AMC Says ‘Almost All’ U.S. Theaters Will Reopen in July

Dont take it from me. Take it from Dennis Villeneuve in his new open letter to Warner:

Streaming can produce great content, but not movies of “Dune’s” scope and scale. Warner Bros.’ decision means “Dune” won’t have the chance to perform financially in order to be viable and piracy will ultimately triumph. Warner Bros. might just have killed the “Dune” franchise...

The moviegoing experience is like no other. In those darkened theaters films capture our history, educate us, fuel our imagination, and lift and inspire our collective spirit. It is our legacy. Long live theatrical cinema!
Click to expand...
https://variety.com/2020/film/news/dune-denis-villeneuve-blasts-warner-bros-1234851270/
 
Dennis Villeneuve should be working in local TV.

And, as a side note, there's no reason someone can't recreate the "cinema experience" at home. One can't recreate a "stadium experience", however.
 
ahalpert said:
Dont take it from me. Take it from Dennis Villeneuve in his new open letter to Warner:

Streaming can produce great content, but not movies of “Dune’s” scope and scale. Warner Bros.’ decision means “Dune” won’t have the chance to perform financially in order to be viable and piracy will ultimately triumph. Warner Bros. might just have killed the “Dune” franchise...

The moviegoing experience is like no other. In those darkened theaters films capture our history, educate us, fuel our imagination, and lift and inspire our collective spirit. It is our legacy. Long live theatrical cinema!
Click to expand...

https://variety.com/2020/film/news/dune-denis-villeneuve-blasts-warner-bros-1234851270/
Click to expand...

Any limiting of "scope" will be artificial and the choice of those making it or controlling the purse strings.

And he can stick the piracy argument up his... They have been beating that horse for decades. Those that are gonna watch it and pay for it were going to watch it and pay for it. Those that steal or attempt to steal it were never going to pay for it anyway.
 
DLD said:
Dennis Villeneuve should be working in local TV.

And, as a side note, there's no reason someone can't recreate the "cinema experience" at home. One can't recreate a "stadium experience", however.
Click to expand...

...why local TV?

I find that you and others take a rather utilitarian view of the moviegoing experience. and if you can get equivalent viewing size (angle?) and resolution, then it's a tie or even a win for the comforts of home.

I'll admit that I have a possibly irrational attachment to the cinema and that my opinion in this matter (as much as I usually try to remain objective) cannot be swayed.

But isn't that part of the point? I highly doubt that I would have ever developed a near-religious fervor for and reverence of cinema/movies if the theater didnt exist. It is a spiritual experience and, in some ways, a humbling one to participate in the communal service at the theater.

Maybe I'm onto something with that last point... when we participate in simultaneous group activity (such as chanting in synagogue), it activates some part of the brain that is connected to a feeling of belonging and probably an infantile sense of familial security. I'm sure there's research into that.

Cinema as religion... watching star trek at home in my skivvies feels less like prayer and more like masturbation
 
Run&Gun said:
Any limiting of "scope" will be artificial and the choice of those making it or controlling the purse strings.

And he can stick the piracy argument up his...
Click to expand...

Dont you think there will come a point where Netflix has developed its own catalog and can pull back on production costs? At some point wall street will want to maximize profit? And each of these companies that posts huge losses up front like uber etc is investing in putting competitors out of business so that they can then lower quality or gouge prices as a monopoly or close to one? Why would they spend $200 million on a movie when they have a solid subscriber base? Or am I wrong?
 
ahalpert said:
...why local TV?

I find that you and others take a rather utilitarian view of the moviegoing experience. and if you can get equivalent viewing size (angle?) and resolution, then it's a tie or even a win for the comforts of home.

I'll admit that I have a possibly irrational attachment to the cinema and that my opinion in this matter (as much as I usually try to remain objective) cannot be swayed.

But isn't that part of the point? I highly doubt that I would have ever developed a near-religious fervor for and reverence of cinema/movies if the theater didnt exist. It is a spiritual experience and, in some ways, a humbling one to participate in the communal service at the theater.

Maybe I'm onto something with that last point... when we participate in simultaneously group activity (such as chanting in synagogue), it activates some part of the brain that is connected to a feeling of belonging and probably an infantile sense of familial security. I'm sure there's research into that.

Cinema as religion... watching star trek at home in my skivvies feels less like prayer and more like masturbation
Click to expand...


You're a romantic, dude. And your'e over romanticizing the theatrical experience. Or maybe I just don't give a rats *** about sitting in a dark room full of other people while watching a movie. In fact, I used to go out of my way to watch movies at the theater by myself. I would go in the middle of the week and the last showing(usually after 9pm or 10pm). When I watched The Revenant, I was the lone soul in there. It was great. And If I remember correctly, there was only one other person in the theater when I saw Batman vs. Superman. And I would have been even happier with no one in there, period.
 
ahalpert said:
Dont you think there will come a point where Netflix has developed its own catalog and can pull back on production costs? At some point wall street will want to maximize profit? And each of these companies that posts huge losses up front like uber etc is investing in putting competitors out of business so that they can then lower quality or gouge prices as a monopoly or close to one? Why would they spend $200 million on a movie when they have a solid subscriber base? Or am I wrong?
Click to expand...

Haven't we already seen Hollywood pull back on movies anyway, as evidenced by the boring and derivative stories? So many Hollywood theatrical releases are the definition and example of boring, corporate "creativity by committee". And the "blockbuster" "tentpoles" are usually the worst. Yes, the production values are outrageous, but it's lipstick and perfume on a pig.
 
Run&Gun said:
You're a romantic, dude. And your'e over romanticizing the theatrical experience. Or maybe I just don't give a rats *** about sitting in a dark room full of other people while watching a movie. In fact, I used to go out of my way to watch movies at the theater by myself. I would go in the middle of the week and the last showing(usually after 9pm or 10pm). When I watched The Revenant, I was the lone soul in there. It was great. And If I remember correctly, there was only one other person in the theater when I saw Batman vs. Superman. And I would have been even happier with no one in there, period.
Click to expand...

That's fuuuuunny. I saw Lincoln by myself, which was maybe why I fell asleep. Or maybe it was boring as hell.

I remember seeing the force Awakens and observing the hurried seriousness of the gen x dads in the packed theater as they shepherded their teen kids to their seats. Getting them ready for communion. And the electric thrill rippling through the room when the theme music came on. Too bad the movie itself was such a disappointment.

And all the girls cheering for legolas when he made his first appearance.

I remember the newspaper photos of people holding signs saying "will work for star wars tickets" when phantom menace was about to premiere.

I remember the disappointment and envy being shut out of home alone 2 when we tried to get tickets and it was a total blockbuster. There were 6 kids in my family and we rarely went out to the movies because it was expensive to do so as a group.

My kid sister had her birthday party at a Lion King screening one year. My 8th was at star trek first contact right around when my youngest sister was born (the very same night? Not sure)
 
Run&Gun said:
Haven't we already seen Hollywood pull back on movies anyway, as evidenced by the boring and derivative stories? So many Hollywood theatrical releases are the definition and example of boring, corporate "creativity by committee". And the "blockbuster" "tentpoles" are usually the worst. Yes, the production values are outrageous, but it's lipstick and perfume on a pig.
Click to expand...

Not quite the same thing... they're still splashing cash, just not taking creative risks.

But then you get a masterstroke like Get Out. Interestingly enough, the horror genre is one of the few bright spots in the theater business, it seems
 
I also met my wife at the cinema (the Angelika on Houston st). My first words to her were, "I'll have a large popcorn and a large coke." Perhaps that's another part of my attachment

(the movie was El secreto de sus ojos (The Secret in Their Eyes))
 
Last edited:
ahalpert said:
...why local TV?

I find that you and others take a rather utilitarian view of the moviegoing experience...
Click to expand...

A) Because I think he's a talentless hack.

B) There's a difference between loving movies and loving the experience of being in a movie theater. When I worked the video rental section of a large electronics chain in the mid-1980's, I used to take a lot of VHS tapes home (part of the benefits of working there at that time) and I was just fine with watching something by myself, especially if it was highly rated by Siskel and Ebert. A few years later, I used to go the Galaxy theaters, which was a couple of blocks from where I used to live. Except, unlike Run&Gun, I used to go to the matinees - cheaper and also void of crowds.

https://losangelestheatres.blogspot.com/2017/02/galaxy-6.html

Wow, Galaxy closed in 2003.

PS. I just watched about half hour of the first two episodes of "I am not okay with this". In Russian but they dubbed it really well. It has a "film look", though the camera work was pretty simple (and some shots I didn't like at all). It has a 7.6 rating on the IMDB (I'd give it a 6.3).
 
A) calling villeneuve a hack does not rebut his statement

B) great or good movies Villeneuve has made: Arrival, prisoners, BR 2049, Sicario

C) you and r&g still used to go to the theater, even if you preferred an empty screening. Maybe the quality of home theatrical equipment has improved so much that you no longer feel the need to. But clearly at one point you did. And not everyone has a 4K projector at home
 
I thought Sicario was garbage and BR2049 only looked good but was awful in every other regard.

Including Robin Wright, which is hard to do.

PS. My first taste of "high end home theater" was at a job. We had high end surround systems + top big screens of the day. I went to the movies because they were no other options for the first-run flix. I rented quite a few VHS tapes too. 'Twas the era before the internet.
 
From The Verge - "AMC Theatres is warning its investors that if it doesn’t find $750 million, it will run out of cash by the middle of January 2021."

From the New York Post - "Cinemark — the nation’s second-biggest movie-theater chain — is angling to move in on AMC Entertainment’s turf under cover of the COVID-19 chaos that has roiled the industry ..... Apollo, along with Canyon Capital Advisors and Davidson Kempner Capital Management, are urging AMC to file for Chapter 11 and have offered $1 billion in debtor-in-possession financing."
 
DLD said:
I thought Sicario was garbage and BR2049 only looked good but was awful in every other regard.

Including Robin Wright, which is hard to do.

PS. My first taste of "high end home theater" was at a job. We had high end surround systems + top big screens of the day. I went to the movies because they were no other options for the first-run flix. I rented quite a few VHS tapes too. 'Twas the era before the internet.
Click to expand...

One Arrival is worth a hundred other flicks to me. Robin Wright could have done better but I dont think it was his fault. BR 2049 was still better than Interstellar and Inception put together, and at least these guys are making high-concept sci-fi. Anyway, I'm sure the following list of names fully agree with the open letter - are they all hacks? Nolan, Tarantino, Scorsese, Spielberg
 
This argument about home theatres being just is good at home make me think of peloton evangelists arguing that it’s better at home.

In my view it’s missing the point.

Im sure the market will decide.

JB
 
This is why Nolan called hbomax the worst streaming service - it's way down at the bottom (below cbs all access, which I subscribe to)

Meanwhile, look at that disney+ growth! Amazon prime is not apples to apples because it's also a shopping service

Screenshot_20201212-124812_Chrome.jpg
 
ahalpert said:
A) calling villeneuve a hack does not rebut his statement

B) great or good movies Villeneuve has made: Arrival, prisoners, BR 2049, Sicario

C) you and r&g still used to go to the theater, even if you preferred an empty screening. Maybe the quality of home theatrical equipment has improved so much that you no longer feel the need to. But clearly at one point you did. And not everyone has a 4K projector at home
Click to expand...

That’s a large part of it. At one point in time (actually decades) you HAD to go to a theater for “the theatrical experience”. Not (as) true today. And while not everyone(far from it) will go to the lengths that some will to be able to have the “theater experience” in their own homes, it’s almost ridiculously easy to today.

I’m not delusional and think that my set-up actually rivals an actual commercial movie theater, but ‘it ain’t bad’. They keep intimating that people just can’t get the same “experience” at home. This isn’t 1987. Our home viewing experience isn’t limited to a 27” 4:3 SD CRT with a small single paper cone speaker built-in to the cabinet and a VHS VCR playing a pan-and-scanned version of whatever movie. So while today most people still aren’t going to get a true 1:1 audio/visual experience, it’s damn good and in a lot of cases the OVERALL experience can/will be better at home.

A few nights ago I streamed Ford vs. Ferrari on HBO MAX in my den and cranked up the volume a little more than normal since my GF was out. I liked the movie and would watch it again, but there was nothing about seeing it in a theater that would have increased my overall enjoyment of it vs. watching it at my house. There may be a literal handful of movies a year released that beg for the true “theater experience” of the largest screen and loudest sound system, but 99%, no. I loved Grosse Pointe Blank. Zac and Miri Make a Porno was great. And I can watch Caddy Shack anytime I stumble across it. All awesome movies, in my opinion, but they gain nothing being watched in a movie theater vs. my home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top