# Prefer to Watch Movies at Home or the Theatre



## IronWolf (Jun 18, 2005)

So this was on CNN today.

Which do EnWorlders prefer?  Watching a movie at home or in the theatre?  I am talking the usual preference - major releases like Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars shouldn't factor in too much.


----------



## Lhorgrim (Jun 18, 2005)

I voted theatre.

I prefer the big sound and big image of the theatre, even if the crowds can be a little annoying.

I don't have a big screen or surround sound at home.


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Jun 18, 2005)

With my big screen TV and progressive scan DVD player, I'm increasingly becoming a stay-at-home kinda guy. Movies are coming out so quickly to DVD that waiting's almost a non-issue now. I go see the big budget epics at the theater, but mostly that's because those are movies I can't wait for. If I had a commercial DVD or some kind of pay-per-view option for a new movie while it was still playing in theaters, I'd rather stay home and watch it and not have to deal with lines and jerks behind me.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jun 18, 2005)

I voted theater.  I just plain like going to movies.


----------



## Angel Tarragon (Jun 18, 2005)

I had to vote other. I'm not too impressed with my personal entertainment pieces, and the speakers on my tv are starting to not function at full effeciency. I had to attach an old set of PC speakers to the audio out to avoid this problem.  :\  I'm not too thrilled with the theatre either. Too many disrepful people just go to have their definition of 'fun at the movies', which most often is distrating to those that actually want to get total enjoyment/fulfillment from the experience. 

I'm jaded.


----------



## reveal (Jun 18, 2005)

I used to be a theater guy but after having a kid I'm more of a home movie guy. We now makes plans for what movies are worth actually getting a babysitter and seeing in the theater. SW:Ep3 was one of those movies. Batman Begins will be that movie next weekend.


----------



## IronWolf (Jun 18, 2005)

I'm in the at home category.  As reveal said, having a child at home really makes you decide what movies are worth getting a sitter for.  Currently we have a cheap home theatre-in-a-box system and a smallish TV for now, but it does well enough.  Plus the comfort of home makes it nice.  I mentioned in another post, I hope to have the funds for a larger TV to make home viewing even more enjoyable.

The downsides of the theatre to me is getting to be the cost to go see one in a theatre.  They just seem so expensive and that's coming from someone that lives in the Midwest!  There's alwas the cleanliness factor...


----------



## Crothian (Jun 18, 2005)

Depends on the movie.  The big summer blockbusters are great on the big screen, but a good comedy I perfer on the small screen.


----------



## ShrinkyLink (Jun 18, 2005)

Home.

Perhaps when audiences learn to keep their mouths shut/not talk on cellphones/bath, I'll return to the theatre.


----------



## Wombat (Jun 18, 2005)

Depends on the movie, my mood, and the cost.

Now, for example, I would never wish to see _Lawrence of Arabia_ again except on a big screen.  You _need_ the theatre sized screen just to get the entire impact of the film.

On the other hand there is _My Dinner with Andre_ -- doesn't matter if it is on a small screen at all and, in some ways, is preferable there.

There are also many films that I _wish_ I could see on the big screen again, but I know I will never have that chance, or there is at least very little chance.  But I would rather see than not see the film, so I will gleefully opt for small screen.

And others that I regret seeing altogether...  

So for me there is no simple answer to the poll.


----------



## devilbat (Jun 18, 2005)

I voted before thinking.  My vote went to theatre.  I prefer watching the big screen, with the great sound and popcorn and ambience.  

After thinking about it for a second, I would have to say my absolute favorite way to watch a movie is at the drive-inn.  We only have one left in the city, and they threaten to close it after every season, but year after year we make the trek to the drive-inn 6-10 times a summer.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jun 18, 2005)

Depends on the movie, but usually theater. I also figure that, eventually, I'll reach the point where I've got other obligations(such as family) that will keep me from seeing movies in the theater as much as I do now...so I enjoy it while I have the time.


----------



## IronWolf (Jun 18, 2005)

devilbat said:
			
		

> After thinking about it for a second, I would have to say my absolute favorite way to watch a movie is at the drive-inn.  We only have one left in the city, and they threaten to close it after every season, but year after year we make the trek to the drive-inn 6-10 times a summer.




Ah... the drive-in!  A forgotten option on the poll!


----------



## IronWolf (Jun 18, 2005)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> Depends on the movie, but usually theater. I also figure that, eventually, I'll reach the point where I've got other obligations(such as family) that will keep me from seeing movies in the theater as much as I do now...so I enjoy it while I have the time.




I should have requested folks also add whether they had children when replying!  *Before* I had a son we went to movies in the theatre all the time!  It certainly does make a difference.


----------



## Tonguez (Jun 18, 2005)

does noone else have a powerpoint projector

I can get a 6 foot image on my wall if need be and with 53 channels to choose from, internet, a PC and a son - who's got either time or a need to go to the theatre?

of course 10 years ago when I was a college boy with disposable income I would spend days at a time in the theatre seeing up to 5 movies per day (_with midnight screenings it can be done_)


----------



## Steve Jung (Jun 18, 2005)

Theater. Generally, if I don't see it in the theater, I'm not going to see it at all. When a movie is on TV, there are too many distractions. Plus I usually catch it in the middle. I think, "Well, it'll be on some other time. I can catch it then." And I rarely do. Problem seeing it in the theater is expensive, about $9.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Jun 18, 2005)

100" front screen projection system, Dolby Digital/DTS  6.1 surround sound that can rattle your teeth, comfy couch, cheap snacks, a pause button (and I can _smoke_ when I want!) and $15 for a DVD I can watch again and again...

VS.

$75 for tickets, transportation, snacks, and a babysitter for a 2-3 hour experience.

Gee. How did I vote?

In the 90's, the movie theatres had to spend a lot of money building massive stadium sized screens and impressive sound systems to entice us away from just renting a VHS tape.  They did so and it worked.

But then front screen DLP projectors and kick-ass surround sound systems for home use + DVD's more than equalled the score again. I spent the money on my home theatre system (e-bayed it all and I pieced it together carefully). I do it better at home.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Jun 18, 2005)

Theatre.

It's just more of an _experience_.


----------



## MonsterMash (Jun 18, 2005)

I like going to the movies


----------



## Fast Learner (Jun 18, 2005)

For any film that has any chance of moving me, I much prefer the theater. I find that all of the other people around me laughing, crying, jumping at the scary thing, etc., really heightens the power of the film.

Though I have a nice home theater setup, I still prefer the theater for big SFX movies, too, or anything with a grand visual scope (like _Kingdom of Heaven_) because even 100" doesn't touch a movie screen, at least for me.

I am, however, happy to watch things at home, and certainly do. I just prefer the theater most of the time.

And on rudeness of crowds: I don't put up with it. I shush people and then go get the manager if necessary (and get a refund on my ticket). I've found that the one megaplex I tend to go to has become _much_ better over the last few years, and have seen other people shushing and reporting people. It's now the rare film that is interrupted by someone in the audience. Just a few miles away at another megaplex, though, the problem is constant. I think it just takes social pressure combined with a manager who cares to get people back in line. People are just too afraid to confront anyone these days, it seems to me.


----------



## trancejeremy (Jun 18, 2005)

I would go to the theater if there was one closer to me and if it was cheaper. Back in college, I'd go every week on a tuesday, which was only $2-3 a ticket. 

But now the closest theater is 30 miles, and even though it's only been 10 years, I doubt I could find tickets for $2-3.  I don't think I've been to one since then.


----------



## Rodrigo Istalindir (Jun 18, 2005)

Nothing beats watching a good movie in a well-appointed theater with a well-behaved and appreciative audience.  Nothing is worse than watching (or trying to watch) a good movie in  a crappy theater with people yapping and cell phones going off.

A home theater setup will be good but not great or terrible.


----------



## Lazybones (Jun 19, 2005)

I used to like theaters. The one in the town where I went to grad school had red curtains before the screen, instrumental movie music before curtain rising, cool games in the arcades, and an employee who would come before the crowd and greet you before the performance. 

Now you have (at least in my town):

Commercials, including the noxious "Twenty" at the Regal cinemas;
10 previews, including some that have nothing to do with the genre you've come to see; 
Parents who bring children (including toddlers!) to an R-rated feature;
People who talk on cell-phones before and during the performance, without concern for those around them. At a recent showing, a man started a conversation during the opening credits, and when people shuushed him, he turned around and flipped them off, and started talking louder. 
Parking problems. 
Crappy sound systems. At the Century where I saw RotS, the dialogue seemed to only be coming from the two front speakers (everything else was surround).
Ten dollar tickets.
Overpriced concessions with 500% markup over retail costs.

I am getting a projection home theater system in late 2005 or early 2006, and if I can get my wife to go along, I may never go to a movie in a theater again.


----------



## Bobitron (Jun 19, 2005)

I have $16k worth of home theater, and there have been plenty of months where I must have driven the folks at Netflix nuts with all my rentals. I would say I am a home theater guy who still appreciates the theater experience. I go maybe once every two-three months, just for the biggest releases.


----------



## Orius (Jun 19, 2005)

At home.

I very rarely watch movies at the theater.   The most recent movie I saw was Revenge of the Sith, and that was the first movie I saw since Return of the King.  I don't like sitting through trailers for lots of stupid movies, or even worse the stupid commercials the cinemas put in before the film (I'm paying to watch this the way it is!  WTF is with the commercials?!).  And sometimes the audience can be obnoxious, although that isn't always a problem.  If I watch a movie at home, I can pause it at any time to go to the bathroom or get more popcorn or something.  And speaking of popcorn, I don't have to pay an arm and a leg to loot my fridge.  DVDs also include stuff like cut scenes and various documentaries which can enhance the experience.  You can't really get that in the theaters.


----------



## Vonlok The Bold (Jun 19, 2005)

Wombat said:
			
		

> Depends on the movie, my mood, and the cost.
> 
> Now, for example, I would never wish to see _Lawrence of Arabia_ again except on a big screen. You _need_ the theatre sized screen just to get the entire impact of the film.
> 
> ...




This sums up my feelings exactly.  I voted other on the poll, and this explanation is worded far better than I could ever do myself.


----------



## Chimera (Jun 19, 2005)

At home, where I can;

Pause at any time.
Go to the rest room and not miss anything.
Stop and get something to eat or drink.
Fast forward through the nasty or tediously dull bits.
Go "what was that?", back it up and watch the scene again.
Go "Holy ", back it up and watch the scene again.
Stop motion through certain bits looking at the detail or things that flew by too quickly.
Stop motion view incredible scenery or background.
Not worry about bothering other people.
Not worry about being bothered by other people.
Crank up the sound during the overly quiet bits.
Turn down the sound during the screaming loud bits.
Check for synchronicity with Pink Floyd's _Dark Side of the Moon_.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jun 19, 2005)

Lhorgrim said:
			
		

> I voted theatre.
> 
> I prefer the big sound and big image of the theatre, even if the crowds can be a little annoying.



Mostly home, even if I don't have surround sound. I hate crowded theaters.


----------



## sunbeam60 (Jun 19, 2005)

I chose at home even though under ideal conditions I would choose the theatre. Problem with cinemas, in the UK at least, is that people just don't shut up any longer. They just don't. They litterally sit there and talk or snicker. Some years ago you might find that with 13 year olds, but nowadays, you can find grown up men and women not giving a .

Went to see Batman Begins the other day and absolutely loved it. However, three teenage girls were sitting in the row behind us and they were seriously talking throughout the whole movie. Until I told them to stay quiet, at least, but my point is that I don't go to the cinema to be unpleasant to people and certainly not to waste my energy getting annoyed.

I find myself opting more and more for the home theatre since the people watching the movie with you will stay quiet.

Bah, rant over


----------



## delericho (Jun 19, 2005)

I prefer the theatre, but I prefer to go when no-one else is about. During the day is really good if you can make it (except during the school holidays), and Tuesday evenings are pretty good, too.

With the exception of films I've made the effort to see on the first weekend (the Star Wars prequels, the latter two Matrix films, the three Lord of the Rings, and Spider Man), I haven't been in a cinema where the screening was more than 50% full in ages.


----------



## Agamon (Jun 19, 2005)

Home.  I'll only go the theatre if it's a major release.  I prefer to enjoy the movie and not worry about listening to comments from the peanut gallery (many of which come from my own friends, who just won't shut up sometimes).


----------



## John Crichton (Jun 19, 2005)

I love going to the theater.  Even if it's a crummy film I still enjoy the experience.

But that said, I haven't been able to get out much in the last 2 or so years.  I mainly (like many others here) just catch the major releases in genre like Star Wars, LotR & Spider-man.  So that puts me squarely in DVD-land.  And I do love mah DVDs.  I put together a pretty respectable home theater last year to play videogames on but it works just as well for movies.  But if I had the choice, I'd still go to the theater.  Voted theater.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jun 19, 2005)

Lazybones said:
			
		

> [*]People who talk on cell-phones before and during the performance, without concern for those around them. At a recent showing, a man started a conversation during the opening credits, and when people shuushed him, he turned around and flipped them off, and started talking louder.




I once watched a guy get kicked out of a movie because he kept talking (loudly) on his cell phone even after being asked by the ushers to please turn off his phone.  When he got the boot, the entire audiance gave the ushers a round of applause. 

Of course, nothing annoys me more during movies than people who *won't take their kids out to the lobby when they start screaming and crying.*  In real life, I'm a pretty laid-back guy, but when I have to listen to a screaming infant while I'm trying to watch a movie, it starts to awaken homicidal urges in me.


----------



## Elf Witch (Jun 20, 2005)

I love going to the movies. Nothing beats seeing a picture on the big screen with the great speakers. It gives me the chance to totally get into the movie and not think about anything else for a couple of hours.

I have a big screen tv and surrond sound at home. But I also have a dog , birds and roommates. And I find myself having to pause the movie more than once. I just can't get into the movie as much as at the theatre.

I have my weekdays free so I see movies in the afternoon. A lot of times I have been the only one in the theatre. 

I am on a tight budget so I can't afford to see everything I want to see at the theatre so I netflix a lot. 

I do have some gripes about the theatre two of my biggest are people who can't get there butt planted in their seat before the movie starts and people who have weak bladders who choose to set in the middle of the row so they have to climb over you to get out.

And yes people who make noise are a pain as well. 

I like previews a lot I enjoy seeing them and I don't mind the twenty it gives me something to do since I always get to a movie in plenty of time to get my drink and find a good seat.


----------



## TracerBullet42 (Jun 20, 2005)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> Theatre.
> 
> It's just more of an _experience_.




I hear that...sometimes the crowd is an essential part of the show.

Other times, they flat out suck.  But I still prefer the theater.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jun 20, 2005)

I voted theatre, but as time goes on that's decreasing. Really, my answer is "it depends". Certain movies I prefer to see in the theatre (the aforementioned movies in the OP) for the obvious reasons. 

Most others I prefer renting, since I have a massive screen, massive speakers, and DTS 6.1 (though DVDs are still too slow in making use of that for my taste) - and it's cheaper for a more-likely-than-not crappy movie that I wisely skipped out on when it was in the theatres. Plus I get to avoid the morons who seem to be going to the theatres more often nowadays...


----------



## sniffles (Jun 20, 2005)

Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> With my big screen TV and progressive scan DVD player, I'm increasingly becoming a stay-at-home kinda guy. Movies are coming out so quickly to DVD that waiting's almost a non-issue now. I go see the big budget epics at the theater, but mostly that's because those are movies I can't wait for. If I had a commercial DVD or some kind of pay-per-view option for a new movie while it was still playing in theaters, I'd rather stay home and watch it and not have to deal with lines and jerks behind me.




I'm with you.  The crowds at theatres are becoming unbearably rude.  I really enjoy the big screen and the surround sound, but it's hardly worth it when some idiot spends the entire film talking (as happened to me during Revenge of the Sith), or lets their kid run up and down the aisles all during the feature (as I experienced during Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban).  Not to mention that now everyone has learned to turn off their cell phone ringers during films, but they haven't yet learned -not- to pull the d*mned things out and text message during the movie, thereby blinding all their neighbors with the light from their screens!!!

Okay, rant over.


----------



## GlassJaw (Jun 20, 2005)

I have a 50" HDTV, prog scan DVD player, surround sound, and Polk Audio towers but I still prefer going to the movies to see the big blockbusters.  The cost sucks but I buy my tix at AAA   .  

I definitely like watching movies at home but there's nothing like seeing the green Lucasfilm logo on the big screen for the first time in a packed theater.  You can't get that experience at home.

For those of your whose local theaters are shady, that's too bad.  That definitely takes the fun out of going.  I guess I'm lucky that I have a few within a few miles of each other and they are all reasonably good.


----------



## diaglo (Jun 20, 2005)

at the drive in with my hottie wife


----------



## Viking Bastard (Jun 20, 2005)

Y'know, it's really sad to hear that so many people's theatre experiences are so bad.

I go about weekly to the movies or so and I've only had a handful that were like that.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jun 20, 2005)

I prefer the theater.

The reality is home.  With two young kids, we miss a lot of movies, so we rent them on DVD later, and even then it seems we only see a dozen or so movies a year, tops.


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Jun 20, 2005)

Viking Bastard said:
			
		

> Y'know, it's really sad to hear that so many people's theatre experiences are so bad.
> 
> I go about weekly to the movies or so and I've only had a handful that were like that.




You are a extremely lucky then.  Everyone I know complains of bad theater experiences each time a big release is made.  I wish this were exaggeration but it is not, unfortunately.  I avoid the theater like the plague but my wife loves going so I end up going.  We did find that weekday matinees are an excellent time to go to minimize the amount of idiots in the theater.  The last time we went (Revenge of the Sith) only one person talked and he was shushed by everyone around him including those he came with .  If I could be guareneteed of an audience liek that everytime I would go to the theater more than once every few months.  My home setup is quite nice - not expensive or ultra huge but just fine for movie viewing.


----------



## Desdichado (Jun 20, 2005)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Depends on the movie.  The big summer blockbusters are great on the big screen, but a good comedy I perfer on the small screen.



That's largely my position as well.  Going to the theater, either on a date with my wife, or a "family comedy" with the family -- is one of my favorite things to do, still.  But I certainly don't feel that I have to do it for every movie that I want to see -- many movies I'm happy to watch on DVD, and mostly for repeat viewings I prefer the DVD.  _In some respects_, home theater is really starting to offer many of the same benefits as theaters, making the theatre less compelling overall. 

But there are certain movies that I really like to see at the theaters, especially blockbuster action/adventure/sci-fi types.  And I also don't want to wait for those, often.  And, I also like the experience.  So, I picked other -- it's too complicated to simply vote one way or another.


----------



## DungeonmasterCal (Jun 20, 2005)

I vastly prefer watching them on the big screen.  I dislike watching them on the small screen so much I own almost no movies on vhs or dvd, though we bought a lot for my son when he was younger.  But for me, personally, big screen or nothing.  Consequently, I see very few movies because I don't get the chance to go to the movies often.

Ironically, I managed a video store for a year, and became pretty famous in the chain as the "manager who refused to watch movies".


----------



## The_Universe (Jun 20, 2005)

I prefer the theater for most films, but in some cases I can say, "it looks good enough for netflix, but let's not go this weekend."


----------



## Kanegrundar (Jun 20, 2005)

I voted home.  There are only a few movies that I have to seen in the theatres.  Otherwise, I can easily wait for them to come out on DVD or HBO.

Kane


----------



## Ranger REG (Jun 20, 2005)

DungeonmasterCal said:
			
		

> Ironically, I managed a video store for a year, and became pretty famous in the chain as the "manager who refused to watch movies".



So, if a customer ask you for video recommendation, you wouldn't be able to help?


----------



## Kanegrundar (Jun 20, 2005)

Dark Jezter said:
			
		

> I once watched a guy get kicked out of a movie because he kept talking (loudly) on his cell phone even after being asked by the ushers to please turn off his phone.  When he got the boot, the entire audiance gave the ushers a round of applause.
> 
> Of course, nothing annoys me more during movies than people who *won't take their kids out to the lobby when they start screaming and crying.*  In real life, I'm a pretty laid-back guy, but when I have to listen to a screaming infant while I'm trying to watch a movie, it starts to awaken homicidal urges in me.



 The second time I went to see RotS, there was a woman in there with an infant that kept crying when the movie got loud.  She wouldn't instantly take the kid outside, but would walk up and down the aisle trying to get it back to sleep.  (Fat chance during a firefight!)  I was so ticked off that the theatre would sell a ticket to woman with an infant in tow in the first place!!!  Sure, mothers have a right to watch a movie also, but for the love of Pete, if you want to go to the movies that bad get a bloody babysitter first!  Anything else is simply being an inconsiderate jerk to the rest of the people in the audience.

At least I don't have to deal with that at home when I watch a movie!

Kane


----------



## DonTadow (Jun 20, 2005)

This article surprised me on CNN.  I would have suspected that the poll would go the opposiitte way in favor of the theater. There's no better feelng than being at a movie theater with TRUE fans of the film.  I don't go to the midnight showings just to see the movie first, I go to watch a movie with true fans of a particular film.  HOwever, if it doesnt have a midnight showing and I can't find other fans to go with, I'll opt to wait for rental at home


----------



## Ranger REG (Jun 20, 2005)

Kanegrundar said:
			
		

> The second time I went to see RotS, there was a woman in there with an infant that kept crying when the movie got loud.  She wouldn't instantly take the kid outside, but would walk up and down the aisle trying to get it back to sleep.  (Fat chance during a firefight!)  I was so ticked off that the theatre would sell a ticket to woman with an infant in tow in the first place!!!  Sure, mothers have a right to watch a movie also, but for the love of Pete, if you want to go to the movies that bad get a bloody babysitter first!



Or better yet, be like this couple:

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200506/200506140037.html

I don't condone it, I just have a dark sense of humor. Very dark.   

I don't know if this happens at your theater, but my theaters usually run a couple of "ground rules" at the beginning of the film, including the crying baby situation (take them out to the lobby as a courtesy to the audience).



			
				Kanegrundar said:
			
		

> Anything else is simply being an inconsiderate jerk to the rest of the people in the audience.



The jerks I encounter are "seating" neighbors hogging them armrests on both sides. Then there is the talking, not just to each other but on the cell phones. And ugh, let us not forget people spilling drink from the back row that eventually reach to my area and become sticky.

And this is my favorite, tall people or people with tall headgear sits in front of you. Some days, I just want to have a portable chainsaw handy.


----------



## DonTadow (Jun 20, 2005)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Then there is the talking, not just to each other but on the cell phones. .



That's why i stopped going to see movies in my old neighborhood (DETROIT).  Two weeks in a row a few years ago there was someone having a loud conversation on the cell phone about the movie.  The ushers didnt care because "they don't get paid to do security".  A few years before that at the same theater i lie not that some guy had a 40 oz of beer while watching the movie and talking to himself.


----------



## Desdichado (Jun 20, 2005)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> And this is my favorite, tall people or people with tall headgear sits in front of you. Some days, I just want to have a portable chainsaw handy.



Yeah, those tall people!  They're all jerks, every one of them!  Why can't they be decently average in height, like most other people?

Hey, what happened to the  smiley?


----------



## Kanegrundar (Jun 20, 2005)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Or better yet, be like this couple:
> 
> http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200506/200506140037.html
> 
> ...


----------



## takyris (Jun 20, 2005)

Hey, my little dude was just fine during Revenge of the Sith.   And if you can hear a baby crying (the early stages, when the parents walk around with them, and not the full-on wail) during a fight scene in that movie, you should demand your money back from the theater for having the sound turned down too low.

I prefer to watch movies at home. It's a combination of a) the fact that I'm not impressed by sheer scale where effects are concerned, so big screens and loud noise doesn't win any points with me, b) the convenience of pausing whenever I want to go to the bathroom, making my own (much better) popcorn, and cuddling under a blanket with my wife, and c) the absence of any of the problems that folks have brought up -- although I haven't personally had any truly bad theater-person problems.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jun 20, 2005)

i go to the theater if it's a movie I really need to see, otherwise I have a hard time fitting  the time in to go see it.  Plus its so damn expensive.  I enjoy seeing movies on the big screeen more than my 19" TV but I don't have the time more often than not.


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Jun 21, 2005)

Once in a discount theater, after watching 3 punks swear and yell at the poor woman behind them when they were shushed for the 10th time I bellowed across the theater to them to "shut the hell up, you little punks!"  One came by my seat near the end of the movie and said something like'You're dead!'.  I stood up - he looked about 13 years old and I had a foot of height  and 80 pounds on him.  I didn't say anything but he scampered away.  Other than that, though, they never said a word.


----------



## Fast Learner (Jun 21, 2005)

For a year straight, I watched movies standing in the back of the theater with my daughter in my arms. The moment she made any noise (or, more commonly, I sensed she was about to make noise), I was out in the lobby, quieting her. Sure, I missed bits of the movie, but it was still well worth it. 

Seriously, I had a responsibility to my child, and a responsibility to society, and lived up to both. I am quite frustrated by parents who can't seem to live up to either one.


----------



## glass (Jun 21, 2005)

I voted other, because I like both.

Cinema has big pictures, big sound, and a sense of occasion. Home has the ability to pause if the phone rings or whatever. Swings and roundabouts!


glass.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Jun 21, 2005)

Psychic Warrior said:
			
		

> You are a extremely lucky then.



Or simply different theatre cultures.

I'll throw this into my buddie's face next time he complains of Icelanders being 
rude (he's never been abroad, how would he know!).


----------



## sniffles (Jun 21, 2005)

takyris said:
			
		

> Hey, my little dude was just fine during Revenge of the Sith.  And if you can hear a baby crying (the early stages, when the parents walk around with them, and not the full-on wail) during a fight scene in that movie, you should demand your money back from the theater for having the sound turned down too low.




You're very fortunate, and so were the other patrons in the theatre.  But I don't think the movie sound should have to be loud enough to drown out a crying baby.  I know babysitters are expensive, but I never understand why anyone would want to take an infant or toddler to a movie.  The child doesn't get anything out of the film, and the parents may spend the whole film being distracted by the child instead of getting to enjoy the movie themselves.

On a different note, I am happy that so many theatre chains have started having "stadium-style" raked seating.  The tall people/hats/big hair problem is a thing of the past with those theatres.  Century Theatres also have alternating rows of "rocker" seats and stationary seats with folding cup holders, so larger people don't feel cramped by the seat arms and no one has to get a backache from constantly leaning back.  Now if they'd just install headphones in every seat, the experience would be almost perfect.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jun 21, 2005)

What is really cool is the speciality theaters that don't allow children and serve drinks.  That is my kind of theater!  No kids and a tall cold beer.  Ahh nirvana!

I can't count the times I've had to supress the urge to scream, "Get that f'ing brat out of the theater!" as someones kid just wailed away and the parent did nothing.


----------



## Warrior Poet (Jun 21, 2005)

diaglo said:
			
		

> at the drive in with my hottie wife



Sure, but presumably you're not there for the film.   

IYKWIM - ah, forget it.

Anyway, like both, but prefer theater in general, though the prices are . . . significant (or can be).

I don't get the talkers and the texters and the phoners.  It's not a social experience.  It's a movie.  The social part happens after.  Go, find friends, talk, be at peace.  During the movie, shaddap!  If these are people you'd much rather be speaking to, go find them, and speak to them!  Elsewhere!

Though some of the talkers in some of the theaters have been simply crazy.  Nuts, that is.  Insane.  Can't get 'em to shut up because they're not hearing you say, "Hush!"  They're listening to the voices tell them what to do.

Like Flexor the Mighty, I dig the theaters where you can enjoy a frosty cold brew, but the regular theater's o.k., too.

Warrior Poet


----------



## Ranger REG (Jun 21, 2005)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> What is really cool is the speciality theaters that don't allow children and serve drinks.  That is my kind of theater!  No kids and a tall cold beer.  Ahh nirvana!



Meh. Sounds close to Nirvana. If I can watch movies in a theater in only my skivvies, then I'm on Cloud Nine.  

Sighs. We need a clothing-optional movie theater in our neighborhood.


----------



## DonTadow (Jun 21, 2005)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> Meh. Sounds close to Nirvana. If I can watch movies in a theater in only my skivvies, then I'm on Cloud Nine.
> 
> Sighs. We need a clothing-optional movie theater in our neighborhood.



They have those, their in the red light district


----------



## Kanegrundar (Jun 22, 2005)

DonTadow said:
			
		

> They have those, their in the red light district



 Like the place Pee Wee got busted in?  No wait, that place required clothing or he wouldn't have gotten busted...

Some dead horses just deserve a good beating!  

Kane


----------



## sunbeam60 (Jun 22, 2005)

All right, if we're gonna share war-stories and show scars of bad movie-going experiences, try this on for size:

We're going to go see We Were Soldiers, which is just about as dark and brooding and serious movie as they come. My house mates and I all agree on the jerkometer running pretty high at our local cinemas, so we chose a late showing to cut out the 13-year old texting crowd.

What we got instead was a serious dose of the drunken man crowd. Squared.

We get there and find our seats somewhere in the middle of the cinema; optimal position to take advantage of the sound system. And then, during the opening credits, the doors spring open and a guy and his girlfriend walk in and start looking for seats, two three rows in front of us. It takes them 3-4 minutes to choose seats because the girlfriend isn't happy about something-or-other.

They finally sit down, and my Canadian friend (who like most North Americans tell people when something annoys them as oppose to us coy Europeans) and I exchange glances and somehow can't help but suppress a smile. We already know this guy is going to ruin this movie and it's kinda ironic because we fought so hard to avoid it.

And then, a minute after the couple sit down, the guy starts talking to his girlfriend. In a regular voice, not even hushed. Three rows up my temperature gauge is slowly rising; pressure cooking, thinking "it's gonna blow ... it's gonna blow".

And then, the guy starts smoking. In a no-smoking theatre. Thin stream of silvery smoke curls up into view. The PSIs increase, my pulse rate increasing now, getting ready to do something, to shut the guy up, or shoot myself, or leave or just anything.

Fzzt! A beer is opened by the guy. Somehow this isn't suprising because we've been smelling beer for a while and the guy's speech is pretty slurred.

Right, I lean forward, and instead of starting at my usual "Excuse me, I'm really enjoying this movie but I find it hard to keep enjoying it with you talking. Could you possibly conduct your conversation outside of the theatre" I go straight to:

"Listen, , why don't you just SHUT THE  UP!". It takes the guy a little while to register someone could have the audacity to speak to him. He turns around and says "well, what the  are you going to do about it?"

"Well", I reply, "right now nothing, but just shut the  up so I can watch the movie in peace".

That gets me pretty pumped up. I'm not usually this confrontational, but at least I have a few silent minutes to calm down and get back into the movie.

Then, the dickhead starts again. And then he drops his can of beer.

And then ... then, my Canadian friend just overheats and explodes. He jumps three row of seats (all empty, the cinema was pretty quiet except for this dickhead), so he's lying flat across three seats and then YELLS straight into the guys face:

"SHUT THE  UP! YOU'VE BEEN TOLD ONCE, AND NOW YOU'VE BEEN TOLD TWICE! IF WE'RE GOING TO TELL YOU THREE TIMES, IT'S GOING TO INVOLVE YOU GETTING HURT".

Despite being angry as well, the whole situation is just comical. My friend is lying sprawled across three rows of seats, his long slender body bending at the resting points like a sheet covering chairs in an empty house. He's literally screaming into the guys face, in the middle of the movie, his right hand either pointing into the guy's face like an angry teacher's or slapping an empty seat to underline his words. The guy's girlfriend has jumped out of her seat and is standing in their aisle looking like she has NO IDEA of what's going on.

And then, like an angry snake curling up after its first attack, my friend slithers back over the rows and assumes his normal viewing position next to me.

Might be funny now, but back then I was SO angry at this dickhead and ready for just about anything. Luckily the guy takes a hint, gets up and leaves while shouting obscenities our way.

When the movie was over we were all pretty certain the guy would be waiting outside, but it was all quiet, like nothing had ever happened.

That night, I decided the cinema sucked and I'd try to stay away from it.


----------



## Nighthawk (Jun 22, 2005)

Home.

I do not have a quality home entertainment system but I still prefer home. It's not even close. Now that I think about it, it's a bit surprising. Heh.


----------



## Orius (Jun 26, 2005)

sniffles said:
			
		

> I know babysitters are expensive, but I never understand why anyone would want to take an infant or toddler to a movie.  The child doesn't get anything out of the film, and the parents may spend the whole film being distracted by the child instead of getting to enjoy the movie themselves.




It's even worse when they take young kids to a movie that is totally inappropriate for children in the first place.  Young kids are often frightened or whatever by the movie, and the parents are just too damn stupid to understand the ratings system to realize this film might be completely inappropriate for their little bundles of joy.  And then they bitch afterwards about how the movie was bad for their kids, and in those cases I find my hands itching for a nice sturdy baseball bat.

Luckily, I have to say I've avoided most of the really bad theater experiences.  The local audiences seem to have a low degree of rudeness.  Maybe it's because I usually catch the matinees, but I've attended several weekend showings of movies with large crowds and have experienced few jerks.


----------



## Thornir Alekeg (Jun 27, 2005)

I work with a person who takes her 1st grader to all kinds of movies.  I asked her about it one time and her reply was, "Well, my husband and I wanted to see it, and he is very mature for his age, he understands that the movies are not real."  I have learned to avoid the topic now rather than risk saying something I shouldn't say to a co-worker.

On another note, the Boston Globe had an article about the movie slump yesterday.  They have it posted online here (note: you may need to register on the website to read the entire article, they are annoying about that sometimes).

http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/articles/2005/06/26/are_the_movies_dying/?page=1


----------



## reveal (Jun 27, 2005)

Orius said:
			
		

> It's even worse when they take young kids to a movie that is totally inappropriate for children in the first place.




Star Cinema has a promotion called "Baby Box Office." It's a movie that is played every Tuesday at 10am and is a little softer than normal with the lights in the theater made a little brighter than normal. When I first saw this, I thought it was a great idea; then I saw what movies they played. Here are some examples:

The Bourne Supremacy
Batman Begins
Star Wars: Episode III
Bewitched
Herbie: Fully Loaded
Mr & Mrs Smith
The Perfect Man


----------



## glass (Jun 27, 2005)

I don't have any real horror stories about the cimena. Well there were a few kids making a racket, and standing up and gesturing during Batman & Robin, but they were a blessing in disguise as they distracted me from how bad the film was.   

Generally though, unless it's an event like RotS, I only see high certificate films at the cimena. You may get idiots of all ages, but crying babies don't tend to be 18!    


glass.


----------



## takyris (Jun 27, 2005)

reveal said:
			
		

> Star Cinema has a promotion called "Baby Box Office." It's a movie that is played every Tuesday at 10am and is a little softer than normal with the lights in the theater made a little brighter than normal. When I first saw this, I thought it was a great idea; then I saw what movies they played. Here are some examples:
> 
> The Bourne Supremacy
> Batman Begins
> ...




It's called "*Baby* Box Office". If it's a baby and not a six-year-old, it's not really watching the movie. You don't face the baby toward the screen, you rock the baby back and forth or nurse the baby or give the baby a bottle or let the baby sleep in your lap or whatever. You're not holding the baby up to let the vicious evisceration scenes really sink in. The baby is not watching the movie.

Those kinds of programs are specifically offered so that parents can see movies that don't involve trying to figure out which of the shapes the floating unicorn is juggling is a triangle, or how many apples the cow has eaten. To show only G-rated movies would sort of miss the entire point.

I hope this alleviates your confusion.


----------



## reveal (Jun 27, 2005)

takyris said:
			
		

> It's called "*Baby* Box Office". If it's a baby and not a six-year-old, it's not really watching the movie. You don't face the baby toward the screen, you rock the baby back and forth or nurse the baby or give the baby a bottle or let the baby sleep in your lap or whatever. You're not holding the baby up to let the vicious evisceration scenes really sink in. The baby is not watching the movie.
> 
> Those kinds of programs are specifically offered so that parents can see movies that don't involve trying to figure out which of the shapes the floating unicorn is juggling is a triangle, or how many apples the cow has eaten. To show only G-rated movies would sort of miss the entire point.
> 
> I hope this alleviates your confusion.




Um, ok.

It might be called "*Baby* Box Office," but a) the description of the program states that kids under 2 get in free so even they acknowledge it's not just for infants and b) I highly doubt that people with babies are going to be the only people going to that movie. If you're going to show movies where small children are present, at the very least do not show R rated movies. Regardless of how "mature" your child is, there is a lot of stuff shown in R rated movies that is confusing and frightening to young ones.


----------



## takyris (Jun 27, 2005)

reveal said:
			
		

> Um, ok.
> 
> It might be called "*Baby* Box Office," but a) the description of the program states that kids under 2 get in free so even they acknowledge it's not just for infants and b) I highly doubt that people with babies are going to be the only people going to that movie. If you're going to show movies where small children are present, at the very least do not show R rated movies. Regardless of how "mature" your child is, there is a lot of stuff shown in R rated movies that is confusing and frightening to young ones.




Fine, infants and toddlers. I can see not showing "Saw" to a 2-year-old, but there is a fairly large difference a) between "Saw" and most of the movies up there and b) between a 2-year-old and a 5 or 6-year old. The degree of interaction with the screen is fairly different, and while I'd probably have the 2-year-old in my lap facing me so that he didn't see any scary stuff on the screen, but you can still convince a 2-year-old that a spaceship battle is just a lot of pretty colored lights.

As for you highly doubting that people with babies will be the only ones there... uh, really? You really think that people are going to say, "Hey, I'm free during the day, and while I don't have children myself, I've decided to spend the afternoon in a movie theater at a showing specifically designed to be accessible to babies, complete with nursing mothers and screaming infants and kids spitting up all over the place... yeah, that's a wonderful idea. Let's do that." And if they do, what exactly does it have to do with your point?

I'm guessing that you think that babies shouldn't be at those movies, despite a) the vision limitations of the very young, b) the attention spans and sleep schedules of the slightly older ones who COULD see the screen from that far away, and c) the lack of interaction with the people on the screens, which they don't really identify as living people until they're older.

I await your backing for such a claim, which I'm sure will be much more enlightening than "Well, if a 6-year-old couldn't handle a movie like that, a 6-month-old shouldn't be able to handle it either," and which might very well reference American Baby, Baby Center, or any of the other baby-advice sites, several of which mention not plunking the child down in front of the screen as a substitute for paying attention to them yourself but suspiciously few of which mention not allowing your sleeping, nursing, or burping baby into the theater of a movie whose sound has been lowered to be less disturbing, for fear that they'll suddenly develop an attention span and improved visual faculties and become deeply scarred by watching Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt flirt on the dance floor.

The movies aren't for the kids. The movies are for the parent (usually but not always the mom) who is stuck with the child all day and who might really appreciate the chance to see a grown-up movie in a theater that won't be full of people griping at her because her baby is crying or nursing. It's possible, just possible, that the movie folks did a little research and thought about things beforehand and decided which movies were ones that parents might want to see and that weren't wall-to-wall carnage and violence, such that parents who wanted to ensure that their baby didn't see a lot of violence during the Bourne movie could cover the baby's head with a blanket during the graphic parts.

But I'm sure you've thought about it more than they have, as a theater professional and as a parent.


----------



## reveal (Jun 27, 2005)

takyris said:
			
		

> But I'm sure you've thought about it more than they have, as a theater professional and as a parent.




Ok. I think you're taking this way to far. I expressed an opinion and you're berating me for it. I don't think it's a good thing and you do. Let's just leave it at that because, honestly, I couldn't care less what you think on this topic.


----------



## takyris (Jun 27, 2005)

reveal said:
			
		

> Ok. I think you're taking this way to far. I expressed an opinion and you're berating me for it. I don't think it's a good thing and you do. Let's just leave it at that because, honestly, I couldn't care less what you think on this topic.




I apologize if it came off as overly emphatic. As somebody who leaves his wife at home every day, I strongly support those baby-cinema deals as a good way for her to get out of the house and maybe even feel like a grown-up for a couple hours. Evidently you feel otherwise, or you believe that they should show different movies, or you just thought that making the confused face was an excellent way to make a point.

That said, while I apologize if I offended you, I do think that when you make a disapproving statement, particularly a statement that is an implicit attack on the parenting skills of the people who attend these baby-cinema shows, you ought to be ready to back it up.

But then, parenting is important to me, and I'm going to get into a very enthusiastic and energetic debate with someone who knocks my parenting skills without putting some facts on the table to support their claims.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jun 27, 2005)

I remember standing outside of the theater after Natural Born Killers was over and seeing families with kids come out.  I was thinking, "What the **** is wrong with you people!"


----------



## reveal (Jun 27, 2005)

takyris said:
			
		

> I apologize if it came off as overly emphatic. As somebody who leaves his wife at home every day, I strongly support those baby-cinema deals as a good way for her to get out of the house and maybe even feel like a grown-up for a couple hours. Evidently you feel otherwise, or you believe that they should show different movies, or you just thought that making the confused face was an excellent way to make a point.
> 
> That said, while I apologize if I offended you, I do think that when you make a disapproving statement, particularly a statement that is an implicit attack on the parenting skills of the people who attend these baby-cinema shows, you ought to be ready to back it up.
> 
> But then, parenting is important to me, and I'm going to get into a very enthusiastic and energetic debate with someone who knocks my parenting skills without putting some facts on the table to support their claims.




A) If you expect me to backup my rationalization for my opinion, please do not insult me. I will be happy to do it otherwise.

B) I made no such attack on parenting skills, yours or others. I merely stated that young children are at a disadvantage because they have a hard time distinguishing fact from fiction. For example: My wife and I watch Star Trek:Voyager on DVD. My 3 year old son sometimes watches them with us. When he was 2, he grew fond of the Doctor. He would recognize him in other shows, like Stargate:SG-1. In one episode of Voyager, the Doctor was "possessed" by a computer program and was hurting people. My son cried because he did not understand why the doctor was acting the way he did. Based on this example, you can see why I have my opinion. And that is how I base a lot of my opinions, either by personal experience, research, or both. In this case, it's purely experience because it's not that important of an issue to me (Baby Box Office), so I haven't researched anything.

C) To reiterate, I did not attack parenting skills. I attacked the choices by the theater to show certain movies. My son loves Batman. However, I will not let him see Batman Begins (PG-13) until he is much older. Why? [sblock]Because of the scenes involving Scarecrow. When he uses his poisonous gas, the scenes become very scary, I believe, for young children.[/sblock] And while it is true that parents can turn the childs head or cover them with a blanket, if you haven't seen the movie beforehand, you wouldn't know _when_ to do this, thereby exposing your child to things you may not want them exposed to.

BTW, I'm glad you value parenting so much. It's important to me as well.


----------



## reveal (Jun 27, 2005)

Flexor the Mighty! said:
			
		

> I remember standing outside of the theater after Natural Born Killers was over and seeing families with kids come out.  I was thinking, "What the **** is wrong with you people!"




That was the first movie I took my then-girlfriend/now-wife to.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jun 27, 2005)

Well I enjoyed the movie, but seeing a group of kids that had to be ages 5-10 walk out with thier parents was kind of odd.


----------



## sniffles (Jul 1, 2005)

I just have to bump this to complain about more rude people in theatres.  Last night I saw War of the Worlds and we had 3 bumpkins with a combined IQ of broccoli sitting in front of us.  One of them was constantly amazed by the most obvious of plot developments; after having seen the references to EMP pulses affecting electronic devices, he was amazed when cars stopped working, and he had to let everyone in the theatre know that he was able to recognize blood onscreen.  He also kept stretching his arms over his head and hitting my fiancee in the knee.  You'd think he would have stopped after the first time, but apparently his IQ was so low he couldn't recognize his own sense of touch.   

Some friends of mine had an even worse experience at the same movie the previous night.  The couple in front of them actually got threatening when asked to stop looking at a photo on their cell phone screen during the film.  Don't people realize how distracting it is to have that bright light glaring in a darkened theater?  Why can't they just wait until the movie is over to look at the picture?

Why should we pay $20 to have people be rude to us while we're trying to enjoy ourselves?

(rant over)


----------

