Psycho and the end of the continuously showing movie | Hacker News Reader

Psycho and the end of the continuously showing movie

kottke.org

88 pointsZeljkoS59 comments

I managed a small movie theater in the 1980s (and was also the projectionist, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35887809). By that time, audiences were conditioned to follow the posted schedules in the lobby and newspapers. The businesses (many of them parts of corporate chains) were structured to not deviate from the schedules - booth staffing, employees' work schedules, theater cleanings, and other tasks were keyed to it. Customers were expected to show up within 15 minutes before the starting time, and leave when the house lights came up.

If a customer came really late and asked to stay to see the start of the next showing we would have let them but it would be regarded as weird. It's a linear story - what's the point of watching the beginning if you already know what happens at the end? And who wants to sit around for 15 minutes while the theater is cleaned?

Tangential: When we first got Hunt For Red October another projectionist spliced the reels wrong. Each film came in octagonal cans, typically six 20 minute sections, before they were manually spliced together on two bigger reels of about an hour apiece. IIRC sections 5 and 6 were switched. People complained ... but no one wanted to stay to watch it again in the proper order.

ETA: Come to think of it, there was an audience segment which seldom followed posted movie schedules: porn.

In the 80s, there were still porn theaters in the seedier parts of town (for Boston, it was the "Combat Zone" on the edge of Chinatown) with films running all day and night and people could come and go as they pleased. Not many were interested in linear stories. I didn't work in that part of the business, but the old guy who licensed me for the state indicated that the bulk of his licensing work was down there. This was pre-WWW and not everyone had VCRs, and even if you did the only way to get tapes was via specialty stores in the Zone or sketchy mail order operations.

I remember watching a student film society showing of Schindler's List, where about halfway through one of the reels came in upside down and backwards. They took a while to fix it and it was very immersion-breaking.

I once watched an Eastern European abstract animation, following a marble bouncing through a surreal world, and only realised it was in the projector backwards when at the end there was a mirrored opening title card.

I watched a sketch show on youtube and after a couple of episodes I noticed that it has been mirrored horizontally. Perhaps to avoid copyright detection mechanisms.

I once had a showing of Pirates of the Caribbean in English where they mistakenly inserted the second reel from the German version - that was also a bit strange...

Sat through a showing of Herzog’s Fata Morgana - partway through they stopped, apologized for the film being backwards or flipped or something. They changed … something … and started up again. It didn’t greatly improve the experience.

The continuous movie was the source of one of my dad's favorite movie experiences. He and his friends arrived late to The Manchurian Candidate and missed an important scene, so they spent the rest of the time trying to piece together what had happened until the "big reveal" on the next showing. It turned a suspense movie into a full on mystery.

Before streaming you used to get a similar experience on basic cable channels where they would play the same movie a few times in a row. I remember first seeing The Shawshank Redemption that way.

I uh, don't understand why this isn't a thing anymore though; the cinemas over here have multiple rooms, they could have one room just show short films, making-ofs, documentaries, etc on a loop, even better if they have it near the entrance so people can just come in and watch for a bit for free (with the intent being that they buy food / drink, buy a ticket for a full film, or use it to wait for their own film.) I'd argue more time spent at the cinema is good, if not from a business, then from a social point of view.

But then I'm sure it wouldn't be sustainable because teenage kids would take the piss in between or after classes, make a mess, etc.

I remember when I was a kid in Spain (in the late 80s, perhaps up to early 90s) cinemas where this was still possible. You could enter at any time, watch the movie, and even remain and watch it a second time if you want. It was also only advertised when the first pass started, but not any other one.

Available movies will be slightly older ones, like 6-months after premier or something like that. And they were a few particular theatres, that only run movies in that way.

I remember watching Return of the Jedi that way, arriving right before the fleet meets and they brief the Endor mission, so it was a good point to get into the movie anyway.

In Spain at least there were also for some time pairings of films, continuously reproduced in alternation, so you would enter whenever and not spoil the end of the complete film you would see starting next.

A few years ago, I kind of wondered about this, and mused whether I could stay for a second showing in a theater, or if I'd be shown the door. It would've mattered years ago, when I was homeless, and sometimes purchased a ticket to see a good film, and sometimes missed most of that film because I just wanted to sleep instead.

But a recent change has definitively killed this idea: reserved seating. Reserved seating was never a thing in these United States, not in the major cities where I lived. You showed up at the box office and it was General Admission for any seats you could take, first-come, first-served.

But a few years ago, I became aware of an independent theater nearby which had reserved seating. And sometime in the past 12 months, reserved seating has been introduced as standard to both major chains that dominate my hometown.

So if your ticket is purchased for a specific seat at a specific showing, there's no way you could argue that you could stay in that seat, or any other, for the next showing, or show up early for the prior showing. You won't necessarily get challenged, but now there's an extra risk of someone else who belongs to that seat, especially in a popular film.

Movie theaters are currently struggling to reinvent themselves, and they're risking obsolescence as more blockbusters go straight-to-streaming, and direct-to-video isn't such a dirty word anymore. It's a miracle that they bounced back after the pandemic. They are now hosting live video-game events, a live Taylor Swift concert, classic films on a weekly basis, and other creative auditorium uses: I believe that your company can have a teleconference in there, too.

My local theater recently added a full bar. Alcohol at the movies wasn't a thing when I grew up. The first time I had a beer and a movie, it was in Barcelona. So far, I have not been subjected to any drunken disruptions, but the floors remain sticky as always.

Maybe we don't watch films like this any more, but this is akin to how one consumes an immersive theatre experience like the ones Punchdrunk puts on. The structure of those is quite different, and designed to be engaged with like this, though.

Pretty common in Mexico in the 80s and early 90s. It was called "Permanencia voluntaria". I remember a showing with the new Robocop 1 and 2, and another one with Hot Shots 1 and Deux.

I'm guessing we'll return to the continuously showing movie. Well, more like the starting-any-time-you-want movie. As individual VR headsets are available in every seat, you could start the movie synchronized with just the people in your own party. Of course, there will have to be technological and/or social advantages over doing the same thing in your own home.

I very much doubt that will happen.

Mostly, because if you want that experience, you can already have it in the comfort of your own home. Why go to a cinema for that?

As is the case today, movies can be released in stages, where early access is provided to businesses like these. Also, there may be technological innovations in AR/VR that don't make sense for every home owner to buy. And the cherry on top is the social occasion that can be cultivated, where everyone meets out of the home, for a shared event.

> where everyone meets out of the home, for a shared event

Yet almost all of the shared experience is removed. Some of the most interesting experiences I had in a movie were when the entire audience reacts to something happening on screen. Can't have that if each group is desynced inside their metaphorical fishbowls.

> the entire audience reacts to something happening on screen

I've always been surprised by this sort of anecdote. Is it a thing that happens a lot in america maybe? Here living across a few places in northern europe, people are just deathly quiet in the cinema. I think its seen as nobody wants to be inconsiderate to one another

In the UK, most serious films would have the audience quiet, but that's relaxed for comedies and horrors where the audience is expected to laugh at the funny bits and maybe gasp at the jump scares.

Context plays a part. When I go to a “regular” movie theatre, people are quiet. But they react a lot, laughing, cheering, and clapping, when I go to a theatre which is many decades old to watch a film as part of a festival.

Yes, apparently in some places in America (I'm told not everywhere) it's acceptable to cheer or even clap during movies. In the places I know in Europe, this is seen as very rude and you're supposed to be fully quiet, or maybe whisper to your neighbor at most.

It's also similar in public transportation. American tourists are often quite loud while locals speak more quietly in buses, trams etc.

Depends where in Europe. People do laugh in cinemas and sometimes clap in the UK or Germany, for example (less than let's say in California, though).

I have been living in Germany for over 20 years now, and never once have I seen somebody clap at a movie. I mean, it makes more sense to clap after your airplane lands, at least that will make the pilots and flight attendants feel good, but who are you clapping for in a cinema? The projectionist (who's probably not even there anymore?).

Having said that, there is a kind of "continuously showing movie" in Germany where the audience is very much encouraged to react during the film: there is a cinema in Munich that has been showing The Rocky Horror Picture Show continuously for over 40 years (not non-stop though), where people sing along, throw rice, dance etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Museum_Lichtspiele https://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/museum-lichtspiele-wie-...

Maybe it is the type of movie or whether it was a dubbed or orginal version of the movie (changes audience mix)? Definitely been in cinemas in Germany with clapping.

Germans also clap when their plane lands in Mallorca.

Is that still a thing? I remember this was a thing when I was a kid in the 90ies, but I haven't experienced this in a long time.

I'm an American, and have never understood why others cheer or clap in movies. There are neighborhoods where loud comments on the movie in progress are not unexpected for discouraged. On the other hand, it was in an upscale movie where the guy behind me wanted to narrate Ed Harris's Jackson Pollock movie--sotto voce, but far from inaudibly.

It's mostly quiet, but you'll definitely hear gasps at a jump scare, chortles as jokes, etc. Muffled, automatic responses.

Audience reaction to an Indian movie called RRR:

https://youtu.be/ExxZBNp6jy4

This is at Grauman's Chinese Theatre in LA :) so as American as it gets

I'm from Germany.

Also, note my wording. I was not saying "this happens all the time", but "those were some of the most memorable moments".

> Can't have that if each group is desynced inside their metaphorical fishbowls.

That's only a limitation of the technology as it exists today. It will be much more immersive in the future, and with AR, you can maintain contact with your party, as well as with whatever experience you're sharing.

Hell, it might even be much greater interactivity than today. Say a dinner-theater like murder mystery, with a dead body lying in the corner virtually, and a common goal of finding the culprit.

Yes, that's possible. Though in that case I expect people to use them together in relatively small rooms and all starting at the same time, instead of big movie theatres.

Why would early access of films go to physical location businesses and not digital businesses?

For the same reason most movies are first released in theaters today. Another revenue stream for the studios.

By the way, at least in America, most movies are digital businesses today. Movie theaters don't receive rolls of movie film that they load into projectors. They receive digital files, that are played on the big screen.

The reason for that is regulation and contracts.

What regulations? And what contracts?

And even if there are contracts, why were they signed in the first place? Presumably because they were in the best interests of both parties. And, why do you think the contracts would change, due to the media becoming digital?

On top of which, you seemed to totally ignore the point I made, that movies are already digital. And yet, they are released to movie theaters first.

I think you don't fully appreciate the situation as it exists today. Nor have you given any reason why you think it would change in the future.

I think you’re being kind of dim if you think that the digital nature of film has any relevance to physical distribution vs. digital streaming distribution tbh.

There is an obvious reason why studios have a vested interest in releasing directly to consumers and that is to cut out the theaters as a middleman.

Which is the entire reason we have the Paramount decrees to stop vertical integration of film studios and film distributors. Which is now being evaded by streaming services.

The contract I have in mind is Scarlett johansenn suing Disney for releasing Black Widow to streaming when her contract stated that would not happen.

I don’t think you fully appreciate the context as you haven’t seemed to acknowledged some basic big moving pieces like Netflix doing films that have substantially smaller theater presences and much higher direct to streaming outcomes. Not to mention the trajectory of film from movies to long form streaming television.

> I think you’re being kind of dim if you think that the digital nature of film has any relevance to physical distribution vs. digital streaming distribution tbh.

Now you're just being an asshole. You were the one that started this conversation by positing that the digital nature of the media meant that physical locations were irrelevant. I was simply pointing out that the current reality already proves you wrong.

And since you didn't see fit to answer my question about what contracts and "regulation" compel studios to release today's movies to theaters first -- and yet they continue to do so -- means this conversation isn't likely going to get any more productive than it already has.

Let's agree to disagree. The future will unfold for us both to witness.

I am being an asshole, yes. You seemed pointlessly aggressive.

I cited both the judicial ruling, the Paramount decrees, and the lawsuit from Scarlett johansenns contract, and the easily observed trends of how things are changing.

> As individual VR headsets are available in every seat, you could start the movie synchronized with just the people in your own party.

I’m very put off by the idea of feeling the moisture of the previous user’s sweaty brow or having residual eye crusts flake into mine (think pinkeye).

> I’m very put off by the idea of feeling the moisture of the previous user’s sweaty brow

Already today, each movie goer gets their own pair of complimentary 3d glasses for movies that need it. They ask you to kindly return them, so they can be recycled. It wont likely be much more of a problem to have a per-viewer covering fitted over the AR glasses and earbuds.

At the very least, they put those 3D glasses through a dishwasher. That’s not possible with a VR set, and the turnaround to replace one-time liners on 100 sets would be unfeasible in an in-out setting of a movie theatre.

Idk man. On one hand it seems like a neat idea. On another hand, it’d be kind of jarring to have one group of people laughing because they are at a fun scene in the movie while me and my friends are in a suspenseful part of the movie.

Or worse yet, me and my friends are watching a scary horror movie, but another group of people are watching a comedy and they are constantly laughing.

Lol, indeed. But I doubt the same form factor of a common theatre hall, would endure. More likely there'd be individual showing rooms, with concession items delivered to the seat after order, etc.

This could work if you base the format on something other than theaters: make it an experience similar to a karaoke room, escape room, or even Top Golf.

You'd have a private or semi-private space to share with a group of friends, get food and beverage service, and view/participate in the VR experience simultaneously as a group.

The price point would be higher than a typical movie, but would support the greater hardware, facility, and service costs.

The continuously showing movie was a vestige of early 20th century nickelodeons where you might see a some newsreel and then a series of relatively short movies. It was effectively a constraint imposed by the format rather than an aesthetic choice.

I think live virtual worlds, mmrpgs, etc are the closest analogue we have now to drop-in-anytime communal entertainment

Yeah, that's all I was saying, really. And that I can see community centers for such events being the movie theaters of tomorrow.

how often though did this happen? I watch a lot of old movies, I don't feel that generally I would have liked to walk in halfway through - I would have preferred asking when does the movie start and coming in at that time.

that the setup of the business allowed the practice I don't doubt, that the practice was really widespread I do doubt.

It was still pretty normal in Britain in the 70s. As a kid I remember watching the end of some disaster movie before it went back to the beginning - most likely Airport '77 or '79/'80. It started to change in my (relatively) small town with Star Wars, Superman and Raiders, when at least some performances required standing in line on the street and waiting to be let in at the right time (nobody had dreamed of pre-booking, or seat reservations, at this point). During the transition period newspaper listings would specify "cont.perf." for continuous performance to indicate when the old system was still in play, which carried on well into the 80s.

Edit to clarify: they did generally list the times that each showing would start, so you could choose to arrive at the beginning and leave at the end. But nobody was forced to do either. You could arrive in the morning and watch the same film five times in a row, if you wanted. Or two films alternating, if it had a B-movie showing between the main film... ah yes, fond memories of strange B-movies like a documentary around offshore oil production - perhaps due to the time period when movie studios became just one part of massive industrial conglomerates, perhaps because they wanted to bore the audience into leaving and freeing up seats... also the combination of Airplane! with the execrable Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (Beatles jukebox-musical starring the Bee Gees).

The Hollywood Reporter article linked how's into much more detail, and makes it sound widespread.

Also, remember that there were thousands of films released every year, and the ones still being watched are mostly the best of the lot. Many of them don't have strong narratives, and watching the jokes/action scenes/smut out of context won't detract a ton.

>how's into much more detail,

Goes into. Odd autocorrect I noticed too late to edit, but will annoy me if I don't address it.

I guess you're right, even some of the good ones (especially in comedy genres) it didn't matter too much when you came in - for example Marx Brothers movies.

I remember seeing exactly one movie like this. I was with my friends family in the early 1980's. It was terrible. I do remember that they all got up 3/4 through the 2nd screening and we walked out just when it was getting good.

Nowadays people randomly start watching TikTok and YouTube on their phones in the theatre, we are looping back

Huh. I've wondered where the "No one will be seated after the X" meme came from.

The recent version of it is from Spider-Man 2, I believe. The snooty usher says to Peter, who's raced to get to a theatre show performed by Mary Jane, that "no one will be seated after the doors are closed; it helps maintain the illusion." Our poor hero, of course, has been off Doing Good Deeds and as a result his double-life has yet again foiled his chance to win MJ's affections.

Cinemas don’t really enforce this (although seats need to be reserved) but the Opera is another matter.

If movie theaters ever go back to that M. Night Shyamalan is going to need a new career.

If After Earth didn’t compel him to switch, nothing will.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com