I must agree with you, Dr.Pino, as far too many movies stink at the box office, because they don't have quality acting in some cases; in others, it seems like entire chunks of the movie are "just there" and not fleshed out. The ones that are successful take the actors and mix the most salient elements for a great movie.

Case in point: I grew up on Spiderman and was quite familiar with the storylines, etc., and that's why I didn't go see Spiderman and Spiderman II at the theater. However, when I saw the DVD releases, I was very won over by McGuire's and Dunst's performances, as they really sold the Parker/Watson love story well (among other things... oddly enough, I actually found the *sequel* better than the first--and that's INCREDIBLY RARE these days). Another example is the "Punisher," which I did see in the theater. They really used Thomas Jane well, and also succeeded in making the movie "less dark" than the comic series (something that turned me off to the comic version). I can't say any of the performances among the major characters were anything less than well done--at least in the sense the storyline was well told and there were very few parts that seemed "lacking." I even liked seeing Travolta get shot and blown up! (And I like Travolta in several movies, too.)

That aside, even when the movie is well done or at least worth watching, I find prices are prohibitive, even for matineés. Even if I metaphorically had so much money to light cigarettes with $100 bills, I would never pay $4 for a bowl of popcorn when I could buy 4x that for $2.50 It is not that I'm cheap, but it has everything to do with charging a reasonable price to start with, as I won't pay for something where I would basically be rubber-stamping their greed. No way! Now that some turnaround times for getting DVD releases out is about 3 months (instead of the former 6), it cuts the cost by half to rent the DVD than go to the theater.