Christopher Nolan Urges Fans to Watch Films in Cinemas, Not Netflix

I'd go to the cinema if any of the local ones I've been to could calibrate their fucking audio to anything other than ear piercing loud. Even the quiet scenes where it's just people talking are ridiculously loud.

Don't get me wrong. I have $6-7k tied up in my home theater equipment, and I do watch my movies with volume up. But it's not making my ears hurt and they're not ringing when I'm done watching.
 
I urge people to watch films (or not watch films) wherever they want to since it is their own time and money to use.
 
The last time a theater represented a superior viewing experience to what I get in my own home was back in the mid 90's. The whole idea that I have to miss part of the movie just to be able to take a piss, it's a big deal if I check my phone for any reason, $1 of popcorn costs $10, etc. Any one of those individually would disqualify me from dealing with that shitty experience.
 
If they would allow us to stream them at home for a higher price the same time they are in theaters then I would do that. Otherwise I will wait until I can watch at home.
 
Sonicks said:
With a setup like that I'd imagine you consume Blu-Ray media and not streaming service media exclusively. I think Nolan's point is that streamed versions of movies are bastardized versions of the original. Any kind of compression, be it visual or auditory, is butchering the original conception of the film.
Click to expand...

If Nolan was worried about Quality of movies he wouldn't shoot on film. I too want theaters to die. I would rather watch all my movies at home. I don't go to movies much anymore.. maybe the big big blockbusters. If I had access to some movies I want to see but didn't have time to see them. I would probably rent them at home. Which results in money for them. But as of right now they aren't getting any money from me.
 
KillerFry said:
I too only go to the Alama Drafthouse since last year when they finally opened one in my city. You can find me there every week either watching something new or some of their specialty shows. Personally, I love the whole cinema experience, and I am grateful to have such an awesome movie theater near me.

Now all I need is a Microcenter...
Click to expand...

It's a great theater!

Next week I'm going to watch their special 2001: A Space Odyssey showing and I can't wait. I've seen that movie more times than I can count at home but I'm really jazzed about watching it at the theater.

I also saw their recent showing of Inglorious Basterds on 35mm film and I gotta say.....that was a huuuge throwback to a time of theater going I was used to but was in such awe at how 'raw' it looked. It just had this crazy nostalgia/grittiness to it that, in my personal opinion, is gone for the better.
 
I like going to the theaters for certain movies, mainly action movies. But I also only like IMAX non 3D because the sound between the IMAX vs the non IMAX in my area is quite noticeable. I'm big into sound I like it to be loud and the subwoofer to hit hard. I consider myself a home theater enthusiast so I'm more partial to things like Bluray over streaming. I'm slowly doing more streaming, I think with HEVC, dolby atmos and dolby vision I can see myself doing more streaming in the near future.
 
I can fall asleep in front of my 12 year old plasma to the latest remakes & unoriginal stories just fine from home the once or twice a year I watch em, thanks.
 
I just don't see this as an either/or thing. Release in theater, and watch in theater like he requests, and also have a high quality stream rental at or near release for the folks that want to watch at home. If cinemas don't survive then so be it. Please your customers and cut down piracy. Win win.
 
Sure. He has some movies that are better with the theater experience. There are a few others that are definitely great at a great theater. Others are fine on a decent home theater. Most people don't have a great home theater, though. He's not really talking to us... Even with a good home theater, watching Interstellar in theaters was awesome. Other huge movies are great in theaters.

When I do get to watch them at home, it's great. I still loved that theater experience, though. It was great.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I prefer to not have to deal with rude, obnoxious and sick people in the theater, in their cockroach infested seats.

Watching it on a home theater is well worth the wait for the bluray.
Click to expand...

This..what people don't realize is you don't have to have an insane setup to beat the typical cinema experience. Other people and the overall quality of everything are such a huge detractor that I would argue that a semi decent HT in a box setup and a decent TV that can easily all be had for under $800 assuming around a 55" screen is still better than the standard cinema. Now obviously if you have something like an Alamo Draft house then yes that is a better experience, but not everyone has access to that. I doubt I have more than about $2k invested into my setup (partially due to buying a pair of extremely nice speakers that had busted cones and repairing them myself) and I would argue all day long that my setup is vastly better than any but the best cinema's. At this point the only thing that could get me into a cinema is a combination of A movie I really want to watch, in an Alamo draft house style place where Cellphones are outright prohibited and people who break that rule will 100% be removed. Even then it is really sketch for me because some people just can't shut the fuck up and watch the damn movie.
 
There's only about three times where going to the movies is worthwhile over watching at home: 1) the big budget action or superhero movie where the big screen and the massive surround sound really adds to the experience; 2) date night for a rom-com or a slasher movie; and 3) for those with children, going to a popular children's movie to make a big family activity and so they can say they saw it in the theater.
 
There is really not a big enough difference between a cinema and my home environment to get me to go out to the movies. I just find most theaters either noisy or uncomfortable, I enjoy stretching my long legs out. And few things ruin the experience more then getting a kid behind me that gets all hyped up and gets chatty the whole time. I could only enjoy a cinema if there were about 20 people there with double the leg room.
 
I prefer movies on a large screen in a properly calibrated room but it really depends on the movie. Half of the romance stuff my wife watches is no better on a TV than in my theater. Action movies with lots of surround and LFE are what really make a difference.
 
All the vibes I'm getting from this thread is how much bigger and more expensive MY home theater is...

If you like going to the theater go. If you like staying home, stay your ass at home. I for one love doing both - I enjoyed the hell out of watching Logan recently and the crowd/atmosphere was amazing.
 
ChadD said:
Well theaters also compress movies... shocker right. As much as Nolan may love film there are no theaters anywhere anymore with actual film projectors. Sure they may be using digital projectors worth hundreds of thousands but they are still digital and they are still not feeding them pure uncompressed input. :)

Streaming today for the most part may be using inferior or heavier compression. That however will change. Blu ray is a set format that can't change... that is its weakness. Disc formats are always the best choice when the format is new... over time not so much. Streaming can adapt to every new bit of tech and expand to take up every bit of pipe thrown at it. That services like Netflix are as good as they are today is an idea we laughed at (we all did) 10 years ago.

10 years from now... at this point I am inclined to bet on the technology instead of against it. Studios themselves are streaming movies to theaters for their digital projectors... the only difference is the size of the files. So I do believe over the next number of years streaming will be capable of that same theater level quality.
Click to expand...

In Aus/Sydney there's the Ritz theatre, that I watched Hateful Eight in 70mm Ultra Panavision. I don't think that was digital? Looked fantastic.

I still like going to the cinemas myself. But agreed with many points around annoying kids, noisy environments, dirty seats, expensive food, etc. Nowadays if I really want to see a movie, I typically spend above and beyond what I'd consider acceptable by going to the 'Lux' or 'Gold Class' screenings, which generally have limits of about 40 seats, large recliners with sets of 2 throughout the cinema. More personalised and almost gauranteed to have very minimal children (who wants to spend 40 AUD odd dollars on a kid who doesn't care about the environment/setting?)... Sadly this costs roughly twice a normal seating. But you get 'complimentary' soft drink and popcorn at least... (Which is 10 bucks these days on its own.. So really, 30 bucks for the ticket? XD)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
the introduction of Dolby Cinema screens in select theaters (including 1 here in NYC) has made me go to the theater more...the picture quality is the best I've ever seen and combined with the Dolby Atmos sound, reclining seats, stadium seating etc it's hands down the best movie-going experience
 
This from the dude that cranks out 3 hour movies. Hey Nolan, yeah the Dark Knight was good, but did it need to be 3 hours? Inception? Anything you've ever made? Not every movie is the f*cking Godfather, longer is not always better. But that is the new trend, directors so full of themselves they pat themselves on the back with one hand and jerk off on us (or piss on us, pick one) with the other.... for making long ass "masterpiece cinema". Whatever.

Digital streaming is the new normal, dude, get over it. 65" high definition TV's are the new normal. Watching movies on your tablet/phone/laptop is the new normal. People are busy, dude, and we don't have time to sit in a theater for 3 hours (or longer with trailers and commercials and such) to watch your "masterpieces". We have work to do, kids to feed, booze to drink to forget about our work and kids. Not to mention it costs $50 to go to a movie nowadays (tickets/popcorn/drink).

Rant aside.... close your eyes and think for a sec... imagine it's 1990 and you could buy a 65" HD flat screen at Walmart for $500, and watch pretty much any movie you wanted, on demand, for $15 a month. Do you think the movie theater chains would have survived the 90's? Nope.

The only positive trend I see in theaters now is they are selling alcohol. About f*cking time, they've been doing it in Europe forever. But be prepared to spend $10 on that tiny rum and coke though.

Improved surround sound, Atmos, etc? Meh. They play the movies at 400 decibels anyway, and you can't hear yourself think. And if the speakers are broken and sound like shit, do you get a refund? Hell no.

I watched Logan at a Studio Movie Grill recently, because a friend really wanted to see it. The big screen was fine, but their sound system was not up to the task. It sounded bad. And this was in their "high end big money recently renovated Dolby" theater.

D4rkn3ss said:
no way jose, cant pause the movie, drink, smoke, kitchen is not around, etc and fuck it.
Click to expand...

Ding! Ding! Ding! Winner! This guy gets it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
I typically watch in the Theatre first and then if I really like it, I will get it on blue ray. I go early in the morning typically on a Monday or Tuesday when the Theatre is completely empty and I get to watch the movie all by myself in most cases.
 
Sonicks said:
With a setup like that I'd imagine you consume Blu-Ray media and not streaming service media exclusively. I think Nolan's point is that streamed versions of movies are bastardized versions of the original. Any kind of compression, be it visual or auditory, is butchering the original conception of the film.
Click to expand...

Alright, you heard it here first folks, every movie ever released is a bastardized butchering of the original conception of the film.

Christ, even the non-talky era films used a metric shit ton of analog compression. compression is part and parcel of every picture ever taken and every sound ever recorded.

As far as streaming vs BR, that's pretty much over, BR is all but dead, streaming won.
 
Sonicks said:
I agree, there is nothing quite like a good cinema experience. I go to the Alamo Drafthouse exclusively and have not had a single bad experience with talking, phones, bad audio, or even kids (because they brilliantly do not allow anyone under 18 at all). Not to mention they serve booze and good stuff too.

It's all about finding the right theater.
Click to expand...

what do you mean they don't allow anyone under the age of 18? Which location do you go to? I haven't seen that at the 4 cities I have been to. All of them play kid movies and have allowed kids. Unless you just mean in an R rated movie
 
daglesj said:
Nolan is wayyy overrated.
Click to expand...

These are the movies he's done:

Dunkirk (completed)
2015Quay (Documentary short)
2014Interstellar
2012The Dark Knight Rises
2010Inception
2008The Dark Knight
2006The Prestige
2005Batman Begins
2002Insomnia
2000Memento
1998Following
1997Doodlebug (Short) (as Chris Nolan)
1996Larceny (Short)
1989Tarantella (TV Short)
Click to expand...

Which ones are overrated? He's not God-like, but those movies were damn good movies. Aside from the shorts, which I haven't watched, there isn't a bad movie he's credited to. Some may not be great movies, but they are still very good movies.

Unless he's rated as God-Like, which he's not where I'm standing, he's a damn good writer and director so far.
 
Ur_Mom said:
These are the movies he's done:



Which ones are overrated? He's not God-like, but those movies were damn good movies. Aside from the shorts, which I haven't watched, there isn't a bad movie he's credited to. Some may not be great movies, but they are still very good movies.

Unless he's rated as God-Like, which he's not where I'm standing, he's a damn good writer and director so far.
Click to expand...

Seen 7 of those and I wouldnt put any of them in my top 50. His cinematography is pretty good (but another guy does that) but the scripts he uses are not great.

It's just my opinion but I think he is rather over hyped.
 
n3ckcutta said:
All the vibes I'm getting from this thread is how much bigger and more expensive MY home theater is...

If you like going to the theater go. If you like staying home, stay your ass at home. I for one love doing both - I enjoyed the hell out of watching Logan recently and the crowd/atmosphere was amazing.
Click to expand...

I think it is really more about getting people to understand that you don't need to spend a ton of money to have a nice HT setup these days. The days of a decent setup costing thousands of dollars and hours of setup are long past. You just gotta take a little time to do some research and shop for deals.
 
The the theater needs to provide the complete experience. to me here are the keys an attentive staff, facility cleanliness & neatness, lifelike picture, earth shattering sound, a well thought out seating and lighting, with fresh food and beverages.
 
daglesj said:
Seen 7 of those and I wouldnt put any of them in my top 50. His cinematography is pretty good (but another guy does that) but the scripts he uses are not great.

It's just my opinion but I think he is rather over hyped.
Click to expand...

Ok. We all have different tastes, but I thought his movies were very good. A couple of those are in my top 50. Inception and Interstellar. The others were great, but in comparison to other movies, they are probably farther down on the list. Doesn't make them bad movies, though.
 
A good theater experience is hard to pass up, even compared to a home theater (and I'm currently in the process of building one with a good sound system and new 4k tv).

The problem for many people these days is simply the cost - ease of doing it vs Netflix and streaming in general.

If movie studios didn't charge the theaters so much from their ticket prices and the whole system wasn't overly complicated (seriously the hoops that small non-large corporations have to jump through is inane) then theaters could actually charge REASONABLE prices on their drinks/popcorn and things.

It's almost exactly why many people are cutting the cable cord and going to netflix and similar services, more reasonable prices + ease of use.
 
KillerFry said:
I too only go to the Alama Drafthouse since last year when they finally opened one in my city. You can find me there every week either watching something new or some of their specialty shows. Personally, I love the whole cinema experience, and I am grateful to have such an awesome movie theater near me.

Now all I need is a Microcenter...
Click to expand...

Same I saw Get Out tonight going to 7 Samurai in a couple days except....I HAVE A MICROCENTER! *BOOM! JUNK HITS THE FLOOR!* (taxes totally kill it, not worth shopping there unless you're feeding a momentary fix)
 
Last edited:
Burticus said:
Not to mention it costs $50 to go to a movie nowadays (tickets/popcorn/drink).
Click to expand...

No idea why movies are so expensive where you are. My theater has $5 tickets one day of the night, otherwise $8 or $10.50 depending on the time. Do you really need to shove food in your face 24/7 that you have to buy junk food when you watch a movie? I don't do it at home, and it isn't required at a theater either. You all keep going on an on about distractions, yet some of you want to yab on your phone, shove gobs of food down your throat, smoke and get up and pause the movie? Talk about distracting! Unless you really have to piss (it happens) I just quietly sit through a movie. At home or at the theater.

Last time I saw a movie at the theater (Rogue One) it set me back $5. I don't mind going every once in a while. With the rise of Netflix and other streaming services, I can see it making a come back since you don't own the movies on Netflix anyways. I'd like for something like Steam (with Steam like sales) to come out for movies. Not sure if I want that service to be Steam itself... I like it being game focused.
 
Hey Nolan, pay the money for every theater to hand out musicians ear plugs so people can see movies on a regular basis without the risk of getting hearing loss and Tinnitus and we'll talk.

Also: Pay theaters to have a bouncer at every showing to toss out the unruly.
 
Flogger23m said:
No idea why movies are so expensive where you are. My theater has $5 tickets one day of the night, otherwise $8 or $10.50 depending on the time. Do you really need to shove food in your face 24/7 that you have to buy junk food when you watch a movie? I don't do it at home, and it isn't required at a theater either. You all keep going on an on about distractions, yet some of you want to yab on your phone, shove gobs of food down your throat, smoke and get up and pause the movie? Talk about distracting! Unless you really have to piss (it happens) I just quietly sit through a movie. At home or at the theater.

Last time I saw a movie at the theater (Rogue One) it set me back $5. I don't mind going every once in a while. With the rise of Netflix and other streaming services, I can see it making a come back since you don't own the movies on Netflix anyways. I'd like for something like Steam (with Steam like sales) to come out for movies. Not sure if I want that service to be Steam itself... I like it being game focused.
Click to expand...

I saw Rogue One for free, thank you T-Mobile! That was a fairly enjoyable experience, and it was an early daytime showing. (if you're not on T-Mo, they give away Fandango tickets sometimes during their Tuesday promos)

Some people REQUIRE popcorn and a soda for a movie. I don't. But people I take do. I think it's called DATE NIGHT, Butthead. :)

A Steam like service for movies could be interesting but I don't think the industry will ever let it happen. They don't want us to own anything, just rent/lease.

If it were up to me I'd never set foot in a theater again (unless free or under $5). And if I weren't married, my living room would have a projector and a 120" screen. And probably a hot redhead hostess with big bewbs. :) :)
 
horrorshow said:
Amen.

Interstellar, Inception, and The Prestige were all TOP NOTCH.
Click to expand...

Are you forgetting something.....?

49944.jpg
 
Burticus said:
I saw Rogue One for free, thank you T-Mobile! That was a fairly enjoyable experience, and it was an early daytime showing. (if you're not on T-Mo, they give away Fandango tickets sometimes during their Tuesday promos)

Some people REQUIRE popcorn and a soda for a movie. I don't. But people I take do. I think it's called DATE NIGHT, Butthead. :)

A Steam like service for movies could be interesting but I don't think the industry will ever let it happen. They don't want us to own anything, just rent/lease.

If it were up to me I'd never set foot in a theater again (unless free or under $5). And if I weren't married, my living room would have a projector and a 120" screen. And probably a hot redhead hostess with big bewbs. :) :)
Click to expand...

I still don't think we 'own' steam games either? We never OWN any of that stuff. We own the right to view it. If we owned it, we'd be able to distribute it. Which we cannot.

Until the day we get on-release streaming around the world, at 4k resolutions and DTS/ATMOS, and then therefore the bandwidth to accommodate it (HA, 50 years for Australia), I'll still likely go to the cinemas and then subsequently buy on blu ray if I'm really into it.
 
ReaperX22 said:
I still don't think we 'own' steam games either? We never OWN any of that stuff. We own the right to view it. If we owned it, we'd be able to distribute it. Which we cannot.

Until the day we get on-release streaming around the world, at 4k resolutions and DTS/ATMOS, and then therefore the bandwidth to accommodate it (HA, 50 years for Australia), I'll still likely go to the cinemas and then subsequently buy on blu ray if I'm really into it.
Click to expand...

50 years? That is being pretty optimistic isn't it? ;)
 
I'm not sure how you can ignore the spatial aspect of being in a large open space with a 75 to 100+ foot screen and sound that can naturally diffuse.

I have a 82" television. It's not the biggest, but it's certainly larger then what most people have. It's not even close to the same peripheral vision experience of going to a movie theater. a 100" screen isn't going to do that either.

And neither are speakers that are all 10 feet away from you. The sound doesn't have room to diffuse.

Saying that watching a movie is 10x20 room on a 100" screen can ever be superior, is as confusing to me as people claiming headphones provide a more realistic sound that actual speakers sitting out in front of you.

Movie theaters have a lot to be desired, but effect is not one of them.
 
ReaperX22 said:
True, we'll probably all be eaten by dropbears by then anyway...
Click to expand...

Fucking drop bears, I don't know why your government doesn't start raising more money to find a way to solve that problem. I am assure you that the good old USA has probably put aside billions if not more to fund research into bigfoot and chupacabras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top