Sartre was right.. Hell IS other people.. (1 Viewer)

[Ricardo C]

I'd go for that, though probably not for the same reasons as Dennis

 

[ThomasC]

I've been unfortunate enough to have my "friends" do this a couple of times (check for messages, at the very least), and I didn't stop them, because I'm a pussy. You can bet I'll never willingly go to the movies with them again. I go alone as much as I can.

 

[Rob Gardiner]

I was with you up until this point. I routinely applaud at the end of a really good movie. In fact, I consider that the sign of a good audience. There's nothing more disappointing than seeing a great film only to have a roomful of people silenty stand up and leave. I always wonder, "Was I the only one who was moved by the film?"

 

[Pete-D]

I still enjoy the movie theater experience. It's been that way from the first movie I ever got to see in the theater.

I suppose this being an internet message board, of course there's likely to be more of an anti-social crowd here, and I understand that, but to me it's still magic to see a great movie in the cinema. I can't explain it fully, and I don't think it's meant to be explained fully. But there's something that's just fun about sharing an experience with a hundred or more other people. Sure there are annoyances some times, but overall its not a problem to me.

It's nice to get out of the house and sometimes you just don't feel like going out to a club or a restaurant.

I see movies like "The Incredibles" during a late show (usually the 9:30 or 10:15 showings) so there aren't a lot of little kids in the theater. But I did see the new Harry Potter with a theather chok full of kids ... and it was kinda fun actually. To see the kids and their enthusiasm for the series (I watch the movies, but I'm not a huge fan or anything) really put me in the mood to see it.

 

[Ricardo C]

It's got nothing to do with being anti-social. It's just a matter of not wanting to "socialize" during a spectacle to which we're trying to give our full attention, and immerse ourselves into. Audience reactions are fine (talking back to the screen, however, is not), but disruptive activities such as making phone calls, talking repeatedly and audibly, allowing children to run around the room, etc., are another thing entirely.

I go to the movies to enjoy the film, not to share the experience with Jack T. Ass. If I could afford to buy out a screening, I'd do it.

 

[Michael Elliott]

I also disagree with the anti-social thing. I love going to concerts and the more the crowd is into it the better. If you don't like what happens at theaters, I say you simply not go. That's the stance I took and I'm quite happy. The same with a concert. If you prefer to sit in your sit and have the guts to tell people not to sing, not to dance or sit down, then perhaps you should just stay at home and listen to your records.

When it comes to movies, I don't want the crowd involved so I stay at home. With concert, I prefer the crowd so that's why a concert DVD certainly couldn't live up to seeing a concert in person.

 

[doug zdanivsky]

Yeah, I can see your guys' point, there.. I never looked at it that way.

To me, it just seems a bit ridiculous when there's nobody really there to show your appreciation TO (maybe the projectionist) which is the point of clapping, I would think..

That doesn't really bother me like the other stuff does.. Just seems like a pointless excersize.

Guess I'm just old and cranky before my time..

As for a theater full of fans of a movie being polite.. It's certainly true they would be self-regulating, as they're there for the show..

They're not on a date or out with the guys, etc.. Oblivious to the other patrons, that is.

Just my 2 cents on that matter..

 

[Patrick Sun]

A lot of people applauded once the credits for "Ray" started rolling at the screening I took in on opening weekend. I thought it was nice to be with such an appreciative crowd for that film.

 

[JonZ]

"I'd have done precisely the same thing. I'm glad to hear that you are so well off that you can simply throw money away, but if I was overcharged a dollar, you can be sure that I'd make sure the error was corrected. I don't think it's "stupid" to value money. You are blaming an innocent woman for the store's mistake."


No I cant afford to throw money away. But I can afford to loose ONE dollar or better yet, put the item the dispute was about aside and forget it so I dont have to waste everyones else's time.

(BTW, she was buying soda, cookies, toilet paper, hair sprays - nothing she couldnt have done without and gone 100 feet to Eckerts to get)

Im sorry but it doesnt doesnt add up either. I cant even remember the last time I was in a situation like this so its not like a dollar here and a dollar there add up. It was ONE dollar.

"My time and stress level is much more valuable than arguing for 15 minutes to save a dollar."

Exactly.

 

[Chad R]

The irony to Sartre's statement is that to anyone else, YOU'RE other people.

 

[Anthony Neilson]

I agree with some of this. I don't mind people clapping, or talking through anything other than the main feature. I don't even mind the sound of mobile phones - as long as theyt don't go on to have a conversation, it's a minor interruption and the phone gets quickly shut off.

I DO have a problem with the sound of people eating but it's not really something you can complain about. Unfortunately, this is how the cinema chains make their money. I just wish the food they served didn't seem to be chosen to make the most noise possible. A separate eating area would be great but I can't see it happening.

What REALLY, REALLY pisses me off is people talking. I choose very carefully the times and locations in order to minimise the chances of talkers but I still get an idiot approximately once in every three visits ; and yes, it's put me off going.

I don't know how it is for you in the US, but over here I think it's down to the fact that the ushers aren't compelled to sit inside the theatre anymore. It used to be part of the job that you had to sit through EVERY showing of the film. Nowadays, what few ushers there are usually mill around in the foyer. This means that it's up to the patrons to intervene, and such differences can end quite badly, believe me.

One simple solution would be too display a message at the beginning of the film that instructs people not to talk. Warner Brothers used to do this - well, Bugs Bunny did it - and it was surprisingly effective. Haven't seen that in a while though ; they seem far more worried about mobile phones and smoking.

Failing this, the solution would be to have induction loops for everyone. If we could opt to wear headphones, then the assholes would be free to behave as if they were in a fast-food restaurant without bothering the rest of us.

In the meantime, what can be done ? For the smokers out there, I recommend this : when someone starts talking, light up a cigarette. Someone will complain. Ignore them, and wait for an usher to come in. When they tell you that you're not allowed to smoke, look puzzled and ask them if you're allowed to talk. When they say no, tell them you'll make a deal ; get the morons in the row behind you to shut the **** up and you'll put out your cigarette.

Try it - it works !

 

[Ricardo C]

If I tried that here, I'd be mighty surprised if I didn't get shot

 

[Malcolm R]

Most theaters run those here (no talking, no smoking, no feet on seats, turn off phones/pagers, put trash in trash cans, etc.), but they're meaningless. No one gives a crap.

People putting their feet up on the back of the seat in front of them is my biggest peeve. Even worse with stadium seating theaters as it's easier to get your feet up there.

And what is with everyone just leaving their trash at their seats? I always clean up all my trash and deposit it in the cans on the way out. Usually I seem to be the only one. The rest of the crowd are a bunch of fu*kin' slobs.

 

[Joe Szott]

Wow, I'm kind of surprised by the responses here. Obviously, the uber popular jag-off with the cell phone and the people that bring crying babies to theaters (?) are idiots, but normal people that laugh, cry, or clap during the show? That's called being human, having emotions, it's why most people go to the movies in the first place. It is a social experience where you relate not only to the characters on the screen but to your fellow viewers in having a shared experience in that moment.

I always try to catch a movie opening weekend if possible. Not only is it usually on the nicest and largest screen, but the viewers are usually the more animate and "into" the social vibe. When it's not there and everyone watches the movie in silence it feels lifeless, like we're all robots.

I understand the pet peeves, but you are going to a public place where some sort of emotional play will be presented. How can you possibly NOT expect there to be a human response to say Jaws eating Quint or Skywalker blowing up a deathstar?

This just confuses me. As suggested above, if you don't agree to the social contract of going to a movie, then well ... don't go out to the movies.

 

[Rob Gardiner]

Joe,

Thank you for that post. May I buy you an ice cream?

 

[doug zdanivsky]

Well, I guess I'd have to say I'm firmly in Ricardo's camp on this one..

I have no problems with the Oooooh's and Aaaaah's and laughing and crying that go on during a good movie..

But I'm not there to have a "moment" with the people around me.. Not really.

I'm there for the big screen and the awesome sound, something I can't quite get at home.. I'm interested exclusively in what's going on on the screen, not wether Joe Blow thought that the main character was on the OTHER guy's side, or wether Jane Doe thought that was "SO funny!"

 

[Patrick Sun]

I guess Doug won't be at the initial midnight showing of "The Revenge of the Sith"...

 

[doug zdanivsky]

Well, no, I prob...

Oh... you're ... mocking me..

 

[Anthony Neilson]

Ah but, you see, a midnight showing of REVENGE OF THE SITH would be fine, just like the first days of any geek-friendly film are fine, because those fanboys do not tolerate non-film-related noise. Anyone indulging in casual blabbing would probably be torn limb from limb.

That's the distinction, imo. That's the type of audience that's responding vocally to a movie they're enthusiastic about. When information is being imparted, they're quiet. That's what makes the cinematic experience a shared experience. It's the people who seem to consider the film as a secondary reason for being in the cinema that do my head in. That's not a shared experience. That's like having sex with someone whilst they're doing a crossword.

 

[Chris Brock]

Just to add in my own little opinion about this ........

For me the choice to either see a movie in a theater or wait to see it in my HT depends greatly on the actual movie I am considering. For instance, I have not watched a horror/thriller movie at a theater in years. My wife and I watched The Ring for the first time alone, at home, all lights off and downstairs in the HT. There were no other people around, no distractions and most importantly no teenagers trying to showoff for their girlfriends by acting unafraid. We were mortified for days from that experience and have totally agreed the experience would not have had near the same impact had we seen it in a theater.

The only actual type of movie I am ok with seeing in a theater is pure comedy. In my opinion any "serious" type of movie such as an action/adventure, sci-fi or horror movie has one goal, and that is to let you escape from reality and actually be drawn into to story to the point where you actually feel like you are part of the movie and story. For me going to a theater to see what I call a "serious" movie would be like trying to read a romantic book at a Metallica concert (I don’t read but it is a good analogy.

I guess my general argument is, if the goal of a movie is to let you escape or forget about reality then why would you watch a movie in a place where you are surrounded by it?