My last drive-in visit was 1995. Double-feature of “Apollo 13” and “Dangerous Minds.” That drive-in, as well as every other drive-in I’ve ever been to, is long since closed.
The one I saw Tron (and Star Wars for that matter) in closed in 2003!
Two drivein theaters in my county (pop a little over a quarter million). That was as of summer 2019, not sure what COVID has wrought with them.
Last time I went was when Shrek was just released.
I saw Waterworld and I think Men In Black in a drive-in theater in the mid-90s. I worked at a mini-amusement park, and the owner also owned the theater, so employees got free admission. I think that one has since closed, though.
Maybe around 5 or 6 years ago, I was visiting a friend of a friend, and their home was close enough to a newly-built drive-in theater that they could watch the movie (at an inconvenient angle) from their back porch.
Oh, and what happened to originally delay Wonder Woman 1984? November 2019 was too early for COVID-related issues.
The filmakers wanted the June 2020 date, but Warner Bros. wanted a big blockbuster in 2019. Director Patty Jenkins was finishing up a miniseries and was crunched for time on post-production, so the studio eventually gave in.
AFAIK, it was a routine programming and market positioning decision. Principle filming was completed in 2018, but additional filming took place in June 2019. Post-production work pushed it towards a holiday season release. But that put it into competition with another DC movie, Joker, and a number of other high budget, high profile FX/action movies, like Jumanji: The Next Level, Terminator: Dark Fate, and a couple of low-profile movies - Avengers: End Game and Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker. Warner decided to bump it to a summer release. But, then, well…
ETA: ninja’ed.
Mine would have been Top Gun in 1986. The theatre didn’t last long after that and is now somewhere beneath generic 1990s-construction suburbia.
I know drive ins have made a teeny bit of a comeback in some parts of the USA, but I can’t recall actually seeing one that is/was still in business since then. Much to my surprise, Google tells me there’s a 14-screen drive-in within 20 miles of here. Wow! Who knew?
regarding package tracking: it’s sad that I live my life thru my packages, who have traveled more than I have.
Even if they are stuck in some warehouse in New Jersey for days.
My last drive in was Tenet a couple months ago.
Today I learned that you can still buy pogs.
In other news, high population states have more voters, period.
But for darn sure this is just another way of showing that coloring states a single color may be “accurate” for counting EVs, but is misleading as hell for all other purposes. And if we’re using it to show which way the EVs went, it’s only actually meaningful as a graphic if the area of each state is proportional to the EV count, not the actual square mileage of the state.
You’ve probably seen maps like this or this or this that adjust the relative size of each state.
They’re somewhat useful to get a better feel for the situation at a glance, I suppose.
I certainly have. Thanks for the links. Those, and the county-level red-purple-blue maps are very valuable for everyone to understand what’s really happening out there, not just emoting about “stuff” some rant-head told them to emote about.
Though I haven’t seen one for the actual 2020 final EV results. It appears your first link is about 2020, but even in the source it isn’t labeled. It does date from just after this year’s election.
Those are all maps where the numerical data and the graphic are “at the same scale” so to speak.
The other kind, leaving the states at their accurate square mileage is about as goofy as a Mercator projection world map which shows Greenland about the same visual size as South America while it’s actually 1/7th the size. Mercators have their legit uses, but comparing the “size” of things isn’t one of them.
When the whole and entire point of an EV map is to show who won by how much where, using a square-mileage preserving “projection” is being deliberately misleading.
The (similar) image I saw was this:
I was surprised to see that the Denver area was basically a big blob of population in the middle of nowhere.
My dad was a doctor. He used to say that if you had to ask whether the results were statistically significant, they weren’t biologically significant. That is, if the effect was around enough that you were likely to care, you didn’t need to do statistics.