (Yep, he came back!)
THE LION KING (they promoted this film about 2 years before it even came out)
TITANIC (call it what you will, this film, unlike the ship, stayed afloat forever and was re-released to theaters because people kept coming)
HOME ALONE (it was Black Friday and I never saw so many cars in all my life at the theater....)

[JSE]

There has been for over 50 years now a battle between home viewing and the movie theater. It started as TV vs. the Movies, then Color TV vs. the Movies, and then with the advent of home video it became an even bigger battle as now the screens and sound systems need to attract people. However, people have big screens and big sound systems at home...so why go to a theater? There is more to it than that folks....

Once upon a time the cinema was a thriving, enjoyable, family-filled, fun, and experiential time. It was for lack of better words: an event! A time to feast your eyes, ears, mind, and soul into the deep recesses of a glowing white screen. The love and passion for movies though is what is dying, which is a tragedy. I love cinema. I always have, always will. I love looking up at a huge screen with the deep, rich color and the truly 3-Dimensional experience that you get. I love being taken back into time or into a place that exists only in the imagination. However, there is a decline in that amount of 'good' movies that are being released. The love and passion has worn off and while people still flock to see SHREK 3 or SPIDEY 3, are these really that memorable? Life-changing? Are they just a quick 2-hour escape and then......what's next?

The great movies, the really great ones make a lasting impression. They are the ones that you talk about for days, maybe even go and see a few more times. They are larger than life. Movies like the original STAR WARS, INDIANA JONES, or THE GODFATHER. These are movie events that people just soak up. In the years to come the movie industry needs to keep up with the standards of excellence in both the actual films and the presentations of film. Instead they spend millions of dollars promoting movies that flat-out-suck. They market to death these movies, even try merchandising the oddest things, and then wonder why people would rather sit at home. Hmmm.

There are only a handful of recent films that I recall being 'movie events'. That is, movies that people talked about, buzzed about, and sometimes event went as a whole group. I can't recall anything post-2000 except LOTR, but the 1990's had a few. They were:

JURASSIC PARK (first DTS film and wow did it ever ROAR)
TERMINATOR 2 (Yep, he came back!)
THE LION KING (they promoted this film about 2 years before it even came out)
TITANIC (call it what you will, this film, unlike the ship, stayed afloat forever and was re-released to theaters because people kept coming)
HOME ALONE (it was Black Friday and I never saw so many cars in all my life at the theater....)

There are still a lot of good movies out there, you just have to find them. I will agree that there has been a decline if good "blockbuster" movies over the years but I don't know if that's the sole reason people of not going as much. I really think it comes down to cost and the theater environment. Why spend $8 - $10 a head when you have to deal with the crowds, rude people and hassle? Especially when a lot of people now have HT systems ar home that sound "in their minds" good and they can go down to McDonalds and get a DVD out of the Red Box for $1 a night. I love going out but these days I would rather spend the money going to a small venue concert.

I could go into my rant about our increasingly self obsessed, rude, inconsiderate society at this time but I won't.

[L.J.]

I've got two little kids, so it's not like I have a choice. Admittedly, most of the movies I see are animated these days, but I still like to go to a theater to see movies that benefit from the big screen. Spidey 3 looked pretty darn amazing as we're fortunate enough to have a full digital theatre with DLP projectors. Sandman looked fantastic!

Umm....what he said

[recoveryone]

I too only go out to see a movie just to get out of the house and away from the kids with the wife, its a date night for us, but I would be just as happy going to a nice little jazz cafe. If the DVD's came out within 30 days of the film release I would never go to a theater any more.

A movie really has to catch my fancy for me to go out to see it (like 300) or if the wife wants to see something. As for the kids, I just put them off for a week or so, just long enough for the hype to pass and then wait for the DVD to come out. I have a big range to cover with the kids, 17, 15 10 and 6, so you can see how I may need to wait until the DVD comes out to keep the peace in my house.

I noticed that theaters seem to be over doing it on the sound by having it extra loud as if that will impress you enough to think that the movie was better at the theater than at home. But they don't get it being loud dosen't equal better. I can crank my system up there too and still enjoy the quiet passages in a movie.

Hey Topspeed you live near Irvine, thats the only fully digital theater I know in So Cal. I saw SW II (AOTC) there and it was the best time I had in a theater since I was a kid. The wife and I caught a mid day peek and we were the only ones in there. Just like being at home.

[RoyY51]

I haven't been to a movie theater in years...and have no desire to do so. I have my dedicated home theater dialed in to the point where I just don't feel it's necessary. When I shut my door and cue up a dvd, I'm in complete control. If I feel it's too loud, I turn it down. If it's not loud enough, I turn it up. If a particular film has overly saturated color, I adjust it. Bass too loud, not loud enough...taken care of. And, most importantly, if I need to make a pit stop or step outside for a breath of fresh air, I don't have to miss a single line. I have a pause button. Life is good.

[ForeverAutumn]

I like the theatre experience. I find watching movies at home distracting. I have trouble sitting on my couch and just watching something for two or three hours (unless it's Lost). I'll end up flipping through a magazine or doing a Cross Stitch or something else when I should be watching.

I like the sticky floors and expensive popcorn. It makes watching a movie more of an event.

Of course, I only have a 27" TV at home. I may feel differently if we ever get around to buying our 52" HDTV, which we've been discussing since last November!

[Troy]

My wife and I used to go to the movies constantly, sometimes several times a week. We'd even see multiple moveis on the same day. As the 90s wore on we found ourselves going to the movies less and less often for all the usual reasons: loud jerks, the proliferation of cell phones, broken sound systems, projector bulbs run at half-intensity (to prolong their life), torn screens etc.

Then at Xmas time, 2001, we went to see the first Harry Potter movie. We arrived for a late afternoon show, the theater was almost empty. We sat right in the sweet spot, 8th row or so, dead center. It was freezing in there. Why heat it for only 6 people, right? My wife curled up under her coat and we watched a rather bland and far too long movie made for children with little movie (or life) experience. My wife complained about the cold several times during the movie. As we stood to leave, she said "hey, my leg is wet!" feeling the back of her jeans, she was soaked from pocket tops to knees. No wonder she never got warm. Then she touched it and smelled her hand . . . and it wasn't Coke. It was USED coke! She had been sitting in a pee soaked seat for the last 2.5 hours! I've been married for 21 years now and have NEVER seen her more pissed (sorry) off than that night. I mean she was smoking mad. WOW. She rode home in the car with no pants on. Called the chains home office (Century Theaters) and read them the riot act. they basically said "oh, sorry, here's a couple of free movie passes."

Within a few days we had a 51" HD TV and that was that. We now go to the movies a few times a year and burn thru piles of DVDs from netflix. Like recoveryone, if DVD release was simultaneous with theatrical release we'd probably never go.

Peru, people used to go to the movies to get the same thing people get from TV today. Until the 1950s, theaters showed newsreels, cartoons, short documentaries AND a couple of features. The format used to be very similar to what TV is now. TV killed movies.

And that old argument that "Movies today suck compared to old movies" doesn't hold water. The ratio of good vs. bad movies has always been 1 in 20 or less. There were THOUSANDS of movies made in the 30s and 40s that no one from our times has ever seen that are lost forever. Because they sucked. Today we only have to watch that 5% of the movies from that supposed "golden era" that were good/relevant enough to last 60 years. Believe me, in 60 years no one will know that "Tomcats" or "Eragon" ever existed either. Even today's fairly popular bubblegum fluff like "Music and Lyrics" will wither away over time. Give it 20 years and the only people that will remember it are film history geeks. Nope, the ratio of good vs. bad has always remained pretty constant.

One last thing in defense of theaters: A comedy is MUCH better in a theater full of laughing people. there's a cathartic, tribal thing about a dark theater filled with roaring humans. Movies like "Ghostbusters" or "Something about Mary" were much funnier in the theater than on home video.

But I'll take the home video over it anytime.

[PeruvianSkies]

There are still a lot of good movies out there, you just have to find them.

Name em'.

[ForeverAutumn]

After saying that I like the Theatre experience. I have to relate this, most recent, experience...which may be one of the reasons for the downfall of the Movie Theatre, or maybe the result of it.

When we went to see Next last week, we got to the theatre and the box office was actually closed! After standing around, staring at the closed box office and looking lost for a couple of minutes, an usher finally came over to us and told us that we could purchase our tickets at the concession stand.

When we got to the concession stand, there were two people there. One girl ran the register, the other filled the orders....very slowly. We were pretty close to the start time, but we had to wait through three other groups of people ordering drinks and popcorn before we could even buy our tickets.

Once we had our tickets, we went to the entrance way for the actual theatres. The usher wasn't even there. He was standing 15 feet away horsing around with another usher. We just flashed our tickets at him as we walked into the theatre.

I've never seen such a poorly managed theatre in my life. I do like the movie experience. But a little Customer Service is nice too.

[SlumpBuster]

Name em'.

Assuming your talking about "event movies" since 2000:

The Incredibles
Finding Nemo
Kill BIll
Casino Royale
Passion of the Christ
Wedding Crashers
40 Year Old Virgin


Howabout movies that get the non-movie going public to get out and go:

An Inconvienent Truth
Farinheit 9/11
The Queen
The Pianist
Hotel Rawanda

Howabout movies that are just plain great films:
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Blood Diamond
Training Day
Cold Mountain
Gangs of New York

Will these movies ever have the social currency that Star Wars did? Probably not. But Starwars isn't all that great of a product to begin with. The acting is bad. The plots are lifted. The writing is so-so. The product today is still good. It's just that popculture is evermore compartmentalized and individualized. I'm not going to listen to Top 40 when I have 200 XM stations to choose from. Same with movies. But to blame the product is to miss the mark. Sure your going to get crap like Epic Movie. But, that low brow crap has always exisisted. To pine for the lost golden age of Hollywood is to rewrite history that ignores the 1000s of B movies that kids loved and directly inspired Star Wars, Raiders, and The Godfather.

[JSE]

Name em'.

I think SlumpBuster just did!

So are you saying there are no longer any "good" movies being made? I find that hard to believe.

Judging by your list, it seems the term "great movie" to you means a blockbuster. There are a lot of great movies out there that are not blockbusters.

Capote? (sp?)

Syriana?

Little Miss Sunshine?


But back to my point, I don't care if a movie is a blockbuster or a artsy fartsy film, theaters have worn my patience thin.

[PeruvianSkies]

I think SlumpBuster just did!

So are you saying there are no longer any "good" movies being made? I find that hard to believe.

Judging by your list, it seems the term "great movie" to you means a blockbuster. There are a lot of great movies out there that are not blockbusters.

Capote? (sp?)

Syriana?

Little Miss Sunshine?


But back to my point, I don't care if a movie is a blockbuster or a artsy fartsy film, theaters have worn my patience thin.

I'm talking about movies that are groundbreaking. STAR WARS, despite whatever flaws that anyone feels that this film has, was a groundbreaking film. It was an event that people flocked to. I am not saying that movies these days are NOT good, the ratio of good to bad though is very minute. There are far too many sequels and remakes and just flat out fluff that even the 'good ones's get lost in the shuffle. Take for instance CINDERELLA MAN.

[kexodusc]

I'm talking about movies that are groundbreaking. STAR WARS, despite whatever flaws that anyone feels that this film has, was a groundbreaking film. It was an event that people flocked to. I am not saying that movies these days are NOT good, the ratio of good to bad though is very minute. There are far too many sequels and remakes and just flat out fluff that even the 'good ones's get lost in the shuffle. Take for instance CINDERELLA MAN.

I'm also in the camp that thinks there's still as many great movies being made as ever - there's just more movies now it seems.

PeruvianSkies - you seem to imply that there was a movie like Star Wars made every other week back in the gold old days. There wasn't. In fact, I think the Star Wars movies, Snow White, and Titanic might very well be the only movies to ever reach "event" status. The industry is irregular that way, some years/periods are full of good films, some suck.
There's a difference between the past and now too - the first 50 years of film making had over 3000 years of the human race's best stories, books, broadway acts, plays, etc to steal from and adapt to the big screen. Well, the well ran a bit dry eventually. Don't give earlier movie generations too much credit because they stole their stories from history before a future generation had the opportunity to be the first to steal an idea. A lot of classic movies were Westerns or War movies based on popular tales - you can only recycle those so often.

In any historical study there's always a survivorship bias - we remember Jaws, Indiana Jones, Star Wars, etc, but we forget The Bad News Bears Go To Japan, Piranha, Grease 2, and Caged Heat.

Oh yeah, there were a lot of bad knock-offs and sequels in any period.

There's also the simple fact that the more you do something, the less special it is. Ride the same roller-coaster 10 times a day next time you're at Six Flags, you'll see what I mean - the 1st time is better than the 9th. The more movies we see, the larger the database for comparison is. Take "Boyz N The Hood". Watch that movie now and it seems rather tame, but back in 1991 it was having a huge impact on society, it was a bad ass movie to watch. The crappy psuedo-knockoff "Juice", doubt anyone even remembers it.

[JSE]

I'm talking about movies that are groundbreaking. STAR WARS, despite whatever flaws that anyone feels that this film has, was a groundbreaking film. It was an event that people flocked to. I am not saying that movies these days are NOT good, the ratio of good to bad though is very minute. There are far too many sequels and remakes and just flat out fluff that even the 'good ones's get lost in the shuffle. Take for instance CINDERELLA MAN.

How much more "ground" is there to break? Star Wars was groundbreaking during it's time for it's specials effects. How much farther can special effects go now? That is without becoming animated. CGI is WAY overused these days and it looks fake in a lot of instances.

Indiana Jones was not a groundbreaking film. It was a great film with a great story. Nothing really groundbreaking about it. Same thing with Titianic. I did not see what the big deal was BTW.

My point is this, a good movie is a good movie and there are still plenty of them. I would be interested to see how many movies per year were being released back in the late 70's through 90's compared to now. It seems like we are flooded with movies these days. Finding the good ones just takes a little more effort now.

[SlumpBuster]

I don't know. I can't actually decide if Peru is on to something. According to Boxofficemojo.com's 100 top grossing movies of all time adjusted for inflation at least 16 are from this decade. That is more than a decade's fair share if your tracking at least the last nine decades. But, a movie from this decade doesn't show up until number 29, and that is Shrek 2.

This of course assumes that box office is a proper measure of a movie's event status.

[Troy]

Name em'.

Pretty good list there Slumpy. I'd add Children of Men, Pans Labrynth and Grindhouse to the list without even thinking much.

I think others have already addressed the "groundbreaking must see" event film issue as well. I'd put "Toy Story" in the short list. "Pulp Fiction" too. But again, we are talking about a once a decade type of thing.

I'm talking about movies that are groundbreaking. STAR WARS, despite whatever flaws that anyone feels that this film has, was a groundbreaking film. It was an event that people flocked to.

Frankly, time will not be good to the Star Wars and Indy Jones series which relied too much on FX which always become dated at some point. Most people of the current generation find the original King Kong to be virtually unwatchable because the stop motion is so cheesy. The same fate awaits SW, Dr. Jones and LOTR.

I am not saying that movies these days are NOT good, the ratio of good to bad though is very minute. There are far too many sequels and remakes and just flat out fluff that even the 'good ones's get lost in the shuffle. Take for instance CINDERELLA MAN.

As I said in yesterday's post, that ratio has ALWAYS been minute. It's just that the bad old movies are already forgotten. Some time in the not too distant future today's bad movies will be forgotten too.

And I don't understand, did you like "Cinderella Man" or not? I thought is was bland and predictable, but people seemed to really like it. Remember "Far and Away" from 1992? "Seabiscuit" from 2003? Same sort of bland and mediocre fluff. Pretty popular with audiences in it's day, but already well on their way to being utterly forgotten.

That is just how most movies work. They are supposed to have a limited shelf life.

[PeruvianSkies]

I don't know. I can't actually decide if Peru is on to something. According to Boxofficemojo.com's 100 top grossing movies of all time adjusted for inflation at least 16 are from this decade. That is more than a decade's fair share if your tracking at least the last nine decades. But, a movie from this decade doesn't show up until number 29, and that is Shrek 2.

This of course assumes that box office is a proper measure of a movie's event status.

That's part of what I am trying to get at. The other thing is that they simply don't make movies like they used to, or compete with Home viewing as much. My original point was that the cinema used to have to keep on it's toes in order to compete with things like TV, Home Video, Etc. Now more than ever they need to since most people can enjoy large screens and big sound at home. However, the theaters are letting people down. Partly because of the conditions/atmosphere of the theater, and the other is the I already mentioned...they don't make movies that people really want to see anymore. I am not saying that they don't make "good" movies, but the frequency of good movies coming out is at an all-time low. People will still go to the theater occassionally, but they are limited with what they can see because often times the better movies get limited release and are overshadowed by things like THE RING 2, GRUDGE 2, GARFIELD 2, SHREK 3, PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN 2 and 3, SAW II, SAW III, FINAL DESTINATION 3, AMERICAN PIE 8, THE HILLS HAVE EYES 2, DADDY DAY CAMP, BAMBI II, BROTHER BEAR 2, BIG MOMMA'S HOUSE 2, HOUSE OF THE DEAD 2, ICE AGE 2, KUNG FU HUSTLE 2, I'll ALWAYS KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER, I'LL STILL ALWAYS KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER, THIS TIME I'M SERIOUS I'LL STILL ALWAYS KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER.

I did like CINDERELLA MAN. Good film and one of Howard's best. Although I am not a fan of most of his films, probably the worst two are BEAUTIFUL MIND and THE MISSING. Dreadful.

[kexodusc]

I don't know. I can't actually decide if Peru is on to something. According to Boxofficemojo.com's 100 top grossing movies of all time adjusted for inflation at least 16 are from this decade. That is more than a decade's fair share if your tracking at least the last nine decades. But, a movie from this decade doesn't show up until number 29, and that is Shrek 2.

This of course assumes that box office is a proper measure of a movie's event status.

I don't think box office is a good measure. There's more theaters than ever before in more markets, especially in other countries. We'd also have to adjust the movie figures for population growth trends, to see what % of the economy paid what amount in real terms.

According to my quick Google search of the USA population, in 1950 there was around 149 million, in 1970 we had 200 million, 1980 had 225 million, and today over 300 million americans. That's 50% growth in population since 1970, 33% or so since 1980.

There's also more forms of entertainment competing for peoples' dollars today though.

[Kam]

great discussion!

i think the major points have already been discussed already though, jumping in late in the game here. but i think the next trend that we're already seeing is a move away from cgi. you will (i hope and pray) start to find artists who really wish to show off their craft show that it can be done 'in-camera' ala tarantino and Grindhouse.

he has a ridiculous appreciation for the artists that have come before him and i think that final stunt in grindhouse is a direct homage to their genius that he has heavily borrowed from and been influenced by.

but on the home vs. outside argument, going to the theater (while it has lost its luster) to me, is still an event. i really do enjoy the magic of sitting in the giant theaters and seeing the curtains part (ok, admittedly then only do that at the ziegfield now) and that beautiful flicker of light. unfortunately, this has to be balance by all the aforementioned crap that we have to put up with from our fellow humans.

i'll see anything that's showing on the Imax because it has that same old 'event' feel to it. and i'll also try and go midday, weekdays, odd times, specifically to avoid the crowds i want to avoid, namely teenagers (and adults too) with short attention spans txt-ing and calling in the middle of movies.

the quality, imo, is absolutely still there. yes, it's harder to find because Spiderman 3 is playing in 4,324 theaters and Half Nelson played in 106.

And on a point Troy made, the strongest films that stand the test of time, imo at least, have nothing to do with special effects at all and everything to do with story. the most 'groundbreaking' effects are all incamera effects. Welles was the first to use Deep Focus and that is something that was then taken and used by hitchcock and depalma for a very specific effect across 3 eras/genres of filmmaking that works in each era because it is not dependant on being 'replace' by 'better cgi.' it's finding how lights and lenses work and taking advantage of physics. we're not gonna get any better at that.

ANY movie, imo, that has reliance on CGI effects (or 'improveable effects') will be replaced and forgotten when the better product comes out. They're still very fun to watch and very enjoyable right NOW, and worth seeing, but they won't stand up over time, because our eyes and minds will advance beyond what they are showing.

A movie has to touch our hearts, because those emotions will stay the same for hundreds of years. The movies that touched me emotionally as a kid, i can watch now and still feel that touch. The movies that touched my 'wonder' as a kid, i can watch and appreciate how i USED to feel about it, but that wonder isn't there anymore.

I see the glass plate keeping harrison ford safe from the snakes, i see the blue screen plates around the Tie-fighters in the original trilogy, etc. I still enjoy those movies, they are fun entertainment. BUT there's a reason why Bridge on the river kwai, lawrence of arabia, and pretty much anything else by lean are always my favorites even now.

i think in time (if not already), schindler's list will still be spielberg's calling card. jurassic and even SPR will diminish over time as 'ground breaking' as they both were. we've had such an unbelievable deluge of violence in this world since SPR that even the attrocity of watching the storming of normandy beach has diminished now that a new kind of warfare if being waged in the world with beheadings and the like. there's a new level of brutality that we've been exposed to.


ok, enough ramblings for me, thoughts are getting muddled as i lose my own attention at what i'm writing haha. i am part of the problem too!

[recoveryone]

As Kam put it, this is a good discussion. The only trend that I see in films today or even over the years is that a story that is some what about a true event or person seem to be the ones that stick in our minds more than the fantasy ones. Fantasy lend itself to sequels due that the story can go on and on and most are from books that were chopped up to fit within 2-2.5 hours. Films like Cinderella Man, Remember the Titans can only be a one shot deal. There is no next season part 2-3-4. For myself I have been leaning toward the qusai Docudramas:

Black Hawk down
Flight 93
911
Coach Carter

I still enjoy the occasional Pirates thing, but when I watch these type I know there will be more of it to come (too many lose ends). I know there has been many Directors that have use the Docudrama style, but one that sticks out to me is Spike Lee. Most of his films take place in a limit amount of time (normally a 24-48 hour period). Some didn't like Inside man, but it struck a cord with me along with many of his other films "do the right thing" "School Daze". Films with this type of style put us in someone elses shoes that we ourselves could really be.

[E-Stat]

After reading S Dog's recent thread, I was just curious how may people here still frequent the Movie Theater and to what extent?

Unless it's a 70mm print (virtually non-existent today) or IMAX, I'd rather stay at home and watch the HT for the same reasons you noted. The sound quality at most theatres is typical "pro audio" dreadful - hard sounding and too loud. It seems that the time between theatre release and DVD release continues to shrink. I can wait a month or two.

rw