New at Reason

|3.27.06 @ 1:42PM|#

The URL is missing the .com part: http://www.reason/links/links032706.shtml

|3.27.06 @ 1:54PM|#

The cell industry is being absurd. Do they really think that people will stop buying and using cellphones just because some venues block their use? I come down on the side of the theaters and their property rights. They have the right to restrict the use of any electronic equipment in the theater that they think will interfere with the theater-going experience.

Frankly, the "what if there's an emergency?" argument makes me wonder how we survived all these supposed emergencies just ten or fifteen years ago when cellphones were rare and expensive. "What if the babysitter is trying to call you?" If it's not serious enough to call 911, it can probably wait until the end of the show. "What if someone has a heart attack?" Relatively few heart attacks happen inside a movie theater and you're only seconds from the concession stand. With a little R&D, they might be able to build jammers that let 911 calls through.

Incidentally, I read of a recent research project that was attempting to place molecules of copper inside of nanotubes that would be added to paint. If a weak electrical current was passed through the paint, it would block all radio signals. When the current was switched off, it would let them through. Such an amazing product will surely be banned, or else the FBI's "wires" will be all but useless.

|3.27.06 @ 1:55PM|#

Deuce Ex Machiner:

Yet, the link still works. Menh, I say.

Great article, Jesse. Very balanced, gives attention to the many sides of the issue. Good on you!

I don't see any good reason why the FCC should not allow signal jamming on private property where people venture onto voluntarily. As long as it is disclosed, I see absolutely no weight in the "but what if there's an emergency!?" avenue. It's not the property owner's responsibility to make sure that you're not inconvenienced, even if it it is dire circumstances.

|3.27.06 @ 2:01PM|#

Oh my God James, you mean the world functioned before cellphones? Gasp. I don't believe it. The world would come to a grinding hault if I couldn't talk loudly about the nefarious details of my boring, meaningless life in every restaurant and theater in America!!

|3.27.06 @ 2:06PM|#

Are these theater owners INSANE? If you are actively jamming cell phone frequencies, there is no way you can guarantee the jamming will not extend outside the theater. Imagine a man dying of a heart attack in a mall retail store just on the other side of the wall from a cellphone jamming theater. Nobody can make the 911 call to save his life. He dies and the relatives sue the theater for MILLIONS.

There are shysters -- uh, excuse me, I mean "personal injury lawyers" -- all over the country rubbing their hands together in glee, because they know where thier next yacht payment is coming from!

The really idiotic thing about the whole idea is that it is completely unnecessary. Has nobody involved with this foolishness ever heard of a Faraday cage? In short, if you surround a room with a continuous conductive surface (metal foil or even screen mesh will work fine), ALL electromagnetic signals inside the room are completely blocked. If you've ever tried to use a cell phone inside a manufactured home with sheet metal walls and roof then you've already experienced this effect.

You can "foil" the cell phone nazis with this simple device without getting permission from a single bureaucrat at the FCC, or risking a massive lawsuit from our nation's army of greedy litigators. Why is active jamming even being considered?

|3.27.06 @ 2:09PM|#

One vote for jamming as a preventative measure and electrified seats as a punitive measure.

|3.27.06 @ 2:11PM|#

Imagine a man dying of a heart attack in a mall retail store just on the other side of the wall from a cellphone jamming theater. Nobody can make the 911 call to save his life. He dies and the relatives sue the theater for MILLIONS.

At the risk of being pedantic, I've been in a lot of mall retail stores -- I've even worked in a few -- and I'm preeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeety sure they all have landline phones. This is, in fact, so obvious that . . . well, I can't think of a polite way to end that sentence, so there it is.

|3.27.06 @ 2:13PM|#

Matt,

They would undoubtedly go to great lengths to minimize jamming overspill to adjacent properties.

One has to wonder, though: would a version of the "Faraday Cage", that perhaps surrounded the viewing rooms in a theater complex, be considered "jamming" by the FCC? Technically, it's different from active signal jamming, but pragmatically, it's no different. So, my guess is that the FCC would probably stick their noses in anyway.

|3.27.06 @ 2:17PM|#

Why spend all the expense and regulatory hell to jam a cell phone signal?

It would be simpler to simply place a sign in front of the theatre that reads...For the enjoyment of our patrons, non-emergency cell phone users will be immediately beaten senseless.

It's simple, to the point and gives new meaning to the movie theatre/arcade/snack joint as 'entertainment complex'...Are You NOT Entertained?

I, for one, would be inclined to get out to the movies more often.

Jesse Walker|3.27.06 @ 2:19PM|#

One has to wonder, though: would a version of the "Faraday Cage", that perhaps surrounded the viewing rooms in a theater complex, be considered "jamming" by the FCC?

No, it's legal. It's also more expensive and can't be switched off, so I can see why a theater might prefer to use a jammer.

|3.27.06 @ 2:20PM|#

Wait, Jesse, the answer isn't jamming their tranmissions. You hit it in your article--what we need is the cone of silence. Each patron can opt to use or not use the cone of silence, which will allow him or her to either hear all of the talking, chewing, crying, whatever or to watch the movie in peace.

In addition, the cone of silence could be configured to allow users to network with other users--allowing conversations and social interactions as desired. Finally, the volume level of the movie could be individually controlled, allowing kids to further pursue deafness (building on the head start they're getting from their iPods) and adults to actually listen without having ringing-ear syndrome after seeing the film.

|3.27.06 @ 2:24PM|#

Or "transmissions".

|3.27.06 @ 2:25PM|#

Jesse:

So why is active jamming illegal, but passive jamming is a-ok? What exactly is the rationale being used by the FCC in this differentiation?

|3.27.06 @ 2:26PM|#

I would prefer the theaters to tell cel users to shutdafuckup.

I see it as a boost to business. Yes, you would lose the whiny, selfish, loudassbitch cel users who would be ticked off as to never return to the theater. But in return you'd gain the respect of the other patrons who witness said shutdafuckup - an encouraging sign that this management enforces (what should be) common courtesy.

R C Dean|3.27.06 @ 2:26PM|#

Imagine a man dying of a heart attack in a mall retail store just on the other side of the wall from a cellphone jamming theater.

Does anyone have a duty to ensure that cell service is available in the mall? What if the mall just has bad cell reception in places? It happens, you know. Could you sue the mall for not providing repeaters to guarantee cell reception over every inch? I doubt it.

So, if no one has duty to ensure that cell reception is omnipresent, does anyone have a duty to refrain from interfering with cell reception? Its not jumping out at me, folks. And without violation of a duty, there should be no liability.

Even if there is some kind of duty, I don't think there will be any actionable harm if phone calls can still be made reasonably - either by walking away from the theater, or by an accessible land line.

|3.27.06 @ 2:28PM|#

Pro Liberace:

Thank you for contributing richly to the discussion. I am sure your brilliant idea will be long remembered forthwith.

Timothy|3.27.06 @ 2:29PM|#

RC: I don't even think you have a duty to call 911 if you see a guy having a heart attack, so I'm right with you there.

|3.27.06 @ 2:30PM|#

Ironchef, I completely agree. I would go out to movies much, much more often if the theater owners would actually enforce common courtesy.

I also suggest you trademark "shutdafuckup" as quickly as you can - that's gold, I tell ya!

Jesse Walker|3.27.06 @ 2:31PM|#

Evan: Basically, the law gives the FCC authority over radio transmission devices but it doesn't give it authority over the insulation in movie-theater walls.

|3.27.06 @ 2:32PM|#

At the risk of being pedantic, I've been in a lot of mall retail stores -- I've even worked in a few -- and I'm preeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeety sure they all have landline phones. This is, in fact, so obvious that . . . well, I can't think of a polite way to end that sentence, so there it is.

Yeah, but what if all the people in the store are deaf-mutes and can't talk into the phone, huh? Then what? Answer me that, Mister Smart Guy!

|3.27.06 @ 2:32PM|#

Jesse,

I can see your point about a Faraday cage being hard to reverse (without additional expense), but I don't think it is really that much more expensive when you look at all of the costs involved.

Designing and installing a jamming system is going to require considerable engineering labor. Every site is going to be unique and require proper placement and calibration of the jamming transmitter if one wishes to guarantee that cell phones are not being jammed outside of the viewing area. Additionally, a jammer is going to require electricity and maintenance on an ongoing basis.

And then there is the potential cost of litigation . . .

A cage only requires the installation of a foil surface behind the sound treatment materials on the walls and ceilings of the theater. A crew of trained monkeys could knock it out in a couple of days. After that, it is maintenance free.

|3.27.06 @ 2:33PM|#

I'm not quite sure if there's a problem here. This is one of
those 'smokers' vs. 'non-smokers' kinds of discussions. But here's my
perspective. I get (yes, operative word, 'get') to go to the movies about
once a quarter, maybe twice if I'm lucky. In 100% of those situations, My wife
and I have performed the herculean task of getting child care for our daughter. We
need to have our phones available in case of emergency. Our phones are
always put onto vibrate. But if there's an issue, we're not out of the loop
from our child for over two hours.

The other issue is that while I'm just as happy to complain about the
boorish behaviour of my fellow humans, I have to confess that cell phone use
in the theater has been a nearly non-existent problem in my experience. I'm
not sure if I've heard a cell phone ring in years, frankly. And even if I
did hear one ring (which I haven't) it was probably muffled so quickly that
the experience ended up being a non-issue. Sure, if movie theaters start
jamming cell phones, they'll lose my business. Not out of my sense of
righteous indignation, but out of the simple and
practical fact that when I have people watching my daughter, I can't be
incommunicado for two+ hours. End of discussion. Plus, there have got to
be thousands of professionals, physicians, military people etc. who need to
be on call 24/7. You make it so they're in 'blackout' for 2+ hours while
they watch Brokeback Mountain, and you'll lose their business as well.
Sure, there's the old way: Tell your party ahead of time that you'll be at
oh-such-and-such a theater at oh-such-and-such a time. Then, in case of
emergency, call the theater emergency number (ever find one of those? Yeah,
exactly) and have a theater employee 'track down' the theater goer in a
crowd of 200-300 people in a nearly pitch black room. You want disruption?
How about a teenaged theater employee from the snack counter walking up and
down the isles with a flashlight shouting "Mr. Smith... Mr. Smith, is there a
Mr. Smith in the theater?". Or better, they stop the movie, turn on the
lights and make an overhead announcement. Yeah, that's the smooth way to
handle it. I'll take a cell phone ring any day.

So, my position on this is they shouldn't be jamming cell phones. Sure, it
helps us feel like we're getting all those rude, inconsiderate people who
sit in their seat and prattle on about the days events just as the two
on-screen cowboys consumate their relationship... but it just doesn't
happen- or hasn't happened to me in years. It happened a couple of times in
the early days of cell phones when some guy's cell phone would ring, and
then he'd pick it up and do just that- but the guy doing it considered
himself a 'playa', and had all the requisite personality traits. He was
also nearly hissed out of the theater. So the problem kind of took care of
itself.

|3.27.06 @ 2:36PM|#

I would prefer the theaters to tell cel users to shutdafuckup.

Actually, when I went to see V for Vendetta last Friday, a message came up on the screen (and was read aloud) asking everyone to please turn off their phones' ringers...then after about 30 seconds, it repeated...and then repeated, then faded out. Pretty much a "you can't ignore this" sort of tactic.

Theaters are working on it, I think.

|3.27.06 @ 2:38PM|#

I go to see a lot of movies and have never once had someone answer a cell phone in the theatre. Only a few times have I ever heard one even ring and not only was it silenced almost instantly but I'm grown up enough to be able to ignore it without resorting to whining like a little kid with a skinned knee.

While I support theatre owners' right to jam cell phones, I don't find it particular necessary. Movie tickets are expensive enough without me having to pay another $1 extra to subsidize a mountain solution to a molehill problem.

Ushers in place during the show would be a better idea. Real people who can enforce whatever rules the theatre wants. After all, the problem is talking and noise while the movie is playing. A jammer only eliminates one potential source of that. If I'm going to have the cost of any etiquette enforcement measures passed on to me then I'd perfer that they were more generally useful than a cell phone jammer, whose main purpose seems only to be placating the fretting Luddites.

|3.27.06 @ 2:40PM|#

Not out of my sense of righteous indignation, but out of the simple and practical fact that when I have people watching my daughter, I can't be incommunicado for two+ hours. End of discussion. Plus, there have got to be thousands of professionals, physicians, military people etc. who need to be on call 24/7. You make it so they're in 'blackout' for 2+ hours while they watch Brokeback Mountain, and you'll lose their business as well.

Then you, and they, will need to go to mobile phone-friendly places that don't jam.

|3.27.06 @ 2:41PM|#

R.C. Dean: If it can be definitively proven that, had the theater not been using a jamming device, the harm would have been averted, I can see a case. The other options play little part in this---it's about the total effect of the jamming device. Situation with jamming device vs. situation without jamming device. So, say someone's in a building next door, and they have a medical problem---if their mobile phone doesn't work because of the jamming device, and people are forced to go search for a landline, which results in more serious consequences, then, as long as the plaintiff can definitively show that, had the jamming device not been there, the sitaution could have been much better, then I think there's at least enough to try the case.

Timothy|3.27.06 @ 2:42PM|#

I'll take the odd cellphone ring over the prattling/crying of infants any day. But, still, theatre owners should have the right to jam signals on their property if they want. Whether they should or not is a different question.

I'd be all for allowing other theatre goers to punch parents with loud children, but I somehow doubt that is in the future.

|3.27.06 @ 2:44PM|#

Paul:

"So, my position on this is they shouldn't be jamming cell phones."

This isn't so much a question of whether the theater owners should or should not do it --- that can be decided by individual theater owners and, ultimately, the market --- rather, this is a question of whether they should be allowed, by law, to do it if they want to.

|3.27.06 @ 2:56PM|#

Then you, and they, will need to go to mobile phone-friendly places that don't jam.

Right, which means I'll be relegated to watching obscurantist French films with endings that leave you with a kind of a 'Huh?" feeling.

|3.27.06 @ 3:13PM|#

Right, which means I'll be relegated to watching obscurantist French films with endings that leave you with a kind of a 'Huh?" feeling.

And hearing a lot of ringing phones, but there you go.

|3.27.06 @ 3:13PM|#

I guess this is the "social experience" that the guys at the Oscars kept harping on about. Of course this does nothing about annoying people who gossip during the film, or idiots who leave to go to the bathroom and need to be brought up to speed on the plot, or families with a half dozen noisy kids in two. Maybe instead of looking for an easy technical solution, theatres should return to using ushers to control the audience instead of just having them stand outside the entrance to stamp tickets.

At any rate, all the more reason to invest in a home theatre system.

|3.27.06 @ 3:15PM|#

Site jamming is overkill and likely to have unintended consequences. The easier and more practical solution--if the problem requires a solution--is for theaters to make it clear that they will oust anyone who uses a cellphone while the feature is playing. Simple enough.

Jamming on private property with notice seems reasonable enough as far as what should be allowed under the law. However, I imagine that the vast majority of people who already turn off their ringers and don't take calls in theaters or in similar environments might be a mite ticked off at such draconian measures. Besides, in the theater situation, I find the full-volume conversations and out and out yelling to be a bit more problematic than a few cellphone rings.

Evan, you want a libertarian without a sense of humor? Tsk, tsk.

|3.27.06 @ 3:16PM|#

Matt said:
"I go to see a lot of movies and have never once had someone answer a cell phone in the theatre. Only a few times have I ever heard one even ring and not only was it silenced almost instantly"

I tend to agree. I've lived all over the US, from Florida to California, and seen movies at dozens of theaters. In all that time I can't remember cell phone users being that big of a problem. Kids, though . . .

Outside the US is a different story. When I lived in Brazil the noise in theaters was absolutely intolerable. They love American movies, but 99% of them can't speak English. So nobody minds if everyone talks during the movie because everyone is reading the Portuguese subtitles. Maybe this will become a problem here in the States when native English speakers become a minority (which may happen any day in Florida, Texas, and California)

Frankly, if theater owners want to boost revenues, I have a modest suggestion:

Serve beer!

I refuse to pay $3.00 for a coke, but I'll pay $5.00 for a beer any day of the week. Nothing goes with popcorn and nachos like brew! These guys need to stop harrasing cell phone users and start giving us what we REALLY want. ;-)

|3.27.06 @ 3:17PM|#

Site jamming is overkill and likely to have unintended consequences. The easier and more practical solution--if the problem requires a solution--is for theaters to make it clear that they will oust anyone who uses a cellphone while the feature is playing. Simple enough.

Jamming on private property with notice seems reasonable enough as far as what should be allowed under the law. However, I imagine that the vast majority of people who already turn off their ringers and don't take calls in theaters or in similar environments might be a mite ticked off at such draconian measures. Besides, in the theater situation, I find the full-volume conversations and out and out yelling to be a bit more problematic than a few cellphone rings.

Evan, you want a libertarian without a sense of humor? Tsk, tsk.

|3.27.06 @ 3:20PM|#

This server is really pissing me off to no end.

|3.27.06 @ 3:33PM|#

What the whole thing comes down to is that people are just animals anymore. How hard is it to put the thing on vibrate and when it goes off, quietly get up walk out of the theater and take the call? That people cannot figure that out or care enough to figure it out is just sad.

|3.27.06 @ 3:42PM|#

John: the only way we're going to win this battle against the animals is call the fucking bastards out in public. Someone answers a cell phone call in the middle of a theater, you go over to him and sternly demand that he turn it off at once. Most of these inconsiderate animals you speak of are only inconsiderate because nobody ever has the nuts to call them on their inconsideration. Embarrass the assholes once or twice, they'll think twice next time. It's OUR fault, dammit. And I've gotten to the point where I am proactive. I'll request that people take their screaming demon spawn outside of a restaurant until it can manage to shut its evil little pie hole. Shit like that is necessary when people have become so inconsiderate and ignorant of others that they cannot function in society.

|3.27.06 @ 3:52PM|#

When I was a kid, in the 70's, my parents used to leave their cell number for the baby sitter to call. No, wait, they left the number of the theater and the restaurant they were going to afterwards. Unfortunately, I was choking while they were in the car between the two places. Since my parents couldn't be reached, I died horribly. At least the funeral was pretty. Serves my parents right for not being in communicable range 100% of the time!

|3.27.06 @ 3:57PM|#

While I support theatre owners' right to jam cell phones, I don't find it particular necessary. Movie tickets are expensive enough without me having to pay another $1 extra to subsidize a mountain solution to a molehill problem.

Ushers in place during the show would be a better idea.

Ushers, of course, are supplied to movie theaters en masse at no cost whatsoever.

|3.27.06 @ 4:03PM|#

This isn't so much a question of whether the theater owners should or should not do it --- that can be decided by individual theater owners and, ultimately, the market --- rather, this is a question of whether they should be allowed, by law, to do it if they want to.

I basically agree. And I admit that I'm not really attacking the problem from a rights of theater owners vs. rights of cell phone yakkers perspective. I'm merely pointing out that I'm not sure if there's really a problem here. It seems as though theater conglomerates are attacking something that in my opinion, doesn't even occur. They'd be just as effective banning children under 6 for any movie that's not intended for them.

Let's look at this another way. Two theaters. One has a movie you want to see, but doesn't jam cell phones, the other, has a movie that you're really not that interested in, but does. Do you go to the movie you want to see, and be subjected to the constant, never ending, relentless and continuing use of in-theater cell phones, or bag it and see the crap movie that your wife wants to see?

Get it?

|3.27.06 @ 4:06PM|#

Ushers, of course, are supplied to movie theaters en masse at no cost whatsoever.

That's why I also said the following:

If I'm going to have the cost of any etiquette enforcement measures passed on to me then I'd perfer that they were more generally useful than a cell phone jammer,

Obviously, hiring ushers will increase cost but I'm more willing to pay for that than I am a cell phone jammer.

|3.27.06 @ 4:07PM|#

Site jamming is overkill and likely to have unintended consequences. The easier and more practical solution--if the problem requires a solution--is for theaters to make it clear that they will oust anyone who uses a cellphone while the feature is playing. Simple enough.

I'll add my anecdotal evidence.

There are two theaters near my house. One is a smaller local theather (General Cinemas). Only about 8 screens. No Stadium seating, not very comforatable chairs Older place. Whenever I have watched movies there, I have never had a problem with noise, particularly cell phone noise.

The other one is a larger theather (Cinemark), attracts a LOT more people from neighboring towns, has nice stadium seating, plush seats and maybe 20 screens. Everytime I watch a movie there, without fail, someones cell phone rings (it has happened more than once in the same movie). Most of the time, someone answers the cell phone and proceeds to explain that they are in a theater watching a movie and they will call back. Sometimes they will actually try to have a conversation. All of this happens after the screen has showed the whole "PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES AND PAGERS" and "Please be quiet during the show." It is because of the behavior of many patrons at this theater that my wife and I prefer to go to the local theater, despite sometimes having to settle and not always get to see the movie we want that happens to be playing at Cinemark.

What I have never seen in this second scenario is someone being ejected, or even approached about their discourteous use of cell phones. Futhermore, in a huge dark theater, good luck trying to find out exactly whose phone is ringing, and not disrupting every other patron in trying to eject the disruptive person. Most of the times, there are only a couple of ushers that even work at the theaters and only periodically check on the the different screens that are being watched. (One time it took 10 minutes before someone realized that the projector was pointed to high and the bottom half of the movie was projected onto the top half of the screen)

My point? I think that each theater should have the ability to do as they please based on whatever problems they have noticed. The Cinemark theater near me would probably be better served by jamming cell phones, since they have tried (to an extent) to curb the issue via reminders and notices, without success. The General Cinemas one probably wouldn't bother. And I think jamming cell phones would be a lot less intrusive than havign to have other patrons confrot others or have to complain and then have to usher people out, who since they are being ejected will probably be even more disrutptive.

|3.27.06 @ 4:07PM|#

Screw cell phones. I want a gameboy jammer.

|3.27.06 @ 4:08PM|#

No, wait, they left the number of the theater and the restaurant they were going to afterwards.

Hmm, I guess you missed my previous post. Allow me to retort:

Sure, there's the old way: Tell your party ahead of time that you'll be at oh-such-and-such a theater at oh-such-and-such a time. Then, in case of emergency, call the theater emergency number (ever find one of those? Yeah, exactly) and have a theater employee 'track down' the theater goer in a crowd of 200-300 people in a nearly pitch black room. You want disruption? How about a teenaged theater employee from the snack counter walking up and down the isles with a flashlight shouting "Mr. Smith... Mr. Smith, is there a Mr. Smith in the theater?". Or better, they stop the movie, turn on the lights and make an overhead announcement. Yeah, that's the smooth way to handle it. I'll take a cell phone ring any day.

|3.27.06 @ 4:11PM|#

The other one is a larger theather (Cinemark), attracts a LOT more people from neighboring towns, has nice stadium seating, plush seats and maybe 20 screens. Everytime I watch a movie there, without fail, someones cell phone rings (it has happened more than once in the same movie). Most of the time, someone answers the cell phone and proceeds to explain that they are in a theater watching a movie and they will call back. Sometimes they will actually try to have a conversation.

Fascinating. I go to both small, 'indy' theaters and the big cineplexes. Neither of which I've ever experienced a cell phone ring since the early eighties when cell phones were 'new' and the etiquette hadn't yet been established. Maybe it's a geographical thing. Peeps in be Chicago rude?

Maybe I'm lucky-- living in Seattle where everyone thinks they're a professional film critic-- there may be a pervasive 'respect' in the theater.

|3.27.06 @ 4:16PM|#

And hearing a lot of ringing phones, but there you go.

Well, no Eric, actually not. As I've been stating in many a previous posts- in theater cell phone ringing is something that I have simply not seen in a dozen years. So what, exactly are we 'fixing'?

There's some odd suggestion here that everyone who sits in a theater for a couple of hours is deluged by the relentless ringing of cell phones and ensuing conversations. Chicagotom alluded to such an experience, but its simply not mine.

I'm not sure where and what movies y'all are going to but, I haven't heard a cell phone ring, let alone the followup conversation since the early nineties when cell phones were 'newfangled'.

|3.27.06 @ 4:18PM|#

I'm going to disagree with those who say that cell-phone use isn't a problem in the theater. Just this past weekend, the teenager seated directly behind me received about a half-dozen calls during V for Vendetta. He was polite enough to set the phone on vibrate. He wasn't polite enough to NOT ANSWER THE FRIGGING CALLS!!! I got to hear all about the social plans he had made for after the movie.

Normally, I'm not shy about telling jerks like this to stuff it. But I was convinced that complaints about his behavior would've been met with loud ridicule that would have exacerbated the problem instead of solving it.

|3.27.06 @ 4:22PM|#

This is nothing that can't be cured by a roll of duct tape. Takes care of cellphone babblers, plus all the other yammering idiots.

Sometimes the simplest ideas are the best ideas.

|3.27.06 @ 4:22PM|#

If we had our Second Amendment rights, this would be a moot point.

|3.27.06 @ 4:25PM|#

Serve beer!

I take it you've never been to Flickers in Columbus.

dhex|3.27.06 @ 4:26PM|#

"I go to see a lot of movies and have never once had someone answer a cell phone in the theatre."

where the fuck do you live?

nyc movies = open mic night

|3.27.06 @ 4:27PM|#

Perhaps it is a regional thing.

I live in the NW Chicago Suburbs and the nearest movie theatre is a 30 screen googleplex.

Occaisionally, cell phones do go off (always after the reminders to turn off your cell phone). The offenders are often thoughtless, clueless teenagers.

|3.27.06 @ 4:31PM|#

I'm going to disagree with those who say that cell-phone use isn't a problem in the theater. Just this past weekend, the teenager seated directly behind me received about a half-dozen calls during V for Vendetta. He was polite enough to set the phone on vibrate. He wasn't polite enough to NOT ANSWER THE FRIGGING CALLS!!!

Look, I'm not trying to get my libertarian card revoked here or anything, but... I mean, I'm all for smokers rights, cell phone users rights, right of an exstablishment to go non-smoking, right of an establishment to go non-cell phone. And I can see here that some people apparently live around or in areas where cell phone etiquette is, shall we say, less than optimum. I'm not sure what the answer is. Move out of the sticks where all the teenagers are? Yeah, I know, I'm being flip.

I'm just not seeing a problem. Take the example above, how is that different from two people talking in the theater? I think that we're not looking at the big picture: Teenager + theater = stupid behavior. I remember before cell phones existed that the one way to annoy theater goers was to strategically place a few teenagers in the theater and voila- feet on seats, chatter about their personal lives during the movie. Is the cell phone the problem, or is it the people who are going to theaters? In the case above, it wasn't the ringing that was the problem, it was the talking. So we can all agree that talking during the movie is bad. There used to be a time that if you yammered during a movie, the theater employees would ask you to shut up. Failing that, you'd be escorted out. Is this one of the cases where the old days really were better?

|3.27.06 @ 4:33PM|#

where the fuck do you live?

Southeastern VA.

|3.27.06 @ 4:34PM|#

nyc movies = open mic night

So maybe the problem is with the denizens of the east coast. Bigger mouths there?

|3.27.06 @ 4:38PM|#

Occaisionally, cell phones do go off (always after the reminders to turn off your cell phone). The offenders are often thoughtless, clueless teenagers.

I'm beginning to see a pattern here... teenager + cell phone + theater = bad idea.

|3.27.06 @ 4:40PM|#

Normally, I'm not shy about telling jerks like this to stuff it. But I was convinced that complaints about his behavior would've been met with loud ridicule that would have exacerbated the problem instead of solving it.

Yeah, especially if I could hear you bitching at him from fifteen rows back. I was in a comedy club once and a phone went off. It rang for maybe a second until the owner shut it off but someone else in the room decided to yell out "Shut the damn thing off, no one came to hear that!" to which the comedian on stage angrily replied "Shut the fuck up, Rambo, no one came to hear you either!"

I had a running commentator in front of me during one movie. I simply leaned forward and said that if he spoke again that I would stab him in the parking lot. He never said another word. You have to say it right though. It's all in the tone of voice...

|3.27.06 @ 4:41PM|#

I quit going to movies a while ago and the cell phone users were a big part of it. At every movie there would be more than a few incoming calls, outgoing calls, and people sending text messages with the brightly glowing screens in the audience. Once you have sat next to someone compulsively checking on the babysitter to make sure everything is OK you will support anything that will make the self absorbed assholes put their phones away for a while. It is not possible to use signs, on screen displays and verbal warnings and really expect any of them to work. There will always be people that think "turn off your cell phone" does not apply to someone with kids, a babysitter at home, a business to run or any of the other excuses that people give for having to have instant worldwide communication capacity available 24/7. IMO, if you can't deal with being out of touch with your kids or the babysitter for 2 hours, then you should just stay home, you would be much happier without the constant worry and your fellow humans would appreciate not having to deal with your life while they are enjoying their own.

|3.27.06 @ 4:47PM|#

There will always be people that think "turn off your cell phone" does not apply to someone with kids, a babysitter at home, a business to run or any of the other excuses that people give for having to have instant worldwide communication capacity available 24

Who does this, though? All of this sounds like generalized bitching about a situation that even the people above don't describe. It's always the clueless teenager. People with babysitters keep their phone on so they can be reached, not so they can reach the babysitter. I've never made a call in a theater in my life, and I've never turned my cell phone off, either. If this behavior is occurring, this is in a place full of overly nervous people with neurotic obsessive compulsive disorders... you know, people from the east. The more I read of this, the more I'm beginning to believe that it is a regional thing.

|3.27.06 @ 4:51PM|#

It rang for maybe a second until the owner shut it off but someone else in the room decided to yell out "Shut the damn thing off, no one came to hear that!"

Ahh yes, the same thing that happens on UseNet groups. A tiny, one line post that's off-topic occurs, and then a thread of no less than 187,000 messages follows with people screaming "Off Topic!". I'm beginning to see a thread between anti-smoking and anti-cell phone use... just thoughts.

|3.27.06 @ 4:58PM|#

The activity that I am describing does occur and not just in the East, I live in Phoenix and there have been plenty of times I have had the terrible luck of sitting near the OCD parent that had to call a few times just to make sure everything was OK, or a realtor that can't stop working for even a minute lest they lose a commission. IMO, parents and business owners are the worst offenders, but I don't go to the types of movies that attract a big teenage crowd.

|3.27.06 @ 5:02PM|#

I live in Phoenix and there have been plenty of times I have had the terrible luck of sitting near the OCD parent that had to call a few times just to make sure everything was OK, or a realtor that can't stop working for even a minute lest they lose a commission.

So you're talking about insufferable obsessive compulsives who recently moved to Phoenix from the East.

*ducks* Don't be hatin'

|3.27.06 @ 5:05PM|#

Proof:

There was a multi-victim shooting at a party in a Seattle neighborhood the other night. When asked what the situation was like, a party goer responded, and I quote, "It was pretty chill."

To describe a massacre involving a youth with a shotgun, and six victims as 'pretty chill', you got a regional thing going on here.

|3.27.06 @ 5:23PM|#

Everett True would take care of theater going cell phone users.

|3.27.06 @ 5:24PM|#

Paul - yeah, it's all the easterners moving here to Phoenix that ruin the movie-going experience!

Actually, I haven't been to a movie in quite a while. I don't go because they're too expensive and too long...you often need to piss at a very important part of the movie, and with my DVD player, I simply pause it while I do so. Don't miss a thing.

Also, I can't sit around in my underwear, drinking a beer, and smoking a joint in a theatre.

|3.27.06 @ 5:31PM|#

Paul's replies to other posters:

Fascinating. I go to both small, 'indy' theaters and the big cineplexes. Neither of which I've ever experienced a cell phone ring since the early eighties when cell phones were 'new' and the etiquette hadn't yet been established. Maybe it's a geographical thing. Peeps in be Chicago rude?

Well, no Eric, actually not. As I've been stating in many a previous posts- in theater cell phone ringing is something that I have simply not seen in a dozen years. So what, exactly are we 'fixing'?

I'm just not seeing a problem. Take the example above, how is that different from two people talking in the theater?

So maybe the problem is with the denizens of the east coast. Bigger mouths there?

Who does this, though? All of this sounds like generalized bitching about a situation that even the people above don't describe.

Ahh yes, the same thing that happens on UseNet groups. A tiny, one line post that's off-topic occurs, and then a thread of no less than 187,000 messages follows with people screaming "Off Topic!". I'm beginning to see a thread between anti-smoking and anti-cell phone use... just thoughts.

So you're talking about insufferable obsessive compulsives who recently moved to Phoenix from the East.

Paul,

After reading through this thread, I think I can sum up your position:

"The problem hasn't directly affected me, so there must not be a problem."

As for the whole "its no different than talkers", you may be right. The reason we can't stop people from talking is because, barring force, there is no way to stop someone from talking. But that doesn't mean that if a way comes up to stop them from talking without using force that it shouldn't be implemented. Jamming a cell phone, while telling them as they enter that their cells will be jammed, seems like a logical choice to me.

If someone REALLY can't be out of range for 2 hours, then a movie really isn't where you should be for 2 hours.

|3.27.06 @ 5:48PM|#

What if just one theater in the multiplex devoted itself to special *over 25 (infants, toddlers, kids and teens), under 65(old people are even worse:P), cell phone-free, quiet showings? Some theatres already have special mom showings where their kids can go wild but everyone expects it going in. At one of the quiet showings, everyone could be notified that if the make noise, they're out. It only requires one or two ushers, and I'd be glad to pay an extra buck or two to enjoy the movie I already paid 8:75 for.

They could alternate the film by time to get all the big releases in. Theaters could see how many people go to those showings and determine if they were worthwhile.

|3.27.06 @ 5:52PM|#

What I would like to see is for a industry standard that would automatically put all phones in vibrate mode when it is in the vicinity of a standard radio signal.

Here is a technology solution I think would be very useful that most could probably agree to:

In area's where it is desirable to silent all phones, a special radio signal is broadcasted. Then when a phone receives a call, only the vibrate would work to alert the caller that a call was received, with the caller-id working. User would not be able to take the incoming call. The phone would not be prohibited to make calls, only blocked from receiving them.

This takes care of emergencies in the theater/office, and still respect others. If the user is in the theater, they would hopefully leave the theater to make the call back, but nothing would prevent them from making the call back in the theater.

What do you think?

-- Leigh

|3.27.06 @ 5:55PM|#

Come to think of it, maybe theaters should offer more "targeted audience" showings. They might even be able to boost revenue by selling commericial time for a more exact demographic .

|3.27.06 @ 6:09PM|#

Paul,

After reading through this thread, I think I can sum up your position:

"The problem hasn't directly affected me, so there must not be a problem."

Well, maybe, except that the opposite could be inferred from others: "The problem has directly affected me (once, maybe), so something must be done!"

Unfortunately, this blog isn't scientific. My experience isn't scientific either... but I just did a short mini survey around my office, and 100% of respondents claimed that they couldn't remember if or when the last time (if ever) a cell phone or cell phone usage in general has disturbed their movie going experience. Most everyone also agreed that in general, people are pretty courteous in the theater about cell phone use.

If someone REALLY can't be out of range for 2 hours, then a movie really isn't where you should be for 2 hours.

And I might agree. But if you get my first post- I was pretty clear about my position, it didn't require the analysis of a panel of expert psychologists. I said that if theaters start largely (or universally) blocking cell phone calls, they'd lose my business (sorry, gonna repeat myself here) not so much out of righteous indignation, but out of the fact that I may not want to be incommunicado for two+ hours while my child is under the care of another. That's my choice. I was merely musing that theaters might lose even more money because I suspoect there are a lot of people in professional positions- physicians, law enforcement (oh, maybe blocking cell phones is a good idea HAA!) etc., who need to be able to receive a call (or a text message) allowing them to leave the theater if need be. All of this can be handled politely, with as much or less disturbance than the annoying diabetic that keeps going to the bathroom every 11 minutes.

I still contend that my *real* position isn't being understood: And that's that if theaters suddenly start blocking cell phone usage, I don't foresee throngs, THRONGS, I SAY of previously distraught theater goers returning to the medium that is cinema because cell phone signals are now being jammed. Theater conglomerates are grasping at straws, and if they think that buying expensive cell phone jamming equipment and installing it in every theater operation nationwide will suddenly return the 'experience' of the big screen to its golden days- they're sadly mistaken.

|3.27.06 @ 6:15PM|#

At one of the quiet showings, everyone could be notified that if the make noise, they're out. It only requires one or two ushers, and I'd be glad to pay

thank you... Excellent point. I really, really think this could be handled without ever jamming a single cell phone, because, as I've been saying, cell phone usage isn't as much a problem as generally unruly theater goers.

Sure, jam all the cell phones you want, but that still won't fix:

o The snacks suck and are over-priced and the crowds immature.

o The idiot kicking the back of my chair

o the squad of teenagers snickering down in the front row,

o the person talking in the back,

o the person yelling at the person in the back to shut up

o and, of course, the small, randomly shrieking child who, after 2.5 hours of LoTR, finally cracks and spends the rest of the movie in one long, final shriek, have all driven nails into the coffin I call "movie-going".

(The above list clipped from a brief list of common complaints about theater going, none of which have anything to do with cell phone usage, per se)

|3.27.06 @ 7:35PM|#

What I can't stand is the people in the theaters screaming about cell phone use. I mean, does anyone have any idea how difficult it is to have a cell phone conversation while fifteen people sitting around you keep screaming about your phone usage?

|3.27.06 @ 8:45PM|#

Sure, if movie theaters start
jamming cell phones, they'll lose my business. Not out of my sense of
righteous indignation, but out of the simple and
practical fact that when I have people watching my daughter, I can't be
incommunicado for two+ hours. End of discussion.

Um, I'll bet you can. I'll bet she'd survive.

My God, how did people ever rear children before the advent of cell phones? Because I'm thinking at least three billion of us managed to survive to adulthood without being tethered to our parents 24/7 by wireless devices.

Sigh. "I breed, therefore I am too special to follow the rules and respect the comfort, enjoyment, and investments of others."

When theaters finally "lose the business" of inconsiderate parents, I might actually start going back to movies again.

|3.27.06 @ 10:45PM|#

Jamming cell phones is really not going to be effective. This isn't even worth arguing about until they start jamming rags into the mouths of every teenager in the theater.

|3.27.06 @ 11:11PM|#

Sigh. "I breed, therefore I am too special to follow the rules and respect the comfort, enjoyment, and investments of others."

Fascinating how little people read... Fascinating.

|3.27.06 @ 11:12PM|#

Jamming cell phones is really not going to be effective. This isn't even worth arguing about until they start jamming rags into the mouths of every teenager in the theater.

Finally, someone who's reading the thread.

|3.28.06 @ 8:58AM|#

If shielding is Not OK, then can I sue my apartment complex because it was build from a reallyoldbuilding with lots and lots of reinforced steel and is nothing more than a goddamn Faraday cage?

I don't understand this assumption that we have the constitutional right to have 24 hour access to cellular phone signals.

|3.28.06 @ 9:27AM|#

Lowdog, Paul, and Deus Ex Machina get right to the heart of the matter: why does anyone choose to see a movie in the theater anymore? Watching DVDs at home is so much cheaper, more convenient, more comfortable, and you can select from tens of thousands of movies to watch, instead of the dozen or two currently featured at the theaters.

Reasons to see a movie in a theater instead of at home:

1) Can't wait for the DVD release.
2) Cabin fever.
3) No air conditioning at home.
4) "Big screen" experience.

Can anybody think of any other reasons?

Reason.com

New at Reason

Jesse Walker|3.27.06 @ 2:19PM|#

R C Dean|3.27.06 @ 2:26PM|#

Timothy|3.27.06 @ 2:29PM|#

Jesse Walker|3.27.06 @ 2:31PM|#

Timothy|3.27.06 @ 2:42PM|#

dhex|3.27.06 @ 4:26PM|#

Leave a Comment

Most Popular Stories

Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey

advertisements

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices: