Submitted 1 year ago by Lauchs@lemmy.world to moviesandtv@lemmy.film
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/6b1e7ca1-9da7-4158-9657-b8289b7eec3d.mp4
Sitting close to a giant tv just isn’t the same as seeing something on a legit giant screen.
Obviously it’s not exactly the same, but my sectional is way more comfy than theater seats, being in control of the film/sound/lighting is way more convenient, and the percentage of my vision filled by the screen is roughly the same as shooting in the back half of the theater.
My home setup is preferable to the theater in all but the rare film that actually gets full mileage out of the screen.
All of that is true, but what kills the movie theaters for me is other people. I don't think i would ever go back to people being on their phones, talking, or just laughing obnoxiously. Some people like that experience, to me it's torture. And while the screen and the sound might never be the same, it's also not like back in the early 90's when i was in the theatres for the first time, where at home you have a shitty ass tv and VCR's.
Fair, I think I’m pretty lucky as my local theatre is an independent one and somehow attracts only movie people rather than talkers or phone folks.
Though I will say a comedies and horrors are better with dozens or hundreds of people. Something really satisfying about hearing a genuine terrified scream on a jump scare or a crowd roar with laughter.
Again, I’m fully lucky with my crowd I suppose. I did have a terrible experience awhile ago in a different, non indie theatre.
Fully agree on the conveniences and comfort.
I also dig action, sci fi and have a movie theatre that rocks classics so I’m biased and probably feel a lot higher percentage of films are better big. I just got to watch Aliens on the big screen. I’ve seen that movie so many times but to see Lieutenant Ripley rocking that power loader at twice the size of God was a whole different experience.
For me, IMAX is the only screen that still makes movies seem impressive. Regular movie screens are not all that much more impressive than my 75” tv.
Well, unless you are watching the special formata most films are still finished/screened at 2k. Sure, the cinema DCP will be way higher bitrate, but depending on the title, you’ll hardly notice it.
Having a big oled playing blu-rays a couple meters in front of you will definitely beat out going to a random theater because of the freedom you have + HDR.
I run an oled it’s contract is definitely good but You should check out a Dolby cinema if you haven’t it Comes close but much bigger screen
Again, to each their own! I love seeing a beautiful masterpiece at twice the size of God. There’s something about watching incredible visuals at larger than life sizes. Maybe with a giant high def wall screen projector you could come close but to me, seeing something on a 70 feet screen destroys my high end 65" tv any day of the week.
There’s also something to be said about surrendering your freedom. I watched Skinamarink in a legit theatre and had I not, I would have absolutely succumbed to the boredom and taken out my phone. Or done anything else. But that boredom and lack of anything else is exactly what made that movie work. It may be a unique case but it absolutely made it better.
Especially seeing a movie in Cinerama format. There was a Cinerama theater in Seattle but it was owned by Paul Allen and I don’t think it ever really made money. But he kept it a special place that would have movie marathons with all the old films he had collected. The yearly 2001 showing was a must for me. That movie is just not the same after seeing it so big and so loud
Oh wild, never heard of that format!
I’m really lucky, 5 minutes from my door there’s a local theatre that does awesome classics, cool events etc (like, I saw Oldboy there last night.) But fully hear you, once you watch a movie on the big screen like that, the home viewing just doesn’t compare.
4K on a 55" screen looks, IMO, a lot better than whatever the resolution of a regular theatre cut is when blasted across that 70 foot wall. And, much more importantly, the 240hz refresh rate on my TV absolutely destroys that of the average cinema. Modern movies rely much more heavily on fast action and camera movements that look absolutely awful when displayed at 24fps.
So, yeah, I really do find myself enjoying movies more in my “home cinema” than I do in an actual cinema. Plus, no kids or crying babies, no one kicking my seat or blocking my view, snacks are way cheaper and I can pause whenever I like.
I’ve really lost any love I used to have for the theatre screening. Its not without its charms (getting to experience the crowd reactions to Infinity War and Endgame was really cool) but I just don’t think that’s enough to save it.
Tom Cruise here they are! The person with motion smoothing!!
I agree with you on everything but the 240Hz I cannot stand anything past 24fps for movies it gives me a headache.
It would be interesting measuring field of view.
I have a 65" 8K television in my living room with 7.1 Dolby Atmos/DTS:X and in general, I prefer that to the movie going experience.
Yeah, I’d be curious about that.
Though I think your brain just knows, maybe subconsciously, that something in your living room is probably not 70 feet tall. So when I rewatched Jurassic Park in theatres, that T Rex was just that much more impressive being 70 feet tall than it was when we watched it on a high quality projector at a friend’s.
To each their own though!
Seeing Oppenheimer in the 70mm IMAX version in Providence agrees. Even if the Trinity test scene was underwhelming.
Yeah, I was kind of stunned they didn’t rock more visual craziness. But the movie was still great.
The visual prowess of it comes in the colors and contrast roll off. Being film it loses in dynamic range but the sharpness and aesthetic was phenomenal.
What if I sit really close with backwards binocular?
Ahahaha can’t argue with that!
!moviesnob Seal of Approval. 🏆 👍
My vote is for movie theatres, say what you will. While I understand and appreciate the convenience and comfort of home theatre viewing, it’s not and can never be the same experience. Go see, for example, any of Christopher Nolan’s works or any of the Wachowskis works at the movies and then at home and tell me there’s no difference (or home viewing is better).
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn’t work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: !moviesnob@lemmy.film
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Meh, 10 feet from a nice big screen with a decent sound bar and subwoofer is pretty nice.
The ability to pause and control of your surroundings is pretty huge too.
If you’re comparing the two, then you need to look at the advantages of both.
Lauchs@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Oh absolutely there are advatnages to both. I was at a movie last night and not being able to pause it to use the bathroom was incredibly frustrating.
But for size/scale, which is the specific thing the post is about, there ism’t really a comparison.
Illbeinthekapuasuite@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
I’ve made thoughts on this clear already, but I’ll regurgitate them here xd:
Being around annoying people is shit. The prices are shit, the screen is shit (look at all the imperfections on the display surface.) the sound is incredibly loud and a lot of times, shit.
I’ll stay at home, make a nice spread, watch the movie on an hd screen with great sound and surrounded by the people I like. The movies are dead. Museums.
korewa@reddthat.com 1 year ago
I have a 135” home theater sitting 13’ away. I think it’s a sweet spot, didn’t cost me more than my 65” tv in the living room And I do appreciate big screens I went on 3am showing for Oppenheimer in 70mm.