Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Secret Cinema does Back To The Future


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 25-07-2014, 15:54
Straker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 25,646
Pics of what people are not going to see tonight:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...g-9629107.html

Reader comment says it all:

Is it still a secret cinema when it's headline news in the ES two days running?
Straker is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 25-07-2014, 17:18
PunksNotDead
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,688
Very good of Rufus Hound.
LINK
PunksNotDead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-07-2014, 18:15
FinalAnswer?
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 253
All weekend shows have now been cancelled.

Only took them nearly 48 hours to admit what was wrong. Hopefully I can move my tickets to another weekend or that's me out.
FinalAnswer? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-07-2014, 21:51
Seanieb1983
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,032
I'm not sure how secret the expected it to be with Westfield Stratford and flats overlooking it.

Utter shambles. Was meant to go on the opening night.

Had to laugh at the owner bragging about selling 80,000 tickets, for it to be cancelled 6 hour later. 5 shows of around 3000 people.

I'd be interests to know what Universal think this kind of bad publicity around their brand won't be what they'd have signed up for.
Seanieb1983 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 25-07-2014, 23:12
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 13,996
Because it's more than just 'seeing the film'. It's supposed to be an immersive experience where you spend time interacting with things from the film that the organisers have set up - A 1950s style prom, battle of the bands performances, actors playing out the best scenes from the film as you grab a snack or drink etc.

Once that's over then you watch the film, which is supposed to be projected onto a replica Hill Valley Clock Tower.

Back to the Future is a classic (best film ever, in my opinion) and so has a lot of fans. It's just a shame the organisers seem to have messed this up so badly.
If that floats yer boat fair enough, though that's more than I just paid to get into this years Scotland v England football match, and I thought that was a rip off.
JCR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-07-2014, 00:08
theonlyweeman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,041
If that floats yer boat fair enough, though that's more than I just paid to get into this years Scotland v England football match, and I thought that was a rip off.
A football match is 90 minutes, this event was supposed to 5 hours a night...
theonlyweeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-07-2014, 13:22
Trsvis_Bickle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 8,858
Pics of what people are not going to see tonight:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...g-9629107.html

Reader comment says it all:
I think this one says it all:

Just had a look on their website - adult tickets 53.50 children 25 or a family ticket for 150- so the people in the photo have spent in excess of 150 to basically go to the cinema in 50's clothing, and be in a replica of the set . some people have more money than sense. I suppose its because i see BTTF as just a fun movie of its time. Nothing to write home about and certainly nothing to spend nearly 200 going to see.
Trsvis_Bickle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-07-2014, 13:45
Los_Tributos
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 199
A football match is 90 minutes, this event was supposed to 5 hours a night...
In fairness, at least the match happened!
Los_Tributos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2014, 17:23
lovetochat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 632
Reviews from last night have been good.

Anyone been/going?

As for the cost, my kids wanted to see Ant and Dec Saturday Night Takeaway on tour and it's more expensive than Secret Cinema for a much shorter event, without the extra effort. At least Secret Cinema is reduced for children!
lovetochat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2014, 19:06
Johnny Clay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,844
I think this one says it all:
Just had a look on their website - adult tickets 53.50 children 25 or a family ticket for 150- so the people in the photo have spent in excess of 150 to basically go to the cinema in 50's clothing, and be in a replica of the set . some people have more money than sense. I suppose its because i see BTTF as just a fun movie of its time. Nothing to write home about and certainly nothing to spend nearly 200 going to see.
That's all it ever really was. A good film, fondly remembered and still entertaining. But this whole episode touches on one of the most pathetic modern conceits: the often sentimental trumping up of something way beyond its actual cultural worth.

Doubtless BttF has its fans, but it was no pop-culture touchstone - the true ones go without saying. Contriving to hike it up amongst them (which I suspect is what this sort of elaborate celebration is in some ways about) looks like a sort of cultural envy, and a faintly desperate envy at that. It all seems rather manufactured, rather than evolved of its own accord.

Stump up and watch the film by all means. But dress up in 50's clothing? Oh, give over.
Johnny Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2014, 19:26
TexAveryWolf
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 443
That's all it ever really was. A good film, fondly remembered and still entertaining. But this whole episode touches on one of the most pathetic modern conceits: the often sentimental trumping up of something way beyond its actual cultural worth.

Doubtless BttF has its fans, but it was no pop-culture touchstone - the true ones go without saying. Contriving to hike it up amongst them (which I suspect is what this sort of elaborate celebration is in some ways about) looks like a sort of cultural envy, and a faintly desperate envy at that. It all seems rather manufactured, rather than evolved of its own accord.

Stump up and watch the film by all means. But dress up in 50's clothing? Oh, give over.
Fundamentally mistaken.
Whether or not the original film is part of the canon of classics is moot, but irrelevant.
SC are not,in stageing these events,affirming the aesthetic worth of the films, but are rather choosing TEXTS,if you will,off of which an event can be explored, or riffed.

It is a theatrical variation on a given cinematic theme.

The notion of brain dead and deracinated hipsters is a figment of your rather quotidian imagination.
TexAveryWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2014, 19:30
Johnny Clay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,844
Fundamentally mistaken.
Whether or not the original film is part of the canon of classics is moot, but irrelevant.
SC are not,in stageing these events,affirming the aesthetic worth of the films, but are rather choosing TEXTS,if you will,off of which an event can be explored, or riffed.

It is a theatrical variation on a given cinematic theme.
But for what reason, and for what (perhaps desired) result?
Johnny Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2014, 20:22
quirkyquirk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,424
That's all it ever really was. A good film, fondly remembered and still entertaining. But this whole episode touches on one of the most pathetic modern conceits: the often sentimental trumping up of something way beyond its actual cultural worth.

Doubtless BttF has its fans, but it was no pop-culture touchstone - the true ones go without saying. Contriving to hike it up amongst them (which I suspect is what this sort of elaborate celebration is in some ways about) looks like a sort of cultural envy, and a faintly desperate envy at that. It all seems rather manufactured, rather than evolved of its own accord.

Stump up and watch the film by all means. But dress up in 50's clothing? Oh, give over.
As much as I love BTTF this thing isn't for me but downplaying it's classic status is a bit silly.

It was a huge box-office success that was loved by audiences and critics, nominated for Academy Awards, BAFTAS, winner of Saturn Awards and such, it's usually considered as the best 80's movie, it's usually on AFI's lists such as Best High School Movies, Comedy movies, Sci-fi movies, Songs, Quotes.

Considered one of the best written screenplays of all time by Writers Guild Of America, selected for National Registry by Library of congress in 2007. And todays critics and audiences are still heaping praise on it, and there's a West End musical planned next year for the 30th anniversary. It doesn't need to try to be part of pop culture, or try to be boosted as a classic, it is.

And I never get the "of it's time" part. It's perfectly acted for the tone of the movie, the screenplay is pitch perfect, and the concept of a teenager meeting his teenage parents is original, and the idea of a son teaching his father how to be a man timeless.
quirkyquirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2014, 21:24
Johnny Clay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,844
As much as I love BTTF this thing isn't for me but downplaying it's classic status is a bit silly.
I know we all define classic differently and via different criteria, but it's no classic to these eyes. Not in the real sense.

I'd agree, very much so, that it was part of the commercialised, mid-eighties, youth-orientated pop-fast movement, alongside Top Gun, Beverly Hills Cop and the like. But these things were largely sales phenomenons, borne of paradigm shifts that had happened earlier and elsewhere (post-Star Wars, the MTV generation etc). Though very much stylistically representative of their time, and of some genuine cinematic worth, none really stained the fabric, so to speak.

Doubtless the profitable boom in eighties nostalgia has afforded it great cultural merit (a West End musical indeed), but it always takes more than that sort of evaluation to elevate something to the real top tier.
Johnny Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2014, 21:58
quirkyquirk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,424
I know we all define classic differently and via different criteria, but it's no classic to these eyes. Not in the real sense.

I'd agree, very much so, that it was part of the commercialised, mid-eighties, youth-orientated pop-fast movement, alongside Top Gun, Beverly Hills Cop and the like. But these things were largely sales phenomenons, borne of paradigm shifts that had happened earlier and elsewhere (post-Star Wars, the MTV generation etc). Though very much stylistically representative of their time, and of some genuine cinematic worth, none really stained the fabric, so to speak.

Doubtless the profitable boom in eighties nostalgia has afforded it great cultural merit (a West End musical indeed), but it always takes more than that sort of evaluation to elevate something to the real top tier.
And it's had more than sort of evaluation, I posted them. It's not a classic to you and that's fair enough. There's a lot of classics I think are crap or average at best. But it's clearly not just considered a classic because of nostalgia or the time it came from. And it's not often mentioned along the likes of cheesy 80's movies likes Top Gun and such but continuously one of the best in all the genres it covers.
quirkyquirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2014, 00:13
Johnny Clay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,844
But it's clearly not just considered a classic because of nostalgia or the time it came from.
Surely they've helped though? Wasn't too long ago that anything 'eighties' was considered something of an embarrassment. But then the youth of that period are the re-evaluators of now perhaps. Nothing wrong with re-evaluation of course, except when it tries to rewrite the past*

I don't recall BttF being considered anything more than good populist fare at the time. Nothing shameful here of course, but it wasn't a film that meant anything on a greater level. If you want to contest that its 'classic' status is down to its durable merits as pure entertainment and nothing more, then so be it. But it wasn't an important film of its time. Don't afford it that sort of status.

* example: late nineties Star Wars re-releases. Lots of thirty-something media bods cracking on Star Wars was cool. Star Wars was many things, and quite an important thing. But it was never cool. Not really. Mainly because the concept of cool/uncool in cinema wasn't really a factor back in the seventies (and it never should be, frankly). Implying that it had since become cool didn't really fly either.

And it's not often mentioned along the likes of cheesy 80's movies likes Top Gun and such but continuously one of the best in all the genres it covers.
Depends on the context, which I thought I made clear.
Johnny Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2014, 00:36
Takae
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,829
Wasn't too long ago that anything 'eighties' was considered something of an embarrassment.
Still is.
Takae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2014, 03:07
quirkyquirk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,424
Surely they've helped though? Wasn't too long ago that anything 'eighties' was considered something of an embarrassment. But then the youth of that period are the re-evaluators of now perhaps. Nothing wrong with re-evaluation of course, except when it tries to rewrite the past*

I don't recall BttF being considered anything more than good populist fare at the time. Nothing shameful here of course, but it wasn't a film that meant anything on a greater level. If you want to contest that its 'classic' status is down to its durable merits as pure entertainment and nothing more, then so be it. But it wasn't an important film of its time. Don't afford it that sort of status.

* example: late nineties Star Wars re-releases. Lots of thirty-something media bods cracking on Star Wars was cool. Star Wars was many things, and quite an important thing. But it was never cool. Not really. Mainly because the concept of cool/uncool in cinema wasn't really a factor back in the seventies (and it never should be, frankly). Implying that it had since become cool didn't really fly either.

Depends on the context, which I thought I made clear.
I'm sure nostalgia has helped I just don't think that's the only or main factor for it's popularity. And I never said it was "important" at the time. I said it was massive and loved by audiences and critics alike and that since then it's become a classic and it's well established in pop culture, which you didn't think it was. And I don't get your point about classic movies been important at the time they're released? Many classic movies weren't that popular or "important" when they were released. It's A Wonderful Life, Wizard Of Oz for example were movies that gradually built up to becoming iconic classics. They weren't making any waves at the time of their release.
quirkyquirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2014, 08:11
Los_Tributos
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 199
Comparing the film to Top Gun and Beverly Hills Cop did give me a good laugh!
Los_Tributos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2014, 01:12
dodrade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,785
I'm sure nostalgia has helped I just don't think that's the only or main factor for it's popularity. And I never said it was "important" at the time. I said it was massive and loved by audiences and critics alike and that since then it's become a classic and it's well established in pop culture, which you didn't think it was. And I don't get your point about classic movies been important at the time they're released? Many classic movies weren't that popular or "important" when they were released. It's A Wonderful Life, Wizard Of Oz for example were movies that gradually built up to becoming iconic classics. They weren't making any waves at the time of their release.
I think the reputation of the entire trilogy has gone up in recent years, especially part II which was seen as the weakest of the three at the time.
dodrade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2014, 13:04
Paddy C
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 12,855
We were in the Olympic Park and then walked back towards the Stratford Centre and noticed an area completely sealed off and boarded up. But something caught my eye. The clock tower. I said to my friends "Hey, doesn't that look like the clock tower from BTTF? Maybe this is where that secret cinema thing is on?" We walked on and paid no more attention to it. Guess I was right! Would have been nice to see for a few seconds, but don't think the high price per person to go in and walk around it and see the film was worth it. Still, horses for courses and all that.
Paddy C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2014, 21:47
blueisthecolour
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 6,198
I find people's concern about the price confusing. 50 is pretty standard price for any type of elaborate entertainment in London, whether it be a football game at Stamford bridge, a show on the west end or an event at the O2. I can easily spend 50 just going down the pub for the evening. I appreciate it won't be everyone's cup of tea but to say it's too expensive is a bit narrow minded. I'm not a fan of One Direction but I wouldn't think bad of anyone that paid 50 to go and watch them.
blueisthecolour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 13:26
blueisthecolour
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 6,198
Just wanted to say that I went to this at the weekend and it was amazing. The attention to detail and the ability to immerse you in the Hill Valley world was outstanding. I think we're going to see a lot more of this kind of thing with popular films as it takes movie watching to a another level.
blueisthecolour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 01:42
MKB
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 21
I'm a fan of both cinema and immersive theatre, so decided to deflower my Secret Cinema virginity, get myself costumed up, and head on down to Hill-Valley-cum-Westfield-Stratford-car-park.

And what a let down.

I had forgotten quite how good the film itself was/is, but that could not make up for the amateurish, shoddy and hugely overpriced hooplah surrounding it.

One or two of the acting vignettes pre-show might have scored a three-star review if one was feeling charitable, but most were wearisome and unengaging and lacking in any drama. The majority of the activities were merely more opportunities to part the captive audience from their money.

The cardboard cut-out sets did not look any better close-up than in the leaked long-shot pictures. It was clear little effort had been taken with gathering/making props and many were out of place both time-wise and geographically. The set designers need to take some lessons from Punchdrunk.

I suppose the way in which the cancelled shows were communicated and handled, the refusals to refund booking fees, and the outright misinformation fed to the press should have set one's expectation as to the moral compass of those involved in Secret Cinema, but I was not quite prepared for the extent to which they would seek to fleece punters further. (Lager was sold at the equivalent of 6.88/pint, for example, and even the two small fairground rides were not covered by the 55 entrance price.)

While the organisers obsessed over banning mobile phone usage, they were happy to allow the equally anachronistic usage of disposable cameras. For a fee of course.

Reserving a pitch on the lawn without actually being present, was ok apparently too. On arrival, the whole of the left lawn was already covered in huge vacated picnic blankets to reserve space. The organisers evidently considered this behaviour acceptable. Those without a blanket were automatically at the back of the "queue" for lawn space when the film started.

Arriving, as instructed, at 17:15 (this past Saturday) proved to be a mistake, because by 18:30 tolerance was waning and boredom was setting in, with another 2.5 hours to kill before the film would finally start. Maybe it was a good thing that the promised post-film activity that would carry on until midnight did not materialise? It was all over by 23:00.

As for positives, the film itself has stood the test of time, and is great fun. Most of the crowd were in costume -- with some even attempting American accents -- and their enthusiasm for the movie was tangible. The screen image was well defined with sound quality as good as one can expect outdoors.

The activity around the square during the film, to mirror what is happening on screen, ultimately proved more of a distraction than an enhancement, and the pyrotechnics were remarkably lame.

Given that most exhibitors get their knuckles rapped by the distributor if they do not play out the end credits, I am surprised Universal were ok with Secret Cinema amateurishly morphing to a projected still after just a few seconds of credits while simultaneously cutting the soundtrack.

Overall rating - Two stars out of five.
MKB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 10:04
blueisthecolour
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: South
Posts: 6,198
Sorry to hear that you didn't enjoy it MKB. Me and my friend found it a fantastic night out and most of the people posting on the FB page said the same (though there are a few people who share your views).

I suppose it's all about what you're expecting from the experience. For us it was just a bit of fun to immerse yourself in a different world for a while and see scenes from the movie played out in real life before your eyes. Talking to 'Lorraine' about Biff, walking round Docs house, going to the Enchantment under the sea dance, the 80s bar, watching 'Marty' skateboarding round the site whilst Biff and his crew chasing him in a period car, seeing the Doc abseil down from the clock tower at the same moment as he does in the film. I just loved all of it.

I didn't have an issue with saving your space on the lawn as otherwise people would have had to sit there for hours rather than enjoying everything going on around them.
blueisthecolour is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 18:59.