Jump to content

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, The Illustrious Jerry said:

Some movies are best viewed in theatres.

Others may simply be better for television.

Overall, an individual one-on-one viewing of a movie on a mobile device can be good for a fair bit of content.

 

There is no one size fits all; not every movie is best viewed in a single format. And even if a film is best, say, in theatres, some may have a better connection to it through the other ways listed.

 

It's all relative. 

Never is a laptop viewing of a film any equivalent to a theatrical experience. It is a convenience nothing more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SteveMc said:

Here is my take: watching a movie on your laptop or tablet with earphones or headphones in a darkened room is a far more immersive experience than watching it on TV.

It's not completely equivalent to watching in a theater, you have to give up a good deal of the scope, some of the texture maybe, and whatever dubious benefits the communal aspect brings ( I don't like crowds), but it might be more ideal in the sense that the film is being communicated directly to you, almost as if you are reading a novel.  

 

I don't understand this post. Watching movies on a tablet is more immersive than on a TV?! That's completely bonkers! Looking at something on a computer screen or laptop feels like you're working on a computer, there's nothing immersive about it. Indeed, the next step would be watching movies on a wrist watch. I guess it must be a generation thing ... 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely! I explained why.

 

Also, since I don't associate TV with work (like I do with computer screens or laptops), I don't see the problem. 

 

Do you associate tablets and wrist watches with movies? 

 

Then there's the issue of image quality. I don't like the way movies look on a computer screen, which is designed for static images.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, dougie said:

Cinema's suck.

 

They do these days. I long for the days of the German film projectors. Ciné Rubens had one that could project either 35mm or 70mm film. The downside with old projectors is that you had to see the movie during the first couple of weeks, when the print was still fresh and relatively undamaged. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

 

I don't understand this post. Watching movies on a tablet is more immersive than on a TV?! That's completely bonkers! Looking at something on a computer screen or laptop feels like you're working on a computer, there's nothing immersive about it. Indeed, the next step would be watching movies on a wrist watch. I guess it must be a generation thing ... 

 

 

I am simply arguing that the cinema screen and the laptop/smartphone screen are the most effective mediums for a movie to communicate itself to the viewer. 

I'm being subjective, but it has something to do with distance.  A TV, depending on its placement, makes the image somewhat farther from your line of sight, and only taking up a relatively small portion of that.  Watching on a smartwatch sounds stupid, yes.  Since the image is so small, it also takes on a distance.  Same with smartphones.  In the cinema, the size of the screen compensates for distance and fills one's line of sight.  The same with laptop and tablet screens, at least for me.

 

I concede that you do, indeed, sacrifice some image and sound characteristics.  I also concede that I don't associate my laptop with work, even if that is what I use it primarily for.  And, I am nearsighted,  and did not realize just how bad for quite some time, so I suppose you could say I grew fond of proximity to a screen.  

I am curious to know why you believe television to be a more ideal medium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SteveMc said:

I am simply arguing that the cinema screen and the laptop/smartphone screen are the most effective mediums for a movie to communicate itself to the viewer. 

 

This is from the generation which will soon see everything through 3D VR goggles Alex, Cinema is doomed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

 

This is from the generation which will soon see everything through 3D VR goggles Alex, Cinema is doomed!

Full disclosure: I will never watch a movie through VR.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the theory or the formula completely works, not for me anyway.  Characters on a laptop have the size of little action figurines. You can sit as close to your tablet as you want, your brain still knows you're watching something that is physically small.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what Steve is getting at. There is a heightened awareness when you have sound directly feeding into your ears and direct proximity to the visual content that might do less to point out the fact that you're "watching a film" than playing a movie on a TV screen in your living room. But I think the compromise in sound, image and seating/ambience doesn't quite let that mode of viewing hold up.

 

And neither compares to the cinema. Not even close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, KK said:

There is a heightened awareness when you have sound directly feeding into your ears and direct proximity to the visual content that might do less to point out the fact that you're "watching a film" than playing a movie on a TV screen in your living room.

 

Actually, there's a height of awareness that I'm watching a film on a laptop or computer screen (which I can't bring myself to do). I mean, it might work for you (for some weird reason), but to say a laptop or tablet is more impactful than a TV is a bit of a stretch. If it was true, then everyone with a TV or home theatre is an idiot, because he can get better and cheaper results with a tablet. 

 

If cinema is better because of its size, then it's true for TV as well. If you believe distance compensates for a smaller screen, then it's just a question of finding the right distance. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking along the lines of a laptop or a computer (something stationary) with his argument. A tablet, or anything mobile wouldn't work, for me at least.

 

But I agree with you. As I mentioned above, even with all that in mind, TV is the more ideal medium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a movie is really good, it'll work (essentially) on any format, anyway. If I have to watch a film under specific prerequisites to "get it" than something's wrong.

 

That isn't to take away anything from the role of the theater. I love the big-screen, and the bigger, the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

If a movie is really good, it'll work (essentially) on any format, anyway. If I have to watch a film under specific prerequisites to "get it" than something's wrong.

 

That isn't to take away anything from the role of the theater. I love the big-screen, and the bigger, the better.

 

Sure. But there are optimal conditions to any viewing conditions that can transcend a film experience. And a tablet is probably not going to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 1/8/2019 at 4:25 PM, Chen G. said:
On 1/8/2019 at 4:24 PM, JoeinAR said:

This is another example of you not knowing 

Some movies do not work on all mediums 

Than they're just not that good, I'm afraid.

 

I'm certainly not against making a film into a theatrical experience, an event. But to do so at the expense of the film's ability to endure on the small-screen is, to my mind, a shame.

 

Many (most?) of my defining film-viewing experiences were in my living-room. I'm sure many others were, too. There had been films that I watched in the theater and found myself engaging with more when I got down to watching them at home; and even when I get to rewatch such a film on a big-screen, I still think back on watching it at home as more affecting.

 

On 1/8/2019 at 4:46 PM, The Illustrious Jerry said:

I must say that I agree with you on a number of fronts (Chen G.)

 

Some films are better to watch at home while others are almost like they were made to be viewed specifically in the cinema, even though all films hit theatres at some point or another. For example, I am very glad I saw First Man this year in theatres. That was one film I can instantly think of as being a great theatre experience, and I'm hesitant to rewatch it at home so as not to, in my mind, lose it's purity. 

 

On the other hand, some films are better at home, and not just because you didn't want to pay 15 dollars admission to get into the cinema. I know that with Darkest Hour I quite enjoyed it on my comfy little couch in my basement, for whatever reason. When it comes to watching the classics, ones which I never would have gotten to see in theatres (unless there was some special showing of some kind) they have always been viewed at home, so they are predestined that title every time I watch them after the first. These include a lot of the classic Spielberg films and childhood classics.

 

I can not, however, think of a time in my own life specifically where I felt that the film was more effective at home than in theatres. Perhaps if that were the case it may have something to do with the context of a second viewing which, by happenstance, occurs in the home. If the film has already been seen in theatres and it is watched at home for the second time, the understanding acquired during the first viewing may give the viewer a better experience because they can look back and piece together plot points, for example. For myself this is not the case, but I can understand a few ways where it could be for someone.

Here it is! Some comments on this very topic were made in a very good discussion a while back on this page of the What Is The Last Film You Watched (Older Films)? thread: http://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?/topic/20559-what-is-the-last-film-you-watched-older-films/&page=813&tab=comments#comment-1573109

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Holko said:

I watch movies all the time snuggled up in bed at night with my 10.1 inch full HD tablet.

Its convenient for a rewatch but not ideal for a first viewing. Most films I own I was fortunate to see at the theatre/cinema/picture show. I have been fortunate to see many old classics on the silver screen. Those palaces hold more magic than many realize. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a single theater-going experience of my life was nearly as transcendant as rewatching The Return of the King (the first time after the theater) on a 20-inch (if that), SD television, with low sound (my uncle was sleeping two feet away), sitting on the edge of the bed.

 

Even the live-to-projection of the very same film - which had a screen that rivalled an IMAX venue and roaring sound - didn't hold a candle to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...