No, I”m not talking about “The Devil Within.” I’m talking about the actual process of going TO movies thanks to audience cluelessness.
Some of you may have read about when I took little Caroline to see “I Bought a Zoo” a couple weeks ago. In a packed theater, we had a group of little old ladies seated behind us, who felt compelled every so often that it was necessary to provide a commentary track if the track was being recorded by Captain Obvious. EX: A teen boy looks longingly at a girl. “He likes her.” And I worked hard to ignore it because it didn’t seem to be bothering Caroline. But then, forty five minutes in, a cell phone started ringing. Instead of flipping to voice mail, it just got louder and louder. It was from right behind me. I turned around. One of the pocket books was literally vibrating. Low and angry, I whispered to the woman right behind me, “Would you please…turn off…your cell phone!” She looked at me, bewildered, and said, “It’s ringing?”
So two days ago, Kathleen and I went to see “The Artist” (more about which I’ll write later.) We’re sitting there, we’re watching this brilliant film unspool, and then about halfway through this guy walks in. Indeterminate age: my age, maybe older. He’s holding one of those tickets you print out from an online ticket service. He stands there for about four minutes, just to the side of where Kath and I are sitting, staring at the screen. Then he turns TO US and says, in full voice, “Is this Mission Impossible?”
I stared at him, stunned. I might, MIGHT be able to understand the confusion if the film were Tinker Tailor or maybe Tower Heist. But The Artist?” Or if he’d stuck his head in and thought this might be a trailer. But he stood there look enough to know he was watching a film. I said, “No! It’s not!” He looked back to the movie, then me. “This ISN’T Mission Impossible?” I pointed at the screen and whispered, “It’s a black and white silent movie! What do YOU think?” Pause. He asks, “Is this theater 4A?” “I don’t know!”
He left.
We’re taking Caroline to see “Beauty and the Beast 3D” today. We’ll probably have two people talking to each other on the phone in the theater asking if they’re watching Schindler’s List.
PAD
• 
Could it be that the reason people aren’t going to theaters is because of the people in the theaters?
It’s the main reason my wife and I rarely go to the theater and usually just wait for the movies to hit DVD…
A portable Cell Phone blocker would be a nice start. Plus maybe a shotgun for the other irritants, like the guy PAD mentioned that can’t read the sign outside the door telling you what the theater number is and what’s playing there.
Simon DelMonte
January 13, 2012 at 10:44 am
Could it be that the reason people aren’t going to theaters is because of the people in the theaters?
Yes. A thousand times yes. It’s certainly my primary reason, though finances have recently become an additional issue.
I have had a number of encounters with The Obvious Squad — usually old people — at movie theatres, who narrate the proceedings from beginning to end (and who think YOU’RE being rude when you tell them to shut up); comments like, “He must be sick,” and “Oh, that’s the bad guy,” and “isn’t that the same guy from the other movie? Whatever that movie’s called? What movie was that?”
Also cell-phone abusers, and kids who think the aisles are jungle gyms.
My all time favorite phenomenon, though, is the customer who picked the movie at random, at the box office, and is loudly irate at whatever it happens to be about.
I didn’t really mind the grandma with small child who was upset at the violence in AKIRA, when she thought it would be a Disneyesque cartoon; I can almost understand that level of cluelessness from somebody who just saw the poster. But the people who get IRATE that a foreign movie has subtitles? The folks upset that THE KILLING FIELDS had scenes depicting the horrors of genocide (literally: “they shouldn’t show such things!”??
And my all-time favorite, the entire family upset at the first bloodletting scene in INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE, surprised by all reason and loud about it that a movie with that title actually had vampires in it? How can *anybody* be that level of clueless and actually manage to walk out of their house in the morning without wearing their underwear outside their pants?
Hey! What’s wrong with wearing your underwear outside…I mean, yeah, what a bunch of clueless dweebs!
You mean… It isn’t supposed to be?
They’re not as clueless as that. INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE had a level of graphic depiction of blood sucking, realism, and sensuality that was somewhat bigger than other vampire movies like LOST BOYS and FRIGHT NIGHT, or even BRAM STOCKER’S DRACULA.
.
I would say the same of THE KILLING FIELDS and prior war movies. APOCALYPSE NOW was shocking, but more on an allegorical level.
.
I mean, I am not the kind of person that gets upset at graphic violence, sex, or mature themes. I enjoy this kind of stuff. But I can see how someone could walk into INTERVIEW WITH A VAMPIRE and think it was a “fun” horror movie with Tom TOP GUN Cruise.
Well, Rene, unless these people had never been exposed to the Christopher Lee “Dracula” (courtesy of the fine folks at Hammer Studios) or even Andy Warhol’s “Dracula,” then I could understand your comment about “graphic violence, sex or mature themes.” But, then again, this is the same Tom Cruise who’d been in some seriously NOT “fun” movies since “Top Gun” (“Rain Man” in 1988, “Born on the Fourth of July” in 1989, “Far and Away” and “A Few Good Men” in 1992, “The Firm” in 1993) and anyone who expected a “fun” Tom Cruise really hadn’t been paying attention. (As an aside, Coppola’s “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” was trying to be a fairly faithful adaptation of that novel and so the lack of any graphic sex or violence; the original novel is pretty restrained on both counts given the era in which it was published.)
But then again, this was a film directed by Neil Jordan who’s no stranger to “mature themes” (“Mona Lisa,” “The Company of Wolves,” “The Crying Game”) and Anne Rice did the screenplay based on her novel; anyone who wasn’t aware of the “graphic violence, sex or mature themes” in the movie–given the reputations of both director and writer–really shouldn’t have bought tickets in the first place regardless of who the stars were.
Trying to be a fairly faithful adaptation …
.
That’s why it had the “reincarnation of lost love” aspect, yes?
.
There’s a wonderful review of the movie (herewith called FrancisFordCoppola’sBramStoker’s Dracula, or FFCBSD for short) that I saw when the film was first released that just ripped the thing to shreds in a stream-of-consciousness, Denis-Leary-narrating sort of way. If I can find it again I’ll post a link; it’s one of the ten most hilarious movie reviews I’ve ever read.
.
TWL
So, in order to see this movie, everyone should have been familiar with the Hammer Dracula, Warhol’s Dracula, AND the works of Neil Jordan and Anne Rice? I think that’s asking a bit much of any audience member.
Please! There was a famous murder trial in Toronto years back. They had a tough time finding an impartial jury because of the publicityu the case had gotten – even with a non-publication order. This was when the Internet started making itself felt and such gag orders were shown to be pretty ineffective.
Anyway, The husband-wife perpetrators had literally filmed themselves killing her younger sister, as well as raping and killing her sister’s schoolgirl friend. Kind of hard to have much ‘reasonable doubt’ under those circumstances.
Prior to introducing that film footage into evidence, the judge warned the jury and the people in the audience of the graphic nature of what they were going to see. Not to mention all the reports which had been floating about.
Yet, when people filed out of the courtroom they were aghast and muttering about “I didn’t think it would be that bad…”
And they are not only allowed to walk the streets unsupervised, they’re allowed to vote and breed. Worry about it.
Actually, believe it or not, I can see why they would think that.
.
Movie depictions of violence can be pretty graphic. But if they don’t go to violent films, and if they don’t watch HBO, Starz, Showtime or any such networks as that, then their concept of what actual, brutal violence looks like is going to be limited. These are probably not going to be people who watch Lisbeth Salander get sodomized in “Dragon Tattoo.”
.
Think about it. On TV, heroes regularly get pummeled in the face. In the next scene do we see them with eyes swollen, noses busted, concussed? No. A scratch, maybe.
.
A woman is brutalized? Producers can cut around it. Close-ups on a fallen pocket book while she screams off camera.
.
They might THINK they’re ready for the real thing, but between the fact that it IS the real thing and that it’s not photographed or scored the way they’re accustomed to seeing violence, it can take them off guard. If their viewing habits are limited to shows like, say, “Castle” or “Burn Notice,” well, they may THINK they’re familiar with what violence looks like, but they’re really not. “Spartacus,” yeah But not typical network level programs.
.
PAD
You wouldn’t mind so much if it was the 99-cent moms & tots showing, but with the prices such as they are (we’re paying a discounted $10 for B&TB later today), it’s unacceptable. The worst we hit was theater tickets for Chorus Line; we wound up with a group home sitting behind us, who made all kinds of interesting noises throughout the performance. My husband recognized one of the people, realized they were from his agency, and went off on the director of the agency the following day. We got an apology, but it didn’t help the show. Kudos to the staff for taking difficult clients to something like that, but they really should have removed the client when they couldn’t remain quiet.
Regarding the Moms and Tots showing: Absolutely. If you go into that expecting the audience to be quiet, something is wrong with you, not them.
.
PAD
I agree that if a show is advertised as a “Moms and Tots” show then you can’t complain if Moms and Tots show up, but if it’s a regular showing, I don’t care if it’s $.99 or regular price, people should be quiet.
This is really a response to Roger —
If you’re going to The Muppets or Arthur Christmas (especially the non-3D flicks) at 10am on a weekday, it is a “Mom and Tots” showing, regardless of how it’s labeled.
There’s something to be said about context. When my 3-year-old is good in a movie (for the full length), that’s great. But I hardly get upset when at an early-morning show, there is a kid out of hand or a baby crying, mine or others. We (as parents) try to handle it as quickly as we can, but sometimes they’re disruptive despite our best efforts.
I’ve had people make comments to me (and others) in such situations, and all I can say is: “Spend the extra $6 and go to the 10pm show; there probably won’t be kids there.”
On the other hand, I don’t mind saving the $6 here in LA (where tickets routinely range from $12.50 to $18), especially if it’s just a “check it out” flick but there happens to be a relatively unruly child — unless it’s something like Shame, but then again, a four-year-old probably shouldn’t be in there in the first place.
AD
I’ve been taking my daughter to movies, concert, plays since – well, basically since she was born. We left a few times in consideration of the audience when she was very young (I believe that is a parent’s responsibility when taking a youngster to a public entertainment). We almost never went to anything specifically geared to a young audience and I’m glad we didn’t. The time or two we did we learned that many, many parents took the special nature of the event to indicate they did not have to control their children or in any way teach them how to be good audience members. Because she learned how to be a good audience member early, by the time she was, oh, four or five, the arts venues in town welcomed her even to usually age restricted performances knowing she’d be better behaved than many of the adults in the audience.
I was probably fortunate in having a daughter who could understand appropriate behavior and consideration for others early. But I also made the effort to teach her.
Aaron, I see your point and it’s a good one. Of course context is important and kids will be kids, especially at a kids’ movie. That’s not to say anything should go, but rather that expectations get adjusted. I’m not a parent, so frankly I don’t have the same perspective, and I can’t imagine a likely situation in which I would be going to a kids’ movie like Arthur’s Christmas. Maybe I’d go see the Muppets, and I’d certainly be more understanding of kids than if I were at an adult movie (don’t snicker; you know what I mean) regardless of the time.
That being said, my original comment stands with regard to the pricing issue, which was what really inspired my original comment more than the moms-and-tots aspect of the comment.
I love to go to a morning matinee where the theater is rarely full, but even if there were just three people aside from myself,you can pretty much guarantee that two of them will be texting throughout the film, their bright little little screens lighting up the adjoining rows like the North Star. Unfortunately I discovered long ago that the manager will all but refuse to throw them out. The most they will do is refund your money or give you a ticket to another film or showing, which is hardly a satisfactory resolution. I’ve been seriously looking into buying one of those cell phone jammers for about a hundred bucks, but that would only stop people from making calls, not turning their phones on and off. Unfortunately we now live in a society where people not only think it is socially acceptable to keep their telephones on no matter where they are, but will loudly defend that right whenever challenged.
.
And Peter? About that guy who asked if he was seeing Mission Impossible 4? You should have said yes. And if ten or fifteen minutes later he finally realized he was in the wrong theater, you could have put on your best mock dismay face and said, ‘It’s not? Honey, this isn’t Mission Impossible 4!’
C´mon, now you are overreacting and nitpicking. Texting is silent and if it actually distracts you from the film, that says more about you than them. Next thing you are gonna say is you hate those annoying people who turn on the light in their watches to see the hour.
.
I could possibly support Joe here depending on how they were texting. I’ve had people spend almost an entire film texting in front of me in a packed theater. But the catch is, they were trying to text and watch the action. Their solution was to hold the device they were using up in front of their face/behind the head of the person in front of them so that they could text and see the screen at the same time rather than being more polite about it and, if they absolutely have to text, holding their phone down in their lap. The result is that you have, in some cases, an extremely bright LED screen flashing you in the eyes in a darkened theater.
.
It’s not as annoying as someone talking through the movie, but when it starts becoming a regular thing… Yeah, it’s annoying and the theaters should deal with it.
I strongly disagree. Texting in a dark theater is extremely detrimental to the viewing experience of others, The light, whether it’s from a mobile phone or from a watch or any other source is very annoying.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L3eeC2lJZs
.
The thing that bumps that video from funny to awesome is that it’s actually put out by the Alamo Drafthouse itself. And their response at the end was absolutely perfect.
Texting is a huge problem in theaters. I’v been to theaters that will throw you out if they see you texting. So no, it’s not nitpicking.
I’m old enough to remember when people smoked in theaters. Texting isn’t QUITE as annoying and distracting as that, but the glowing screens can be extremely irritating.
,
PAD
@Kabe
I’ll tell you what. Next time you go to a movie (paying full price of course) I’ll go to the same theater. While you’re watching the film I’ll periodically turn on and off a flash light, leaving it on for several seconds each time. So as you’re watching a dramatic scene, a poignant scene I’ll make sure to light up my flash light which will distract you from the movie.
It will be silent of course and there’s really NO reason to be doing it (much like those who are texting) then we’ll see if you’ll be “overreacting”.
Usually, when Pam and I go to the movies (about twice a year!) we try to sit off to the left side and away from folks because I WILL be doing a commentary all during the movie! Since she is blind, I will occasionally have to narrate a scene or two just so she can keep the flow of the movie going…
.
To a large degree, things such as that are why I don’t go to the movies much anymore.
Ditto.
Oddly enough (especially since I made the comment above about the morons who text during a film) I go to about 60 films a year and rarely have any problems. Those who talk on cell phones are happening less and less if not at all. And most of the showings I go to are the 6-7 Pm shows.
My all-time favorite clueless movie-goer was a guy I know who went to see Al Pacino’s SCENT OF A WOMAN. His review? “If I had known it was about a blind guy, I wouldn’t have gone to see it!”
In his defense, he might not have read the book (if any), I hadn’t. And there are too many reviewers out there (Aint-It-Cool is full of them) where they’ll trip over themselves saying how awesome and amazing and great and well acted a film is … without giving the slightest clue as to what the dámņ thing is actually about. Or even whether it’s a comedy or musical or romance or … so forth. I hate that sort of review because movies are expensive and I’d rather have SOME idea of what it is I’m laying cash out to see.
I heard JJ Abrams on The Nerdist recently talking about how you can’t recreate that Big Screen experience at home, so he isn’t worried about losing theatrical revenue to home viewings and iPads. And all I could think was “When was the last time he had to deal with the people WE have to deal with in the movie theaters?”
Ugh.
(Although the Tintin experience over the holidays was remarkably pleasant.)
.
I tend to agree with Abrams and others about this on one level, but I disagree with him more than agree with him here.
.
You can’t recreate the “Big Screen” experience at home. He’s quite correct. The problem with that statement is that it’s becoming harder and harder to recreate the “Big Screen” experience in the theaters.
.
Every new theater that opens around here to replace the ones that have closed usually cram an additional three or four more screens than the older theaters into the same amount of space. The screens are all smaller by a noticeable degree than the screens in the theaters I used to go to. They’re also cramming a few extra seats into each row of seats, so you’re packed into your seat uncomfortable and tightly even in a half empty theater.
.
And, of course, most of the movies being made to be giant spectacle films that have to be seen on the big screen just aren’t worth sitting through them to see them in the theater. Avatar was one of those. Everyone I know was saying that you had to see Avatar on the big screen. I passed on that simply because a number of the people telling me that it had to be seen on a big screen flat out said that it was a so-so film at best and that the only reason to see it was for the amazing visuals. I’m really just not that interested in paying almost $20 a person to look at pretty pictures for two plus hours.
.
I have a nice home entertainment center. I make my own (non-microwave) popcorn and I can actually control the volume settings so that I can actually hear what the characters are saying and not have the sound FX and musical score tracks blow my ears into next week. I have comfy seats, I have a noticeable lack of obnoxious or annoying people bothering me during the film, I control the temperature in my “theater” and I spend way less on the film.
.
A film really, really has to have me hooked and excited to see it when it comes out or be an indie film where I know that the audience won’t be the average random group of people queuing up for the blockbuster of the week these days for me to bother with the theater.
“I can actually control the volume settings so that I can actually hear what the characters are saying and not have the sound FX and musical score tracks blow my ears into next week.”
A-F&@#ing-MEN! TV is just as bad too though, the soundtracks and background are blaring and the dialogue is like a whisper, you practically need Close Captioning to follow it…
We’ve gone from an average of 2-3 movies at the theater a month years ago to MAYBE 1 every year or two…
Here’s what I find interesting about “The Artist.” I actually had some trepidation because I figured that, with it being a silent film (music notwithstanding) people would blabber away since dialogue wasn’t an issue.
.
As it turned out, it was actually one of the quietest audiences ever. There was some very low chatting initially, but because it was silent, it absolutely demanded one’s full attention. You had to be focused on the screen, focused on the dialogue cards, all of it. Lack of dialogue commands that you don’t look away or engage with the person next to you because you’re gonna miss something. The idiot who walked in was the only disruption.
.
PAD
Living in Brazil and watching all my American movies and TV shows captioned I don’t have that problem, at least.
.
“Here’s what I find interesting about “The Artist.” I actually had some trepidation because I figured that, with it being a silent film (music notwithstanding) people would blabber away since dialogue wasn’t an issue.”
.
That’s the one thing I wouldn’t have been too worried about. I love a lot of foreign films and learned a long time ago that I can’t watch them and do pretty much anything else because I have to watch the film (subtitles) rather than half watch the film because I can listen to it. Unless a friend and I have been really, really, really looking forward to a film with subtitles, I rarely even watch them when I have friends over and we’re just in a movie mood.
Rene, Gerry, I’m familiar with this but it can backfire.
When I was quite young in Québec province, much of the movies on TV were of the English, subtitled in French variety. God used to that early on. Now, I often watch Japanese material subtitled in English.
So, during one of my visits to fiancee in Sao Paulo, she decided she wanted her Hugh Jackman fix and we went to see WOLVERINE, and I had a problem at first as I was having trouble reading the subtitles and then woke up and remembered the film was in English and the Portugese subtitles were for the locals. Oops.
“Here’s what I find interesting about “The Artist.” I actually had some trepidation because I figured that, with it being a silent film (music notwithstanding) people would blabber away since dialogue wasn’t an issue.”
I had the same concern – based partly on an experience seeing “Koyaanisqatsi” (yeah, I know that was a long time ago) when the people behind us kept chattering and chattering until about 15 minutes into the film when I finally asked them to shut up because the movie had started.
Good, quiet audience at “The Artist”, though.
I can see what he’s saying. I went to the theater last night and I really enjoyed hearing the crowd laugh along with me. It’s much different than hearing an overdone laugh track for a TV show.
Some of the funniest TV comedies don’t even use laugh tracks…
What bothers me most about modern shows is that *every* joke gets a huge laugh. I can watch a old show (or a British show) where small jokes get small laughs. I love watching the Daily Show where a bad joke gets a groan from the audience and Jon Stewart has to acknowledge that it was bad. I just can’t take the forced laughs of modern shows.
.
Laughing along with people in a theater? That’s great. It can even make a bad movie enjoyable. There was a scene in Ang Lee’s Hulk that was so bad the whole audience groaned in unison. The enjoyment I’ve gotten from remembering that actually makes up for what the movie lacked.
I can’t watch anything with a laugh track.
The worst I’ve ever seen was at a concert late last year, where not only did you have people everywhere chatting and on phones and recording the concert, but there was a *constant* stream of people going in and out to go to the bar, and with it the constant roaming of venue staff with mops to mop up the spills. Even the singer commented on it. It was truly disgusting.
Fortunately the concert itself was stunning.
Well, if this had to happen, at least it happened in a movie with no dialogue to interrupt.
Best cure for annoying theater people I’ve found is to just not go the first couple weeks. Sucks having to wait, but I’m generally busy enough to find SOMEthing to occupy my time, and then after the furor has died down, it’s less crowded, greatly reducing the likelihood of getting some annoying half-wit doing whatever they do to kill your experience.
Still happens, of course, but the odds are so much better it’s not even a question for me, anymore. IF I go see something in the theater, I wait.
That poor guy. I wonder how much of Mission Impossible he missed. I often miss as much as much as the first twenty minutes of a movie from having to peek in each auditorium and guess if they’re showing the movie I came to see. If only the theatres would post the movie title and time over the entrance to the auditoriums I could find what I’m looking for so much faster. Oh wait, no I don’t, and they do.
Can anyone really be said to “miss” any of a Tom Cruise “Mission: Impossible in name only” movie?
.
–Daryl
You could try checking your ticket for the theater number.
One of the theaters near me has removed the display of the movie titles and times outside each auditorium and replaced it with just the theater number. In their defense, they’re just starting a remodeling project, but how hard is it to print the name of the movie and tack it up outside the door?
It deters theater hoppers. Some theaters near me do it, too. It’s actually a smart move on their part, even if it annoys me because I like to theater hop.
One of the things I’m most happy about with my life these days is that I work Tuesday through Saturday. That way, on Mondays during the school year, I can go to matinees of “kid’s movies” (including things like “Hugo” and “The Adventures of Tintin”) and watch them without the presence of kids in the audience.
No offense meant to Caroline, Peter, I’m sure she’s well-behaved at theaters.
Most of the above reasons listed above are why I don’t go to theaters often (that, and the ticket prices), but sometimes, audience members DO provide a reason to be entertained during a screening.
Example 1 – I had scored a sneak preview for “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” a few years back, and during the moment when the lead actor was about to do something stupid (which the audience was clearly grumbling about), one guy verbalized what we were all thinking:
“Don’t do it, man!”
From there, the floodgates opened – EVERY red-blooded American male in attendance (including yours truly) started pleading for the character not to f— it up… which he did, followed by a disappointed groan from the audience.
Example 2 – During “Captain America: The First Avenger”, when Nick Fury appeared onscreen, a moviegoer suddenly yelled, “That’s Sam Jackson!” I guess he’d never seen any of the Marvel Studios movies before then…
Also, I find myself going to more out of the way theaters; usually the crowds and people are more well-behaved than at the multiplex near my place.
My favorite recent comments were at the end of First Class when someone shouted “OH SHÍT!” when the gun was fired, and then two minutes later someone else finally realized who got shot where and said “Oh, so that’s how it happened.”
(left semi-vague for anyone who hasn’t seen it yet)
And what made the curse even better was that the person was seriously startled and jumped out of his chair.
Just be glad there wasn’t some neckbeard next to him to say, “Well, *actually* in the *comics* blah blah blah.” Because then there’d be nothing for it but to kill him.
Yeah, uh…I hate to admit that I was in the “Oh šhìŧ!” brigade. Sorry about that.
.
PAD
The person who mistook THE ARTIST for MI:4 may be among the greatest theater flubs of all time. (Then again, back in college they had an outdoor showing/audience participation of THE ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW, and some folks in the audience tried to quiet down the people talking during the movie. There are rare occasions when it’s good to talk during a movie.)
And as an aside, something I learned from working at a movie theater is that there are senior citizens who will see *anything* during the daytime. It can be the most gore-and-torture-filled horror movie, it can be the most juvenile t&a teen sex comedy, it can be insane Japanese animation, idiotic Adam Sandler, whatever… There *will* be older couples with nothing better to do who’ll go see it. Seriously.
Heh. Two incidents come to mind: One was a young lad of about 11 explaining to his companion every aspect of the plot to the Speed Racer movie 20 minutes in, including all the plot twists and “big reveals”. Even being a fanboy familiar with the story, when he blurted out the “revelation” of Racer X’s identity in the first half hour, I turned and snapped “Thanks for telling those of us who haven;t seen the movie yet!”
Second was a 7:30 PM showing of “Ever After”. I had two mothers behind me with 3 young children who were talking and asking for explanations through the whole first half of the movie, loudly. “Who’s that? What’s she doing? Why are they fighting?”. Of course, the parents made no effort to quiet their children, which was my sticking point. After 45 minutes of this, I turned around and said “I’m sorry, but I didn’t pay $14 to listen to you narrate the film for your kids”. The mother angrily turned to me and said “They’re CHILDREN! They’re going to ask questions!!!” So I replied “Then RENT it when it comes out and discuss it in your home. This ISN’T your living room! Do some parenting and teach your children consideration of others!” Of course, I got a huffy “WELL, I NEVER!” from both, as they moved 5 rows back…. And went on with the same routine. Sigh.
I’ve had similar problems. What always ticks me off is the lack of parenting involved. As a child, it was always made clear to me that if I didn’t behave properly during the movie, my parents would take me out of the theater and we would go straight home. Once home, I would be going to bed. No TV, no stories, no playtime. I NEVER caused a disturbance during a movie. Parents, if your kids won’t shut up during a show, leave. The people that paid for their tickets that have well behaved kids, or no kids out number you. Your money isn’t better than theirs and the “just a child” excuse is a dodge for your bad parenting and laziness, not your kid’s behavior.
HUZZAH!
While I agree wholeheartedly, I had parents who were the same way with me (“Behave or we’re leaving.”)
Most folks these days aren’t going to give up on the over-priced ticket and concessions dollars they’ve spent…
When my Dad broke his hip last May, I was so busy taking care of him, I missed seeing almost all of the blockbusters in the theater. been catching up with them via DVD and the premium cable channels. Not bothering me. Our TV set up is big enough, and I don’t miss the cost or hassle of the Multiplex. It has to be a very special film for me to go, and since I have old, bad, eyes, 3D doesn’t have much appeal. At this point, the next time I may be in the theater will most likely be the next Star Trek movie in 2013, since I am a big fan and won’t want to be spoiled.
I would absolutely love it if they’d replace the trivia card or an ad with a film clip of someone like Samuel L. Jackson or Denis Leary glaring out at the audience, saying something like, “Listen up! The people in the audience didn’t pay ten bucks to listen to you yakking with your buddies. This is NOT your living room, and they can’t back the film up to catch the parts you talked over. Turn OFF your dámņ phone and SHUT THE F*$% UP.”
Maybe have a PG-13 version with “…SHUT THE HÊLL UP,” too.
I might just pay to see that PSA by itself.
The Alamo Drafthouse theaters do promos like that. I’ve only seen them online as I don’t live anywhere near their theaters.
It’s absolutely killing the business. They brought in 3-D and Uber-sound and other bells and whistles and then promptly soured it with jacked up prices, incompetent projection quality, and no control at all over the disruptive elements of the audience. Plus too many of the movies (and the whole movie going experience) have now been geared to the youth market…and that market is increasingly not interested in movies at a theater. They are perfectly happy to watch a downloaded camcorder version on an iphone.
.
They are losing people like myself, Jerry, PAD–people who love cinema as entertainment and art, people who are willing to love a movie that is not 10 explosions every minute and has a budget that would fund a world war. I’d rather see a movie as it was meant to be seen than on netflix but given the choice between seeing a blurry movie at $10 a pop (plus concession stand costs that the mafia would be ashamed to charge) with yappy teens, clueless adults and a cacophony of cell phones…or watching movies on my HD TV in the comfort of my own home with my wife and cats, for the cost of nickels per film…I’m not stupid. About the only ones I see now are either the ones I can’t wait for (THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO, anything by Tarantino) or movies that are so epic the demand to be seen on a big screen (AVATAR, PROMETHEUS, A FEW BRAINS MORE;SUMMER OF BLOOD).
Bloody hëll Peter, you’ve had fun experience with the moron pool. It boggles the mind wondering whether people go to the theater to actually watch movies or is it just another place to chat. This also brings up something that always drives me nuts and that is how ill informed some people (especially parents in regards to movie content). I remember when Starship Troopers came out it was full of kids…Ghost Rider with tons of families because a flaming skull is perfect for a family movie, but my favorite was the midnight showing of Watchmen where a father had his 8 year old daughter with him…WTF!!! That girl probably wondered what Dr. Manhattan was swinging from side to side. The father deserved that question.
Those experiences and more are precisely the reasons for why I do not really care for the moviegoing experience any longer. It is just no longer enjoyable for me. And I am the one in my group who grew up going to the theaters to watch all sorts of movies!!
It is not the high prices of tickets or the overpriced food/drinks that keeps me away these days … other apparently more clueless people are just determined to ruin the experience and theater personnel simply are hard pressed to even give a hoot even when prompted to do so.
A good movie? I prefer to just wait and eventually catch it on dvd.
Peter, I wish for you and for everyone else annoyed by texters, talkers, and cellphone-users that Alamo Drafthouse could speed up building franchises all over the country. There’s definitely a demand for it — totally aside from the “they bring you beer at your seat” aspect, which is a lot less disruptive than you’d probably think it is. Mostly because the no talking/no texting rules are enforced so strictly — boisterous drunks get thrown out, too.
We have two multiplexes here. One is a Carmike theater located at the one and only mall, the other is an independent in a freestanding location. The independent ran special trailers for a couple years that used celebrity voice impressions to remind the audience not to talk during the film and turn off the cell phone and other tidbits of good behavior. I realized when I read Paul1963’s post I that I hadn’t seen one in most of year. The one they most used was John Wayne. Its debatable whether they made a difference, but I appreciated the effort.
The same theater runs a an independent/foreign/art film series during the spring and fall school semesters. One showing each, one night a week, eight films each time. I get season tickets and take my mother. These are attended by a much higher than usual percentage of seniors as well as folks that appreciate the opportunity to see something like The Artist which we are unlikely to get for a regular run. Very few teens or younger, generally middle and upper class by appearance. 90% adults and people you would expect to know how to behave in the venue. Usually, 2-3 weeks into the series, I spend each evening mentally composing a letter to the paper while watching the film intending to chastise my fellow movie watchers. Many of them are the sort who will feel superior for watching such films. Way too many given the makeup of the audience, exhibit the behavior mentioned here. Talking in full voice during the film whether its discussing the film or their lives, taking cell calls, playing with the cell phone and so on.
If I were to go to an Adam Sandler film filled with teenagers, I would expect some of these things. IF we get The Artist here, I will wish that I could expect good behavior, but I will know going in it won’t be 100%. I have gone and will continue to go to every one of them I can because I much prefer to see a movie at the theater over watching at home.
I saw “The Artist” over christmas break in Santa Fe. Loved it! OSCAR FOR UGGIE!!!
This is why I sit in the back of the theater as much as possible. If people in front of me are talking, it doesn’t bother me, but if they are right behind me, then they are harder to ignore.
My friends and I got chased out of our seats while watching Sherlock Holmes in the UK last month. Apparently, this theater sold reserved seats and we were in them, in the middle of the theater. We ended up sitting at the front, which are my least favorite seats in the theater.
No one has to text or make a phone call during a movie. These devices did not exist 20 uears ago and the world did not end if you were separated from the outside world for two hours. Doctors had pagers, true, and maybe some parents would be more comfortable if rhe baby sitter coild reach them during the film but most got past it.
It’s the same as my issue with texting and driving. Even if you can avoid killing someone due to the distraction, why must you be connected to the device all the time?
Sad to say, this has also crept into the home viewing experience. Folks who text while a movie or TV is on, as if it’s background music. My father-in-law is not the type of person who can ever sit still so he will ask random questions to my mother-in-law while she’s watching TV. Yes, she can pause the TV but that’s distracting as hëll. Om Christmas Day, the extended family wondered why I watched thr Doctor Who Christmas specal is another room rather than on the big TV — because I actually wanted to watch it — lights off, no other sounds, no requests to pauae because someone just has to answer that cell phone call. Aargh. Sadly. i’ve found planes more pleasant because especially if I’m seated by the window with my noise-cancelling headphones, there are leas distractioons.
I’m glad to see I’m not the only one infuriated by the Obvious Squad and the Narrators. I thought this only existed in my neck of the woods. When I went to see Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol at Lincoln Square, I had no problems.
.
But whenever I go to the theater that’s a short walk from my house, there’s always some idiot with a cell phone texting or doing whatever else during the movie, and when I say something, even politely, I get grief from the idiots, who act like I’m the one who’s wrong. One guy carrying on a conversation on his cell, when I politely asked if he could take it outside, said, “Go fûçk yourself.” I was incredulous, and got the manager. When the manager refused to remove him from the theater, I was dumbstruck. So I called the cops. While I was on the phone in the lobby, the manager, who for some reason found it more acceptable to eject this gentlemen after he realized I was serious about calling the cops, finally did so, so I cancelled the call. More recently, when I a guy sitting right in front of me was looking at his phone after the movie started, I politely asked him if he not do that in here, he just stared at me for a few seconds. Returning his gaze, I said, “Is there a problem”, and he replied, “I will”. I maintained my politeness by saying, “Thanks”, not breaking eye contact with his dûmbášš stare.
.
Then there are the Narrators.
.
I remember watching Pearl Harbor, a girl sitting with her friends behind me had to comment on every gøddámņ scene or shot. Josh Hartnett and Kate Beckinsale are shown sleeping in a hammock and I heard behind me “Awww….sleepy sleep.” A woman watching Monster House with her family says, when the titular house is first shown at the top of the film, “Oh, that looks like the house I grew up in…!”. And then there was this dipshit who kept commenting during the 2009 Star Trek Film. “Oh, look, that girl is green.” “Oh look, it’s Madea!”
.
Where the hëll do these people come from, who don’t know that you’re not supposed to talk during movies? Were they raised by wolves?
So I called the cops. While I was on the phone in the lobby, the manager, who for some reason found it more acceptable to eject this gentlemen after he realized I was serious about calling the cops, finally did so, so I cancelled the call.
.
I really can’t believe the cops would have actually come. “Calling all cars. Never mind about that burglary/mugging/bank robbery, someone won’t shut off their cell phone at a movie.”
.
Yeah, I know the guy was being an ášš and the manager was trying to duck the responsibility of his position, but expecting the police to settle something like this sounds really self-aggrandizing.
.
“One guy carrying on a conversation on his cell, when I politely asked if he could take it outside, said, “Go fûçk yourself.” I was incredulous, and got the manager. When the manager refused to remove him from the theater, I was dumbstruck. So I called the cops.”
.
Seriously? Good thing that you canceled the call. Any cops who showed up to a theater to address someone not shutting off their cell phone might be a wee bit harder on the person who filed a complaint that was a waste of their time more so than with the jerk yakking on his cell during the movie.
The logic on calling the cops for a cell phone user in a theater is a bit silly.
What law is being broken? None.
(Yet…)
George Haberberger: “Calling all cars. Never mind about that burglary/mugging/bank robbery, someone won’t shut off their cell phone at a movie.”
.
Jerry Chandler: Any cops who showed up to a theater to address someone not shutting off their cell phone…
Luigi Novi: The fact that he said, “Go fûçk yourself” when I politely asked him to take it outside makes it a bit more than just about the cell phone.
.
Not really. Maybe if her had he said that he was going to do something painfully physical to you and punctuated that thread by telling you to now “go fûçk yourself.” But just saying that to you with no threat attached?
.
Whoever showed up would not have been Officer Friendly once you had explained to him or her that they responded to your location because someone didn’t shut their cell phone off when you told them to and that they told you to go and fûçk yourself instead.
.
Trust me. There are calls that cops see as keeping the peace and then there are calls that cops see as bûllšhìŧ calls. That one would really have been leaning heavily into “bûllšhìŧ call” for most officers I know.
I agree with Jerry. Cops have a higher opinion of their job description than settling verbal disputes.
,
Of course I don’t know how threatened you felt but I still think calling he cops because someone was rude and crude was a massive escalation. I try not to involve the cops/the state/the government etc. unless there is absolutely no other alternative.
It’s hard not to sympathise with one of the leads in TAMPOPO.
Film opens to a cinema as seen from the screen. This gangster type comes in the back, escorted by his ‘moll’ and a few gunsels. He sits in front with ‘moll’ at his side and gunsels around him.
Suddenly, loud crackling and crunching noises from somewhere behind and to his left. Gunsels immediately leap to their feet and stare at the offender who is oblivious to this. Yakuza type gets up and casually wanlks over to the guy, leans over and “That looks quite good.” The loud snacker nods “Yes, it’s (food name, I forget) and very tasty. Care for some?”
Yakuza grabs him by his lapels and prectically shakes him apart as he yells “If you make ANY noise once the film starts, I’ll kill you.”
Perhaps overreacting a triffle, but if I’d been there it would have been hard not to cheer right then.
Ummm… I’m pretty sure gunsel doesn’t mean what you think it means. Great movie, though.
Saw The Iron Lady and there were to Clueless Morons blathering on. “Oh, is she hallucinating?”. “I like that music.”. “Did she dance with Reagan?”. It was painful.
I love my mom to death, but she is quite the offender where talking during films is concerned. She has a very bad habit of asking whoever she happens to be with questions that, if they too are seeing the film for the first time, they have no more idea what the answer is than she does. At least when we’re in a home setting, I can respond out loud and calmly….but I start getting annoyed and self-conscious in a theater when I have to hiss for the umpteenth time, “Watch the movie and find out, Mom!”
My mother in law is just like that.
I go out of my way to avoid movie theaters for exactly these reasons. None of those horrible people are ever in my living room, and watching at home on my comically over-sized television has the added bonus of being able to watch with my dog and maybe a beer. I understand the “big screen experience”, and I regret not being able to enjoy it more often. But between the insane ticket prices, the gouging at the concession stand, and the utter horribleness of what passes for the movie-going public, it’s not worth it.
Incidentally, it’s worth mentioning that the problem isn’t just “people today are rude.” Part of the problem is that movie theaters won’t or don’t enforce any kind of civility or courtesy. I used to work in a chain theater in the 80’s, and even then it was starting to slide. Basically there’s a liability thing where it’s not really worth the management’s time or risk to send a seventeen year old with a flashlight to kick people out.
I have (sadly) come to expect some noise from regular audiences. But this past week, I went to an advanced screening of an upcoming film, with critics and an audience who won tickets on the radio or something in attendance and was aghast by the behavior of two people who were the section reserved for journalists. I assuming that it was a journalist with a friend brought along as their plus one. Through a majority of the film they kept commenting on various things from how bad the lead looked (“Does he have cancer?”) through a range of other things. If it weren’t for the fact that the auditorium was filled, I would have moved. Unfortunately I was trapped next to these two nattering nabobs.
I recall going to see Kill Bill Part 2 at the theatre some years ago. As the film moved into the last quarter or so, a fellow in the audience started giggling sporadically. Around the time when Bill begins to quote Jules Feiffer to the Bride, this fellow announces, quite loudly to the audience, that it’s his birthday (it had just clicked over midnight). This, as you might expect, brought a flurry of “shut the hëll up’s” from other audience member, which upset this fellow somewhat as he then started issuing threats to those not inclined to wish him a happy birthday. Ushers showed up and escorted the fellow out without, as far as I know, incident. This experience, plus being jostled in my seat by a 40 year old woman punching the air excitedly during the battle for Helm’s Deep, and having a 9 year old girl apparently root for change in my coat pocket during Spider Man 2, have kind of soured me on public movie going.
In France The Artist left the onlookers speechless.
An addition, not movie related but certainly audience related. I was lucky enough to cath Patrick Stewart doing his one-man “Christmas Carol” right before he announced he would stop doing them over here. During the whole first half of the performance, there was a family sitting next to us who had clearly confused it with the musical version being advertised down the road. The kids were complaining there was no music, the parents were wondering why it’s only “The guy from Star Trek” on stage, all the time loudly crinkling bags of chips and popcorn they brought in from the outside. Thankfully they left at the intermission, complaining to the manager that it wasn’t the “Christmas Carol” they saw advertised on TV…
Yeesh. I was fortunate enough to see Stewart’s one-man CC several times (living in LA at the time helped), but haven’t for years (obviously). A shame — the man was magic, and I’d love to see my daughter’s reaction to it.
.
Has he said why he’s not doing them here any more?
Maybe because of people like the family in the story.
My absolute favorite “annoying audience moment” I ever experienced was during “Lost in Translation.”
An elderly couple sat a few rows behind me, and the man kept asking the woman questions about the movie – “What’s he doing?” “What’d she say?” “How did that happen?” Et Cetera.
Somewhere in the middle of the movie, there’s a scene where Bill Murray’s character plays golf against the backdrop of Mt. Fuji. Short scene, no dialogue, a highlight of the mixture of familiarity and alienation Murray’s character deals with for the entire film.
When this scene comes on, the elderly man says – in a voice of calm eureka, as if he’s just unlocked the entire movie’s theme and message and in the process achieved enlightenment: “Ohhhh. So he’s a *golfer*.”
He didn’t aks another question for the entire movie.