Are Seven has moved! Go to areseven.com

This page has moved from its Blogspot origins and is now on a hosted server. If you're getting here from a blogspot.com bookmark or feed, stop where you are, go to areseven.com and never look back.

If you're feeling lazy, just hang on a couple seconds and you'll be redirected automatically.


Friday, July 21, 2006

The Way-Delayed Critic: King Kong & Kapote

The argument of the Experience Of The Big Screen has existed at least since the invention of the VCR, and probably before that, back to when The Wizard of Oz first aired on network TV and only the kids with color TVs even came close to experiencing it.

The Big Screen argument says that there are some films (or maybe even all films) that you HAVE to see in a theater, that you just can't get the same experience on a small screen. You can't feel the brush of the slightest whisper or get your brain knocking around in your head at every explosion. You don't get the same level of visual detail, don't get the same big-room-big-screen experience, and can't feel the rush of a lake-sized diet Sprite spilled down your back (unless you're into those sorts of things, pervert).

I usually touch on this argument as I put a Netflixed movie into the DVD player. Maybe I should be better about going to movie theaters, I think. This movie that I'm about to watch would probably be much better if I didn't have to put the subtitles on or pause it every half hour to move the laundry from washer to dryer.

In this last week (laundry needs+no social engagements=catching up on Netflix) I saw two movies that tossed the Big Screen Argument around my head even more.

King Kong
Like, say, Gladiator, I couldn't help but wonder if I would have enjoyed this movie if I had seen it on a big screen and all at once, instead of broken up over two nights. But as it was, I spent a good chunk of the movie (as I did with Gladiator) talking to the screen ("Good Lord, this is TERRIBLE!"), and playing a game where I would guess what was about to happen ("That crazy guy with the accent is totally gonna die. And there he goes"). I was really hating it.

It was the fact that I was outright bored during action-packed scenes that made me wonder if I could have felt more excitement in the theater. But just when I was starting to wonder if maybe it was because I was watching on my mono small screen, the movie moved to New York, and in spite of the stupid ice-skating bit, it was really beautiful. The detail didn't escape me at all, and I actually enjoyed that last hour; feeling the excitement and emotion that was meant to be there, all on my (relatively) small screen.

ADVANTAGE: Draw. I'm sure it would have been more enjoyable in some big movie screen with unbearably loud speakers, but the fact that I was able to (relatively) enjoy the last bit of the movie on my TV means that the big stuff can still fit on the small screen. I tend to think it was the lousy quality of the first part that made it so unenjoyble.

Capote
Sometimes, I think that the tons-of-talk movies translate even worse to the small screen than the big sound-and-vision blockbusters. Nothing takes the enjoyment out of a movie faster than putting the bright yellow subtitles on or having to do the "what'd he say?" rewind. So I didn't have a whole lot of hope of enjoying this movie, especially because I heard that it was kind of slow and quiet.

But I LOVED it. What an amazing movie. And even if the sound didn't come through so well, the cinematography and framing still looked fantastic, even with those yellow subtitles stepping all over it. I'm sure I would have liked it more in the theater, but it's hard to imagine loving it much more than I did.

ADVANTAGE: The small screen. Quality still translates.

9 comments:

doug said...

Reid, I hate to tell you this, but Capote was in the English. Did you get the French version?

We just saw "Syriana" the other day, and I think it was the same deal as Capote - would have been good to see on the big screen, but nice to be able to rewind or talk about what was going throughout the movie.

Reid said...

Wait...that was ENGLISH?! And here I was patting myself on the back for being fluent in French!

I guess I should have made that more clear: sometimes, it's so hard to hear that I have to put the English subtitles on to be able to follow the movie. Most of Capote was fine, but I had to keep them on the entire time for The Constant Gardener (which I also really liked).

Anonymous said...

The big screen/small screen argument really has nothing to do with how well you hear the movie. If you have a decent surround sound stereo, you can still hear all the dialogue and feel the explosions even if you're watching a tiny screen.

Reid said...

Well, of course. If you have a 27" hi-def screen and a full surround sound home theater system, then the entire argument is off the table. But I'm thinking of "small screen" in the way that almost everyone I know has it at home: TV with decent sound at best. Mine has only one speaker, which makes it nearly impossible to hear the quiet dialogue. Hence the subtitles. This is why I (and a lot of other people, I'm assuming) often wonder if it's even worth it watching some movie that was clearly made for the big screen.

doug said...

See, what you need to do is install a small theatre in your apartment, with a projector, screen, surround sound, and even a snack bar, then this debate about whether to go to the movie theater or not becomes moot. It's as simple as that really.

I gotcha on the subtitles - ever try to watch "Gosford Park" or any Altman movie on a teevee? Good luck with catching all the dialogue there.

Anonymous said...

You listen to lots of music, you can't use headphones...I would expect you to have the most kickass stereo of anyone I know. Even if you've only got a 13" tv. I'm not sayin' you need a Carver amp and a full 7.1 speaker system or anything, but even a few relatively inexpensive components should allow you to ditch the subtitles.

Doug, you forgot the sticky floors and the loud talkers sitting behind you. It's really not the same without those.

d-lee said...

Yeah. I'm with you, Doug. I loved "Gosford Park" in the theatre, so I bought it on DVD. I've tried to watch the DVD three times, but it's just too damn quiet. No good. "Finding Neverland" was probably the worst of that lot of "quiet" movies.

Capote was super-dope. One of the few movies I saw in the theatre in the past year.

By the way, for anyone who's interested, "Kicking and Screaming" (NOT the 2005 movie with Will Ferrell, but the 1994 movie directed by Noah Baumbach) will FINALLY be released on DVD this summer. It's getting the Criterion treatment, and will be out in August.

Reid said...

I wonder if I'll still think "Kicking And Screaming" is funny. Hello, Netflix.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the info, Dave. It's about time. I love that movie byt my VHS copy is pretty worn out. I never understood what took them so long considering Barcelona and Metropolitan were released long ago.