Movies and TV Shows

1 readers

2 users here now

General discussion about movies and TV shows.

Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title's subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown as follows:

::: your spoiler warning
the crazy movie ending that no one saw coming!
:::

Your mods are here to help if you need any clarification!

Subcommunities: The Bear (FX) - [!thebear@lemmy.film](/c/thebear @lemmy.film)

Related communities: !entertainment@beehaw.org !moviesuggestions@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

admin@lemmy.film

257

'Barbie' dominates cinemas: Movie tops $1 billion globally in first for solo woman director (youtube.com)

submitted 1 year ago by Woland@lemm.ee to c/moviesandtv@lemmy.film

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The pink wave has yet to crest, the 'Barbie' movie has sold more than a billion dollars worth of tickets at the global box office, after just 17 days on general release. The milestone makes #GretaGerwig the first woman to reach the such heights as a solo director.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] golli@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

For me it might actually be the other way around. Being in the cinema forces me to pay better attention, which especially for a long movie can be helpful. And imo there is no "too long" in absolute terms, what matters is whether the movie requires the time or if there is a lot of padding that could have been cut.

Havent gone to see Oppenheimer, but for example when it was released i went to see "Drive my Car" (179 minutes long and subtitled) in the cinema. I've since also watched it at home, but i am glad i went to the cinema on my first watch. It's my own flault, but i am not sure if i would have had the same focus and attention when watching it at home or if i'd at some point would have gotten distracted by something.

[–] Chetzemoka@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm the same. If I'm home, I'm gonna pause to...do whatever. So I actually prefer seeing movies I want to pay attention to in the theater.

Plus I just love the experience of a theater. I understand why someone who wasn't into that would prefer streaming. But I've always loved it and I don't expect that's going to change. So I'mma hold onto this AMC A-list membership for now

[–] golli@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For me it depends on what we define as "theater experience":

I absolutely never care about the rest of the audience (unless they'd be actively annoying). The Part where it forces me to pay attention is the biggest draw. And the technical aspect (better/larger screens) only matters for certain movies ever since i got a decent sized oled tv. So i'd go see Oppenheimer if there were an IMAX cinema in my area (which sadly isnt the case) or i went to see Avatar 2 last christmas, because i think there the technical aspects matter more. There i went to see it on a large screen, whereas otherwise i often choose smaller independent cinemas, whenever i go. Next one is probably gonna be "Past Lives".

A membership sounds nice, but i feel like i wouldn't have enough movies i truly want to see to justify one. Also i think the one that's available in my city that i know of would be 20€/month, but not truly unlimited but 8 tickets/month (but i guess that is still plenty to see everything).