GOING TO THE MOVIES

I know for me and my wife, we hardly go anymore. Other than Batman and Star Wars, I don't think we'll be in a movie theatre until Spider-Man 3. And we used to go all the time, but why pay $35 for tickets and drinks when I can own the damn thing for $15 in 5 months. What I'm wondering is how much you have decreased in going to the movies? And what does it take to actually get you into a theatre these days?

Most of my favorite films fall into the period between 1957 to 1976. Its kind of interesting that independent films in America were just beginning to be made during that period (starting with Cassavetes' "Shadows"), but the European art films had already been established much earlier. American films do have hope for the future, but it may be a while until we have another developed movement or wave of great American films. I am hopeful that American audiences will venture out to foreign films, especially French cinema and later (which will be extremely interesting) Iraqi cinema.

I don't think American films are in a particularly exciting phase right now, in large part because the independent scene is in transition which so much of the traditionally "independent" cinema being co-opted by the studios. Can I really think of Miramax productions as independent? A counter to this, however, is the number of very impressive American documentaries made in the last several years.

I don't think it's at all outlandish to suggest that movies, or at least certain types of movies, go through cycles and that some eras are better than others. I think it's true of any art/entertainment form: I think comic books were much better in the 1962-1968 period than they were, say, from 1950-1958 and that the worst period of all was the dreadful early 80s which gave way to an exciting period in the late 80s/early 90s.

I dislike the big budget fare as much or more than most film geeks, and it is often easy to feel a sense of despair over the total dominance of Hollywood studios in the marketplace. So many people never even see a movie that didn't have a budget of $50 mill or more and opened on 3,000 plus screens.

However, to say that movies are in decline today, in my opinion, says more about the viewer than the state of cinema. If you think movies stink more today than yesterday, that's just because you're not looking in the right place. There's more to the movie world than the multiplex and, here's a shocking secret, they make movies in countries other than America too!

Look at all the great films coming out of Taiwan and Iran these days, as well as the usual strong offerings from Hong Kong and Japan. It's far too early to form any Top 10 lists for 2005 but if I had to, my list would include Kung Fu Hustle, Oldboy and Tony Takitani from Hong Kong, Korea and Japan, respectively.

Unfortunately, people who do not live near a handful of major metropolitan centers never get the opportunity to see movies like these in theaters. In that sense, I do think things are worse today than they used to be. DVDs make up for it, but not completely.

I thought 2004 was a fantastic year for movies, one of the best I can remember in some time. For me, the "golden age" will probably always be very roughly from about 1964-1975 (I call it the "Strangelove to Taxi Driver" period) but I'm just as stoked about going to the movies now as I was ten years ago, much more so now that I live near L.A. and get to see a lot of great movies.

______________________________
Granted I don't go as often as I use to, but I also don't believe the quality of movies is decreasing at all, you just have to sift through a number of mediocre films to find the gems (which happens every year).
______________________________

Thats like that saying... we only remember the good times. Never the bad ones, which is probably why previous decades seem to have been better times for movies.

I have to agree with Chris on his last post. One of my favorite films is Rebel Wthout a Cause and had seen it numerous times on TV and DVD. One of my professors in undergrad screened a print for class in one of the campus theatres and to say the least it was AMAZING. There is nothing like seeing a film in the theatre. Especially when a director makes such wonderful use of his aesthetics.

Granted I don't go as often as I use to, but I also don't believe the quality of movies is decreasing at all, you just have to sift through a number of mediocre films to find the gems (which happens every year).

Now, I'm off to see Elisha Cuthbert bounce around for two hours at the $1 theatre. ;)

I had seen 2001: ASO over 30 times on DVD but never had the chance to see it in a theater until I moved to California. I saw it on a 70 mm print at the Egyptian Theater in Hollywood and it was like seeing an entirely new film. I honestly thought I was seeing new scenes I had never watched before and I rushed home to check my DVD to make sure - this for a movie I knew by heart.

There are a lot of great movies I have only seen at home. I'm glad I've seen them, but I seek every opportunity to see them on a screen, the way they need to be seen. At home, you get the content, but not all of the form.

I would recommend going to college moviehouses and/or art house theaters. Sometimes I go to the huge cineplexes like AMC or Carmike, if it is like a midnight first showing of something that I might be interested in, like I was with "Lord of the Rings" or "Batman Begins". I remember getting very lucky one time and was able to catch a double feature of "Dr. Strangelove" and "2001". Boy, was that awesome. That was enough to realize the difference between big screen and home theater. But then again, I am still in high school and haven't gotten married or had any kids.

"We are the children of Marx and Coca-Cola."
- from the Jean-Luc Godard film "Masculine-Feminine"

Just a quick lesson in monitary finance. If you have one in your town, why not wait for the movie to hit the "Dollar Theaters" (which is usually a month or so before it hits DVD) and pay $1 to see the film (in a theater) before you pay the "$15" to own it? Granted, the sticky floors, tattered seats and "old school" theater seating, aren't the most enticing of attributes in a theater. But, then again, you're only paying $1. ;)

Popcorn for thought.


- Josh

Chris is right about seeing movies the way they were meant to be seen. I go at least once a week now that I'm retired and have the time to go to bargain matinees.

However, I must admit that I can do without sound systems that are either too loud or too soft and without people who are sometimes noisy, like the old folks who were bused in from a retirement home to see "Phantom of the Opera" and chatted all the way through it!

There are advanges to both theaters and home systems that can't be beat by the other.

John

I go about once a week but that includes going to the IMAX which I do every week because of the musem pass I have. I like going to the Budgettheaters because they are two bucks nd you can't beat that these days. First run movies cost about 6.50 in Milwaukee but you should buy the senior special or the kids pak if you are getting food. It will save you alot, but its not the biggest portions of snacks. Also sneaking soda in is very easy to do.

"If you don't see it in a theater, you aren't really seeing it."

No I am seeing it;)

I go 2 or 3 times a week. Movies cost about $6.75 - what a bargain! Why buy the expensive food and drinks - you really can't last two hours without soda and candy?

DVDs are nice, but nothing matches the experience of watching a film the way it was meant to be seen - in a theater. If you don't see it in a theater, you aren't really seeing it.

Last movie, I saw in theater was Spidey 2 in July 2004. So you can imagine how often we go. You are right why spend $35 on a movie when you can buy a DVD or rent it. The quality of movies has gone down. Plus it depends on the genre you want to see. If you like dramas then it makes sense to wait for the DVD. SW and Batman etc are good one for theater. New York Times recently ran an article on how DVD media has actually affected the ticket sales in the US. Don't be surprised if you see DVDs of new movies released in 1-2 years.
--Ranjan

I have to agree with Eddie 100% on this one. Even though I (as a general rule) HATE having to read subtitles throughout a movie, mainly because I wind up missing expression, body language, or other important events on screen while I'm reading, I've found that the films I do give a chance that are subtitled, wind up being AMAZING films! If for no other reason, they're so far off the beaten path, that you start to remember that movies aren't "just" about explosions, CG, scantly clad women, or the latest gimmic for the screen. You start to rembember things like, movie's (at least the really good ones) start off as stories. Words on paper. And if you think further back than the first written book, the first movies were more than likely "told" around a campfire. What I'm getting at is "storyline". Very few movies today have a storyline that's both believable, as well as captures your imagination. And I don't mean just seeing a movie like "Spiderman 2" that makes you come out of it saying "That was EASILY the best comic book movie ever!". I'm talking about a movie that's story is so good, and keeps you so focused to what's going on, that you feel like you're there! People are no longer sitting around you. You aren't in a darkened theater. You can't hear the rest of the theater react. You're just in the moment. THAT is what movie making, or story telling once was.

I had such an experience with a movie I never would have thought to see otherwise. I decided to take a chance on a little known movie called "Turtles Can Fly". Odd title to start with, and as I recall was in "Arabic" as well. I suppose it doesn't matter what language it's in, if it's not one you speak, it's just as hard to understand. What an amazing film about a perspective that most of the world does not know, or even care to understand. It's set on the Iraq Turkey border, from the perspective of children trying to survive on their own. Collecting unexploded ordinance such as bombs and mines to barter with arms dealers to survive. What an amazing film! I didn't understand a lick of what those little kids were saying, but the emotion is very real, and at times overwhelming. I found myself reading so rapidly, that for the first time ever I was able to keep up with reading what was being said, as well as the expression and emotion on screen. One little boy in the film is armless, due to a mine he was collecting to sell, exploding... and still he collects mines and bombs to support himself, his younger sister, and his sister's child. Yes, you read that correctly. Both children can be no older than 10 or 11 years old, and the girl has a baby of her own to take care of. I won't say more, as not to give the film away. Suffice it to say, this is a story of survival, humanity, hope, and struggle. I would highly recommend this film to anyone that has a shred of emotion within them. It was fairly shocking, and to some extent, disturbing in a lot of places within the film, but did not use "gore". Some people may not like the perspective in which this was shot however. It is told from more of a documentary perspective, but is not narrated. Director "Bahman Ghobadi" has intrigued me to investigate his other films. I'm just hoping I can find them to rent somewhere.



Go see this movie, it's truly as "different" as they come.



- Josh

Chris,

The real problem is still people who see movies for entertainment rather than for art. They only want to see a certain kind of movie, and they bitch about that certain kind of movie because you almost never see a superior attempt at popcorn moviemaking.

Like you wrote, there are plenty of great movies. However, it's unreasonable to expect popcorn movies--which are derivative, formulaic, and tired--to be worth anyone's time.

My advice to people like Johnson316--instead of seeing "Batman", "Star Wars", and "Spider-man", see something playing in only one theatre in town or that's in something other than the English language. Even if you wind up hating the movie, at least you did something different from what you normally do.

Eddie

What makes the theater expirience far more better than home viewing is not just sound and the big image. The fact that you are watching something and following its progress with another 200 people creates the notion that you are expiriencing an "event". When you walk in a theater, u dont worry about the image...you dont worry about sound. You dont have to worry if the sub tops itself and "pops" a bit...or if the image on your tv is a bit blurred etc etc. As for CGI heavy movies like superhero movies...they are not the only reason that a theater exists. I, for example, would love to catch "amadeus" way back in '84 and watch it like it was ment to be watched, not just amadeus...but countless classics that i only saw on DVD.
As for people speaking while the movie plays... well, we have a theater or two here that show european films...classics and new ones...nobody talks, and nobody makes stupid noises to attract attention. Maybe its because very plainly put... hollywood doesnt offer anything to respect anymore. Dont look for the decline of the cinematic art in bad movies. Search for it in "bad" audiences .We shape what is gonna be out there.
Cinema can be more Enlightening than the adventures of the "dark knight" or the guy that got bitten by a spider and became a spider himself...The remains of a pseudo-culture that now even more people will grow-up with.

Going to the movies is one my my favorite things to do!! This summer, I have had more of a chance to go, but I usually don't have that much time. So, my husband & I tend to go sporadically. To me, it's an outing, just like going to eat at a nice restaurant or going to the theater. It's just antoher form of entertainment. You could own or rent all the movies that are released, but it doesn't feel the same...

I also believe that there are certain movies that just aren't enjoyed as much at home, bc screens aren't as large or the sound is not as good. At the same time, there are those that aren't worth paying the extra cash for at the theater.

As previously mentioned, I also tend to like watching films that aren't mainstream...my husband LOVES them! So, he has gotten me really into them as well. But, these also can be categorzied into those that can be seen on the big screen and those that don't have to be. We saw a documentary at home called Everest, and it just wasn't the same...seeing it at a movie theater or IMAX would have been a million times better! Good documentary, btw, highly recommended!

Since I bought my Sanyo Z2 projector and 133" diagonal Da-Lite High Power Screen, I haven't set foot in the local theater. I get a much better experience at home than there.

The local theater isn't one of those huge mega THX places, but even if it was, I still think I'd prefer staying home.

Dont forget the Smoke Factor. Its not enough that i paid to see a mindless blockbuster...i cant even smoke while watching it. You will probably tell me to visit an outdoor cinema screen. Well...i tried...the sound sux.

Josh,

I know what you meant!!;). I was just imaging your wild american dream:)

--Ranjan

Ranjan,

I guess I should have put more ;) and :D at the end of that post. I thought I was being sufficiently facetious there. ;)

- Josh

Or you could switch over from smoking cigarettes to Cuban cigars, read Che Guevara's "Guerrilla Warfare", and join a revolutionary movement in Cuba to create a socialist democracy, in which time you gain enough power for it to spread to the United States, and THEN you can change the American Dream for your government to have the theater chains have what food you want, drink you want, toliet you want, and of course the Cuban cigars that you want. Entertainment is after all is the most important social issue of the 21st century.

By the way America, give me a break.

Josh,

Its bit extreme. What is the difference between a prison cell and your american dream home theater?:). I don't think this is an American Dream I want to follow:).

--Ranjan

Well, I suppose if it came right down to it, you could always install a toilet right dead-center of your home theater. Then put a "mini fridge" next to it Put a telephone and neck pillow on top of it. Make sure you've got a 100 DVD Carousel, and are hooked up to one of those "on demand" movie subscription services! Then, you'd never have to leave your home theater! You could eat, sleep, watch all the movies you want, call for pizza, eat the pizza, "get rid of the pizza", have a beer, "get rid of the beer", watch your cholesterol and bloodpressure climb to heartattack levels, and then fall back to sleep with the cigarette still burning in your hand! All from the comfort of your toilet seat, and in the name of being sedentary!! Then you'd never have to miss anything! HEY, IT'S THE AMERICAN DREAM!! ;) :D



- Josh

Yes, the smoke factor is a good one. That and the fact that I can eat whatever the hell I want, drink whatever I want, go to the bathroom without having to miss a thing.

Hello? Hello? Am I late to post in here? Hello?

I used to go to the theaters every weekend. When I lived in America it was an addiction. I would rarely spend money on candy and drinks but the 7 bucks ticket price has never stopped me.

Now I live in Spain where it is customary to dubb movies. Tha-at's right, an annoying voice, in badly translated and badly recorded language over the top. Theaters here annoy me, even the pretty ones like Cineplex (owned by Movieplex). Audiences here annoy me, even when there are cute guys in stylish jeans right there next to me. Prices here annoy me, 5 euros for a movie that premiered in the United States six months ago? Puh-leez!

So I wantch movies on DVD. Me--happy this way.

Ranjan,


In the news today, an 847 lb. man was found dead on his toilet in his home theater. Cause of death was determined as having too little blood in his cholesterol system. ;) :)


- Josh

Sh*t happens. In this case, quite literally.