Would you pay $50 to watch new movies at home?

I don't know why so many people have an issue with this. After my wife and I buy a $17 IMAX ticket, Popcorn and two drinks (plus maybe Candy) I believe I've already spent that much. I would have no issue buying this for the house. If money is the issue, no reason to get butt hurt about it, don't buy it and keep going to the movies the way you have been. Regardless of those opinions this is a great idea.I didn't make a home theater for nothing.
Oh, my post simply pointed out the logical end game of the idea with respect to the theater business and its effect on them. I imagine I'm one of those bad, bad , cheapskate people, who never goes to the movies anyway.

In fact, the 1st and only Imax movie I've gone to was a bust. This was the 2nd installment of the "Transformers" franchise. It was pretty obvious the film wasn't shot with Imax cameras in the first place. Consequently, the fish eye projection distortion at the edge of the frame was unbearable. I couldn't wait for Redbox to get it in stock so I could watch, and actually enjoy it on me home telly.

When I started going to the movies it was 35 cents to get in. A quarter for a hot dog. 10 cent cotton candy and a drop down cup carbonated beverage for 25 cent. Didn't matter what was playing unless it was too long and boring...such as Tarzan's Greatest Adventure
When I started smoking, cigarettes were 33 cents a pack. I'm still coughing from that! :eek: (Since quit though). Come to think of it though, I do believe I can recall movies @ a quarter, possibly less. We had 2 theaters on the main street where I live in the city, but they've been gone for literally decades.
 
Oh, my post simply pointed out the logical end game of the idea with respect to the theater business and its effect on them. I imagine I'm one of those bad, bad , cheapskate people, who never goes to the movies anyway.

In fact, the 1st and only Imax movie I've gone to was a bust. This was the 2nd installment of the "Transformers" franchise. It was pretty obvious the film wasn't shot with Imax cameras in the first place. Consequently, the fish eye projection distortion at the edge of the frame was unbearable. I couldn't wait for Redbox to get it in stock so I could watch, and actually enjoy it on me home telly.

When I started smoking, cigarettes were 33 cents a pack. I'm still coughing from that! :eek: (Since quit though). Come to think of it though, I do believe I can recall movies @ a quarter, possibly less. We had 2 theaters on the main street where I live in the city, but they've been gone for literally decades.

That is a sensible answer. I can't argue with that.
 
I'd do it to avoid the incredibly annoying people at the cinema/movie theatres.
People who use their phone during the movie so you can see the white glow in the corner of your vision.
Or those that find the need to talk throughout the film adding their own layer of moronic commentary.
Or perhaps the neanderthal movie goer who hasn't yet discovered the ability to eat food with their mouth CLOSED. They need a slap.
Then you've got your ***** late attenders who have to walk across the screen to get to their stupid seat. I wish the doors would be guarded against this kind of halfwit and their spawn.
And don't get me started on babies and the literally retarded. There was once a retard in my show sitting at the back of the theatre who would let out a moan every 3 seconds. Obviously I left as who can enjoy a film with that going on. I bet it didn't even know where or what it was.

/rant
I'm not sure, but I don't think you're allowed to say any of that, especially with respect to the IQ challenged.

Oh what the hell, let it rip......:eek:
 
Not no but hell no! Then the theaters charge a fortune then stick a big one up your *** if you want anything from the concession stand. We have laws that prosecute those raising prices during disasters but it's ok for these thieves to charge $5.50 for a small coke....
 
I honestly find it hard to believe that someone who founded one of the biggest piracy sites out there is trying to essentially promote movie piracy by charging you $200 for your first movie (Cost of receiver plus the movie) and $50 for every one thereafter.

I'd rather spend that $200 on several trips to my local theater or DVDs of recent movies than get this device...
 
I honestly find it hard to believe that someone who founded one of the biggest piracy sites out there is trying to essentially promote movie piracy by charging you $200 for your first movie (Cost of receiver plus the movie) and $50 for every one thereafter.

I'd rather spend that $200 on several trips to my local theater or DVDs of recent movies than get this device...
Like anything new, early adopters will pay the higher price until they have offset some of the development costs. Then down the line the box will become free and you will only be charged for what you rent.
 
This is one of those "bright ideas" which will eventually only benefit the "fat cats" in Hollywood. The theater business, (I've heard), is already depressed. I can only imagine what that industry will suffer should this concept be actualized.

No matter though, it's none of you who will likely lose their income over it."No skin off my nose", as it were. Yet the same people you constantly ***** about, ( MPAA lawyers and the studio moguls), would be the ones to reap the whirlwind of profits.

No matter though, no amount of privacy invasion will keep you off of your smart phones, and no amount of people losing their income and jobs will stop you from doing what's most convenient for yourselves.
And its those theater execs that make, IMHO, stupid moves like not allowing 4K Blu-ray playback on HTPCs - further limiting a declining market.

In our area, there are at least two multiplex theaters that have powered, reclining seats - in one of those, all of the individual theaters have those. Every movie that I have seen in that particular multiplex has been sold out. You can reserve specific seats on line ahead of time. That said, its more expensive than the rest of the theaters in the area - for my wife and I reserving on line ahead of time, the cost for seats alone is approximately $25.

The number of people those theaters hold is less, but they might be making money, and in this age of home theaters, I think they are trying to entice those who have home theaters out. I've heard of other cities that also have similar theaters, and I think it is in response to people going to the movies less these days.

That said, the multiplex where every theater has those seats has only a few theaters in it (those on the end) where the noise from adjoining theaters does not detract from the experience. I would be more inclined to go if the sound proofing was better. Most of the theaters in our area are Regals, and they absolutely suck sound wise and not to mention that their theaters are probably never mopped meaning your every step sticks to the floor. In addition, they sometimes serve moldy popcorn - I'll never go to another Regal again.

There is also one multiplex in our area where all movies are $2.00. Movies go there after they are out of the mainstream movie theaters - it is a bargain, but they are heavy on commercials and the theaters are not the greatest.

We used to have THX theaters that could not be matched in terms of sound quality and viewing experience, but they were torn down. Now, there are only two multiplex theaters that I consider are good enough - sound wise and in not hearing the movie in the next theater., Those theaters do not have the recliners.

With an utterly crappy experience like the Regals in our area, its no wonder to me that the movie theater experience is declining.

ATM, I consider my home theater to have better sound than all but the two best multiplexes. My wife and I have no children, so it is most often a better experience just to stay home, watch a Blu-ray, Netflix, or Hulu.
 
Oh, my post simply pointed out the logical end game of the idea with respect to the theater business and its effect on them. I imagine I'm one of those bad, bad , cheapskate people, who never goes to the movies anyway.

In fact, the 1st and only Imax movie I've gone to was a bust. This was the 2nd installment of the "Transformers" franchise. It was pretty obvious the film wasn't shot with Imax cameras in the first place. Consequently, the fish eye projection distortion at the edge of the frame was unbearable. I couldn't wait for Redbox to get it in stock so I could watch, and actually enjoy it on me home telly.

When I started smoking, cigarettes were 33 cents a pack. I'm still coughing from that! :eek: (Since quit though). Come to think of it though, I do believe I can recall movies @ a quarter, possibly less. We had 2 theaters on the main street where I live in the city, but they've been gone for literally decades.
Ya beat me by 2 cents on the butts. 35 cent a pack. The two theaters I went to are down to one but it's still kickin
 
Well atm it costs more then $100 for me to take my family to the theater so YES I would pay $50.00 to see a show in my own home, with BETTER popcorn and snacks to boot! nice!
 
Yes I would - for select movies. As a few have mentioned already, taking the family is easily this much and considerably more after snacks.
 
YES I would pay $50.00 to see a show in my own home, with BETTER popcorn and snacks to boot! nice!
Ah yes, "the wonders of microwave".
Yes I would - for select movies. As a few have mentioned already, taking the family is easily this much and considerably more after snacks.
From the point of someone who is admittedly way outside the mainstream of contemporary society, this seems like the worst idea / value ever......:D

I guess this partially depends on how you view a movie versus a trip to the movies. If you believe it's a social event, a family oriented outing, this idea sucks to no end. After all, you can sit in your home theater whenever you like. If the screen isn't fifty bucks full, you run the risk of it becoming just another venue for family disagreements..:eek: (That only qualifies as an "upside" by the skin of its teeth).

It's scary how many DVD sets I have laying around the house gathering dust. (And there's plenty of that if you're using clumping clay cat litter as I am). I normally devote, and try to limit my TV viewing to the scripted dramas in prime time. One of these days, (if I don't kick the bucket first), I'm going to watch the 4 seasons of "Game of Thrones" I bought and set down somewhere, assuming I can still find them.

So, "a dollar feefty, si, feefty dolares, ningun camino Rutherford"!
 
Last edited:
Hell No!! There are so many ways to get new movies via net it's ridiculous.
No, I don't advocate piracy. There are legitimate ways to DL or stream them.
What a joke.:cool:
 
Ah yes, "the wonders of microwave".
From the point of someone who is admittedly way outside the mainstream of contemporary society, this seems like the worst idea / value ever......:D

I guess this partially depends on how you view a movie versus a trip to the movies. If you believe it's a social event, a family oriented outing, this idea sucks to no end. After all, you can sit in your home theater whenever you like. If the screen isn't fifty bucks full, you run the risk of it becoming just another venue for family disagreements..:eek: (That only qualifies as an "upside" by the skin of its teeth).

It's scary how many DVD sets I have laying around the house gathering dust. (And there's plenty of that if you're using clumping clay cat litter as I am). I normally devote, and try to limit my TV viewing to the scripted dramas in prime time. One of these days, (if I don't kick the bucket first), I'm going to watch the 4 seasons of "Game of Thrones" I bought and set down somewhere, assuming I can still find them.

So, "a dollar feefty, si, feefty dolares, ningun camino Rutherford"!

Less likely to get shot in my home theater than at the theater... O_o
 
Less likely to get shot in my home theater than at the theater... O_o
Quite the opposite on these mean streets. As a result, I've taken to listening to symphonic metal. Nightwish on Blu-Ray drowns out the gunfire, hip-hop, and constant screaming outside. I just fire something like that up, kick back, and hope any stray bullets lodge in the brick exterior walls.....:cool:(y)

CODA: I almost forgot. :D You should also set the alarm system and turn on the security monitors so nothing sneaks up on you.
 
Absolutely would, but only under the condition that the movie your getting on the set top box is of the highest fidelity ... If not I'd rather go to IMAX or wait until the blu-ray is released. The math is simple ... if you have a home theatre that accommodates more than 3 people it's worth it as IMAX costs $17 per person ($51) You have the movie for 2 days which means if its good you can re-watch multiple times and if you have more than 3 people say 6 you are now getting the movie for half the price than the theater .... but again if it's netflix quality I wouldn't bother ... it has to be high fidelity video and audio otherwise you can't really compare it to an IMAX viewing ...
 
Absolutely would, but only under the condition that the movie your getting on the set top box is of the highest fidelity ... If not I'd rather go to IMAX or wait until the blu-ray is released. The math is simple ... if you have a home theatre that accommodates more than 3 people it's worth it as IMAX costs $17 per person ($51) You have the movie for 2 days which means if its good you can re-watch multiple times and if you have more than 3 people say 6 you are now getting the movie for half the price than the theater .... but again if it's netflix quality I wouldn't bother ... it has to be high fidelity video and audio otherwise you can't really compare it to an IMAX viewing ...
It's rare to find IMAX screens in private residences even today.
 
I vote for it being a simple delusion.
True or............, LSD won't enable you to "fold space" as would "spice", (*), but it might enable a person to bend the TV screen enough to make to think you're at an Imax theater. So, "illusion", "delusion", or "confusion", you make the call! :eek:

(*) If that reference is unclear, refer to Frank Herbert's "Dune" novel(s).
 
Back