Movie Theater Attendance Hits 24-Year Low, Ticket Prices Rise Nearly 4 Percent

The Wrap ^ | January 17, 2018 | Jeremy Fuster

[nopardons]

YIKES...what a story! I'm glad that you and your friend just moved. Sadly, today, most people would have started and argument, which would not have helped at all.

I hope that you enjoyed whatever it was that you went to see.

[nopardons]

THRONE OF BLOOD is a great movie and that last scene is indeed shocking, but also quite riveting. But it isn't overdone,nor as sickening as the stupid slo-mo, gratuitously disgusting with uncalled for gorey death scene of Bonnie and Clyde, in the movie of the same name.

Time was, from the silent era through the 1950s, when operas and operettas were made into movies, as well as movies that contained parts of operas in movies, which were aimed at the general public and yes, they did well at the box office. The same is true for ballet and stories about composers and opera stars.

Though I do admit that watching the silent movie of THE STUDENT PRINCE, for instance, is kind of weird. LOL

I understand your frustration and share it.

[nopardons]

Your post wasn't clear and I'm sorry that I went off on you to the point where you feel obligated to tell me off; however, your explanation helps some.

I am looking forward to seeing THE DARKEST HOUR, though truth to tell, from what I have read about it, the Churchill portrait the film projects, messes with the facts and denigrates the great man, some.

Long ago, going to the movies was a "SHARED" experience, which added to the pleasure of seeing the movie. Those days are long gone and now, not only is it NOT a "shared experience" that is pleasurable, it is one that is HORRID!

Though we don't have a HUGE T.V. screen, as some do, I don't agree with you, that seeing any movie on a gigantic movie theatre screen is all that necessary; however, some people DO have gigantic T.V. screen that function in the same way.

Many historical series/one shot T.V. shows ( Brit ones and now ones from Australia ) are marvelous and more often than not, far superior to any movie made today! Do I think that TENKO, SHOULDER TO SHOULDER, or BY THE SWORD DIVIDED would have been better seen in a movie theatre? NO!

And I doubt that my seeing THE DARKEST HOUR, on T.V., is going to be any the less, for me, than seeing it in a theatre. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this. ;^)

You really should see the original '29 movie ( it's a "talkie; not a silent film ) of THE LETTER! Though I love the '40 Bette Davis one, the original film version of the Somerset Maugham story contains more of the novella, than the latter remake.

[Sans-Culotte]

Darkest Hour was pretty factual, at least for a movie. The now infamous subway scene was bogus, but I expect that sort of thing in a movie treatment. I really don't go to movies very often because I don't care to see what is playing. I have a 60" screen and a decent 5.1 sound system, so I can have a pretty good experience watching movies at home. However, I wanted to see Darkest Hour right away, and contribute to its box office take at least a little. I read the Manchester/Reid 3-vol. bio of Churchill last year, so I was definitely in a mood to see the movie in a theater. The small theater in which my wife and I watched it was sold out, and all the patrons were mature like us, and there were no phones, talking, etc. I'll get the Blu-ray when it is available.

Even though I generally watch movies on TV, I have to say the I had a thrilling experience a couple of years ago when my wife and I watched the 1963 version of Cleopatra (one of my favorite epics) on the big screen during a limited run. Just seeing the names of Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton and Rex Harrison on the big screen was exciting, and it reminded that few of today's stars are of their stature.

I have not seen the early version of The Letter. I've always like the Bette Davis movie because she is great in it and it's directed by William Wyler. I also like Herbert Marshall in films of the 40's. Speaking of Marshall, one of my favorite Maugham adaptations was the 1946 version of The Razor's Edge, in which Marshall plays Somerset Maugham as an onscreen observer of the events. I tend to shy away from early talkies because I find them so static and creaky. I have watched a lot of silent films, and it is really jarring to see movies grind to a halt with the advent of sound. I should probably see it because it has Jeanne Eagels and I don't think I've ever seen her in anything.

[nopardons]

Yes, movies, no matter where they are made, take liberties with the truth. It is to be expected, but it ALWAYS drives me crazy.

I'm a very big Churchill fan ( as well as the rest of his family...especially John Churchill, the first Duke of Marlborough and his immediate family ) and have read most of Winston's books.

Though not a particularly patient person, I have all the patience in the world, when it comes to seeing a "new" movie. *shrugs*

I'm glad that you saw the movie with a crowd of well behaved people!

Oh gee...that '63 CLEOPATRA movie was dreadful! Try to see the Claudette Colbert one, which is also a start studded epic; though it's in black&white. It's light years better!

OTOH...I agree completely with your observation regarding today's so-called actors and actresses and even most of the younger Brit ones now mumble and stink on ice; sadly.

I'm a gigantic Bette Davis fan, have all of her movies on DVD and even the few stinkers, she was in, are light years better than anything made today!

I'm also a big Somerset Maugham fan ( read ALL of his work when I was around 15-16 ) and have seen all of the movies made from his work. They're ALL fantastic!

Aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh...THE RAZOR'S EDGE"; one of my favorite movies ! :-)

Herbert Marshall was a fantastic actor and you'd never know that he had lost a leg in WW I ! His movies are all wonderful and I have all of them.

It sounds as though you and I enjoy a lot of the same films and actors and actresses.

Do try to see the '29 version of THE LETTER; just for seeing Jeanne Eagles act, if for no other reason. But you WILL enjoy it, fr other reasons as well.

[miss marmelstein]

Movies are now splintered into different demographics although there doesn’t seem to be any films for older, mature and/or educated people. The Darkest Hour is very good but it isn’t some new classic. It’s very similar to the Robert Hardy tv series.

I must say that last night we watched Deliverance because my husband hadn’t seen it in awhile. Such a deeply disturbing movie! The 70s were the last gasp of intelligent filmmaking even when tackling such a frightening subject. I suddenly recognized the author, James Dickey, as the sheriff at the end of the movie interrogating Jon Voight. You’ll get a kick out of this: I said to J: he looks just like Grady Sutton!

[miss marmelstein]

Shoulder To Shoulder is available on You Tube. I watched it about two years ago on my bigscreen tv. It wasn’t very good quality because British tv values could be pretty wonky but it certainly held up as a brilliant evocation of the great British suffrage movement with excellent performances from all the women, including Georgia Brown and Sian Phillips.

[nopardons]

There used to be films for the general public ( all ages ), ones for ONLY adults, and yes, kiddie films; though the latter were usually shorts, from the '20s - the '30s; perhaps even as far forward as the '60s.

Now? Now there's just about NOTHING that I care to see. Thus far, I do want to see the new Dickens/A CHRISTMAS CAROL movie ( my progeny saw it and loved it; but I'm very picky, so don't know how I'll react to it ) and THE DARKEST HOUR. That's it and I'm perfectly happy to wait to see these 2 movies when they hit cable.

Love, love, LOVE Robert Hardy ( he was an amazing Essex to Glenda Jackson's Elizabeth I ) and his Churchill was fantastic.

I've never seen DELIVERANCE, but remember when Hollywood still made good to great movies.

Oh my goodness. someone looked like Grady Sutton? REALLY? WOW! LOL

We won a book about W.C. Fields, in a radio contest, back in the early '7os, by knowing who Grady Sutton was. :-)

[nopardons]

I've always loved Sian Phillips and Georgia Brown and SHOULDER TO SHOULDER is SO much better than that POS "SUFFRAGETTE" movie, starring the execrable Meryl Streep. That movie was not only terrible, but played loose & fast with the facts.

Now I'm going to have to go find SHOULDER TO SHOULDER on YouTube and watch it again! Haven't seen it since it first was shown; though I did buy the companion book. :-)

[miss marmelstein]

I had the book too! It also starred Patricia Quinn as one of the daughters (she, who brilliantly plays villainesses) and Angela Punch as the “good” daughter. Punch used to give tours of London when I was there in the 80s.