The Case of the Empty Theatre Seat

Once upon a time, I was a passionate moviegoer. Seeing movies in theatres was my jam. I skipped college and would pay $3.99 to see three movies at the Paradise, starting at 1.

These days, I’ve seen two movies since the pandemic – Parasite and Everything Everywhere All At Once. The former was one week before the lockdown, the latter was the summer of its big release. Both were political choices for me, because I believe movies can be helmed by people of all nationalities, ages, and genders, and dollars at the box office are the only way to say that loudly.

Nomad No More is reader-supported. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Would I be seeing more movies these days if it wasn’t still pandemicky? Maybe.

But, also, maybe not.

I stay away from a lot of movies because there’s this incredibly stupid trend toward longer and longer movies.

It’s rare now that anything is under 2.5 hours – when it used to be an average of 90-105 minutes.

The movie kicking up the controversy now is one that sounds like many of us should see because it has such important topics – The Killers of the Flower Moon.

The running time is 3.5 hours. There are no intermissions.

The last time I saw a nearly-4-hour film in the theatre was Kenneth Brannagh’s Hamlet.

There was an intermission. That was 1996.

The last intermission I had was in anything I saw in Europe. Nearly every movie I saw there had a break. I ambled out during The Martian, had time for the loo and bought more popcorn, and got back to my seat just as it was restarting.

It’s fitting with Europe, where you’re expected to enjoy your meal in restaurants, and the norm is 4-6 weeks of vacation, if not longer. These are people who understand life is meant to be lived and savoured.

Here, in North America, specifically in the United States, there are no mandated vacation times, fast food is the norm, and you’re fucked if you want a leisurely pee during your movie.

It’s a cultural choice, and it’s the wrong choice.

Did you know there’s now an APP you can look up movies in and see what the best moment to go pee during the film is? Yes! It’s called “RunPee.”

Movies are supposed to be LEISURE time and you’re making me do homework before the film just so I can urinate? I think not.

But God forbid you rail against a 3.5-hour runtime without an intermission. You’re told it’s “just a movie” and “when I go to a ball game, I don’t expect them to stop so I can pee,” and all these other brainiac retorts from mansplainers who can’t for a minute grasp that we didn’t used to have to make that choice.

Here’s the thing.

When you’re firmly on the “who cares about intermissions” side, you’re doing the heavy-lifting for big industry. You’re saying fuck people, yay profits. You’re belittling anyone with any physical ailment that makes sitting 3.5 hours straight too hard. You’re siding on a poorer viewing experience because you will contend with people shifting in seats, getting restless, etc.

You’re also showing your privilege financially, because, for a lot of people, seeing a movie out today is an expensive proposition and they want to savour the whole experience – not keep wondering “is THIS where I can pee without missing a major plot point?”

I haven’t seen one woman go “Whew! A four-hour movie! Just what I wanted!”

Meanwhile, it seems to be entirely men who are dogpiling on anyone who has an issue with a 3.5-hour running time. Why do they care if I have an issue with long movies and want intermissions to return?

Men, who don’t have to sit or wipe to urinate, or even LOWER THEIR PANTS.

Men, who have more bladder staying power.

Men, who have more disposable income.

Men, who have Reddit threads on your “Bladder Strategy for Overly Long MCU Movies.”

(Let me stop you right there: Yes, not all men — there are plenty of guys who are just as annoyed about this overly-long-movie-sans-intermission trend too.)

Now, should a woman do the valiant thing and LAST until the end of a 3.5-hour movie before needing the bathroom, she is almost certainly then going to be stuck in some stupid line that could take a further 10 or 15 minutes to bring her relief.

And let’s talk about the theatres, theatres who wish the Crowds of Old would return to movies and they’re forever wondering where the REST of the audience is, then are shocked — SHOCKED — when the whole world shows up to watch a movie about Barbie (directed by a woman, running time 1 hour 54 minutes, let’s remind you).

I’ll never understand how movie theatres somehow think people having longer movies, with no intermissions, is better for a theatre experience. Especially when, you stick me in that theatre for 3.5 hours, I’m bringing in snacks for when I run out of popcorn. But you give me an intermission, and I’m buying more stuff.

So, yeah, when guys are cracking jokes about how people are bitching about a 3.5-hour runtime but then they binge some series at home, they’re showing how incredibly ignorant they can be.

Of course I’ll binge shows at home. I also pause them a BILLION times to do a Scrabble board, grab snacks, use the loo, text my friends, and stare out the window. “Bingeing” is not remotely the same thing.

That’s why I’ll be doing exactly that with The Killers of the Flower Moon, no matter how long it takes to reach a streaming platform, where the theatre won’t get a penny of my money, the concession stand won’t earn a cent, and the film company will take home a smaller profit.

Keep making stupid choices, Hollywood, and you won’t see me back in theatres.

Bring back the intermission.

Until then, my wallet’s closed.

[PS: Matthew Perry’s death became known last night and I think some of my anger and grief is burrowed into this piece as a way of redirecting it. Matthew’s death has broken my heart. Truly one of my generation, and one of my favourite Canadians. Ever.]

Nomad No More is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.