Comments on: Open Forum Friday: Is it Better to Watch Horror Movies at Home or in a Theatre?

By: Reed Farrington

Reed Farrington — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 07:26:13 +0000

I’ve always held the position that movies that are trying to create an experience like horror films should be seen when you’re alone or with one other person. I mean it’s kind of hard for me to suspend my disbelief and be scared when there are people sitting all around me.

I have a 7.1 Dolby Digital home theatre in my basement. I’ve stopped watching horror movies down there after midnight ever since I got spooked when I heard a noise and realized that the noise came from upstairs rather than my speakers. (I live alone.)

By: Slushie Man

Slushie Man — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 02:05:40 +0000

At home. Every single horror movie I have ever seen in theater, the experience was completely ruined by immature teen girls.

By: Noah

Noah — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:44:53 +0000

I watched this in the cinema over the weekend as part of a 24hr movie marathon festival so everyone who was there was a fairly hardcore movie-goer and it definitely made a great atmosphere with a large crowd all in silence waiting and allowing themselves to be drawn in, wanting to be scared. Although ultimately this film is bit lame and really slow so I probably would have lost interest by the end if Iâ€™d watched it at home but with this crowd it was a far more enjoyable experience.

By: Duke Togo

Duke Togo — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 19:16:14 +0000

Sure, a movie can be scary in the theater, but you can’t really get comfortable in a theater, you can’t draw the curtains, you can’t hear wind howling just outside your window or see lightning strike. Bottom line, you don’t live in a theater, watching at home brings the horror and fear to where you live everyday. I remember watching Body Weapon in my unheated apartment, the air was cold and damp, my teeth were chattering, that sure adds to the viewing experience when you have to hold your jaw shut while you are watching something spooky.

By: Maopheus

Maopheus — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 13:34:54 +0000

If given a choice, I’d always go see a movie in the cinema, in its original intended venue of display. Of course, you have to deal with the idiots who go to a movie and then decide to snore as loud as possible, the people who come late, and then leave to go out multiple times, the people who bring babies to rated-R movies, the people who keep staring at their cell phones, and the guy who keeps kicking the seat. Other than those distractions, I love watching movies in the theater. Now if they could only do something about the jacking-up of prices…

By: Ovenball

Ovenball — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 08:33:20 +0000

I am the general manager of a movie theatre. We are showing Paranormal Activity in a couple of auditoriums. I fully realize how awful it is when disruptive patron behavior ruins the film. I do my best to remind the offenders of our policies and to remove the most flagrant scofflaws, but there is just such an overwhelming number of oblivious, disruptive idiots…

Short of positioning staff permanently in the auditoriums as Jay suggests, I don’t think this situation is going to improve. I think for most locations this would be totally impractical as well. A good sized multiplex can’t afford to have 14 to 16 employees doing nothing but standing in an auditorium all day instead of selling tickets, cleaning, selling concessions, etc. I think this type of usher position would have been more practical in the 500+ seat auditoriums of the 1 to 3 screen cinemas of the past.

I think the bottom line here is just a simple acceptance of the utter failure of humanity. I mean even when shows don’t sell out, when they just get close, say maybe 25 seats left, you still get 10-15 people telling you there are no seats and that you’ve oversold the auditorium. You literally cannot set up 300 chairs and tell 275 people to find a seat without there being problems. Trying to get them to shut the hell up for two hours and to stay off their cellphones, good luck.

By: Tommy

Tommy — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:52:43 +0000

Laughter is a release of fear.

By: rus in chicago

rus in chicago — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 19:42:08 +0000

aaah, that’s life. I don’t want to live in a world were the crazy drunk girl doesn’t lift her top at a rock concert, nor we never experience the couple at the restaurant breaking up and the woman goes crazy. Why does everyone take stuff that happens in movies so personal?! Maybe I’m able to multi-task but rarely does another person’s reaction affect my appreciation of a film. Sometimes disturbances in a film ADDS to your appreciation, case in point, at my screening of The Aviator a very old lonely man walked in late and sat in the front row, alone. He literally became a child watching the biopic on Howard Hughes unfold on the screen. He even went so far as to talk to the screen as Hughes fell into madness. Was it distracting, yes, but what I experience was a very old man’s response to a film character that was very personal to him due to his age and growing up in another time. On top of that, this man seemed to be slipping in to some of the mental instability that Hughes had. But guess what, this crazy guy didn’t ruin the film for me AND I think of him (and his story) every time I watch Aviator.

By: Sean

Sean — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 17:36:59 +0000

I don’t think anyone is arguing that movies should stop being shown in theatres permanently, but certain types of movies seem to bring out the worst in people. Sometimes that’s okay, but usually it’s not.

I understand what you’re saying about different audiences reacting to things different ways, but I think if people are laughing at something that you personally find scary or absorbing, then that is going to seriously detract from your enjoyment.

By: rus in chicago

rus in chicago — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 17:06:44 +0000

Overall I think movies are meant to be seen in public with strangers. People here that are saying stuff about “people laughing at inappropriate moments” and such are clueless. You talk to any filmmaker and they will talk about the “happy accidents” of people reacting to things differently then they ever intended. Movies have so may layers of information and each audience member brings their own experiences to each film – judging them on reacting differently then you is an act of foolishness and narrow mindlessness. All of society is so quick to judge anything outside their own perspective, why not open yourself to other possibilities. Go see a movie you like twice and see the different reactions of two different audiences. Going to movies is one of the last communal things we do as a society why not embrace it?! Do you really want sports to be the ONLY communal thing? I think not.

By: rus in chicago

rus in chicago — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 16:54:52 +0000

I saw it last night and although I had a Ritalin kid next to me that couldn’t sit still nor leave his phone alone, the only thing that saved the movie for me was the screaming girls as I didn’t find it that scary. I didn’t see the appeal of this film and couldn’t figure out how this was getting as much word-of-mouth as Blair Witch. I chalk it up to the undefinable aspect of filmmaking were the public is just ready for a type of film at a certain time.

By: Tommy

Tommy — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 10:58:25 +0000

If I really want to be disturbed/creeped out by a film, I’d rather watch it at home. Some movies are good to watch as a group as long as they play nicely.