Why Are People Still Going To Movie Theaters?

Nowadays people complain that the only movies Hollywood make nowadays are superhero movies (that and whatever Christopher Nolan is doing). It is true that movies have gone downhill in modern times, but let us consider the main reason that good movies are hardly made nowadays, and that reason is television.

All the way back in the 50s, many movie makers were growing concerned that television will eventually replace movies as a form of entertainment. They tried various ways to stem the tide, such as providing larger screens, making the 3-D movie, and adding better sound systems. Of all these attempts, only better sound systems attracted people to the theaters. But despite the slow decline of the movie theater, they never completely die out, and in most cities there are still a handful of them clinging to life. Why didn’t television completely wipe out the movie theaters?

One reason might have to do with nostalgia. Because movies have been around decades longer than television, there are more classic movies than television shows, which gives the medium prestige. More professors study movies than television shows, and aspiring actors and directors study movies when they go to school more than television shows.

But the major reason is movie theaters are still in business is the fact that the movie theater provides a much more immersive and sensual experience than television. Movie screens are huge, they fill the entire visual field of the viewer, allowing people to see things in greater detail and giving the feeling that they are immersed in the movie. Television has a much smaller screen, it is a much more limited sensory experience. Unlike in a movie theater , you are constantly bombarded with distractions. Also, the acoustics of a movie theater is much better than your home, adding to the wealth of mum sensory experience.

But television has two major advantages over movies, the first is that television is convenient. You don’t have to go to drive to a theater to enjoy a show, just stay in your living room. Computers have made television even more convenient, it can be something you can enjoy on your laptop or even your phone. The second advantage is that television show can be serialized, so it can be longer than a movie. A movie can only be around 3 hours long at most, people tend not to be able to endure sitting for longer than that. If a television show lasts longer than 3 hours, it can be divided into episodes and put into a series. In theory, movies can also be serialized, but for some odd reason this doesn’t happen very often. The only movie to be successfully serialized was Star Wars, most other examples of successful movie serialization were adaptations from books (Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings and so on).

But movie theaters still have the advantage of providing a better sensory experience. This is taken advantage of by movies that use a lot of special effects, where the immersive sensory experience of the theater is possible. We already see this trend beginning with Star Wars. Ever since Star Wars, the films that make the most money tend to be visual-audio spectacles, such as science fiction, fantasy, disaster and superhero genres(and also certain films in the action genre).

Can movies go much beyond the special effects spectacles they have become? Movies that focus on personal relationships are still being made, but they are less successful than other genres. it looks like that for the time being, if we want serious drama we will have to turn to television. But is there something about the human experience that can be better dramatized through the spectacular experience of the movie theater?

Advertisements

Ramblings on a Broken Typewriter #1

o fortune,
lying restlessly
on your lilac-scented burgundy throne,
no ruined sheep-bed and urine-soaked scoundrel
to call my own,

the moon shone through
the vermouth soul and gin-imbued heart of
a golden fool
will taunt forever
the cavernous haunts of man’s and woman’s desire,

yearning to be free
but trapped in a glassy cage
through no fault of their own,

the shiftless silver idols
on a torn and tattered shelf
near the endless sea of madness
called the railway hell.

in dreams no one dared to do
what in a fevered irreverent wave of visions
through which vagabonds roam
through depleted hills.

dripping in the hypocrisy of a million innocents,
the cave-bear rides the dragon
through the cloudy sky to valhalla
where the heroes dwell.

home of the beggars
no one will take to home,
in the foggy mist of shroud-encased vermilion gin,
the lady of venus has come to meet
the milk-maids of the bronze-colored moon.

the harp harps melodies
inconceivable in the minds of man
but possible in the silicon brain of our mechanical gods.

sense rendered senseless
through expropriation of meaning
to the hummingbird-headed accountant tourists,

graceful rainbows
deck the halls of the ninja turtles
in their discombobulated soul-seeking quest for a lilac dream.

pig-tails ride on solid-gold phones,
restless.

grey poupon drips a trail
through a rugged forest
as greek gods descend into buddhist hells
to meet their urine-stained coffins of infinite doom.

cows suddenly crouch into tiger-shaped holes
as beams of bees swallow an infinite dawn
capturing the brass and electrons on a far away planet
that cows and antelopes play on.

blue dawn arose from nil,
then into an oblivion of arsenic opium
the magnanimous fools
threw the nickel-dated doves
into a green and yellow flame
raptured into a heaven for sadists.

the railway heaven through hell
for television force feces through a straw
was usurped the queen into a king
for the price of a prince-ling.

Weapon of Mass Distraction

One of the problems of the Internet is that it constantly serves us with distractions. I am not quite as affected by it as many of my friends, but it has affected me nonetheless. YouTube has decreased my productivity by a third to a half, since I find it so irresistible to click on any of its myriad of videos. The worst part is, much of the content of that site is quite banal, such as people complaining about the quality of KFC food or knick-knacks at dollar stores. The trouble is that such content, in all their inanity, is nonetheless insanely addictive. I find it difficult to concentrate on my work or writing with so many potential sources of distraction.

Wikipedia is also one of these sites that become addictive. The problem with Wikipedia is that I have to sometimes use it for work, and while initially I might be looking up something work-related it can quickly devolve into a self-indulgent stroll of hyperlinks, as I waste my in time looking up dead celebrities that have been long forgotten or a mathematical theorem so obscure only the most dedicated math geek will care.

The thing is, it didn’t used to be this way. When I got my first computer back in the 90’s I couldn’t connect to the Internet, because I was given an outdated model that did not have a phone modem. You couldn’t play music or videos on the machine because Windows 3 did not have the appropriate software, and the machine lacked a sound card. My first computer was more or less a glorified typewriter, it allowed me to write and edit documents in Microsoft Word, has advanced functions such as the ability to change font size and use bold and italics, and use the magical feature of spell-check. Those features may not sound impressive now, but that was back in the 90’s. What it lacked in functionality it made up for by the absence of any distractions such as Facebook or YouTube.

The world of my childhood, the world before the juggernauts of Facebook, Google and YouTube, and smartphones, is forever lost to us. I wouldn’t want to go back to a time where I couldn’t simply check Wikipedia on my phone whenever I needed some piece of information, yet it is also a world where I am constantly bombarded with having to make decisions which I never had to make before. Should I take a look at that notification I got from Facebook or should I work on that assignment from work? Should I enable notifications from my phone in the first place? In a world of constant distraction it is difficult to decide whether one’s obligation in the cyber world trumps ones obligations in the real world.

Sometimes I take refuge in the charm of outdated technology. Instead of writing everything on a computer, I sometimes use a typewriter. The mechanical workings of a typewriter feel more substantial than a computer. Sometimes it makes me feel like I’m being a real writer. Also, it frees me up from some of the distractions of writing on a computer.

But I can’t run away from technology forever, because modern technology is far more efficient. I can’t easily blog or tweet something I’ve written on a typewriter. (Although people are developing solutions to this problem.) The solution is to learn how to use the new technologies more efficiently. Avoid the compulsion of clicking on whatever click-bait that comes in our direction, avoid the compulsion to fill our lives with social media. Eventually the people creating online content will need to be more responsible as well, crafting content that is more useful than distracting. It will be a long time before we learn how to use the new technologies responsibly. In the meantime, we should be more mindful of what we do on the Internet.

Technological Nostalgia: The Manual Transmission

Recently I need to buy a new car, so I searched online for some inexpensive entry-level automobile. Somewhat to my surprise, I found some models with manual transmission. These are not old models that were made in the 90’s, but ones made this year. Technologically, there are no reasons for making cars with manual transmissions anymore. A few decades ago, automatic transmissions were expensive, fragile and impractical for consumer-level cars. But now the technology has improved to the point where automatic is inexpensive and reliable.

I have never driven a car with manual transmission, but I understand that it takes some skill to do it. Understanding when to shift gears is not something a novice can get a hang of easily, and doing it inappropriately can kill the engine and put you in danger. Some claim that shifting manually is more efficient than shifting automatically, but such gains in efficiency are so small that it can be easily overcome by getting a more powerful engine. Automatic transmission makes driving much easier, yet manual transmissions continue to be produced today.

The reasons that some people still prefer manual transmission are mostly psychological. People who drive manual feel a greater sense of control. Perhaps the word “control” is inappropriate, perhaps a better term is that they “feel at one with the car.” I know this sounds quasi-mystical, but learning to drive a car isn’t learning how to control a machine, but to accustom oneself to the workings of a vehicle so one feels that the car is a part of one’s own body. This is quite a powerful feeling, since it makes the person feel they have appropriated the power of the car for him or herself. Having such fine control over the gears of the car enhances this feeling of power.

Many Americans have an image of themselves as ridiculously macho figures who are powerful both physically and psychologically. Sometimes they express this image through their choice of vehicles, which is seen in the plague of SUVs, pickup-trucks and sports car in our streets. The manual transmission is another version of it. We shouldn’t underestimate this factor in our choice of cars.

Technological Nostalgia: The Steam Locomotive

When the steam-powered locomotive was invented, it was the most advanced technology ever developed. In the 19th century, there were all sorts of concerns about the technology, such as what would happen if the locomotive travels faster than 30 miles-per-hour. Doctors of the time thought that it would create a vacuum inside the carriage, causing the lungs of the passengers to explode. Fortunately the doctors were wrong, people can travel faster than 30mph without suffering any ill effects. But it goes to show what people’s attitudes were towards the locomotive. The poet Wordsworth didn’t like them, and had a train track in front of his house rerouted because he thought it ruined his view of nature.

Nowadays we have almost the exact opposite attitude towards steam-powered locomotives. People nowadays enjoy seeing the beauty of nature on steam-powered trains. Today when we see a steam-powered train going through a beautiful rural landscape, we think of the train as a symbol of the quaint countryside. The reason for this is because steam-power is now seen as old-fashioned. Since the 19th century we have developed far more advanced forms of transportation. Electric trolleys, the automobile, diesel locomotives and airplanes all make steam-power rail look outdated. It would be shocking if we see a Boeing 747 in the middle of a flowering meadow, but completely normal if we see a steam-powered train in the same scene.

Part of the romance of the railroad has to do with its macho connotations. In the past, men were worked on the rails were quite tough, and had to deal with the dirt and grime of the smoke of coal-burning engines. Of course, there was the entire hobo tradition of sneaking onto cattle cars for those who don’t have enough money to ride in the passenger compartment.

Ultimately, what steam-powered train represent is an “old-fashioned” world that is lost to us. Most steam-powered trains have shut down operations, and those that are still running cater mostly to tourists. It is a technology that is a bridge between modern and ancient times. The steam engine is not something so ancient that we cannot understand, yet it is clearly an old technology that has become obsolete. Riding on a steam-powered vehicle, we are traveling fast enough to feel like we are traveling on a modern vehicle, yet it still feels like we are participating in a ritual from the past.

Technological Nostalgia: The Typewriter

There is no writing implement that symbolizes the profession of writing quite like the typewriter. In classic movies, journalists often write their assignments on a typewriter. The movie “The Shining” has the main character, a frustrated writer, type the words “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy” over and over again. Event in recent works such as “The Simpsons”, when Homer became a food critic he writes his articles on a typewriter. Even after the invention of the word processor, the typewriter is still recognized by almost everyone despite being obsolete.

Even though the typewriter is almost synonymous with the profession of writing, it is a recent invention. The first commercially available typewriter was put on the market in 1873 by the Remington company, which up until that point was an firearms manufacturer. It was originally intended to be used by clerks to dictate or transcribe documents, not for creative writing purposes. Early on, people did not use a typewriter themselves, but hired a typist to type for them. The reason was that learning to type is an arduous task, something most people would avoid if they can pay someone else to do it for them. Eventually many people saw the value in being able to write quickly and legibly and started learning how to type themselves. Mark Twain was the first to write a book on a typewriter, and it caught on from there.

With advances in technology, the typewriter is no longer the fastest way to get an idea from the mind onto the page. Computer keyboards, because they are not as limited by the physics of mechanical gears and linkages, can be much faster. With computers, you can have predictive text. Chorded keyboards, which are used by clerks in courts, can be even faster. Finally, all this might eventually be replaced by speech-to-text software, or some kind of advanced brain-to-computer interface that can literally read your mind by detecting brain waves.

However, there is something romantic about the physicality of using a typewriter. In order to type a letter, you have to press down hard on the key, and you feel the strain in your fingers every time you type a letter. There is also something special about the sound the machine makes. When you write on a computer your work is accomplished in silence, but working with a typewriter you are almost announcing to the world that you are accomplishing something creative. Each time the typebar hits the paper make it makes a very loud clacking sound, each time you reach the end of a line a bell rings. Also, there is some satisfaction in knowing that you are writing a book the same way many great writers before you did, like Mark Twain or Ernest Hemingway.

In recent years there has been a revival in typewriters, and at the risk of sounding like a hipster, I was participating in this trend even before it was a trend. In around the year 2006, I bought a typewriter off eBay. It is a Smith-Corona, and it is not in very good condition. The machine has this yellow tint that comes from age, the platen (the roller that feeds the paper into the machine) is severely dented after years of use, parts of the return carriage keep falling off, some of the letters on the typebars had been intentionally damaged, and none of the capital letters align correctly with the platen when I engage the caps lock. But the machine cost $30, which is a bargain. Despite all these problems all the mechanisms in the machine work smoothly, therefore I decided to keep it.

The problem with using a typewriter in a modern environment is that your work does not immediately get born into a digital environment. You can’t simply copy and paste your typewritten document onto your website, but have to go through an elaborate process of scanning it and then using software to turn it into text. This is somewhat more challenging than what I am used to.

But there are advantages. When you are typing on a typewriter, you do not get distracted easily. You can’t open YouTube on a browser and forget to write your book, or if you do the sound of the typewriter will drown out YouTube. Also, since you know it is difficult to delete text, you are forced to think about what you will type more carefully before you commit your words to paper, so you will make fewer mistakes. All these benefits are at the cost of having sore fingers when you are done.

Technological Nostalgia: The Fountain Pen

Many people nowadays do not know what a fountain pen is, so let me explain for the uninitiated. It is a pen with a tip that is a piece of steel,or some other metal, with a small slit cut into it. The slit allows ink to flow into the tip and onto the page. It uses a principle pioneered by the quill pen, which is what I love about it. Whenever I use a fountain pen to write I feel a historical connection to medieval monks sitting in a monastery transcribing ancient manuscripts. I find this feeling very empowering. Unfortunately I no longer use fountain pen for many of my works, because it is a hassle to transcribe a handwritten manuscript into a computer, which is much more convenient to work with.

The problem with the quill pen is that you have to constantly dip it in ink, which was very inconvenient. After you write a few words (or even a few letters), the pen will run out of ink and you need to dip it in ink. So when William Shakespeare or Charles Dickens wrote their works, they need to have a bottle of ink, which is called an inkwell, on their desks. I had a teacher who remembers using inkwells when he went to school. A common prank he played was if he was sitting behind a girl, he would sneak up on her, take the tip of her hair and dip it in ink. Needless to say, having to a pen that needs to be constantly dipped in ink was very messy, so eventually people invented the technology to put the ink inside the barrel of the pen. This technology had already existed in the Middle Ages, but it wasn’t until the development of better materials such as steel and better inks that it was technically possible to manufacture these pens on a large scale.

Almost immediately after the invention of the fountain pen, manufacturers began making high-end versions of their products. They would make the nib out of a gold alloy instead of plain steel, add intricate inlays onto the barrel, and even encrust the pen in gemstones. One of the best marketing campaigns was the “iridium-tipped” pens. Iridium is an extremely hard precious metal that is usually found in meteorites, and perfectly suited to be used as tips for fountain pens. It is rarer and more expensive than gold, which made it a good marketing point. Early fountain pens from the 1920s sometimes did use iridium alloys, but the metal was so expensive that only a few manufacturers can afford it. Other manufacturers started calling their pens as “iridium-tipped” as well, even though they often contained no iridium. By the end of World War II almost no manufacturers used iridium alloys to tip their pens, but the name still persists.

When ballpoint and other types of pen became common, fountain pens fell out of use. At that point, the marketing focused more on presenting fountain pens as a luxury item and class symbol rather than a utilitarian tool. Today, writing with a fountain pen contain certain notions of class and prestige, as well as a sense of nostalgia. Despite being an obsolete technology, it continues to be a symbol of the writing profession, along with the typewriter. Artists still sometime depict writers holding a fountain pen in their hand, and it is recognized by many people who have not seen one first-hand. Perhaps it is due to the distinctive shape of the pen ma The pentagon shape of the nib is immediately recognizable in a way the tip of a ballpoint pen isn’t.

There is an advantage to fountain pens that ballpoint pens don’t have, it takes a lot less pressure to write. I can’t imagine what it would be like to write an entire novel with a ballpoint pen. The smooth gliding of the tip of the fountain pen over the paper made writing very easy. Modern roller ball pens write much smoother than ballpoint pens, but they are not refillable the way most fountain pens are, which puts them at a disadvantage.