honestly, Covid had the opposite effect on me. I was that 'only blockbusters really warrant a big screen' guy before the pandemic, but during lockdown I really started to realize how I took 'events' for granted. Concerts, plays, movies in the theatre. In the two months of 2022 I have seen more movies in the theatre than at home on my TV or computer. No idea how long I'll be able to keep it up and I'm sure I'll fall back at some point to my mindset of 'oh I can watch that at home', but I'll try not to.
Love that Ingrid Bergman close up from Casablanca is the thumbnail. I had the pleasure of seeing it for the first time in a theater. During that scene, when the camera is just holding on her while the song plays, I felt chills. Truly incredible what her performance and that shot conveys before we've even learned the details over their failed relationship
I had the exact same experience of being mesmerized by a massive face on the cinema screen when I went to see Dunkirk at the BFI 70MM IMAX in London, last year. It was at the moment just after Kenneth Branagh's character says "I'm staying here, for the French". Nolan cuts away to the train, where the main soldier (played by Fionn Whitehead) wakes up. The light is bright on about 1/4 of his face, and he turns to see the daylight. That tender image, contrasted against all the epic, expansive wides of the rest of the film, touched me so deeply, I was in awe - and that on 520 square-meter screen, projecting 70mm film, you can only imagine how wonderful it was.
This made me immediately think of the shot toward the beginning of Midsommar when Dani's on the phone with Christian, talking about her sister. She leans into frame and we see this matrix of emotions through her eyes and words... The amount of information and emotion conveyed in that scene is immense and dense and her performance is so raw and upfront and ...in your face
What timing! I saw The Godfather Part I in a Dolby Cinema yesterday. I've seen it multiple times and have always really enjoyed it, but I always found it a bit difficult to keep characters straight and therefore the plot at times could get a bit confusing. That kept me from considering it an all time favorite. And the home setups were always well above average including dedicated home theatre rooms. Watching it in an actual theatre made such a huge difference not only in my ability to enjoy the aesthetics, but literally to understand and enjoy the characters and plot better. Especially in a film where so much of the plot isn't stated, but conveyed through how people act and say things. Boy does it make a difference.
@@bobunitone Oh that'd be a good one. I unknowingly some director's cut version with extra USO and French scenes. Made it even longer than it normally is, but I liked those scenes and only found out they weren't in the theatrical cut after talking to a friend about the movie. I also got to see Schindler's List in a theatre for the 25th anniversary like this Godfather showing was for the 50th. Really hope AMC does more of these if new movies are getting fewer theatrical releases.
This also works with older films. I had always seen Citizen Kane on television. The first time I saw it at the theater was like experiencing an entirely new movie.
Once upon a time in Hollywood was the first Tarantino movie I've ever watched in theater and it was an amazing experience. The tension was immense and the hours went by like nothing. I also felt like the style of the director was so much more obvious on the big screen. It just felt more "like a Tarantino"
I’ve probably seen the Godfather a dozen times but watching it on the big screen on Sunday I was able to really understand and appreciate it for the masterpiece that it is. There truly is something about watching a movie in the theatre that you just can’t replicate at home.
When I was in San Diego, there was the Point Loma theater. It was on Rosecrans. The screen was HUGE, and I believe they ran full frame film, what we called premiere format 70-74mm? Whatever was playing, I went to see it, as old films were revealed on a scale that made them new, as If I'd never really seen them before. That was how I felt we should really experience movies. In another direction entirely, as a child, I watched the Saturday Morning Film Festival. Something about being alone and watching a small TV that brought foreign or independent films in a way that embedded them into my subconscious mind made them deeper somehow. I'm a new subscriber, looking forward to seeing familiar art in an unfamiliar way. Thank you.
I think something that should have been mentioned is the price, movie theaters are fricking expensive. Free at home in a couple months vs. 15 bucks and the hassle of getting to the theater + no subtitles most of the time. The community hype and avoidance of spoilers for the most popular movies justifies it. Movies I know will be beautiful on the big screen but I won’t have anyone to talk about with feels less justified even though I’d love to go
I keep hearing about movie theather prices and I don't get it. Compare it to other art forms. Music concerts cost way more than CDs. At the cinema you are paying for the expenses of setting up such a great experience that can not be matched by a tv screen. Same as a CD will never replace the experience of hearing the artist on the stage. I think that there is a gap between movie lovers and casual movie watchers who are looking for entertainment only. Same as with music, movies have become ultra accessible so the majority will want a entertasining action movie and less people will be interested in more demanding movies. (Not saying that there is anything wrong with action movies). Obveously cinemas as businesses will meet the demand.
Of course I don't know where you're from, but here in the Netherlands you can often get a "mid-week ticket" for the most popular cinema chain. So on Monday through Thursday, you can see a movie for half price. I don't know if they have something similar in your area, but it's worth it to check if price is a factor for you.
While he was doing press for Eighth Grade, Bo Burnham had a similar take: he felt that seeing the movie in the cinema forced you to reckon with, and humble yourself before, the lived experience of this thirteen-year-old girl. (Not to mention that the cinema is one of the few spaces that still demands your undivided attention; i.e. "Put away your small screen and watch this big one now.") Beautiful piece as usual, Evan! Unrelated: By sheer coincidence, I watched this on my desktop monitor (which I don't usually do). And boy did Ms. Harris' mannerisms shine through at 3:51. I can't imagine what it would have been like on a big screen!
I know this is just a cheeky comment - but I think the beauty of nerdwriter is 90% of what he imparts could be done in content alone or at the very least via audio.
@@Kerdis Nerdwriter is very weird in the sense that his consistency is so insanely dialed in. His UA-cam videos are literally more well constructed than a lot of stuff coming from Netflix and TV right now. So, I have to give the man credit and say I don't think there is one video I have seen that I didn't find.... top tier. I think Netflix/Mainstream media should literally hire him as a consistency consult.
I totally agree. When I saw Spencer in November, watching Kristen Stewart as Diana Spencer have an anxiety attack in that wall to wall theatrical experience, I was right there with her in that anxiety. I think it would have lost all impact on the small screen.
It's definitely not the screen that makes these character films work, it's the theatre itself. Leaving the house, willingly becoming a captive audience, and sitting through the experience uninterrupted, makes us think through what we're seeing.
To me, an ADHD guy, movies are worth seeing in theater simply because it's worth sitting through 2 hours in dark without ever reaching for my phone. Big movie, small movie, it doesn't matter. I just can't do it at home. I would simply watch "walkthrough" narration videos (they're big in China) to finish a movie in 10 minutes. Yes I might lose the full experience of watching a full movie, but I don't particularly value that experience for a bad movie.
Came here to say this. It's so easy to be distracted, or pause to send a txt etc in the middle of a scene. It dilutes the effect, even if you have a big screen at home. I saw Memoria in the cinema last year and there's no way I could have managed that at home, even if it was released on streaming (which it isn't).
See my ADHD is one of the key reasons I don't like going to the cinema. 2 hours in the dark with nothing to do with my hands, and huge noise. And then about 30 min in all I can think about is how I can see every pixel (yes, even in IMAX) and I can hear the woofer rattling (yes even in IMAX), and how cold my legs are (I've taken to bringing big puffy coats to the cinema to use as a blanket but even then), and how my neck feels uncomfortable, and that I can hear the person Infront of me breathing, and how *bored* I am. Being able to pause, to discuss the film, to get up, to grab a cup of tea, being able to shift in my seat, do something with my hands like crochet ect makes films so much more enjoyable. I've also found myself just being a lot less compromising with films. If the latest blade runner can catch and hold my attention even though nothing happens for 90% of the film, then I don't see why I should be going out of my way to force attention on whatever action flick can't hold it. I don't want to have to force my way through films by forcibly removing every possible stimulus. If thats it for you, great, but for me that just leaves me under stimulated and irritable.
@@Albinojackrussel yes! It’s so difficult for me to go to the movies. I’d rather watch every movie at home and then watch the best on a big screen. But of course, it doesn’t work this way. Though I have been able to catch some rereleases in smaller theaters. Ultimately, it’s just not worth it to me.
I watched this video when it initially dropped two years ago, and loved the insights. And now, two years later, I keep mentally coming back to it when I’m watching a movie in a theater. The insights were so spot-on, and I am so much more aware of and mindful of these types of closeups, and it adds so much more to the viewing experience. And I came back to this video to share this after having seen Dune: Part II, where this was such an awesome part of the movie, and the big-screen viewing experience. Great stuff, Nerdwriter1, as always! Thank you!
I'm a forever sucker for the 'slow push in towards a face' camera move. Just moving in close, closer, closer still, uncomfortably close as the actor or actress makes their face do all the work and gives you a showcase of twitches, jaw setting, eyes moving. Reminds me, strangely, of the TV show The Shield. It's filmed in the handheld style, but two shots in the finale just took me: both slow pushes into a face. The actor is not speaking, but their face is monologuing up a storm. Their nose and jaw are earning Emmys in this scene, flaring and setting and clenching and sighing. It's utterly magnetic, and impossible to look away from.
I don't watch or even like superhero movies. One the most dramatic moments in cinema's history (at least for me) was seeing Rhett & Scarlett's faces up close on that big screen! Great stuff, Ethan!
My local cinema is the oldest purpose built one in the country and they play all kinds of films that aren't shown in most big franchise cinema chains. After starting film school in September and not really having a chance to go to the cinema as often before moving here, I have now started to watch a whole variety of movies that I would have not seen yet or in the big screen had COVID completely demolished the industry. We are only in February and I think I have watched more movies this year than any other year of my life.
I thought about this before, screen size, that is, and I tested it out. When I go to a theater, I usually sit in the center seats roughly halfway back. The screen that that position is roughly the exact same as I get at home sitting 6 feet away from my wall mounted 85" 4k TV with surround sound. It is actually a more enjoyable experience. The point is that given the advancements in home theater technology with falling prices, theaters a becoming more and more unnecessary. You can still get the effect of a giant face in glorious detail filling your viewable space or an expansive action scene with booming audio while sitting on your couch. Pants not required.
The intimacy of a close shot portrayed on the scale of a cinema screen is reminiscent to a person standing close to you. It fills your entire vision, that's the primary necessity of such a big size, to really perceive the emotions of the moment, it feels you're there for real. Maybe this can be substituted by a VR headset as it fills completely your vision and really immerses you into it, but I haven't Tryed yet. Anybody with a VR?
The pandemic helped me realize that I never want to go back to the movie theater for any reason. I'm only sad that I have to wait for movies to hit the "small screen" (with a big enough TV or a projector, nothing is small screen). I've always felt like seeing a movie with friends is to not actually spend any time with them. And I'm allergic to corn, so I can't eat movie theater popcorn. So I have little reason to go to movie theaters anymore.
If someone is interested about this topic (the use of faces on the big screen), it might be interesting to look up Béla Balazs and his work, particularly 'The Visible Man'. His theory on how cinema can bring up deep and hidden emotions through the use of faces on the big screen really fits the tone of this video (besides that, his work is one of if not the first works on film theory). He even goes further and states that landscapes and 'inmate' objects can express these kind of emotions ('Physiogonomy of Things'), which is a concept that was also described by the french theorists (Deluc, Epstein and Dullac to name a few) of the 20s. The french called it 'Photogénie' but it was closely related to Balazs concept of 'Physiogonomy'. Both also described how faces could show such complex and immense action, if used correctly in front of the lens. Anyways, I just found it really awesome that after a hundred years the same concepts and ideas continue to fascinate people about cinema. Great video!
There's a reason I have a video projector at home. The experience is similar to a movie theatre. A 120" face from 10 feet away is big enough for what's talked about here. I quit going to the cinema several years ago.
Reminds me of seeing Inglorious Basterds in theater and during the climax of the opening scene, watching Hans Landa's expression go from warm affability to expressionless and cold. It's one of my favorite movie scenes for that very reason.
Theaters help me with maintaining focus and being absorbed by the film. It's also fun to watch films with people (even if they are mostly strangers) after months/years of on and off quarantines. When I watch Dune at home, I'm folding laundry and checking my phone. When I watch Dune in a Dolby Cinema or IMAX, I'm on Arrakis.
I see a lot of movies in the theater, and the last movie I saw multiple times on the big screen was Eighth Grade. From the first seconds of actual webcam footage blown up to cinema scale, there was something really compelling about it on the big screen. The video normally only seen on a laptop or phone blown up so large was almost an abstraction. The party felt overwhelming. The mall cafeteria felt isolating. The car scene felt inescapable. Unpausable. The graduation confrontation where she can't hold eye contact felt like she was looking a mile off into an abyss. The campfire felt like you were on another planet where only these two people existed. If you're talking about 'big movies' and 'small movies,' I think everyone would call Eighth Grade a 'small movie' but the gigantic lens of cinema makes it feel like staring at the details of a tiny insect through a macro lens.
this video is so awesome. I had been waiting for months for Licorice Pizza to come out but because of reasons I didn't get to watch it until January. I called my friend who had seen it and asked him his impression. And the very scene at the heart of this video is the one that left the biggest impression on him - what he called "uncomfortable, unnecessary closeups." Awesome synchro!
I do find myself wondering how quickly we reach the limits of the human eye with big screens. While I was never a particularly frequent cinema goer (I've had some problems in the past holding my head at that sort of upwards angle for 2+ hours before owing to a mild disability), I'd have assumed the extra distance of some cinema seats would counteract the difference in size and graphics. I know for example that this occurs already with the top end of HD TVs since people already sit too far away from them for anyone without better than twenty-twenty vision to actually see everything the screen displays. Of course, I haven't run the maths on this and a cinema experience is certainly better than what my laptop can muster, but for people who can afford it and are very invested in their home set ups, does the cinema still offer an appreciable difference once the limits of the space-screen-body relation are factored in?
I think that's just resolution though. And for theatres with actual film and projectors I don't think resolution works the same way. But also there's just something different about the way it looks, not just clarity. I'm sure there are people who could give the reasons why which I certainly can't, but it's not solely about distance and resolution.
There are more elements like light being bounced instead of light being lit (the latter is what TVs do). Think that our eyes see light bouncing of things in the world, not coming out of elements. That's why looking at the sun or a lamp, that emit light, is bad for our eyes. Your vision is always gonna be worse when looking at a display instead of a theatre screen because in a display you are doing what your eye always suffers from doing, looking at the light source. Also, I don't know what theatre you go to but my father always has neck pain and problems from just sleeping so he can't stand watching a movie from a low seat that forces your eyesight up. So, for my whole childhood I developed the tendency of looking for the best seat for him which is one that puts the exact center of the screen right in front of his eyes in a normal neck position. Even today I keep doing it because that makes the experience better. I hope my advice can help.
@@Jorge_Ambruster nice point, hadn't thought about our eyes interpretation of light and distance and emitting vs reflected light. My brother has just bought one of those new Samsung laser projectors, mainly to save on the space taken up by a big tv but also for the image quality. I'm yet to visit for movie night, but I imagine it would be similar to a cinema experience for the eyeballs. And yeah in cinemas I always go for the middle row centre for comfort... mild- moderate spinal disability here as well. The sound in the centre is different too and feels more "realistic" for me, with better voice and dialogue clarity.
I have a projector and a 100" screen in my small living room. I sit about 11ft from the screen. It is a similar field of vision as being in most cinemas - sometimes better, depending on the size of an individual theater's screen and the distance of my individual seat. 1080p and 4k look terrific, cinemas aren't noticeably better.
im so incredibly glad you made a video talking about this. and when you - for just the briefest moment - showed Anthony Hopkins' closing scene of The Father, I choked up just thinking of how powerful it felt watching this close up. once again, thank you for your content, please don't ever stop
Very opportunistic of you to change the thumbnail :) Ironically it made it difficult to find this video again to post in a forum discussing Oppenheimer because a lot of posters were saying how it wasn't "worth it" watching in IMAX because of the lack of action set pieces. I kept passing this video because I knew it was made well before Oppenheimer came out.
True! That is why I never regretted getting a 4k projector and screen at home. Win win win, if i could screen the latest indie movies on release dates at prices close to a movie ticket.
I saw Liquorice Pizza on the big screen and I completely agree. That scene made me crack up and the detail of her face was essential to the joke landing.
There's a middle-ground between TVs and cinemas and that's home projectors. I have a condo that's less than 500 sq ft, but I sit 11 feet away from a 100" screen and...it's pretty much the same visual field I'd get in a movie theater. Maybe better, depending on how deep the theater is and if I have to sit in the back. A decent home projector and a cheap ceiling-mounted electric retractable screen are maybe 50% more expensive than a 75 inch TV, but 500% better viewing experience. I've had mine over a year and I still feel excited to turn it on. I mean, holy crap, you don't know how good Succession is until you've seen it theatrical-style! It's possible to almost get there. You just have to spend a little bit more and take a little more time with research and installation.
65” OLED at a good viewing distance plus surround sound and subs is legitimately as good as most theaters. Once I run the ceiling speakers for Atmos I’ll only need theaters to avoid spoilers.
Honestly I picked all that up on my phone. Her performance still holds up. I don't know why he seems to think we either have bad eyesight or hold our phones super far away. I love the cinema but I don't think its performance that gets lost. Its the communal nature of movie going that is special
Last summer, I really wanted to see Spencer, generally not considered a big movie. I was gonna wait ‘til it was released to home media, but changed my mind after Chris Stuckman (in his review of the film) strongly suggested watching it in the theater. I am so glad that I did.
I completely agree with the ideas you express here. I'm also a sucker for good naturalistic and immersive cinematography, which really sets in when you're seeing it on a big screen. But at the risk of being pedantic, I think sometimes the bigger screen is in fact at home. TV's have plummeted in price, and concurrently multiplex screens have gotten smaller (or were they always that way?). In terms of how much a FOV a screen takes up in front of you can actually be better in a home setup.
I agree! That's what I've been thinking since "Bad Times at the El Royale" (Jeff Bridges dementia part) and later in "Joker". I LOVE it when the movie gives the actors time to show and feel all of their emotions as a progress. Way too often I see instant emotions following one incident, rather than a progression of different feelings resulting in one overwhelming emotion.
I really seem to be in the minority, prefering the "at home experience" ^^ At the cinema a movie usually feels distant, too big (too loud) and less impactful, while at home it's much more intimate, emotional - deeper. Especially on my laptop, on my couch, almost in the dark, with headphones I had the most wonderful, spellbinding experiences. I have no problem seeing micro expressions and have the opportunity to immediately rewatch a brilliant scene or stop it to have a closer look at the costumes/set design or just "mull over" what a character said. I guess I want to dissect it the first time, and simply marvel at it if I watch it again. Recorded theater plays or live streams on the other hand I do prefer to watch at a cinema - mostly for the energy of the other people in the room, which is so different compared to a movie screening.
You are in fact in the majority. Most people who say they prefer theatres are still watching most content at home. It's just a more socially acceptable thing to say. Just like in anime community, most people claim to prefer sub than dub , but in reality dub is way more popular.
I get the point made in this video and think its really valid. As for me, I don't miss cinemas one bit. Even if I could get used to the sticky floors, the chunks of food everywhere, the open-mouth chewing symphony... it's the fact that I can watch the same movies on my pajamas at home, with a Pause button. Doesn't get better than that in my opinion 🤭
The price problem is not as much of an issue in Spain (all Wednesdays my local theater is 3.90 €) and I used to go every week pre-pandemic but I don't think you can't appreciate performance or appreciate it less on a smaller screen. For me it's the fact that you're going to a space tailor made to watch a movie. Image, color and sound quality in a dark room with other people, a communal experience in a further atomized and individual world. As with a live performance you share laughter, amazement, sadness and emotion with others. Sometimes people laugh when you don't and it makes you think why. Sometimes you go with a friend who loves dark humor as much as you do to see The Lobster and you realize you're the only two people laughing in the entire theater. It's too bad that, except for a couple of sessions a month, you are expected to go in watch the movie and leave to allow other people in to watch another movie. I like it when there's also a discussion afterwards and you can share with strangers your thoughts on the movie.
In a world where claims on your attention are so manifestly difficult to fight, the cinema becomes a space where we can willingly give our attention over to one thing, without interruption, without the world acting upon us constantly. We don't choose what images come before us, but we do make the choice to let those images arrest us. This is also why I think watching longer movies is not only important, but presents a beautiful kind of time-experience. Crazily perhaps, I see it as a spiritual and attentive practice, relearning the joys of duration, and developing a discipline of the self in the face modern life's constant hijacking. The cinema is embryonic, inviting, like entering into a slumber, only the dream is someone else's. You can truly forget yourself at the cinema - that is a magic that is not possible at home, and never will be. It is a giving up of the self to an other, and in that sense it has both philosophical and political implications. I have seen over 50 films at the cinema in the last year, after recognising how much I have been missing, and I will continue to do it as much as possible. Paul Thomas Anderson in a recent Reddit AMA, when asked what he sees as the future of cinema, responded (paraphrasing): "Movies shot on film, watched in cinemas!" That positive vision has stuck with me, and has made me understand that it's not enough to just hope the multiplexes will suddenly start showing movies of all varieties. I dream of a community cinema in every neighbourhood, showing old classics, experimental work, independent films, and becoming the in-person social hub for filmmakers, enthusiasts and all members of a community. The cinema is a social space, and more than ever we must invest in and create social institutions that bring people together, for the love of art, and humanity.
The last movie I saw in theaters was 2012's "Prometheus ", and the experience was so annoying I didn't care if I went back. Generally, I don't like most blockbusters, especially superhero movies and endless sequels. I used to enjoy the communal experience of theaters years ago. Now an audience is a detriment to my enjoyment that overrides other experiences. I can appreciate an actors face and expression without it being blown up to overwhelming proportions.
I actually saw more movies in the theater during covid than any other time in my life. When there's nothing else to do, I went to the empty theater and saw some amazing films. thanks to AMC A-List.
I've opted out of the cinema for many years due to other viewer's annoying habits ruining it and not making it worth the ticket price. So I've been watching all films on my TV at home, and still easily connect with the characters' minute facial expressions, that absolutely don't require a big screen to appreciate.
What a lovely idea! Last week I went to a theater after 3 years of consuming overwhelming amount of content on my laptop- it was refreshing, more impactful and lingering in my memory.
When I go see something in the theatre it's to see it with a crowd. It's not about the size of the screen, so much as being in a room with a bunch of other people all getting scared or surprised or happy at the same time as me. Action movies are for sure good for that, but the quieter non action movies are good for that too, so long as they aren't sad. I don't want to be sad in a room with a whole lot of other people being sad at the same time. It makes the sad so much bigger and that is so very hard to claw myself out of. The non action movies, unfortunately, have a tendency to have more sad in them.
When it comes to a story being told by faces, the music video of Max Richter's "On the Nature of Daylight" really sticks out to me. The video does not give you much to work with, but more than you'd ever need. You can painfully feel the emotions exerted by the faces without ever being told a single detail.
The “thoughtful” movie fan is watching at home. TV screens and speakers are improving quickly to give the average person a more cinematic at home experience. My dad always has three or four movies he recorded from TCM that he is working through, one of my kids prefers the Criterion app. When mainstream media doesn’t deliver quality movies, interesting music, or smart TV through the avenues available to most, discerning viewers/listeners seek it out wherever they can find it. Quality is still being produced, but if everyone continues to run out and see the latest goofy action or superhero movie (no offense to anyone who likes these), that’s exactly what we will continue to get.
I feel this way about cinematography as well. I couldn't help but think about Nomadland, one of the first movies I went to see in a cinema after the pandemic had hit, and how awe-inspiring the scenery was. I've watched it since at home, and still enjoyed the story & performances a lot, but the impact of the visuals was definitely lessened on a smaller screen.
I just wanted to say thank you for the inspiration and influence over the years. I just put out my first video essay and your influence on my writing and speech is pretty undeniable. I hope one day I can make the kind of art you do. Thanks for being so amazing! ♥️
I love seeing more artsy/slow films in the cinema - partly because I really struggle with distractions and the cinema stops me from reaching for my phone so I properly focus on the film.
OTOH, today a lot of people have 65" or larger 4K screens at home which in effect (because you are sitting so close) are relatively as big and also about as detailed as a theater screen, plus at least a sound bar for better louder TV sound. In a theater you are forced to just watch though, and can't be thinking about what snack to get from the kitchen or what text or video or news flash you need to see.
I have a 32" monitor in front of me that takes up more of my field of view than a typical theater screen, so I don't think I'm really missing much by avoiding theaters.
Most people buy 65 inch tvs these days. It fills about the same field of vision as it would at the cinema, you can pause, re-wind, stick on subtitles, the picture quality is brighter, deeper blacks, and you can get a good surround sound system for not much, anything that doesn't push the boundaries of a big screen cinema just does not justify itself.
VR theater is a good compromise, now that headsets are becoming more accessible. Not the same experience as having people around you, and you might lose some visual quality if your PC or VR device can't stream in 4K. But it's good enough to experience movies or even great TV shows and youtube videos you'd never get the chance to see in a real theater in the best way
I was very happy to see "the ugly" Eli Wallach in your video, because I have never accepted this idea of "movies for the big screen" exactly for the same reason: the faces. And you could see plenty of meaningful closeups in the slower, more reflective grandparents of action movies that were the spaghetti western.
i saw alphonso cuaron's ROMA twice in the theater, the first time was a day after the premiere so i only got tickets to be up front in one corner, and the second was in the middle but slightly more on the opposite side than my first time. they were two totally different movies and experiences, it's a movie where a lot is going on all the time. it was like the first time i saw it i focused my attention on the lower right corner quadrant and the second time, a little more centered with focus on the right half. when i watched a 3rd time at my home, i couldn't have that. true directors think in movies for big scale.
that take on faces in cinema reminded me of Jean Epstein. he was a theorician of cinema in the 20's, who basically defined the artistery of cinema in how the captation changed how the subject appeared. specifically, emotions shown on close-ups were described as earthquakes.
Unless you're watching films in an Imax or something the term 'THE BIG SCREEN' is misleading. No one ever mentions how though the screen is bigger, it's further away and thus the image appears smaller, and I tested this recently: When I went to see Dune, before the movie started, I took a photo of the screen by putting the phone right infront of my nose. I did the same for my computer monitor at home, where I usually watch films. Overlaying the photos, my computer monitor was bigger, meaning it takes up a bigger part of my visual field so... the real 'BIG SCREEN' is at home in my case.
You are one of the few channels I have the alerts turned on for, and yet I haven't received an alert or had your videos come up in my feed in months. I assumed you weren't putting out videos, but turns out I just haven't been notified. Just a heads up! Keep em comin!!!
fantastic. when you explored Harriet Sansom Harris’ performance, I physically smiled. remember seeing Licorice Pizza in the theater and the audience was utterly consumed. happened earlier, too, in the movie with Skyler Gisondo. you added a whole new layer to enjoying the theater!
The only people who can afford to see a movie on the big-screen at a "premium" theater also have a 4K 65" TV w/surround sound in their living-rooms (thank Spielberg, Lucas, & Coppola for these home-entertainment innovations, mind you). This means, at home, the concessions are cheaper & more individualized, no plot-lines or plot-twists are lost to bathroom breaks, the seating & lounging is more comfortable, there's no commute, pajamas aren't frowned upon, & you pick the audience for your engagement. Win, win, win, win, win, win, win.
@@exiletsj2570 a sci-fantasy epic, sure. It has a good helping of action, I guess I just find the most valuable scenes are not the big flashy ones which is why I say that
For me, part of the experience of going to a theater is as much the size of the screen as it is a ritual. Blocking off 2 hours of an evening to shut off your phone, be totally isolated from the outside, and just focus on a film - undistracted by texting or social media or stopping and making a meal halfway thru. It's why you feel so different walking out of a theater into the "real world" you've just been teleported into another dimension
Two of my favorite and best (imo) movies from last year were released digitally. The Father and Tick... tick... Boom! Both incredibly films in many ways.
Absolutely. While I'm happy that streaming exists, there are few things that compare to being swept-up in a good movie on the big screen. It is those faces, precisely, that tell a story - even beyond that of plot or dialogue.
Like Scorsese, I've had my life changed by watching innumerable masterpieces on a 13" black&white TV w/a mono speaker the size of a grapefruit. A presentation-vehicle doesn't diminish perfection, only mediocrity. A beautiful poem can be written on the back of napkin & still resonate. Because Hollywood isn't based on meritocracy but rather cliques & nepotism of questionable talent, the lowest-common-denomination of mediocrity is the norm, & anything fairly exemplary is considered "genius"
you show that brief image of Ingrid Bergman which I'm pretty sure if from Hitchcock's 'Notorious' (or is it from "Casablanca'). Notorious is one of my favorite movies of all time. I think it is absolutely incredible. I've watched it easily over 20 times. But I've never found it on a big screen. I've only seen the DVD version. If I could find it on a big screen someday/someway I'd jump at the chance. But there's probably very little chance that most cinema chains would ever show it... (bummer)
I was soooo looking forward to seeing Licorice Pizza in the theatres. In my country, it released in the theatres on the 25th of February but, for some reasons, the "movie theatre people" in my city didn't think it was worth projecting. Same happened with The french dispatch. Oh how delightful it would've been to experience that Wes-Andersonian cinematography on the big screen! :/
Funnily enough, even without context, I saw this video’s thumbnail on my phone and immediately opened it on the big screen, because Nerdwriter1 video definitely “worth” the largest screen I have
I have a cinema pass for theatres that frequently play alternative and international films as well as blockbusters, but I have a hard time going frequently. I don't have the time, I don't have the energy or I place priority on my projects and other hobbies. Its sad because I feel like I should be going more often, especially considering I have an interest in writing and concept art and have graduated in video and film.
I have been to the cinema only twice in my life. I have seen over thousands of movies. I don't buy the BS that seeing certain movies on the big screen is better. Over three decades of watching movies on normal tv screens, and then on my laptop, my eyes have been trained to pick out little subtleties and expressions on the human face.
OLEDs are becomiing cheaper and cheaper and with them the access to near perfect color reproduction, HDR, etc. Something even most cinemas can't offer. The cinema viewing angle is considered to be 40* so a 65" TV means you a cinema experience at a distance of ~6.5ft (though it's closer to ~6.8). Most people don't have rooms that big and if they do they can definitely afford to spring for the 75" model. In a cinema you're limited by the available seats and annoyed by the always on exit light and the more inconsiderate viewers in the room. At home you can cleanup almost every aspect of the experience. There's no justification for going to the cinema apart from the social experience of seeing a long awaited movie in a big group of people. If you're moderately well off you can easily see faces better and more clearly at home.
honestly, Covid had the opposite effect on me. I was that 'only blockbusters really warrant a big screen' guy before the pandemic, but during lockdown I really started to realize how I took 'events' for granted. Concerts, plays, movies in the theatre. In the two months of 2022 I have seen more movies in the theatre than at home on my TV or computer. No idea how long I'll be able to keep it up and I'm sure I'll fall back at some point to my mindset of 'oh I can watch that at home', but I'll try not to.
Same here.
Same!
Yeah same!
As a person with a projector at home i can tell you it doesnt matter to me where the big screen is located :D
Nobody asked you
Love that Ingrid Bergman close up from Casablanca is the thumbnail. I had the pleasure of seeing it for the first time in a theater. During that scene, when the camera is just holding on her while the song plays, I felt chills. Truly incredible what her performance and that shot conveys before we've even learned the details over their failed relationship
I had the exact same experience of being mesmerized by a massive face on the cinema screen when I went to see Dunkirk at the BFI 70MM IMAX in London, last year. It was at the moment just after Kenneth Branagh's character says "I'm staying here, for the French". Nolan cuts away to the train, where the main soldier (played by Fionn Whitehead) wakes up. The light is bright on about 1/4 of his face, and he turns to see the daylight. That tender image, contrasted against all the epic, expansive wides of the rest of the film, touched me so deeply, I was in awe - and that on 520 square-meter screen, projecting 70mm film, you can only imagine how wonderful it was.
This made me immediately think of the shot toward the beginning of Midsommar when Dani's on the phone with Christian, talking about her sister. She leans into frame and we see this matrix of emotions through her eyes and words... The amount of information and emotion conveyed in that scene is immense and dense and her performance is so raw and upfront and ...in your face
What timing! I saw The Godfather Part I in a Dolby Cinema yesterday. I've seen it multiple times and have always really enjoyed it, but I always found it a bit difficult to keep characters straight and therefore the plot at times could get a bit confusing. That kept me from considering it an all time favorite. And the home setups were always well above average including dedicated home theatre rooms. Watching it in an actual theatre made such a huge difference not only in my ability to enjoy the aesthetics, but literally to understand and enjoy the characters and plot better. Especially in a film where so much of the plot isn't stated, but conveyed through how people act and say things. Boy does it make a difference.
Nice, just watched Apocolypse Now on the big screen for the first time and wow! What a difference from the DVD viewing I had years ago.
@@bobunitone Oh that'd be a good one. I unknowingly some director's cut version with extra USO and French scenes. Made it even longer than it normally is, but I liked those scenes and only found out they weren't in the theatrical cut after talking to a friend about the movie.
I also got to see Schindler's List in a theatre for the 25th anniversary like this Godfather showing was for the 50th. Really hope AMC does more of these if new movies are getting fewer theatrical releases.
This also works with older films. I had always seen Citizen Kane on television. The first time I saw it at the theater was like experiencing an entirely new movie.
Once upon a time in Hollywood was the first Tarantino movie I've ever watched in theater and it was an amazing experience. The tension was immense and the
hours went by like nothing. I also felt like the style of the director was so much more obvious on the big screen. It just felt more "like a Tarantino"
I’ve probably seen the Godfather a dozen times but watching it on the big screen on Sunday I was able to really understand and appreciate it for the masterpiece that it is. There truly is something about watching a movie in the theatre that you just can’t replicate at home.
When I was in San Diego, there was the Point Loma theater. It was on Rosecrans. The screen was HUGE, and I believe they ran full frame film, what we called premiere format 70-74mm? Whatever was playing, I went to see it, as old films were revealed on a scale that made them new, as If I'd never really seen them before. That was how I felt we should really experience movies. In another direction entirely, as a child, I watched the Saturday Morning Film Festival. Something about being alone and watching a small TV that brought foreign or independent films in a way that embedded them into my subconscious mind made them deeper somehow. I'm a new subscriber, looking forward to seeing familiar art in an unfamiliar way. Thank you.
I think something that should have been mentioned is the price, movie theaters are fricking expensive. Free at home in a couple months vs. 15 bucks and the hassle of getting to the theater + no subtitles most of the time. The community hype and avoidance of spoilers for the most popular movies justifies it. Movies I know will be beautiful on the big screen but I won’t have anyone to talk about with feels less justified even though I’d love to go
100000% agree the way audio is balanced now-a-days i literally cannot understand dialogue sometimes without subtitles
I keep hearing about movie theather prices and I don't get it. Compare it to other art forms. Music concerts cost way more than CDs. At the cinema you are paying for the expenses of setting up such a great experience that can not be matched by a tv screen. Same as a CD will never replace the experience of hearing the artist on the stage.
I think that there is a gap between movie lovers and casual movie watchers who are looking for entertainment only. Same as with music, movies have become ultra accessible so the majority will want a entertasining action movie and less people will be interested in more demanding movies. (Not saying that there is anything wrong with action movies). Obveously cinemas as businesses will meet the demand.
@callmecatalyst You just wrote a weird thing. I love it!
Of course I don't know where you're from, but here in the Netherlands you can often get a "mid-week ticket" for the most popular cinema chain. So on Monday through Thursday, you can see a movie for half price. I don't know if they have something similar in your area, but it's worth it to check if price is a factor for you.
@callmecatalyst Keep takin' those pills buddy.
While he was doing press for Eighth Grade, Bo Burnham had a similar take: he felt that seeing the movie in the cinema forced you to reckon with, and humble yourself before, the lived experience of this thirteen-year-old girl. (Not to mention that the cinema is one of the few spaces that still demands your undivided attention; i.e. "Put away your small screen and watch this big one now.") Beautiful piece as usual, Evan!
Unrelated: By sheer coincidence, I watched this on my desktop monitor (which I don't usually do). And boy did Ms. Harris' mannerisms shine through at 3:51. I can't imagine what it would have been like on a big screen!
For that very reason, I wish that Inside gets some sort of wider cinematic late-release. The special freaking deserves it.
I used to only make videos on art history, but you inspired me to expand and analyze movie as well.
Thank you for being an inspiration as always!
Imagine a Nerdwriter video marathon on the big screen.
would go and see thrice or maybe more than that!
I know this is just a cheeky comment - but I think the beauty of nerdwriter is 90% of what he imparts could be done in content alone or at the very least via audio.
What are some of your fav Nerdwriter videos? I personally love the Steely Dan, Fleetwood Mac, Maus, Heat, and K=Lauryn Hill ones.
@@Kerdis Nerdwriter is very weird in the sense that his consistency is so insanely dialed in. His UA-cam videos are literally more well constructed than a lot of stuff coming from Netflix and TV right now. So, I have to give the man credit and say I don't think there is one video I have seen that I didn't find.... top tier. I think Netflix/Mainstream media should literally hire him as a consistency consult.
@@Levipaulsen I couldn’t agree more.
I totally agree. When I saw Spencer in November, watching Kristen Stewart as Diana Spencer have an anxiety attack in that wall to wall theatrical experience, I was right there with her in that anxiety. I think it would have lost all impact on the small screen.
This film was the first to pop in my head when hearing the thesis of this video. Totally agree.
Possibly my favourite movie I saw last year. Kristen Stewart deserves that oscar.
I'm actually gonna say that my movie theatre experience of Spencer far surpassed that of The Batman.
It's definitely not the screen that makes these character films work, it's the theatre itself. Leaving the house, willingly becoming a captive audience, and sitting through the experience uninterrupted, makes us think through what we're seeing.
To me, an ADHD guy, movies are worth seeing in theater simply because it's worth sitting through 2 hours in dark without ever reaching for my phone. Big movie, small movie, it doesn't matter. I just can't do it at home. I would simply watch "walkthrough" narration videos (they're big in China) to finish a movie in 10 minutes. Yes I might lose the full experience of watching a full movie, but I don't particularly value that experience for a bad movie.
Came here to say this. It's so easy to be distracted, or pause to send a txt etc in the middle of a scene. It dilutes the effect, even if you have a big screen at home. I saw Memoria in the cinema last year and there's no way I could have managed that at home, even if it was released on streaming (which it isn't).
Do you have any yt channel that do these narration videos ? I don't know what is is and I'm curious what it looks like
See my ADHD is one of the key reasons I don't like going to the cinema. 2 hours in the dark with nothing to do with my hands, and huge noise. And then about 30 min in all I can think about is how I can see every pixel (yes, even in IMAX) and I can hear the woofer rattling (yes even in IMAX), and how cold my legs are (I've taken to bringing big puffy coats to the cinema to use as a blanket but even then), and how my neck feels uncomfortable, and that I can hear the person Infront of me breathing, and how *bored* I am.
Being able to pause, to discuss the film, to get up, to grab a cup of tea, being able to shift in my seat, do something with my hands like crochet ect makes films so much more enjoyable.
I've also found myself just being a lot less compromising with films. If the latest blade runner can catch and hold my attention even though nothing happens for 90% of the film, then I don't see why I should be going out of my way to force attention on whatever action flick can't hold it. I don't want to have to force my way through films by forcibly removing every possible stimulus. If thats it for you, great, but for me that just leaves me under stimulated and irritable.
If you can watch the full movie in a cinema, you don't have ADHD, you're just a dopamine addict.
@@Albinojackrussel yes! It’s so difficult for me to go to the movies. I’d rather watch every movie at home and then watch the best on a big screen. But of course, it doesn’t work this way. Though I have been able to catch some rereleases in smaller theaters. Ultimately, it’s just not worth it to me.
I watched this video when it initially dropped two years ago, and loved the insights. And now, two years later, I keep mentally coming back to it when I’m watching a movie in a theater. The insights were so spot-on, and I am so much more aware of and mindful of these types of closeups, and it adds so much more to the viewing experience. And I came back to this video to share this after having seen Dune: Part II, where this was such an awesome part of the movie, and the big-screen viewing experience. Great stuff, Nerdwriter1, as always! Thank you!
I'm a forever sucker for the 'slow push in towards a face' camera move. Just moving in close, closer, closer still, uncomfortably close as the actor or actress makes their face do all the work and gives you a showcase of twitches, jaw setting, eyes moving.
Reminds me, strangely, of the TV show The Shield. It's filmed in the handheld style, but two shots in the finale just took me: both slow pushes into a face. The actor is not speaking, but their face is monologuing up a storm. Their nose and jaw are earning Emmys in this scene, flaring and setting and clenching and sighing. It's utterly magnetic, and impossible to look away from.
I don't watch or even like superhero movies. One the most dramatic moments in cinema's history (at least for me) was seeing Rhett & Scarlett's faces up close on that big screen!
Great stuff, Ethan!
My local cinema is the oldest purpose built one in the country and they play all kinds of films that aren't shown in most big franchise cinema chains. After starting film school in September and not really having a chance to go to the cinema as often before moving here, I have now started to watch a whole variety of movies that I would have not seen yet or in the big screen had COVID completely demolished the industry. We are only in February and I think I have watched more movies this year than any other year of my life.
I thought about this before, screen size, that is, and I tested it out. When I go to a theater, I usually sit in the center seats roughly halfway back. The screen that that position is roughly the exact same as I get at home sitting 6 feet away from my wall mounted 85" 4k TV with surround sound. It is actually a more enjoyable experience.
The point is that given the advancements in home theater technology with falling prices, theaters a becoming more and more unnecessary. You can still get the effect of a giant face in glorious detail filling your viewable space or an expansive action scene with booming audio while sitting on your couch. Pants not required.
The intimacy of a close shot portrayed on the scale of a cinema screen is reminiscent to a person standing close to you.
It fills your entire vision, that's the primary necessity of such a big size, to really perceive the emotions of the moment, it feels you're there for real. Maybe this can be substituted by a VR headset as it fills completely your vision and really immerses you into it, but I haven't Tryed yet. Anybody with a VR?
The pandemic helped me realize that I never want to go back to the movie theater for any reason. I'm only sad that I have to wait for movies to hit the "small screen" (with a big enough TV or a projector, nothing is small screen). I've always felt like seeing a movie with friends is to not actually spend any time with them. And I'm allergic to corn, so I can't eat movie theater popcorn. So I have little reason to go to movie theaters anymore.
Always a good day when Nerdwriter uploads
Can confirm. I watched Tenet in cinema, and the airplane scene and stuff was awesome, but that eye close up in the beginning is what really got me.
If someone is interested about this topic (the use of faces on the big screen), it might be interesting to look up Béla Balazs and his work, particularly 'The Visible Man'. His theory on how cinema can bring up deep and hidden emotions through the use of faces on the big screen really fits the tone of this video (besides that, his work is one of if not the first works on film theory). He even goes further and states that landscapes and 'inmate' objects can express these kind of emotions ('Physiogonomy of Things'), which is a concept that was also described by the french theorists (Deluc, Epstein and Dullac to name a few) of the 20s. The french called it 'Photogénie' but it was closely related to Balazs concept of 'Physiogonomy'. Both also described how faces could show such complex and immense action, if used correctly in front of the lens. Anyways, I just found it really awesome that after a hundred years the same concepts and ideas continue to fascinate people about cinema. Great video!
There's a reason I have a video projector at home. The experience is similar to a movie theatre. A 120" face from 10 feet away is big enough for what's talked about here. I quit going to the cinema several years ago.
Reminds me of seeing Inglorious Basterds in theater and during the climax of the opening scene, watching Hans Landa's expression go from warm affability to expressionless and cold. It's one of my favorite movie scenes for that very reason.
Theaters help me with maintaining focus and being absorbed by the film. It's also fun to watch films with people (even if they are mostly strangers) after months/years of on and off quarantines. When I watch Dune at home, I'm folding laundry and checking my phone. When I watch Dune in a Dolby Cinema or IMAX, I'm on Arrakis.
I see a lot of movies in the theater, and the last movie I saw multiple times on the big screen was Eighth Grade. From the first seconds of actual webcam footage blown up to cinema scale, there was something really compelling about it on the big screen.
The video normally only seen on a laptop or phone blown up so large was almost an abstraction. The party felt overwhelming. The mall cafeteria felt isolating. The car scene felt inescapable. Unpausable. The graduation confrontation where she can't hold eye contact felt like she was looking a mile off into an abyss. The campfire felt like you were on another planet where only these two people existed.
If you're talking about 'big movies' and 'small movies,' I think everyone would call Eighth Grade a 'small movie' but the gigantic lens of cinema makes it feel like staring at the details of a tiny insect through a macro lens.
this video is so awesome. I had been waiting for months for Licorice Pizza to come out but because of reasons I didn't get to watch it until January. I called my friend who had seen it and asked him his impression. And the very scene at the heart of this video is the one that left the biggest impression on him - what he called "uncomfortable, unnecessary closeups." Awesome synchro!
I do find myself wondering how quickly we reach the limits of the human eye with big screens. While I was never a particularly frequent cinema goer (I've had some problems in the past holding my head at that sort of upwards angle for 2+ hours before owing to a mild disability), I'd have assumed the extra distance of some cinema seats would counteract the difference in size and graphics. I know for example that this occurs already with the top end of HD TVs since people already sit too far away from them for anyone without better than twenty-twenty vision to actually see everything the screen displays.
Of course, I haven't run the maths on this and a cinema experience is certainly better than what my laptop can muster, but for people who can afford it and are very invested in their home set ups, does the cinema still offer an appreciable difference once the limits of the space-screen-body relation are factored in?
I think that's just resolution though. And for theatres with actual film and projectors I don't think resolution works the same way. But also there's just something different about the way it looks, not just clarity. I'm sure there are people who could give the reasons why which I certainly can't, but it's not solely about distance and resolution.
There are more elements like light being bounced instead of light being lit (the latter is what TVs do). Think that our eyes see light bouncing of things in the world, not coming out of elements. That's why looking at the sun or a lamp, that emit light, is bad for our eyes. Your vision is always gonna be worse when looking at a display instead of a theatre screen because in a display you are doing what your eye always suffers from doing, looking at the light source.
Also, I don't know what theatre you go to but my father always has neck pain and problems from just sleeping so he can't stand watching a movie from a low seat that forces your eyesight up. So, for my whole childhood I developed the tendency of looking for the best seat for him which is one that puts the exact center of the screen right in front of his eyes in a normal neck position. Even today I keep doing it because that makes the experience better. I hope my advice can help.
@@Jorge_Ambruster nice point, hadn't thought about our eyes interpretation of light and distance and emitting vs reflected light.
My brother has just bought one of those new Samsung laser projectors, mainly to save on the space taken up by a big tv but also for the image quality. I'm yet to visit for movie night, but I imagine it would be similar to a cinema experience for the eyeballs.
And yeah in cinemas I always go for the middle row centre for comfort... mild- moderate spinal disability here as well. The sound in the centre is different too and feels more "realistic" for me, with better voice and dialogue clarity.
I have a projector and a 100" screen in my small living room. I sit about 11ft from the screen. It is a similar field of vision as being in most cinemas - sometimes better, depending on the size of an individual theater's screen and the distance of my individual seat. 1080p and 4k look terrific, cinemas aren't noticeably better.
im so incredibly glad you made a video talking about this. and when you - for just the briefest moment - showed Anthony Hopkins' closing scene of The Father, I choked up just thinking of how powerful it felt watching this close up. once again, thank you for your content, please don't ever stop
I recently saw Drive My Car and how I would have loved to see it on the big screen. The performances, story and absolute heart of that film
Very opportunistic of you to change the thumbnail :) Ironically it made it difficult to find this video again to post in a forum discussing Oppenheimer because a lot of posters were saying how it wasn't "worth it" watching in IMAX because of the lack of action set pieces. I kept passing this video because I knew it was made well before Oppenheimer came out.
True! That is why I never regretted getting a 4k projector and screen at home. Win win win, if i could screen the latest indie movies on release dates at prices close to a movie ticket.
I saw Liquorice Pizza on the big screen and I completely agree. That scene made me crack up and the detail of her face was essential to the joke landing.
Same. She stole the show it was hilarious
VR is my miracle device, I watch most of my films using my quest with high-fidelity IEMs, and the experience is breathtaking.
There's a middle-ground between TVs and cinemas and that's home projectors. I have a condo that's less than 500 sq ft, but I sit 11 feet away from a 100" screen and...it's pretty much the same visual field I'd get in a movie theater. Maybe better, depending on how deep the theater is and if I have to sit in the back. A decent home projector and a cheap ceiling-mounted electric retractable screen are maybe 50% more expensive than a 75 inch TV, but 500% better viewing experience. I've had mine over a year and I still feel excited to turn it on. I mean, holy crap, you don't know how good Succession is until you've seen it theatrical-style!
It's possible to almost get there. You just have to spend a little bit more and take a little more time with research and installation.
I agree with you about Harriet Sansom Harris. Very memorable and funny scene that I'm glad to have seen in the theater.
I watch movies at home on a 4k 65inch OLED screen. That also works.
65” OLED at a good viewing distance plus surround sound and subs is legitimately as good as most theaters. Once I run the ceiling speakers for Atmos I’ll only need theaters to avoid spoilers.
I love your work! I always get an adrenaline rush when you post a new work of art. ❤🌻
Honestly I picked all that up on my phone. Her performance still holds up. I don't know why he seems to think we either have bad eyesight or hold our phones super far away. I love the cinema but I don't think its performance that gets lost. Its the communal nature of movie going that is special
Last summer, I really wanted to see Spencer, generally not considered a big movie. I was gonna wait ‘til it was released to home media, but changed my mind after Chris Stuckman (in his review of the film) strongly suggested watching it in the theater. I am so glad that I did.
I completely agree with the ideas you express here. I'm also a sucker for good naturalistic and immersive cinematography, which really sets in when you're seeing it on a big screen.
But at the risk of being pedantic, I think sometimes the bigger screen is in fact at home. TV's have plummeted in price, and concurrently multiplex screens have gotten smaller (or were they always that way?). In terms of how much a FOV a screen takes up in front of you can actually be better in a home setup.
I agree! That's what I've been thinking since "Bad Times at the El Royale" (Jeff Bridges dementia part) and later in "Joker". I LOVE it when the movie gives the actors time to show and feel all of their emotions as a progress. Way too often I see instant emotions following one incident, rather than a progression of different feelings resulting in one overwhelming emotion.
Me watching a video 10 inches from my face on laptop can see more than me in the back of a theater
I really seem to be in the minority, prefering the "at home experience" ^^
At the cinema a movie usually feels distant, too big (too loud) and less impactful, while at home it's much more intimate, emotional - deeper. Especially on my laptop, on my couch, almost in the dark, with headphones I had the most wonderful, spellbinding experiences.
I have no problem seeing micro expressions and have the opportunity to immediately rewatch a brilliant scene or stop it to have a closer look at the costumes/set design or just "mull over" what a character said. I guess I want to dissect it the first time, and simply marvel at it if I watch it again.
Recorded theater plays or live streams on the other hand I do prefer to watch at a cinema - mostly for the energy of the other people in the room, which is so different compared to a movie screening.
You are in fact in the majority. Most people who say they prefer theatres are still watching most content at home. It's just a more socially acceptable thing to say. Just like in anime community, most people claim to prefer sub than dub , but in reality dub is way more popular.
Seeing Licorice Pizza at the cinema felt like being in a time capsule. I was completely lost in 1970s LA for two hours
I get the point made in this video and think its really valid. As for me, I don't miss cinemas one bit. Even if I could get used to the sticky floors, the chunks of food everywhere, the open-mouth chewing symphony... it's the fact that I can watch the same movies on my pajamas at home, with a Pause button. Doesn't get better than that in my opinion 🤭
Sitting far in theatre balcony is same as sitting in front of your large telly with surround sound
The price problem is not as much of an issue in Spain (all Wednesdays my local theater is 3.90 €) and I used to go every week pre-pandemic but I don't think you can't appreciate performance or appreciate it less on a smaller screen.
For me it's the fact that you're going to a space tailor made to watch a movie. Image, color and sound quality in a dark room with other people, a communal experience in a further atomized and individual world.
As with a live performance you share laughter, amazement, sadness and emotion with others.
Sometimes people laugh when you don't and it makes you think why. Sometimes you go with a friend who loves dark humor as much as you do to see The Lobster and you realize you're the only two people laughing in the entire theater.
It's too bad that, except for a couple of sessions a month, you are expected to go in watch the movie and leave to allow other people in to watch another movie. I like it when there's also a discussion afterwards and you can share with strangers your thoughts on the movie.
Sound design in this one is too good
That popcorn at 1:12 with earphones was scary
In a world where claims on your attention are so manifestly difficult to fight, the cinema becomes a space where we can willingly give our attention over to one thing, without interruption, without the world acting upon us constantly. We don't choose what images come before us, but we do make the choice to let those images arrest us. This is also why I think watching longer movies is not only important, but presents a beautiful kind of time-experience. Crazily perhaps, I see it as a spiritual and attentive practice, relearning the joys of duration, and developing a discipline of the self in the face modern life's constant hijacking. The cinema is embryonic, inviting, like entering into a slumber, only the dream is someone else's. You can truly forget yourself at the cinema - that is a magic that is not possible at home, and never will be. It is a giving up of the self to an other, and in that sense it has both philosophical and political implications. I have seen over 50 films at the cinema in the last year, after recognising how much I have been missing, and I will continue to do it as much as possible.
Paul Thomas Anderson in a recent Reddit AMA, when asked what he sees as the future of cinema, responded (paraphrasing): "Movies shot on film, watched in cinemas!" That positive vision has stuck with me, and has made me understand that it's not enough to just hope the multiplexes will suddenly start showing movies of all varieties. I dream of a community cinema in every neighbourhood, showing old classics, experimental work, independent films, and becoming the in-person social hub for filmmakers, enthusiasts and all members of a community. The cinema is a social space, and more than ever we must invest in and create social institutions that bring people together, for the love of art, and humanity.
The last movie I saw in theaters was 2012's "Prometheus ", and the experience was so annoying I didn't care if I went back. Generally, I don't like most blockbusters, especially superhero movies and endless sequels. I used to enjoy the communal experience of theaters years ago. Now an audience is a detriment to my enjoyment that overrides other experiences. I can appreciate an actors face and expression without it being blown up to overwhelming proportions.
I actually saw more movies in the theater during covid than any other time in my life. When there's nothing else to do, I went to the empty theater and saw some amazing films. thanks to AMC A-List.
I've opted out of the cinema for many years due to other viewer's annoying habits ruining it and not making it worth the ticket price. So I've been watching all films on my TV at home, and still easily connect with the characters' minute facial expressions, that absolutely don't require a big screen to appreciate.
What a lovely idea! Last week I went to a theater after 3 years of consuming overwhelming amount of content on my laptop- it was refreshing, more impactful and lingering in my memory.
When I go see something in the theatre it's to see it with a crowd. It's not about the size of the screen, so much as being in a room with a bunch of other people all getting scared or surprised or happy at the same time as me. Action movies are for sure good for that, but the quieter non action movies are good for that too, so long as they aren't sad. I don't want to be sad in a room with a whole lot of other people being sad at the same time. It makes the sad so much bigger and that is so very hard to claw myself out of. The non action movies, unfortunately, have a tendency to have more sad in them.
When it comes to a story being told by faces, the music video of Max Richter's "On the Nature of Daylight" really sticks out to me. The video does not give you much to work with, but more than you'd ever need. You can painfully feel the emotions exerted by the faces without ever being told a single detail.
The “thoughtful” movie fan is watching at home. TV screens and speakers are improving quickly to give the average person a more cinematic at home experience. My dad always has three or four movies he recorded from TCM that he is working through, one of my kids prefers the Criterion app. When mainstream media doesn’t deliver quality movies, interesting music, or smart TV through the avenues available to most, discerning viewers/listeners seek it out wherever they can find it. Quality is still being produced, but if everyone continues to run out and see the latest goofy action or superhero movie (no offense to anyone who likes these), that’s exactly what we will continue to get.
I feel this way about cinematography as well. I couldn't help but think about Nomadland, one of the first movies I went to see in a cinema after the pandemic had hit, and how awe-inspiring the scenery was. I've watched it since at home, and still enjoyed the story & performances a lot, but the impact of the visuals was definitely lessened on a smaller screen.
I just wanted to say thank you for the inspiration and influence over the years. I just put out my first video essay and your influence on my writing and speech is pretty undeniable. I hope one day I can make the kind of art you do. Thanks for being so amazing! ♥️
4:30 I’m actually watching this in the cinema right now
I love seeing more artsy/slow films in the cinema - partly because I really struggle with distractions and the cinema stops me from reaching for my phone so I properly focus on the film.
The new A21 MacBeth exemplifies this perfectly. Glorious film to see at a theater
OTOH, today a lot of people have 65" or larger 4K screens at home which in effect (because you are sitting so close) are relatively as big and also about as detailed as a theater screen, plus at least a sound bar for better louder TV sound. In a theater you are forced to just watch though, and can't be thinking about what snack to get from the kitchen or what text or video or news flash you need to see.
Dude I totally agree about Harriet Sansom Harris! I thought the same thing watching it in the theater.
I have a 32" monitor in front of me that takes up more of my field of view than a typical theater screen, so I don't think I'm really missing much by avoiding theaters.
Most people buy 65 inch tvs these days. It fills about the same field of vision as it would at the cinema, you can pause, re-wind, stick on subtitles, the picture quality is brighter, deeper blacks, and you can get a good surround sound system for not much, anything that doesn't push the boundaries of a big screen cinema just does not justify itself.
Totally agree, bring me more extreme close up of people's eyes!!!
VR theater is a good compromise, now that headsets are becoming more accessible. Not the same experience as having people around you, and you might lose some visual quality if your PC or VR device can't stream in 4K. But it's good enough to experience movies or even great TV shows and youtube videos you'd never get the chance to see in a real theater in the best way
HSH killed it in LP i felt the same way you felt even though i was watching that movie on my cell phone!
I was very happy to see "the ugly" Eli Wallach in your video, because I have never accepted this idea of "movies for the big screen" exactly for the same reason: the faces. And you could see plenty of meaningful closeups in the slower, more reflective grandparents of action movies that were the spaghetti western.
i saw alphonso cuaron's ROMA twice in the theater, the first time was a day after the premiere so i only got tickets to be up front in one corner, and the second was in the middle but slightly more on the opposite side than my first time. they were two totally different movies and experiences, it's a movie where a lot is going on all the time. it was like the first time i saw it i focused my attention on the lower right corner quadrant and the second time, a little more centered with focus on the right half.
when i watched a 3rd time at my home, i couldn't have that. true directors think in movies for big scale.
that take on faces in cinema reminded me of Jean Epstein. he was a theorician of cinema in the 20's, who basically defined the artistery of cinema in how the captation changed how the subject appeared. specifically, emotions shown on close-ups were described as earthquakes.
Unless you're watching films in an Imax or something the term 'THE BIG SCREEN' is misleading.
No one ever mentions how though the screen is bigger, it's further away and thus the image appears smaller, and I tested this recently:
When I went to see Dune, before the movie started, I took a photo of the screen by putting the phone right infront of my nose. I did the same for my computer monitor at home, where I usually watch films. Overlaying the photos, my computer monitor was bigger, meaning it takes up a bigger part of my visual field so... the real 'BIG SCREEN' is at home in my case.
I doubt I will ever set foot in one of those disease boxes ever again.
You are one of the few channels I have the alerts turned on for, and yet I haven't received an alert or had your videos come up in my feed in months. I assumed you weren't putting out videos, but turns out I just haven't been notified. Just a heads up! Keep em comin!!!
fantastic. when you explored Harriet Sansom Harris’ performance, I physically smiled. remember seeing Licorice Pizza in the theater and the audience was utterly consumed. happened earlier, too, in the movie with Skyler Gisondo. you added a whole new layer to enjoying the theater!
The only people who can afford to see a movie on the big-screen at a "premium" theater also have a 4K 65" TV w/surround sound in their living-rooms (thank Spielberg, Lucas, & Coppola for these home-entertainment innovations, mind you). This means, at home, the concessions are cheaper & more individualized, no plot-lines or plot-twists are lost to bathroom breaks, the seating & lounging is more comfortable, there's no commute, pajamas aren't frowned upon, & you pick the audience for your engagement. Win, win, win, win, win, win, win.
Dune as an "action movie" is a stretch... but it is DEFINITELY the kind of movie that gets major benefits from being on an enormous screen
What would you class it as then, an 'epic saga' or something?
@@exiletsj2570 a sci-fantasy epic, sure. It has a good helping of action, I guess I just find the most valuable scenes are not the big flashy ones which is why I say that
For me, part of the experience of going to a theater is as much the size of the screen as it is a ritual. Blocking off 2 hours of an evening to shut off your phone, be totally isolated from the outside, and just focus on a film - undistracted by texting or social media or stopping and making a meal halfway thru. It's why you feel so different walking out of a theater into the "real world" you've just been teleported into another dimension
Profit should not dictate how to make art
It's first and foremost a business.
Two of my favorite and best (imo) movies from last year were released digitally. The Father and Tick... tick... Boom! Both incredibly films in many ways.
If your small screen just isn’t large enough just hold it closer until it fills you view like the large ones do. Problem is that we don’t.
Absolutely. While I'm happy that streaming exists, there are few things that compare to being swept-up in a good movie on the big screen. It is those faces, precisely, that tell a story - even beyond that of plot or dialogue.
Like Scorsese, I've had my life changed by watching innumerable masterpieces on a 13" black&white TV w/a mono speaker the size of a grapefruit. A presentation-vehicle doesn't diminish perfection, only mediocrity. A beautiful poem can be written on the back of napkin & still resonate. Because Hollywood isn't based on meritocracy but rather cliques & nepotism of questionable talent, the lowest-common-denomination of mediocrity is the norm, & anything fairly exemplary is considered "genius"
you show that brief image of Ingrid Bergman which I'm pretty sure if from Hitchcock's 'Notorious' (or is it from "Casablanca'). Notorious is one of my favorite movies of all time. I think it is absolutely incredible. I've watched it easily over 20 times. But I've never found it on a big screen. I've only seen the DVD version. If I could find it on a big screen someday/someway I'd jump at the chance. But there's probably very little chance that most cinema chains would ever show it... (bummer)
I just watched licorice pizza yesterday (yes I know I am late) and absolutely blown away by that scene in the cinema
God bless you Nerdwriter.. you help reverse my cynicism of the movies. Even if only for the moment
I was soooo looking forward to seeing Licorice Pizza in the theatres. In my country, it released in the theatres on the 25th of February but, for some reasons, the "movie theatre people" in my city didn't think it was worth projecting.
Same happened with The french dispatch. Oh how delightful it would've been to experience that Wes-Andersonian cinematography on the big screen!
:/
Best part of licorice pizza, honestly
Burst of dopamine, When we see Nerdwriter upload a new video!
Funnily enough, even without context, I saw this video’s thumbnail on my phone and immediately opened it on the big screen, because Nerdwriter1 video definitely “worth” the largest screen I have
Dune was a must see on the big screen and not just for the action. The scene of him being trialed with the needle was amazing
I have a cinema pass for theatres that frequently play alternative and international films as well as blockbusters, but I have a hard time going frequently. I don't have the time, I don't have the energy or I place priority on my projects and other hobbies. Its sad because I feel like I should be going more often, especially considering I have an interest in writing and concept art and have graduated in video and film.
Burning, Thief, Good Time… You have great taste in film
I have been to the cinema only twice in my life. I have seen over thousands of movies. I don't buy the BS that seeing certain movies on the big screen is better. Over three decades of watching movies on normal tv screens, and then on my laptop, my eyes have been trained to pick out little subtleties and expressions on the human face.
I've never seen Casablanca or Lawerence of Arabia on the big screen and suddenly feel as though I've missed out on something great.
For me, Dune was a must-see in theaters not because of the action, but because of the score and the scenery
OLEDs are becomiing cheaper and cheaper and with them the access to near perfect color reproduction, HDR, etc. Something even most cinemas can't offer.
The cinema viewing angle is considered to be 40* so a 65" TV means you a cinema experience at a distance of ~6.5ft (though it's closer to ~6.8). Most people don't have rooms that big and if they do they can definitely afford to spring for the 75" model.
In a cinema you're limited by the available seats and annoyed by the always on exit light and the more inconsiderate viewers in the room. At home you can cleanup almost every aspect of the experience.
There's no justification for going to the cinema apart from the social experience of seeing a long awaited movie in a big group of people. If you're moderately well off you can easily see faces better and more clearly at home.