Why Do We Eat Popcorn at the Movies? | Hacker News Reader

Why Do We Eat Popcorn at the Movies?

blogs.smithsonianmag.com

66 pointsshrikant57 comments

> Popcorn wasn’t widely eaten in homes, mostly due to how difficult it was to make: consumers needed a popper, oil, butter, salt...

That's wrong, it's insanely easy to make. You don't need a "popper", just a pot with a lid. Any pot. And what kitchen doesn't have oil, butter and salt around?

But since TV wasn't around yet, what were you going to eat it to? ;)

You don't even need butter (that's a US thing). A pot, lid, bit of oil, popcorn seeds and salt. It's done in few minutes, you just have to shake a pot a bit to prevent burning and that's it. I plough through popcorns regularly, movies or not. Hot air popcorn maker is shit though, popcorns are dry and it takes a long time to make a decent amount.

You especially don't need butter if you cook it in something tasty like lard or duck fat :)

You can make it over an open fire - two sieves wired on to a metal rod will do the trick.

I have never actually seen a popcorn maker in anyone's home. Either people have used pots or microwaves, and it is very easy to use a pot.

I bought an air popper for popcorn on clearance a while ago. Has a few advantages to the "stove and pot," but it's not necessary really. Mostly it keeps the popcorn from burning if you're not paying close enough attention and the ratio of unpopped kernels is much lower.

I have an air popper, a stove-top popcorn popper (complete with a wire stirrer that you crank around with the lid closed), and a microwave. When I was growing up we had a popcorn popper that you held over a fire for fireplace popping. That was circa 1970.

Air popper also means less (or no) oil used.

The amount of oil used is tiny - less than a tablespoon for like 8 servings, plus almost all the oil stays in the pot.

You just need enough for heat transfer from the metal pot to the kernels. You can add more for flavor if you like, but you don't have to - the thinnest coating of the bottom of the pot is enough.

Fair point. Not saying it's a huge difference, just that it's a difference.

We've got the Whirley Pop. It's fun to use with the kids. Popcorn tastes great.

http://www.vermontcountrystore.com/store/jump/productDetail/...

I used to run a small community theatre group, on a wing and a prayer and a shoestring budget. When we discovered how much of a money-maker popcorn was we were elated. Basic materials were cheap, and we sold a small bag of popcorn for a dollar - lots of those little bags. Wonderful stuff, worth even the extraordinary mess that patrons always left behind. (Cleaning up the house after a show is part of the biz. Ah, the romance of the stage!)

> Popcorn, it seems, was the original clandestine movie snack.

Haha. I have a big coat with inner bags where I can fit two 1.5 lt sodas, I always sneak snacks when going with my friends, since, at least in my country, every snack is ridiculously overpriced (around 5 to 10 times the original price).

> sneak snacks

It may be a bit of a faux pas, but I've often openly gone into cinemas with my own food/drink and no one seems to mind. (Side-note: I highly recommend edamame-in-the-pod for a cinema snack. Quiet, healthy, cheap, comes with its own hydration and lasts a long time.)

At least in NYC cinemas, the person who takes your ticket will demand to check your bag for drinks (not sure about snacks). You're not allowed to bring your own. Feels a lot like going through a TSA security checkpoint.

Wow, seriously? That's ridiculous.

It's really that the movies are something of a loss leader. People don't come to the movies to buy snacks, but snacks are how theaters really make money. Which means that you're ripping them off worse by sneaking snacks than you are sneaking a video camera in.

Though with the way the prices of movie tickets are going up, I've begun to suspect that this is no longer true.

Nope, the prices are going up because the studios are charging the theaters more. Our theater was even taking a small loss for each ticket for a while in order to keep people happy. All of theater profits come from sales at the concession stands. That's why most places are so strict about bringing in outside food and drinks. Though I've never seen anywhere that would ask to search your bags, that's ridiculous and sounds like a good way to loose customers.

Source: projectionist at a theater all through college.

>Which means that you're ripping them off worse by sneaking snacks than you are sneaking a video camera in. //

You're not "ripping them off", you pay for your seat. They're welcome to advertise at the payment desk that people who may have food with them aren't welcome however.

Not being a persons most profitable customer is not the same as ripping them off.

The theater I used to work at was never that strict about bringing in food. If you made it obvious you were bringing in food we would ask you to throw it away, or finish it before entering. We would never search someones bag, or throw someone out that we didn't catch on the way in. For the most part people sneaking in food were the type of people that would never pay the crazy food costs at a movie theater anyways, so it was always better for use to keep customers happy.

We were much stricter about people sneaking in camera equipment though. In fact if an employee caught someone trying to record a movie the MPAA would pay you a $5,000 reward, and our theater would match that with another $5,000.

My wife pointed out is that one of the disposable lines in the article mentioned that until "talkies," movies were less of a "bread and circuses" pasttime - the illiterate don't get the full experience of a silent film.

Considering the storylines of many silent films, I'm rather amused to contemplate what that implies. Seriously, "Keystone Cops" is kind of like the "America's Got Talent" of its day - "Othello" it ain't.

I'm skeptical of that claim - I don't think you needed to be literate to follow the story in a Buster Keaton film.

How difficult it was to make? lol. Popcorn is extremely easy to make, cheap, and every typical kitchen had the supplies to make it back then.

I can never eat popcorn at the movies because it's gone by the time the previews are over. Am I the only one?

I found a way that forces me to slow down when eating popcorn is to use chop sticks, it also keeps my hands free of grease. I usually have a pair of the disposable wooden ones on me.

That's pretty serious. :)

Gone? I've never heard of it running out before. In fact I've heard of staff leaving their shift with trash-bags filled with extra popcorn they didn't sell.

But the bag sitting in my hand is empty. That's what's gone. There's still more to purchase, but what I already purchased has been eaten.

A bag of popcorn you purchase will run out when you consume it all.

You're not alone. ^_^

To me cinemas / movie theaters are about the film. I never eat or drink while I'm there... maybe I missed the memo.

To me, it depends on the film. If it's some brainless Hollywood sequel to a sequel of some action flick, I don't mind eating some popcorn every now and then. But that's not the only kind of movie I watch so, plus I'm getting older and more calorie-aware now, so more often than not I don't eat anything during a movie either.

I feel as if the best reason to eat popcorn is because it's not terribly crunchy. If i eat chips while watching a show the crunching of the popcorn makes me unable to hear the movie.

I was looking for this as it's what I've always assumed. The salt and fat I would think also makes for good fill and makes you want more fluids ($$$) and lets you retain more in your body (practical).

I do wish theaters did a better job of becoming a great experience again, as I'm a fan of the concept, the two nearest movie theaters here are considered world class (Norway) so I much prefer it to home theater, but it's not enough for the average Joe to bother (barring the top blockbusters.)

That thought crossed my mind previously but I didn't know if it had occurred to anyone else.

I mean it's not horribly priced here in the US. For a couple it's around 9$ each ticket, but if you want 3D or anything special it's 12-13$. A lot of that seems overpriced to me, and the one complaint I have is: you purchase a 5$ drink and they don't allow fountain drink refills.

It's interesting to learn that movie theaters originally tried to establish themselves as highbrow institutions that drew inspiration from actual theaters. Sadly, not much is left of this ambition today.

The introduction of popcorn may have been one of the first steps of movie theaters to "open up to wider audiences", but as another thread points out, the artificial flavor and smells that surround the product today has not just found friends. Movie theaters, in their fight for customers, have had to lower their standards so drastically to attract new movie goers that others turned away in bewilderment. With the advent of home entertainment technology, both for audio and video, a fair amount of people now prefer the quiet, clean, comfortable, distraction-free screening in their own living room to a night at the movies.

At the same time, we're witnessing a big cultural landmark of the 20th century is dying out. It already has in some forms that had to make space for the mega multiplexes and super blockbusters.

In this context, the introduction of popcorn may have marked the beginning of a development in which the original attraction, the movie, became just one factor among many in the "movie going experience", thereby being devalued. In the end, movie theaters will have to answer to the question why they expect their customers to pay premium prices for these factors.

The business model of movie theaters, with or without popcorn, is not sustainable any more. Whether the disappearance of the cultural entity "movie theater" in its present form would still constitute a big cultural loss, or whether that loss has already happened long ago, is certainly worth debating.

On some level this seems like sn interesting debate but the realist in me sees this a useless navel gazing. Why don't you go to a movie theatre, see that there are, in fact, many people there regardless this death of sophistication or whatever you're talking about. :)

It's a bit like reports of Mark Twain's demise.

In recent years there's been the rise of "premium lounge" type cinema products, with features like large recliner style seats (and many fewer of them), in-seat wait service, less or no advertising and a separate pre-show lounge serving restaurant-style food. With of course a pricetag to match.

Isn't the Smithsonian shutdown along with the rest of the gov't? Or is Smithsonianmag.com not affiliated with the museums?

From their website, it looks like the magazine is part of the Smithsonian Institute, i.e. they are affiliated with the museums (you even get a membership when subscribing to the mag).

Well, I clicked on http://www.smithsonianmag.com/about/internships-employment.h... and an interstitial ad popped up that I couldn't close.

I don't think they're federally funded.

Kind of price tiering as well. People with little money can come and just pay for the show, others can buy lots of extras.

Also of related interest is this article from 2009 that says:

A "small" at Regal has 670 calories and 34 grams of saturated fat. That’s about as many calories as a Pizza Hut Personal Pan Pepperoni Pizza—except the popcorn has three times the saturated fat. Even shared with another person, that size provides nearly an entire day’s worth of the kind of fat that clogs arteries and promotes heart disease. And every tablespoon of "buttery" oil topping adds another 130 calories. Asking for topping is like asking for oil on French fries or potato chips, according to CSPI.

http://www.cspinet.org/new/200911182.html

That article has so many holes in it, I don't know where to start, short of going back in time and writing it for them and then setting it on fire.

This really says it all, "An 8-ounce bag of Reese's Pieces is just a cup of candy. But with 1,160 calories and 35 grams of saturated fat, it's like eating a 16-ounce T-bone steak plus a buttered baked potato." These two things have the same amount of calories and saturated fat, but one of them is obviously real food and the other, well, you guess.

Further, CSPI's history is more than a little sketchy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSPI

Mark Sisson has a lot of good material if you're interested in saturated fats and other food info. This article is even from 2009: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/saturated-fat-healthy/

Er, we do ask for more oil on potato chips. The marketing name is "kettle cooked", but "oilier chips" is basically what they're selling.

Kettle cooked tastes totally different, crisper, less grainy, thicker, and less oily.

And you can get low fat kettle cooked which tastes identical to me.

>the kind of fat that clogs arteries and promotes heart disease.

Medical advice straight out of the 1970's.

I've never eaten popcorn at the movies, and have long thought popcorn smelled disgusting. I wasn't pleased when that American tradition was imported into Ireland when I was a kid.

Popcorn by itself actually smells good - it's just fried corn. It's the ridiculous amount of butter Americans put into it in movie theaters that makes it smell terrible.

It's usually even butter flavored oil. I agree that butter flavor tastes something like butter, I don't think it is the same. Pretzels with butter flavor are similarly awful.

Nope, it's a specific chemical that smells like buttery popcorn, it's what they put on microwave popcorn. It also destroys the lungs of the factory workers who produce it (or people who eat too much of it):

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57516710-10391704/col...

Whoa. There's a truth stranger than fiction for you. It lures you in by smelling like tasty popcorn but its really a diabolical chemical that kills you if you breath it for too long? Seriously? That sounds like something that kills people in red shirts on funky planets with numbers in the name.

Note that after some successful lawsuits by both employees and consumers Diacetyl is being phased out.

Why indeed? I'd rather have a beer than popcorn, so Alamo Drafthouse Cinema in Austin, TX gets my vote.

Cause it is tasty.

Not everything needs a blog post.

You see, there is this thing called historical reasons for things to happen. That post was actually very entertaining and informative.

Until you bust a tooth :(

(this had happened to me twice)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com