Wellthen…as I suspected, you really are just a self-important little weasel, aren’t you?
Everyone in that theatre payed the same amount of money as you. If you tell them to stay home, why don’t you just stay home? You call them self absorbed twits, but why is your complaining any less self absorbed than them? Look at it like this, yes this will be a worst case scenario, but regardless, it isn’t very farfetched. I am at a movie, I get a call from my dad, he says, “It’s an emergency, you need to get to the hospital right now, your mom was in a car accident.” Am I really supposed to not answer, knowing that there COULD be an emergency, that is one of the miracles of technology. The only times I answer are if my parents call, or if someone that normally wouldn’t call me call. When I answer, I talk so quietly, that I haven’t ever even got a sideways glance. And texting… If that really bothers you that much, you are the ones that need to stay at home. It isn’t overly bright, I would venture to say that the people who are bothered by the 1" by 1" screen are just as self absorbed, if not more than the people that talk loudly and let their phone ring. I would also say that letting every small thing bother you like that will lead to an early death. JUST RELAX AND LIFE WILL GO BY MUCH SMOOTHER.
I paid my money to see a film with a minimum of distraction and interruption. Why is this so difficult to understand? Social politeness dictates that, when attenting a film or theater performance that you demonstrate a modicum of respect for your fellow patrons, i.e. you remove your hat, you don’t talk in loud voices, and you otherwise refrain from actions that conceal the screen or the soundtrack. Is there something about this idea that is incomprehensible to the average monkey?
If someone was complaining that he can’t concentrate on reading his paper at the local coffeehouse because “all these damn people keep talking and answering their cell phones” then the backlash would be appropriate–a coffeehouse, a resturant, or a bar is an explicitly social place, and within societal norms energetic conversation and spontaneous laughter are normal an accepted. But in a darkened cinema or theater, where the focus of attention is the screen or stage, the attention isn’t on “me”; it’s on the show…you know, the one we all paid to see in expectation of being able to make out the dialog and follow the action without having to ask you to shut up every three minutes.
What part of this concept is unclear to those of you who protest that it’s your right to do whatever you want, whenever you want, in whatever manner you like, and if someone is distracted it must be their fault for not being sufficiently oblivious?
Stranger
This statement is premised on the notion that both parties (the one with the cell phone and the one without) have an equal right to behave as they wish in public. That simply isn’t true. As a society, we expect certain things from our neighbors. At a funeral, your cell phone is off. At a restaurant, we line up to get our lunch. At a bookstore, we don’t take a book from someone else who’s just snatched it off the shelf in front of us, even if we really wanted to get that book for a friend for Christmas and this was the third bookstore we’d been to and they were all out, so if we didn’t take it from this joker who really doesn’t need it, we would have to rethink what to get our friend.
Anyway, the point is that while there may not be “laws” dictating behavior, there are social norms. One of the social norms is that you turn your phone off in the theater (or, as the one person who’s actually stated a reasonable basis for needing to have the phone on said, you sit on an aisle and put your phone on vibrate – so that you cause the least commotion possible). Once in a while, there’s someone who violates the social norms – cuts in line, etc. That’s just plain rude.
Because, actually – well, let’s consider the definition of “self-absorbed.” “Self-absorbed” means involved with yourself. The pro-disturbance people are self-absorbed: “I want my cell phone, damn the rest of you.” The anti-disturbance people are not, because we (despite how much we love love love our cell phones and blackberries and how important we are in our own minds) agree to turn our cell phones off during movies so as not to disturb those around us. So you really can’t apply the term “self-absorbed” to those who are thinking about their fellow patrons.
Well, frankly, two can play at the slippery slope game of “think of the most absurd thing that could possibly happen then posit that it’s actually going to happen.” But, really, I only do that when someone’s paying me. I will say, though, that I’d come up with a better “emergency” than that one. You see, that technically is not an emergency (unless you are the only trauma doctor in the tri-state area and must rush to the hospital to save your mom). And as someone who has missed just such a call, let me tell you that it all worked out okay in the end, despite the delay between the time my dad called me and when I picked up his voice mail.
That you know of. Many people – most, in fact – do not have eyes in the backs of their heads. And, frankly, when I hear asshats doing what you do, I don’t look at them. The theater is dark and (this is the key) I try very hard to ignore their rudeness and focus on my movie.
I would urge you to spend a moment looking up “self-absorbed” in the dictionary. I suspect you will be surprised by what you find. I would also suggest that you consider that if the world is your living room, it’s also mine.
OKAY BUT YOU NEED TO DO THAT TOO. AS WELL AS READ A DICTIONARY.
self-ab·sorbed (slfb-sôrbd, -zôrbd)
adj.
Excessively self-involved.
Now, wouldn’t you also say that the people bitching and moaning about every little slight inconvience to them are self absorbed? Are you worried about the cell phone users annoying other people in the movies, or are you worried about people annoying you? I would venture to say you don’t give a shit about the other people. You are worried that you will be annoyed. Well, what if it annoys me not to have a phone. It is the same damn thing. I agree, the phone should be on vibrate, but you mean to tell me, you never say something to your husband/wife/friend/kids in the movie? Why is that any different than me answering my phone(that you didn’t even hear ring) and whisper, “I am in a movie, I’ll call you back later.”
Well, considering as often as I can, I sit in the very back row, I don’t think anyone behind me cares…
Well, I am glad to hear that everything ended up ok for you when you were in that situation. But about 6 months ago, my GF father was killed in a car accident. He died instantly, but what if he had made it to the hospital. If you think the movie you are at is more important than the possiblity of someone else never getting to say goodbye to a family member, you are the most self-absorbed person ever. Granted, that isn’t a common occurance, but even if you have to sit through annoyances so that even just one person can say goodbye to a loved one, wouldn’t you do it?
With your calloused responses, you just make yourself out to be the self-absorbed bad guys.
Why do you even have to answer the phone just to say this? Why not let it go to voice mail?
Give up and rent videos for home viewing guys. It seems that there are many who simply are unable to grasp the concept that some go to a theater to enjoy the performance on stage or screen and not to converse by phone with their buddies, probably at another movie in the same theater complex.
I really, really, really shouldn’t respond to this asininity. And if asininity is not a word, it should be.
Sweet. Now we have the same definition. But I have that tingling feeling in my nose. You know the one. The one that says, “Oh, no. Now he’s gonna pervert the issue so that people who care about the feelings of those around them are self-absorbed.”
Uh, no.
Clearly, one finds it difficult to peer into the heart of one’s fellow man. So we judge based on actions. From an objective, rational perspective (stay with me here), who would a jury believe is more sensitive to those around them (i.e., less self-absorbed)? I submit that the jury would find that a person who turns off his cell phone is less self-absorbed than a person who continues to take calls during a movie.
No, I’m pretty sure that the reason I turn off my phone is so that I won’t annoy people around me. But I think I see where you’re going: you’re now going to make the absurd statement that because (in your mind) you and I are concerned about the same thing, it is all morally equivalent.
Fine; I’ll see your annoyance and raise you “rude.” Hah! You can’t tell me that I’m being rude by turning off my phone. Since I turn off my phone so as not to be rude, and you leave yours on because you don’t care (i.e., you’re rude), I win.
Actually, I have never said a word to my husband, wife or kids during a movie. I believe that I once said something to my mother during Mulan, but there were extenuating circumstances. (There was a fire alarm, but they continued playing the movie. I believe I said, “Mom, we should evacuate,” or words to that effect. Never did see the end of that movie, and I also believe that me talking to mom wasn’t a source of annoyance to any of the other patrons.)
You’re missing the point, though. I wonder if you’re doing it deliberately. The point is this: we shouldn’t talk during movies, and you making the “but everyone does it” point doesn’t mitigate the damage. If everyone were as rude as you – talking, taking calls, texting – movies would suck. As it is, there are only a handful of people who are sublimely ignorant of their anti-social behavior. In other words, I don’t encounter your type very often (thank goodness).
Good for you. Now if you would just turn off your phone…
So on the one in 200 million chance that the phone rings and it is you being called to the bedside of a dying loved one, who will live only long enough to see you if you come now, we should permit phones in theaters. Okay, fine. But I think that if your phone rings and it isn’t a dire emergency (it’s just a friend you haven’t spoken with in a while, as you posited initially before this reached its current height of absurdity), you ought to be fined. Pay for everyone’s ticket and their refreshments, plus a full tank of gas for their cars.
Hello! I’m a lawyer! You’re gonna have to do better than that in the insult department to get on my radar.
I really am a tad disappointed that the concept of public shaming doesn’t seem to work anymore.
Luckily for me it doesn’t much matter what you think of me. You made up your mind a long time ago to be offended at the very use of cell phones in a theater (and probably a lot of other places as well). The fact that you would never hear or see my cell phone is irrelevant. The fact that I might not answer a call in the theater out of concern for interrupting your movie going experience is irrelevant, since I make an effort to be as thoughtful as possible and to treat others as I would like to be treated. The fact remains that I am a “self-important twit”. I will try once more to demonstrate my willingness to accomidate you, this time bolding the important parts, since they seem to be constantly getting lost in your self-righteousness.
Let’s say I’m watching a movie in a movie theater. I, of course, turned my cell phone to vibrate before walking in. I check the volume level of my phone a lot, as I am constantly going into meetings at work, church, and other places where people hearing my phone play a midi of Eye of the Tiger would be inappropriate. About 30 minutes in it vibrates. Since I wonder who might be calling me, I pull my phone out of my pocket and, keeping it as low as possible where nobody in the theater other than me can see it, check the caller ID to see who’s calling. Let’s say it’s my dad. Since I’m most likely enjoying the movie, I decide that I will call him back after the movie is over.
That last part bears repeating. I decide to call him back after the movie. Your movie experience is uneffected. You will not hear or see my cell phone unless your head is in my crotch (in which case, I’ll assume you don’t much care for the movie).
Now, let’s say that 30 seconds later, my phone vibrates again. My dad is calling me again. Now, since he called me twice in a very short period of time, I can safely assume that it’s important. Maybe my brother was in a car accident. Maybe my dad’s car broke down somewhere in the middle of December and he’s freezing his ass off with nobody to come pick him up. Maybe my nephew was born four months early with a lot of severe complications. Any number of important things could happen in my personal life which, if they happened to you, would probably merit a similar response to the one I am about to make. Since this appears to be something that can not wait, I get up out of my seat and leave the theater to make a call. If you’re properly engrossed in the movie, you should barely notice it, since it only takes a few seconds. Since something important is clearly going down, it is unlikely that I will be returning, so you won’t see me again. If I determine that it’s not, I’ll get back in my seat swiftly and quietly. The likelyhood of this happening to me more than once during a two hour movie is very, very, very, very, very small.
Had I not had my cell phone with me (or if the signal was jammed), my dad wouldn’t have been able to get through. Could these things wait two hours? I suppose so, but why should they have to?
Do I deny that there are rude people out there who abuse the privilege of having cell phones? Absolutely not. Do I think they are assholes? Definately. Do I think you’re being a tightass about this? For sure.
This thread came to my mind a few hours ago when I was talking to a friend of mine who came into town for the holidays from NYC. I would LOVE to see how you would get along in that town. Everyone is rude, obnoxious, and doesn’t give a damn if they’re interfering in your ability to enjoy your movie/train ride/meal in a restaurant. I wonder if you would go ballistic and killing everyone you find irritating, have a conniption, or continue to sit there and say nothing about it while expecting the management of said establishment to take care of it for you like the little bitch that you are.
If someone is doing something that is interfering in your ability to enjoy the movie, the first thing you should do is say something to them. You could try politely saying, “Excuse me, but your cell phone is distracting from the film. Would you mind putting it away for the rest of the movie?” I think you’d be surprised at how most people would accomidate you. If they don’t, then you need to be a little firmer with them. “Excuse me, but I asked you once nicely to put the cell phone away because I find it distracting and irritating. If you continue, I’m going to go alert management.” After that, you’ll need to get up out of your seat and get someone who’s job it is to take care of such situations. I’m sure that if someone is being that rude, the manager would have no problem comping your ticket price, because that’s the kind of thing a good manager would do.
Instead, you choose to sit there and seethe, steam, and get increasingly frustrated and annoyed. And that, my friend, is entirely your problem.
Hey! I resemble that remark.
Despite Campion’s elequent and eviscerating responses, I’m afraid David Simmons has it right; trying to teach a pig to sing only frustrates the teacher and annoys the pig. I guess I should probably take those dollars I normal budget[sup]*[/sup] to cinema tickets and apply them to the purchase of a first class home entertainment system and extensive DVD collection. I certainly know who among the participants in this thread I’d invite to attend a movie or play (although I’m still not going to pay to see Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants, regardless, Campion 
).
Stranger
[sup]*[/sup]If I actually budgeted my money like I should, instead of relying on my spartan tastes and innate frugality to keep my lifestyle within my means
I have no problem with folks who leave their phone on vibrate in the theater and if they feel it’s an emergency, take the call outside. The reason theaters do things like locking a signal is because too friggin many people are irresponsible and only consider what they want.
Someone suggested asking someone politlely to please not talk on their phone in the theater. Get real. If someone is inconsiderate enough to sit there and chat then there’s a dam good chance they will ignore your request more often than not.
If a theater goes to the exspense of some kind of phone blocker then thats because they’ve had complaints and problems with that very issue. It seems to me they have every righht to make that judgement call and for those few who have to have their phone on, then don’t go there. This reminds me of people lobbying for smokers rights. It’s only those who insist on being blatently inconsiderate of others who make most of this crap happen.
I see cell phones at work all day and they come in real handy. People can call a friend for a little helpful info while they are shopping . What I have a problem with is people answering their phone while we’re in the middle of a sale. If you’d like to ask questions and make a purchase then do that until it’s done. It’s rude to expect me to stand around while you’re on the phone with idle chatter. Others are also waiting to be helped. I’ve walked away from several customers who decided to answer the phone instead of finisheing out business. If I get tied up with another customer then it’s just too bad. It’s the equvilent of losing your place in line. What I don’t understand is the irresitable compulsion to answer the phone if it rings. I’d bet for most people over 90% of their calls could wait just as if they never had a cell and checked the answering machine.
Hah! It’s just as bad from the other end. At a large, well known, Do It Yourself Warehouse the cashier was on a cell phone talking while trying to check me out. At a local liquor store I picked up a Sunday paper outside before the store opened. When I went back to pay for it later the cashier was on the cell phone arranging a trip to Las Vegas with someone. I had to fight with her to get her to pay any attention to me so I could pay for the paper. I came this far || from walking out and I’ve not been back there since.
Of course my reactions are merely a sign of an old man’s extreme fussiness. :rolleyes:
Count me as one of those as well. I think it’s very rude if a worker is on a personal phone call when waiting on a customer. I don’t even like answering the phone at all but that’s unavoidable. I also don’t like coworkers having a private non work related conversation in front of a customer while they are waiting on them. That person deserves your attention. Avoid any conversation when possible while I’m waiting on a customer. If unavoidable say excuse me and ask a brief question. Don’t just interrupt and expect any detailed answer. My response is usually. I’ll be with you in a moment.
MAn I am a fussy old bastard ain’t I?
A few times when I’ve been in line while someone who was supposed to be working was on a personal phone call I fought the urge to just take their phone and hang it up for them. Perhaps I’ll have the nads to try that one day.