How Many of You Don't go to Commercial Theaters Anymore? (1 Viewer)

[Patrick McCart]

I hardly go to theaters anymore.

In 2001...

I saw A.I. once.

I saw Shrek once. (while working)

I saw LOTR once.

I saw POTA once. (While working)

That's it. On the other hand.... I saw 26 movies for the first time in 2001 via DVD. (Meaning I saw these movies for the first time, period.)

 

[Vickie_M]

I must say that the thought of my going months or even years without seeing a movie in the theater is appalling. I get antsy if I haven't been to the theater in a couple of weeks. We have a fairly decent HT setup (ceiling-mounted Sony VPH-1252 HiDef 8" CRT front projector, 7 1/2' wide 16x9 screen, 5.1 Surround, over 1000 DVDs) and we still go to the movie theater several times a month. We're movie buffs more than HT buffs, and couldn't imagine willingly waiting months to see a film we really, really want to see. Plus, if I love a film, I'll want to go see it again and again. We've seen LOTR/FOTR 5 times so far, I saw Moulin Rouge 5 times in the theater. Hell, I saw The Matrix 30+ times in the theater, but I've only watched the DVD once. It's just not the same experience. If it were to open again in a theater, say, a re-release before the sequel, I'd be there, and would try to see it several times before it left again.

I do honestly understand the situations of those who have children, and/or those who live in a place where there aren't many good theaters, especially theaters showing smaller, independent/foreign films. We're lucky (as movie buffs) to be childless and living in a big city with lots of choices. So, for us, the movie theater will always (hopefully) be our first choice for movies.

Vickie

 

[Mike Heenan]

Someone posted here that film resolution only is about 1000 by 700 or so (I forget the exact number) but that is incorrect, it is about 4 times that, as there are 12 million pixels per frame ( about 4000 by 3000). Current HD machines in use do not come anywhere near that. In fact, Hollywood is going to have to make HD machines that surpass or equal film resolution to keep people coming to the theatres, since when we get HD dvd, youll be getting the same thing the theatre does, only on a smaller scale.

I collect older 35mm films and tons of old trailers, and have a small 35mm setup as well as a video setup. I sympathize with all of you who have to sit through crappy presentation, thats whats really ruining the industry, is these teenagers who have really no clue how to properly run a projector and load film safely on a platter. Its really the absense of a regular projectionist up in the booth, because mostly its the manager or a popcorn counter person that starts the movie and leaves to do something else. Another problem with most films nowadays is that what you are seeing is about 3 to 4 times away from the original negative ( a print of a print, etc etc).

As for my own movie going experience, luckily in my area we have decent theatres. I always try to pick a time and day where there will be less people in the theatre, so the experience of seeing something on the big screen will be more enjoyable. I dont go to movies much anymore, not because I have a home theatre or anything like that, its simply because most movies suck nowadays. Whenever theres something I want to see, Ill go see it. I now regret not seeing Fast and Furious in the theatre, the sound must have been kickin.

 

[ChrisA]

Whenever theres something I want to see, Ill go see it. I now regret not seeing Fast and Furious in the theatre, the sound must have been kickin.

This was the last DVD I just watched and I can tell you that it was incredible. NOS! You feel as though you were in those cars in the home theater... much more involving experience. Also, when we get a discrete, limited bandwidth tactile channel (0-600 Hz), it will not be a subtle difference over using the soundtrack/LFE channel... the difference will be staggering.

I will not buy a digital projector until they reach a minimum of being able to display 1080p = 1920 x 1080 progressive (or whatever, I'm on call and it is 3:30 a.m., no sleep as usual, so I may have miscalculated). Currently, the home digital projectors are around 1280 x 720.. 720p. We have a ways to go to get to 1080p, but I wont settle for less in a digital projector. CRT still rules for the home.

 

[Glenise]

The last movie I saw at the theaters was "Monsters Inc.".

Planet of The Apes, The Brothers, Two Can Play That Game, etc. I saw on dvd first.

I also plan on getting "Training Day".

 

[RAF]

CRT still rules for the home.

Chris,
That's another argument for another thread (and has been mentioned over and over again on this forum). Needless to say there are as many divergent opinions on that topic as there are with the subject of this current thread. And after having weighed all the pros and cons of CRTs vs. the digital types (LCD, DSP, etc.) I've chosen to go with a modern LCD to use in my HT.
In other words, to each his/her own, be it hardware, software or just plain "where" itself.

We now return you to the Home Theater/Movie Theater debate....

 

[Kevin Coleman]

Thanks for the clarification Robert,
I knew you didn't mean all young people.
I have been pretty lucky going to the theater lately without even minor distractions. I even get some entertainment from some of the morons that arrive about 3 minutes prior to the scheduled start time of the movie then they stand down in the front looking like a deer caught in the headlights and wonder why in the hell can't I find a good seat. Now that's entertainment.
Kevin C.

 

[Jason Seaver]

So going off that logic we should all just stop complaining about pan and scan because if we're not watching movies in a large auditorium then we're already violating the director's intent right?

Not what I said at all. Someone said that one of the advantages of forgoing the commercial theater for one's living room is that you can pause for bathroom breaks or phone calls and review scenes before proceding to the rest of the movie. The point I was trying to make was that doing so, especially if it's the first time you've seen the movie, is arguably a more egregious violation of the "director's intent" argument than panning and scanning. In fact, one of the advantages commercial theaters have is that, barring a power outage or something even more unusual, there are no interruptions.

 

[ChrisA]

Hi Robert,

I guess I should have said top of the line 9 inch CRT, but that assumes you still have total light control, and a minimum of $20,000 to spend (for instance a Sony G-90 can be had for around $19,000 B-stock and $23,000 factory sealed A-stock). Of course you have to deal with much more complicated maintainance and paying an ISF tech around $400 or so for yearly tweaking (every 6 months if you can afford it). I don't have the money for a solid 9 inch CRT, nor do I feel like dealing with the fan noise issue, which is why I use a DWIN HD700. I was hoping Dwin would come out with a 9 inch CRT, but they scrapped that project. Still, if I had $20,000 to spens on video, my current choice would be a Sony G90 CRT--which is fully capable of optically resolving 1080p (and because out of all the other 9 inch CRTs, ISF technicians in general can more easily tweak a G90 compared to a couple other competing 9 inch CRTS. I have heard great things about the Runco 9 inch, but you have to get an ISF technician who really knows that projector).

I wasn't aware of a digital projector that could *overall* outperform a top of the line 9 inch CRT. That being said I believe digital projectors are all superior in terms of lumen output and contrast. However, I still haven't seen a digital projector for a dedicated home theater with total light control that could *overall* outperform the top 9 inch CRTs. I personally do not like to deal with CRTs because of the high level of maintainance and I certainly look forward to moving into a digital projector someday, but not anytime soon. I am glad to hear that you prefer LCD, but is that over 9 inch CRT, or just over 7 inch CRT in the same price range? It is encouraging to hear good things about LCD/DILA/DLP... I didn't mean to come off quite as sounding like one of those 'tube and vinyl' types since my allegience is simply to obtaining the best picture. If I had to chose a projector today, I'd still pick a Sony G90 simply because it can optically resolve 1080p and no digital projector that I am aware of can do that, nor can digital projectors produce the same black levels, or have that smooth 'dither' (lack of pixel). I'm not so sure the hassle of CRT is worth it though...

 

[Chuck Anstey]

Someone posted here that film resolution only is about 1000 by 700 or so (I forget the exact number) but that is incorrect, it is about 4 times that, as there are 12 million pixels per frame ( about 4000 by 3000).

I made this claim after spending some time researching the web. The "4000x3000" claim is for Black and White film using a still camera with seconds of exposure time (ie under perfect lighting conditions) and exposing the entire frame. Color film loses at least half of the resolution in both directions due to emulsification/dye clouds. I don't have the link here at work but I also read where "Johnny Mnemonic" had its CGI done at "film resolution" of a little over 1100x600 (can't remember exact value). I know that other films use much higher resolution in their CGI. This isn't the thread to really get into this technical discussion and I am certainly not an expert in film. I am basing this on what other experts have stated and my own practical theater going experience.

Chuck Anstey

 

[ChrisA]

In fact, one of the advantages commercial theaters have is that, barring a power outage or something even more unusual, there are no interruptions.

I think one of the biggest points made here was the home theater environment by far has the capability of less interruptions of any sort. Just because somebody has a remote control doesn't meant they have to use it. My goal is to set everything up in the begining before the movie starts, then dim the lights and play 'without interruption'. The argument of trying to say that directors intent includes criteria based on the cubic volume of the viewing room or the exact number of people watching the screen just doesn't hold any water IMO.

 

[Jason Seaver]

I think one of the biggest points made here was the home theater environment by far has the capability of less interruptions of any sort. Just because somebody has a remote control doesn't meant they have to use it.

It's not just the remote, though - it's the phone, or the doorbell, or the dog, or one's spouse, or the kids, or the neighbors... Interruptions are just far more likely in your own home than they are when you go out.

And, for some, the very act of Going Out is part of the appeal - you're not in your familiar environment, in control of the experience. You are just an audience member, being entertained by others, and not a technician or otherwise part of the process.

 

[Michael Reuben]

ChrisA --
Just out of curiosity, why did you start this thread?
The thread title asked a straightforward question: "How Many of You Don't go to Commercial Theaters Anymore?" Not surprisingly, it turns out that many people do not go to commercial theaters, or do so only rarely. But it also turns out that many people do still go to commercial theaters on a regular basis, and we manage to enjoy ourselves. A number of different reasons have been given.
Are you now trying to prove that we're all wrong?
M.

 

[ChrisA]

There are multiple reasons to discuss this topic:

1) General Diffrences in home theater and commercial theater environments

2) technical and performance differences

3) Wish lists for both home theater and commercial theaters

4) DVD and the need for HD-DVD

5) Improvements that need to be undertaken by commercial theaters to increase realism and quality of experience.

etc...

Just another friendly and hopefully interesting discussion nothing more or less...

 

[Martin Rendall]

The only aspect to the movie theater which bugs me is people talking near me. A few years ago, the stupid &$%^ who was talking right behind me wanted to fight in the parking lot after the movie - just because I turned around and asked him politely to shut up. I'll go whenever the wife or a friend insists, but I'd rather just stay home and watch on the HT.

As for movies coming out in a timely fashion, I look at it this way: you've waited you whole life to see the movie. What's another year? Even if some sort of rental pricing went into effect, I'd happily wait out the rental period before making the purchase. It's not like the movie is going anywhere...

Martin.

 

[Derrick_Ellis]

The talking thing really bugs me too. I'll admit, if I'm at the movies with a friend and I'm not sure about something or need to make a comment, I'll whisper to the person. But talking so loud that everyone in the theater thinks you are talking to them is just unacceptable.

 

[RAF]

ChrisA,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on CRTs and other FP's. I am not "anti-CRT" by any means. In fact, if you check the construction of my HT (as outlined on my web site) you will notice that I built the theater with both CRT and Digital projectors in mind and provided appropriate power and other cabling provisions to handle either. While I would love to have purchased a Sony G90 or similar (since I agree with you totally that it and other 9" CRT projectors stil provide the best overall HT picture) it was completely out of my budget range. Therefore, if I was going to go the CRT route it would have had to have been a refurbished unit (hopefully 9" tubes) and all the headaches that come with used units.
On the other hand, Sony was just introducing their new VW10HT at the time (I got one of the first units in 2000) and, with a money back guarantee from my vendor, I took a sight unseen gamble that paid off handsomely. Weighing all the factors I decided that for me the price/performance winner was the VW10HT. And that doesn't even factor in other things like edge to edge brightness, weight of the unit, "set it and forget it", etc. etc. In this regard the VW10HT (with its native 16:9 panels and performance) was a revolutionary product. Now that it has approached the $4000 level (putting it in the same price range of some of the better HDTV RPM's) it and others like it have opened up a whole new world of quality, ease of use and performance for many, many more people. I still stand by my statement that my projector offers at least 95% of the picture quality for about 1/10th the cost. That's what I mean by price:performance.
Whatever. I think we both agree that with today's technology and constantly falling prices it is possible to reproduce the theatrical experience at home, be it CRT, LCD or whatever. The key is in the implementation. Total control over ambient light, quality sound, etc. I'm sure you've had the same experience as I have when friends come over and see your home theater - jaws dropping, "You've got to be kidding" commentary, the whole nine yards. A person can nit-pick regarding film resolution, director's intent, etc. but the inescapable conclusion is, to anyone who has seen a quality HT, that yes, there is a viable alternative to the commercial experience. And as ticket prices rise, audience courtesy disintegrates, and world conditions change, more people will be drawn to the home theater experience.
I suspect that a large number of the people who are dismissing Home Theaters as a poor subsitute for the "real thing" on technical terms haven't seen home theaters of the type we are talking about. As far as prefering "real" theaters to "home" theaters for artistic or other aesthetic reasons, that's a different thing entirely and an individual choice.

 

[Michael Reuben]

I suspect that a large number of the people who are dismissing Home Theaters as a poor subsitute for the "real thing" on technical terms haven't seen home theaters of the type we are talking about.

I have, RAF.
Then again, I don't think either I or anyone else in this thread has "dismissed" home theaters as a "poor substitute". (I'm surprised at you. That's the kind of exaggerated overstatement I'd expect from the "younger generation". ) I actually think home theaters are a good substitute in many respects; if I didn't, I wouldn't own hundreds of LDs and over a thousand DVDs.
But they're still a substitute, which is why see 100+ movies a year in theaters. Most of those experiences are positive, and some of them are truly wondrous.
It's just too easy to dismiss as ignorant those of us who still value the theatrical experience (and whether you meant it or not, that's what you just did). I could just as easily say that guys who haven't set foot in movie theaters for a long time have forgotten what a real film looks like (but I would never say that ).
M.

 

[Andrew Beck]

[font=http://beck.servebeer.com/ht.html]It seems to me there aren't very many movie fans here. Anyone who doesn't want to see a movie on the bigscreen just isn't a fan of movies. I go to the movies 1-2 times a week. In the last year I've seen everything from indie stuff (the princess and the warrior, ghostworld, memento), to bigger hollywood stuff (the royal tennebaum's, harry potter, FOTR). some of them have been good some haven't. The three movies I enjoyed most though were: the princess and the warrior (played in an old theater with out of date stuff), the royal tennebaums (played at an angelika film center, the state of the art indie movie house), and memento (played at the standard Cinemark type movie house). I can probably make my system sound and look as good as some of these, but it's still not the same. And even if it was would it be worth it to wait almost a year to see the princess and the warrior? Can you put a price on the fact that you've seen such a great flick?



There is no way to recreate the best theaters in your home for any reasonable amount of money. Even if you did you still have to wait for the movies to come out on DVD. I don't think I could've waited another minute for the royal tennebaums, and I know that i'll be seeing AOTC at 12:01am.



If a movies is good, it's good despite the system. I like foreign films, i like indie films. Many of these wouldn't look great no matter what they were played on. Does that make Pi a bad movie?



My favorite movie of all time is Dr. Strangelove. 4:3, black and white, mono sound. Doesn't mean it isn't great.



Movie fans go to the movie, and then try to re-create the movie expierence at home. (I want my movies to make me feel i'm there). Equipment fans stay home and watch there DVD's, avoid the movies, and pretend "refrence dvd's" like air force one are good movies.[/font]

 

[Scooter]

In the spirit of the title of this thread..I simply state....I refuse to go to movie theaters simply because I have what I need to enjoy movies here. No commercials before the flick..rude, unbathed people..and the beer is free..bathrooms close!

However...I saw this buncha peace-niks on TV last protesting Blackhawk Down so I may step into a theater this week JUST because of that.