13 ms·

This is cool. Something about dropping everything to go see a movie in an empty theater is sort of tempting.

by blintz 5mo ago

HerbManic 5mo ago
The only film I saw in an empty theater was 'The Death of Stalin'. That was kind of odd but a decent film regardless.
- nebula8804 5mo ago
  On the one hand Its fun to watch movies alone on a big screen. My area of NJ apparently could care less about movies like Knock Down The House(Biography of AOC and other house candidates), Navalny (Movie about the murdered politician opposing Putin), The Imitation Machine: Movie about Alan Turing or Last Night in Soho (A wonderful Edgar Wright thriller) On the other hand, I feel sad that no one in my region seems to care enough about these topics. Instead the latest superhero movie is next door packed to the brim and is so loud it rattles the walls to the room playing my quiet documentary with only me sitting inside watching it. :/
  - lotsofpulp 5mo ago
    I have seen too many video projects that were supposed to be non fictional either have fictional material or a misleading slant such that I would not consider it a good use of my time.
    - nebula8804 5mo ago
      I can understand this for Nvalny given I think CNN help with the production...but Knock Down the House was an indie producer and just happened to choose AOC as one of four candidates she was covering. When it was filmed I don't think the producer would anticipate her explosive popularity after the election so its hard to concede that it was a puff piece. The premise of the film was the massive wave of females deciding to run for office in 2018 after Trump's win in 2016. There was the collective awakening that despite females making up 50% of the population they in no way had anywhere near the representation that they should have. Due to AOC's popularity the film took on a new meaning as a historical record of her campaign. If you apply your logic to all political documentaries then you're just going to end up not watching anything.
    - embedding-shape 5mo ago
      Yeah, kind of defeats the purpose when you have to spend hours double-checking if every "fact" you just got "taught" was actually true or not afterwards...
      - Forgeties79 5mo ago
        There has to be some latitude given here. They can’t possibly, for instance, know exactly what was said or who interacted with who and when with any reasonable certainty. It’s usually “John met with Ted and I think Sally too, he told them to fuck off because it was a bad idea.” Now make that a scene and stay accurate. Rarely are these things documented in the moment and human memory is fickle even when we think we recall something accurately. It may seem like I’m taking y’all too literally or being nitpicky but I’m just illustrating one component. These kinds of situations happen across every “fact” of the story, which is almost always a movie based on a written account that came after, often written by someone who wasn’t even involved in the subject matter. Degrees of separation, lack of information, some or all people involved may be dead, etc.
        lotsofpulp 5mo ago
        Which is why it should be assumed to all be fiction. Video presents the problem that you are receiving lots of extra data which are fictional, and pretending that you are getting a sufficiently accurate representation when you have no idea how much of the representation is accurate is a detriment. Take it as entertainment, and nothing more. For example, Remember the Titans, we were shown it in school over and over. There was no racial component in real life. The Blind Side is egregious in its portrayals. Pursuit of Happyness also.
        bombcar 5mo ago
        It's inherent to video that you "have to make up data" - if I tell you the barebones of something that happened in real life (we went to a doctor's appointment but discovered it had been scheduled earlier than we thought) - you may supply details that aren't "true" because you have to supply something to flesh it out - but you know you're supplying them! If instead we make a video that conveys the same information; it has to "make up" details (we have to cast the actors, which will be of a certain age, sex, race, etc; we have to give them lines, etc; and so on) that may colour the implications - and you, as a viewer, have no easy way to determine what is essential and what is accidental.
    - bell-cot 5mo ago
      That I've seen, the problem is worse than that. A movie merely says it's "based on a true story". If you're a lawyer or literature professor, that "based on" might be correct usage - since 40-ish percent of what the movie told was true. The other 60-ish percent was utter fiction. Meanwhile, people who saw the movie and found it decently engaging are busy convincing themselves that it was 99% true. And 99% of 'em will never bother to check.
      - genghisjahn 5mo ago
        There is no data to support your last paragraph. But it is fun to talk about how dumb the “other” people are.
        bell-cot 5mo ago
        I coulda added another "That I've seen" disclaimer to my second para. My dataset is just friends & family who I've seen "based on a true story" movies with, where I happened to know the history. The term to describe my "99%" isn't "dumb". It's "don't care".
        bombcar 5mo ago
        It's all variations of Gell-Mann Amnesia. Any portrayal is a betrayal. Of course, if I'm going to talk about something I know deeply, I'm almost certainly going to begin with "this is all incorrect in the details, but correct in general" or similar.
        bell-cot 5mo ago
        > Any portrayal is a betrayal. For those sufficiently pedantic, true. OTOH, there's a rather wide spectrum in how well (say) Mitchell's Gone With the Wind, Ken Burns's The Civil War, and McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom portray the U.S. Civil War.
      - nkrisc 5mo ago
        Actually 99% do understand it’s not all factual and do bother to check.
  - jonners00 5mo ago
    This is a bit off topic, but I occasionally used to sleep on the sofa in our first floor office in an old Georgian building in Fitzrovia. One occasion when I did that, I woke up at about 3.30 am with intense red light flooding through all the rear windows and the sound of loads of people chattering in the street out front, which seemed as busy as it normally would be in the daytime. I rushed to the front windows and looked down onto a street full of people, but all in 60s get up. I was still half asleep and panicked by the red light and it was totally disorientating to see a busy street of retro Londoners. I actually felt briefly nauseous but I went to the back windows and shaded my eyes, from the crazy glare from two arrays of red spotlights, which it turned out Edgar Wright was using to bounce light off our building, onto the cobbles below ...and began to understand what was going on. Was a relief to get a full explanation, for what had briefly felt like a weird time leap, when I went downstairs and chatted to the extras hanging around out front. The few seconds of woozy, confusion I spent in 1960s london seemed particularly appropriate when I saw Last Night in Soho a year or so later.
    - nebula8804 5mo ago
      That is such a wonderful story! Thank you for sharing! I was able to experience the movie in a very special way. In New York BAM Rose Cinemas was running a special 35mm press of the film one week before its official debut. Edgar Wright did a red eye run debuting the film in London and then getting on a plane to rush to New York where he arrived just in time for the credits. Having him walk down the steps and sitting right in front of me for Q&A was a amazing experience. Its really a shame the movie flopped even with the extra slack it was given due to debuting during COVID. His most recent film did pretty bad as well. I'm bummed as he is my favorite director. :/
    - rashkov 5mo ago
      it's like a microcosm of the movie itself! super cool
  - deleted 5mo ago
    [deleted]
  - GJim 5mo ago
    > My area of NJ apparently could care less Surely you mean "couldn't care less"?
    - nebula8804 5mo ago
      Sure, im fine with either and at 3AM I'll write one or the other.
      - GJim 4mo ago
        So you switch opinions randomly at 3 am? I'm afraid you are making less and less sense.
    - bombcar 5mo ago
      People couldn't care less about being careless with could care less.
      - ssl-3 5mo ago
        I'm people, and I could care less about that word usement.
    - mikestew 5mo ago
      That, my friend, is a decades-old battle I’ve given up on, even if it literally makes my brain explode.
- imzadi 5mo ago
  A few years ago we decided to go see the movie Thanksgiving for my friend's birthday. We were the only ones in the theater (about 8 of us). It was such a blast. We occasionally talk about renting out a theater so we can have the same experience again.
- tclancy 5mo ago
  Did you arrive late? Could be you actually survived a purge.
hgoel 5mo ago
I think whether or not it's worth it really depends on the kind and quality of movie. When I went to see Project Hail Mary, I enjoyed the full theater, when I went to watch the new Jurassic World movie in an empty theater I was bored out of my mind, on the other hand I've seen many anime movies in empty theaters where I absolutely loved having a quiet theater entirely to myself.
zerocrates 5mo ago
One of the joys of having Moviepass in that brief period where it was very cheap but still worked was going to random late-night showings of stuff I'd have never otherwise seen, sometimes being the only person there. Of course you can still do that with the surviving "all you can eat" plans, but they're way more expensive and aren't quite as generous.
- echelon 5mo ago
  MoviePass was one of the most absurd ideas for a company ever. I don't know what they were thinking. Unlimited movies and they ate the entire cost? They didn't arrange any special deals or anything - they just paid the full price of the movie. It was insane.
  - DoktorDelta 5mo ago
    https://youtu.be/YBO_7UezpbY https://youtu.be/YBO_7UezpbY
  - Forgeties79 5mo ago
    1 movie per day I believe FWIW. I had it briefly as well. But they kept making changes it’s hard to remember exactly what the first iteration was.
    - tracker1 5mo ago
      I am mostly only familiar with the AMC version of this (A-List) which I had pre-covid, but since there haven't been multiple movies I'd want to see most months at all.
  - RankingMember 5mo ago
    There were also people abusing it to simply earn loyalty rewards at the theaters, e.g. people that lived close enough to theaters just going there, buying tickets, and not even seeing the movie just to pile up rewards points for free food/drink when they did actually go to see movies.
  - 5mo ago
2ndorderthought 5mo ago
People used to buy out theaters to have that privilege on blockbuster opening nights.
- dsr_ 5mo ago
  It's usually quite possible. Movie theaters make their money on food and drink, so arranging an extra screening for the cost of 50% of the seats in a given room is nicely profitable. Depending on the theater's manager, they'll either want someone to guarantee a minimum or to have a single fee paid up front. There's nothing quite like knowing that everyone in the theater is a friend.
  - bombcar 5mo ago
    Opening night most if not all of the ticket price goes to the studio anyway, but it's the ticket price not the per-showing price - so if they have a theater empty anyway (and I've not seen a blockbuster fill all theaters at a given multiplex for decades, and even then it was only small 4plex) they might as well make you a deal.
    - cjkaminski 5mo ago
      The split on ticket price between studio and theater operators is usually around 50% for the opening period. The window scales towards the theater's benefit over time, usually going to about 75% in favor of the operator. That said, you're 100% right about making an offer. Most theaters have underutilized screening rooms, and managers have the ability to rent for private events. I've done this a few times. The rental rate tends to be about 10-15x the price of a single ticket (in my experience).
aaron695 5mo ago
[dead]
benoau 5mo ago
It is luxurious seeing a movie in an empty theater.
alsetmusic 5mo ago
I was going to the 10am or 11am screenings for years to avoid crowds and drunks who'd talk or otherwise distract from the show. I have a 4k projector so the only movies since the pan have been the Spiderverse sequel on IMAX, the Avatar sequel (regular screening), and Everything Everywhere All At Once in a small theatre with sofas and pizza and beer. Either it's big enough to warrant a massive video and sound system (because I have pretty great ones at home already, so it has to be extravagant), or it has to be something I've heard about and want to see so much that we don't really care about the best, we just want to go. Otherwise, why mess around with high prices and rude people? I hate to say it, but I think most theaters are gonna die.
mizzao 5mo ago
I thought this was the case, but then I went to a full movie theater and really enjoyed being a part of an audience that was all experiencing the same thing. You could feel the emotion and that is a different sense than having the theater all to you to, but potentially just as rewarding.
- lostapathy 5mo ago
  I think this varies with the type of film. If it's a film with real fans and excitement is thick, a packed theater is amazing. OTOH, films where the audience isn't engaged, or dare I say invested, having a crowd can often just be annoying because of the chatter or people moving around.
  - bullfightonmars 5mo ago
    yes! I want the opposite. Packed screenings. There are some movies, especially summer blockbusters, that I want to see in a full room.
    - tracker1 5mo ago
      I went to a pretty packed showing of Spiderman No Way Home... the reaction to Matt Murdock catching the brick was pretty awesome. It's definitely a better experience watching movies with fans of the movies themselves. That said, it's also nice sometimes catching a mostly empty 2pm showing of something and getting the perfect seat without distractions... Especially considering if I turn up the volume to get the appropriate experience at home I get yelled at.
  - dtgriscom 5mo ago
    I saw the first Star Wars movie on the day it opened in Boston, in an enormous, packed theater. I will never forget the roar that went up when Han Solo came out of the sun to save Luke.
- WorldMaker 5mo ago
  Hah, yeah, my local AMC is a ghost town as people moved to newer and/or better maintained theaters. (Not entirely AMC's fault, they bought a decades old theater that was sort of on its last legs after four other companies controlled it in as many decades.) Most of the screenings I attend are empty or nearly so. I almost need an app to find the full AMC screenings. (I know it is at least as much a factor of which nights of the week I attend. I could attend busier nights. But even then this theater's busiest nights now are not what they were way back when I was in school.) I do sometimes miss seeing something with a large audience.
vlachen 5mo ago
I saw IT Chapter II in a completely empty theater, late at night. It was delightfully creepy. However, if I had been an employee there, I think I would have do do something with a red helium balloon to anyone watching that movie alone.

This is cool. Something about dropping everything to go see a movie in an empty theater is sort of tempting.

by blintz 5mo ago

This is cool. Something about dropping everything to go see a movie in an empty theater is sort of tempting.

HerbManic 5mo ago

The only film I saw in an empty theater was 'The Death of Stalin'. That was kind of odd but a decent film regardless.

nebula8804 5mo ago
On the one hand Its fun to watch movies alone on a big screen. My area of NJ apparently could care less about movies like Knock Down The House(Biography of AOC and other house candidates), Navalny (Movie about the murdered politician opposing Putin), The Imitation Machine: Movie about Alan Turing or Last Night in Soho (A wonderful Edgar Wright thriller) On the other hand, I feel sad that no one in my region seems to care enough about these topics. Instead the latest superhero movie is next door packed to the brim and is so loud it rattles the walls to the room playing my quiet documentary with only me sitting inside watching it. :/
- lotsofpulp 5mo ago
  I have seen too many video projects that were supposed to be non fictional either have fictional material or a misleading slant such that I would not consider it a good use of my time.
  - nebula8804 5mo ago
    I can understand this for Nvalny given I think CNN help with the production...but Knock Down the House was an indie producer and just happened to choose AOC as one of four candidates she was covering. When it was filmed I don't think the producer would anticipate her explosive popularity after the election so its hard to concede that it was a puff piece. The premise of the film was the massive wave of females deciding to run for office in 2018 after Trump's win in 2016. There was the collective awakening that despite females making up 50% of the population they in no way had anywhere near the representation that they should have. Due to AOC's popularity the film took on a new meaning as a historical record of her campaign. If you apply your logic to all political documentaries then you're just going to end up not watching anything.
  - embedding-shape 5mo ago
    Yeah, kind of defeats the purpose when you have to spend hours double-checking if every "fact" you just got "taught" was actually true or not afterwards...
    - Forgeties79 5mo ago
      There has to be some latitude given here. They can’t possibly, for instance, know exactly what was said or who interacted with who and when with any reasonable certainty. It’s usually “John met with Ted and I think Sally too, he told them to fuck off because it was a bad idea.” Now make that a scene and stay accurate. Rarely are these things documented in the moment and human memory is fickle even when we think we recall something accurately. It may seem like I’m taking y’all too literally or being nitpicky but I’m just illustrating one component. These kinds of situations happen across every “fact” of the story, which is almost always a movie based on a written account that came after, often written by someone who wasn’t even involved in the subject matter. Degrees of separation, lack of information, some or all people involved may be dead, etc.
      - lotsofpulp 5mo ago
        Which is why it should be assumed to all be fiction. Video presents the problem that you are receiving lots of extra data which are fictional, and pretending that you are getting a sufficiently accurate representation when you have no idea how much of the representation is accurate is a detriment. Take it as entertainment, and nothing more. For example, Remember the Titans, we were shown it in school over and over. There was no racial component in real life. The Blind Side is egregious in its portrayals. Pursuit of Happyness also.
        bombcar 5mo ago
        It's inherent to video that you "have to make up data" - if I tell you the barebones of something that happened in real life (we went to a doctor's appointment but discovered it had been scheduled earlier than we thought) - you may supply details that aren't "true" because you have to supply something to flesh it out - but you know you're supplying them! If instead we make a video that conveys the same information; it has to "make up" details (we have to cast the actors, which will be of a certain age, sex, race, etc; we have to give them lines, etc; and so on) that may colour the implications - and you, as a viewer, have no easy way to determine what is essential and what is accidental.
  - bell-cot 5mo ago
    That I've seen, the problem is worse than that. A movie merely says it's "based on a true story". If you're a lawyer or literature professor, that "based on" might be correct usage - since 40-ish percent of what the movie told was true. The other 60-ish percent was utter fiction. Meanwhile, people who saw the movie and found it decently engaging are busy convincing themselves that it was 99% true. And 99% of 'em will never bother to check.
    - genghisjahn 5mo ago
      There is no data to support your last paragraph. But it is fun to talk about how dumb the “other” people are.
      - bell-cot 5mo ago
        I coulda added another "That I've seen" disclaimer to my second para. My dataset is just friends & family who I've seen "based on a true story" movies with, where I happened to know the history. The term to describe my "99%" isn't "dumb". It's "don't care".
        bombcar 5mo ago
        It's all variations of Gell-Mann Amnesia. Any portrayal is a betrayal. Of course, if I'm going to talk about something I know deeply, I'm almost certainly going to begin with "this is all incorrect in the details, but correct in general" or similar.
        bell-cot 5mo ago
        > Any portrayal is a betrayal. For those sufficiently pedantic, true. OTOH, there's a rather wide spectrum in how well (say) Mitchell's Gone With the Wind, Ken Burns's The Civil War, and McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom portray the U.S. Civil War.
    - nkrisc 5mo ago
      Actually 99% do understand it’s not all factual and do bother to check.
- jonners00 5mo ago
  This is a bit off topic, but I occasionally used to sleep on the sofa in our first floor office in an old Georgian building in Fitzrovia. One occasion when I did that, I woke up at about 3.30 am with intense red light flooding through all the rear windows and the sound of loads of people chattering in the street out front, which seemed as busy as it normally would be in the daytime. I rushed to the front windows and looked down onto a street full of people, but all in 60s get up. I was still half asleep and panicked by the red light and it was totally disorientating to see a busy street of retro Londoners. I actually felt briefly nauseous but I went to the back windows and shaded my eyes, from the crazy glare from two arrays of red spotlights, which it turned out Edgar Wright was using to bounce light off our building, onto the cobbles below ...and began to understand what was going on. Was a relief to get a full explanation, for what had briefly felt like a weird time leap, when I went downstairs and chatted to the extras hanging around out front. The few seconds of woozy, confusion I spent in 1960s london seemed particularly appropriate when I saw Last Night in Soho a year or so later.
  - nebula8804 5mo ago
    That is such a wonderful story! Thank you for sharing! I was able to experience the movie in a very special way. In New York BAM Rose Cinemas was running a special 35mm press of the film one week before its official debut. Edgar Wright did a red eye run debuting the film in London and then getting on a plane to rush to New York where he arrived just in time for the credits. Having him walk down the steps and sitting right in front of me for Q&A was a amazing experience. Its really a shame the movie flopped even with the extra slack it was given due to debuting during COVID. His most recent film did pretty bad as well. I'm bummed as he is my favorite director. :/
  - rashkov 5mo ago
    it's like a microcosm of the movie itself! super cool
- deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
- GJim 5mo ago
  > My area of NJ apparently could care less Surely you mean "couldn't care less"?
  - nebula8804 5mo ago
    Sure, im fine with either and at 3AM I'll write one or the other.
    - GJim 4mo ago
      So you switch opinions randomly at 3 am? I'm afraid you are making less and less sense.
  - bombcar 5mo ago
    People couldn't care less about being careless with could care less.
    - ssl-3 5mo ago
      I'm people, and I could care less about that word usement.
  - mikestew 5mo ago
    That, my friend, is a decades-old battle I’ve given up on, even if it literally makes my brain explode.
imzadi 5mo ago
A few years ago we decided to go see the movie Thanksgiving for my friend's birthday. We were the only ones in the theater (about 8 of us). It was such a blast. We occasionally talk about renting out a theater so we can have the same experience again.
tclancy 5mo ago
Did you arrive late? Could be you actually survived a purge.

hgoel 5mo ago

I think whether or not it's worth it really depends on the kind and quality of movie. When I went to see Project Hail Mary, I enjoyed the full theater, when I went to watch the new Jurassic World movie in an empty theater I was bored out of my mind, on the other hand I've seen many anime movies in empty theaters where I absolutely loved having a quiet theater entirely to myself.

zerocrates 5mo ago

One of the joys of having Moviepass in that brief period where it was very cheap but still worked was going to random late-night showings of stuff I'd have never otherwise seen, sometimes being the only person there. Of course you can still do that with the surviving "all you can eat" plans, but they're way more expensive and aren't quite as generous.

echelon 5mo ago
MoviePass was one of the most absurd ideas for a company ever. I don't know what they were thinking. Unlimited movies and they ate the entire cost? They didn't arrange any special deals or anything - they just paid the full price of the movie. It was insane.
- DoktorDelta 5mo ago
  https://youtu.be/YBO_7UezpbY https://youtu.be/YBO_7UezpbY
- Forgeties79 5mo ago
  1 movie per day I believe FWIW. I had it briefly as well. But they kept making changes it’s hard to remember exactly what the first iteration was.
  - tracker1 5mo ago
    I am mostly only familiar with the AMC version of this (A-List) which I had pre-covid, but since there haven't been multiple movies I'd want to see most months at all.
- RankingMember 5mo ago
  There were also people abusing it to simply earn loyalty rewards at the theaters, e.g. people that lived close enough to theaters just going there, buying tickets, and not even seeing the movie just to pile up rewards points for free food/drink when they did actually go to see movies.
- 5mo ago

2ndorderthought 5mo ago

People used to buy out theaters to have that privilege on blockbuster opening nights.

dsr_ 5mo ago
It's usually quite possible. Movie theaters make their money on food and drink, so arranging an extra screening for the cost of 50% of the seats in a given room is nicely profitable. Depending on the theater's manager, they'll either want someone to guarantee a minimum or to have a single fee paid up front. There's nothing quite like knowing that everyone in the theater is a friend.
- bombcar 5mo ago
  Opening night most if not all of the ticket price goes to the studio anyway, but it's the ticket price not the per-showing price - so if they have a theater empty anyway (and I've not seen a blockbuster fill all theaters at a given multiplex for decades, and even then it was only small 4plex) they might as well make you a deal.
  - cjkaminski 5mo ago
    The split on ticket price between studio and theater operators is usually around 50% for the opening period. The window scales towards the theater's benefit over time, usually going to about 75% in favor of the operator. That said, you're 100% right about making an offer. Most theaters have underutilized screening rooms, and managers have the ability to rent for private events. I've done this a few times. The rental rate tends to be about 10-15x the price of a single ticket (in my experience).

aaron695 5mo ago

[dead]

benoau 5mo ago

It is luxurious seeing a movie in an empty theater.

alsetmusic 5mo ago

I was going to the 10am or 11am screenings for years to avoid crowds and drunks who'd talk or otherwise distract from the show. I have a 4k projector so the only movies since the pan have been the Spiderverse sequel on IMAX, the Avatar sequel (regular screening), and Everything Everywhere All At Once in a small theatre with sofas and pizza and beer. Either it's big enough to warrant a massive video and sound system (because I have pretty great ones at home already, so it has to be extravagant), or it has to be something I've heard about and want to see so much that we don't really care about the best, we just want to go. Otherwise, why mess around with high prices and rude people? I hate to say it, but I think most theaters are gonna die.

mizzao 5mo ago

I thought this was the case, but then I went to a full movie theater and really enjoyed being a part of an audience that was all experiencing the same thing. You could feel the emotion and that is a different sense than having the theater all to you to, but potentially just as rewarding.

lostapathy 5mo ago
I think this varies with the type of film. If it's a film with real fans and excitement is thick, a packed theater is amazing. OTOH, films where the audience isn't engaged, or dare I say invested, having a crowd can often just be annoying because of the chatter or people moving around.
- bullfightonmars 5mo ago
  yes! I want the opposite. Packed screenings. There are some movies, especially summer blockbusters, that I want to see in a full room.
  - tracker1 5mo ago
    I went to a pretty packed showing of Spiderman No Way Home... the reaction to Matt Murdock catching the brick was pretty awesome. It's definitely a better experience watching movies with fans of the movies themselves. That said, it's also nice sometimes catching a mostly empty 2pm showing of something and getting the perfect seat without distractions... Especially considering if I turn up the volume to get the appropriate experience at home I get yelled at.
- dtgriscom 5mo ago
  I saw the first Star Wars movie on the day it opened in Boston, in an enormous, packed theater. I will never forget the roar that went up when Han Solo came out of the sun to save Luke.
WorldMaker 5mo ago
Hah, yeah, my local AMC is a ghost town as people moved to newer and/or better maintained theaters. (Not entirely AMC's fault, they bought a decades old theater that was sort of on its last legs after four other companies controlled it in as many decades.) Most of the screenings I attend are empty or nearly so. I almost need an app to find the full AMC screenings. (I know it is at least as much a factor of which nights of the week I attend. I could attend busier nights. But even then this theater's busiest nights now are not what they were way back when I was in school.) I do sometimes miss seeing something with a large audience.

vlachen 5mo ago

I saw IT Chapter II in a completely empty theater, late at night. It was delightfully creepy. However, if I had been an employee there, I think I would have do do something with a red helium balloon to anyone watching that movie alone.