Should America Re-Open Its Movie Theatres? (npr.org) 244
70% of America's movie theatres have now re-opened for business, reports NPR:
"When our patrons come back, they'll see the safe environment we've provided for them," said John Fithian, president and CEO of the National Association of Theater Owners.
Fithian invited two medical experts and the heads of the country's biggest theater chains to launch a public awareness campaign dubbed "CinemaSafe," meant to ease moviegoer's fears. The campaign featured new industry-wide health and safety protocols, including mandatory face masks for moviegoers and employees, social distancing and regular sanitizing in theaters with better air ventilation, reduced theater capacity (most between 30% and 50%), and contact-less, electronic ticket sales.
Fithian says the protocols will be followed by more than 2,600 theater locations, including more than 30,000 screens in the U.S. The National Association of Theater Owners used guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
"It's important to understand that going to the movies is not risk free," said David F. Goldsmith, an epidemiologist at George Washington University who consulted with the National Association of Theater Owners on the protocols. Still, during the announcement, he said he had not seen any medical literature evidence showing movie theaters around the world have been a venue for viral transmission of COVID-19. "Honestly, time will tell," he said.
The New York Times reports that six U.S. states say it's still too dangerous to open their movie theatres — New York, California, New Jersey, North Carolina, Maryland and New Mexico.
But Megan Colligan, the president of Imax Entertainment, countered at a news conference Friday that "Some people go to the gym, some people go to church, some people need to go to the beach and surf, and some people really do need to go to the movies."
Fithian invited two medical experts and the heads of the country's biggest theater chains to launch a public awareness campaign dubbed "CinemaSafe," meant to ease moviegoer's fears. The campaign featured new industry-wide health and safety protocols, including mandatory face masks for moviegoers and employees, social distancing and regular sanitizing in theaters with better air ventilation, reduced theater capacity (most between 30% and 50%), and contact-less, electronic ticket sales.
Fithian says the protocols will be followed by more than 2,600 theater locations, including more than 30,000 screens in the U.S. The National Association of Theater Owners used guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
"It's important to understand that going to the movies is not risk free," said David F. Goldsmith, an epidemiologist at George Washington University who consulted with the National Association of Theater Owners on the protocols. Still, during the announcement, he said he had not seen any medical literature evidence showing movie theaters around the world have been a venue for viral transmission of COVID-19. "Honestly, time will tell," he said.
The New York Times reports that six U.S. states say it's still too dangerous to open their movie theatres — New York, California, New Jersey, North Carolina, Maryland and New Mexico.
But Megan Colligan, the president of Imax Entertainment, countered at a news conference Friday that "Some people go to the gym, some people go to church, some people need to go to the beach and surf, and some people really do need to go to the movies."
Body fluids (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Body fluids (Score:5, Interesting)
I believe that many people agree with your thinking. And therefore, the movie theater business and the film studios will never recover or expect pre-covid levels of revenues. I think this is a good thing for true nerds of film.
Why? The film studios for the last 10-20 years focused on a relatively safe and profitable business of making unoffending movies about nothing. Mostly superhero films, their prequels sequels, and reboots. This model was profitable because of the brick and mortar box office.
Now with the box office revenue gone, I think the Hollywood producers will realize that the age of movies that cost hundreds of millions each is gone. Instead of making one film that costs 300 millions, they will choose to invest into ten movies that cost less than 30 millions each, many released directly to streaming platforms. This will sure lead to some great innovation and a big time return to art house cinema
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Never is a long time.
I am inclined to disagree with your assessment.
I think it is only accurate to say that they will not recover or expect pre-covid levels of revenues for the immediately foreseeable future. It is, I think, expected that the industry will eventually recover, but nobody can really predict how long for sure that is going to take.
Re: Body fluids (Score:2)
I think your predictions for the industry ignore the actual market. It's not like there are all these great ideas that aren't getting produced. It's not like the 90s, when digital video opened up a vast pool of talent previously unable to get their films made.
Nowadays the problem is that there's too much content, it's mostly derivative, and the market fragmentation is pushing out quality in favor of quantity.
What you're describing (10x the movies) only makes this worse.
What you want is a smaller number of m
Re: Body fluids (Score:2)
No.
Streaming revenues will not be sufficient to replace theater release revenue for big-budget films.
A "low budget" $30 Million movie will have a tremendously hard time just re-coupling it's $30 million cost, let alone generate sufficient profit to off-set losses on other projects.
Imagine a family of five that wants to see the latest movie - in the theater the studio getS the lions share of those 5 tickets (2x adult, 3x child), maybe as much as $35-40. Now, what will that family pay to stream the same movie
A missed point (Score:5, Interesting)
If seeing a movie is more important to you than your grandparents, or the person you know who is seriously ill already, or anyone without health insurance. If seeing a movie is worth penalizing one of them to drowning in their own fluids; by all means, go.
One point that seems to be missing in this discussion is: are there any movies actually worth seeing?
I haven't seen a movie in the theatre since Avengers, and I don't know of any coming up that will be worth the trip/expense/babysitting and general hassle.
My TV is *real big*, I can make popcorn for pennies (including the butter), and I can hit pause to use the bathroom any time I want.
Oh, and Covid. There's also that.
Re:A missed point (Score:4, Funny)
"One point that seems to be missing in this discussion is: are there any movies actually worth seeing?"
Sure, there's lots of them for the movie buff, Wonderwoman, The New Mutants, Black Widow, Shazam, Spawn, Suicide Squad...
mmmh, I begin to see what you mean.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't seen a movie in the theatre since Avengers, and I don't know of any coming up that will be worth the trip/expense/babysitting and general hassle.
If you need to hire someone to babysitting, rather than needing to be babysat yourself, you were never the core audience for movies.
Re: A missed point (Score:2)
You are making good points, but young people love huge crowds. Whether it's a Rod Stuart's concert in South America or a National-Socialist larty gathering kn Nuremberg, it has roots in this youth tendency.
I am not young, i hate crowds, but i am against simple dismissing as stupidity this natural objective factor
False premises (Score:3, Interesting)
If seeing a movie is more important to you than your grandparents>
What about people who will not see the grandparents (or parents) for some time?
Also, what if your grandparent is Hitler.
or the person you know who is seriously ill already
What if you aren't staying with someone seriously ill? Or anyone at all?
Basically you are laying out all of these extreme scenarios when for the vast majority of people that might go, the risk profile to others is extremely low.
Is mandating that everyone NOT see movies
Re: (Score:2)
Also, what if your grandparent is Hitler.
I thought he was already dead?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Body fluids (Score:3)
My grandparents live out of state. I do not know anyone over the age of 45, and they're all in fair health, and there's only one person I hang out with in person. Everyone I associate with has health insurance.
I'm gonna go.
Re: Body fluids (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Jesus, what a crappy fear ridden country this has become.
Re: (Score:2)
My 80-year-old father and I agree with you. When his church re-opened, he was excited to go back for the first time in months. My brother and I jokingly warned him about people who might come without wearing a mask, and that he might die. He said, "I'm going to die of something, sometime, I'm not going to stop living in the meantime!"
Re: (Score:2)
So if I go to a movie, my grandfather is going to die? Is that how this works?
Oh wait, if I go to a movie, there is a tiny fraction of a percent chance that my grandfather will die. Or if I get in my car and drive somewhere with him in the back seat. I guess we shouldn't drive anywhere then either!
Re: (Score:2)
60% effective administered to 100% of the population will bring about the "herd immunity" that you hoped to get through "free" exposure.
So, no problem there as long as we have it.
Re: (Score:2)
60% effective administered to 100% of the population will bring about the "herd immunity" that you hoped to get through "free" exposure.
Except unless you mandate it, a large percentage simply won't get it. A small number for legitimate medical reasons, but most because (insert crazy conspiracy theory here, there are plenty to go around).
60% effective administered to more like 60% of the population will not be nearly as good.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> Half a million people die with the flu each year
Your number is drastically inflated. That would have been a hell of a bad year. Also, an interesting look at how they even come up with the flu numbers, anyway:
https://theweek.com/speedreads... [theweek.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Your number is drastically inflated.
https://www.health.com/conditi... [health.com]
Globally, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that the flu kills 290,000 to 650,000 people per year.
Re: (Score:2)
you see the word "estimates" in there? try to find the number of actual confirmed flu deaths. you will be surprised.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: You Dumb Fucks (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no reason to believe that early Covid vaccine will be 60% effective.
Why not, professor?
We have been living with influenza forever.
Which has nothing to do with covid-19.
I think
There, found your problem.
Re: (Score:3)
All over the world? Or where? Because in the US, it's 20,000 to 70,000 who died from the flu annually in the past decades. Which is a tad bit less than the 160,000 Covid killed in just half a year.
Re: You Dumb Fucks (Score:5, Informative)
Diagnosed flu deaths run about 20K per year (CDC inflates the number later to account for un-diagnosed deaths). Covid is at 180K in the US and we continue to drop like flies to the tune of about 1K per day, so right now Covid is about 10X worse in terms of deaths than flu. At current rates we could hit 300K by the end of the year. If this thing runs for two years like Spanish flu did with its waves, then we could easily get to the Spanish flu death toll. I do have hope that we will now see workable drugs and it won't get that bad but barring such developments this pandemic is starting to rival the worst of the worst for last century.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, you're dumb as fuck if you think everyone is from the US.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's always ironic when Anonymous Cowards are so eager to demonstrate their imbecility.
The article you reference is talking about third world countries with people living in slums.
Also... some elementary mathematics: The number of deaths due to Covid is related to the number of infections. As the number of infections climbs because morons like yourself fail to socially distance and wear masks, the number of deaths also increases EXPONENTIALLY. Do you understand wh
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
" The article you reference is talking about third world countries with people living in slums."
Now what countries come to mind when one says "slums"? India? India has embraced HCQ widely as a preventive and has a deaths-per-million population of 41.
But the rate of increase in deaths in India shows no sign of slowing, and the deaths are mounting. It doesn't seem like HCQ is proving to be effective there if rates are climbing.
Re:You Dumb Fucks (Score:4, Interesting)
While I understand what you are saying, it is worth pointing out that it's not because people who might want a return to normalcy soon are necessarily being "dumb fucks" as you suggested.
There is a biological and entirely real human need for companionship and participation in things that people do in groups. Humans are social creatures, and a virus isn't going to change that. The degree to which people need this kind contact can vary widely, of course.
Suppressing this need in the long term interests of society is certainly possible, but after some time. fatigue will set in, and some people are already simply too psychologically exhausted from the ordeal to sustain it. I would compare the social distancing that we need to practice roughly to using starvation tactics in dieting, where you diet simply by restricting calorie count to perhaps about half of your otherwise daily recommended total. It can certainly work for losing weight, but it isn't sustainable for long periods.
Re:You Dumb Fucks (Score:4, Insightful)
No, they're pretty much dumb fucks.
Part of the problem is that their thinking goes like this: "My lifestyle has been compromised, I've suffered enough, I shouldn't have to do this any more. WAAAAAHHH!"
That is stupidity on one hand and emotional immaturity on the other.
It's a fucking virus. It will spread given the opportunity. The only way to counter it is to deny it that opportunity. Bitching about your lifestyle being compromised is simply denying reality.
Similarly, if you're a business owner and you're trying to cling to the way things were before instead of adapting, then you're not accepting the reality of the situation. Your business model is - in all likelihood - dead. Either adapt or resign yourself to losing your business.
This is one virus. There can and will be others. You think wet markets are going away and jumps between species are going to stop? I've got bad news for you pal - the issue here isn't just the wet markets, it's the highly interconnected nature of our world. There will be another pandemic. That is virtually indisputable. So get with the program and realize that social distancing may become a regular aspect of our lifestyle for decades to come.
The irony here, of course, is that the anti-mask, anti-social distancing rhetoric of the Republicans is a great way for them to decimate their own constituency. COVID hits those with low incomes and poor or no health insurance harder. If the Republicans had half a brain between them, they'd be trying to keep their constituents alive. Instead they're encouraging those likely to be hit harder to reject those measures which might keep them alive because... 'freedom'?
Honestly, it's literally the dumbest political move I've seen in a while.
Re: (Score:3)
Part of the problem is that their thinking goes like this: "My lifestyle has been compromised, I've suffered enough, I shouldn't have to do this any more. WAAAAAHHH!"
Sadly, you're not wrong.
Some people think that since "they've been good" and they aren't sick, they can relax and go back to their their daily activities as if nothing was amiss.
It's as if they think they've built up a resistance by "being good" and that will somehow offset the possibility of infection.
And then you have the dumb fucks like a friend's son, who simply doesn't believe in the virus AT ALL. He's convinced it's "a big hoax and that no one is dying", it's all overblown, etc etc etc.
Re:You Dumb Fucks (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't say you're really wrong, of course, but I do not think you appreciate the degree of psychological toll that this places on people.
With most viruses, there are social cues to tell people that a person is sick, and the degree to which they have symptoms is generally commensurate with how lethal the disease is.
Not so with COVID-19. Most people who can spread it do not actually have any symptoms, and so it is extraordinarily likely from a sociological standpoint that they could inadvertenly sprea
Re: (Score:2)
I understand what it means.... but it's absolutely asinine to ignore the psychological impact that being prevented from being in larger groups is having.
Humans, as I said, are social creatures. You can't just undo countless millennia of social and societal engineering just by willing it to happen, regardless of how good it is for us in the long term because humans simply are not equipped from an evolutionary standpoint to deal with threats that operate on these scales.
I'm not saying that we should do
Re: You Dumb Fucks (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Shut up.
You have no idea how long it'll be before a vaccine is available and no idea how effective it will or won't be. No one knows, including you.
Please shut the fuck up.
Sure... if you want hospitals to be overwhelmed. (Score:3, Insightful)
The virus needs time to mutate and become less lethal (which similar viruses to this tend to do) before doing many things that bring back a real sense a of normalcy.
This is going to be part of our lives throughout most or all of 2021, and probably going into 2022.
Re: (Score:2)
There will NEVER be an end to new, life-threatening viruses. MERS and SARS are still around, still killing people. Are we going to stop living because we have a new one called COVID?
Re: (Score:2)
A vaccine is at best only going to have modest effectiveness anytime soon. Viruses mutate, and a vaccine will generally only be effective against the strains of viruses that it was engineered to protect from. The fewer mutation strains that they protect against, the less effective the vaccine.
Meanwhile, of course, there's the fact that coronaviruses do not, in general, provide long lasting immunity anyways. Even if you get the virus and fight it off, with most coronaviruses your body stops making the
Re: Sure... if you want hospitals to be overwhelme (Score:2)
Yeah. Vaccines are magic. That's why we eliminated the cold with vaccines. Not to mention all those wildly successful vaccines that eliminated all the old coronaviruses. That's why we're on COVID 19 now: we wiped out COVID 1-18 with vaccines.
Re: (Score:2)
"The cold" is 200 different viruses. If you vaccinate for one, you will still get one of the others. If you try to vaccinate for all 200, this will probably be too much for your immune system to "remember" and the protection against each of the virus strains will be weakened, perhaps to the point of nonexistence. And for many of these viruses, immunity is only temporary in the first place.
Whereas COVID19 is a single virus, it only needs vaccination, if immunity turns out to be temporary then you can get jus
COVID plays on American selfishness (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the reasons this damn thing has spread so badly in the US is that there are so many selfish people who think only of themselves and are more than happy to harm everyone else so they can go see some third rate remake of a remake of a movie.
Re: COVID plays on American selfishness (Score:2, Insightful)
Indeed. I don't think things would have been much different right now under president Hillary Clinton.
Re: COVID plays on American selfishness (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: COVID plays on American selfishness (Score:5, Informative)
Re: COVID plays on American selfishness (Score:4, Interesting)
The countries with women leaders have done much better, from New Zealand to Germany to Bangladesh. One theory is that women are quicker to sacrifice the economy by shutting down to protect lives.
Re: COVID plays on American selfishness (Score:2)
This is a myth. Mask wearing in urban and suburban areas of the US is nearly universal in states where they are mandated. Stop listening to the crappy fourth estate.
I'll be delighted to go to the movies again, provided there is anything worth buying.
Let's have a real discussion (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Let's have a real discussion (Score:2)
We already have enough railroads in the USA and most of the mining business is no longer profitable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
San Francisco opened up their bath houses because they were culturally and economically important.
Re: (Score:2)
Why don't we re-open whore houses and opium dens?
Because that's too soon to have that discussion. Even in the Netherlands where a large portion of restrictions have been lifted and the "economy is open" sex workers and nightclubs are still closed until September. The Coffee shops are open for takeaway drugs only.
Let's worry about cinemas, restaurants and shopping malls, then we can discuss whore houses and drugs. Everything has an order.
Re: (Score:2)
My Provincial government suggests glory holes as a way to have paid sex. They also are pushing people to use the safe injection sites as the pandemic has caused more opioid poisoning deaths then Corona 19 deaths. The quality of street drugs are way down so there's a push by both the government and the cops to decriminalize hard drugs and make them legally available and to discourage people shooting up alone.
Nope! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's way too early! I'm not sure I will ever go back to a theater but if and when I do, it will only be after a vaccine has been out for some time... My wife feels the same.
My thoughts exactly. Not until there's universal testing and/or a vaccine that's been shown to be effective. Until then I'll just sit this one out.
Re: (Score:2)
Good for you, feel free to lick all the doorknobs you want.
In the meantime, can I interest you in my new harmonica rental business?
Re: (Score:3)
Well you can stay at home.
I’ve already had it and I’m perfectly fine going to a movie.
Enjoy the movie! (Score:3)
America? No. (Score:3, Insightful)
Many other parts of the world sure, with conditions. But America has demonstrated you can't even manage mandating masks which means you're government is way too weak and incompetent to handle implementing safety measures where people go and sit together in public.
Do yourself a favour and stay closed until the virus is under control, or until the next election when you have a competent government (the rest of the world hopes).
Need a reason to go back to the Theatres (Score:2)
Where is a "must-see" blockbuster that is not going to be streamed and is going to excite people and get them to brave being in a large enclosed space with people who may potentially infect them? Along with that, how is eating and drinking in the theatre going to be carried out.
When I look at the movies coming out, I would have been reluctant to see them in a theatre even without the thread of Covid infection.
Should America Re-Open Its Movie Theatres? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Should America Re-Open Its Movie Theatres?"
Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck NO. Not for me, no way.
But for you intrepid folks, feel free to go soak yourselves in a virtual soup of virus particles after paying $9 for a drink and a candy bar. What could possibly go wrong?
Hollywood is Dying (Score:2)
For the bigger fish, they can eat this for now and eventually release their stuff. For smaller fish, their project is doomed.
For movie theaters, the bigger ones survived by sellin
Yes. Definitely yes. (Score:2)
The quicker we get over with this, the sooner we can start repopulating the country with sane people.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
no (Score:4, Insightful)
October surprise? 2024? 2030? Who knows? Maybe no permanent vaccine is even possible.
By the time this is "over," a lot of people -- myself included -- ain't coming out of quarantine. No cruises, concerts, sporting events... nothing in a crowd, or indoors in large numbers.
Re: (Score:3)
Live in your hole and don't go to the grocery store.
Plenty of people have already had it and I'm fine getting on with my life.
Why is not going to the grocery store living in a hole? We used to make one big grocery store run each week which would fill up our refrigerator. Since the pandemic started, my family and I get our groceries exclusively via pickup. Not only do we spend less time shopping, but we now seem to have much more variety in the refrigerator because it is so much easier to put in a quick order and run by the store.
If you're fine getting on with your life, that's your choice. Personally, I am going to do what I can t
Good time for B movies direct to home on PPV? (Score:2)
Good time for B movies direct to home on PPV?
No recovery for the foreseeable future (Score:2)
No! (Score:4, Informative)
Even Betteridge knew that, years before any pandemic.
Mask compliance (Score:2)
Where I am in Arizona, our local cinema is scheduled to re-open in the next two weeks, with masks required.
Seriously, if people believe masks are a nuisance/mark of the beast/government plot in general, how many will keep them on when the lights go down?
I thought so. I won't be back.
No... they have not prepared (Score:5, Interesting)
Until such time as the executive government declares a state of emergency that provides socialized medicine and quality treatment for everyone during this time, the people of the US absolutely must shut down and remain shut down until a cure is available.
So long as Americans lack the right to quality treatment as ALL other developments nations have, the risks of getting ill are too high and as such society must remain shutdown.
Of course, the alternative is to use the Swedish method which is to kill as many old and infirm as possible as quickly as possible and eliminate the problem by purely natural selection.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, the alternative is to use the Swedish method which is to kill as many old and infirm as possible as quickly as possible and eliminate the problem by purely natural selection.
At least they don't have Texas-style "Death Panels"
Re: No... they have not prepared (Score:2)
Bullshit.
Which hospital is turning away covid patients for lack of insurance (your central thesis is that people lack healthcare coverage so they don't get treated and thus die)?
In America, it is illegal for a hospital to turn away a patient for an inability to pay for treatment.
Many people, afraid of the bill they might get for their treatment, CHOOSE to forgo treatment, just as they choose not to enroll in free/heavily subsidized healthcare. There are millions upon millions of Americans that qualify for
Re: No... they have not prepared (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: No... they have not prepared (Score:2)
So long as Americans lack the right to quality treatment as ALL other developments nations have, the risks of getting ill are too high and as such society must remain shutdown.
The VAST MAJORITY of Covid deaths are from people that qualify for free Medicare coverage because of their age - they don't lack healthcare coverage. Every nursing home death occurred in a medical facility where the patients got medical care. They aren't dying because they lack healthcare coverage.
It's only fitting. (Score:2)
Hollywood movies are designed for consumption primarily by idiots, so opening movie theaters is completely appropriate.
Free movies for all Antifa and anti-vaxxers (Score:2)
They should all go watch lots and lots of movies, preferably together and in large numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
The spice must flow (Score:2)
I don't give a fuck about COVID; all I care is that Dune doesn't get a delayed release (again).
Fear of COVID is the mind killer. The spice must flow. I'll be happy to take the gom jabbar after I experience the revelation.
Put your faith in Paul. Paul saves.
Numbers/science on how risky it really is? (Score:4, Interesting)
There are a lot of opinions on both sides, but before deciding this issue, I'd like to see some facts and numbers.
How risky is it really, with the mitigation measures that are in place?
I do think we should open up as much as possible balanced against risk. A collapsed economy is going to lead to deaths, too--unless we institute a universal basic income and tax the heck out of people who are still working to cover those who can't.
What's the right balance? What is the actual risk of movie theaters operating this way vs. the benefit? Jobs DO matter. So does grandpa and the risk of permanent damage from a COVID infection to younger people.
Bars, for example, seem particularly dangerous. Bars are a lot of people with masks off running their mouths at each other spewing droplets. Ideally, in a theater, people are just sitting silently. Maybe one risk is not worth it (bars) and the other IS worth it (movies), but what are the numbers????
--PeterM
Re: Numbers/science on how risky it really is? (Score:2)
A safe theater experience is possible - social distancing coupled with the fact that everyone faces the same direction and USUALLY refrain from talking/yelling/singing means theaters are likely lower risk when compared to a bar where customers lean in, yell at each other to talk over the crowd/music, and 'get sloppy' as the liquor kicks in.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I recognize what you say as true. But how true? Got some numbers to quantify how safe it is? Exactly how much better is it than a bar? What's the risk compared to mandatory activities such as shopping for groceries?
Let's maybe do some rational fact-based decision making for a change? Or at least admit that the figures are unavailable and say we're going to try it in some places and not in others and measure the results?
-PeterM
Re: Numbers/science on how risky it really is? (Score:2)
70% of theaters already open? (Score:3)
If that statement in the summary is true, then the theater owners think America is ready.
Personally here in Texas one theater chain opened back in late June, they ran recent classic movies (Lord of the Rings trilogy, Harry Potter series, etc) at $5/seat and I went back and watched most of them. The theaters were safe, the audience was between 5-15 people in a theater designed for 200-500 people, and social distancing wasn't a problem.
I returned to the theaters because I enjoy the theater experience AND I fully-expected the theaters to be mostly empty, and they were.
My local theater has reserved recliner seats, and the software will enforce social distancing between parties - two seats between parties, and each row is about 5-6 apart front-to-back.
Theaters can open safely, operate with fewer guests, but over the long-term they will need to find a way to get back to something resembling normal crowd sizes.
Perhaps studios could rework revenue sharing?
One interesting development, local theaters are offering 'private showings' where a group can reserve a screening room for $100. For example, an extended family (mom, dad, the kids, their significant others) could rent a theater for $100-200 and not have anyone else in the room.
Re: 70% of theaters already open? (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
Power over Others (Score:2, Insightful)
I do not understand why there exists a class of people who are entirely concerned only with claiming power and using violence in order to exert control over other people. In my opinion these people should just fuck off and die (or better yet, should be taken out behind the barn and shot as soon as their proclivities manifest). Getting rid of these "nannies" would be good for civilization, reduce the "carbon footprint" and put and end to "Global Warming".
What the hell do *I* care if someone wants to have a
Re: (Score:3)
The people infected in the theater can spread it further. If you care about the spread of the virus, then you should also care about the places where it spreads and the methods of spreading. If you don't care about thousands of dead elderly people and many more otherwise affected persons, that is your prerogative.
Re: Power over Others (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Power over Others (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Moderates on all sides have trouble taking care of their respective wingnuts, and sometimes they fail. The set of wingnuts and people who want power "to do unto others" overlaps to a great degree.
COVID-19 isn't killing movie theaters, anyway (Score:2)
At best, it's providing the coup de grace.
Need? (Score:2)
No, no one NEEDS to go to the movies. People need to learn how to be self sufficient and do stuff at home. I don't understand what is so hard about that. You can stream anything from home. Why do you need to sit in a room with a bunch of stranger with whom you don't interact just to watch something? On top of that, you pay exorbitant prices and get shitty food.
I feel like this is just some kind of movie theater propaganda, and not the sentiment of actual people, but hey, we voted for Trump, so any idiotic t
Re: (Score:3)
Who knew that those of us that are old enough to remember history are condemned to repeat it with those who aren't?
Not many left who remember the last big pandemic and how it was those who locked down quick and hard whose economies bounced back the quickest. Not many who remember the 2nd wave hit way harder and mostly killed young people either.
Here's one guy who was old enough that he remembered his whole family getting wiped out in that pandemic until he died yesterday at 116, https://celebritygist.com.ng/2... [celebritygist.com.ng]
I'd suggest you look at history.
Re: (Score:3)
"When we say "America did {insert anything}" the implication is that it was an action of the federal government"
Who is this "we"? Usually we just mean a majority or even just a large number of Americans.