h a l f b a k e r yA few slices short of a loaf.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
A movie is written and directed, except with two 'decision points' in the movie, in which a main character has to make a decision, or something similar happens that affects the outcome: one in the beginning/middle transition, the other in the middle/end transition.
At these points during the film (assuming
an audience in a theater is watching), the audience votes on one of two choices, and the choice with the most votes is placed in the projector.
In this way, the same movie has 4 different endings, and moviegoers have to go back a few different times to see all of the options.
How the voting works: Simple hands-raised voting. A theater employee stops the projector on the frame with the choice, then the audience is asked to vote by raising their hand.
I assume you won't want to go and watch the same exact version again and again...if this is your first time seeing the film, you are given a green cardboard paddle to hold up to vote. If it's your second time (you need to bring the ticket stubs back as proof), you get red. Third time, you get blue. This makes it more fair to people who have already seen the film.
A green paddle is worth 1 vote, red is worth 2, and blue is worth 3. Based on the votes, the next part of the film is played.
If you plan to return and see another version, a theater employee is standing at the exit with a stamp. You get your ticket stub stamped with the movie version (1-4).
If you end up seeing the same version of the film again and want your money returned, you can show the stub afterward and get a half-price refund. This is to prevent it in the case someone liked the film and wanted to see it again.
I guess there can also be showings of each version, in case a theater doesn't want to deal with the voting/stubs, or for the security of someone who doesn't want to see the same version again.
halfbaked already
http://www.halfbake...Adventure_20DVD_27s
same thing, home version [luecke, Oct 05 2004]
Sliding Doors
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120148/
[calum, Oct 05 2004]
the same idea, but older
http://www.halfbake...ticipation_20movies
Sorry, but it's redundant [schematics, Oct 05 2004]
[link]
|
| |
Your subtitle is flawed: it would be
the same after four viewings. |
|
| |
I think they tried this in the 50's,
along with Smell-O-Vision (tm)
(really!) and various different
aspect ratios. And, of course, the
3D glasses. None of them really
worked out. |
|
| |
At first it seems like a good idea and then I recoil in horror. |
|
| |
I've done this with live theatre. it's excellent. we rehearsed two different endings and had an electronic voting system for the audience to decide. however, they didn't decide the ending just a decision for the central characetr, so there was still room for a little twist at the end. |
|
| |
Dramocracy! Brilliant! Do you mind if I steal your idea for my degree [etherman]? |
|
| |
not a prob. I'm a drama grad. let me know if you need some details. e-mail on profile. |
|
| |
I know, lets do the Thelma and Louise ending. |
|
| |
How can you vote for an ending without
knowing what it is? And if you already know what it is, why not watch something else? |
|
| |
the idea shouldn't be to vote for an ending. itshould be to vote for a turning point in the movie which triggers and ending. there needs to be a dilema which the audience answers and which triggers the following chain of events. i.e alove triangle, which guy should the heroine go for. |
|
| |
Sorry if I misphrased it. I don't mean that you vote for an ending that you already know about, I mean that you vote for a decision by one of the characters or something like that, depending on the film and the situation. You don't know what the ending is. |
|
| |
[phundug] It really helps to read the entire description. |
|
| |
Read it. Mainly because this monkey was throwing his shit around elsewhere. |
|
| |
This is stupid. Really fucking stupid. |
|
| |
It sounds like a computer adventure game, along the lines of "Dracula Unleashed". |
|
| |
Or the film version of the "clue" game. It had three end reels shipped to theaters, so the ads said "who done it, depends on where you see
it". So that part of the idea is baked. |
|
| |
But on the clue video, you got all the endings. |
|
| |
Also, In live theater there was "The Mystery of Edwin Drood", where you voted on the murderer, and the secret lovers, or something like
that. |
|
| |
It was sort of a "dramocracy", cool word for that kind of theater, etherman. |
|
| |
oh yeah, there was also that play, "Tamara", in which you'd pick an actor to follow into various rooms of an "Italian villa". the end was
the same, but you saw different scenes in the middle, depending on who you followed. It was great fun. |
|
| |
You people need to make up your minds. You're giving me negative votes, and then saying how much fun it would be. What's the deal??? |
|
| |
[Neelandan] Just for the record - I don't like you. Keep your goddamn mouth shut. |
|
| |
it is a good idea but i suspect it would work best in an art house cinema, having been to a local cinema not sure i would want the bunch of chimps in there choosing the end of the film. (i use chimps as they seem to have been unable to stay still, quite or understand the concept of turning a phone off) |
|
| |
I just voted for it, it's a cool concept. It hasn't exactly been baked in a movie theater, at least I don't think so. |
|
| |
And yes it would be better for an art house, or some sort of film festival. |
|
| |
This was done once, I know for certain, but I can't remember the movie. It was invented by the same guy responsible for the original "13 Ghosts" which had special glasses you wore to allow you to see the ghosts. |
|
| |
Anyway, it was something of a flop because the audience always (ALWAYS) voted for the same ending. The alternate ending was literally never shown. |
|
| |