When to go to the cinema

How do you decide whether to devote two hours of your valuable time to going to the cinema? There’s a pretty good method here: The Dilbert Blog: Downer Ratio.

I think he needs to factor in the outrageous (about equal) admission and popcorn (etc) costs.  The more awful the film, the more I resent paying for it and its edible accessories.

Of course there was a time when I went to the cinema at least once a week, didn’t have to fork out for popcorn, and didn’t mind if I saw a few duds. Now, however, when time is so precious, I need to key in my general preferences to Scott Adams’s general formula before my next vist to the movies.

5 thoughts on “When to go to the cinema

  1. I’m with you. I hate going to something that turns out to be lousy. For that reason, I read reviews, pick and choose. The best movies I’ve seen in the last few months (one at the cinema, one a rental) are “The Illusionist” with Edward Norton and “Little Miss Sunshine” with Steve Carell, Toni Collette, et al.
    Certain movies, however, I will go see simply because actors I love are starring in them. “Notes on a Scandal” with Cate Blanchett, Bill Nighy, and Judi Dench, is such a one, though the entire plot is given away in the trailers and it’s the kind of stalkerish, weirdo-friend plot I hate. (Now that I think of it, “Enduring Love,” also had this plot. Absolutely the worst movie I ever saw Bill Nighy in, ditto Daniel Craig, and everyone else remotely connected to it.)
    What movie have you seen, Maxine, that was a costly stinker? And what movies are you looking forward to seeing? I want to see “The Painted Veil” (also with Edward Norton — our best American actor) and “Sweet Land,” a foreign film. I recently saw “History Boys,” which didn’t improve on the play, despite having the resources of film. (It was good, but talky. This works with live theatre, I think, but is harder to sell on a screen. Oh, well.)

  2. Most recently, “Pirates of the Caribbean 2”. Talk about a costly stinker, as well as “taking the piss out of the audience” as I call it. That is, the makers knew that it was part 2 of 3 so that virtually all the viewers would go to no. 3 irresepective of the quality of 2. And I am afraid Bill Nighy was in it, I hope they gave him a big cheque. I would not even let Bill Nighy tempt you on this, Susan– he is covered in barnacles and tentacles so you can’t really recognise him. He probably got them to write it in his contract so that he can pretend that he was never in it in future years.

  3. Alas, I did see it. My adolescent son enjoyed it and I figure that’s who the movie was aimed at (adolescent boys, who are to films what women are to novels: the primary consumers). Yes, poor Bill. He says he no longer eats calamari after that role! On the other hand, he doubtless did get a big check, which enables him to do stuff like “The Vertical Hour” on B’way. I think it’s a worthy trade-off, ’cause otherwise I would never have had the chance to see what a brilliant stage actor he is, to meet him, etc.
    But which movies are you looking forward to seeing?

  4. I don’t mean just myself getting to see him on stage, but people in general. Sorry for the narcissistic pronoun!

  5. Any movie with Viggo Mortensen in it 😉
    Apart from that, anything with a script. I did quite want to see “Children of Men” (from the P D James novel) but blinked and missed it. I’ll watch it on DVD.
    To be honest, I see about 3 films a year at the cinema since my girls became old enough to go on their own (mercifully). My lifestyle doesn’t accommodate spare 2 hour slots, though I did manage to make time for Viggo’s last movie (History of Violence). I think that’s the last film I saw on my own, though I did see POTC2, Narnia, Pride and Prejudice and possibly a couple of others since then with my family. If I were well-organised, I’d list them all on a blog somewhere….oh well…

Comments are closed.