Yes! You did an amazing job with this video on intermissions! Fantastic work you always put together. I loved Intermissions! Last time I recall seeing one was during an extended screening of "Its A Mad ,Mad, Mad World". I am very much in favor of the intermission for long films. Plus the fact that if done well, it becomes an artistic part to the film itself.
As a filmmaker in the making, I would keep it in mind for the next generation of cinema, plus we do need around a 10 minute break of a 3 hour runtime, 7 mins for a under 2 hour runtime
Your insertion of teh intermission into the Rain scene in Killers of the Flower Moon was PERFECT! That scene would be amazing with a longer rain atmosphere
@@PentexProductions I am sorry but a disagree ... if a film is over 3 hours , or even 4 hours long , cinemas should do intermissions regardless , if the studio isn't happy with it. people might need to go to the toilet., or stretch their legs. Intermissions should be brought back but only for films that are very long. They were used up until 1982
I've definitely been having this discussion with friends as of late. Aside from bathrooms, it also lets people check their phones, stretch, chat about what they've seen. One thing you addressed was the challenge for the multiplex. I used to think that was too much of a logistic challenge, but luckily (at least where I live) all the multiplex theatres are now reserved seating, so you don't really need to fear people sneaking in or taking your seat. I would add: - countdown clock - disclaimer before the film about intermission; enjoy a stretch, more snacks, returning to same assigned seats, etc. - an usher in the theatre during intermission, mainly towards the end and a few minutes into the second half, just to make sure there's no issues (ie so someone doesn't have to come out to the lobby to find staff) - maybe bring a cart of general snacks for people that don't want to go stand in line in the lobby (I've seen theatres do this before regular shows).
A belief that I hold very firmly is that having an intermission only immerses the viewer more for the exact reasons you listed; Having a break and talking about the first half, basically building hype for the second. When I watched Lawrence of Arabia for the first time with a friend, we actually had a larger break. We talked and went to get something to eat. That way, the whole thing turned into much more than just "watching a movie". It has become a very fond memory and we plan to do this more often with other epics. Dedicating an entire afternoon and evening to this kind of thing just makes it so special.
the 15-30 minutes of ads before a movie is actually something ive come to really appreciate. If your running behind or maybe just on time for your movie, getting popcorn and snacks are no longer stressful because you just miss some ads. And they often play full trailers which I actually quite enjoy, given they are in big screen quality.
I agree that it's nice to have a buffer at the start - though when my seat is in the middle of a full row of people that I have to scooch past it makes it less fun!
You don't remember a time when people bought a ticket and went to find seats in the theater that weren't already occupied. That was a reason not to come in late; you wouldn't find a good seat anymore. I did that at a movie some years ago and a few minutes after the movie started, some people came in and said we were sitting in their seats. And asked us to move! Well, find some other seat that no one's in yet. You're late.
@@speeta in the world of electronic tickets and seat selection that is indeed how it works. You don't need to show up early, you need to book early to get the seats you want. There is no rush to get to your seat or save them while someone else gets popcorn.
@@garthvater You don't even have to make an effort to be seated before the movie starts anymore; that's the difference. I wouldn't have minded moving earlier, but now the theater's dark and the opening credits are over and the dialogue has begun. Would you get up and move for this latecomer when you're already a few minutes into the un-pausable film that you haven't seen before?
During the screening of Flower Moon people stood up all the time to head for the bathroom - and when they returned the person next to them filled in with what they just missed, no matter if they knew them or not. You had a bit of a community feeling in there, and it was a great atmosphere to be in there and a lovely cinema experience. Only for the first 2 1/2 hours or so though. After that you noticed that the movie was beginning to slowly lose its audience, including me, because it was just too much to watch in one go, and a quick rush to the bathroom while the film is playing just isn't the same as a natural break to get some air for a bit and process what you have seen so far.
Thanks to an unknown illness I've been disabled for just over 3 years now. My wife and I want to see this movie but I can't physically sit for long enough to watch it. We'll have to wait until we can watch it at home where I can take a break every 60-90 minutes. But if there was an intermission at the halfway point I could probably see the movie in theaters.
It really is an accessibility thing as much as anything for exactly this - lots of people can't sit that long for various medical reasons. Everyone should welcome intermissions!
Yes. Oh god, please... PLEASE BRING THEM BACK. I have held myself from pissing my pants so many times throughout the years that I'm sure I already have done irreparable damage to my bladder.
As I get older and my bladder gets smaller every time I go to a theater I now play the game of missing 5 minutes of the movie or finding relief. Also, I was one who hunger striked Oppenheimer. I heard how long it was, and I watched it in full IMAX. No way I was going to leave.
I loved Killers of the Flower Moon, and I made it the whole way through in the theater without having to get up for a bathroom break or anything else. I was surprised by how many other people in my theater made it through the whole way too, it was a really good audience. But I would've been totally fine with an intermission. If a movie is over 3 hours, it should probably have one, or maybe don't play a half hour of trailers before the movie starts.
Agree - my theatre was pretty good too (everyone came prepared!) but it was also half empty. I think the length turned a lot of people away from buying a ticket (my other half included!) I'm sure everyone would have appreciated a break.
Intermission would be great. Have a "screen saver" from the movie with the words Intermission and also have a clock countdown. Churches do this all the time with their pre-service countdown.
As an Indian, I am glad that our directors still keep an interval block for their films in the 1h30m or so mark, sometimes earlier depending on the length. And it has led to some of our Indian Cinema's strongest scenes, see films like Vikram, RRR, Leo, Jawan and Animal as an example. They have some strongly written and choreographed interval blocks.
It's crazy how they used to be such a normal part of movies but have almost totally vanished, and even old-school film-makers like Scorsese are resisting putting them in. I'd have thought they'd see it as a chance to bring back some of the old magic, and also do something a bit creative. I'll keep dreaming!
Film makers and film bros have an INMENSE disrespect for casual audiences, the fact that Scorcese truly thinks that people asks for intermissions in disrecspect and not because they need to pee is absolute self centered
The first time I went to the movies was for a double feature of _101 Dalmatians_ and _Mr. Hobbs Takes a Vacation._ The management put in intermissions for both movies. At run times of 79 and 116 minutes respectively, you would think intermissions wouldn't be necessary, but this was a double bill aimed at children, and children have child-sized bladders. Those intermissions, along with theater ushers, loge seating, shorts such as an opening cartoon, and cry rooms made going to the movies an experience that modern audiences will never get to experience.
I've been thinking this for a while now. We watched The Sound of Music over Christmas, and not only did the intermission aid an emotional climax, it gave us a chance to heat up the Christmas pudding and use the bathroom (which I'd needed to do for a while) it would be so nice if they brought this back
Only had 2 intermissions in a theater Return of the King Grindhouse Honestly I’m so glad for the Grindhouse one, death proof would have been very hard to endure if I hadn’t taken a break
The last movie I recall with a Intermission was "Gods and Generals" (2003). It was a brutally long movie and then it just said Intermission and then faded to black. No words saying intermission just a stop for 15 mins. People didn't know this and were pissed.
The only movie I've ever been to that had an intermission was Gettysburg (Maxwell's earlier film). I recall the intermission being well received in that case, but I also have some vague feeling that we knew there was going to be an intermission.
8:15 I remember seeing "Gods and Generals" in theaters in the early 2000's and it had an intermission. Only time I ever experienced one. Lol, just looked up the box office results, that movie bombed.
Near the end of the video I mention that we shouldn't need to go on mini-hunger strikes just to enjoy a movie! I'd love not to have to be monitoring my hydration all day leading up to a movie night!
In India, every film would have an intermission. For Hollywood films, the theaters just pause the film at some point in the middle. And people walk out to get some popcorn or cola.
Films like Lawrence of Arabia and 2001: A Space Odyssey not only had intermissions, they had overtures. Those were some perfect opportunities to set the tone of the film, while people were still walking into the cinema. Unfortunately, comercials have taken that spot now. But I think film makers can be a lot more creative in making filler sequences with good visuals and music. Most of that is only shown in the credits nowadays. And if you buy the blu-ray, you should get the option to play the film with or without the intermission.
Here in Switzerland the Cinemas have added intermissions of their own for as long as I can remember, except for when I went to see Oppenheimer, which was a nasty surprise to say the least. But yes, I'd love to see the return of traditional/intentional intermissions.
The question is then, how long should intermissions be at a giant multiplex where there are bound to be lines for the bathroom and concessions? Also, there should definitely be a countdown clock so audience knows how much time is being allotted.
Agree on the countdown! I think 10-15 minutes is plenty of time. Lots of stage theatres let you pre-order concessions to be ready for you at the intermission to just pick up, so that'd help manage crowds, and it's enough time for the vast majority of the audience to get through the bathroom (think about what it's like when you finish a movie - a bit of a wait, sure, but you're not in line for 15 minutes). The issue for multiplexes would be staggering the times of intermissions in different showings so you don't get 2-3 theatres emptying at once, but they already do this for the start and end times.
@@PentexProductions Yeah I echo those thoughts for how to make smooth breaks that are of adequate duration but yet not too generous as to be tedious for those audience members eager to continue their viewing experience. There could be scrolling captions in the pre-programme slot of miscellaneous ads as reminders to pre-order additional concessions ahead on the theater App for the intermission period, for those people early enough to observe it. I wonder if maybe a countdown of 9 minutes might be a good compromise to give people enough opportunity for relieving themselves or refuelling? Psychologically, 9 minutes feels more imminent and urgent than 10 somehow. Well... I suppose it actually indeed is, but I mean it gives more of the prodding to be quick and not settle back in late as an interruption to others. You should make a poll on the intermission span perhaps. )
Yes indeed. If a movie gets to be around 2.5 hours or more, build in an intermission with some nice music. Most of my favorite longer films have built-in intermissions, such as Ben-Hur
back in the 90s & 2000s, any movie over 2hrs and something got an intermission. Even if it's just 10 minutes it helps. When I went to see Avatar 2 last year I was foolishly drinking beverages during the movie so missed bits from having to go peepee. The second time I watched it I chose to withstand a few hours of dehydration in order to not miss any bits. A long movie if not properly edited can feel like a marathon, and a break in the middle is much appreciated. However I think intermissions might have been done away with due to people being on their phones these days whenever they're not immediately occupied
One of many countries to keep them! In the video I mention how they're common practice in countries around the world, but only single out India specifically because it'd take too long to name them all! Goes to show that it's by no means an unusual idea - we used to have them, lots of countries still do - so why not bring them back?
Intermission can be a great storytelling device and fit perfectly in most movies. Just use it after the midpoint when most stories reveal an important twist, use it as a cliffhanger and let the audiences wonder for 10 minutes about what's gonna happen. Instead of distracting the audience, a well-executed intermission can boost their engagement.
I've been saying this probably for around 4+ years, when the 3rd Avengers movie and others continued the block of big studio movies being too long for a comfortable single stretch. To me, anything above 2.5 hours should have an intermission. Even if someone CAN hold it in, it doesn't mean it's comfortable or they're enjoying their time waiting. A person sitting in discomfort, waiting for it to get done, will certainly rate the movie lower and have a lesser view on whether it was "worth it." When I want to go see a movie I intentionally do not go out to dinner beforehand like I used to, and deny the movie theater concessions, just to avoid having to use the restroom during what could suddenly be a great part of the movie when I go out the doors. Some movies I have skipped entirely due to their length and/or my proximity to when I've eaten, knowing they do not have an intermission. And last, saying "people binge watch for hours at home" is not a good argument from these film creators. At home, there is a major difference: I have a pause button. I go when I have to, and I know I won't miss anything.
I grewup in India so intermissions were norm for me. So when I moved abroad and went to movie it was utter shock that you have to watch whole movie in one sitting. I had so much fun discussing 1st half with my friends in the break.
The Intermission idea worked for the musical movies in particular back then because they for the most part were Broadway adaptations (London West End in the case of Oliver!) which by their very nature had a pre built intermission point in them to start with.
one of my favorite theatrical experiences was the Road Show version of The Hateful Eight, which had an intermission. Gave me time to go use the bathroom and get some snacks and reset. It also stopped on a cliffhanger, so it really built-in the thought-provoking heightened state. I still have the play bill from that movie, and I think the intermission made the experience more memory.
Why add an intermission in a 3.5h film, when you could split it into two 2h films (with a little bit of padding thrown in) and make twice as much in sales?
As someone who occasionally goes to theatre/opera/musicals etc intermissions feel like a good idea to me. So long as the original work is made with intervals in mind, it won't feel awkward at all. In fact, it can sometimes help a narrative experience because the intermission in a play or musical will often serve as a punctuation to an important scene AND an in-story time-skip, with the second act sometimes taking place months or years after the first act.
The idea of an atmospheric and/or musical intermission makes so much sense. Makes for a better theatre experience, and you could make it skippable when it goes to streaming
Not only would I like to see the return of intermissions, I would also like to see the return of epics. Sure, we get long movies now, but we rarely get films that have both the epic LENGTH and SCOPE of movies like Lawrence of Arabia, Ben-Hur, The Ten Commandments or Gone with the Wind.
I totally get that (Oppenheimer is a great example of enjoying the build of the story) but this for me is why it's important that the film-makers choose where to place the break, so as not to disrupt that. Obviously shorter, tighter movies don't need intermissions at all but I think most longer films would not suffer from having a break at a natural lull in the story. Each to their own though.
Totally agree that intermissions are necessary for longer movies, and that they should be built-in to the film. Lawrence of Arabia stands out as having a well-placed intermission wrapping up his ascendancy in part one, and chronicling his downfall in part two.
I actually had a break on my showing of return of the king when it came out in cinemas, they actually did need to change the film reel xD it was the only time I've ever seen that happen. Nowadays I mostly watch movies at home now, I still give them my full attention and prep for it to make it in one go, but sometimes taking a tiny break is still needed, and if I had to go to a cinema and the bladder would call at some point, it would surely be a grueling experience without an intermission lol
I was born in 1982 so yeah...intermissions mid-film were before my time. When I was a kid, cinema chains inserted an intermission between the ads/trailers and the main film. Now it's simply a matter of "guess the right time to go to the toilet". I would want to know ahead of time though that an intermission was part of the film.
There is intermission in most all cinema screenings in Iceland. And its always jarring, but I never thought anything of it and thought it was the rule elsewhere as well.
*I think a rule in theater distributions should be like..* *-If a film exceeds a runtime of two and a half hours the filmmakers are obligated to put an intermission Or..* *-if a film exceeds two and a half hours and the filmmakers don't put in an intermission then theaters are allowed to put an intermission themselves where they see fit*
Roger Corman did nothing wrong. He's still kicking so maybe he can give us a Corman fan edit of Killers of the Flower Moon - 87 minutes long, 5 explosions, 2 shower scenes, so good I'd watch it 3 times in a row with no intermission
Here in belgium its still perfectly common for movies without intermission just shove an intermission in. When i saw dune, i did so twice, and i thought there was a fire because the second time it just...stopped. first time no intermission
I stopped hoing to theaters, for a few reasons, but this is a big one. The mid-movie bathroom shuffle is annoying whether you are the one getting up, or the one seated getting "the view". Maybe if they bring back intermissions and learn how to better ventilate theaters so I'm not sucking in covid through a cloud of farts, I might actually consider going back.
Would love to see intermissions make a come back for longer films. Even the short ones had them when I was a kid 😀 question: at 2:23 what film is that clip from? It’s driving me nuts!! 😅
i did have to leave once or twice in killers of the flower moon, i dont think i missed too much but i was watching trying to decide when to leave until i couldnt stay in the theatre any more
I 100% agree, I like the intermission in theatre to discuss the show so far with the people im with. Maybe they have insights or thoughts I should also explore in the second half. Great video, I've been saying the same thing for years now!
partially a planning problem on my part, I guess, but oppenheimer's last 20 minutes was just me needing to go and that's just tied to my experience of the film now so...
Different for everyone. For me three hours is the limit, and any longer an interval is needed (e.g I don't think Oppenheimer NEEDED one but it would have been nice to have.) Again it should be left up to the filmmaker to judge the length and pacing of the story and whether one is necessary for the audiences to remain invested, like Hitchcock said.
@@PentexProductions Maybe have particular sessions that include one and others that don't. With the filmmakers input and permission of course. But solely and most importantly I think it should be a Director's call.
$horter run time$ = More $howings, for the $tudio$, not the Theater$. I'm just old enough (and have shocked my mother by recalling things from when I was a 2 y.o.) to remember Intermissions. Right before the Multiplexes (MP's). 1 HUGE theater (think IMAX, but the screen is turned sideways, not as tall), 2 movies (1st the premier, 2nd an older movie or "B" movie). Popcorn & soda, movie (I want to say if less than an hour & 1/2, no intermission), Intermission (10-15 minutes?), bathroom break, more popcorn & soda (or pretzel, nachos, hotdogs, candies, etc.), find your seat, finish movie. 10 minute break between movies and repeat for the 2nd movie. If you came in 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, 3/4 of one of the movies, you would stay until you got caught up (they would repeat the same 2 movies all night). These theaters could seat 200 (?), with a Large (about 1.5 - 1.75) size screens that we are used to today, in MP's (have to fit more $creen$ for more $howing$). I lived in Los Angeles. I remember the local MP (4 screens), renovated and went to 12 screens! Mind blown! My 2 favorites, "old" screen theaters, closed down. 1 turned into a clothing store (multiple stores inside). The 2nd one, my favorite, not as big as the 1st, but still big, had 2 screens, but they were the same layouts, main floor, 2nd floor and actual side balconies, classic architecture and details, was shuttered for a long time and finally knocked down, now a dirt lot. I remember when it was usually me and my dad, he would take me to the "scary" movies. I saw kujo, children of the corn, etc.. Sorry, trip down Memory lane. Now, when I feel like there is a movie worth spending time and money (big screen at home, internet and ALL the conveniences), I'll go to the real IMAX (HUGE screen, Awesome sound, not the smaller, neutered imax, look up the differences) and just get a Medium popcorn, with a SMALL soda (trying to avoid the pee break). Only BIG Directors can DEMAND intermissions and have the $tudios give in. So big I'll jut use their last names and you will know who I am talking about, like Nolan, Tarantino, Spielberg, Scoresese. Theaters will $upport. They get a percentage of the ticket$, but get ALL of the conce$$ion$. Agreed that a great story will make a long movie time fly by and I'm sure, as some stats were shown in this video, that Directors WANT to tell their stories, not the cut/edited versions that we get in theaters, wait about 10 years and finally get the "director's cut".
I usually go to the bathroom or just into the lobby during movies over two hours, to give myself a little intermission. Yes, I will miss something, so I usually do it during a long fight scene or something like that. It would be nice if there was an intermission so I didn't have to miss anything, however!
Patton needed three hours but some of these movies really be padding it out. Whenever I think of a movie that moves and tells a great story I think of a fistful of dollars which is 90 minutes
I need intermissions not just because of bathroom breaks, but because of just how UNCOMFORTABLE it is to sit for 3+ hours 😭 by the 2 1/2 hour mark I start getting restless legs and I’m totally removed from the immersion of a movie cause all I can think about is how I need to stand up and stretch lol
You know why Killers of the Flower Moon didn't win a single Oscar? It had no intermission, meaning people couldn't get past the length to see and respect Lily Gladstone's performance or Scott George and the Osage Nation's song.
As a Muslim, we have timed mandatory prayers a couple of times a day, and KOTFM was so long that I genuinely had to get up and pray in the theater (it was basically empty, and me and the people with me did it in shifts so that we could fill each other in on what we'd missed). Ten minute break in the middle would've been nice lol, but it didn't affect my (extremely positive) opinion of the movie.
When Scorsese (or was it Schoonmaker) came out with that line before the film was released, saying that cinemas should not put an intermission in, I said to myself, would they prefer we miss 5 minutes while we go to the loo? Mad
maybe they should have timers, so people know the amount of time they have until the intermission is over and they could probably be edited out for streaming and physical releases
I love longer films if the pacing is great but I am one who has bladder problems these days due to a medical condition which is why I might have to give Killers of the Flower Moon on the big screen a miss this time so if there are gonna be moore 3 plus hour Films then we need the return of the intermission
Great breakdown - being so respectful and supportive of audiences, art and even the cinemas. And seeing those great examples makes it really easy to see this working. However, is there a line when a movie becomes objectively too long? Would a 5 hour movie with 2 intermissions be reasonable? If a movie is so long that watching it in one sitting is literally putting your health at risk then a line has already been crossed. Granting the audience a moment of relief is a band-aid solution to a foundational problem. Stories should certainly be as short or long as they need to be, but movies should have a limit. If a story exceeds that limit, make it two movies or pick a different medium. Sorry - don't mean to take my frustration out on this friendly penguin. Great video all the same!
Going into this video, I was against the idea of a planned intermission in the cinema. However, you have convinced me that it may not be such a bad idea. Especially if they do it in a way which doesn't impact story and keeps the audience immersed, like in the example of the house in the rain you gave for KOTFM. Definitely not an excuse for advertisments to be shown.
I have a bad case of ADDH. It's not getting any better with age. 😉 I want 3 hours and more productions. But to be enjoyable for a 3 hours sitting it have to be some kind of epic masterpiece of the decade... Attendance is fleeting. Make those tickets pay.
I went to see a theatre show a few years ago and took the opportunity to walk out completely. If I had left earlier it could've been disruptive to people. Handy get out chance
The first time I became aware of intermissions was at home watching The Godfather, it works perfectly in that movie and I think your video makes a great point on why 3 hours or even 2 and a half hour movies should all have intermissions
![[UNCUT] "เสรีพิศุทธ์" แฉยับ! งัดหลักฐานใหม่ชั้น 14 ได้นอนคุกสมใจแน่!! I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ I 2 ก.ย.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/O1SSg4p9Izs/mqdefault.jpg)
What do we think? Time to bring back intermissions?
Yes! You did an amazing job with this video on intermissions! Fantastic work you always put together. I loved Intermissions! Last time I recall seeing one was during an extended screening of "Its A Mad ,Mad, Mad World". I am very much in favor of the intermission for long films. Plus the fact that if done well, it becomes an artistic part to the film itself.
if that would be the case, I think there should be a timer on the screen too, just so I know how much time I have left of the break
As a filmmaker in the making, I would keep it in mind for the next generation of cinema, plus we do need around a 10 minute break of a 3 hour runtime, 7 mins for a under 2 hour runtime
I'm 100% with you on that
yes.
Your insertion of teh intermission into the Rain scene in Killers of the Flower Moon was PERFECT! That scene would be amazing with a longer rain atmosphere
"Just be still."
@@PentexProductions I am sorry but a disagree ... if a film is over 3 hours , or even 4 hours long , cinemas should do intermissions regardless , if the studio isn't happy with it. people might need to go to the toilet., or stretch their legs. Intermissions should be brought back but only for films that are very long. They were used up until 1982
I've definitely been having this discussion with friends as of late. Aside from bathrooms, it also lets people check their phones, stretch, chat about what they've seen.
One thing you addressed was the challenge for the multiplex. I used to think that was too much of a logistic challenge, but luckily (at least where I live) all the multiplex theatres are now reserved seating, so you don't really need to fear people sneaking in or taking your seat.
I would add:
- countdown clock
- disclaimer before the film about intermission; enjoy a stretch, more snacks, returning to same assigned seats, etc.
- an usher in the theatre during intermission, mainly towards the end and a few minutes into the second half, just to make sure there's no issues (ie so someone doesn't have to come out to the lobby to find staff)
- maybe bring a cart of general snacks for people that don't want to go stand in line in the lobby (I've seen theatres do this before regular shows).
A belief that I hold very firmly is that having an intermission only immerses the viewer more for the exact reasons you listed; Having a break and talking about the first half, basically building hype for the second. When I watched Lawrence of Arabia for the first time with a friend, we actually had a larger break. We talked and went to get something to eat. That way, the whole thing turned into much more than just "watching a movie". It has become a very fond memory and we plan to do this more often with other epics. Dedicating an entire afternoon and evening to this kind of thing just makes it so special.
the 15-30 minutes of ads before a movie is actually something ive come to really appreciate. If your running behind or maybe just on time for your movie, getting popcorn and snacks are no longer stressful because you just miss some ads. And they often play full trailers which I actually quite enjoy, given they are in big screen quality.
I agree that it's nice to have a buffer at the start - though when my seat is in the middle of a full row of people that I have to scooch past it makes it less fun!
@@PentexProductions solo front row, best seat in the house and no one ever sits in them
You don't remember a time when people bought a ticket and went to find seats in the theater that weren't already occupied. That was a reason not to come in late; you wouldn't find a good seat anymore. I did that at a movie some years ago and a few minutes after the movie started, some people came in and said we were sitting in their seats. And asked us to move! Well, find some other seat that no one's in yet. You're late.
@@speeta in the world of electronic tickets and seat selection that is indeed how it works. You don't need to show up early, you need to book early to get the seats you want. There is no rush to get to your seat or save them while someone else gets popcorn.
@@garthvater You don't even have to make an effort to be seated before the movie starts anymore; that's the difference. I wouldn't have minded moving earlier, but now the theater's dark and the opening credits are over and the dialogue has begun. Would you get up and move for this latecomer when you're already a few minutes into the un-pausable film that you haven't seen before?
During the screening of Flower Moon people stood up all the time to head for the bathroom - and when they returned the person next to them filled in with what they just missed, no matter if they knew them or not. You had a bit of a community feeling in there, and it was a great atmosphere to be in there and a lovely cinema experience. Only for the first 2 1/2 hours or so though. After that you noticed that the movie was beginning to slowly lose its audience, including me, because it was just too much to watch in one go, and a quick rush to the bathroom while the film is playing just isn't the same as a natural break to get some air for a bit and process what you have seen so far.
Great freaking opening montage 😂 and then "some of my best friends are long movies"??? I'm cackling
It was a pain to edit but I'm VERY happy with how it turned out.
The irony of not accommodating people needing the bathroom in a film called The Way of Water
Thanks to an unknown illness I've been disabled for just over 3 years now. My wife and I want to see this movie but I can't physically sit for long enough to watch it. We'll have to wait until we can watch it at home where I can take a break every 60-90 minutes. But if there was an intermission at the halfway point I could probably see the movie in theaters.
It really is an accessibility thing as much as anything for exactly this - lots of people can't sit that long for various medical reasons. Everyone should welcome intermissions!
Yes. Oh god, please... PLEASE BRING THEM BACK. I have held myself from pissing my pants so many times throughout the years that I'm sure I already have done irreparable damage to my bladder.
As I get older and my bladder gets smaller every time I go to a theater I now play the game of missing 5 minutes of the movie or finding relief. Also, I was one who hunger striked Oppenheimer. I heard how long it was, and I watched it in full IMAX. No way I was going to leave.
I assume all these old auteurs have some Hollywood semi-legal bladder medication to enable them to watch their own films.
I loved Killers of the Flower Moon, and I made it the whole way through in the theater without having to get up for a bathroom break or anything else. I was surprised by how many other people in my theater made it through the whole way too, it was a really good audience. But I would've been totally fine with an intermission. If a movie is over 3 hours, it should probably have one, or maybe don't play a half hour of trailers before the movie starts.
Agree - my theatre was pretty good too (everyone came prepared!) but it was also half empty. I think the length turned a lot of people away from buying a ticket (my other half included!) I'm sure everyone would have appreciated a break.
i peed right before oppenheimer and i was able to make it to the credits but as soon as the lights went up i RAN to the bathroom
Intermission would be great. Have a "screen saver" from the movie with the words Intermission and also have a clock countdown. Churches do this all the time with their pre-service countdown.
Countdown clock is important!
As an Indian, I am glad that our directors still keep an interval block for their films in the 1h30m or so mark, sometimes earlier depending on the length. And it has led to some of our Indian Cinema's strongest scenes, see films like Vikram, RRR, Leo, Jawan and Animal as an example. They have some strongly written and choreographed interval blocks.
Give me some examples before 2020s!?!?
I can still hear: "Let's all go to the lobby" from my childhood drive-in experiences.
Great video and fantastic intro. I agree that if intermissions become a thing, the filmmakers should design how and when they happen.
It's crazy how they used to be such a normal part of movies but have almost totally vanished, and even old-school film-makers like Scorsese are resisting putting them in. I'd have thought they'd see it as a chance to bring back some of the old magic, and also do something a bit creative. I'll keep dreaming!
Film makers and film bros have an INMENSE disrespect for casual audiences, the fact that Scorcese truly thinks that people asks for intermissions in disrecspect and not because they need to pee is absolute self centered
Totally agree. It's not about attention spans or not respecting the artform, it's about physical discomfort.
I thought Killers of the Flower Moon was great.
…but at some point my butt hurt.
As a fan of musicals I’m always a fan of intermissions
Hope you liked the little Hamilton clips (I can HEAR that line delivery whenever I watch it).
The first time I went to the movies was for a double feature of _101 Dalmatians_ and _Mr. Hobbs Takes a Vacation._ The management put in intermissions for both movies. At run times of 79 and 116 minutes respectively, you would think intermissions wouldn't be necessary, but this was a double bill aimed at children, and children have child-sized bladders. Those intermissions, along with theater ushers, loge seating, shorts such as an opening cartoon, and cry rooms made going to the movies an experience that modern audiences will never get to experience.
I've been thinking this for a while now. We watched The Sound of Music over Christmas, and not only did the intermission aid an emotional climax, it gave us a chance to heat up the Christmas pudding and use the bathroom (which I'd needed to do for a while) it would be so nice if they brought this back
Sound of Music is a great Christmas movie.
Only had 2 intermissions in a theater
Return of the King
Grindhouse
Honestly I’m so glad for the Grindhouse one, death proof would have been very hard to endure if I hadn’t taken a break
Tarantino delivering the goods!
Hateful Eight didn't have an intermission?
I've been screaming from the rooftops about this for at least a year now. I am glad that I am not alone in this.
The last movie I recall with a Intermission was "Gods and Generals" (2003). It was a brutally long movie and then it just said Intermission and then faded to black. No words saying intermission just a stop for 15 mins. People didn't know this and were pissed.
Probably one of the many reasons it bombed...
. People at screenings of Grindhouse left during Planet Terror's end credits because they didn't realise it was a Doublr Bill!
The only movie I've ever been to that had an intermission was Gettysburg (Maxwell's earlier film). I recall the intermission being well received in that case, but I also have some vague feeling that we knew there was going to be an intermission.
8:15 I remember seeing "Gods and Generals" in theaters in the early 2000's and it had an intermission. Only time I ever experienced one.
Lol, just looked up the box office results, that movie bombed.
Not even an intermission can save a bad movie!
Definitely agree. When I know I’m going to the cinema I won’t drink all day in preparation so I don’t have to leave for a break half way through.
Near the end of the video I mention that we shouldn't need to go on mini-hunger strikes just to enjoy a movie! I'd love not to have to be monitoring my hydration all day leading up to a movie night!
In India, every film would have an intermission.
For Hollywood films, the theaters just pause the film at some point in the middle. And people walk out to get some popcorn or cola.
12:09 THIS
and
12:34 THIS
Yes, oh god, yes.
The DC DVD of kingdom of heaven has an overture, intermission and Entr'acte as well. It all fits together quite well.
Films like Lawrence of Arabia and 2001: A Space Odyssey not only had intermissions, they had overtures. Those were some perfect opportunities to set the tone of the film, while people were still walking into the cinema. Unfortunately, comercials have taken that spot now.
But I think film makers can be a lot more creative in making filler sequences with good visuals and music. Most of that is only shown in the credits nowadays. And if you buy the blu-ray, you should get the option to play the film with or without the intermission.
I love the overture. So many great scores deserve a moment to shine like that.
Here in Switzerland the Cinemas have added intermissions of their own for as long as I can remember, except for when I went to see Oppenheimer, which was a nasty surprise to say the least. But yes, I'd love to see the return of traditional/intentional intermissions.
The question is then, how long should intermissions be at a giant multiplex where there are bound to be lines for the bathroom and concessions?
Also, there should definitely be a countdown clock so audience knows how much time is being allotted.
Agree on the countdown!
I think 10-15 minutes is plenty of time. Lots of stage theatres let you pre-order concessions to be ready for you at the intermission to just pick up, so that'd help manage crowds, and it's enough time for the vast majority of the audience to get through the bathroom (think about what it's like when you finish a movie - a bit of a wait, sure, but you're not in line for 15 minutes).
The issue for multiplexes would be staggering the times of intermissions in different showings so you don't get 2-3 theatres emptying at once, but they already do this for the start and end times.
@@PentexProductions
Yeah I echo those thoughts for how to make smooth breaks that are of adequate duration but yet not too generous as to be tedious for those audience members eager to continue their viewing experience.
There could be scrolling captions in the pre-programme slot of miscellaneous ads as reminders to pre-order additional concessions ahead on the theater App for the intermission period, for those people early enough to observe it.
I wonder if maybe a countdown of 9 minutes might be a good compromise to give people enough opportunity for relieving themselves or refuelling? Psychologically, 9 minutes feels more imminent and urgent than 10 somehow. Well... I suppose it actually indeed is, but I mean it gives more of the prodding to be quick and not settle back in late as an interruption to others.
You should make a poll on the intermission span perhaps. )
Yes indeed. If a movie gets to be around 2.5 hours or more, build in an intermission with some nice music. Most of my favorite longer films have built-in intermissions, such as Ben-Hur
That intro was fucking immaculately edited what the hell
It took a ridiculous amount of time but I'm very happy with it.
The best contribution to 'intermission discourse' I've seen so far!
I'll take that!
YES!!!! OH MY GAWD. This is the main reason i dont watch movies in the theater anymore.
back in the 90s & 2000s, any movie over 2hrs and something got an intermission. Even if it's just 10 minutes it helps. When I went to see Avatar 2 last year I was foolishly drinking beverages during the movie so missed bits from having to go peepee. The second time I watched it I chose to withstand a few hours of dehydration in order to not miss any bits. A long movie if not properly edited can feel like a marathon, and a break in the middle is much appreciated. However I think intermissions might have been done away with due to people being on their phones these days whenever they're not immediately occupied
"Killers of the Flower Moon's" greatest achievement is to Bring Back discussions of Intermissions.
Which is a shame, really, because there are some much deeper questions raised by that film. Yet here we are.
Me laughing in Belgian.
Intermissions are a common thing in Belgium. You get strange looks when a movie doesn't have an intermission.
One of many countries to keep them! In the video I mention how they're common practice in countries around the world, but only single out India specifically because it'd take too long to name them all! Goes to show that it's by no means an unusual idea - we used to have them, lots of countries still do - so why not bring them back?
Intermission can be a great storytelling device and fit perfectly in most movies. Just use it after the midpoint when most stories reveal an important twist, use it as a cliffhanger and let the audiences wonder for 10 minutes about what's gonna happen. Instead of distracting the audience, a well-executed intermission can boost their engagement.
I've been saying this probably for around 4+ years, when the 3rd Avengers movie and others continued the block of big studio movies being too long for a comfortable single stretch. To me, anything above 2.5 hours should have an intermission. Even if someone CAN hold it in, it doesn't mean it's comfortable or they're enjoying their time waiting. A person sitting in discomfort, waiting for it to get done, will certainly rate the movie lower and have a lesser view on whether it was "worth it."
When I want to go see a movie I intentionally do not go out to dinner beforehand like I used to, and deny the movie theater concessions, just to avoid having to use the restroom during what could suddenly be a great part of the movie when I go out the doors. Some movies I have skipped entirely due to their length and/or my proximity to when I've eaten, knowing they do not have an intermission.
And last, saying "people binge watch for hours at home" is not a good argument from these film creators. At home, there is a major difference: I have a pause button. I go when I have to, and I know I won't miss anything.
I grewup in India so intermissions were norm for me. So when I moved abroad and went to movie it was utter shock that you have to watch whole movie in one sitting. I had so much fun discussing 1st half with my friends in the break.
The Intermission idea worked for the musical movies in particular back then because they for the most part were Broadway adaptations (London West End in the case of Oliver!) which by their very nature had a pre built intermission point in them to start with.
love the concept of diegetic intermissions. great video.
one of my favorite theatrical experiences was the Road Show version of The Hateful Eight, which had an intermission. Gave me time to go use the bathroom and get some snacks and reset. It also stopped on a cliffhanger, so it really built-in the thought-provoking heightened state. I still have the play bill from that movie, and I think the intermission made the experience more memory.
I'd love to see a proper roadshow screening of The Hateful Eight. Very envious you got that experience.
Why add an intermission in a 3.5h film, when you could split it into two 2h films (with a little bit of padding thrown in) and make twice as much in sales?
As someone who occasionally goes to theatre/opera/musicals etc intermissions feel like a good idea to me. So long as the original work is made with intervals in mind, it won't feel awkward at all. In fact, it can sometimes help a narrative experience because the intermission in a play or musical will often serve as a punctuation to an important scene AND an in-story time-skip, with the second act sometimes taking place months or years after the first act.
The idea of an atmospheric and/or musical intermission makes so much sense. Makes for a better theatre experience, and you could make it skippable when it goes to streaming
Not only would I like to see the return of intermissions, I would also like to see the return of epics. Sure, we get long movies now, but we rarely get films that have both the epic LENGTH and SCOPE of movies like Lawrence of Arabia, Ben-Hur, The Ten Commandments or Gone with the Wind.
ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA HAD A INTERMISSION
*stands up*
👏 👏 👏 👏 👏
"Science fiction double feature" (Richard O'Brien). Double features of shorter movies. Intermissions in longer movies. Bring them back!
No! I like the seamless flow without intermissions!
I totally get that (Oppenheimer is a great example of enjoying the build of the story) but this for me is why it's important that the film-makers choose where to place the break, so as not to disrupt that. Obviously shorter, tighter movies don't need intermissions at all but I think most longer films would not suffer from having a break at a natural lull in the story. Each to their own though.
Totally agree that intermissions are necessary for longer movies, and that they should be built-in to the film. Lawrence of Arabia stands out as having a well-placed intermission wrapping up his ascendancy in part one, and chronicling his downfall in part two.
I actually had a break on my showing of return of the king when it came out in cinemas, they actually did need to change the film reel xD it was the only time I've ever seen that happen. Nowadays I mostly watch movies at home now, I still give them my full attention and prep for it to make it in one go, but sometimes taking a tiny break is still needed, and if I had to go to a cinema and the bladder would call at some point, it would surely be a grueling experience without an intermission lol
Well it's litreally a law to have an intermission and the film industry incooparate that intermission thing into a scene in their theatrical release.
The original theatrical release of Branagh’s Hamlet (1996) had an intermission - but at a tick over four hours there needed to be one.
Also reflects the fact that there is an intermission in the actual play (as there should be).
I was born in 1982 so yeah...intermissions mid-film were before my time. When I was a kid, cinema chains inserted an intermission between the ads/trailers and the main film. Now it's simply a matter of "guess the right time to go to the toilet". I would want to know ahead of time though that an intermission was part of the film.
Amen!!!
*as a guy who enjoys playing hour long videos of sounds of Rain*
*I like the idea of thunderstorm intermission*
😌😌🌧️🌧️
when i go to see a movie i expect no breaks, this ain't a tv show, plus they would pump it full of ads
There is intermission in most all cinema screenings in Iceland. And its always jarring, but I never thought anything of it and thought it was the rule elsewhere as well.
*I think a rule in theater distributions should be like..*
*-If a film exceeds a runtime of two and a half hours the filmmakers are obligated to put an intermission Or..*
*-if a film exceeds two and a half hours and the filmmakers don't put in an intermission then theaters are allowed to put an intermission themselves where they see fit*
Fuck that. Bring back 90-minute movies.
Roger Corman did nothing wrong. He's still kicking so maybe he can give us a Corman fan edit of Killers of the Flower Moon - 87 minutes long, 5 explosions, 2 shower scenes, so good I'd watch it 3 times in a row with no intermission
@@dudekidhairwhite Hey, if it's good it's good. Fa sho.
th-cam.com/video/-UKbwz6s6VY/w-d-xo.html
Here in belgium its still perfectly common for movies without intermission just shove an intermission in. When i saw dune, i did so twice, and i thought there was a fire because the second time it just...stopped. first time no intermission
Maybe use the intermission to play the credits?
Totally agree, everything above 3,30h should have Intermissions!
I stopped hoing to theaters, for a few reasons, but this is a big one. The mid-movie bathroom shuffle is annoying whether you are the one getting up, or the one seated getting "the view". Maybe if they bring back intermissions and learn how to better ventilate theaters so I'm not sucking in covid through a cloud of farts, I might actually consider going back.
Would love to see intermissions make a come back for longer films. Even the short ones had them when I was a kid 😀 question: at 2:23 what film is that clip from? It’s driving me nuts!! 😅
The one with Margot Robbie? Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
@@PentexProductionsbingo, thank you!
i did have to leave once or twice in killers of the flower moon, i dont think i missed too much but i was watching trying to decide when to leave until i couldnt stay in the theatre any more
I 100% agree, I like the intermission in theatre to discuss the show so far with the people im with. Maybe they have insights or thoughts I should also explore in the second half. Great video, I've been saying the same thing for years now!
10000%
I either don't drink anything halfway into the movie or I have to sit and hold it. esp as so many movies are 2.5-3h long now.
partially a planning problem on my part, I guess, but oppenheimer's last 20 minutes was just me needing to go and that's just tied to my experience of the film now so...
This is such a well thought out and justified argument. Huge thank you from the bladders of the world!! ❤️
So what is the optimal total movie length that when exceeded needs an intermission? 2.5 hrs? 3 hrs?
Different for everyone. For me three hours is the limit, and any longer an interval is needed (e.g I don't think Oppenheimer NEEDED one but it would have been nice to have.) Again it should be left up to the filmmaker to judge the length and pacing of the story and whether one is necessary for the audiences to remain invested, like Hitchcock said.
@@PentexProductions Maybe have particular sessions that include one and others that don't. With the filmmakers input and permission of course. But solely and most importantly I think it should be a Director's call.
$horter run time$ = More $howings, for the $tudio$, not the Theater$. I'm just old enough (and have shocked my mother by recalling things from when I was a 2 y.o.) to remember Intermissions. Right before the Multiplexes (MP's). 1 HUGE theater (think IMAX, but the screen is turned sideways, not as tall), 2 movies (1st the premier, 2nd an older movie or "B" movie). Popcorn & soda, movie (I want to say if less than an hour & 1/2, no intermission), Intermission (10-15 minutes?), bathroom break, more popcorn & soda (or pretzel, nachos, hotdogs, candies, etc.), find your seat, finish movie. 10 minute break between movies and repeat for the 2nd movie. If you came in 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, 3/4 of one of the movies, you would stay until you got caught up (they would repeat the same 2 movies all night). These theaters could seat 200 (?), with a Large (about 1.5 - 1.75) size screens that we are used to today, in MP's (have to fit more $creen$ for more $howing$). I lived in Los Angeles. I remember the local MP (4 screens), renovated and went to 12 screens! Mind blown! My 2 favorites, "old" screen theaters, closed down. 1 turned into a clothing store (multiple stores inside). The 2nd one, my favorite, not as big as the 1st, but still big, had 2 screens, but they were the same layouts, main floor, 2nd floor and actual side balconies, classic architecture and details, was shuttered for a long time and finally knocked down, now a dirt lot. I remember when it was usually me and my dad, he would take me to the "scary" movies. I saw kujo, children of the corn, etc.. Sorry, trip down Memory lane.
Now, when I feel like there is a movie worth spending time and money (big screen at home, internet and ALL the conveniences), I'll go to the real IMAX (HUGE screen, Awesome sound, not the smaller, neutered imax, look up the differences) and just get a Medium popcorn, with a SMALL soda (trying to avoid the pee break).
Only BIG Directors can DEMAND intermissions and have the $tudios give in. So big I'll jut use their last names and you will know who I am talking about, like Nolan, Tarantino, Spielberg, Scoresese. Theaters will $upport. They get a percentage of the ticket$, but get ALL of the conce$$ion$. Agreed that a great story will make a long movie time fly by and I'm sure, as some stats were shown in this video, that Directors WANT to tell their stories, not the cut/edited versions that we get in theaters, wait about 10 years and finally get the "director's cut".
I usually go to the bathroom or just into the lobby during movies over two hours, to give myself a little intermission. Yes, I will miss something, so I usually do it during a long fight scene or something like that. It would be nice if there was an intermission so I didn't have to miss anything, however!
I loved that Asteroid City had an intermission
Patton needed three hours but some of these movies really be padding it out. Whenever I think of a movie that moves and tells a great story I think of a fistful of dollars which is 90 minutes
I need intermissions not just because of bathroom breaks, but because of just how UNCOMFORTABLE it is to sit for 3+ hours 😭 by the 2 1/2 hour mark I start getting restless legs and I’m totally removed from the immersion of a movie cause all I can think about is how I need to stand up and stretch lol
You know why Killers of the Flower Moon didn't win a single Oscar? It had no intermission, meaning people couldn't get past the length to see and respect Lily Gladstone's performance or Scott George and the Osage Nation's song.
With intermissions i would buy popcorn or a drink. Without i dont
As a Muslim, we have timed mandatory prayers a couple of times a day, and KOTFM was so long that I genuinely had to get up and pray in the theater (it was basically empty, and me and the people with me did it in shifts so that we could fill each other in on what we'd missed). Ten minute break in the middle would've been nice lol, but it didn't affect my (extremely positive) opinion of the movie.
When Scorsese (or was it Schoonmaker) came out with that line before the film was released, saying that cinemas should not put an intermission in, I said to myself, would they prefer we miss 5 minutes while we go to the loo? Mad
maybe they should have timers, so people know the amount of time they have until the intermission is over
and they could probably be edited out for streaming and physical releases
I love longer films if the pacing is great but I am one who has bladder problems these days due to a medical condition which is why I might have to give Killers of the Flower Moon on the big screen a miss this time so if there are gonna be moore 3 plus hour Films then we need the return of the intermission
You're not the only one with medical reasons to need an interval - you shouldn't need to miss out bits of a film for that.
i'm seeing it today. at which part can i take my own intermission?
Great breakdown - being so respectful and supportive of audiences, art and even the cinemas. And seeing those great examples makes it really easy to see this working.
However, is there a line when a movie becomes objectively too long? Would a 5 hour movie with 2 intermissions be reasonable? If a movie is so long that watching it in one sitting is literally putting your health at risk then a line has already been crossed. Granting the audience a moment of relief is a band-aid solution to a foundational problem. Stories should certainly be as short or long as they need to be, but movies should have a limit. If a story exceeds that limit, make it two movies or pick a different medium.
Sorry - don't mean to take my frustration out on this friendly penguin. Great video all the same!
Going into this video, I was against the idea of a planned intermission in the cinema. However, you have convinced me that it may not be such a bad idea. Especially if they do it in a way which doesn't impact story and keeps the audience immersed, like in the example of the house in the rain you gave for KOTFM. Definitely not an excuse for advertisments to be shown.
I have a bad case of ADDH. It's not getting any better with age. 😉
I want 3 hours and more productions. But to be enjoyable for a 3 hours sitting it have to be some kind of epic masterpiece of the decade...
Attendance is fleeting. Make those tickets pay.
Watched Killers of The Flower Moon the other week, my showing actually had an interval/intermission, I was incredibly glad for it.
Love love love the intro... 😂😅
And let's refer to them as smoke breaks
Scorsese isn't my favorite director and his lack of consideration for film goers isn't winning him any points.
My god I miss intermissions, I been going on about it for years
Couldn’t agree more!
yaa we need Intermissions back!
I went to see a theatre show a few years ago and took the opportunity to walk out completely. If I had left earlier it could've been disruptive to people. Handy get out chance
they could make it so one room has intermission and one does not so they see if it works
The first time I became aware of intermissions was at home watching The Godfather, it works perfectly in that movie and I think your video makes a great point on why 3 hours or even 2 and a half hour movies should all have intermissions