Amph At The Movies (film discussion thread)

Could be seeing Lethal Weapon 5.

 

Yeah, that'll work. After The Last Jedi, looks like I'll only be going to the movies for revivals then. The renting new and buying old decision is the better choice then.

 

How much are you guys paying for your movie tickets right now? Here in new Zealand it's $22.50 ($15.50 USD), which I think is insane. Thanks to my mobile phone company I can get them for $14.50 ($10 USD) as a deal, which I really need to start doing more often.

 

My last ticket, which was for a 2D showing of Thor:Ragnarok, cost £10.50 iirc.

 

Here in Australia, in two different cinemas for each film:

-$10 for Rogue One

-$11.50 for Dunkirk (per viewing, to total a cool $57.50)

Both were in 2D

 

So the UK one is similar to ours then, but Australia seems cheap. That's around half price and you're just across the ditch!

 

I do vaguely recall more expensive prices in the past, but I don't actually remember what they were. It might depend on what cinema or cinema chain you go to, and also that I don't live in the biggest, but not the smallest either, of town centres. I have thought the prices cheap before.

 

I've only been to the cinema 3 times (I think) this year , once prices hit £10+ it was just too much , plus there's the matter of folk pissing about on their smart phones , they seem to think as long as they're not talking its ok but the damn phone screens going on and off is very annoying .

 

Right, so under current conversion rates, my prices mentioned previously are:

-$7.60 US (A$10.00) at one cinema
-$8.84 US (A$11.50) at the other

 

I think dynamic/demand pricing will price out a good amount of families. A family of four could conceivably cost around $90-$100 for a film, which does not include a trip to the concession stand (which theaters make their money). Higher prices for popular films is not a way to attract movie goers and will most likely turn them away.

As for movie ticket prices in my neighborhood... I typically either go to an IMax screening or lounge/recliner seating theater.
IMax = $21.49;
Lounge/Recliner seats = $17.50.

 

We'll be hearing some of the Batman 89 theme in Justice League too.

 

I am right there with you. Seeing how much regular tickets are these days (and not including IMAX which we capitulated on), it's

2D AMC: $16.95
2D Regal: over $17.

IMAX 2D is $20 and change, plus the online surcharge of $2 per ticket at IMAX 34th.

Both friends had to bail on seeing Thor this week at the times we were supposed to go, so for me, Thor wound up being one IMAX showing. Friend is paying $45 for two tickets for an IMAX 2D movie and nothing else. I might treat IMAX friend to a matinee since I have credit at Fandango.

I haven't been to a movie theatre that has dine in yet, but honestly that sounds like a royal pain in the bottom. If I was a big movie fan I'd consider Movie Pass once I am employed again, but given the price points and such, I think this is my last year seeing current films at movie theaters. Now revivals? If they're in 35mm and a nice theatre, yes.

 

If I was Danny Elfman, I'd do the same thing too. I wish he'd do the same with John Williams' Superman theme, instead of rearranging it to fit the film.

 

Got to be the odd man out on Thor: Ragnarok. Really good, but doesn't hit great status for me.

Everything on Planet Hulk was great. Everything on Asgard was not. That part of the film was by the numbers Marvel. Bold would have been just Thor and Loki having an adventure on Planet Hulk.

A great score the film has, but you can barely hear it.

And there's little emotional core to this film. It wants you to care about events and certain characters, but never gets the right build to do so.

I said it was really good. Very funny. Goldblum is excellent. Blanchet is excellent for a very bland character. Just like Mads in Dr. Strange.

Not great. Above the worst, but just misses the best.

Spoiler

Warriors 3 going out like that was not shocking. It was lazy, and showed the first signs of the failure at connecting emotionally

 

The cut scene of Bruce the Shark eating Alex Kitner from Jaws.

 

The cut scene of Bruce the Shark eating Alex Kitner from Jaws.

 

Not cut. It's in the film. It was just never intended to look the way it does to us in that photo.

 

Interesting. Never noticed.

 

Of course it's "cut" in the sense that this photo shows us what isn't seen in the edited version of the scene, i.e. big gaping jaws. But it's necessary to shoot it that way (as best they could) in order to present the carnage as intended. That is, more subliminally "Did you see that?". So that a full size shark appearing starkly in front of every one on the beach wouldn't have the audience wondering why they are so blase about an absolute monster prowling around their waters.

The real cut scene is Michael Brody being saved by the pond victim. Unfortunately, that one was never completed as an intact scene. It was decided that the end result was going to be too graphic and not to bother shooting necessary inserts. IIRC.

 

Little piece on the Suspiria remake

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/11...s-suspiria-remake-will-be-a-personal-film/amp

 

Little piece on the Suspiria remake

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/11...s-suspiria-remake-will-be-a-personal-film/amp