Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Movies Television Entertainment

Our Obsession With Trailers Is Making Movies Worse (cnet.com) 206

An anonymous reader shares an article: Our increasing obsession with trailers is changing how we watch movies. We're becoming audiences afraid of surprise, audiences that would rather watch movies we're certain we'll like than risk watching films that surprise us into love. In some cases, this fixation is even lowering the quality of movies themselves by encouraging bad filmmaking habits. The most extreme example happened when Warner Bros released such a successful trailer for 'Suicide Squad' it brought on the company that cut it to edit the whole film -- dropping the director's original cut altogether. [...] Thanks to trailers' easy accessibility on YouTube and those shot-by-shot breakdowns that quickly appear online once trailers drop, anyone interested in a given flick can pore over all the available footage for hours -- even if that leads to major spoilers for them and everyone they share it with.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Our Obsession With Trailers Is Making Movies Worse

Comments Filter:
  • If only... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Bodhammer ( 559311 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @12:44PM (#54427259)
    If only there were tornados that attacked these trailers...
  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @12:46PM (#54427271)

    A studio is afraid to try something new because a movie costs millions, often hundreds of millions, to make. So they are afraid to try something out of the ordinary and instead rehash the same stuff that once managed to get people into the cinemas, we get reboot after reboot, relaunch after relaunch.

    And going to see a movie costs between 10 and 20 bucks a person. So we're afraid to try something that we don't know anything about, fearing that we're going to waste 20 bucks on something we are not going to enjoy.

    It's a matter of money. People don't want to waste it on something that's not going to perform the way they would like it to.

    • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @01:49PM (#54427863)
      Back in the 1970s, you either paid for a movie ticket to see a movie, or waited 3-5 years for it to show up on TV at an indeterminate time, with commercials interspersed, and with unknown editing.

      Today, if you don't pay for a ticket, you can catch it on pay per view in a couple months, or rent it on Blu-ray/DVD/streaming, or watch it on a pay movie channel, or stream it from a service you already pay for like Netflix, or wait a couple years for it to show up on TV, or pirate it.

      In the face all that new competition, the logical thing to do is to lower movie ticket prices to make the theater experience more attractive. Instead, studios and theaters have done the opposite and raised ticket prices [collider.com]. I don't mind seeing the occasional bad movie on Netflix or Amazon Prime, or HBO because I'm already paying for those services. The only thing I lose is 90-120 minutes of my time (and that's only if I choose not to stop watching before the movie finishes). With a theater ticket I lose my money as well as my time. So I don't think it's at all surprising that people are holding theater movies to a higher standard than in the past. The studios need adapt to how technology has changed in the last 50 years - lower ticket prices, or improve the ratio of good to bad movies.
      • In the article you link to the inflation adjusted line seems to imply that prices have barely changed since the 1970s. Also, this may seem stupid, but I recall paying around $10 for a cinema ticket in the early 2000s, I'm surprised to see that article imply it was less than $5 around that time - actually, not surprised, I just don't believe it.

        Also to what extent does the different prices for 3D/non-3D factor into this? 3D movies are sold at a premium, the 2D version being charged the same as other 2D m

        • by Altrag ( 195300 )

          There's a whole confluence of things going on here:
          - Sure, the price may track well with some vague metric of inflation, but wages have not, so as a wage ratio the price to an individual is still higher. Add onto that that we've got a bunch of other costs (cell phone, internet, Netflix) that many or even most of us didn't have two decades ago, and even $20 can getting stretched a bit thin if you're in the lower end of the middle class or below -- which is a large portion of the population.

          - Large, really g

      • Back in the 1970s, you either paid for a movie ticket to see a movie, or waited

        Back in the 1970s, the normal news cycle didn't carry news of how much money a movie made on its opening weekend. Now, news of the top-5 money-making movies is all-important, both for studios to brag about and to persuade gullible people that the movie is worth watching. Drop the price of tickets and that number goes down, and guys in suits get twitchy. It's weird, but true, because you can't objectively measure whether a movie is good or bad, certainly not when it's released, but you can measure how muc

    • Apparently, it's gotten so bad that even when it's different, it's the same.

      This is supposedly the book that ruined hollywood [slate.com]...

      This book took the history of three-act blockbuster movies and distilled movie making into a minute-to-minute movie formula (a beat sheet) for future amateur screen writers. Apparently, the author died in 2009 (the book was published in 2005) so he probably didn't know how bad it would become and can't even repent...

      • by Altrag ( 195300 )

        It seems a little pessimistic to blame everything that's wrong with movies today on breaking them down into 15 chunks instead of just 3 chunks. Yeah that's certainly more fine-grained and therefore less flexible, but its still giving the screenwriter 4-8 minutes of freedom for each "beat" (depending on the length of the film.)

        There are lots of other issues going on as well though: - High risk-avoidance leading to a continual stream of remakes and sequels rather than allowing fresh ideas.

        - The desire to ap

  • by Quirkz ( 1206400 ) <ross.quirkz@com> on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @12:47PM (#54427281) Homepage

    They tend to give away too much, or, in a bad movie, show the only things worth watching. If I'm going to get suckered in to see it, I might as well save those five good jokes.

    It really helped when I cut cable, because I barely see any these days, other than previews before other movies.

    • same. i dont like to see trailers, especially on movies i am looking forward to.
    • It's more fun watching negative reviews (like redletter media) than to actually watch the movie.
      • by Quirkz ( 1206400 )

        I do really enjoy Cinema Sins' "Everything Wrong With X" clips on YouTube. It's like watching a whole movie in 15 minutes, while also making fun of it.

    • One of the last Star Trek reboot movies apparently decided that they didn't give a damn about their big villain reveal, and just spelled it all out on the back of the Blu-Ray box. I hadn't watched any trailers (may have been equally spoilerific, I don't know), and fortunately didn't read the back of the box, or I'd have been rather peeved. Did they assume that the only people who had seen the movie or knew about it would buy the Blu-ray? Apparently so.

      A lot of movie trailers are just as bad about showing

      • it's worse than that. In the trailers everyone was like "OH ITS KHAN!" and JJ Abrams played coy in interviews and press saying "No it isn't Khan" there was a lot of drama about it and he even apologized for treating fans like idiots. http://io9.gizmodo.com/j-j-abr... [gizmodo.com]
        • Dude... spoiler!

          Okay, I guess it's past its statute of limitations for plot secrets, especially those which probably everyone but me knew about. Yay for never reading entertainment news.

          Also: Rosebud was his sled.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Also, it's more common these days to release content in the trailer, that will NOT be in the movie itself.

      So plot lines which might be suggested in the trailer, won't exist in the movie. At best they're side-plots, and topics or characters which may exist in the directors cut, but they again only hint at a larger narrative that we won't actually get to see in the theater. I'm not sure many others notice this, but I certainly do, when in the event I do see the trailer, go to the movie, and notice content tha

    • They tend to give away too much...

      That's not a problem of the trailer it's a problem of Hollywood's inability to take risks with a plot. It's been over 10 years since I've seen a film which had an ending which I could not see coming well beforehand (and because of that it's one of my favourite films despite not being a "blockbuster"). The trailer is no different than the first few minutes of the film.

      Once the characters have been established the plot follows with annoying predictability. Occasionally there may be the odd twist but even

    • by Daetrin ( 576516 )
      There was a period where i would get excited about a movie and consume every trailer i could, and then frequently be disappointed by the movie itself.

      At some point i decided to no longer go out of my way to see trailers. If i'm exposed to a trailer by someone else (i.e. commercials, before another movie, etc) i will watch it if i have no idea what the movie is. But if it's movie i know i'll probably want to see i close my eyes or look away. I won't go so far as to cover up my ears, but if i'm intentionall
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @12:51PM (#54427313)

    Why would you since they so often contain spoilers? What kind of idiot wants to ruin a movie just to find out something a little earlier?

    • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @12:59PM (#54427391)

      Take your average movie. Say, anything Michael Bay did lately.

      Now spoiler it in any meaningful way. I dare you.

      Nearly all mass appeal movies of today are so formulaic and predictable that "spoiler" doesn't really describe the problem. The problem is more that it's "seen one, seen 'em all".

      • On one of my TV shows, I saw the preview for the following week, and I gave out a spoiler: "They are going to do something really stupid". The response: "Cro, they do something stupid every week! That's no spoiler".

    • If a movie can be "spoiled" just by knowing a little bit about the plot, then its not a good movie to begin with.
    • The same reason I watch "let's play" videos of games that seem interesting on Steam before I buy them. If I'm going to drop money of any significance I want to make sure I'm better off than throwing it into a trash can. While I personally don't bother with the theaters and just do Netflix--principally for the reason just mentioned--I can easily see them wanting to make sure the $20+/person they're about to drop as a compelling reason to screen the movie aforehand.
    • Most people are not as emotionally brittle as you, and can handle seeing a trailer.

  • Don't Blame Me. (Score:5, Informative)

    by TechyImmigrant ( 175943 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @12:52PM (#54427327) Homepage Journal

    >Our increasing obsession with trailers is changing how we watch movies.

    Your obsession. I don't have an obsession with trailers. They barely register on my personal radar of things I'm aware of and they certainly aren't something I care about.

    • by Luthair ( 847766 )
      I agree, its been years since I watched one. I imagine its a tiny subset of the movie viewers who do more than file a movie under "looks neat" vs "zzz" from trailers.
  • NOPE! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ichthus ( 72442 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @12:53PM (#54427329) Homepage

    We're not the ones making the trailers, and we're not the ones making the crappy movies. Not our fault.

    We're fine with suspense and surprise. And, I'm pretty sure we're just fine with... *read slowly* GOOOD MOOOOVIES. So, make them good.

    • We're not the ones making the trailers, and we're not the ones making the crappy movies. Not our fault.

      Yep. That's right. Besides, if you watch "Kung Fu Trailers Of Fury", which I do recommend if you're into that kind of thing, on the commentary track, Asian cinema expert Ric Meyers talks about how many of the trailers completely give away the plot of the movies they promote and are little more than highly condensed 2 to 3 minute versions of the films. Keep in mind that these particular trailers were from the 1970s and very early 1980s and were made in Hong Kong. So it's not like nobody anywhere in the

  • by LiquidMind ( 150126 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @12:53PM (#54427343)

    The trailer showed Neo stopping bullets with his mind. In the trailer.

    That was supposed to be the shock and awe moment that tied it all together.

    There should be a new category.... Spoiler Trailer.

    • The recent "prologue trailer" for Alien Covenant is worse. Look away now if you haven't seen the film and don't want spoilers.

      It literally has nothing to do with the film - I have no idea what actually happened, but Noomi Rapace (Elizabeth Shaw from Prometheus) basically doesn't appear in the full film, all her scenes are in the "prologue trailer", and the film itself goes off in a totally different direction. The "prologue trailer" hypes you up for the coming story and then ... nothing. That story isnt

      • by Ramze ( 640788 )

        At least there is a plan in the works to make a film that will be between Prometheus and Covenant to fill that gap.

        Who knows if we'll ever see that film, though.

    • by Kjella ( 173770 )

      The trailer showed Neo stopping bullets with his mind. In the trailer. That was supposed to be the shock and awe moment that tied it all together.

      I think that's your re-imagination of the script, it's already pre-spoiled in the movie itself too.

      Neo: What are you trying to tell me? That I can dodge bullets? Morpheus: No, Neo. I'm trying to tell you that when you're ready, you won't have to.

      There was never really any question that he'd transcend and defeat Agent Smith in the Matrix somehow, the thriller was the counter-offensive in the real world to find the Nebuchadnezzar and destroy it because with their minds trapped in the Matrix they couldn't just run or use their EMP. Don't get me wrong I thought it was cool, it just wasn't a major spoiler that he'd eventually stop bullets. And I never saw

    • What about Terminator 2? If you carefully watch the movie as it starts, you realize that you're not supposed to think Arnold S is actually a "good robot". There's only one clue (he doesn't outright kill the bikers, he just, you know, tortures them, permanently disfiguring them, and steals their clothes and stuff, but he doesn't kill them), but until he actually saves Connor for the first time, there's no serious reason to believe he's not out to kill Connor.

      Spoiled by every trailer of the movie, plus, in

    • The "Miracles from Heaven" trailer ended with the mom saying "you're telling me that when my daughter fell 20 feet onto her head it didn't paralyze her, but it cured her of the incurable disease that she was suffering from?" The movie was two hours of the mother agonizing over whether or not her daughter would be cured of the incurable disease that she was suffering from.
  • for watching the commercials that they play before the movie starts. I think the movie would be way better if we didn't see baby groot pick the wrong button before running off with the nuke.

  • by __aaclcg7560 ( 824291 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @12:56PM (#54427371)
    Sometimes the trailer is better than the movie.
    • by OzPeter ( 195038 )

      Sometimes the trailer is better than the movie.

      I'm not sure if "King Arthur: Legend of the Sword" proves or disproves your theory.

      The trailer was pretty confusing and then you get King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is bad in ways I didn’t realize movies could be bad [arstechnica.com]

      • The movie Dangerous Kelly hit the nail on the head with this one. A sleezy hollywood producer finds out about Shakespeare and other public domain works and uses the dialog word for word in his movies. He doesn't have to pay writers or royalties!

    • Actually most of the time. Which makes a lot of sense. You get to see the interesting parts of the movie in the trailer so you are excited about it and want to see it.

      Unfortunately, and this is why the trailers become spoilers more and more, the interesting parts are also the parts that resolve issues. Movies, especially today, follow a certain logic, a pattern. In the penultimate act, the resolution happens. And this resolution is of course also the culmination, the climax of the whole show. Here, everythi

    • Almost always, actually.
    • by judoguy ( 534886 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @02:54PM (#54428329) Homepage
      My oldest son is a trailer editor in Hollywood. It drives him crazy when the studios force him to promote the movies in certain ways. They'll often take his work and combine it with other trailer houses work to produce frankentrailers.

      What I hear is that most, if not all, trailer editors are serious film geeks and would love to be able to do good work but the client always wins.

      Here is a version of a trailer my son made on his own time and showed the client just to try and do something he could be proud of. The client loved it but then the client's marketing department made him tone it way back. It's not what he first wanted, but it's still pretty fun: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

  • by DatbeDank ( 4580343 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @12:59PM (#54427393)

    When something costs me a lot of money, my expectations start to increase. When a movie costs $13+ for a single ticket, I expect that movie to be mind blowingly awesome. When it undoubtedly falls flat on its face for not living up to its $13 value to me, I feel ripped off and stop going to see movies that I don't feel were worth the $13 to me.

    If movies cost, 6,7, or even 8 dollars, my expectations will be more reasonable and thus my enjoyment of the movie increases because i'm not asking myself, "Was this worth it?"

    • by Ramze ( 640788 )

      If movies were $5 like they were when I was younger, I'd probably go see more movies. Many people probably would. There'd be less risk involved in paying to see a movie you don't like, and it'd also be a decent value for being entertained for a couple hours on a weekend.

      There's a point in risk vs reward that's a proper sweet spot, and unfortunately theaters and studios are missing that mark where I live. Movie ticket prices are adjusted for local costs of living, but only slightly. There's a big diff

  • by swb ( 14022 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @01:02PM (#54427415)

    My 12 year old son will, at times, sit down in front of the Apple TV and watch nothing but trailers for an hour.

    I'm wondering if the culprit isn't the short attention span syndrome, immediate gratification and the regular consumption of very short form videos on YouTube and the like.

    • by wonkey_monkey ( 2592601 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @01:11PM (#54427519) Homepage

      I'm wondering if the culprit isn't the short att

      Ugh, TL:DR pls.

      • The 140 character mark is here:

        I'm wondering if the culprit isn't the short attention span syndrome, immediate gratification and the regular consumption of very short for

        Sounds like you have the next great unicorn idea. Twitter with an even lower character limit! Do you have VC funding yet?

    • by ljw1004 ( 764174 )

      My 12 year old son will, at times, sit down in front of the Apple TV and watch nothing but trailers for an hour. I'm wondering if the culprit isn't the short attention span syndrome, immediate gratification and the regular consumption of very short form videos on YouTube and the like.

      Yeah, and I know someone who reads HAIKU!!! How ridiculous. Why can't they read proper full-length poems like the Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner? Also, the Hugo and Nebula awards should eliminate their "short story" categories and only reward real full-length novels.

      Seriously, "culprit" is too loaded a word. Maybe your son has picked the smarter option?

  • by Austerity Empowers ( 669817 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @01:06PM (#54427455)

    While there may be some truth that we prefer to know the movie genre ahead of time (begetting genres themselves), the idea that we're afraid of being pleasantly surprised is asinine. We almost never are, that is the problem. Absolutely no effort is made to hook us in with a genre, and deliver us with more than we expect, at best we get a marketing checklist of included sequences. It makes a bit of sense then that audiences will at least decide which spreadsheet they wish to be party to, verify their assumption via trailer, and then commit $20+ to see the thing. $20 will get you substantially more hours of (and usually better) entertainment for the dollar than a movie theater, you have to be convinced that at least you won't hate it.

    Or, we stream it on something for $5, or get it via Netflix DVD or Redbox and toss it back when the nausea subsides.

    The movie industry is failing itself, blaming millions of people for not appreciating it isn't good thinking. I personally think the movie industry would do way better with a $10M budget cap and some creativity, rather than $150M explosionfests and absolutely no creativity at all.

  • by WDot ( 1286728 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @01:06PM (#54427463)
    In many (but not all) movies, spoilers aren't a huge deal. Are we really surprised that Captain America beats the bad guy at the end? Seeing two seconds of the final fight in the trailer doesn't mean I'm not going to enjoy watching the entire movie. You could make the argument that the issue is that modern movies are shallow or dumb. Maybe, but I think this also applies to classic movies. Citizen Kane's "Rosebud" has been so endlessly parodied that someone sitting down to watch Citizen Kane for the first time is not going to be surprised at that revelation. They'll still enjoy a finely crafted story. Except for mystery stories, I don't think surprise is a primary factor in enjoying most movies.
    • It's the Colombo effect: Of course we know that Captain America is going to win in the end, the question is how it's done. If we see him cornered in the trailer and then we see how he gets out of the trap, that takes away the suspense.

      At the very least, that last part should be omitted.

    • "spoilers aren't a huge deal"

      Spoiler Justice Warriors, on the other hand, who claim that every "and" and "the" are spoilers, are insufferable.

  • Japanese trailers (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Rakarra ( 112805 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @01:07PM (#54427485)

    This sounds like American film trailers are becoming more like Japanese film trailers. The trailers are often cut to tell much of the plot, and since there's more of a focus on the interests of Japanese women (as opposed to the obsession with American teen boys) they tend to add more emotion to the trailer itself. This is maybe most stark in the trailers for animated films which have a long history in Japan as adult fare, but are still often relegated to the animation ghetto in the USA.

    Compare these two trailers for Inside Out. The American version [youtube.com] focuses on slackstick humor, while the Japanese trailer [youtube.com] kicks you right in the feels and isn't afraid to spoil the plot.

    Also, the Trailers Always Spoil [tvtropes.org] trope from TV Tropes is always a good read on this.

  • Hollywood aims to the lowest common group whom by sheer volume can generate the most profits.People who pay to see movies is whom Hollywood aims too. Blame those people who will pay to see Fast and Furious 345 or another marvel movie,
  • by sqorbit ( 3387991 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @01:08PM (#54427495)
    You sure it's not the garbage story lines that Hollywood keeps repeating that are making movies worse? How many times are they going to rewrite superhero story lines or the same boring "boy meets girl who he isn't really supposed to be in love with" plot line
    • by acroyear ( 5882 )

      Indeed. or pre-writing the 'trilogy' to fit the star wars original trilogy pattern, the Campbell Story (episode one) embedded within the larger Campbell Story (the whole trilogy), then...throw it all away and reboot so you can do it again to a new generation. Sam Raimi's Spiderman set certainly fits this bill, but there are others.

      Trouble is, as soon as you step away from the stereotypes and tropes and get 'original'...something falls short and then everybody's hunting around for what caused it to jump the

    • They'll stop making those kinds of movies when those kinds of movies stop making money.
    • Re:Garbage (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Nethemas the Great ( 909900 ) on Tuesday May 16, 2017 @02:04PM (#54427949)
      It could be worse. They could all be Hallmark movies.
    • ... or the same boring "boy meets girl who he isn't really supposed to be in love with" plot line

      I know, right? Frigging William Shakespeare.

  • Lone Ranger and Tonto are surrounded by hundreds of hostile Indian warriors.

    Lone Ranger: Well Tonto, it looks like we're finally doomed.

    Tonto: Who is we, white man?

    Methinks the cnet movie blogger is obsessed with trailers and maybe a good chunk of the teenage male action movie viewers, but that's about it.

  • If I'm going to go to the theatre I want a good experience for what I'm gonna pay: time, travel, snacks, tickets... it all adds up and really there haven't been many films that were actually good vs marketed as good (again beauty/eye/beholder whatever you decide for yourself)

    So what is a trailer then? Advertising to show you the film at its best or to pique your curiosity enough that you'll at least consider it, but since Everything is Bad(tm) all I see is:
    - Every good joke in a comedy film

  • Too many plot twists got given away. The funniest scene in the trailer isn't in the movie. I use either reviews or the subject matter to decide if I wanna see a movie or not.
    • by acroyear ( 5882 )

      "The funniest scene in the trailer isn't in the movie."

      This was so true with the Bill Murray / Richard Dreyfuss "What About Bob?" - the high point of the trailer was, clearly after the house blew up, Bill Murray yelling (but totally deadpan about it) "OH MY GOD your house.". We waited the entire film for that line when the explosion happened and...nothing. Totally cut. Never existed.

      It was actually more annoying and depressing than not having somebody face down a tie fighter on a balcony. more than 25 year

  • There's a huge difference between saying that trailers are making movies worse and saying that trailers may give away some spoilers.

    Do trailers make movies worse? Absolutely not. Except perhaps a few rare cases like the aforementioned Suicide Squad,the movie is the movie regardless of the trailers. Obsessing over trailers leading to worse movies seems silly.

    I also find it hard to take anything in TFA seriously when it starts with:

    "I'm not going to see "Spider-Man: Homecoming" this July. You're probably t

  • ... then it is with the Film Studios being obsessed over returning obscene profits from each and every film.

    This is driving the push towards re-hashing "proven" formats, plots and approaches. This is reducing the willingness of studios to be a little bit more edgy, or take a chance with some slightly different material. In fact, here's a little test for you... Think back to your favourite (and original) movies from, say, the 1990s, i.e. say roughly 15-25 years ago. Now ask yourself how many of these woul
  • even if that leads to major spoilers for them and everyone they share it with.

    While most people say they hate spoilers, there's a number of studies out there that show when you measure it, people actually enjoy movies MORE when they know in advance what is going to happen.

    This is because people actually don't like being surprised, but confuse their desire for novelty with a desire for surprise. This makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint: surprise means having a lion unexpectedly jump out of a bush on

    • The big problem with spoilers is when they reveal the punch line of a joke. One of the better jokes in the first "Men in Black" movie was the childbirth scene. The trailer reduced a "Whoa! ha ha ha!!" to "OK, there's that distinctive car in the trailer with all the tentacles coming out of it... wait for it... wait for it... yeah *yawn* there are the tentacles."
  • Could you please take this story, and re-post it somewhere like Vanity Fair. It seems odd that you identify a problem caused by 97% of the population, and then tell the remaining 3% that it's their fault.

  • When I go to GAP and I buy a shirt I can return it next day, full refund no hassle.

    When I go to the cinema and sit through a movie that sucked I cannot get a refund without jumping through multiple magic hoops.

    Listen to this; during a Spiderman 3 premier the film, towards the end started going dark randomly. First 3-5 seconds then 10 and then 60 seconds at a time. Apparently the projector was running back to back all day and was overheating. they had to stop the screening.

    How can I get a refund? Show
  • all the trailers in a single place, like a park. We could call it a trailer park.
  • Bullshit.

    I don't even go to movies any more because there is no surprise.

    This reminds me of our monthly management meetings. Attendance dwindled off, and during one meeting, the big guy asked what could be done to improve attendance. Most people had suggestions about how we could expand upon what we were doing, to implement the topics in more detail. People there nodded in approval.

    Then a guy in the corner stood up and said - "We're losing attendance here, and you are asking how to improve attendan

  • I suppose it stands to reason that someone must still care about Hollywood movies, but I can't figure out why... they just seem like an un-ending meh-fest to me. When I see one that doesn't completely suck that's a remarkable surprise.

    Me, I think Hollywood was doomed when the international market took off, and they dropped writing dialog in favor of doing stuff that would translate more easily.

    I would rather watch the trashiest of Japanese anime, the dorkiest Bollywood film, or the slowest Korean come

"This is lemma 1.1. We start a new chapter so the numbers all go back to one." -- Prof. Seager, C&O 351