首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 领导力 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

新冠疫情或将重塑观影方式

Austin Bunn
2020-10-25

疫情让超级影院“繁荣-萧条”经济模式的脆弱本质暴露无遗。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

2020年4月21日,洛杉矶Vista剧院外景。图片来源:JAY L. CLENDENIN—LOS ANGELES TIMES VIA GETTY IMAGES

与疫情期间蔓延全美的博物馆、音乐厅、剧院关门潮一样,Cineworld关闭美国536家Regal影院,并给4万名员工放无薪假的决定虽然让人感到非常痛苦,但也可以理解。上周情势又进一步恶化,原因是全美最大连锁影院AMC宣布其资金流仅足以支撑至今年年底。

作为一名编剧,由于早年深受《性、谎言与录像带》(Sex, Lies, and Videotape)、《为所应为》(Do the Right Thing)、《魔域煞星》(Dreamscape)等电影的影响,我在书案前度过了无数个改编剧本的日日夜夜。在我看来,美国的观影方式早就应该进行改革,我也希望本次停业潮能够成为一个契机,彻底改变美国人的观影方式。

作为大片时代的产物,超级影院就像飞机机库一样毫无特色和个性可言,一如对我们本能的拙劣妥协。联网家庭影院的音响系统与无限制流媒体服务抢走了影院许多观众,对Regal(美国影院数量第二多的连锁影院集团,仅次于AMC)而言,早在疫情之前,逆转局势、抢回观众便已经成为其刻不容缓的头等大事,而007系列新片的推迟上映(从今年秋季延档至2021年4月)更是成为“压垮骆驼的最后一根稻草”,直接导致Regal宣布停业、放假,这一事件让超级影院“繁荣-萧条”经济模式的脆弱本质暴露无遗,正可谓“眼见他起高楼,眼见他楼塌了”。

连锁影院早已深陷困境之中,我搬到纽约北部时,这里的Regal影院便有小便池与喷泉处于损坏状态,此后八年竟无人修理,其财务拮据程度可见一斑。

作为消费者,无论影院如何,我们都少不了要去看电影。但扪心自问,我们会用同样的态度去对待餐馆或博物馆么?ArcLight、IPIC、Alamo Drafthouse等配备有舒适座椅、食品、成人饮品、专业排片人员的小型影院的出现为未来更好的观影方式指明了方向。

但纽约对想要吸引成年观众的展映商(比如:在伊萨卡深受人们喜爱的本地非营利性影院Cinemapolis)并不友好,现行法律规定,所有提供饮料的店家都必须备有全功能厨房、餐桌服务,并且每个供应酒水的座位都要配有餐桌。(州长两度试图修改法律,但均遭州参议院驳回。)

20世纪40年代末,最高法院在审理一起案件时判定,华纳兄弟、米高梅等电影制作公司不得自有、自营电影院,派拉蒙也接受了相关法令。今年8月,司法部宣布废止此类法令,这一决定标志着一股创新浪潮即将来临。不过我们已经可以猜到这波创新的模样。2019年,迪士尼拿走了全美40%票房,毫无疑问,该公司也将成为这波潮流的引领者,将影院改造成"景点",让观众融入设计精妙的娱乐氛围之中。

但看电影并不仅仅是为了娱乐,更是为了获得那种旅行、探索、感受共鸣、迎接挑战并脱胎换骨的体验。很难想象《月光》(Moonlight)、《请以你的名字呼唤我》(Call Me by Your Name)或《宠儿》(The Favourite)等拥有丰富内涵、精彩绝伦的奥斯卡获奖影片会出现在迪士尼的天幕之上,这种电影需要人们走进影院与亲友一同观看,并就影片中未解答的问题和话题进行大量讨论。更难想象的是上述讨论会出现在迪士尼乐园的蓝海湾餐厅之中。

新冠疫情期间出现的另一种模式或将成为未来的发展方向。

上周我原计划前往多伦多在Inside Out电影节展映一部新的短片,但由于疫情影响,本次电影节只得转为线上举行,所以原本排满两个周末的影片展映、问答及电影制作人共进晚餐环节改为了影片线上售票。这就使得那些没有发行、没有知名演员参演、没有炒作甚至宣发费用、只能够在电影节上看到的电影也得以通过流媒体走入更多观众的视野。我希望在疫情之后,圣丹斯电影节、特柳赖德电影节、戛纳电影节等于偏远之地举办的高标准电影节依然可以沿用这种借助网络进行线上公映的展映方式。

不过这种巧妙方法也有一个问题,就是人们不再需要前往影院观影,而如果我们不再像以往那样与他人一同观看电影,那么我们可能也无法感知艺术的强大力量。在《诗学》(Poetics)一书中,亚里士多德认为,宣泄,即通过在观众与角色之间建立深层联系来获得一种净化、重新觉醒的体验,是伟大戏剧最核心的效果。

但在他那个时代既没有Reddit上的StartledCats版块,也没有Oculus Quest。如今在家中观影就如同在音乐厅外听交响乐一样,注意力很容易被分散,几乎不可能达到亚里士多德所推崇的那种感觉深度。

影院是宣泄情绪的最佳环境,但也需要调整自己的态度与品位。电影本身是我们文化的深刻反映,影院也应如此。(财富中文网)

奥斯汀·邦恩是一名编剧,在康奈尔大学的表演与媒体艺术系任副教授。

译者:梁宇

审校:夏林

与疫情期间蔓延全美的博物馆、音乐厅、剧院关门潮一样,Cineworld关闭美国536家Regal影院,并给4万名员工放无薪假的决定虽然让人感到非常痛苦,但也可以理解。上周情势又进一步恶化,原因是全美最大连锁影院AMC宣布其资金流仅足以支撑至今年年底。

作为一名编剧,由于早年深受《性、谎言与录像带》(Sex, Lies, and Videotape)、《为所应为》(Do the Right Thing)、《魔域煞星》(Dreamscape)等电影的影响,我在书案前度过了无数个改编剧本的日日夜夜。在我看来,美国的观影方式早就应该进行改革,我也希望本次停业潮能够成为一个契机,彻底改变美国人的观影方式。

作为大片时代的产物,超级影院就像飞机机库一样毫无特色和个性可言,一如对我们本能的拙劣妥协。联网家庭影院的音响系统与无限制流媒体服务抢走了影院许多观众,对Regal(美国影院数量第二多的连锁影院集团,仅次于AMC)而言,早在疫情之前,逆转局势、抢回观众便已经成为其刻不容缓的头等大事,而007系列新片的推迟上映(从今年秋季延档至2021年4月)更是成为“压垮骆驼的最后一根稻草”,直接导致Regal宣布停业、放假,这一事件让超级影院“繁荣-萧条”经济模式的脆弱本质暴露无遗,正可谓“眼见他起高楼,眼见他楼塌了”。

连锁影院早已深陷困境之中,我搬到纽约北部时,这里的Regal影院便有小便池与喷泉处于损坏状态,此后八年竟无人修理,其财务拮据程度可见一斑。

作为消费者,无论影院如何,我们都少不了要去看电影。但扪心自问,我们会用同样的态度去对待餐馆或博物馆么?ArcLight、IPIC、Alamo Drafthouse等配备有舒适座椅、食品、成人饮品、专业排片人员的小型影院的出现为未来更好的观影方式指明了方向。

但纽约对想要吸引成年观众的展映商(比如:在伊萨卡深受人们喜爱的本地非营利性影院Cinemapolis)并不友好,现行法律规定,所有提供饮料的店家都必须备有全功能厨房、餐桌服务,并且每个供应酒水的座位都要配有餐桌。(州长两度试图修改法律,但均遭州参议院驳回。)

20世纪40年代末,最高法院在审理一起案件时判定,华纳兄弟、米高梅等电影制作公司不得自有、自营电影院,派拉蒙也接受了相关法令。今年8月,司法部宣布废止此类法令,这一决定标志着一股创新浪潮即将来临。不过我们已经可以猜到这波创新的模样。2019年,迪士尼拿走了全美40%票房,毫无疑问,该公司也将成为这波潮流的引领者,将影院改造成"景点",让观众融入设计精妙的娱乐氛围之中。

但看电影并不仅仅是为了娱乐,更是为了获得那种旅行、探索、感受共鸣、迎接挑战并脱胎换骨的体验。很难想象《月光》(Moonlight)、《请以你的名字呼唤我》(Call Me by Your Name)或《宠儿》(The Favourite)等拥有丰富内涵、精彩绝伦的奥斯卡获奖影片会出现在迪士尼的天幕之上,这种电影需要人们走进影院与亲友一同观看,并就影片中未解答的问题和话题进行大量讨论。更难想象的是上述讨论会出现在迪士尼乐园的蓝海湾餐厅之中。

新冠疫情期间出现的另一种模式或将成为未来的发展方向。

上周我原计划前往多伦多在Inside Out电影节展映一部新的短片,但由于疫情影响,本次电影节只得转为线上举行,所以原本排满两个周末的影片展映、问答及电影制作人共进晚餐环节改为了影片线上售票。这就使得那些没有发行、没有知名演员参演、没有炒作甚至宣发费用、只能够在电影节上看到的电影也得以通过流媒体走入更多观众的视野。我希望在疫情之后,圣丹斯电影节、特柳赖德电影节、戛纳电影节等于偏远之地举办的高标准电影节依然可以沿用这种借助网络进行线上公映的展映方式。

不过这种巧妙方法也有一个问题,就是人们不再需要前往影院观影,而如果我们不再像以往那样与他人一同观看电影,那么我们可能也无法感知艺术的强大力量。在《诗学》(Poetics)一书中,亚里士多德认为,宣泄,即通过在观众与角色之间建立深层联系来获得一种净化、重新觉醒的体验,是伟大戏剧最核心的效果。

但在他那个时代既没有Reddit上的StartledCats版块,也没有Oculus Quest。如今在家中观影就如同在音乐厅外听交响乐一样,注意力很容易被分散,几乎不可能达到亚里士多德所推崇的那种感觉深度。

影院是宣泄情绪的最佳环境,但也需要调整自己的态度与品位。电影本身是我们文化的深刻反映,影院也应如此。(财富中文网)

奥斯汀·邦恩是一名编剧,在康奈尔大学的表演与媒体艺术系任副教授。

译者:梁宇

审校:夏林

Like the shuttering of museums, concert halls, and theatrical spaces across the country during the pandemic, Cineworld’s decisionto close all 536 Regal Cinemas in the U.S.—and furlough 40,000 employees—is at once both deeply painful and understandable. The news only got worse last week, as the largest chain, AMC Theatres, announced that it’s facing bankruptcy by the end of the year.

I’m a screenwriter, whose early experiences swept up in the power of movies (Sex, Lies, and Videotape, Do the Right Thing, and, okay fine: Dreamscape) have made me park myself in a chair for untold hours trying to reproduce it. The American way of moviegoing is long overdue for a “page one” rewrite, and I hope that these closures might serve as the inciting incident of a profound transformation in how we experience movies.

Megaplexes, designed during a blockbuster era of moviegoing, resemble airport hangars, with no discernible atmosphere or curatorial imprint, and “concessions” conceding to our worst instincts. Not surprisingly, before COVID, Regal (second in the U.S. in number of theaters only to AMC) was in desperate need to win back audiences from their dialed-in home theater sound systems and infinite streaming options. The fact that one movie getting bumped from this fall to April 2021—the next James Bond—triggered Regal’s announcement reveals the tenuous nature of megaplexes’ boom-or-bust economic model. The dinosaurs got very big before they got very dead.

The plight of chain movie theaters was already serious. The men’s bathroom at the local Regal here in upstate New York has had broken urinals and a broken water fountain since I moved here. How financially strapped—or checked out—do you have to be to let the same urinal go unrepaired for eight years?

As consumers, we’ve been going to the movies almost in spite of the movie theaters themselves. Could you imagine saying the same about a restaurant or a museum? ArcLight, IPIC, and the Alamo Drafthouse phenomenon—plush seating, food, and adult beverages at smaller-scale theaters with actual cinema programmers at the helm—point to a better future of moviegoing.

But here in New York, the current law works against exhibitors—like Ithaca’s beloved local nonprofit Cinemapolis—trying to appeal to grownups. Serving drinks requires having a full kitchen, table service, and a table for every seat where alcohol is being served. (The governor has tried twice to change the law, but it’s been stymied in the State Senate.)

In the late 1940s, the Paramount consent decrees (decided in a Supreme Court case) prohibited movie studios like Warner Bros. and MGM from also owning and operating movie theaters. This August, the Justice Department terminated the decrees, which signals that a wave of innovation might be coming. But we already can guess what it will look like. Disney accounted for 40% of the U.S. box office in 2019, and there’s no doubt it will lead the charge, remaking theaters into “attractions,” enveloping us in highly polished entertainment.

But I don’t just go to the movies to be entertained—I go to travel, discover, empathize, be challenged, and come out changed. It’s difficult to imagine brilliant, visceral Oscar-winners like Moonlight or Call Me by Your Name or The Favourite on the Disney marquee—the kinds of films that demand social viewings, in theaters, followed by rich conversations to explore their unanswered questions and provocations. It’s even more difficult to imagine those conversations happening at Disneyland’s Blue Bayou Restaurant.

There’s another model at work right now, a consequence of COVID, that might prove to be a path forward.

Last week, I was supposed to be in Toronto at the Inside Out film festival, screening a new short film. But because of the pandemic, the festival had to go virtual, so instead of two weekends full of screenings, Q&As, and dinners with filmmakers, the festival released tickets to the films online. This meant that the kinds of films you might ordinarily only see at a film festival—those without distribution, or unknown actors, or simply no hype or marketing budget—were available to stream and take a risk on. I hope that highly selective and remote festivals like Sundance, Telluride, and Cannes can use these kinds of public access screenings even after the pandemic fades.

The only issue is that this smart workaround for movies misses the going part of moviegoing—and when we lose the communal aspect of watching together, we’re at risk of losing the substantial power of the art. In Aristotle’s Poetics, he argues that catharsis is the central effect of great drama—a feeling of purgation and reawakening forged from a deep link between the audience and the protagonist.

But he didn’t have the Startled Cats subreddit or my Oculus Quest to worry about. When we watch at home, when we watch with our attention scissored up by other screens, that amplitude of feeling is next to impossible, like listening to a symphony from outside the concert hall.

Movie theaters are the best environment for catharsis, but they need to respond to shifts in attitudes and taste. Movies themselves deeply reflect our culture. Theaters should as well.

Austin Bunn is a screenwriter and an associate professor in the performing and media arts department at Cornell University.

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开