Comments on: Roger Ebert on Digital Distribution and the Future of Movies

By: Phil

Phil — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:05:37 +0000

To me, it seems large crowds in a theater only enhance good comedies, where everyone is laughing together. It can make a funny movie funnier.

I'm kind of like you, I'd prefer not to be disturbed when watching a more 'serious' movie. Unless, of course, it's a bad movie and Jett Loe is somewhere in the theater, shouting at the screen. In this case it would be entertaining.

By: Phil

Phil — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 15:05:37 +0000

To me, it seems large crowds in a theater only enhance good comedies, where everyone is laughing together. It can make a funny movie funnier.

By: Ana

Ana — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:26:05 +0000

The only thing is, the theater setting provides the magic of being removed from the everyday environment. I love seeing a great film on the big screen and forgetting who I am and where I am for those two hours. There is so much room for distraction at home, it ususally diminishes the experience. I think going out to the movies makes it easier to connect with the movie itself, even if you're alone! If the multiplexes disappear, maybe we will progress into a golden age of community movie theaters playing great films for smaller numbers.

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:09:17 +0000

Maybe I'm being a little too British and reserved about this, but I often feel that the audiences in cinemas often detract from my enjoyment. Chatting, rustling food wrapper, more interested in texting friends. I'm beginning to think people have forgotten how to watch patiently.

Additionally there are times that the quality of projection isn't a lot better than what I can get at home. More often I'm going for the large sound, that I can't reproduce at home without making myself extremely unpopular with the neighbours.

Tickets are too expensive, but I would be sad to no longer have the option to go to the cinema.

By: Jett Loe

Jett Loe — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:19:49 +0000

re: “The only thing that will keep the movie theater going, as you have said, is the 'communal' experience.” yes, but unfortunately the communal experience has been destroyed for the most part by the multiplex – with multiple screenings only minutes apart you go to a first run pic right after it opens and find the theatre practically empty – better to watch at home!

By: Phil

Phil — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:19:05 +0000

I still feel that the "movie theater" as we know it today could become obsolete in 15, 20 years, primarily because of continually rising ticket prices (it now costs roughly $40 for 2, sharing popcorn and a drink), the progression of technology, and the availability of these movies.

At some point, I'm going to have (as most people will) a very large high definition television, with superb sound, and a newly released movie (in high definition) available to me for about $6 via my cable/satellite provider. That's for me and whoever else wants to watch the movie with me.

The only thing that will keep the movie theater going, as you have said, is the 'communal' experience. "Going out". It's something that you and I would probably miss, but it's just going to be too easy, too inexpensive, and without loss of quality for most movie-goers.

And that doesn't count how easy it will probably be to pirate movies.