Fair :)
Comment on Three original movies are being released in theaters today
victorz@lemmy.world 2 months agoSure. I’d never pay theater money for such an experience though. Like going to a restaurant. One day I don’t want beef bourguignon, some days I want a pack of noodles. But I won’t go to the theaters restaurant to get a pack of noodles.
tiramichu@lemm.ee 2 months ago
nyctre@lemmy.world 2 months ago
That’s fair, but the analogy is wrong, imo. In the sense that I can enjoy a good movie anywhere. I don’t need to see the green book in a cinema to enjoy it, it’s probably even better at home. I go to the cinema for the experience…the huge screen, the sound, etc. Which is why the only movies I’ve seen in cinemas in the past years are Avatar, Furiosa, Deadpool and into the spider verse, pretty much.
victorz@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I don’t understand how the analogy is wrong if you are describing exactly what I mean. I won’t go to the theaters either if it’s not something spectacular that is enhanced in the cinema in a way that can’t be done at home. Exactly like those movies you mention. And that becomes increasingly difficult for the cinema when I have a 65" OLED with 5.1 surround sound at home. Especially considering the comfort (and price 🏴☠️) of watching at home.
Only ever will I go to the cinema with my kids as an outing, or my wife as a date type of scenario. Otherwise it’s just not worth it IMO. At home I can go to the loo, get a snack, talk all I want, sit on my phone during boring parts… List goes on. 😄
nyctre@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Well, I was just thinking that you can do the bourguignon at home, whereas you can’t really have an IMAX at home. Maybe I was just overthinking it, my bad :D sorry
victorz@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I can build an IMAX at home too (theoretically), but that’s a very hypothetical situation that isn’t really part of the analogy. 😁 The implication was that the bourguignon is best at a fancy restaurant. 😉