Many are trying to do both, if your definition of art can include simple fun and entertainment.
Fie on your pretentious brand! Mine’s a XXXVVIIV-inch and the brand is so pretentious it doesn’t have a name.
Actually it’s a Sony.
Top of the line movies don’t have the deadline and budget pressures TV shows have. You can take a lot longer to shoot a page of script in a movie, which means more control over the location, more rehearsal and more takes. While limited series can have character development, episodic television has to keep things static for fear of changing the chemistry. If ST:TNG had been inherently a movie Riker would have had his own command ages ago.
I’m not knocking TV, but there are plenty of good reasons for people to pay to go to the movies in terms of quality.
Going to the cinema is the only way I watch movies (and even that is rare) because I don’t even own a TV
I had to leave it at my mom’s house (she does have a TV)
Do you ever end up watching movies rented from the library, from Netflix or Amazon, or when they are on TV? If so then you’re still part of the reason why movies are made. Even if you can’t bear to go to a theater, if you (or your library) are willing to give up a few pennies to the movie and are part of the reason why movies keep being made.
Whether or not people like going to theaters is not really the be-all-end-all argument for why movies are still being made. Movie revenue doesn’t end at the ticket booth.
Well, you’ve certainly taught me a valuable lesson about how unappealing it is to be too judgemental. I apologize for the temerity of my OP.
By the way, Tim (of the movie) and Teller (of Penn and Teller) were on Charlie Rose (a TV show) recently, discussing the film, and I found it fascinating. When it comes out on DVD, I’ll watch it, because then I’ll be able to pause it as long as I want when something interesting is shown, and to back up and replay it when something I didn’t quite fully appreciate the first time is said.
I’m so happy that you are setting all kinds of records for the numbers of movies you see, but your approach would never work for me. I’m just not smart enough to get everything in one take. I have to go over stuff a few times before I feel like I really understand it.
Gasp! I bet you read a book more than once, too, don’t you?
Everyone’s answer simply comes down to “I like movies” or “people like movies.” Trivial questions demand trivial answers.
Beats me. Why are there moving pictures?
I guess the big clue is in the multiplex demographic. I certainly don’t feel films are aimed at me, but if I were 18-30 then, yeah, loads of explosions andd car chases for me, and throw in some romance for the girlfriend.
It obv. still works.
I’m baffled how you found my post to respond to, since it doesn’t look like you’ve read this thread. Multiple posters have called out reasons that they - or others they know - like the movie experience or feel it offers something that TV serials do that goes beyond “I like movies” or “people like movies.”
It used to be, years ago, that I could go to a movie theater and there were few to no distractions and I could enjoy the immersive experience. But in recent years it has been the rare exception when there hasn’t been near constant chatter from other movie-goers around me. Far fewer distractions at home. That’s why I’ve given up going to movies in the theater.
That’s why I share the OP’s puzzlement. Am I just particularly cursed? Particularly sensitive? Has the culture just changed so that no one expects quiet in movie theaters anymore? Do people just not care? Have most people become so social that other people talking during a movie is just part of the expected experience? I don’t get it.
Have you started going to different theaters? Because personally, there are several movie theaters here I prefer, and several I have sworn to avoid, solely based on the quality of its typical patrons.
What a silly question. Because they make money. Duh.
That first sentence quoted is a lie. This board is supposedly dedicated to fighting ignorance, yet here you are trying to spread it.
Contrary to your lie film actors and actresses in Hollywood have always been paid amazingly HIGH amounts of money. Charlie Chaplin, aside from the likes of Rockefeller and Henry Ford was the highest paid person in the United States during the height of his career. Who exactly do you think lived in all of those Hollywood and Beverly Hills mansions in the 1920’s and 1930’s homeless bums?
Charlie Chaplin was not "most’ actors; he was one of the most successful, and, I believe, owned a production company with his wife and other successful actors. (I’m sure there are others better informed that I on that issue.) I don’t think we can use Chaplin as a measure of the salary of most of the stars.
Isn’t “lie” a little strong for this board?
Agreed with Alessan on maybe you should try to go to different theaters. I rarely have the issue with people being disruptive. Constant chatter is something I couldn’t stand.
Personally I love the massive screen and great soundsystem. The big screen experience is something I gladly will pay for. I saw “Gravity” in IMAX 3D and it was an utterly amazing cinematic experience that I can never get on TV.
Also, when I watch a movie at home, my girlfriend wants to freaking pause the movie 3-4 times to get a snack or go to the bathroom interrupting the flow of the film - that doesn’t happen at the theater.