[Wrao]

This was a good piece about the state of hollywood right now I thought
http://grantland.com/features/2014-h...es-box-office/

Relevant excerpt:

What the movie industry is about, in 2014, is creating a sense of anticipation in its target audience that is so heightened, so nurtured, and so constant that moviegoers are effectively distracted from how infrequently their expectations are actually satisfied. Movies are no longer about the thing; they’re about the next thing, the tease, the Easter egg, the post-credit sequence, the promise of a future at which the moment we’re in can only hint.

I think this rings true in a lot of ways and also directly contributes to a movie like Hobbit 3 kind of inevitably being 'off'. I haven't seen it, and I don't really plan to, but that sense zippy is talking about 'expected', 'inevitable' these are all things that we feel negatively about as they stand in such strong contrast to the anticipation factory that is modern Hollywood hit making. For the love of exposition we've kind of grown to have a distaste in conclusion and 'pay off', it's more of an afterthought, or an obligation. Which is the not-so-hidden secret in the Marvel Super Franchises. You might not care to see each individual movie much but they are built on the premise that you 'have to', that it is 'the way they are meant to be seen' and 'they are internally rewarding' and all of these things.

It's not enough anymore to just tell a story and be contented with that.

Anyway, it's a good read that touches on a lot of the stuff we've talked about in this thread I think.

[zippy]

Auto-pilot may be a decent descriptor. I read the book, so it's not like I didn't know the outcome- though I read it a long time ago and the details are hazy.

I think maybe it has to do with that old saying "it's not the destination that matters, it's the journey." And the 3rd movie was ALL about the destination. There really wasn't anywhere to go, or anything interesting too do at that point. If it had been the final 15 minutes of climax at the end of a 2.5 hour movie, that would be fine. But there just wasn't enough material to make a whole movie from.

And I'm not one to be too picky about movies. Hell, aside from some bad acting and Jar Jar (who is only slightly more childish than Ewoks), I really don't mind the Star Wars prequels that much. I just want to be entertained for a couple of hours and block out the real world. Hobbit 3 just barely accomplished that much for me.

[kieran]

Just posted this on twitter, but figured I'd put it here too.

AMC is piloting an "all you can watch" monthly movie pass for $45 a month.

I could see this being an incredible deal some months, and a terrible deal other months. I've pretty much stopped going to the movies because it's expensive as hell these days. I can just wait a few months and watch it at home.

[psmith2.0]

Interesting. As someone who doesn't go in for all the IMAX and 3D stuff, the $35/month (2D viewings) would be my choice. I'd have to watch five about movies a month to make it break even, and I honestly don't think I could do that at this point.* I'm afraid I'd just go see stuff just to meet my quote - a "pity viewing" - so I'd feel like I was getting my $35 worth.

But if you're the type who goes to a movie a week (sometimes more), it's a great deal. It'll pay for itself in 4-5 trips. Way better than paying full box office price, 4-8 times a month!

Last I checked, nighttime viewings here (2D) were $8.75, and the matinees were around $6.50 (not much of a bargain anymore). They could be higher now, for all I know.



*Says the guy who's seen only one movie at the multiplex this year (and who only has firm plans to see three in 2015...Avengers, 007 and some space movie).

[Wrao]

Definitely not for me. I see maybe 3 movies a *year*. I'm not a fan of everything turning into subscription models, understanding this is just an option but still, I'd be willing to bet a helluva lot more people will justify it to themselves like "oh, just gotta watch X movies a month and not buy snacks and it makes sense" which will turn into "I haven't seen a movie at the theater in 4 months but I'm still paying for my subscription".

Seems to happen any time memberships are involved that a majority of people don't *really* maximize the service. Where this gets troublesome is that it winds up inadvertently softening economic pressures for the companies that offer these things. If they come to have a fat revenue stream from subscriptions they can 'get away with' being dicks in other areas more readily with reduced pressure for being accountable to the consumer. See, the video game market and how it routinely releases broken and incomplete games but it's rare that any company ever has to answer for that or face any real economic consequence because they've widened their revenue streams away from the 'buy thing, get money' simplicity of yesteryear.

Ah well. I still like having Amazon Prime, even though by my third year of paying for it I've stopped being 'ahead' with regards to its benefit, even though the first year I took advantage of it all the time. Just so easy to have that happen for reasons that really are outside of your control in a way. With movies it could be that nothing looks good and you don't want to force yourself to sit through 2 hours just to make your subscription 'pay for itself'. With Amazon Prime it can be that you only buy so many things and past a certain point you don't really need anything or not as frequently or whatever.

Long story short, businesses will always find new ways to channel our money to them and I'm worn out by it.

[psmith2.0]

I think the multiplex experience is just poison and misery for a lot of us anymore. Any sort of subscription or enticement gimmick would actually have to address/involve a top-down tweak to the whole thing (trailers, commercials, latecomers, cell phones, talkers, etc.).

Frankly, "the price" is about the last reason I don't go to movies much these days. I'll gladly pay for something I really want to see. It's all the other stuff above that I just no longer want to fool with.

Make a theater or experience for me and others who can STFU and sit quietly for 2-3 hours, who aren't compelled to pull our phones out and Tweet, "like" and Instagram everything that crosses our brain, who can show up and be seated on time and not disturb everyone by cruising in during the opening credits/scenes and making a big, disruptive production out if finding seats, etc.

Do that and maybe I'll rediscover my love/joy of going to the movies.

[addabox]

I bet a small, independent theater chain could make a go of it by flatly declaring themselves the zero tolerance hard asses. As in, talk, fire up the cell, be a dick and you're out. Just throw your ass right out, no refunds, fuck off. I'd go. Fuck, I'd pay extra.

I say "small independent chain" because the AMCs of the world are like Walmart-- they're catering to teeming hoards of subhuman scum who sincerely believe that being a complete fuckwitted shit for brains is their God given right, if not their mission if life.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Last I checked, nighttime viewings here (2D) were $8.75, and the matinees were around $6.50 (not much of a bargain anymore). They could be higher now, for all I know.

Nighttime tickets here range from $12-17 typically.

Aside from cost, I detest the tradition of open seating in most US theaters. If tickets are going to be that expensive, then let me choose a seat at time of purchase. Then I wouldn't have to arrive half an hour early only to stand in line.

E: Apparently 48fps IMAX-D here costs $18.50...

[psmith2.0]

Bay Area vs. smaller Southern city

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by addabox I bet a small, independent theater chain could make a go of it by flatly declaring themselves the zero tolerance hard asses. As in, talk, fire up the cell, be a dick and you're out. Just throw your ass right out, no refunds, fuck off. I'd go. Fuck, I'd pay extra. I say "small independent chain" because the AMCs of the world are like Walmart-- they're catering to teeming hoards of subhuman scum who sincerely believe that being a complete fuckwitted shit for brains is their God given right, if not their mission if life.

Alamo Drafthouse does this. No talking period. No cellphones, no texting. Food and beer delivered to your seat. When I lived near one it was the only theater I would go to. Now I just don't go to the movies.

http://youtu.be/JVz-fO7kxcQ

[kieran]

$19.50 for the nearest IMAX to me right outside of Boston.

Didn't think it crept up that high. They were around $15 back in Philly.

[addison]

Originally Posted by Eugene Nighttime tickets here range from $12-17 typically. Aside from cost, I detest the tradition of open seating in most US theaters. If tickets are going to be that expensive, then let me choose a seat at time of purchase. Then I wouldn't have to arrive half an hour early only to stand in line. E: Apparently 48fps IMAX-D here costs $18.50...

There is an AMC around here that is a Dine In theatre and I believe you can choose your seats when you purchase your tickets. It's not a bad theater really. I thought I wouldn't like it since people would be eating but I prefer it to the regular ones now. The seats are like big captains chairs and there is a wide console between each seat. Some seats are recliners. Much more leg space too.

[psmith2.0]

We have a new(ish) Carmike theater downtown and it has the dine-in/order thing. I've never gone there because I just don't like the idea of that much fuss/distraction...I just never got my head around that, the idea of waiters or others milling about, taking orders, etc. Surely all that is done before the movie, right? Because I don't want to be sitting behind all that - some waitress' head in my way, hearing someone place some stupid food order when I'm trying to watch a movie, etc.. But even if it's not an issue, I don't want anything at a movie theater that I can't go order/bring back myself (popcorn, Coke, candy). Getting too elaborate with that strikes me as a solution in search of a problem. Go to the movie, and then a restaurant afterwards (or vice versa).

I've just got a severe "sit there and shut up...and if you can't, then beat it!" streak in me, when it comes to movies.

The big 18-screen place (formerly a Rave Motion Pictures, but now a Carmike) is about 1.6 miles from my house, so that's the one I always go to, including all the midnight premieres I've gone to (and there's a Dollar Tree store in the same plaza, so that's nice...a $1 box of Junior Mints beats the hell out of the $28.75 version at the theater). It's where I'll see the three 2015 movies I've got on my list...although I'm not looking forward to standing out there at midnight in the middle of December!

[Frank777]

Sony has cancelled the theatrical release of The Interview. North Korea wins one?

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 We have a new(ish) Carmike theater downtown and it has the dine-in/order thing. I've never gone there because I just don't like the idea of that much fuss/distraction...I just never got my head around that, the idea of waiters or others milling about, taking orders, etc. Surely all that is done before the movie, right? Because I don't want to be sitting behind all that - some waitress' head in my way, hearing someone place some stupid food order when I'm trying to watch a movie, etc.. But even if it's not an issue, I don't want anything at a movie theater that I can't go order/bring back myself (popcorn, Coke, candy). Getting too elaborate with that strikes me as a solution in search of a problem. Go to the movie, and then a restaurant afterwards (or vice versa). I've just got a severe "sit there and shut up...and if you can't, then beat it!" streak in me, when it comes to movies. The big 18-screen place (formerly a Rave Motion Pictures, but now a Carmike) is about 1.6 miles from my house, so that's the one I always go to, including all the midnight premieres I've gone to (and there's a Dollar Tree store in the same plaza, so that's nice...a $1 box of Junior Mints beats the hell out of the $28.75 version at the theater). It's where I'll see the three 2015 movies I've got on my list...although I'm not looking forward to standing out there at midnight in the middle of December!

I've never found it a huge problem at the Drafthouses I've been to. Typically most of the ordering is taken care of before the film starts and delivered during the previews. After that it's mostly drinks. They put a *lot* of space between the rows and the staff are trained to hunch down so they don't block anyone's view.

The menu varies by location, and I've heard the non-Texas locations aren't as elaborate, but at the ones I went to they generally did pretty good food at reasonable prices ($8 for a cheeseburger, various cocktails, huge microbrew beer selection). Plus they do a lot of fun themed nights with tie-in food and beverage.

[addison]

Yeah. They do a pretty good job here keeping quiet and out of the way. The seating more than makes up for the little bit of extra noise. Can't say much for the food though.

[psmith2.0]

I don't even like that..."The seating more than makes up for the little bit of extra noise."

Ewww...no way. Not for me!

Crouched down or not, it's still unnecessary movement/distraction in the one place I really don't want it. Instant deal-killer for me. I don't want any part of that at a movie theater.

Originally Posted by Frank777 Sony has cancelled the theatrical release of The Interview. North Korea wins one?

I was just reading about that. I don't think it has anything to do with "theater security" and "customer safety", etc. I think it's Sony not wanting any additional hacked emails released, showcasing their enlightened, donating-to-the-right-parties/candidates execs totally coming off as flyover-country rubes and 14-year-old catty junior high girls (aka "showing their true colors/personalities" when they think they're just talking amongst themselves).

"Blow the place up...we don't care. Just please don't release any more of those Amy Pascal emails!"

[drewprops]

That shit better be dropped onto the internet by somebody in the middle.

I want to see it being sold on the STREETS of America.

...

[Ryan]

Okay, just got back from The Hobbit.

That was bad. Martin Freeman did have some terrific one-liners ("Gandalf, is this a good place to stand?"). Dain was good too ("There's too many of them buggers!"). Cross-dressing Alfred in the middle of the battle was nicely irreverent. Speaking of battles, someone needs to teach Jackson the line between improbable and impossible. Legolas running up bricks plummeting in mid-air. Legolas throwing a sword perfectly from a hundred yards. Legolas diving sword-first off a cliff into that guy's skull. (There's clearly a pattern here) When the eagle dropped a raging bear into the orc battalion I just burst out laughing. Somehow The Hobbit turned into a parody of Die Hard 5 but I don't quite know where the flip came about. An impossibly epic battle scene between mythical races? Fine. Totally improbable combat within the battle? Just comes off as silly. There were waaaay too many moments when the audience laughed at scenes that I'm pretty sure weren't meant to be comic relief.

[_Ω_]

To defend my countryman I suggest Bad Taste and Meet the Feebles. As for Tolkien, I gave up at Helms Deep when Legolas used a shield as a skateboard.

[psmith2.0]

Hey, has anyone here seen The Babadook? It's a 2014 Australian horror(?) story. I keep hearing great things about it, and the pics (and trailer) interest me. I'm not a fan of slasher/gore stuff, but I do like genuinely creepy, unsettling tales. All the talk and reviews make this sound like the sort of thing I'd enjoy.

Just curious if anyone has seen it.

[709]

I'm not sure that's it out yet? I saw the trailer earlier in the year and like you my interest was piqued. I've been keeping an eye out for opening dates, but haven't seen any thus far.

Also, same. Modern "horror" relies too much on blood and guts and gross and shock value. That's not horror to me at all, that's gore porn. Gimme scary and eerie and blanket-grabbing tension. That's where it's at.

[psmith2.0]

According to IMDB and its Wikipedia page, it was released in the U.S. on November 28...probably to about seven theaters.

Chattanooga never gets the smaller, quirky (or indie) type movies like this. But, hey...the Marky Mark Transformers movie was shown on about eight of the 18 screens at my nearest multiplex a while back!

"So, Optimus...you're a robot, huh? Okay. Say hi to your mother for me...".

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by Ryan Okay, just got back from The Hobbit. That was bad. Martin Freeman did have some terrific one-liners ("Gandalf, is this a good place to stand?"). Dain was good too ("There's too many of them buggers!"). Cross-dressing Alfred in the middle of the battle was nicely irreverent. Speaking of battles, someone needs to teach Jackson the line between improbable and impossible. Legolas running up bricks plummeting in mid-air. Legolas throwing a sword perfectly from a hundred yards. Legolas diving sword-first off a cliff into that guy's skull. (There's clearly a pattern here) When the eagle dropped a raging bear into the orc battalion I just burst out laughing. Somehow The Hobbit turned into a parody of Die Hard 5 but I don't quite know where the flip came about. An impossibly epic battle scene between mythical races? Fine. Totally improbable combat within the battle? Just comes off as silly. There were waaaay too many moments when the audience laughed at scenes that I'm pretty sure weren't meant to be comic relief.

I agree completely about the scene with Legolas running up the falling stones. That scene was far worse than any of the other snafus. Even elves have to obey the laws of physics. This was Jackson's shark-jumping bullet-time moment and it was really sad. This is the ultimate admission by the storyteller himself that he had run out of ideas, that he made 3 movies when he should've made 2, that he was scrambling to insert "wow moments" into a story that does not require them. That said, on the whole I liked the last movie OK. There were some very well done sequences and it was interesting to watch Thorin be transformed by the dragon sickness on some level. My biggest problem with all 3 of the Hobbit movies is that they hit you over the head with the formulas that worked in the first three movies. You expect on some level for things to be repeated in a new way but Jackson made no effort to hide the formulaic moments anywhere in any of the three films. That and, this movie wasn't too bad in the sense that the bad moments (anti-gravity elf not withstanding), weren't as bad as some of the others that preceeded it. The whole wart-faced jabba-goblins under the mountain riding coal train rollercoasters was not only terrible on its own, but it was so bad it reminded me of other terrible "under the mountain" scenes that should've never been done, in movies that should never have been made (see also: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Fail, et al). My wife tricked me into seeing the 3D variant by choosing a time when only 3D was available to avoid crowds, but on the whole the 3D in the third movie was less distracting than in the first IMO. Clearly though, this movie was unnecessary. Cut out a half dozen sequences full of over-the-top effects, among the three movies, and cut down the length and BS factor of the last battle and you have two movies that would've been pretty epic. I read the Hobbit as an adult a long time ago but I don't remember most of the things that happened in those battles, ever happening in the book. Am I wrong? My favorite scene: Elf King riding bad-ass war-elk... runs across bridge, gores six orc on his antlers, lifts them off the bridge as it continues running and Elf king severs their heads... immediately followed by war-elk meeting an untimely demise. That's an example of a cool and not totally improbable good guy moment, followed by some realism. But it's one of the few scenes that stands in my memory less than 48 hours later. That shows you how much flash and thunder Jackson overloaded this film with at the end. It totally overwhelms everything else in the movie. Also "The Eagles Are Here!"... perfect example of being hit over the head with a formula, right down to it being in the third movie, at the end of the movie, when all hope is lost. Second favorite scene: Galadriel going all dark princess and owning Sauron with her thunder-sphere-emp-shockwave-of-pain-thing. Did not expect that at all (nor do I remember that from the book but it'll do, Sam, it'll do). I will probably will not buy any of the three Hobbit movies because Where Have I Seen This Before ™? Final Quality Ranking ™ Best Movie - 2nd One, by far Worst Scene - Anti-Gravity Elf Best Elf Babe - The Only Elf Babe Best Scene / Sequence - Bilbo and the Dragon under the mountain, without a doubt. Second Worst Scene - tie goes to Jabba Goblin and his Coaster Minions; dwarves in barrels on a raging river, with one anti-gravity elf, laying waste to a hoard of orcs on high ground; anything in the first movie that puts you to sleep; The Final Battle; and anything that involves psychadelic Sauron-60sTV-Eye-within-an-Eye-within-an-Eye-gosh-thats-spooky-and-compelling-not.

[Ryan]

I agree with everything Moogs said.

This really should've been two great films, rather than three meh films.

[Moogs]

Ryan you may want to check if that's still true... I ended up going back on a ramble and wrote a few more paragraphs and added Quality Rankings.

[Bryson]

I'm done with the Hobbit. I can't even believe that the same people who decided to cut Tom Bombadil and The Scouring Of The Shire for time from the Lord of the Rings were straight up making stuff up to pad the Hobbit out a bit. And then, they pad it with more fucking Legolas being awesome bullshit? Hell no. We're done here.

[psmith2.0]

Trailers for The Imitation Game really need to stop showing Benedict Cabbagepatch running. He looks like a lizard that's been shot out of a cannon, possibly losing control of bowels. The look on his face conveys all the above.

[Ryan]

Tells us how you really feel about him.

[psmith2.0]

No problem with the guy in general (other than hes possibly on the cusp of serious overexposure/wearing-out-his-welcome). Seems to be a fine actor, if you're looking for someone to cast in everything ever made.

But I just saw a new trailer which featured another scene of him running (different from the others), and he has that same weird expression.

"Has this guy ever had to run before?"

But maybe that's how Alan Turing looked when he ran, which means BC is just doing a really solid acting job.