Austin's Alamo Drafthouse Theater Gives Texters the Boot 370
Hugh Pickens writes "Ever been annoyed during that nail-biting darkened hallway scene by someone turning on their phone to send a text? Well, don't mess with Texas or you may end up on the screen in a public service announcement. Alamo Drafthouse, a local chain of dine-and-screen movie theaters in Austin, Texas, has long waged a war against impolite moviegoers booting out customers who talk or text during performances. Phoebe Connelly writes that according to Tim League, the Drafthouse's founder, a woman was recently warned twice about texting during a screening, and then, in accordance with company policy, was escorted out without a refund. 'I don't think people realize that it is distracting,' says League. 'It seems like nothing, but if you spend as much time as I do at the movies, you realize the entire theater sees it and it pulls you out of the movie experience. It's every bit as intrusive as talking.' The irate customer called up the Alamo Drafthouse and left a profanity-laced (and perhaps slightly inebriated) message decrying the theater's policies, but the theater got the last laugh as they took the audio of the woman's voicemail, transcribed it, and turned it into an in-house preview [tl: Note, YouTube video contains some profanity] that warns theatergoers against cell phone use during movies. 'Part of what we're trying to do is have a comedic message about what to us is a very serious issue,' says League, declining to give any more details about the woman at the center of the recent PSA."
Sucks To Be Her, I Guess. (Score:5, Informative)
I knew this policy quite well and I've only ever visited the chain ONCE. Plus I don't even live in the area. This woman has no excuse.
Re:Sucks To Be Her, I Guess. (Score:4, Interesting)
Before the trailers there are multiple announcements (some quite amusing) that spell out very clearly that texting, talking, or using your bright-as-twenty-suns cellphone in any capacity are NOT tolerated.
In her message she says she was using her phone as a flashlight to find her seat (one of the most annoying things you can do in a theater), so chances are she came in mid-movie and didn't see the trailers or the warnings.
Re:Sucks To Be Her, I Guess. (Score:5, Insightful)
Meaning she wasn't even considerate enough to come in on time for the movie, so to hell with her. And even that would have only gotten one warning, ergo she had to have kept using the phone after being warned once. Additionally, there are signs posted that warn of this policy as well.
Another damn good reason for this policy is safety. As there are staff constantly walking around the theater serving food and drinks (in glass containers, no less) in the darkness, the last thing I would want is for some poor staff member to have their low-light vision impaired and end up tripping with a full tray of glass + food/drink.
Re:Sucks To Be Her, I Guess. (Score:5, Informative)
When movie theaters are considerate enough to not steal my time with their advertising drivel at the start of the movie I paid for then I will be considerate enough to turn up on time.
I visit the Drafthouse often. They never run advertisements before their movies, with the exception of previews for upcoming films. To fill the time between movies, they run old cartoons, or kung-fu fight scenes, or whatever wacky reel the projectionist finds entertaining. Never advertisements. For that reason alone, I've stopped patronizing other theaters.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, I love it when non-Austnites try to sound all authoritative about Austin things. Most of us get to Drafthouse FOR the pre-screening stuff. Plus, they don't let customers in after the screening begins anyway, so the notion this women showed up late is not a valid argument.
Re: (Score:2)
so chances are she came in mid-movie
Yet another way to piss people off.
Re: (Score:3)
>In her message she says she was using her phone as a flashlight to find her seat
Assuming this is true and not a lie to cover up the fact she was texting:
So she was shining it directly in the eyes of other patrons? Throw her out.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:3)
Even worse. She says texting, then mentions the flashlight bit, then goes back to texting.
The flashlight bit is clearly a lie.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sucks To Be Her, I Guess. (Score:4, Informative)
Before the trailers there are multiple announcements (some quite amusing) that spell out very clearly that texting, talking, or using your bright-as-twenty-suns cellphone in any capacity are NOT tolerated.
In her message she says she was using her phone as a flashlight to find her seat (one of the most annoying things you can do in a theater), so chances are she came in mid-movie and didn't see the trailers or the warnings.
But then at 0:52 she essentially admits she was texting.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem is people of a younger generation have this entitlement attitude that because they can they should be able to do it. The theater rules are stated before each and every movie. I find it hard to believe she never heard of any theater having the policy against talkers and texters. It is also sad that people cant disconnect from their reality for a mere 2 hours to watch a movie. I go into a theater I turn my phone to silence and ignore it. I dont maybe I'm getting too old but I find it easy to not s
Re: (Score:2)
Before the trailers there are multiple announcements (some quite amusing) that spell out very clearly that texting, talking, or using your bright-as-twenty-suns cellphone in any capacity are NOT tolerated.
In her message she says she was using her phone as a flashlight to find her seat (one of the most annoying things you can do in a theater), so chances are she came in mid-movie and didn't see the trailers or the warnings.
She also said, "I didn't know I wasn't supposed to be texting" (it's been a few days since I've heard it so the quote may not be accurate). Also, Alamo gave her multiple warnings. How many times did she need to find her seat?
Re:Sucks To Be Her, I Guess. (Score:5, Interesting)
In her message she says she was using her phone as a flashlight to find her seat (one of the most annoying things you can do in a theater)
... and shortly thereafter says that she didn't know she wasn't meant to be texting. And then proudly declares that she's texted in every other cinema in the area. So I'm going to go right ahead and sound the bullshit horn on this one...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Score! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What good guys? Isn't posting her rant on Youtube a copyright infringement?
Is posting a voicemail from a telemarketer on YouTube copyright infringement? Is playing a voicemail from a bad business on some news program's help-the-consumer-with-their-problems segment copyright infringement? No. It's not an artistic work, and when you record something directly to my machine you essentially hand over whatever rights may exist to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, it's the internet. Extra points for copyright infringement.
That said, this must surely be analogous to having someone send you random shit in the mail that you never ordered. Now you own it--throw the bill in the trash.
Why is this on Slashdot? And a week late? (Score:2, Offtopic)
Subject says everything. It "went viral" last week, so does Slashdot have a good antivirus, or why does it like being late? Not to mention the rambling summary is written by Hugh Pickens, who seems to fancy himself to be a journalist, but whose website contain a lot of poorly written articles...
Re:Why is this on Slashdot? And a week late? (Score:4, Funny)
1 week sounds about right:
Original ->
(2 hours later) reddit
(3 days) Digg RSS
(2 days) Slashdot submission queue
(12 hours) Typo insertion script
(6 horsu) Front page
(10 seconds) Posts pointing out why the article is wrong
Re:Why is this on Slashdot? And a week late? (Score:4, Funny)
(1 horsu) Post pointing out the typo "horsu"
Bravo! (Score:3)
Bravo. Warned twice already? I wish that anti-social behavior were outed like this more often.
So annoying! (Score:2)
Alamo's CEO's blog post (Score:5, Informative)
Commercial Theaters are a waste of time and money (Score:2)
It is both sides of this story that keep me from going to theaters. At home I suffer none of this, and the pause button rox!!
Re: (Score:2)
Theaters removing people who insist on turning lights on during the movie keep you from going to theaters? Thank you for staying away.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree, both sides are asshats. The customer for disturbing the movie, and the management for not putting their money where their mouth is and giving her a refund along with a written notice that she's barred from attending again.
If, as someone else said, the theater doesn't WANT this particular business, they should stop hiding behind 'policy' and just reverse the transaction - she's no longer allowed to watch the movie, so they no longer keep her money. It's not the 'escorting out' which is obnoxious, it
Re: (Score:2)
Management did put their money where their mouth is. The policy is *explicitly* "no refunds", stated several times before the movie and in the lobby.
Although, actually, they didn't completely follow the policy. It's stated as one warning.
Re: (Score:3)
Who cares if she got a refund? She cost them money by making the experience worse for other patrons. It's the same thing if some jackass has to be thrown out of a ballgame. They don't give you refunds when they have to throw you out. Just show some common courtesy and follow the rules.
Re: (Score:3)
She cost them money by making the experience worse for other patrons
That's called a cost of doing business. If they want to end the disruption sooner than the end of the movie, they can stump up to refund what she paid them to be allowed to be there. Legally, maybe the 'rules' get incorporated into the contract with the patron, but it's still pathetic and still wrong. The fundamental agreement is that the customer pays their money, and watches the movie - any attempt to include a clause which allows one party to declare unreasonable conduct on the part of the other and then
Re: (Score:2)
The fundamental agreement is that the customer pays their money, and watches the movie - any attempt to include a clause which allows one party to declare unreasonable conduct on the part of the other and then, not just cancel the contract, but get themselves out of performing their obligations under it whilst requiring the other party still to perform theirs is just plain wrong.
If she wanted to turn her little ass around when she was notified that she couldn't use her phone and get a refund then, she could have had one. Just like how if you get the software home, and want a refund... er, wait.
Re: (Score:2)
That's called a cost of doing business.
That phrase is reserved for costs you just can't avoid. A single person acting like a jackass, breaking the rules and ruining the experience for everybody else, has no right ethically or legally for a refund. She got what she deserved, a booting with no refund.
Imagine if you paid on your way out of the theater, rather than on the way in - and on management escorting someone out they expected them to stop at the cash-desk and pay for the movie they were being escorted out of. It would be both insane and unenforceable. This is exactly the same principle, it's just that people have paid up-front.
As a matter of practicality, it would be difficult to get the money from such a patron and not worth their time. I wouldn't say it would be unenforceable, though, if they really wanted to force the issue.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The purchase of the movie ticket comes with certain obligations on the purchaser. In this cinema chain, one of those is no talking or texting.
An identical principal applies when I buy a train ticket. On Sydney's trains, you are not allowed to smoke or drink and by purchasing a ticket you agree to those obligations. Get caught and you get thrown off without a refund. In fact, you usually get fined as well.
There is no reason you should get a refund for not following the obligations attached to the ticket.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
ok, the thrust of my argument is that by attaching such conditions (and especially by enforcing them) they are behaving like asshats. All you seem to have is 'everyone else does it' and 'it's ok to do it because that's what they're doing'.
There is no reason why a break clause allowing one party to unilaterally cancel a contract on grounds of unreasonable behaviour by the other should allow the cancelling party out of their obligations whilst requiring the other party to fulfill theirs.
Let's have another tho
Re: (Score:2)
Why should she get a refund?
It's not hiding behind a policy, it is protecting the other customers.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If refunds were given to people who disturb others, then people would start being obnoxious to get their money back when they don't like the movie. Then you'd really have to ban them, but that's much more work for keeping track and it doesn't give people a chance to learn the lesson.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe I proposed that she ought to be given a ban.
Every now and again, someone might act up to get their money back when they're in a crappy movie, but that's going to be a negligible number if doing that also causes them to be barred from the theater. As for the difficulty in enforcing such bans - that's a problem that every other type of business owner has to deal with.
I don't believe that private business owners have any role in 'teaching someone a lesson'.
Re: (Score:3)
Fair enough, but once she's paid for a ticket and been let in, they have accepted her as a customer.
Imagine if the ticket let you be in the theater for the specified duration of the film. Period.
If they want to now cancel that because they no longer want her as a customer, they can cancel having taken her money.
A shopkeeper can refuse service to whomsoever he will; but if, after having served you, he came running down the street and tried to cancel your transaction because he'd changed his mind about servin
Re: (Score:3)
They have accepted her as long as she doesn't bother others, which is something that any movie goer knows they agree to, whether it's written or not.
She consumed part of the product she bought. It's no pro-rated.
Re: (Score:3)
The customer for disturbing the movie, and the management for not putting their money where their mouth is and giving her a refund along with a written notice that she's barred from attending again.
Well, first up, "Money where their mouth is"? Their mouth says "act like a fuckwit, we'll throw you out with no refund." Their money says the same. So they are indeed putting their money where their mouth is.
Second, I can see a glaring flaw or three in this plan.
-- "Hey, I'm bored of this movie. Let's walk out and skip the last twenty minutes."
-- "Wait, I've got a better idea. Let's act obnoxiously and get thrown out, then we get a refund!"
Or:
-- "Dude, I'm bored, there's nothing to do, and we haven't got mu
Re: (Score:3)
The problem with your idea is that it requires the theatre to maintain a database of barred patrons, creating (1) overhead for them and (2) inconvenience for all the good patrons who now have to show ID just to get in to a movie. And even if you're in a state where ID has to be shown for (some) movies anyway, IDs can be forged.
Or they could just boot asshats (who carry on despite being warned of the consequences) out of the theater at the time, with no refund. This focuses the societal cost of poor decision
Pretty great chain (Score:2)
I've only been to the Alamo Drafthouse once, but I think it was the best experience I've ever had at a normal (i.e. 35mm) movie theater. Comfortable seats, good projection/sound, friendly staff, and the food was delicious and was served unobtrusively. The prices were quite reasonable as well.
Completely spoiled by the Drafthouse (Score:3)
I hate even going to conventional theaters anymore since I moved to Austin. Reasonably priced actual meals served with the movie. What a ground breaking concept! No commercials before the movie, just little loops they specifically for the movie your watching that somehow related to it. All kinds of special events, like a secret premiere of the new Star Trek movie hidden as a showing of Wrath of Khan, or John Carpenter and Shepard Fairey showing up for a screening of They Live, it's just a cool place. I'm so glad they're building one down the street from me on Slaughter, so I don't have to shelp all the way to Lamar, except for the special events. When I'm in Dallas, I'll usually go to The Movie Tavern which functions as a fair replacement.
All you automatic Texas haters can go fuck off, because Austin is a nice little liberal enclave that somehow managed to create itself down here.
Re: (Score:3)
We can be very conservative at times, too.
You can be as gay as you want.
You can smoke weed.
You can hold all kinds of surprising and non-conformist opinions.
But you goddamn well better be polite about it.
Bad for someone else, but OK for me to do it! (Score:2, Insightful)
I think there will be no one here who will "take the other side" until, that is, it is their side.
We have discussed mobile phone behaviors on occasion here and elsewhere. Invariably we say things like "no excuse" or "under no circumstances" and of course "rude" and "thoughtless." Really?
When driving, for example, it is next to impossible to resist answering the phone when it rings. And you know that last-second thought you just had? You've got to call someone right now because it might leave your head i
Re:Bad for someone else, but OK for me to do it! (Score:5, Funny)
When driving, for example, it is next to impossible to resist answering the phone when it rings.
Very not-true, unless you were raised by B.F. Skinner in a Nokia lab.
Re:Bad for someone else, but OK for me to do it! (Score:5, Funny)
>Very not-true, unless you were raised by B.F. Skinner in a Nokia lab.
Yeah, and what about it? Next you're going to insult my dogs because they drool every time a bell rings?
Re:Bad for someone else, but OK for me to do it! (Score:4, Insightful)
Yup - people look strangely at me when I have a meeting with somebody in my office at work, the phone rings, I glance at it, and then I don't answer it and proceed with the meeting. I find this bizarre - this person has taken the time to set up a meeting with me, and I made time on my calendar to meet because whatever we're talking about was important enough to discuss (and my calendar tends to book up quite a bit). Why would I then set aside that carefully prioritized calendar just because some random person wants something from me? When I have a free moment I'll find out what it was about, prioritize it accordingly, and deal with it. If they're having a heart attack they should be dialing 911, since there isn't much I can do for them personally.
Answering the phone when it rings amounts to prioritizing your work (or recreation) purely on the basis of the urgent, and not on the basis of the important. Learning the difference changed my life.
Re: (Score:3)
Yup - people look strangely at me when I have a meeting with somebody in my office at work, the phone rings, I glance at it, and then I don't answer it and proceed with the meeting.
Indeed. It was one of the best lessons I learned from a mentor as an undergrad. She was an eminent professor and a scholar with an international reputation, but she wouldn't answer the phone when I had a scheduled meeting with her. Perhaps after two or three times, I think I said something like "do you need to get that," at which point she explained the same philosophy that you did. Unless you are aware that you are expecting an urgent and very important phone call (in which case, you inform the person
Re:Bad for someone else, but OK for me to do it! (Score:5, Funny)
I have a proven, reliable algorithm for not answering the phone when it rings, either while driving, or in a movie theater, or even while coding. Here it is, in all its unpatented glory:
Works every time!
Re: (Score:3)
An unanswered phone is a happy phone!
ps: "Bad for someone else, but OK for me to do it!" sounds an awful lot like Al Gore and learjet liberals carping on about CO2 while they have chauffeured SUVs and private jets spewing several villages worth of CO2 as they travel from junket to junket..
Re: (Score:3)
> ...spewing several villages worth of CO2...
It's ok. They buy "carbon offsets".
Re: (Score:3)
Mr. Poster:
Your algorithm is in violation of my client SCO corporation's existing patent #38466643, computer device to prevent phone answering. Don't bother paying us for this violation; We have already files a lawsuit against you and requested that your phone company provide us with the names of all subscribers who have ever not answered their phones.
Re: (Score:2)
When driving it is actually quite easy to not answer your phone when it rings: Turn off the ringer. Or if you forget, simply don't answer it.
If you lack the self-control necessary to resist the siren song of the ringer, then you shouldn't be driving - you should be somewhere safe where other people, people with normal levels of impulse control and cognitive faculty, can take care of you and prevent you from being a complete fucking idiot to the detriment of yourself and others.
Re: (Score:3)
Uh, no, we just don't answer the damn phone. That isn't next to impossible. It isn't walking on water. It isn't even going on a diet or quitting smoking. It's easy.
Really, I understand that 99.99% of driving is boring as hell. The other .01% includes moments when you see something in front of you that you didn't see a second ago. In a lifetime of driving, eventually one of those moments may coincide with one of the seconds when you were paying attention to yo
Re: (Score:3)
When driving, for example, it is next to impossible to resist answering the phone when it rings. And you know that last-second thought you just had? You've got to call someone right now because it might leave your head in the time it takes to at least get to a stop light or to pull over.
Your assumption that we all feel a phone call must be answered or responded to as soon as humanly possible is completely misplaced. When I get a phone call while driving, I ignore it. I don't feel any pavlovian desire to dig through my pocket and answer it, and I CERTAINLY don't consider pulling over or phoning back at a stoplight. Aside from the fact that where I live it would be illegal for me to answer it while driving, I am confident that there is no phone call so pressing that it can't wait until I arr
I Will Throw You Out (Score:2, Troll)
When people have a light on in the theater I'm in, I ask them politely (and quietly) to turn it off. If they persist, I ask them again, a little less politely, and warn them that the next time I won't be polite at all. If I need to intervene a third time, I tell them I'll throw them out if they don't stop. Then I get the usher, unless it's obvious the first time or two that I'll have to get the usher.
Sometimes they get violent with me when I'm asking them - pushing me, getting in my face with "what you gonn
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Sometimes they get violent with me when I'm asking them - pushing me, getting in my face with "what you gonna do about it?", things like that. I am all too willing to stay in their face when that happens - pushing back, telling them I'm going to retaliate, even kill them if they get tough with me. [...] And if someone wants their day ruined by testing whether I'm nuts, they're going to get vastly more trouble than an annoying light in a dark movie theater.
That made me laugh out loud. The reason these people are behaving this way is precisely because they have the same attitude as you do. They react so bizarrely because they think "hey, don't fuck with me". They react to you because they perceive you to be fucking with them, not because they don't care about other people, and you are doing the same thing. It doesn't matter how polite your words are, if you have in the back of your mind that this person you are interacting with is possibly one of "those aggres
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
No, the difference between them and me is that I'm doing what I'm doing to stop someone else from harming me. They're just selfishly indulging themself; they don't even think about the harm. I can assure you that when I'm confronting these selfish jerks, I'm thinking about the harm I am, and could be, causing them.
It does matter how polite I am - not just the words, but the tone - when I ask the first time. You might not be able to appreciate that actually being polite, which I said I was, does not equal on
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you're nuts. You're going to KILL someone for using their phone in a movie theater? Get help, seriously, you're out of your mind.
Re: (Score:2)
Magnited States of America... (Score:2, Funny)
... bwahahah
She even made it to CNN (Score:4, Interesting)
Say what you will about Anderson Cooper, but he rips this drunk chick a new one in this video:
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/bestoftv/2011/06/07/exp.ac.ridiculist.talk.text.movie.cnn.html [cnn.com]
I don't live in Austin, but if I visit, I'll make a point to go to this theater.
Re: (Score:2)
Did Anderson Cooper say something about "inane chatter?"
Seems a classic case of it taking an inane chattered to know one.
Re:horseshit (Score:5, Insightful)
No you don't. A cinema isn't exactly a proper place to work.
Re:horseshit (Score:5, Interesting)
For example, a friend of mine once worked as an emergency responder for the Red Cross. Part of that was to carry the emergency contact phone wherever she went while she was on call. If she was going to be somewhere that respectful quiet was expected, like a church, or the theatre, or a classroom, she made damned certain that the thing was set to vibrate. She also made sure to arrive at the venue early, so that she could get an aisle seat and, if she felt the phone vibrate, she could slip out to the lobby without shoving her ass in a row-full of faces. As far as anyone who wasn't in her group was concerned, she would just be politely nipping out to the bathroom. No ringtones, no sudden glare, no conversations, not difficult.
Re:horseshit (Score:4, Funny)
A friend of mine used to be an Assistant Manager for a company. Let's call it "Madio Shack". His District Manager insisted that he listen in on a teleconference involving the DM and server local managers - maybe the DM was trying to groom him to be a Manager? (This, by the way, was something he clearly did not want.)
The major problem about this teleconference was that it was taking place at around 21:00 on a Friday night. During a Dragonforce concert. I popped outside every five minutes or so and checked up on him, and he basically had this look on his face of "They're still going!". After about 20 minutes of this shit, I tapped him on the shoulder and he muted the phone.
"How's your battery doing?" I said.
"Fine," he replied.
"No it's not, it's dead."
"No, I have plent-"
That's where he got a smile on his face and disconnected the battery from the back of his phone. "Oops".
Friends help friends have a social life.
Re: (Score:2)
No you don't. A cinema isn't exactly a proper place to work.
yes, there are times when it is necessary to check any messages you may receive. For example, about six months after my wife and I had our first child, we finally got a break to go see a movie. Every time our phone vibrated, we had to check it to make sure our kid wasn't in the hospital or something.
Yes, we were paranoid.
Yes, we didn't HAVE to go to the movie. Then again, you didn't HAVE to go either.
After six months of no sleep, changing diapers and not leaving the house with the kid because we know kid
Re:horseshit (Score:5, Insightful)
So NO ONE needs to check email or text messages during a movie. Tell someone if they really need to get hold of you to CALL YOU and leave a voice mail. NOW you know it's important and you can slip out, check your voice mail.
Your petty, self-centered excuses (along with others on this board) only show how inconsiderate, self centered, or technologically ignorant you are.
At least if you are technologically ignorant about your phone, you can learn
Re: (Score:2)
So you admit that you didn't have to go see a movie, but you did anyway and don't see anything wrong with bothering anyone around you while you are paranoid about your kid. Ya know .. my phone vibrates differently for a text message and email than it does a phone call. One would think that if your kid got hurt, someone would CALL you. In fact, if I get a phone call and don't answer it, it vibrates for several seconds. Then, when a voice mail is left, it vibrates again. So I know if someone that just called me left a voice mail.
So NO ONE needs to check email or text messages during a movie. Tell someone if they really need to get hold of you to CALL YOU and leave a voice mail. NOW you know it's important and you can slip out, check your voice mail.
Your petty, self-centered excuses (along with others on this board) only show how inconsiderate, self centered, or technologically ignorant you are.
At least if you are technologically ignorant about your phone, you can learn ....
Did you even READ his comment before replying to it? "sat in the very back row, kept our phones on silent mode and in my wife's purse so we could check by looking into the purse without actually taking the phones out........it is possible to do without anyone even knowing you are doing it." If they were bothering anybody, somebody could have complained to the waitstaff. Nobody did. The waitstaff who were standing right behind them didn't say anything about it. I hate people who text in movies when I know th
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's nice and all, you may have earned a night out, but you didn't earn the right to possible annoy someone else who may have an actual reason to check their messages but steps out of the theatre to see what's what.
Re: (Score:3)
Just a tip. (Score:2, Insightful)
I admit it, I check email during a movie because I need to.
You're using email to receive important and time sensitive messages?
OooooooooKaaaaaaayyyyy.
The way it's usually done is with text messages or voice which vibrate when you receive them - if you actually have the device on vibrate. In other words, when you're on call, you can go about your business without having to constantly check.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your urgency does not entitle you to disrupt other people's enjoyment of their paid-for evening. The Alamo's policy is in place because of self-important jackasses like you,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
$10 is $10, and when it's my wife and I it's $20.
Thirty feet? Are you kidding?
I often see kids play with their phones in the rows right in front of me. Stadium seating means there's very little to obscure the screen from sight.
Re: (Score:3)
That, or get a job where you can sit in a movie for two hours without distracting other patrons.
Re:horseshit (Score:4, Insightful)
Put your phone on vibrate and step outside if you get a message you need to check.
Re: (Score:2)
He can't do that - it would inconvenience *him* - only OTHERS should be inconvenienced by his lifestyle choices.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I sit on the isle and try to be subtle about checking.
I'm sorry that my job requires me to be available 24/7.
I guess that means no movies for me because some hypersensitive person might be offended.
I cannot believe this is even ambiguous to some people. If your job requires you to be on call, YES THAT MEANS YOU CAN'T GO TO A MOVIE THEATER! Holy shit, how could you possibly think otherwise?
You want to watch a movie while on call? Get a good home theater system, some comfortable chairs, and watch it at home. You think it's not reasonable to give up going to a theater? Don't take a job that requires you to be on call, or at least negotiate for somebody else to cover for you during the time you will
Re:Respect the policy (Score:5, Insightful)
Or.... you could not be an asshole, and wait an hour until the movie is over, and then text your friends that it was bad instead of annoying everyone else in the theater behind you.
Re:Respect the policy (Score:5, Insightful)
Here is what is playig at the theater. Brides mainds, kung fu panda. x-men, etc. Not a high end theater like landmark or Dundance where the films require a little more attention.
That's right. Only people who are watching appropriately high-class, cultured, artistic works of cinema should expect to be able to watch a film without unnecessary distractions. Folks who are going to watch mass-market movies just to have a pleasant night out aren't interested in paying attention; of course they shouldn't expect to be able to see or hear what they're watching. Their low-brow entertainment preferences don't deserve any better.
Seriously? For someone who's bemoaning Austin (Austin? Texas? Really?) as a city of pseudo-chic poseurs, you're awfully stuck up. Sure, this could just be a publicity stunt--but I hold out some faint hope that there might actually exist theaters which care about the audience's experience, and expect a better level of conduct than we seem to settle for in most venues.
Re: (Score:2)
You sound like someone with pretension of being "down to earth". How awfully Texan of you.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Hmm.... Well, let's address this bit by bit:
1. Austin pseudo-chic -- Same thing applies at the Houston Drafthouses, and for that matter at the other similar themed theatres I have been to in Houston and St. Paul. The Drafthouse folks are nicer about it than others and they give much more warning than is usual.
2. Distracted by the popcorn, the cokes, the patrons trying to get refils -- That's a given at this sort of place and part of the reason they are so agressive on enforcement.
3. Distracted by people ta
Re: (Score:2)
And people spend what has to be hundreds of dollars on the cheap watery beer so they can get drunk and forget the concert anyway.
I don't understand that either (Score:2)
I don't understand either - I purposely don't do drugs at a concert, specifically so I can clearly remember the event I bothered to go to. Sometimes quite a lot of bother ($ and maybe travel time) is involved in getting to said event.
It reminds me of stories of people who saw some classic acts in their prime but were too stoned to remember it.
sometimes I ingest caffeine if I'm tired by showtime or during the show - caffeinated gum is useful there, since I don't want to leave my spot and shell out for a caff
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's pretty messed up that people like this lady insist on ruining movies for dozens or hundreds of other people. And even more messed up that people at concerts ruin it for others by interfering with the music or viewing the performance.
Re: (Score:2)
Why should I have to go spend another $10 because some inconsiderate "person" decides to come in and be annoying.
On the flip side, why does spending $10 give the aforementioned inconsiderate "person" the right to come in and disrupt a hundred other people who spend 100x the amount she did for an uninterrupted movie-going experience?
Re: (Score:2)
No, I don't. "Total" prick wouldn't have the redeeming virtue of shutting down the offender.
But if it does, then it just demonstrates to the prick with the phone that "there's always a bigger prick", and you're inviting it to fuck you harder than you can stand it when you take your little prick out in public.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the total prick is the one texting. The one going to the manager is trying to make sure all the other customers can enjoy the film.
Re: (Score:2)
No one under 6 allowed, except on Baby Day (first couple of Matinees every Tuesday)
Re:that's Texas for you (Score:5, Informative)
Neither the theater operators nor the patrons have any style. Best avoid the whole state.
You shouldn't speak of things you know nothing about.
Alamo has its own style. I haven't been since we've had kids, so it's been a while. You don't take kids to Alamo! The place is not like a normal theater. They serve real food and beer at reasonable prices. Not stale popcorn at what calculates out to $150/lb.
But, I don't remember seeing previews there. Before the movie, they show clips from old, terrible 70's B-movies. Usually the type that Quentin Tarantino tries to emulate, but worse. Or, maybe they'll show a comedian. I guess it really depends on the type of movie you are going to see. I remember seeing boobs during the "previews" when going to see American Pie at Alamo. This theater marches to the beat of its own drummer. It is different than anything I have ever experienced at a movie and can't wait to go back. Alamo certainly has a style that is all its own. Ask anyone who has ever been there.
Just because you can't understand the "style", doesn't mean that it's not there. It's probably just too far above you for you to see. By insulting that which you don't understand not makes you an idiot, but an asshole as well.
Re: (Score:3)
You sir/ma'am, are an idiot. If you fly to Austin, I'll personally take you to a movie at the Drafthouse. If you don't like it, you can fly back to whatever shitty place you come from and you are welcomed to take your small-minded attitude back with you.
The worst thing about Austin is we are surrounded by Texas (I kid, I kid).
Re:Its a very serious issue... (Score:5, Insightful)
How could you not find a bright backlit LCD distracting during a dark scene in a movie? The Alamo's policy is a great one - they prohibit children under a certain age, too, outside of certain designated showings They are well-loved in Austin for these kinds of policies - I won't go to other theaters now unless I want IMAX or they are not showing a movie I want to see. It really does make a different kind of experience, making sure that nobody is distracting their neighbors.
Re:Its a very serious issue... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, this seems like an incredibly stupid thing to become so righteously anal over. I've never once been distracted by someone texting in a movie. Talking, yes, but never texting.
This is just some stupid theater owner's personal crusade to fight a really ridiculous cause. They've probably spent 10x as much fighting cellphone use as they would have lost in customers had they allowed them in the same capacity as any other theater. Heck, if they are escorting people out of the theater for texting, that would be WAY more distracting than someone just using their phone.
I would stay away from a theater with this policy out of spite.
You must not have to deal with many texters. Many times have I had to kick the back of somebody's chair because I'm being blinded by their lack of ability to keep themselves from chatting with their friends every minute of every day. It's not about being righteously anal, it's about not wanting to have your $11 experience be ruined by some self-centered asshole.
The Alamo's policies alone make me wish there was one around here that I could patronize, but the fact that they would take an angry person's voicemail and make it into a pre-show video (without trying to appease the hypersensitive by censoring the hilarious overuse of profanity) makes me want to travel to Texas solely to give them my money.
Re: (Score:3)
They, too, belong in the "special hell".
Re:Its a very serious issue... (Score:5, Interesting)
The irony being that, although they do have a system to order food and drinks that doesn't necessarily involve talking, frequently one does need to talk. The wait staff is continuously whispering to people to make sure they are receiving the correct order. This is pretty distracting, but then I go to the Alamo Drafthouse for exactly this service and I just have to accept a certain level of distraction.
I like the Alamo Drafthouse, their "concessions" beat the crap out of the overpriced Cinemark down the street, but one thing you are not getting there is silence and full devotion and reverence to the movie. If anything it's a nod to the fact that many of us in the audience aren't there to watch a movie so much as sit in an air conditioned theater away from our own children, with each other, sharing a relaxing (and typically mind numbing) experience, but also resting the frayed nerves one receives after a week of maximizing shareholder potential, balancing our finances, maintaining our habitat and trying to raise our spawn to be good citizens.
Re: (Score:3)
Speaking for the rest of the planet, we would all be happier that you did.
A Subway in Syracuse, NY too (Score:2)
http://twitpic.com/22sgdu [twitpic.com]
Saw this at the Subway inside of the Syracuse, NY bus/train station - a sign at least warning people not to use their phones while they're in the front of the lien and are thus supposed to be ordering. Reminds me of the behavior of an inconsiderate Starbucks patron cited in Weird Al's song "Craigslist"