# of screens for Frozen vs. # of screens for 12 Years a Slave. Fair or not fair?

[Goffe]

So I'm a film snob because I believe Hollywood makes way too many dumb movies aimed at Michael Bay and Adam Sandler fans....

ok, tell me something, how many films aimed to TF and Sandler fans (bad movies with comercial success) were released last year and how many were successful?

[Blankments]

Not gonna lie, reading this thread kinda makes me wanna rewatch Frozen. It is, after all, a better film than 12 Years IMO, and both are playing locally either way.

 

 

(Honestly, I want to see Gravity again, but no one wants to see that with me/will drive me )

[portgas]

Not gonna lie, reading this thread kinda makes me wanna rewatch Frozen. It is, after all, a better film than 12 Years IMO, and both are playing locally either way.

 

 

(Honestly, I want to see Gravity again, but no one wants to see that with me/will drive me )

Watching movies alone is better. This way you don't need to hold your tears in bay.

[baumer]

Watched Rocky and Rocky II last night and this morning.  Balled my eyes out when Adrian tells Rocky she wants him to do one thing for her....WIN....then the Bill Conti music comes on and Mickey says, "What are we waitin for?"  I balled unapologetically because I was alone and didn't have to worry about someone making fun of me.  And if felt great lol.

[75Live]

Watched Rocky and Rocky II last night and this morning.  Balled my eyes out when Adrian tells Rocky she wants him to do one thing for her....WIN....then the Bill Conti music comes on and Mickey says, "What are we waitin for?"  I balled unapologetically because I was alone and didn't have to worry about someone making fun of me.  And if felt great lol.

 

Someone has the ION channel I see  Yes, I have watched some of the Rockys as well

[Webslinger]

I think your frustration is misguided, at least. Bad movies have and always will exist, and you can't just force everyone to watch something more substantive when the primary motive for going to the movies is to kill a couple hours with family/friends/dates.

 

I second each point in this post. As we know, the majority of moviegoers go to the movies to fulfill some desire for escapism. This point is probably true even of the majority of the audience for a massively critically-acclaimed blockbuster like Gravity.

 

As for the topic of the thread: it seems silly to compare the theatre bookings of Frozen with those of 12 Years a Slave. Has Frozen had its moment in the sun and made gobs upon gobs of money? Yes; but even so, audiences still want to see it. It's not some grand conspiracy as to why the movie is still in so many theatres; crowds are still showing up week after week. Thus, why give it the ax if the venue in question has quite a few screens? Furthermore, it's not like there's an overwhelming amount of audience overlap between the two; the bulk of Frozen's audience is made up of families, while that of 12 Years a Slave is almost entirely adults over the age of 25.

 

If everyone thought like me, 12 Years a Slave would be a big hit and would be much more widely available than it is. It's a great movie, and it's worthy of the extremely lofty praise that it has received. Any older teenager or adult who has a serious interest in film should consider it a must-see. However, even as a huge admirer of the movie, I have to admit that if I showed up at a theatre and had to pick on a whim whether to see it, Gravity, American Hustle, The Wolf of Wall Street, or - yes, I'll go there - Frozen, 12 Years a Slave would be my fifth choice. It requires more mental and emotional preparation, and a different frame of mind than any of those other films mentioned.

 

Moreover, it feels pointless to brood over the film's box office because of just how plainly obvious it is that the film is going to have a very, very long life after it hits home video. That's one of the perks of being (arguably) the definitive movie on a particular subject.

[baumer]

Someone has the ION channel I see  Yes, I have watched some of the Rockys as well

 

Nope.  I bought the BR set a little while ago and just got around to finally watching them.  

[Lordmandeep]

I watched 12 Years a Slave but at home.

 

Personally I can never watch serious films at theaters as visit to the theaters with my friends is more of an escape and have fun.  

[Walt Disney]

  Let's not be shocked when we see studies showing that American students' ACT and SAT scores continue to drop....

 

You have to be kidding me. This comment is just ridiculous at its core. You are a film snob if you think some form of entertainment on video is the key to education. Almost all movies are very historically inaccurate. If you are using those as educational tools, then you have a big problem.

 

If you want to improve ACT and SAT scores, then have your kids read books. And I don't mean YA fantasy books. I mean real educational books. The kind that won't get made into movies because they're not filled with revisionist history and over-dramatizations.

[lab276]

I think films are great educational tools.

[AniNate]

They are through the virtue of their over-dramatization, making the event more engaging and opening up new discussions of fact vs. fiction, but unless the ACT has questions like "Who was the director of the 2013 film "12 Years a Slave"" it's dumb to say that they'll have a direct impact on test scores.

Edited February 2, 2014 by tribefan695

[Walt Disney]

They are through the virtue of their over-dramatization, making the event more engaging and opening up new discussions of fact vs. fiction, but unless the ACT has questions like "Who was the director of the 2013 film "12 Years a Slave"" it's dumb to say that they'll have a direct impact on test scores.

 

Moreover, the fiction gets confused with the fact, and replaces it in the minds of the viewer.

 

But, great point on the ACT, as the ACT and SAT both do not test history. They test basic math and reading comprehension/vocabulary skills.

[AniNate]

Moreover, the fiction gets confused with the fact, and replaces it in the minds of the viewer.

 

Well, at least it has a better chance of being remembered at all.

 

Frankly, 12YAS did a better job demonstrating the brutality of slavery than any high school documentary I ever remember seeing. Probably because they're toned down so no parents get upset.

Edited February 2, 2014 by tribefan695

[75Live]

Nope.  I bought the BR set a little while ago and just got around to finally watching them.  

 

Ah, just a funny coincidence then

Edited February 2, 2014 by 75live

[cookie]

Frozen has made a killing at the box office.  It has also been helped by theaters basically keeping its screen count relatively the same since December.  One would figure that after Frozen hit 300 million domestic, it would lose screens and thus give more opportunities to show lower budget indie movies like 12 Years a Slave, Nebraska, or Her.

Theater owners don't give a crap how much a film has made overall. If a film like Frozen keeps getting people in the seats and make money for their business (especially this late in the run where they get most of the share) then they see no problem keeping it playing.

Edited February 2, 2014 by C00k13

[Blankments]

Well, at least it has a better chance of being remembered at all.

 

Frankly, 12YAS did a better job demonstrating the brutality of slavery than any high school documentary I ever remember seeing. Probably because they're toned down so no parents get upset.

I'm willing to bet 12 Years a Slave joins the ranks of Schindler's List and Glory of movies you watch in Junior History class