And so it begins. Whats the point of WWII any more? I will not be searched to go to a freeking movie.
'Dark Knight' massacre could prompt massive, expensive security changes at movie theaters, experts say
By Hollie McKay
Pop Tarts
Published July 23, 2012
FoxNews.com
FILE - In this July 20, 2012 file photo, people walk past a "The Dark Knight Rises," at Regal Cinemas at Crossgates Mall in Albany, N.Y. (AP)
In the wake of Aurora’s tragic ‘Dark Knight Rises' screening massacre, the entertainment industry has been abuzz with speculation and concern about the safety of moviegoers and how this could impact the theater industry long-term.
Stephen Galloway, The Hollywood Reporter’s Executive Features Editor, tells FOX411’s Pop Tarts column that incident will likely cause theater owners to debate stepping up security – which would in turn impact ticket prices, and that in turn could affect movie theater stock.
Meanwhile, Thelma Adams, Yahoo! Movies contributing editor questioned why all cinema guests can’t be “bag-checked and wanded” the same way critics and the press are prior to advanced screenings.
But such measures come at a cost, and Hollywood movie producer Mark Joseph is not convinced that cinema patrons will be willing to pay even more to see a movie, even if that does translate to an added feeling of security.
“You can never guarantee safety and movie tickets are already too high,” he said. “There will be efforts to ban costumes, check bags and increase security but in three months it will be back to normal.”
However, leading crisis management expert, Gene Grabowski of Levick Strategic Communications, argues that the latest tragedy will have a permanent effect on the once simple adventure of going to the theater.
“Parents are very concerned that their children are being frightened by news reports and so business will likely drop of for a while,” he explained. “Many theaters, especially those showing movies with violence, will be equipped with metal detectors. The major theater chains will certainly enforce these restrictions across the country in order to protect against copycat incidents and to protect against lawsuits.”
And it seems truly passionate, costume-wearing movie goers will have their cinema experience taken down a notch with the possible enforcement of a long-term no-costume policy, given that shooting suspect James Holmes reportedly wore an elaborate assassin-like outfit complete with a ballistic helmet and gas mask to the screening. He also dyed his hair red and later referred to himself as “The Joker” when taken into custody.
“We will not allow any guests into our theaters in costumes that make other guests feel uncomfortable and we will not permit face-covering masks or fake weapons inside our buildings,” Ryan Noonan, AMC Director of Public Relations, said in a statement. “If you don’t like it, they will give you a refund.”
The representative also noted that the prominent cinema chain had no plans to alter its show schedules, but are working with local law enforcement agencies, landlords and local security teams nationwide to “provide the safest environment possible for guests,” and a spokesperson for the National Association of Theater Owners concurred that members were in the process of reviewing security procedures.
“It’s not unlike the ramped-up security in schools across the country after Columbine, and the increase of security at airports after 9/11. It’s just what needs to be done right now,” Jami Philbrick, Managing Editor of movie news site iamRogue.com. “The effect this all has on the theater industry is the true question. With the advent of HD TVs, Blu-ray, Netflix and especially VOD, the theater industry was already in trouble … and this could make it worse.”
However, veteran Hollywood entertainment and pop culture reporter Scott Huver, said too many stringent changes could turn away patrons in the long-term and that clearly wouldn’t be good for the industry. “
As a nation we must be careful before being too reactionary and implementing measures that do more to impinge our personal freedoms than they do to ensure public safety,” he added. “Some things as fast and simple as a bag and coat check might be an acceptable price that patrons are willing to pay to feel more secure, but ultimately moviegoers may be more likely to accept that sometimes the bad things that occur are beyond reason and control, and attempts to guard against them aren’t worth the cost of every day liberties.”
Oh my god! They might possibly install metal detectors at movie theaters! But probably won't because it will hurt business! We're all slaves! Freedom is dead, America is no more!
rubiksnoob wrote:Oh my god! They might possibly install metal detectors at movie theaters! But probably won't because it will hurt business! We're all slaves! Freedom is dead, America is no more!
And search your bags? No way. Why should I? Not for some pissant film I'm already paying too much for. I'll send off missives tonight to AMC etc. about this and vote with my dollars.
I'll get searched to get on a plane because I have to get on a plane or courthouse because its a government building and stuff goes down there. . No ing anywhere else thank you.
Here is what will happen
1: Movie tickets go up, sales go down
2: In a desperate move to get movie goers back they will made more micheal bay knockoffs and even worse. And THEN we will have to deal with new technology worse then 3d.
ITs happened before in the past when ticket sales went down.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote:
rubiksnoob wrote:Oh my god! They might possibly install metal detectors at movie theaters! But probably won't because it will hurt business! We're all slaves! Freedom is dead, America is no more!
And search your bags? No way. Why should I? Not for some pissant film I'm already paying too much for. I'll send off missives tonight to AMC etc. about this and vote with my dollars.
I'll get searched to get on a plane because I have to get on a plane or courthouse because its a government building and stuff goes down there. . No ing anywhere else thank you.
Worse. They wil catch you when you bring in your own candy.
Jihadin wrote:Seems to me its the movie theater coorperation and not the gov't doing it.
Still someone trying to search me. If I'm not going to let the government do it, I'm sure not going to permit some snot nosed teenager to do it. As I said I will voice my opinion to the actual chain owners, and vote with my $. I am a Texan by God and they can stick it where the sun, don't shine.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hotsauceman1 wrote:Worse. They wil catch you when you bring in your own candy.
That too. The wife and her bag of granola would hate that. And by that I mean she would them up.
Cinemas are an excellent terrorist target, probably even better than trains, so for the only real suprise is why some kind of semi decent security measures took so long to be implemented.
Palindrome wrote:Cinemas are an excellent terrorist target, probably even better than trains, so for the only real suprise is why some kind of semi decent security measures took so long to be implemented.
You're ok with that? why? When do you say enough and no more?
Well can't really say enough to enough to private coorperation if they themselves implemented safety standards to protect their customers only recourse for citizens is to boycott the coorperations. If the government enforced the safety issue for the theaters and develope something like TSA then its a different ballpark
Jihadin wrote:Well can't really say enough to enough to private coorperation if they themselves implemented safety standards to protect their customers only recourse for citizens is to boycott the coorperations. If the government enforced the safety issue for the theaters and develope something like TSA then its a different ballpark
Well thats what I meant. When do you personally say enough is enough?
Jihadin wrote:Well can't really say enough to enough to private coorperation if they themselves implemented safety standards to protect their customers only recourse for citizens is to boycott the coorperations. If the government enforced the safety issue for the theaters and develope something like TSA then its a different ballpark
Well thats what I meant. When do you personally say enough is enough?
When my pigheaded desire to emulate the mythical qualities of legendary progenitors overrode my desire for personal safety in the face of what is, in all honesty, a few minutes inconvenience. At that point, yes, I would stop going to the cinema.
If they do implement this, I'll just start getting all my movies from my friend the shut in. I'm not getting searched to see A superhero movie.
On a slightly related note, My sister's wussy boyfriend said he wanted to go to see the Dark Knight rises, but was too afraid of a Copycat. I told him "Once you start planning around what a nutjob might do, you might as well lock your door, bar your windows, and never leave your house again."
And that's what I've been pretty much telling everyone that has been saying "I'm not going to see the movie because there might be a Copycat."
Crazy people will still find a way to hurt people regardless of what measures you take to stop them. All you can do is make sure they are removed from society before they can cause even more damage.
Jihadin wrote:When the last known terrorist is dead or access to mental records is implemented when purchasing a fire arm. Just off the top of my head
Good luck with that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LoneLictor wrote:I'm just dreading the day a guy goes on a shooting spree in a bathroom.
I don't want to be strip searched just to go piss!
I guess you'll be halfway there...
Shooting have occcured in movie thaters before. Not seeing why this is different. Heck we had a pickup truck crash in Texas yesterday that killed 12 people.
Wow, I think I'm almost arguing Dogma's terrorism point.
If they do implement this, I'll just start getting all my movies from my friend the shut in. I'm not getting searched to see A superhero movie.
On a slightly related note, My sister's wussy boyfriend said he wanted to go to see the Dark Knight rises, but was too afraid of a Copycat. I told him "Once you start planning around what a nutjob might do, you might as well lock your door, bar your windows, and never leave your house again."
And that's what I've been pretty much telling everyone that has been saying "I'm not going to see the movie because there might be a Copycat."
Crazy people will still find a way to hurt people regardless of what measures you take to stop them. All you can do is make sure they are removed from society before they can cause even more damage.
So go buy a gun, and spend time at the range. That way you'll be ready to remove them when you see them.
If they do implement this, I'll just start getting all my movies from my friend the shut in. I'm not getting searched to see A superhero movie.
On a slightly related note, My sister's wussy boyfriend said he wanted to go to see the Dark Knight rises, but was too afraid of a Copycat. I told him "Once you start planning around what a nutjob might do, you might as well lock your door, bar your windows, and never leave your house again."
And that's what I've been pretty much telling everyone that has been saying "I'm not going to see the movie because there might be a Copycat."
Crazy people will still find a way to hurt people regardless of what measures you take to stop them. All you can do is make sure they are removed from society before they can cause even more damage.
Tell your sister she needs to dump the girly boy and get a Man instead.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Albatross wrote:Unless it's your own bathroom there's not a whole hell of a lot you can do.
Not go there and complain to management, with a invoice detailing how much money they just lost.
On a slightly related note, My sister's wussy boyfriend said he wanted to go to see the Dark Knight rises, but was too afraid of a Copycat. I told him "Once you start planning around what a nutjob might do, you might as well lock your door, bar your windows, and never leave your house again."
That falls under terrorism to.
As for boycotting movie theaters I see ticket prices dropping pretty low along with concession goodies to get more peeps in.
If people start avoiding going to theaters due to safety measures I don't see them maintaining current prices but lowering them to entice more people back into theater.
The Cinema's are just protecting themselves, you have a country with easy access to guns, it's a wonder they haven't done this earlier. They might have to implement higher security now, because they fear losing customers who are worried about it happening again. What you really have to do is look at gun ownership as a society. Not ask how to prevent a man packing weapons got into a cinema, because a shooting could happen anywhere, but ask why a nutter was able to stockpile a large amount of weapons and ammunition. Hell, with your litigation culture if the cinemas in future don't check people then they will probably get sued if some gak does go down because they didn't raise security as a response to this attack.
I do find it odd that some of the people complaining that private businesses, like cinemas, are going to check customers coming in to protect themselves and other customers from gun packing crazies, are the same people who will fight tooth and nail against gun control and effectively support the right for people to own heaps of guns and even carry them on the street in the first place.
You can't reasonably demand to have a country with easily accessible firearms and then complain when businesses, or anyone, take precautions against people bringing weapons onto their premises. We don't have to worry about this much in the UK because these sorts of shootings almost never happen. But in a country like the US, as gun ownership is widespread then precautions will be higher, it's an unfortunate consequence of demanding other freedoms.
I'm sure they did a projected loss of profit worse case to wishful thinking after this incident.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also preapring for the law suits thats going to happen due to them not ensuring the "backdoor" exits were not secured
Sure you can. Terrorist attacks can occur anywhere. Is everything going to involve TSA feelups and cancer causing X rays?
Why? We survived for thousands of years without that. e founded a nation based on individual rights. SO when a few wackjobs with a gun or bombvest go off we have to give up more of freedom? Man the ^*% up already.
Howard A Treesong wrote:The Cinema's are just protecting themselves, you have a country with easy access to guns, it's a wonder they haven't done this earlier. They might have to implement higher security now, because they fear losing customers who are worried about it happening again. What you really have to do is look at gun ownership as a society. Not ask how to prevent a man packing weapons got into a cinema, because a shooting could happen anywhere, but ask why a nutter was able to stockpile a large amount of weapons and ammunition. Hell, with your litigation culture if the cinemas in future don't check people then they will probably get sued if some gak does go down because they didn't raise security as a response to this attack.
I do find it odd that some of the people complaining that private businesses, like cinemas, are going to check customers coming in to protect themselves and other customers from gun packing crazies, are the same people who will fight tooth and nail against gun control and effectively support the right for people to own heaps of guns and even carry them on the street in the first place.
You can't reasonably demand to have a country with easily accessible firearms and then complain when businesses, or anyone, take precautions against people bringing weapons onto their premises. We don't have to worry about this much in the UK because these sorts of shootings almost never happen. But in a country like the US, as gun ownership is widespread then precautions will be higher, it's an unfortunate consequence of demanding other freedoms.
At the same time though, had several people in that theatre been carrying guns, it is very likely that this person would have been dropped long before his gun jammed and he tried to run.
I've been patted down (searched) at every NFL game I've been to, and no one opened fire at one of them. I've never felt my freedom was impinged upon as a result.
I've got the freedom to stay home and watch on TV, or to go to a place where I know they're doing 'safety' checks. I have the freedom to make that choice. (I might even have more freedom in this regard, than those fans without tickets, who don't have a choice and have to watch at home, as at least I get a choice).
If they put up scanners at theaters, it's not like anyone with a gun is making you go there. A theater is a private establishment, and if they want to make a purse check part of their entry process, it will be no different than any concert I've been to in the last 20 years.
Howard A Treesong wrote:The Cinema's are just protecting themselves, you have a country with easy access to guns, it's a wonder they haven't done this earlier. They might have to implement higher security now, because they fear losing customers who are worried about it happening again. What you really have to do is look at gun ownership as a society. Not ask how to prevent a man packing weapons got into a cinema, because a shooting could happen anywhere, but ask why a nutter was able to stockpile a large amount of weapons and ammunition. Hell, with your litigation culture if the cinemas in future don't check people then they will probably get sued if some gak does go down because they didn't raise security as a response to this attack.
I do find it odd that some of the people complaining that private businesses, like cinemas, are going to check customers coming in to protect themselves and other customers from gun packing crazies, are the same people who will fight tooth and nail against gun control and effectively support the right for people to own heaps of guns and even carry them on the street in the first place.
You can't reasonably demand to have a country with easily accessible firearms and then complain when businesses, or anyone, take precautions against people bringing weapons onto their premises. We don't have to worry about this much in the UK because these sorts of shootings almost never happen. But in a country like the US, as gun ownership is widespread then precautions will be higher, it's an unfortunate consequence of demanding other freedoms.
At the same time though, had several people in that theatre been carrying guns, it is very likely that this person would have been dropped long before his gun jammed and he tried to run.
He shot teargas into a crowded, dark theater. No one could see a goddamn thing. If everyone had started shooting, just more people would've been killed.
Redbeard wrote:I've been patted down (searched) at every NFL game I've been to, and no one opened fire at one of them. I've never felt my freedom was impinged upon as a result.
I've got the freedom to stay home and watch on TV, or to go to a place where I know they're doing 'safety' checks. I have the freedom to make that choice. (I might even have more freedom in this regard, than those fans without tickets, who don't have a choice and have to watch at home, as at least I get a choice).
If they put up scanners at theaters, it's not like anyone with a gun is making you go there. A theater is a private establishment, and if they want to make a purse check part of their entry process, it will be no different than any concert I've been to in the last 20 years.
I never cared enough about the raping that is professional sports to want to participate. The minor league hockey stuff, professional baseball, and college games I have been to, did not require such. I would not have gone through them if they did.
Wait until this bad boy is out.. and you know for a fact its going to eventually wind up getting installed in patrol cars so the police can see if you had controlled drugs at any time in the last 8 hours and can be retroactively arrested.
WASHINGTON (CBSDC) – The Department of Homeland Security will soon be using a laser at airports that can detect everything about you from over 160-feet away.
Gizmodo reports a scanner that could read people at the molecular level has been invented. This laser-based scanner – which can be used 164-feet away — could read everything from a person’s adrenaline levels, to traces of gun powder on a person’s clothes, to illegal substances — and it can all be done without a physical search. It also could be used on multiple people at a time, eliminating random searches at airports.
The laser-based scanner is expected to be used in airports as soon as 2013, Gizmodo reports.
The scanner is called the Picosecond Programmable Laser. The device works by blasting its target with lasers which vibrate molecules that are then read by the machine that determine what substances a person has been exposed to. This could be Semtex explosives to the bacon and egg sandwich they had for breakfast that morning.
The inventor of this invasive technology is Genia Photonics. Active since 2009, they hold 30 patents on laser technology designed for scanning. In 2011, they formed a partnership with In-Q-Tel, a company chartered by the CIA and Congress to build “a bridge between the Agency and a new set of technology innovators.”
Genia Photonics wouldn’t be the only ones with similar technology as George Washington University developed something similar in 2008, according to Gizmodo. The Russians also developed something akin to the Picosecond Programmable laser. The creators of that scanner claim that “it is even able to detect traces of explosives left by fingerprints.”
But what makes Genia Photonics’ version so special is that the machine is more compact compared to the other devices and can still maintain its incredible range.
djones520 wrote:At the same time though, had several people in that theatre been carrying guns, it is very likely that this person would have been dropped long before his gun jammed and he tried to run.
Yeah, like all the after action heroes said that they "totally would have dropped that guy" who was hassling and being really aggressive to some poor guy on the bus I was on the other day... after the guy had gotten off the bus and the bus was on the move again...
Even if one, or several people had decided to open fire on this guy in a dark theatre they probably would have ended up shooting each other and fellow movie goers in the confusion.
Melissia wrote:Well, one more reason not to go to the theaters. As if I needed another reason to avoid those dismal places.
Its getting to be that way. The only real advantage now is that I can eat popcorn there without Rodney attempting a swan dive into the bowl at every opportunity.
djones520 wrote:At the same time though, had several people in that theatre been carrying guns, it is very likely that this person would have been dropped long before his gun jammed and he tried to run.
Yeah, like all the after action heroes said that they "totally would have dropped that guy" who was hassling and being really aggressive to some poor guy on the bus I was on the other day... after the guy had gotten off the bus and the bus was on the move again...
Even if one, or several people had decided to open fire on this guy in a dark theatre they probably would have ended up shooting each other and fellow movie goers in the confusion.
I don't get what your issue is. How am I going to "motivate" the popcorn line to hurry up without my gatt?
Why I go to on post movie theater. Its cheaper for me...way cheaper...just have to wait a couple weeks after release to see it on the big screen. As for airport travel I go in uniform (since I'm always on orders) so I avoid the hassle that everyone else goes through
Frazzled wrote:I don't get what your issue is. How am I going to "motivate" the popcorn line to hurry up without my gatt?
Surely it is quicker to wait for someone else to just gun them down first?
While I am a firm believer of the motto "why put off tomorrow what you can get someone else to do today," sometimes to get something done right, you just have to do it yourself.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Easy E wrote:They all ready serch you to go to concerts.
Even at my "big" company meeting that is held twice a year in a stadium, we get searched going in.
I've never been searched at a concert. That includes U2, Chilis, Johnny Cash, and of course that drug crazed singer - Barney.
The issue is not killing Barney...the issue you killing yourself is the problem due to actually seeing Barney....live...for 30 min at least...in person...no way to get out of it....
There is no way in hell that in the middle of whitebread Michigan I will put up with searches before I go into movie theatres. If that happens we might as well have searches in the entrance of every single place that people congregate-shopping malls, churches, the DMV, Walmart, etc.
As stated before, the problem isn't that a guy was able to smuggle guns into a movie theatre. It's that he used the emergency exit that is supposed to be locked from the outside. A search to get in wouldn't have done anything, because it's not like he was sneaking in his RIFLE and SHOTGUN under his shirt.......
All it will do is take forever to get into the movies, and further knee-jerk rulings and actions. When exactly was the last cinema shooting spree? Ever?? I don't wanna have to go to the theatre an hour early just to have time to get through security, ala the airport. Half the last movies I have gone to involved a last minute decision with friends and a fun, mad rush to get to a showing.
It is by far one of the least things to live a paranoid life about.
As stated before, the problem isn't that a guy was able to smuggle guns into a movie theatre. It's that he used the emergency exit that is supposed to be locked from the outside. A search to get in wouldn't have done anything, because it's not like he was sneaking in his RIFLE and SHOTGUN under his shirt.......
He didn't smuggle the weapons in
Federal law enforcement sources tell ABC News that Holmes bought a ticket to the movie, slipped out of the theater once it began and propped open the emergency exit before gathering his weapons and gear and coming back into the theater. Once inside, he opened fire.
AegisGrimm wrote:There is no way in hell that in the middle of whitebread Michigan I will put up with searches before I go into movie theatres. If that happens we might as well have searches in the entrance of every single place that people congregate-shopping malls, churches, the DMV, Walmart, etc.
The problem is that it is apparently very easy to get hold of highly dangerous weapons. Easy enough in fact for a lunatic to get them, as has happened here. Either you restrict access to those weapons, which obviously won't happen, or you have to take precautions about their potential usage by said psychopaths. I went to Tel Aviv a couple of years ago, you get scanned and searched every time you go into a cinema or shopping mall. In Israel there is a very real danger of someone planting a bomb or blowing themselves up in a shopping mall, and so the government and state, in fulfilling its primary function, does what it can to stop that happening.
It is by far one of the least things to live a paranoid life about.
I'm constantly amazed by the human capacity to become used to elements of danger in their everyday lives, to the point where they don't really consciously acknowledge it. I Watched a program the other night about a group of poor people in Vietnam, who make money wandering into dense undergrowth, and areas they know to contain live ordinance/unexploded bombs, so they can collect scrap metal for money. Asked if they worried about it, they just shrug their shoulders and say that it's part of their daily life. I'm sure most people who read this forum (Vietnamese bomb collectors excluded) would be positively horrified at the thought of living so dangerously.
As a Brit, and having grown up in a life surrounded by cotton wool compared to probably a good 95% of the earth's population, the thought of people wandering around with the capacity to kill a finger move away, I find absolutely unconscionable. I got posting rights removed from a certain other forum because I got into a discussion with an American chap about this issue after he had posted pictures of his models but with handgun in holster in plain view (presumably inadvertently). In a shop, with kids in it. Despite his protestations of being martial arts-level whatever, and therefore able to stop anyone making a grab for the gun, if I were a parent with a kid in the shop I'm not sure if it is anything I could ever learn to cope with. I guess a lot of it comes down to the kind of environment you grow up in, what you are used to and what is seen as being an acceptable part of daily life. I did have a similar experience living in Korea, a country with by far the most RTAs in the developed world, and again an element of danger that I wasn't used to. Although I must say I somehow found taxi drivers zig-zagging at 50mph through traffic to be somewhat less unsettling than the above gun-related example. I guess it must be a cultural thing, and on that front I don't think attitudes could be more different on either side of the Atlantic.
Howard A Treesong wrote:The Cinema's are just protecting themselves, you have a country with easy access to guns, it's a wonder they haven't done this earlier. They might have to implement higher security now, because they fear losing customers who are worried about it happening again. What you really have to do is look at gun ownership as a society. Not ask how to prevent a man packing weapons got into a cinema, because a shooting could happen anywhere, but ask why a nutter was able to stockpile a large amount of weapons and ammunition. Hell, with your litigation culture if the cinemas in future don't check people then they will probably get sued if some gak does go down because they didn't raise security as a response to this attack.
I do find it odd that some of the people complaining that private businesses, like cinemas, are going to check customers coming in to protect themselves and other customers from gun packing crazies, are the same people who will fight tooth and nail against gun control and effectively support the right for people to own heaps of guns and even carry them on the street in the first place.
You can't reasonably demand to have a country with easily accessible firearms and then complain when businesses, or anyone, take precautions against people bringing weapons onto their premises. We don't have to worry about this much in the UK because these sorts of shootings almost never happen. But in a country like the US, as gun ownership is widespread then precautions will be higher, it's an unfortunate consequence of demanding other freedoms.
This still remains a knee-jerk reaction(I don't see the chances of it being implemented 'permanently' good, though). It's very costly, inconvenient, intrusive, and cannot be proven to really make a difference.
And speaking broadly, strict regulation of firearms and reduced availability is a mixed bag, results-wise. It just hasn't proven itself to be effective enough at reducing 'normal' crime, let alone massacres.
The reporting was sensationalist to scare the Frazzies and we do not yet know enough about the policy. It looks like a knee jerk, and may be one, but then it might not, it all depends on how long the changes are implemented for.
Copy cat crimes are a genuine problem, but one that dissipates over time. Once the killings are old news, by the end of the summer the restrictions can (and should) be relaxed.
Pop Tarts
Published July 23, 2012
FoxNews.com
Stephen Galloway, The Hollywood Reporter’s Executive Features Editor, tells FOX411’s Pop Tarts column that incident will likely cause theater owners to debate stepping up security – which would in turn impact ticket prices, and that in turn could affect movie theater stock.
Meanwhile, Thelma Adams, Yahoo! Movies contributing editor questioned why all cinema guests can’t be “bag-checked and wanded” the same way critics and the press are prior to advanced screenings.
But such measures come at a cost, and Hollywood movie producer Mark Joseph is not convinced that cinema patrons will be willing to pay even more to see a movie, even if that does translate to an added feeling of security.
“You can never guarantee safety and movie tickets are already too high,” he said. “There will be efforts to ban costumes, check bags and increase security but in three months it will be back to normal.”
However, leading crisis management expert, Gene Grabowski of Levick Strategic Communications, argues that the latest tragedy will have a permanent effect on the once simple adventure of going to the theater.
“Parents are very concerned that their children are being frightened by news reports and so business will likely drop of for a while,” he explained. “Many theaters, especially those showing movies with violence, will be equipped with metal detectors. The major theater chains will certainly enforce these restrictions across the country in order to protect against copycat incidents and to protect against lawsuits.”
Summary = Four random talking heads with no special insight other than their desire to promote themselves, say totally speculative sensationalist things, because that's what the media oulet wants them to do.
“We will not allow any guests into our theaters in costumes that make other guests feel uncomfortable and we will not permit face-covering masks or fake weapons inside our buildings,” Ryan Noonan, AMC Director of Public Relations, said in a statement. “If you don’t like it, they will give you a refund.”
The representative also noted that the prominent cinema chain had no plans to alter its show schedules, but are working with local law enforcement agencies, landlords and local security teams nationwide to “provide the safest environment possible for guests,” and a spokesperson for the National Association of Theater Owners concurred that members were in the process of reviewing security procedures.
Summary = Two industry PR guys say A) No masks or fake weapons for now; and B) we are "the process of reviewing security procedures." Translation: Don't freak out, keep spending money, we won't let anyone in who looks anything like the killer, and we are making no specific commitments to any kind of long term or serious changes of any kind.
“It’s not unlike the ramped-up security in schools across the country after Columbine, and the increase of security at airports after 9/11. It’s just what needs to be done right now,” Jami Philbrick, Managing Editor of movie news site iamRogue.com. “The effect this all has on the theater industry is the true question. With the advent of HD TVs, Blu-ray, Netflix and especially VOD, the theater industry was already in trouble … and this could make it worse.”
Summary = After letting the PR guys do their job and say non-alarmist things, here's another talking head to promote his website and say something sensationalist again to freak Fraz out.
Executive Summary: Ratings-driven media outlet prints sensationalist story to give its consumers their regular and expected dose of something to freak out over. Easily-trolled and not-particularly-critical Dachhound enthusiast takes the bait, reposts on Dakka.
Seriously? You read the sentence "Many theaters, especially those showing movies with violence, will be equipped with metal detectors" and didn't laugh out loud? Like there are special movie theaters which only show non-violent movies? How much more clearly could this guy say "I am an idiot, pay no attention to me"? Does he have to hold up a sign for you?
And that was the only person quoted in the entire article who sounded like he MIGHT POSSIBLY have some sort of credentials, maybe. He works for a "strategic communications" company, and Fox411's Pop Tarts column says he's a crisis management expert. His resume looks pretty good, but I don't see him having written any books on security issues, or anything about public event venues.
http://www.levick.com/executive-vice-president/gene-grabowski
True; but IME a whole lot of these kind of stories and emails get circulated around just for attention and ratings and hubbub without having any real substance to them.
Mannahnin wrote:True; but IME a whole lot of these kind of stories and emails get circulated around just for attention and ratings and hubbub without having any real substance to them.
Meh. If I were to make a list of things that might signal "I'm about to start living under a grossly oppressive regime, in which I have no rights or freedoms", "They start searching me for weapons an private movie theaters" is pretty far down on the list.
Then again, I place a relatively low value on privacy in general compared to the average person. So long as they don't break my gak while looking through it I'd probably find it hard to get my feathers ruffled up over something like this.
Other than outright banning guns and becoming a police state that prevents any form of weaponry potentially be developed at all, how do you stop some random person in an urban area from suddenly jumping out of a car and gunning down random people?
Amaya wrote:Other than outright banning guns and becoming a police state that prevents any form of weaponry potentially be developed at all, how do you stop some random person in an urban area from suddenly jumping out of a car and gunning down random people?
Kill everyone before they have a chance to kill you?
The only time I go is to take my kids to see whatever Disney/Pixar/etc. movie, because they are still young enough to not be completely annoyed by the entire experience.
Frazzled wrote:Actual in the door ticket volumes have been on the decline for a decade however.
In the US. With other markets expanding, especially in Asia, it's no surprise Hollywood is moving more and more to bland, generic blockbusters that work regardless of the culture of the person viewing it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
djones520 wrote:At the same time though, had several people in that theatre been carrying guns, it is very likely that this person would have been dropped long before his gun jammed and he tried to run.
Yeah, that kind of thinking? That kind of thinking is lunacy. A darkened theatre, with tear gas shot into it, with an unknown, and unexpected shooter, and you are actually claiming that multiple people getting up out of the panicked, fleeing crowd to try and locate and then gun down the shooter would be a reasonable solution?
I mean, this fantasy about guns being able to solve problems with violence... that's a really, really big part of the reason that these kinds of nutjobs keep showing up.
Monster Rain wrote:I kind of dislike going to movie theaters anyway.
The only time I go is to take my kids to see whatever Disney/Pixar/etc. movie, because they are still young enough to not be completely annoyed by the entire experience.
This. If it wasnt for my kids I wouldnt even set foot in one...
djones520 wrote:Kind of knee jerk considering the guy came in through an emergency exit that was supposed to be locked.
Exactly.
Double exactly.
I think you might be able to do it from a practical viewpoint, in that you've got a relatively limited number of people going though a specific set of gates. But would it have stopped this latest shooting? No.
How are ticket sales at US cinemas since the crime?
Frazzled wrote:Actual in the door ticket volumes have been on the decline for a decade however.
In the US. With other markets expanding, especially in Asia, it's no surprise Hollywood is moving more and more to bland, generic blockbusters that work regardless of the culture of the person viewing it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
djones520 wrote:At the same time though, had several people in that theatre been carrying guns, it is very likely that this person would have been dropped long before his gun jammed and he tried to run.
Yeah, that kind of thinking? That kind of thinking is lunacy. A darkened theatre, with tear gas shot into it, with an unknown, and unexpected shooter, and you are actually claiming that multiple people getting up out of the panicked, fleeing crowd to try and locate and then gun down the shooter would be a reasonable solution?
I mean, this fantasy about guns being able to solve problems with violence... that's a really, really big part of the reason that these kinds of nutjobs keep showing up.
Yeah, i'm a decent shot but there is no way in hell that i would be able to do gak to someone wearing body armor, in a dark room, while being blinded by tear gas, especially with what would be considered standard for a CC gun. There are situations were a gun can be used for self defense, most of the time without even firing a shot, but to suggest that anyone would have been able to take him out under those conditions is lunacy.
People need to chill the fk out. A movie theater, a bell tower, a school campus, a shopping mall...you can't lock down every locale with searches and scanners. And if it's not a gun, it'll be a bomb, or gas, or a knife, or a truck driven through a crowd of people.
You cannot bubble wrap the world, and in trying, all you are doing is empowering the James Holmeses, Charles Whitmans, Lee Harvey Oswalds, John Hinkleys, and all the other crackpots who feel so crappy about their lives that they feel the only way they can make a statement or make an impact is to kill. The more it happens and the more sensational the reaction and media coverage is, the more likely the unknown crackpots that are still out there are going to be encouraged that they can get their thrill of terrorizing a bunch of people and maybe find their way into a history book.
There are an infinate number of ways for you, or the people you love, to randomly be snuffed out at any moment of any day, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. Don't be an idiot, get on with your life, and quit trying to control every aspect of the world around you, it's an excercise in futility.
The thing is there are some locations that can be locked down, such as airplane access gates, and there are others that can't be locked down.
Airplane security works because people are prepared to put up with the inconvenience on the relatively few times they need to fly, because the benefit of flying is huge.
London Transport, carrying 9 million passengers a day, has been trialled for gate type security and it just doesn't work. It just cannot work with the number of people involved, and the conditions of people wanting to use the buses and tubes for quick, short journeys carrying their pen knives and stuff.
A cinema certainly could be locked down. It has a small number of entrances and is visited by a limited number of people at regular times.
The argument is whether it would be a good thing to lock down a cinema and/or other such locations where it could work in a technical sense but maybe not a social sense.
Would you be prepared to arrive at the cinema one hour earlier than now in order to get through security? Just to watch a film for two hours? Probably not.
I'm barely wiling to arrive at a theater at all, and only then when family and friends insist. If I had to spend an EXTRA hour in those dismal, filthy places? Ugh. I'd just stay home and rent a movie.
I'm not arguing that there are places that can and should be carefully controlled in a measured response comparable to the actual threat posed. Still, even with aircraft, I'm far more likely to die in a plane because some slob in management cut the maintenance budget or the mechanic forgot his "righty tighty/lefty loosey" than I am from some idealist strapping a bomb to his leg.
EDIT: and THAT's probably more likely than me being shot in a theater.
Amaya wrote:Other than outright banning guns and becoming a police state that prevents any form of weaponry potentially be developed at all, how do you stop some random person in an urban area from suddenly jumping out of a car and gunning down random people?
How do you stop them from setting off a car bomb? From just running a vehicle into a crowd?
Amaya wrote:Other than outright banning guns and becoming a police state that prevents any form of weaponry potentially be developed at all, how do you stop some random person in an urban area from suddenly jumping out of a car and gunning down random people?
How do you stop them from setting off a car bomb? From just running a vehicle into a crowd?
In Japan, a man drove a car into a crowd, then jumped out with a knife and started stabbing people. He killed 7 and injured 10.
Random acts of violence by "nutters" cannot be prevented.
All we can do is to try and create a society in which as few people as possible get themselves into a position where they think this sort of thing is a good idea.
On the positive teeny weenie 8 lb TBone can clear a room. The first sign is the canary in the room: the other wiener dog jumping up and running out in a panic. Then it comes. Then you die.
As stated before, the problem isn't that a guy was able to smuggle guns into a movie theatre. It's that he used the emergency exit that is supposed to be locked from the outside. A search to get in wouldn't have done anything, because it's not like he was sneaking in his RIFLE and SHOTGUN under his shirt.......
He didn't smuggle the weapons in
Yes, exactly what I said. That's why having a line of people backed up at the entrance being searched wouldn't have done a single thing to stop the shooting.
As stated before, the problem isn't that a guy was able to smuggle guns into a movie theatre. It's that he used the emergency exit that is supposed to be locked from the outside. A search to get in wouldn't have done anything, because it's not like he was sneaking in his RIFLE and SHOTGUN under his shirt.......
He didn't smuggle the weapons in
Yes, exactly what I said. That's why having a line of people backed up at the entrance being searched wouldn't have done a single thing to stop the shooting.
Exactly. besides, I'm too sexy to be searched at a theater. It would be too distracting to the female patrons.
You probaly threaten to sue Fraz by "You touch my junk I sue your a$$" Your no John Holmes (pornstar not shooter)....I don't think Rodney would appreciate being stuffed down the front of your pants....
If movie theaters are installing metal detectors, it sounds like the free market is responding to market forces which desire theaters that are perceived to be safer.
The business choices of a private corporation have absolute no impact on "our freedom".
I pay you about 12 bucks to see a movie that wouldn't be worth seeing if the ticket cost was 3..
So I can sit in a room with 60-100 mouth breathers who can't manage to turn off a cellphone, sit in a chair for 15 continuous minutes, find a babysitter, chew food with a closed mouth or indeed close their mouths at any point...
....And now you want to frisk, wand, probe, etc. me at the entrance?...
Look bud, I think you have this backwards. If you want to go there you have to buy me dinner, THEN take -ME- to a movie (As in, you buy.) and THEN you get to wand me.
This isn't even a civil rights issue. This is worthy of dating fail.
I pay you about 12 bucks to see a movie that wouldn't be worth seeing if the ticket cost was 3..
So I can sit in a room with 60-100 mouth breathers who can't manage to turn off a cellphone, sit in a chair for 15 continuous minutes, find a babysitter, chew food with a closed mouth or indeed close their mouths at any point...
....And now you want to frisk, wand, probe, etc. me at the entrance?...
Look bud, I think you have this backwards. If you want to go there you have to buy me dinner, THEN take -ME- to a movie (As in, you buy.) and THEN you get to wand me.
This isn't even a civil rights issue. This is worthy of dating fail.
ing anywhere else thank you.
