What does it take to get you to see a film in a theater?

I’m out of step with the majority, (even including devoted cinephiles), who now apparently see most films at home. The number one thing that gets me to a theater is film that I really want to see. I never even consider a home viewing unless it’s never shows or unless I have little interest in it and am just watching to pass time with friends and family. But apparently that’s a rare attitude now. With attendance so low I started wondering if it isn’t a bad investment to open a new theater (something that’s happening tonight in my city). I guess with the coming digital projection costs will eventually lessen for theater owners but if the stay at home trend continues or quite possibly increases then even lower costs won’t help the bottom line.

I’m always fascinated with why two similar films at different venues can draw dramatically different sized crowds. I certainly prefer some theaters to others – obviously convenience, parking, yummy restaurants nearby, cleanliness, layout, etc. factor into my decision if I have a choice. But what else would draw you there? Would you really be more compelled to go if the talent were in attendance (even if you hadn’t seen any of their previous work)? How about special one time event programming? For me I sometimes have the opposite reaction to special guests attending or one time programming because I fear it will be too crowded and difficult.

How about advertising? Do you regularly seek what’s playing in your area or is it too overwhelming to keep up with? Probably not a problem for us addicts but I do sometimes get overwhelmed with life and miss opportunities.

Anyway would be interesting to hear your thoughts…

I especially seek out a film in English when travelling abroad (in non English language speaking countries), it gives me a couple of hours to switch into film mode - and it actually is an enhanced experience for being in a foreign clime. I have been doing this since the 1970s, and it still really reminds me of what going to Cinema can be about as an (immersed) experience.

Back on Home shores I used to then ironically be found seeking out foreign language films, or more non-blockbuster stuff - but the real death of Repertory Cinema has diminished that. So, in fact contrary to what I just wrote, I must now watch most blockbuster mainstream films and rarities on my Home Cinema projector (on a very large screen area with Dolby Surround) unless travelling. That is all thanks to the wonder of DVD primarily, which has seen more films made available for consumption in whatever way the consumer feels comfortable - without even having to schlep down to the Cinema.

I've actually gone to the movies almost as many times these past four months of 2008 than I did in all of 2007. Why? More time, once the pressure of getting a book out subsided. Also, more things I wanted to see on the big screen, e.g. a new Stephen Chow film, a new Wong Kar Wai film and a new Jackie Chan/Jet Li film, all things I wanted to talk about should there be any conversations about them. (And there haven't been many. I don't think there's been a single post about MY BLUEBERRY NIGHTS and I didn't feel at all compelled to start a thread about it.)

Also, I'm rapidly learning that if I don't see it in a theater I'll wind up taping it off cable and then never watching it. (The SUPERMAN RETURNS tape is still sitting on a shelf.) So I made a point of seeing THE BANK JOB (yaaay!) and 10,000 BC (groan!) on the big screen just to get them out of the way. Same with JUNO, which I felt I needed to see while the conversation around it was still ongoing. Otherwise, I probably never would. At home I tend to watch stuff I can't see on cable or in theaters. And I've got plenty of those on tape and DVD to keep me busy.

. . . it is really true that DVD and the modern home theater system has impacted my cinema going to a degree I never would have thought possible - I just completed the ALAIN DELON COLLECTION and began the ANGELIQUE series; sitting on the shelf are the OZU SILENTS, EARLY KUROSAWA and the LUBITSCH MUSICALS; coming in the next few months or so are a bunch of westerns including THE BIG TRAIL (widescreeen!!), MAN OF THE WEST and THE FURIES, as well as HOW THE WEST WAS WON and a couple more directed by John Sturges; we will soon get Minnelli's SOME CAME RUNNING, Corman's THE SECRET INVASION; then following those will be collections of films with CATHERINE DENEUVE and SOPHIA LOREN, as well as an ANDRE TECHINE set . . . to be honest, most of what I have seen playing at the cinema the last several years has simply not motivated me to leave the house when I can stay at home and spend my time with films such as these (to say nothing of learning about the SHAW BROTHERS, Japanese exploitation movies of the 60s-70s, euro-cult, and such as that) - I am afraid the sort of film I most enjoy watching is simply not the sort of film that is often found on the big screen today . . . on the other hand, the SEATTLE INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL Press Screenings are off and running, and we already saw one excellent film by Catherine Breillat called THE LAST MISTRESS (2007) with a fearless central performance by Asia Argento (so what else is new) . . . I just did a quick count and I have seen 130 movies so far this year, only 4 of which were at the cinema . . .

Strong patrimony, excited word of mouth, the palpable need to get out, and a lift.

My bike.

These days? $12!!! :blink:

That was my ticket price at the Ziegfeld tonight.

I only go now as a social thing - i.e. if I'm going with a friend. Now that we have the quality of DVD preserving the correct aspect ratio, etc; I prefer home viewing to going to a theatre on their own merits. Less expense, pause the movie if I need to, no people talking, rewind it back if I missed a line.
I've gone maybe... three times in 2007? And once in '08. It doesn't help that the movies I tend to be interested in get limited or no release in my area, which is only packed with the generic, mainstream studio fare (which is not to say I never like any big-time Hollywood flicks; but it's a rare one that interests me enough to go out of my way for). Like I seeing the new Errol Morris film isn't an option for me anyway; I have to wait for it to hit DVD.

I don't live in NY or LA, so "talent in attendance" doesn't really enter the question... if it did, though, that might also get me to go. But only if it was talent I was a fan of, and if they were going to do something (speak before, Q&A after) to make it a unique event.

I am an avid home media collector and the cinematic experience knocks home viewing into a cocked hat. Nothing compares to the big-screen escape of a cinematic presentation with an appreciative audience. Sure you can have bad luck with a fidgety patron or a cacophony of phones but generally speaking I can really engage with a movie in this environment. No matter how good my AV setup is, the home environment is fraught with distractions and I just don't immerse myself in the movie as completely as I find I can in the cinema auditorium. Furthermore, as an aspiring film-maker (who isn't) I get a lot from the audience response to scenes. Even if it's irritating to hear people laugh or groan inappropriately, it's useful to know what pushes peoples buttons if you're trying to pitch your own work at a contemporary multiplex audience.

Victor

PS I have a monthly cinema subscription card that allows me free access to any film screening any time at a local multiplex so I tend to go as often as I can if only to ensure I'm getting value for money. Such an arrangement means I get to see films that I would otherwise be ambivalent about and I'm rarely disappointed.

I used to work at a radio station and one of the bennies was that I got a free pass to every screen in town. So I was watching everything. The weird thing is that then I was less likely to walk out on a movie that I didn't pay for (only two as I recall) than now that I'm paying six bucks bargain matinee.

Now I just don't have a problem screen-hopping. If the movie sucks, I'll find one that doesn't. But then, I've never asked for my money back on a dog, either.

I mean, it's not the theater's fault that Hollywood continues to employ Brett Ratner...

I was able to see free movies from about 1989 through 1994, so I also saw just about everything...even AMOS & ANDREW, OUT ON A LIMB and COPS AND ROBBERSONS. But theatergoers were more behaved then, and--previous titles aside--movies in general were just all-around better than they are now. Certainly there were more choices then, as many pictures that go directly to DVD now were still able to land theatrical play. Is it a good thing that I was able to see KEATON'S COP and EXCESSIVE FORCE on the big screen? I think so.

For one thing, I love going to the cinema because it's just part of the experience of how a film should be seen - even though I have it sitting at home on DVD, I'll still check out my favourite films if they pop up in a cinema.

Although cost is a factor in many folk watching movies at home, for me the cost is one of the plus points as memberships of various cinemas and societies mean I get discounts on just about every film I go to see anyway.

I can't claim that the social side is a factor since with my love of movies far outweighing that of my friends I spend most of my cinema time by myself anyway. I've just re-read that sentence and I should clarify that I mean I love the cinema more than my friends do, not that I love cinema more than I love my friends. :D That said, I guess there is a social aspect to some degree since I regularly chat to people that I've met solely through mutual regular cinema attendance.

The choice of film is a factor too. Where I live, there is a ten screen multiplex just five minutes from my home. I almost never visit it. On the other hand, I happen to work in Edinburgh (and it's only a short drive away on the weekends too), which boasts plenty of cinemas and, most importantly, a couple of good arthouse cinemas in the form of the Cameo and the Filmhouse.

While the former is my favourite, I have to say that the latter has probably the best programming of any cinema I've ever been to in terms of the variety on offer - perhaps it's no coincidence that they're programmed in-house rather than as part of a chain. While catering for new arthouse releases, there are plenty of old classics, various special seasons every month, numerous special events - in fact, there's never enough time to see everything I'd want to. (This month, on the same day no less, they're showing 2001 (in 70mm) and Planet of the Apes - see my first point!)

Both of these cinemas are well supplied in terms of facilities (both in house and nearby), are nice cinemas, have mostly pleasant staff - and the arrival of digital projectors to both has been very pleasant too.

Then there are festivals too. I admit I use up pretty much all of my holidays going to film festivals. Half the films I see there I'd probably never see anywhere else, and the rest of them - well, sure, I could see them on DVD or TV or whatever, but I prefer the feeling of it being more of a special event.

This has gone on longer than expected, and I bet I've still missed stuff. So the quick answer to the question is, usually, the fact that it's a film I want to see is reason enough for me.

I grew up watching everything in the theaters. It was that, or wait for a highly edited version to pop on T.V. a few years later. So, I'm still very much in favour of watching a movie on a big screen. Especially when I was still watching them all for free, until recently. Though that may change back again.

Nowadays though, there a lot of movies that I just won't pay 7-10 dollars a showing for. I'll wait until the DVD. Mostly, these are comedies, always awkward in a theater unless you're with a group of friends, and some dramas. Big budget spectacles, I'll always catch on the big screen. Double for Horror/Fantasy/Sci-Fi.

I'm fortunate. We still have 5 dollar Tuesdays and sometimes 4 dollar twilight shows, work permitting. Sadly though, very little independent and arthouse films make it here, so with those I'm forced to wait for DVD.

I actually go to the movies all the time. I own maybe six dvds, and a handful of vhs tapes.

One of the reasons I wanted to take a semi-break this year was to ponder this very question. I've come to the conclusion that movies really play two completely seperate roles for me.

One of 'em is just to get me out of the house. Movies fill the niche for me that a lot of other folk fill with sports, I think. I love the whole experience of it -- the posters that always promise more than they can possibly deliver, the teenagers nervously trying to count me my change, the wildly overpriced and not that great popcorn, the seats, the darkness, the previews, the shared feeling of watching something together, even when "together" means that greasy yahoo who took your favorite seat, dammit.

As a result when I'm really in the groove I watch all sorts of stuff in the theater. For me the experience is a kind of visceral cultural engagement that I don't think is replicable in any other way -- well, except maybe for sports. (This is why I have no fears about moviegoing dying, home video, whatever it's pleasures, is no substitute.)

The general kind of stuff I like is "melodrama". Yeah, I've had me an epiphany, watching those "Firefly" episodes on Hulu -- I love that kind of heightened Romanticism. Dumas stuff, in shorthand. And this is the sort thing movies do exceptionally well, maybe better than any other art form, because it's such a visceral medium. Heightened emotions make a lot of sense projected on a huge screen -- well, not "sense". Maybe I just mean that's the way I forlornly wish life could be, and usually ain't.

Which is why I'm catching IRON MAN this weekend.

doug

Are you a scary man?

Yes. Yes, I am.

Except to that greasy yahoo who keeps taking my favorite seat in the theater! Third row, right in the center!

You know who you are! :angry:

doug

*sniff*

Well, if you got there earlier...

... it is the best seat in the house, though.

You should change your name to "Craig Blamee"! Ha! Ahhahaha!!!

Er, oof. Sorry.

I have to REALLY want to see something to go to the theater any more. I live in New York City, and more than anything it's the audiences that have driven me out. Audience behavior is simply too obnoxious these days. Cellphone usage, outside food that reeks and/or is a noisy affair, and, of course, talking, all make me enjoy the film less. Catching the earliest matinee helps, as does waiting into a film's run, but I probably see one film in the theater every six weeks, where I used to see one a week.

I still love going to the movies. Good movie or bad, it's always a thrill. The audiences do get obnoxious, but I'm ready shush them (or more drastic measures if required). My girlfriend kicked the back of someone's seat a few months ago when they wouldn't stop talking on the phone. Despite these annoyances, it is most definitely the most fun night out for me. The big problem is simply time. Between work and life stuff, I just don't get to the movies as often as I would like. Unlike most people on the list, I find it even more difficult to find time for DVD watching. When I buy a DVD, it often ends up sitting on the shelf for months. I also find DVDs to be expensive, whereas I never take cost into consideration when I am deciding to go out to a movie, even if I know it will be a bad movie.

Isn't that sort of an ostrich with its head in the sand attitude?

Money is money.

Or so I've heard.

No, it's a love of watching movies on the big screen. $10.50 (the average ticket price in my area) feels like a pretty good deal for an experience that I really enjoy, even with the annoyances that I mentioned in my earlier post. Don't get me wrong, I like DVDs, and watch them on a regular basis. I own a lot of DVDs, and used to buy them regularly. However, I began to notice that a serious percentage of my purchases were just ending up on the shelf, unwatched for months. I still get excited about some of the amazing releases coming out, but $15-20 for a DVD that I may not get around to watching for a while is an expenditure that I have to think about, and then there are those glorious but wallet-draining box sets...