Don't you remember the "rental only" VHS tapes? I lost two videos once and it cost me $100 bucks to replace.

Anyway, studios where trying to fight Redbox, I guess this is there idea how.

"In the theater it's just you and the movie, and it has an effect whether you want to admit it or not."

You are kidding, right? In the theater it's the flock of teeny boppers prattling to their friends and not paying a bit of attention to the movie. It's the idiot who doesn't understand the concept of cellphones turned off turning the feature who not only gets a call but TAKES it and proceeds to talk for 5-10 minutes over whatever dialogue/sound effects are going on on screen. It's people climbing over and around you to get to the restroom or go get another box of popcorn and another soda so that they can go to the restroom again in fifteen minutes.

And all this can be YOURS for the low price of 8-10 bucks per ticket.

No thanks.

I'd rather wait the extra weeks/months, see the movie in the comfort of my own home without the distractions of the crowd. Be able to put on subtitling so i can make sure to catch every bit of the dialogue and not ask "What'd he/she say?" if the sound effects drown out a bit of the conversation. The ability to pause if there is a call of nature. Have whatever snacks i want without paying insane theatre prices.. and all this for the cost of usually less than it would be to get two tickets. Oh and be able to curl up in my bed to watch so i have the faithful pillow to hide my eyes when the action / horror gets to be too much and i have to scream like a little girl!

I waited to see Spiderman and Transformers 2 because I knew it would be on DVD in a few months.

I usually check the tomatometer and if it falls within the 80% or higher, I will make an effort to see it at the theater – the rest is usually a wait for DVD.

Some movies must be seen on the big screen to be fully appreciated. But with the cost of movie tickets now more than $10 and matinee pricing only for the first showing of the day, we've become more discriminating. We used to see many more movies just for the by far superior (and we have a 60" screen TV) experience of seeing it in the theater. But now, we really have to want to see a particular title. The story is the major driving factor to get us into the movie theater these days. A plot line that sounds interesting will get us to cough up the cash, regardless of whether or not there are spectacular visuals. If movies like Transformers 2, etc. would include a good story, however, we'd be there in a heartbeat.

@Kay: I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, but I am saying you are missing out. Perhaps don't go to a movie on opening weekend. Wait a month or so and then go see it in a relatively empty theater. There are ways to ensure your experience in a theater is the desired one.

I don't skip movies in theaters because they will be on DVD soon. I usually skip movies in theaters because I don't wanna see them there. But sometimes I catch them on DVDs, since it's cheaper and easier to watch…

But nowadays, movies are getting to home video WAY too fast.
Here in Brazil, Ice Age 3 was released in theaters July. On DVD, for rental, in September!! Just three months, and we're talking about a movie that was EXTREMELY successful here (biggest box-office ever, topping Titanic)

Unnecessary.

@Brad Brevet: Doesn't that go against your romantic idea of a full house with a great crowd at the ol' theaterplex? I love going to the theaters, but you're high on something if you refuse to believe the theater experience isn't that great for people anymore. Ticket prices are out of control, food is even worse, COMMERCIALS BEFORE PREVIEWS, and people seem to hate the other people in the theater with them.

I'll gladly hit up the theater to go see Knocked Up or Transformers, but great moments in quieter movies like No Country For Old Men are ruined by cell phones and talkers and what have you. I think NATO needs to get with the damn times and transform the experience and make it more appealing for people. I hate when lazy industries with long traditions just blame the consumers for their current problems. I don't know where they get the nerve to stay so flat-footed and expect the world to keep coming to them.

I and my wife agree (yes, we're geezers) with Kay. No amount of coercion will get us into a theatre unless it is an exceptional movie. Special effects included. And to address your reply to Kay about waiting until the theatre is almost empty is lidicrous because the concession prices are insane and should be avoided unless you're Donald Freakin' Trump. Theatre owners can kiss our married butts because they have the temerity to charge a premium to see movies in 3D.

Love your site Brad, thanks!

I'm with Kay and Mike to an extent -I stopped going because I kept getting people that felt it was acceptable to yak throughout the movies and bring their crying infants into R-Rated movies.
it really takes a lot for me to get to the theater now.

Fortunately, In my neck of the woods, I discovered that the best time to go is the pre-noon shows on sunday. I found a theater close to me that also sells the concessions at the ticket stand and the popcorn and drinks are all you can eat/drink.

@Tyler: I would say yes and no. Packed theaters are great for certain movies; Paranormal Activity and Drag Me To Hell are good examples.

However, with other films it really doesn't matter because the etiquette of the theater remains no matter how many people are there. Yes, I agree audiences can be annoying and I have written about it many, many times and even earlier this year posted an article headlined "Are Movie Theaters Still the Best Place to See a Movie?" which even points out an example where a drunk couple spoiled my screening of Fellini's Amarcord.

It is definitely a crapshoot, but this year has invigorated my belief in the theater. It's obviously a topic I continue to debate in my head and many of you have pointed out several reasons why.

I see your points Brad, but I continue to have bad experiences at theaters, which unfortunately has caused my theater attendance in the past year to drop veryyy sharply.

It's not that I don't want to go to the theater to see movies. I do. But to have to drop $20+ to have people talking, kids screaming, constant disturbances, uncomfortable seating, insane prices, and all of the other annoyances that other folks have talked about is crazy. Why suffer when I can pay that $20, own the movie, watch it in the comfort of my own home, in my comfortable chair, and watch the movie my way.

I understand your concept of the "theater experience." But that's not my experience. Not only can I save my money by waiting for the DVD, but I can save my sanity as well. To me, that's worth the wait…

If a movie seems to be a movie I will love (great reviews definitely, or even not-so-great reviews if I think I won't be following critical consensus), I try to see it in theaters, and I normally manage it. Since the beginning of the year I've gone to the theater close to 40 times.

However, if a movie gets bad reviews and looks like a stinker, but I'm still interested in watching it, I'll hold off until the DVD so that I don't feel as bad for wasting time/money. I'm holding off on "Jennifer's Body" and maybe "Law Abiding Citizens," but I took the chance to see "Paranormal Activity" in theaters, and I'll do all I can to catch "Antichrist" in theaters.

The window between release and DVD has little to do with my choice. What has most to do with my choice is how close a movie is playing to me. Some movies never play close enough to me, and I have to wait until DVD. Or they play close, but not long enough for me to get to the theater ("Funny Games").

Well, for me it depends on how much I really want to see it. If I'm not that gungho about seeing it like Bright Star I'll wait for the DVD. If I can't wait like An Education ( which is still NOT playing in Chicago) then I'll go to the theatres.

I agree though, big budget films or a movie like Drag Me To Hell would be much more fun in a packed theatre. When I saw Star Trek, the theatre had like 15 people in it ( Yes, it was the first weekend on a Saturday), so the experience wasn't as fun for me as others. I'm seeing Paranormal Activity this weekend, but someone said it would be scarier to watch it at home by yourself with the lights out.

The movie theatre has been and always will be the absolute best place to see a film, regardless of audience size, unless you have the means to build your own cinema at home with state-of-the-art technology.

I understand the concerns from everyone about annoying people, cell phones, previews, but there is an evolutionary process of theatre owners that is beginning to happen. I'm spoiled by living in LA where film is appreciated and there are several theatres here that strictly enforce the no talking, no cell phones, no commercials, limited previews, and high tech. experience. You have to pay a little bit more, but if you're a cinephile, it's worth it.

The theatre industry is changing and theatres are popping up all over the country that are attempting to alleviate the issues that many people experience. Additionally, many cities have art houses or independent cinemas where you can see films that don't typically play near you. These are the places you can go to have the filmgoing experience so many of you desire with a respectful audience. It's a shame there aren't more film havens out there, but the industry is changing and evolving, and it's worth your business.

The ability to watch any film on a huge screen with crystal-clear surround sound with a group of people in a dark room is a truly collective experience that allows us to escape our lives, inspire us, or just have a fun time out with friends for a reasonable price.

I would say that I am most tempted to see a movie in the theater when the audience will play a part . Movies like "The Hangover" or "Zombieland" are more fun with a rowdy, responsive audience on a Friday or Saturday night. (I expect it's the same way with "Paranormal Activity")

Then there are films like the upcoming "Nine" (the musical, not the cartoon) that I will make an effort to see in the theater because the bigger-than-life experience would add to the enjoyment.

Everything else, even if it looks good, can probably wait for a DVD release. Yes, there is a difference, but if we only get to see a couple movies every season in the theater I'm going to base my decision on what movie I want to see that would benefit most from the experience of seeing it in the theater.

It used to be a year. They shortened it to six months so that movies released in theatres in the Spring could be on video by Christmas. I think a year to eighteen months is better. At the very least they should leave films in theatres longer. I used to see the best movies several times in theatres, and I liked being able to wait a couple of weeks between viewings. I had to drive over an hour to see Drag Me to Hell just four weeks after it was released.

What happened to $1.50 theatres? Back when it took a year for the video, you could see it a few months later at a budget theatre. Those were the best.

Crowds ruined my first viewing of Drag Me to Hell. Midnight showings with a dedicated crowd are the only times a crowded theatre is a plus. Otherwise you get people who just didn't have anything else to do. I'd be okay with the ridiculously high ticket prices if it actually priced out the juveniles, but I guess their parents think it worth the money just to get them out of the house.

I usually try to catch the midnight screenings on Thursday night/ Friday mornings because those seem to be the showings where real moviegoers are in attendance. 99% of the time people are respectful and don't talk at inappropriate times or don't text or answer the telephone during the middle of the movie. If I miss it then, I usually won't make it.

Trace in Austin

If the price of admission comes down, and they drop the premium for 3D and iMAX. Then theaters would be swamped. I would rather see three movies for $10 than one for $10. They still get their $10 dollars regardless. With so many 300 seat auditoriums with 10 people or less at any given showing, it's not like they are giving up $10 seats. Sell MORE seats for $3.50. In the long run it would make the profit. As for concessions, just say no. Food and drink are not required for every film I watch on my couch, so why do I need it at the theater? With the increasing use of digital filming and projection, its not like these films are costing as much to mass distribute, so bring some of that savings back to us.

As for the price, it's only 5.75 before 6pm ( Kerasotes Theatres) so I just see movies before then (unless someone else is paying). Of course that's only where I live, I think with AMC it's the first show.

@Fate: Movie theatre prices can not drop in order for them to remain competitive, possibly lucrative, or remain out of the red. You should consider researching how movie theatres operate and how they have to profit share with the studios on a sliding scale.

A main point of Brad's article here is that the studios are in many ways screwing over the theatre chains by releasing the films on DVD much more quickly than they have in the past. Basically, the studio takes the lion's share of the profits on opening weekend, and as each subsequent weekend passes the studio gets less. If they cut off a film's run within 3 months now and release a film on DVD to get more money, they are completely undercutting the ability of theatres to actually make any money.

In fact, most theatre chains are unsuccessful businesses because of the profit-sharing with the studios, even with high prices.

If movie stuidios would stop pumping flicks out so quickly i'm sure it would make an impact on keeping audiences interested and anticipated in watching a movie more in theatres, rather than waiting to catch it on DVD. With so many films being released on a weekly and bi weekly basis, it becomes very hard to pick and choose what you really want to see, and sometimes once you decide by a couple of weeks the movie is all ready out of most theatres. With so many movies flooding the theatres, studios have no choice but to rush them to DVD in order to sometimes make profit, so basically its there fault on both ends.

I can understand why some people might not prefer to go to the theaters. It is very expencieve (I don't know what it's like anywhere else, but here it's either $11 or $12, depending on how new/"big" the film is..), and you don't have to wait that long for the film to come out on dvd anyway.
However, I love going to the theaters! First of all the screen is somewhat bigger than the one I have at home :p And as you said: there's just you and the film, meaning no distraction from the film by everything else going on around you. Of course, there is the other audience as well, but I don't really get that bothered by them. Especially since I usually sit in the front or second row, I don't really get that crowded by the rest of the audience.

I try to catch everything in the theatres. I don't buy DVD's in the same way that I don't buy CDs.

@Kay: you should go on a weekday at the first showing if ya can!! all the states i visited the theatres are empty then!! no teens or annoying movie food wrapping crinkling either!!