Better At Home?

The general attitude is that you don’t want people watching your film at home if you can help it. Too many distractions, too easy to pause or fast forward. You want them fully engaged in a theatre, staying with it, in it. But I felt a bit distracted when I saw In A World in a theatre, and I’m wondering if this is the kind of film that almost plays better on a disc because you can cantake a short break when a sluggish moment happens and then come back to it 20 or 30 minutes later without losing anything. Lord knows that are films that have to be seen in a theatre (Gravity, All Is Lost, 12 Years A Slave), etc. You know that when older Academy members pop in 12 Years A Slave at home they’re just going to fast-forward through the rough parts.

  • JoeS

    Well, if a movie gets that boring that you have take a break and walk around then it ain’t great (saving really long films like BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOR). And, IN A WORLD is a really mild entry no matter the viewing experience. A decent idea, but, bland treatment.

  • scooterzz

    i wokeup at 3am today and couldn’t go back to sleep so watched ‘in a world’ and ‘stories we tell’ back to back…completely engaged, never distracted and never had the feeling that these titles ‘needed’ to be seen in a theater… felt the same way about ‘the way, way back’, ‘mud’ and ‘kings of summer’…

  • berg

    these are not the droids that we are looking for

  • Popped mine in this morning and ran through it without breaks, like Mud, it plays really well at home. Those two may draw a few extra votes because they’re rewatchable and out of the gate early.