The movie experience has to change (2 Viewers)

[Hastur]

As stated above, studios must cater to a global market, not just American tastes. The Asian market is highly lucrative, and likes a certain style of movie Americans have tired of. Movies will cater to where the money is.

This is the deal.

Waaaaay to much money in global sales to care about enjoyment of the US consumers.

I remember listening to an NPR interview with a band a few years back(sorry, don't remember which band it was. Pop rock type band I believe). The band was describing how their #1 song was rearrainged a few different ways to play on different types of radio formats. Sometimes the same song had a little more horns section, another version had a subtle undertone of melodic piano, etc.

Is the wave of movie making future to do the same to movies? Same movie, but slightly different tone/car chase/romance for different countries/audiences?

 

[KarmaPolice]

I was thinking about it a lot today and what is missing. What I came with is that it was the combo of tech and prestige TV & their companies that are mostly to blame for the state of theaters today and our choices.

Tech made it less of a spectacle. Going to the theater isn't an event for most types of movies. When the experience is comparable, that $15/ticket for the family that is a tough ask when you know it's going to be at most a $30 purchase and you get the rewatch factor. More and more people choose to go only when it's a huge action movie they can justify and is still enough of an upgrade from what they have at home to make it worth it.

Prestige TV shifted the cultural dialogue and habits to streaming and shows. Less and less people were talking about a movie like The Sixth Sense or There's Something About Mary. We started talking about The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones. Still now at work people are way more likely to talk about new movies. What it has become is people are happy with a couple services to stay on top of the shows they love, and catching up on whatever movies happen to be on that month. On top of that, the subscription services had way more free reign for content than the movie studios, which pulled the talent that direction and away from movies. Hell, how many directors have gotten pulled into the superhero and Star Wars movies that we wish were doing content like we see on the streamers? The ones that rejected the studios can be found on the TV shows that are the best.

What gives me hope is that we have some fantastic young directors that people seem to know making movies. We also seem to have shaken the superhero part a little bit. Unfortunately, what seems to have replaced it is remakes and legacy sequels, but hopefully some more Barbies and Oppenheimers will poke through and give studios more confindence in some other fare again.

TV at 4k sitting at a distance of 10 ft with a sound bar is equal or better to 90% of the in theater tech out there now. Add a surround set and it's 98%.

I'm in the minority because I still think the theater experience is better. I also don't have that great of a set up, so that is a point many have over me. It was just Garfield, but my $800 TV and $300 soundbar aren't even close to the theater. On top of that, it forces people (well, civilized people) to put their stuff down and focus on the movie. Again, maybe people have a more dedicated movie space, mine is filled with annoying cats and distractions. For me theater >> home still for any type of movie. It's just that our lifestyle and having kids has meant what I am spending my money on in the theater is the very crap that we are saying we are getting sick of. If it was just my vote and dollars I would be seeing the newest PTA or Aster in the theater and watching Garfield either never or at home - not the reverse.

Same. My setup is not great, I have like a 42” TV. Trying to get a soundbar but the wife says it will clash with her decor

We do have a 55” or whatever in the basement with surround but the kids have commandeered that for the Xbox so we have the living room setup I mentioned above

That said I probably only go to a handful of movies a year, last year was Dune 2

Me as well, I just try my best at home. I use headphones more now (I've been surprised how much better experience that is vs. the sound I have) and have started putting away my phone when watching, especially for 1st time watches.

My reasons are more just parenting and time, not anything to do with not loving movies or thinking it's not worth it. When I do have time on my days off, it's a weekday when school is in session and movies don't typically start until 3 or 4 around here during non-summer time, so that's a bust. When I do go, it's usually something with the kids. I can't remember the last truly "me" movie I saw in the theaters. Pretty sure I've managed to miss every spectacle movie in the last decade +.

 

[JAA]

Took my kid to see Garfield yesterday. I got candy beforehand for myself but still a kid’s meal for him and a popcorn and drink for the wife and I was 30 bucks. Crazy! The showing was pretty full shockingly and everybody behaved in there.

I like seeing movies and my son is obsessed with going to the theater but I just can’t get past 60 bucks round trip for the whole thing.


Movie was TERRIBLE too even for a kid’s movie. I’ve had to sit through a lot of kid’s movies let me tell you and this might be near the end of the list.

Just some additional perspective, but $60 for a family of 3 for being out of the house ~2 hours is ~$30/hr, $10/hr/person. Pretty good money spent IMO to just get out of the house.

For my family of 5 it sucks. Everything is wicked expensive and going out for a meal is out of the world expensive if you include a drink and desert.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Took my kid to see Garfield yesterday. I got candy beforehand for myself but still a kid’s meal for him and a popcorn and drink for the wife and I was 30 bucks. Crazy! The showing was pretty full shockingly and everybody behaved in there.

I like seeing movies and my son is obsessed with going to the theater but I just can’t get past 60 bucks round trip for the whole thing.


Movie was TERRIBLE too even for a kid’s movie. I’ve had to sit through a lot of kid’s movies let me tell you and this might be near the end of the list.

Just some additional perspective, but $60 for a family of 3 for being out of the house ~2 hours is ~$30/hr, $10/hr/person. Pretty good money spent IMO to just get out of the house.

For my family of 5 it sucks. Everything is wicked expensive and going out for a meal is out of the world expensive if you include a drink and desert.

There are ways to make it cheaper too - most theaters have cheap days, matinee prices, or cheaper snack options.

Yes, it's expensive, but so is damn near everything else from museums to water parks to just going out to eat.

 

[KarmaPolice]

But again, I get it- most of those things we can list are also things we wouldn't be able to replicate at all in the home. Movies and eating out are tougher and tougher asks as the prices spike.

I just love movies, and hate lines/heat/people. I'd rather go to the movie and a hike with the kiddo vs. go the water park or museum with her.

 

[bagger]

Something original would be a start. Despicable Me 4, Garfield, MI #12, etc..

Fall Guys was original. Nobody went to see that. Oppenheimer and Barbie were original. There’s an original movie out every week. There will always be sequels but there is more new content than any of us could ever see.

I assumed Fall Guy was the remake of the TV show with Lee Majors.

 

[Capella]

Something original would be a start. Despicable Me 4, Garfield, MI #12, etc..

Fall Guys was original. Nobody went to see that. Oppenheimer and Barbie were original. There’s an original movie out every week. There will always be sequels but there is more new content than any of us could ever see.

I assumed Fall Guy was the remake of the TV show with Lee Majors.

Yea somebody corrected me with that but Lee Majors Jesus it may as well be a new idea at that point.

 

[Chadstroma]

Just got notification that our local Marcus theatre will have 'child and senior' matinee pricing at $7 for showing before 4pm on all days. Might... might.... make us see another movie this summer.... was planning on one or two movies with the kids through the summer on Tuesdays when the tickets are $6 each for even me and there are other perks too. But the matinee pricing for the kids might make me decide to take them on a non-Tuesday.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Went to see Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes about a week or two with my son. I'm not sure I'll be going back to the movies anytime soon. Tickets were $15 each, and then with small popcorns, 2 bottles of water, and a candy for him it was another $35.

A group of 10 or so teenagers in the theater, talking, laughing, and running around. A middle-aged lady looking at her phone in the row ahead of us, the light from which was very distracting. A couple of people went out to complain about the teenagers, but not much was done (theater employee walked in and looked around once). Then my son said it sounded like one of the teenagers was beating up another one in the walkway back to the lobby area ( I didn't notice it). I didn't think the picture quality on screen was very good. Way too many commercials after the previews before the movie itself began.

Just not worth it to spend that kind of money (and that was just for two of us) and have to deal with inconsiderate people who don't know (or care about) how to behave in public. Not worth the aggravation.

Except I would have yelled at the kids and asked the lady to turn her phone tint down.

This is why all the boys are terrified of you Chaderick!!!!!

 

[Chadstroma]

Went to see Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes about a week or two with my son. I'm not sure I'll be going back to the movies anytime soon. Tickets were $15 each, and then with small popcorns, 2 bottles of water, and a candy for him it was another $35.

A group of 10 or so teenagers in the theater, talking, laughing, and running around. A middle-aged lady looking at her phone in the row ahead of us, the light from which was very distracting. A couple of people went out to complain about the teenagers, but not much was done (theater employee walked in and looked around once). Then my son said it sounded like one of the teenagers was beating up another one in the walkway back to the lobby area ( I didn't notice it). I didn't think the picture quality on screen was very good. Way too many commercials after the previews before the movie itself began.

Just not worth it to spend that kind of money (and that was just for two of us) and have to deal with inconsiderate people who don't know (or care about) how to behave in public. Not worth the aggravation.

Except I would have yelled at the kids and asked the lady to turn her phone tint down.

This is why all the boys are terrified of you Chaderick!!!!!

To think about it... I might have yelled at a few of them before. In basketball, it is a pet peeve of mine for not dribbling basketballs during a game when on the sidelines. I am not shy from telling kids to 'hold the ball' when they do dribble. Usually I am nice about it but I do remember a couple of times when I was coaching that I yelled across the court to tell them to stop dribbling... I can't remember if it was our boys or another team though.

There is also the time that when my daughter was playing a game and some parent from the other team behind me started chirping at me all game long with little comments. She apparently was annoyed that I was cheer my team on loudly and proudly. So, that only made me get louder and more boisterous. Eventually, she started chirping about our girls though and that was a line I was not cool with. Talking about them being dirty and when an out of bounds was right in front of us she was like "Don't worry Sue, we see it...they aren't playing basketball, they are wrestling and boxing." the thing that set me off on that (besides that there was no dirty play at all) was that the previous year one of their girls took a full on hook of a swing at one of our girls... luckily missed but it was an unmistakable swing. I later found out from our girls that the same player had been digging her nails into our girls arms doing little punches and jabs all game long. So.... I turned around and said "Shut up you hyprocrite...one of your girls took a swing at one of ours last year. Just shut up!" Of course that didn't have things quiet down at all.... yelling back and forth from me and then a couple of gorillas from the other team got in on it yelling at me. I turned my back on them and went back to ignoring the wrench behind me. However, one of the boys from my daughters class was sitting next to me. He has a splash of a trouble maker streak in him... kind of class clown type trouble making.... but certainly isn't opposed to pushing people's buttons. So, after that, he really got into cheering in ways that were obviously directed at the lady behind me and even made a couple of comments.... I gestured to him to bring it down. But then this lady turned on him and started talking crap to him. A kid in 7th grade! NOPE. I am not allowing that. I turned back around and told her to shut up and that I wasn't letting her talk to a kid like that. Of course, the two gorillas from the other team started yelling back at me and started coming down the stands telling me to shut up. I held my ground and said "I am not letting her talk crap to kids!" that went back and forth a little and then I just motioned to the gorillas like "get our of here" and turned my back on them because either they would sit back down or they would sucker punch me and go to jail- that was the only options I was going to give them. They sat down and that was it. I am certain Joe has told that story to all the boys in the class and I wouldn't be surprised if there was a little embellishment on it as well.

 

[RCon]

Relevant:

Digg Reboot

Digg - The front page of the internet, now with superpowers

digg.com

 

[Payne]

I was thinking about it a lot today and what is missing. What I came with is that it was the combo of tech and prestige TV & their companies that are mostly to blame for the state of theaters today and our choices.

Tech made it less of a spectacle. Going to the theater isn't an event for most types of movies. When the experience is comparable, that $15/ticket for the family that is a tough ask when you know it's going to be at most a $30 purchase and you get the rewatch factor. More and more people choose to go only when it's a huge action movie they can justify and is still enough of an upgrade from what they have at home to make it worth it.

Prestige TV shifted the cultural dialogue and habits to streaming and shows. Less and less people were talking about a movie like The Sixth Sense or There's Something About Mary. We started talking about The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones. Still now at work people are way more likely to talk about new movies. What it has become is people are happy with a couple services to stay on top of the shows they love, and catching up on whatever movies happen to be on that month. On top of that, the subscription services had way more free reign for content than the movie studios, which pulled the talent that direction and away from movies. Hell, how many directors have gotten pulled into the superhero and Star Wars movies that we wish were doing content like we see on the streamers? The ones that rejected the studios can be found on the TV shows that are the best.

What gives me hope is that we have some fantastic young directors that people seem to know making movies. We also seem to have shaken the superhero part a little bit. Unfortunately, what seems to have replaced it is remakes and legacy sequels, but hopefully some more Barbies and Oppenheimers will poke through and give studios more confindence in some other fare again.

TV at 4k sitting at a distance of 10 ft with a sound bar is equal or better to 90% of the in theater tech out there now. Add a surround set and it's 98%.

I have a killer 77" setup and I disagree. Can't replicate a GOOD movie theater at home. You just can't.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Relevant:

Digg Reboot

Digg - The front page of the internet, now with superpowers

digg.com

"The film industry has countered this trend by emphasizing the indelibility of moviegoing, as highlighted by AMC's Nicole Kidman advertisement, which (bizarrely) promotes movie patronage to people already at the movies."

God that self congratulatory commercial is insufferable.

 

[culdeus]

I was thinking about it a lot today and what is missing. What I came with is that it was the combo of tech and prestige TV & their companies that are mostly to blame for the state of theaters today and our choices.

Tech made it less of a spectacle. Going to the theater isn't an event for most types of movies. When the experience is comparable, that $15/ticket for the family that is a tough ask when you know it's going to be at most a $30 purchase and you get the rewatch factor. More and more people choose to go only when it's a huge action movie they can justify and is still enough of an upgrade from what they have at home to make it worth it.

Prestige TV shifted the cultural dialogue and habits to streaming and shows. Less and less people were talking about a movie like The Sixth Sense or There's Something About Mary. We started talking about The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones. Still now at work people are way more likely to talk about new movies. What it has become is people are happy with a couple services to stay on top of the shows they love, and catching up on whatever movies happen to be on that month. On top of that, the subscription services had way more free reign for content than the movie studios, which pulled the talent that direction and away from movies. Hell, how many directors have gotten pulled into the superhero and Star Wars movies that we wish were doing content like we see on the streamers? The ones that rejected the studios can be found on the TV shows that are the best.

What gives me hope is that we have some fantastic young directors that people seem to know making movies. We also seem to have shaken the superhero part a little bit. Unfortunately, what seems to have replaced it is remakes and legacy sequels, but hopefully some more Barbies and Oppenheimers will poke through and give studios more confindence in some other fare again.

TV at 4k sitting at a distance of 10 ft with a sound bar is equal or better to 90% of the in theater tech out there now. Add a surround set and it's 98%.

I have a killer 77" setup and I disagree. Can't replicate a GOOD movie theater at home. You just can't.

I didn't say it was perfect. But approaching it.

 

[Payne]

I was thinking about it a lot today and what is missing. What I came with is that it was the combo of tech and prestige TV & their companies that are mostly to blame for the state of theaters today and our choices.

Tech made it less of a spectacle. Going to the theater isn't an event for most types of movies. When the experience is comparable, that $15/ticket for the family that is a tough ask when you know it's going to be at most a $30 purchase and you get the rewatch factor. More and more people choose to go only when it's a huge action movie they can justify and is still enough of an upgrade from what they have at home to make it worth it.

Prestige TV shifted the cultural dialogue and habits to streaming and shows. Less and less people were talking about a movie like The Sixth Sense or There's Something About Mary. We started talking about The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones. Still now at work people are way more likely to talk about new movies. What it has become is people are happy with a couple services to stay on top of the shows they love, and catching up on whatever movies happen to be on that month. On top of that, the subscription services had way more free reign for content than the movie studios, which pulled the talent that direction and away from movies. Hell, how many directors have gotten pulled into the superhero and Star Wars movies that we wish were doing content like we see on the streamers? The ones that rejected the studios can be found on the TV shows that are the best.

What gives me hope is that we have some fantastic young directors that people seem to know making movies. We also seem to have shaken the superhero part a little bit. Unfortunately, what seems to have replaced it is remakes and legacy sequels, but hopefully some more Barbies and Oppenheimers will poke through and give studios more confindence in some other fare again.

TV at 4k sitting at a distance of 10 ft with a sound bar is equal or better to 90% of the in theater tech out there now. Add a surround set and it's 98%.

I have a killer 77" setup and I disagree. Can't replicate a GOOD movie theater at home. You just can't.

I didn't say it was perfect. But approaching it.

Understand. That's why I stated GOOD theater. A really good home system isn't too far off a crappy movie theater.
But the newer, Atmos theaters are at a whole new level.

 

[belljr]

I was thinking about it a lot today and what is missing. What I came with is that it was the combo of tech and prestige TV & their companies that are mostly to blame for the state of theaters today and our choices.

Tech made it less of a spectacle. Going to the theater isn't an event for most types of movies. When the experience is comparable, that $15/ticket for the family that is a tough ask when you know it's going to be at most a $30 purchase and you get the rewatch factor. More and more people choose to go only when it's a huge action movie they can justify and is still enough of an upgrade from what they have at home to make it worth it.

Prestige TV shifted the cultural dialogue and habits to streaming and shows. Less and less people were talking about a movie like The Sixth Sense or There's Something About Mary. We started talking about The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones. Still now at work people are way more likely to talk about new movies. What it has become is people are happy with a couple services to stay on top of the shows they love, and catching up on whatever movies happen to be on that month. On top of that, the subscription services had way more free reign for content than the movie studios, which pulled the talent that direction and away from movies. Hell, how many directors have gotten pulled into the superhero and Star Wars movies that we wish were doing content like we see on the streamers? The ones that rejected the studios can be found on the TV shows that are the best.

What gives me hope is that we have some fantastic young directors that people seem to know making movies. We also seem to have shaken the superhero part a little bit. Unfortunately, what seems to have replaced it is remakes and legacy sequels, but hopefully some more Barbies and Oppenheimers will poke through and give studios more confindence in some other fare again.

TV at 4k sitting at a distance of 10 ft with a sound bar is equal or better to 90% of the in theater tech out there now. Add a surround set and it's 98%.

I have a killer 77" setup and I disagree. Can't replicate a GOOD movie theater at home. You just can't.

I didn't say it was perfect. But approaching it.

Understand. That's why I stated GOOD theater. A really good home system isn't too far off a crappy movie theater.
But the newer, Atmos theaters are at a whole new level.

I have Atmos at home

 

[BobbyLayne]

40 years ago….

At the movies. This wkd. 1984.

• Ghostbusters
• Gremlins
• Indiana Jones - Temple of Doom
• The Karate Kid
• Star Trek III
• The Natural
• Police Academy

 

[Doug B]

40 years ago….

At the movies. This wkd. 1984.

• Ghostbusters
• Gremlins
• Indiana Jones - Temple of Doom
• The Karate Kid
• Star Trek III
• The Natural
• Police Academy

Tip of the iceberg, too.

Domestic Box Office For June 1984

www.boxofficemojo.com

Domestic Box Office For July 1984

www.boxofficemojo.com

 

[Snotbubbles]

Why are tv series so good with often a fraction of the budget, and movies can't make a compelling product?

I think as cool special effects and standout actors have become saturated, the longtail format of TV for storytelling and character development is something that movies just can't compete with.

You just can't tell the same kind of story or develop characters in the same way in a 2 hour movie as you can in a 10 hour TV season. To trump that, movies used to beat TV with better acting and much better special effects, but that advantage is mostly gone now.

There are plenty of good actors doing TV now, so that advantage is out the window, and cool special effects are easy enough to do now and widely available that people care about them less, AND on top of that TV shows can do them almost as good as movies even on a limited budget.

If Independence Day were released today no one would give a crap about it. There are a zillion movies and TV shows with sky beams and explosions and witty well delivered dialogue now. Everything has great effects so that is no longer a trump card, and story/characters are the way to really stand out now, and that's just much more difficult to develop in a short movie than a long TV show.

Exactly. Just look at Game of Thrones and what they did with a character like Theon Greyjoy. He went from a "who cares" character, to a character, at the end that you cared about. It's those type of character arcs that you can develop over hours and hours (and years) of writing and storytelling. If you tried to make every Game of Thrones book into a 2 hour movie, it wouldn't work because there is just so much content that you'd have to cut. The final season of the series was basically what the first 7 years would have looked like if it was in movie format. It would just feel rushed and not make a ton of sense.

 

[culdeus]

Why are tv series so good with often a fraction of the budget, and movies can't make a compelling product?

I think as cool special effects and standout actors have become saturated, the longtail format of TV for storytelling and character development is something that movies just can't compete with.

You just can't tell the same kind of story or develop characters in the same way in a 2 hour movie as you can in a 10 hour TV season. To trump that, movies used to beat TV with better acting and much better special effects, but that advantage is mostly gone now.

There are plenty of good actors doing TV now, so that advantage is out the window, and cool special effects are easy enough to do now and widely available that people care about them less, AND on top of that TV shows can do them almost as good as movies even on a limited budget.

If Independence Day were released today no one would give a crap about it. There are a zillion movies and TV shows with sky beams and explosions and witty well delivered dialogue now. Everything has great effects so that is no longer a trump card, and story/characters are the way to really stand out now, and that's just much more difficult to develop in a short movie than a long TV show.

Exactly. Just look at Game of Thrones and what they did with a character like Theon Greyjoy. He went from a "who cares" character, to a character, at the end that you cared about. It's those type of character arcs that you can develop over hours and hours (and years) of writing and storytelling. If you tried to make every Game of Thrones book into a 2 hour movie, it wouldn't work because there is just so much content that you'd have to cut. The final season of the series was basically what the first 7 years would have looked like if it was in movie format. It would just feel rushed and not make a ton of sense.

Part of that is there are so many characters to deal with. A GOT movie could perhaps be Jon Snow/dragon driven, cut a lot of the side characters out and roll as a trilogy. Basically LOTR with dragons and not elfs

 

[Snotbubbles]

Why are tv series so good with often a fraction of the budget, and movies can't make a compelling product?

I think as cool special effects and standout actors have become saturated, the longtail format of TV for storytelling and character development is something that movies just can't compete with.

You just can't tell the same kind of story or develop characters in the same way in a 2 hour movie as you can in a 10 hour TV season. To trump that, movies used to beat TV with better acting and much better special effects, but that advantage is mostly gone now.

There are plenty of good actors doing TV now, so that advantage is out the window, and cool special effects are easy enough to do now and widely available that people care about them less, AND on top of that TV shows can do them almost as good as movies even on a limited budget.

If Independence Day were released today no one would give a crap about it. There are a zillion movies and TV shows with sky beams and explosions and witty well delivered dialogue now. Everything has great effects so that is no longer a trump card, and story/characters are the way to really stand out now, and that's just much more difficult to develop in a short movie than a long TV show.

Exactly. Just look at Game of Thrones and what they did with a character like Theon Greyjoy. He went from a "who cares" character, to a character, at the end that you cared about. It's those type of character arcs that you can develop over hours and hours (and years) of writing and storytelling. If you tried to make every Game of Thrones book into a 2 hour movie, it wouldn't work because there is just so much content that you'd have to cut. The final season of the series was basically what the first 7 years would have looked like if it was in movie format. It would just feel rushed and not make a ton of sense.

Part of that is there are so many characters to deal with. A GOT movie could perhaps be Jon Snow/dragon driven, cut a lot of the side characters out and roll as a trilogy. Basically LOTR with dragons and not elfs

You would have to do it like they did the Harry Potter/Twilight series, follow it book by book. Focusing on one character would be virtually impossible since they all converge at the end and they all played important roles.

 

[massraider]

40 years ago….

At the movies. This wkd. 1984.

• Ghostbusters
• Gremlins
• Indiana Jones - Temple of Doom
• The Karate Kid
• Star Trek III
• The Natural
• Police Academy

Tip of the iceberg, too.

Domestic Box Office For June 1984

www.boxofficemojo.com

Daily Box Office For July 1984

www.boxofficemojo.com

Man, that was a home run of a year.

Just comparing it to 83, and 85, 1984 was really great, huh? Lot of movies on that list aged really really well.

 

[Doug B]

Man, that was a home run of a year.

I messed up the July 1984 link above, but I just fixed it. When you take June/July 1984 together, you really see how special of a time it was for movies.

And without researching, there was even more to come in 1984 - The Terminator and Beverly Hills Cop for starters.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Man, that was a home run of a year.

I messed up the July 1984 link above, but I just fixed it. When you take June/July 1984 together, you really see how special of a time it was for movies.

And without researching, there was even more to come in 1984 - The Terminator and Beverly Hills Cop for starters.

Right - sticking just with summer 1984, still coming: July - Bachelor Party, Purple Rain August - Red Dawn, Revenge of the Nerds.

And more…crazy good year.

 

[Frostillicus]

Going to see Inside out 2 tamorrow with the family. 4 tickets = $53. Probably spend another $50 on concessions. $25 per person for a movie and food is pretty reasonable imo.

 

[Capella]

Going to see Inside out 2 tamorrow with the family. 4 tickets = $53. Probably spend another $50 on concessions. $25 per person for a movie and food is pretty reasonable imo.

Yea I just bought 3 tickets for 48. The kid will want the popcorn combo kid’s meal. I’ll probably smuggle in some candy though.

 

[Frostillicus]

Going to see Inside out 2 tamorrow with the family. 4 tickets = $53. Probably spend another $50 on concessions. $25 per person for a movie and food is pretty reasonable imo.

I should probably also mention that my kid are a 16 year old girl and a 14 year old boy. I'd pay way more than $100 for all of us to spend 2 hours together.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Going to see Inside out 2 tamorrow with the family. 4 tickets = $53. Probably spend another $50 on concessions. $25 per person for a movie and food is pretty reasonable imo.

I should probably also mention that my kid are a 16 year old girl and a 14 year old boy. I'd pay way more than $100 for all of us to spend 2 hours together.

Yep, it's all how you look at it, and I understand both. It's true you could replicate close to that for a bit less at home, but also true that many things cost $100+ for a night out with the family.

Example: we just went to a car show with the family in Minnesota- $15/person to get in, and food every bit as expensive as at the theater. We basically spent $200 to look at old cars and listen to terrible music.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Going to see Inside out 2 tamorrow with the family. 4 tickets = $53. Probably spend another $50 on concessions. $25 per person for a movie and food is pretty reasonable imo.

I should probably also mention that my kid are a 16 year old girl and a 14 year old boy. I'd pay way more than $100 for all of us to spend 2 hours together.

Yep, it's all how you look at it, and I understand both. It's true you could replicate close to that for a bit less at home, but also true that many things cost $100+ for a night out with the family.

Example: we just went to a car show with the family in Minnesota- $15/person to get in, and food every bit as expensive as at the theater. We basically spent $200 to look at old cars and listen to terrible music.

I was there last night - go every year if I can. It's a little more than a "car show". Lol

Downside is I spent $16 on an okay roast beef/onion/cheese/pepper sandwich.

The upside was I finally got to see a 1958 Plymouth Fury, aka "Christine" for the first time.

 

[Ilov80s]

Going to see Inside out 2 tamorrow with the family. 4 tickets = $53. Probably spend another $50 on concessions. $25 per person for a movie and food is pretty reasonable imo.

I should probably also mention that my kid are a 16 year old girl and a 14 year old boy. I'd pay way more than $100 for all of us to spend 2 hours together.

Saw it non IMAX mid day during the week. Luckily the 15 year old looks more like 12 so she got the kids price but was $28 for the two of us. On the downside she’s got some eating issues but that at least it saved me money.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Going to see Inside out 2 tamorrow with the family. 4 tickets = $53. Probably spend another $50 on concessions. $25 per person for a movie and food is pretty reasonable imo.

I should probably also mention that my kid are a 16 year old girl and a 14 year old boy. I'd pay way more than $100 for all of us to spend 2 hours together.

Yep, it's all how you look at it, and I understand both. It's true you could replicate close to that for a bit less at home, but also true that many things cost $100+ for a night out with the family.

Example: we just went to a car show with the family in Minnesota- $15/person to get in, and food every bit as expensive as at the theater. We basically spent $200 to look at old cars and listen to terrible music.

I was there last night - go every year if I can. It's a little more than a "car show". Lol

Downside is I spent $16 on an okay roast beef/onion/cheese/pepper sandwich.

The upside was I finally got to see a 1958 Plymouth Fury, aka "Christie" for the first time.

Yes, I exaggerate for effect when I am grumpy. Family went late, so by that time many activities were done, so in fact we paid that much to watch people drive around in a circle with their classic cars and rev their engines for an hour or two. Sandwich and beer at Mancinis was decent, but my point was to point out that pretty much everything is expensive for a family now, so if you frame it as $100-150 for a family outing, a trip to the theater isn't terrible. All in the eye of the beholder and what your family enjoys doing and if you think the price is worth the experience.

I left out that, yes- it's what, the 4th or 5th biggest car show in the US? It's huge, but from what I see it's 90% a car show, so I don't think it's a misrepresentation that way. I also left out that my niece was in one of the 2 groups that did the rat rod contest through the High School, so this was the 2nd time in two days we paid that for the event, adding to my grumpiness of the post.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Going to see Inside out 2 tamorrow with the family. 4 tickets = $53. Probably spend another $50 on concessions. $25 per person for a movie and food is pretty reasonable imo.

Yea I just bought 3 tickets for 48. The kid will want the popcorn combo kid’s meal. I’ll probably smuggle in some candy though.

My mom took our kids to see Inside Out 2 this weekend and she was telling me how she hadn't been to the movies in forever and she was shocked at how much popcorn/candy cost. I was like mom, I remember when we were kids you would take us to the grocery store first and buy candy, and then we had to shuffle into the theater like a penguin so we could sneak it in without the usher hearing the gobstoppers jiggling in our pocket so you could avoid paying movie theater prices on it. It's not like expensive concessions at the movies are a new thing.

 

[Frostillicus]

Going to see Inside out 2 tamorrow with the family. 4 tickets = $53. Probably spend another $50 on concessions. $25 per person for a movie and food is pretty reasonable imo.

Yea I just bought 3 tickets for 48. The kid will want the popcorn combo kid’s meal. I’ll probably smuggle in some candy though.

My mom took our kids to see Inside Out 2 this weekend and she was telling me how she hadn't been to the movies in forever and she was shocked at how much popcorn/candy cost. I was like mom, I remember when we were kids you would take us to the grocery store first and buy candy, and then we had to shuffle into the theater like a penguin so we could sneak it in without the usher hearing the gobstoppers jiggling in our pocket so you could avoid paying movie theater prices on it. It's not like expensive concessions at the movies are a new thing.

Yep we are stopping somewhere for candy first.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

It's not like you really have to "sneak" your concessions in these days. The next person I meet working at the theater that cares enough to call you on it will be the first.

I buy popcorn to do my part in keeping theaters open. What make at home is vastly superior.

 

[Frostillicus]

It's not like you really have to "sneak" your concessions in these days. The next person I meet working at the theater that cares enough to call you on it will be the first.

I buy popcorn to do my part in keeping theaters open. What make at home is vastly superior.

True, but I suppose it's tradition at this point.

I always get a hot dog at our local theater (Marcus Cinema). It's one of the best dogs I've ever had.

 

[WVU Alum]

It's not like you really have to "sneak" your concessions in these days. The next person I meet working at the theater that cares enough to call you on it will be the first.

I buy popcorn to do my part in keeping theaters open. What make at home is vastly superior.

True, but I suppose it's tradition at this point.

I always get a hot dog at our local theater (Marcus Cinema). It's one of the best dogs I've ever had.

And for the low, low price of $10 for a hotdog, it better be good.

 

[WVU Alum]

Was going to take my sons to see Furiosa yesterday, but my middle figured out that we can rent it starting today. So we all decided to save $20 and watch it on his projector this evening.

 

[Payne]

Was going to take my sons to see Furiosa yesterday, but my middle figured out that we can rent it starting today. So we all decided to save $20 and watch it on his projector this evening.

Movies coming out on demand so quickly is nice.

 

[Payne]

I was thinking about it a lot today and what is missing. What I came with is that it was the combo of tech and prestige TV & their companies that are mostly to blame for the state of theaters today and our choices.

Tech made it less of a spectacle. Going to the theater isn't an event for most types of movies. When the experience is comparable, that $15/ticket for the family that is a tough ask when you know it's going to be at most a $30 purchase and you get the rewatch factor. More and more people choose to go only when it's a huge action movie they can justify and is still enough of an upgrade from what they have at home to make it worth it.

Prestige TV shifted the cultural dialogue and habits to streaming and shows. Less and less people were talking about a movie like The Sixth Sense or There's Something About Mary. We started talking about The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones. Still now at work people are way more likely to talk about new movies. What it has become is people are happy with a couple services to stay on top of the shows they love, and catching up on whatever movies happen to be on that month. On top of that, the subscription services had way more free reign for content than the movie studios, which pulled the talent that direction and away from movies. Hell, how many directors have gotten pulled into the superhero and Star Wars movies that we wish were doing content like we see on the streamers? The ones that rejected the studios can be found on the TV shows that are the best.

What gives me hope is that we have some fantastic young directors that people seem to know making movies. We also seem to have shaken the superhero part a little bit. Unfortunately, what seems to have replaced it is remakes and legacy sequels, but hopefully some more Barbies and Oppenheimers will poke through and give studios more confindence in some other fare again.

TV at 4k sitting at a distance of 10 ft with a sound bar is equal or better to 90% of the in theater tech out there now. Add a surround set and it's 98%.

I have a killer 77" setup and I disagree. Can't replicate a GOOD movie theater at home. You just can't.

I didn't say it was perfect. But approaching it.

Understand. That's why I stated GOOD theater. A really good home system isn't too far off a crappy movie theater.
But the newer, Atmos theaters are at a whole new level.

I have Atmos at home

Still not the same.

I just bought new Elac speakers for my home and there are Atmos speakers I can purchase and place on top.
However, I read they don't work very well with a drop ceiling, which I have in my basement.

What is your Atmos setup and are you happy?

 

[Gally]

I always get a hot dog at our local theater (Marcus Cinema). It's one of the best dogs I've ever had.

Seinfeld - Kramer Eats a Rancid Hotdog

Season 7 - Episode 10

youtu.be

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Once you start living with a decent home theater you start noticing niggling details about the in-theater experience.

For me it's mostly involving sound issues - typically around sound placement. The local Marcus theater has a great Extreme Screen that I can no longer go to because the "center" channel sounds as if it's been shifted 25% left and 25% higher than it should. I fretted about it all the way through Dune 2 - which is a kind time to fret.

 

[Titans_fan]

I was thinking about it a lot today and what is missing. What I came with is that it was the combo of tech and prestige TV & their companies that are mostly to blame for the state of theaters today and our choices.

Tech made it less of a spectacle. Going to the theater isn't an event for most types of movies. When the experience is comparable, that $15/ticket for the family that is a tough ask when you know it's going to be at most a $30 purchase and you get the rewatch factor. More and more people choose to go only when it's a huge action movie they can justify and is still enough of an upgrade from what they have at home to make it worth it.

Prestige TV shifted the cultural dialogue and habits to streaming and shows. Less and less people were talking about a movie like The Sixth Sense or There's Something About Mary. We started talking about The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones. Still now at work people are way more likely to talk about new movies. What it has become is people are happy with a couple services to stay on top of the shows they love, and catching up on whatever movies happen to be on that month. On top of that, the subscription services had way more free reign for content than the movie studios, which pulled the talent that direction and away from movies. Hell, how many directors have gotten pulled into the superhero and Star Wars movies that we wish were doing content like we see on the streamers? The ones that rejected the studios can be found on the TV shows that are the best.

What gives me hope is that we have some fantastic young directors that people seem to know making movies. We also seem to have shaken the superhero part a little bit. Unfortunately, what seems to have replaced it is remakes and legacy sequels, but hopefully some more Barbies and Oppenheimers will poke through and give studios more confindence in some other fare again.

TV at 4k sitting at a distance of 10 ft with a sound bar is equal or better to 90% of the in theater tech out there now. Add a surround set and it's 98%.

I have a killer 77" setup and I disagree. Can't replicate a GOOD movie theater at home. You just can't.

I didn't say it was perfect. But approaching it.

Understand. That's why I stated GOOD theater. A really good home system isn't too far off a crappy movie theater.
But the newer, Atmos theaters are at a whole new level.

I have Atmos at home

Still not the same.

I just bought new Elac speakers for my home and there are Atmos speakers I can purchase and place on top.
However, I read they don't work very well with a drop ceiling, which I have in my basement.

What is your Atmos setup and are you happy?

Not who you were replying to, but I can contribute to this question. Basement with drop ceiling also.

Center speaker, two tall front L/R, two small rear surround, 1 sub, 4 ATMOS speakers in ceiling driven by a Marantz receiver. When playing a movie that utilizes the ATMOS sound stage, it's really pretty awesome.

Video is 100" projecter. (Only 1080p for now as the 4k projectors were stupid expensive when I installed it)

FTR, I had the "bounce" ATMOS speakers and couldn't get them to work ever. Just my experience though.

 

[belljr]

I was thinking about it a lot today and what is missing. What I came with is that it was the combo of tech and prestige TV & their companies that are mostly to blame for the state of theaters today and our choices.

Tech made it less of a spectacle. Going to the theater isn't an event for most types of movies. When the experience is comparable, that $15/ticket for the family that is a tough ask when you know it's going to be at most a $30 purchase and you get the rewatch factor. More and more people choose to go only when it's a huge action movie they can justify and is still enough of an upgrade from what they have at home to make it worth it.

Prestige TV shifted the cultural dialogue and habits to streaming and shows. Less and less people were talking about a movie like The Sixth Sense or There's Something About Mary. We started talking about The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones. Still now at work people are way more likely to talk about new movies. What it has become is people are happy with a couple services to stay on top of the shows they love, and catching up on whatever movies happen to be on that month. On top of that, the subscription services had way more free reign for content than the movie studios, which pulled the talent that direction and away from movies. Hell, how many directors have gotten pulled into the superhero and Star Wars movies that we wish were doing content like we see on the streamers? The ones that rejected the studios can be found on the TV shows that are the best.

What gives me hope is that we have some fantastic young directors that people seem to know making movies. We also seem to have shaken the superhero part a little bit. Unfortunately, what seems to have replaced it is remakes and legacy sequels, but hopefully some more Barbies and Oppenheimers will poke through and give studios more confindence in some other fare again.

TV at 4k sitting at a distance of 10 ft with a sound bar is equal or better to 90% of the in theater tech out there now. Add a surround set and it's 98%.

I have a killer 77" setup and I disagree. Can't replicate a GOOD movie theater at home. You just can't.

I didn't say it was perfect. But approaching it.

Understand. That's why I stated GOOD theater. A really good home system isn't too far off a crappy movie theater.
But the newer, Atmos theaters are at a whole new level.

I have Atmos at home

Still not the same.

I just bought new Elac speakers for my home and there are Atmos speakers I can purchase and place on top.
However, I read they don't work very well with a drop ceiling, which I have in my basement.

What is your Atmos setup and are you happy?

Not who you were replying to, but I can contribute to this question. Basement with drop ceiling also.

Center speaker, two tall front L/R, two small rear surround, 1 sub, 4 ATMOS speakers in ceiling driven by a Marantz receiver. When playing a movie that utilizes the ATMOS sound stage, it's really pretty awesome.

Video is 100" projecter. (Only 1080p for now as the 4k projectors were stupid expensive when I installed it)

FTR, I had the "bounce" ATMOS speakers and couldn't get them to work ever. Just my experience though.

Sorry never saw the post.

I have drop ceiling. Svs prime towers, center, rears, Atmos front and other rears wired but not hooked up yet, 2 subs. 105 inch screen

Works fantastic imo