Auteurs want to have everything on their terms these days. They want their films to have movie-theater-only releases before showing up on streamers, but they’re also making the running times of these films increasingly longer. Then when movie theaters add intermissions at the request of their patrons (like many attempted for the 3.5 hour long Killers of the Flower Moon), film directors and distributors balk. “That wasn’t the vision!!” Something’s gotta give. The Hollywood Reporter spoke with various movie theaters who say that they and their movie-going customers are in favor of bringing back intermissions. Are you listening, Scorsese?
Paramount threatened fines over Killers of the Flower Moon: The art house cinema [The Lyric in Fort Collins, Colorado] … inserted an eight-minute break. It wasn’t long before a customer’s photo of an ad highlighting the intermission went viral and The Lyric received a call from Paramount, which is distributing the film, saying it had violated the booking contract and fines could be levied. “We didn’t know we had done anything wrong,” says Lyric manager Aaron Varnell, who recently added “chaos cultivator” to his title in a nod to challenging times.
Make it an event: In Long Beach, California, the Art Theatre — a single-screen theater built in 1925 — likewise hoped an intermission would lure more customers to see Killers of the Flower Moon on the big screen… “Our thinking was, we can really make this an event,” says Kerstin Kansteiner, who heads the board of the nonprofit theater. “It gives folks the opportunity to use the restroom, and it could also make for extra concession sales, which is literally how we pay our bills these days.” The idea was abandoned when Art’s film booker reached out to Paramount before the film opened and was told an intermission wasn’t allowed. “It was disappointing,” says Kansteiner. “We understand that directors have a vision and don’t want to take the viewer out of the film, but it’s problematic if you make a film that’s three hours and 26 minutes long.”
Movie theaters are struggling: Cinemas that survived the pandemic are still trying to find their footing during the streaming boom; as much as 15 percent of the moviegoing population hasn’t yet returned to theaters, according to data collected by Hollywood studios. This applies especially to older adults, the target audience for Killers of the Flower Moon and Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer, which runs three hours. These longer films mean fewer showtimes, too, which compounds concerns for cinemas when it comes to ticket sales.
Moviegoers want intermissions: [Vue Cinemas head Tim] Richards engineered a test in which Vue offered its U.K. customers the choice to see Killers of the Flower Moon in one uninterrupted viewing or with a 15-minute intermission (in Europe they’re known as “intervals” or “comfort breaks”). “It is the first time we’ve had an interval in decades,” Richards says. “Right off the bat, 30 percent of our customers chose to watch the movie with an interval even if it meant staying longer. And 85 percent said they would absolutely come back and watch a movie with an interval.” Vue was also asked to cease the breaks, but no fines were issued.
James Cameron said no to intermissions for Avatar: Late last year, some theaters had reached out about including an intermission with 20th Century’s Avatar: The Way of Water (three hours and 12 minutes) and said they were told no per the wishes of James Cameron, according to exhibition sources. “Imagine being immersed in the world of Avatar and having a sudden break. It would be hard to get back into the movie,” says one Hollywood studio executive not affiliated with the film.
‘I really needed to pee’: There’s evidence to back up the theory that intermissions could boost grosses for all involved. The Lyric saw a bigger turnout than usual on the second weekend of Killers of the Flower Moon — before word got out there were no more breaks during the film. Adds Varnell, “People said after, ‘I just kept waiting for the intermission. I really needed to pee.’”
Oh reader, that Avatar comment did me in. “You can’t break the immersive experience!” What, are they worried that moviegoers running to the bathroom will be shocked to see non-blue people again? Please. Inevitably I think the purse (not to mention the bladder) will win out. If more people say they’ll go to movies with guaranteed intermissions, directors will magically find a way to adapt. Scorsese being such a film historian, I would think the transition wouldn’t be that difficult. Intermissions harken back to classic Hollywood. It’s retro!
Growing up in San Francisco I regularly went to the Castro Theatre to see vintage cinema. Not only did I survive, I thrived with each and every intermission. Even today I go to see rereleases of old films. During the intermission I relieve myself in the little girls room and return to the concession stand to purchase another tub of popcorn. The intermission system works! Embrace the wave, filmmakers. Or, you know, listen to Alexander Payne and learn to tighten your stories.
Photos credit: Xavier Collin / Image Press Agency / Avalon, Brock Wegner on Unspash and Eugene Lisyuk on Pexels
OMG, no.
Stop making 3+ hour movies And turn the sound down.
Movie theatre volume has always been a problem for me. I’ve been using ear plugs since I was a teenager.
THIS! most modern movies shouldnt even be 2 hours long & certainly not more than that. just do a better editing job!
I hate, hate, hate how loud they play them and how much quieter the dialogue is than everything else. Painful and frustrating.
Oh heck yeah! Noise sensitivity headsets help me a lot with volume since I had a stroke in Feb. I grew up w movie intermissions as a standard feature. If this leads to more quality director’s cut movies I am ALL IN! As a kid it was bc our little bladders needed to pee. As an adult, the theater serves strong dirty martinis and um lol I have to pee but don’t mind as much.
If a film is 3+ hours long I am likely to need a toilet break. I would far rather have a scheduled break than have to run out in the dark, interrupting other people’s experience and have to use my best guess to go when I won’t miss anything too critical.
The other solution is to EDIT your films. They should not need to be that long.
That’s the thing. People are already missing parts of the film because most people can’t avoid the bathroom after drinking a beverage even during a regular length movie. And it is super awkward to have to walk past people.
Yeah, having a scheduled break affects the “immersive” experience less than having to run out and miss parts of the movie.
I ALWAYS need a potty break? it’s one of the things I dint like about watching movies in the theater! I’m usually ready for a drink refill as well.
I got to the bathroom anyway during most movies that are longer than 2 hours and I also sometimes buy another drink as well. That means I miss part of the movie.
Oh well. I am not there to be lectured at about art by some old dudes I don’t know, but for entertainment. If they don’t want breaks, I will be missing part of a movie.
Cinemas suffered during the pandemic, so give them some extra opportunities in which people will likely buy snacks and drinks.
That’s what I like about the drive-in. There is an intermission while they switch films that lets you grab popcorn, use the facilities or just sit in the car and watch movie trailers until the next film starts. Unfortunately, it’s seasonal.
My biggest pet peeve is movies not having tight storytelling. I regularly think of 10-20 minutes that could have been cut and made a much better movie.
These 3+ hour films almost NEVER need to be 3+ hours. Give me better editing and intermission, please.
Agreed. I’m yet to watch anything that long and not be able to find a good 30 minutes that could have gone away and left the story intact.
I love 90-120 min movies. Ideally closer to 90.
Yep, agree. A lot of movies need tighter editing. I don’t want to go and see a looong movie. Having an intermission will not change that.
YUP. I always say to my husband after a movie – it could have been a half hour shorter.
you have to be a really really good director to make 3 hours worth it for a movie. I thought Oppenheimer was worth it. But that’s very rare.
If directors insist on having 3+ plus films, then we need intermissions. Plus, it would give the theater a chance to make a few extra concession sales! People get up in the middle of films anyway to use the restroom and grab a snack. You might as well just make the break official.
I have a disability, so sitting that long without a break to get up and move around is the biggest reason why I choose streaming films at home. That way I can pause to grab snacks, move around, and use the restroom. (Also, I don’t have to put up with other people talking or the blue light of their phone screens). I refuse to sit in one spot for that long so the director doesn’t get their feelings hurt.
That part! Being newly disabled…I STILL feel pretty vulnerable in public & I’m not going to put my body through the anxiety of going to the show when I can have THAT particular enjoyment in the safety of my home!
Many people watching a movie in the theater need to use the restroom at some point, whether there is an intermission or not. I would think that some producers and executives would love the idea of an intermission so that no one is forced to miss any of their movie. Rather than being like I can’t hold it anymore and then missing the “I see dead people” reveal or “the iceberg we’ve been worried about is bigger than we thought and we can’t miss it” scene etc.
When I heard about Killers of the flower moon, I was intrigued until I heard the length of the movie. So I decided to read the book instead. Haha.
YES! I was so glad that a long movie like Elvis had an intermission. Movies longer than 2 hours need a short intermission, say 15 minutes at the most. Just like when you go to see live theatre. It’s gives you a chance to stand up (for those of us who have siatica/back issues and bladder control issues – I’m an old lady!) and stretch your legs, go the restroom and get a snack or drink if you want something else for the back half of the movie.
Letting the populace pee and stretch will not diminish your art. If the film is good it can withstand a pee break. Get over yourselves.
If these directors are going to make 3 hour films then they will have to accept intermissions.
For me 2.5 hours is pushing it but 3+ hours is ridiculous. It’s really hard to sit for that amount of time. Not to wait to use the bathroom but just the sitting. Most people would need to stretch their legs, move a little to get comfortable again.
Don’t make movies as long as miniseries if you’re gonna cry about people wanting breaks in the runtime. Seriously, these directors bitch about their vision and the cinematic experience and then wonder why people prefer streaming at home at their own convenience where you can hit pause if you get hungry or need to pee or whatever.
Honestly I feel like the only movies that have a right to want an uninterrupted, cinematic experience are blockbusters that were shot specifically to be seen on a big screen with surround sound and a crowd all watching it together. People who are interested in seeing Killers of the Flowers Moon are gonna watch it either in a theater or at home, whichever they prefer, and imo it would make no difference in how rewarding the experience is because they’re in it for watching an engrossing narrative, not for the cinematic experience. Scorsese needs to just sit down about this. This isn’t shot for a theatrical vision. This isn’t Dune on IMAX, and I’d have more sympathy if Denis Villenueve was the one complaining about theaters unilaterally adding intermissions in his movies. Which they don’t, because his movies are reasonable runtimes.
The sole reason I’m not seeing Killers of the Flower Moon in theaters is because of the run time. I can do three hours once in a while in a theater, but 3.5? No.
Plan an intermission, let people stretch their legs without disrupting the other theatergoers, buy more concessions, etc.
Watching a movie that mostly takes place in water would make me want to pee more.
Well, I guess that’s one way of being immersed in the Way of Water! lol
This insistence on maintaining their artistic visions at the expense of both audience members and the theaters ability to profit from showing films with long run-times sounds seriously controlling. Some of these directors may not get that most of their audience won’t have the luxury of private viewing rooms. It’s disrespectful to the audience and not cost effective for the theaters. Maybe multiplexes could offer options — showing the films with and without intermission breaks.
The last movie I saw in the theater was Barbie…which will PROBABLY BE THE LAST movie I’ll see in a theater…and THIS is from someone who spent EVERY weekend at the show from 1979-2002…and who went to the show at least once a month after that…Between the media technology at home & the amount of GOOD content at your fingertips & the speed the movies are moving to streamers…It adds up to me enjoying movies at home…BTW…I want the Directors of these long ass movies sit for 4 hours WITHOUT a biobreak…it’s RIDICULOUS 😡
If they let me pee without missing the movie I would absolutely go to more movies.
Let me have my snacks and pee time!
I purposely don’t drink anything at the movies because I know I’ll need to pee. An intermission would be great!
Yes to everything said above. I’m 52 and can remember intermissions as a kid. (And the glossy color special programmes they’d sell for some movies. Bring those back too!)
I remember when Avengers Endgame came out. People were giving the times (no spoilers) like 1:52 for the bathroom breaks. 😆
It works for Broadway it can work for long movies. And theaters make their money on concessions. If directors want them to survive throw them a bone.
It’s clear these directions have no experience of “theater”. Also kind of surprising and disappointing how little faith they have in their own cinematic vision.
I’ll never forget my dad and I going to see the first Matrix movie. He headed for the loo just as Morpheus was telling Neo why the Matrix existed in the first place. Turns out unless you get that five minutes of dialogue the action that follows is almost incomprehensible. He was sooo confused for the rest of the movie.
I would have never gone to movies if this was the case in my country as a small bladder person. I don’t understand the financial incentive of not giving 10/15 min break. People always buy stuff during break besides using restroom.
Are these directors willfully clueless that people streaming at home are absolutely taking one or more breaks during movies?! If they want people to come to theaters they have to make the experience enjoyable by modern standards, that means comfy lounger chairs, good snacks and booze, and bathroom breaks when a movie is more than a couple of hours long!