John Crichton
First Post
At most likely $5 a beer (or more) I can't see a problem with it. Morons will ruin a movie if they are drunk or not. It's usually the high school crowd that bugs me the most.
Star Wars makes a BILLION dollars at the domestic Box Office
WayneLigon
Adventurer
That's why we usually go to last-showing movies on school nights, though we will go to Sat and Sun matinees. Sat night, though.. that's something to totally avoid. (Went to see RoTK again in it's fifth week at a Sat matinee; it was sold out shortly after we bought our tickets, which was nothing short of amazing. Yay, LOTRJohn Crichton said:
) I have never seen a theater that served alcohol, so I have no experience with the audience in one.
Flexor the Mighty!
18/100 Strength!
There is a new theater around here that serves alcohol but I haven't been to it. Me and my friends have been wishing for years to get theaters that would serve you a damn beer, now it's coming true. I may go back to the movies again, and a 21 and over rule would get rid of screaming kids and related bull%@*t that I seem to run into at every movie I go to.
Holy Bovine
First Post
Kai Lord said:
No they are perfectly legitimate. And I can easily see a lot of people getting 3 sheets to the wind at a movie theater. Ever been to a baseball/hockey/football game? That would be a more accurate analogy than a resturant.
Taking out your condesending tone and the answer to this is, simply, yes.
Last edited:
Shadowdancer
First Post
There's nothing to stop filmgoers from getting drunk, or high, before the movie. I've encountered that several times, although more frequently when I was in college. Especially at late-night or midnight showings.
But I would enjoy going to a theater that sold alcohol if it meant under 21 couldn't go. I hate it when people bring small kids to movies that are inappropriate for them because they can't afford a babysitter. If they can't afford the babysitter, maybe they can't afford to be going to a movie.
But I would enjoy going to a theater that sold alcohol if it meant under 21 couldn't go. I hate it when people bring small kids to movies that are inappropriate for them because they can't afford a babysitter. If they can't afford the babysitter, maybe they can't afford to be going to a movie.
Shadowdancer
First Post
Actually, the sports event analogy doesn't work, either. The games are usually longer than a movie. And it's not usually that crucial if you get up and go to the concession stand during the game. You're still going to understand the outcome of the game. Yes, you might miss a big play, but most venues now have monitors at the concession stand so you can at least watch the action while you're waiting in line. And at games, there are usually vendors selling to you in the stands, so you don't even have to leave your seat if you don't want to.Holy Bovine said:
The restaurant analogy comes closer.
jdavis
First Post
I must of got your extras then. I'd have to say that a full 1/3 of every movie going experience I have ever had there has been a problem with children, including twice I left with my own children because I didn't want my kids to ruin somebody elses experience. Your supposed to be quiet in movies which is something it's hard for kids to do. Your sporting event theory is totally bunk due to the fact that you are supposed to yell your head off at a sporting event and act crazy, it's the expected behavior. If you were at any kind of sporting event and people were sitting there in the dark being quiet for the full length of the event then you must of been in the twilight zone. If somebody tries to do the freaking wave in a movie theater they are getting kicked out. Would a drunk bother me in a movie theater..... only if he wouldn't shut up, not every person who gets drunk runs around yelling, heck most drunks in a place as dark as a movie theater would probably just pass out.Holy Bovine said:
Point is it's a lot less likely to be a problem than children in a movie theater or especailly young teens in a theater talking and cutting up, which is one of the main reasons you couldn't force me into a theater on a Friday or Saturday night, there is a 99% chance there will be young people having a good old time at the expense of my movie enjoyment (I am sure a lot of people would of loved to kick me out of a theater when I was 16 myself). Teens don't go to the theater on Friday nights to see the movie they go to have fun, the minute the movie isn't exciting to them they have fun in other ways. Anybody who would go to a theater to get drunk would be a idiot to start with (it cost $5 for a coke, a beer would be astronomical not to mention the 8 to 10 it would take to get them drunk). Why pay $100 on alcohol to get drunk in the dark with people telling you to shut the hell up when you can get drunk in any bar cheaper and can actually interact with other people (which is why many people drink to start with). It's far more likely a person got drunk before the movie than during it and that can happen at any theater, but I've never had that problem, I have had several dozens of problems with kids in theaters though, some that actually broke down into shouting matches or required somebody to get a manager to kick the kids out. I understand your concerns about the drinking issue but if you have never been in a theater where some stupid 14 year old is throwing M&Ms at the back of your head or kicking the back of your seat while goofing off with his friends then I want to move to where you are because it sounds a lot like fantasyland. Myself I am not a fan of beer but if there was a theater that didn't allow people under 21 into it around here I'd never go to anyplace else.
Last edited:
WizarDru
Adventurer
An interesting mental exercise, but it's really not much more than that. In 1978, video games didn't have nearly the penetration they do now, the internet was a military and scientific tool, computers were a rich man's toy, cable was only in a handful of homes, VHS and Beta had not reached either an acceptable price level OR any significant amount of content, and several other diversions also didn't exist.
Further, in 1977, they made fewer movies than today, and hade a drastically reduced emphasis on films making a huge profit on it's opening weekend. Disposable income was greater per family. The number of movie theaters was also much less, by 15,000 screens or so. In many cases, you had much less choice, so people migrated to certain releases, because they had less choice in the matter. And the further back you go, the more polarized this becomes. When Star Wars was released, some 4100 films were released internationally that year. In 1952, that number was closer to 2500. In 1939, there were only 1900. In 2003, that number was 10,180. Never mind that, when Star Wars came out, the concepts of a marketing blitz had only been done once or twice before, and the viewing public wasn't tired of the concept yet (Planet of the Apes really having been the only big example previously).
And don't forget, prior to the mid-60s, going to see a movie could be an all day event. You might see two movies, three short subjects and some cartoons and a serial in one sitting. So some of the old movies might be considered 'double-dipping'. And I'm not sure I jibe with their number-crunching, anywho.
There are simply too many factors that would make Star Wars less of a blockbuster than it is, now.
As for theaters with alcohol...no big deal. I first went to one back in the mid-80s. It was OK. Being able to eat pizza and having a little table was what made it better, for me. It was more like a pub then a movie theater, in atmosphere. Too bad they went out of business, like so many theaters are, these days.
Further, in 1977, they made fewer movies than today, and hade a drastically reduced emphasis on films making a huge profit on it's opening weekend. Disposable income was greater per family. The number of movie theaters was also much less, by 15,000 screens or so. In many cases, you had much less choice, so people migrated to certain releases, because they had less choice in the matter. And the further back you go, the more polarized this becomes. When Star Wars was released, some 4100 films were released internationally that year. In 1952, that number was closer to 2500. In 1939, there were only 1900. In 2003, that number was 10,180. Never mind that, when Star Wars came out, the concepts of a marketing blitz had only been done once or twice before, and the viewing public wasn't tired of the concept yet (Planet of the Apes really having been the only big example previously).
And don't forget, prior to the mid-60s, going to see a movie could be an all day event. You might see two movies, three short subjects and some cartoons and a serial in one sitting. So some of the old movies might be considered 'double-dipping'. And I'm not sure I jibe with their number-crunching, anywho.
There are simply too many factors that would make Star Wars less of a blockbuster than it is, now.
As for theaters with alcohol...no big deal. I first went to one back in the mid-80s. It was OK. Being able to eat pizza and having a little table was what made it better, for me. It was more like a pub then a movie theater, in atmosphere. Too bad they went out of business, like so many theaters are, these days.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
