Posts by Terry Ramos60

Zachary Thompson2 said:but clearly, from someone else's perspective—say, the owner of that movie theater—there just isn't enough interest in high-quality cinema here in America. At least, there isn't enough demand to actually keep a theater running.

I, on the other hand, feel like I am speaking a foreign language! It seems quite obvious to me that the owner cares nothing for the business of showing films, nor for the audience, nor for the movies themselves; instead, hasn't he intentionally managed the theater to bring it to the very brink of ruin just so he "has" to sell it? To this owner, it simply doesn't matter whether the building is demolished to make way for a shopping mall, converted into a nightclub, or turned into a CVS. His only goal is to pocket the cash and wave us all goodbye!

Oh, and yes, I assume you have all heard the news that in the spot where that theater used to be, they are planning to build a mixed-use residential and commercial complex?

Anthony Davis6 said:Shouldn't we be demanding more from the management at Central Park? Wouldn't it be much more productive if I were to relentlessly pursue the local news outlets and various media organizations to insist that they provide far superior coverage regarding the scheduled programming? Is it not high time they offered more frequent and thorough updates on what is actually happening within the program?

I truly believe that Agar Pata is performing more than adequately in her role! Honestly, does anyone else find themselves wondering what would happen if she weren't so incredibly agile when it comes to promoting these programs? It makes one contemplate the alternative! Of course, we must remember that Central Park isn't exactly the kind of venue that needs to be packed to capacity every single day, nor is it a space that requires a constant, frantic rotation of brand-new programming. I will admit, I was initially quite bothered by the fact that so many classics and series seem to repeat themselves year after year. However, have I not since come to realize the profound reason behind this pattern? Am I not actually quite pleased with it now? Every single year, new generations arrive—fresh students and young kids who, if Central Park doesn't offer them these timeless works, simply won't have any other opportunity to experience them!

(Since I am the one running Central Park) I actually attempted to secure some funding for an advertising campaign!

The individuals managing Central Park are truly quite proficient in their specific field of expertise. However, if you happen to be harboring any secret strategies or superior concepts that could generate significant revenue—well, why not reveal them immediately? And I am talking about funds specifically earmarked for advertising! When you are relying on a massive sponsor like ExxonMobil, you can barely scrape together enough just to cover basic maintenance costs, don't you think?

Shouldn't the city have absolutely surged forward with a massive injection of capital? Wouldn't we all agree that a bold, decisive move to pump money directly into our urban centers was exactly what was required at that moment?

Do you have any idea how one might actually go about this? How can we possibly compel the city to act? It seems to me that the city hasn't contributed even a single cent toward funding Central Park this year—at least, from everything I have gathered! Is it not true that Central Park only continues to exist thanks to our most hated local tax authorities?

Can you believe it? Almost every single screening was completely sold out!

I distinctly remember when I attended, and the venues were absolutely packed to capacity! Yet, Zachary Thompson2 insists that Broadway was practically a ghost town. Now, who is actually telling the truth here?!

robybaggio said:Is it not utterly preposterous to suggest that we should withhold investment from the film industry? How can anyone possibly argue against fueling the very engine of our cinematic culture?

Does anyone here actually discuss the cinematic arts? It seems to me that we are exclusively preoccupied with the business of theater exhibition, and isn't that precisely what we have been establishing from the very beginning?!

Is it not absolutely staggering to witness such astronomical sums of money being poured into mediocre cinema? One has to wonder, how can we justify spending upwards of $1.5 million on a single production that barely scrapes by as an average American film?

It seems you aren't entirely up to speed with the recent surge in American cinema and its incredible momentum over the last few years! Might I ask, what was the very last American film you had the pleasure of watching?

Honestly, how could I possibly continue to engage with someone who possesses such a peculiar mindset? Is it even worth my time to waste energy on this level of discourse? No, I simply refuse to dwell on such trivialities any longer, so consider our interaction officially concluded!

steelstag4 said:To be perfectly honest, they really have themselves to blame! They simply failed to establish a distinct brand identity when it mattered most, nor did they manage to truly captivate an audience.

But really, who exactly are these people you say are to blame?
Are you referring to the management at the local AMC Theatres? I would argue they aren't actually the culprits here—the leadership at AMC Theatres (and let’s not forget, they are owned by some investment fund from a far-off foreign land) never actually intended to run a successful business or build a loyal following! In fact, isn't it possible that what we are witnessing right now was always their ultimate goal? To drive these theaters to the very brink of bankruptcy, liquidate everything, pocket the cash, and simply disappear?
And as for who sold off AMC Theatres to them in the first place? Oh, we all know the answer to that. But was it even legal? No, it certainly wasn't! However, at this stage, isn't it far too late to try and undo decisions made ten or fifteen years ago?

Brenda Lee50 said:when you step into a venue like that, you can almost hear the echoes of a local mindset that simply hasn't grasped it yet: film is actually the seventh art.

How on earth can one explain such a concept to someone who views moviegoers as nothing more than mere "customers"? And isn't it just fascinating how he takes such immense pride in being treated as a transaction by AMC Theatres?

nimblemarlin17 said:Now that nothing that isn't profitable is allowed to survive.

Oh, isn't it just wonderful that we should be guided solely by the almighty dollar? If that is our guiding principle, why stop there? Should we not simply shut down every single museum and art gallery in existence? After all, they aren't turning a profit either, and wouldn't it be absolutely "foolish" to expect any municipal or federal government to provide them with support?
Or perhaps you happen to possess some secret knowledge that the rest of us lack—can you point us toward a museum that actually generates a surplus? Please, do enlighten us!
And why not lease those grand museum buildings over to private corporations? They could host commercial exhibitions sponsored by companies like Verizon or AT&T, who would surely offer free parking just to get people through the doors! I highly doubt there wouldn't be an eager line of entrepreneurs ready to jump at such an opportunity. The real issue here is that when it comes to privatization, one must eventually draw a line in the sand, mustn't one?
By that logic, we might as well abolish FC Barcelona right this second! You might argue, "But they produce their own performances!" But tell me, who is paying for those performances? They cost money, and they certainly cannot pay for themselves merely through ticket sales alone. In fact, producing these shows essentially creates a deficit. Of course, private theaters operating on strictly commercial principles already exist! So, why on earth do we keep FC Barcelona alive? It’s non-profitable—how absolutely dreadful!

Zachary Thompson2 said:Does anyone else feel that sense of pure anticipation when stepping into a truly world-class cinema? This theater offers absolutely nothing short of perfection, boasting top-tier audio and visual equipment that makes every frame leap off the screen! Can you even imagine anything better than sinking into those incredibly plush, comfortable seats for a few hours of bliss? And let's not forget the delightful little touches, like having a cozy spot to enjoy a premium coffee while you wait for the feature to begin, or the seamless convenience of easy parking right outside. Isn't it just wonderful when every single detail is designed for your ultimate comfort?

I simply cannot fathom how any of the points you’ve raised could be considered an upgrade in terms of service quality when it comes to the actual cinematic experience! To my mind, true quality would mean being spared the relentless barrage of commercials for Joy detergent, deodorants, potato chips, or Tic Tacs before the feature even begins. Wouldn't we all prefer a more seamless transition into the story? Or perhaps, instead of those tedious community center promotions asking us to "send in your vacation photos for a chance to win a DVD," we might actually enjoy a slightly more affordable ticket price? Is it too much to ask for the simple luxury of choosing between showtimes at a major multiplex or a local boutique theater? And frankly, wouldn't the experience be infinitely better if I weren't intercepted by security guards just for carrying a half-empty bottle of water while trying to enter the theater?

But honestly, I find myself wondering, what could possibly be the cultural or social significance of screening Pirates of the Caribbean at an AMC Theatre when it is already being shown in much more magnificent cinemas?

What if that cinema—since its mission isn't driven solely by the bottom line—decided to show some heart? Wouldn't it be wonderful if they swapped out those same repetitive screenings of Pirates of the Caribbean just once a week to host a dedicated film festival instead? Or perhaps the program director could choose to schedule more screenings of Volver or an indie American drama that didn't quite make the blockbuster list, rather than dedicating almost every single time slot to Pirates?
Wouldn't it be simply wonderful if we could find ourselves in an arena where the ticket prices weren't dictated by some corporate executive's strategic business plan?
Wouldn't it be absolutely wonderful if we lived in a world where the films selected for screening and their actual showtimes weren't dictated by someone's calculated business strategy? Wouldn't it be a dream to see a cinema that prioritizes the art itself rather than just following a corporate blueprint?

Does the "Bring Back the Cinema" movement actually carry more weight in a bustling metropolis like Chicago, where we are seeing the rapid expansion of massive multiplexes boasting over twenty screens, compared to those smaller cities that are left struggling with either one lonely theater or nothing at all? Is it not far more logical to advocate for film in a place where the infrastructure for a true cinematic revival already exists in such abundance?

What is even the point of trying to launch these initiatives in other cities now? Shouldn't such movements have been organized years ago, back when our local cinemas were still fighting to stay afloat? They have already been lost to us, so what could an action like this possibly change at this late stage in the game?!

And what if I were to ask you: what happens when we live in a city that is about to have three different multiplexes, boasting twenty whole screens, yet every single one of them is controlled by just two massive private corporations?
And let me be perfectly clear: this isn't some grand crusade to gift Chicago yet another movie theater! Isn't it obvious that this is actually a movement to ensure that our beloved city doesn't lose one of the precious gems it already possesses?

🙂
because this isn't merely some isolated opinion I've cooked up on my own, is it? No, this represents a coordinated effort by approximately ten highly relevant film institutions and creative projects! We shall soon see just how many signatures we can gather for this petition 😉

A business driven solely by profit will always exert every ounce of effort just to squeeze out more revenue.

You claim that capitalism has finally arrived in our city, but shouldn't culture and social welfare be those very sectors—both here and even in the most ruthless capitalist nations—that are shielded from the jaws of uncompromising capitalism through government funding, donations, and foundations? Is it not precisely because they hold such immense public and social significance?
I mean, what comes next? Will we exist in a world where only private theaters remain? Will the Metropolitan Opera building eventually be converted into corporate office space for rent?!?!

It actually seems quite the opposite to me. Crying "give me a cinema!" doesn't make much sense for the rest of the cities across America, because over there, everything has already gone completely downhill. It might make sense for Washington, D.C., though, assuming the same thing hasn't already happened here.

Now I find myself wondering why on earth I have become so incredibly worked up and personally invested in all of this, almost as if it were a direct affront to my own life! Perhaps it is simply because nobody else seems to grasp what I am talking about.

Zachary Thompson2 said:I honestly can't tell the difference between the darkness of an old-school theater in Europe and the darkness of a massive multiplex.

it’s all about this:
The American government and the City of Washington, D.C.... have allowed the entire film industry engine to be privatized... and handed over to nothing but private financial interests.[

And if we are left with nothing but AMC Theatres and Broadway—where on earth are we supposed to host our film festivals, heavens above—just at Central Park?!?!?! And what about the science center? How are you even meant to curate a festival with a rich and diverse program when you only have one single hall at your disposal!

Oh, right, I completely forgot 😵who actually needs film festivals; apparently, they aren't useful if you can't book tickets online and find free parking nearby, silly me!

Zachary Thompson2 said:Does anyone truly crave Spartan living conditions? Certainly not I! Yet, one has to wonder why, in most of the cinemas owned by the City of Washington, D.C., the experience remains so consistently underwhelming. Is it not quite disappointing that the standards are so consistently unappealing?

Could you perhaps provide a bit more clarity on this matter? From what I can gather through my own research, it seems as though there isn't a single cinema actually owned by the City of Washington, D.C., is there? 😕
I must admit, I am somewhat uncertain as to who holds the actual deed to Central Park, but since the day has been officially reserved by the American Film Federation, they are the ones calling the shots and managing the grounds!
If your objective is to target those halls that are currently, or once were, under the ownership of AMC Theatres—well, nowhere in the documentation does it state that these halls are off-limits for renovation! Is there any rule forbidding us from touching them? Not at all! In fact, I was the very first person to suggest that we should transform the space into a sleek, modern cinema hall. And wouldn't you agree that such an undertaking would actually cost significantly less than trying to convert the venue into a theater space?

Which seats will ultimately sit vacant? Is it not exactly like what happened on Broadway, when the theater sat empty during that run of Asian cinema? Given the situation for you, for me, and for at least another hundred people living here in Washington, D.C., does it not stand to reason that it isn't worth the city's investment to maintain a dedicated cinema? People actually make an effort to attend the theater, don't they?

Once again, you seem to be completely conflating apples and oranges! It truly makes me wonder at times: am I perhaps writing in some obscure dialect that no one understands, or does the modern American public genuinely require hand-drawn illustrations just to grasp my point?
Does anyone actually care about the artistic programming? We already have plenty of that over at Central Park! Perhaps I am simply missing something here, but could you please explain your reasoning? Why on earth would you assume people would only watch something like Miami Vice exclusively at an AMC Theatres, rather than enjoying it in a similarly (pre)refined part of Europe?
And why on earth would you assume that a dramatic repertoire from the Metropolitan Opera would draw a larger crowd to that hall than something like Pirates of the Caribbean?
I must confess, I find myself quite unable to grasp the underlying logic behind your conclusion! Truly, what could possibly be the issue with watching films in that particular theater?

nimblemarlin17 said:Given that AMC Theatres and Broadway truly actually care about their patrons by offering amenities such as online ticket reservations, discount cards, free garage parking, organized screenings, and more...

If you interpret those basic services as them actually caring for their customers, then I fear we shall never find common ground!

If you are feeling nostalgic for the shortcomings of old-school cinemas, the issue lies within you rather than with modern theaters, which are a hundred times superior to the old ones. Honestly.

Oh, well, perhaps the fault lies with me if I simply enjoy having the luxury of choice! Would you be perfectly satisfied with just one single theater, one solitary library, and one lone concert hall, provided they offered you free parking?

Zachary Thompson2 said:But Central Park isn't running anything?

But Central Park isn't a repertory cinema; they showcase curated programs—various director retrospectives, specific cinematic movements, or thematic cycles.

You could just head over to AMC Theatres or Broadway; they are fantastic theaters that show all the major releases, including domestic films.

But wouldn't it be wonderful to actually have a choice? Is there truly no one on this forum who feels nostalgic for those classic halls in Europe or Washington, D.C. (which could be just as comfortable as an AMC)? Must absolutely EVERY film screening activity in this city—the true repertory kind—be nothing more than pure commerce and capitalism? Because if that is the case, doesn't it mean that, theoretically, Broadway and AMC could simply collude to hike the ticket price to $17, leaving you with no choice but to pay up or miss out on movies entirely?

Why is the screening of legitimate repertory films considered less vital to the cultural life of this city than theatrical productions like those seen on Comedy Central or at Second City?

And, regardless of what one thinks about it or how many AMC Theatres may exist, the privatization of the local Cinema was an absolute disgrace! It was sold for a pittance to some investment fund headquartered in some exotic foreign country, whose sole objective was to grab the real estate—the actual halls—and then strip them, sell them off, pocket the cash, and disappear!

Well, since we cannot change the past and the film 😁 cannot be brought back, let us return to reality...

I don't need a Spartan setup with uncomfortable seats, poor sound, and terrible picture quality.

Huh? It seems to me you haven't quite grasped the point of my argument. No one is calling for Spartan conditions! But why, for instance, does the City of Washington, D.C., after purchasing, say, four halls, decide to turn one into a dance center, another into a theater, a third into a theater, and the fourth *must* become a theater? Why couldn't that fourth one remain a movie hall? And instead of investing, let's say, three million dollars to remodel it into a theater, why not invest a third of that to renovate it into a perfectly comfortable, modern cinema?!

Well, fine, I suppose I am asking rhetorical questions too. I do so because various interest groups, personal agendas, and lobbies—whether they represent theater or cinema—seem to hold far more sway than common sense or the public good ever will.

A campaign to save our "normal" local cinemas:

If a certain European friend comes to visit and expresses a desire to be taken on a tour of the theater scene here in Washington, D.C., will you find it difficult to fulfill that wish? Not at all! With a leisurely stroll through the heart of the city, starting from Times Square (where the Metropolitan Opera is located) and moving through New England (home to the Lincoln Center), then heading down Fifth Avenue (where you'll find Second City) and over toward Harvard to reach the Steppenwolf Theatre, one can scan almost every essential landmark of the local theatrical landscape. And if your guest happens to be an avid walker, they could quite easily wander all the way to Coachella, the Jim Henson Company, Comedy Central, and the Otter...

Furthermore, should they plan to stay in Washington, D.C. for an extended period or perhaps even settle here temporarily, you might feel compelled to warn them about two upcoming theater locations on Fifth Avenue—specifically, the site of the former Lika cinema, where a dance and theater stage is destined to emerge one day, and the old Apollo cinema, which the city government, alongside a significant increase in investment for a complete renovation, has most generously donated to The Knight's Jester.

But what if your European guest decides they would like to visit a cinema or, heaven forbid, watch a truly valuable (perhaps even an American) film? Wouldn't you, acting as a host eager to make a lasting impression, find yourself in quite a predicament?

If, by any chance, the only remaining municipal cinema (Europe) is playing nothing but some childish nonsense, won't you be forced not only to expand your search or hop on a streetcar far outside the city center, but also to contend with the crowds of shopping mall consumers to whom the city government has essentially outsourced the care of movie lovers?

Might you not find yourself later bombarded with some rather non-trivial questions:
Could it be that the nineteenth-century mindset, coupled with a pre-modern and pre-urban approach to managing public goods, is now intending to deal the final blow to a symbol of modernity and urbanity—the cinema!

remainder:

Comments, opinions, discussions......?

neonhound32 said:Look, it’s an international production, which tells you everything you need to know! The whole movie is driven by the actual plot rather than just relying on flashy special effects.

🤣 🤣

Well, the film was directed by Almodóvar, and doesn't that say a whole lot about its quality? It's a classic piece of international cinema, isn't it? 🤣

It isn't playing in theaters just yet; you'll have to wait until Thursday!

The book is entirely hollow and lacks any sense of credibility

Honestly, I am quite perplexed as to why you have become so fixated on using a Microsoft card when it is fundamentally incapable of handling online transactions! If your primary goal is to make purchases over the internet, what possible utility could a Microsoft card offer you in that scenario?

Is it not absolutely fascinating how they claimed the festival was on its way out, suggesting this would be the final Sundance Film Festival, only to later suggest they were merely playing games with the concept? Is it possible they were simply mocking the very idea of media scandals and tabloid sensationalism that often haunt the film industry? (Could it be that certain actors were merely performing these ridiculous, fabricated controversies just for the sake of it?)

It seems they were essentially hedging their bets—securing their footing by preparing for a shutdown, then pivoting to claim they were only teasing us about the end! They essentially said, "Oh, we were just joking about closing down to poke fun at those fake scandals and yellow journalism tactics!"

edit - Oh my goodness, I posted this before I had even finished reading the second page of the thread!

One wouldn't expect to find a top-tier plastic surgeon just wandering through a local florist, would they?
Between a quick Google search, a phone call, and a brief visit to a professional medical office for some initial information, one can achieve wonders!