Movies

In the last two weeks, I saw Lions for Lambs on a flight and The Visitor in the theatre. I really liked both movies.

My favorite part of the movies was that they ended. Aristotle wrote in Poetics that a story has a beginning, middle and an end. Unfortunately, most mainstream movies do not end. They drag on and tie-up loose bits or provide a more "satisfying" conclusion.

Lions for Lambs and The Visitor ended on time. Each had a well-crafted beginning, middle and end. They did not continue for the same of adding minutes to the running time or a more cheerful conclusion.

In many cases, American movies continue past their ending because the consumer equates quantity with value. Since the price is the same, do we see a one-hour movie or a 100-minute movie? Often, the longer movie wins; however, what if the shorter movie provides a higher quality story with no extra filling, while the longer movie adds a bunch of filler to extend the running time? I would rather see a one-hour well-made film than a 100-movie with dead spots, but many consumers disagree.

And, this affects numerous products, not just movies. Too often, we value quantity over quality, so we get bigger, longer, heavier products with less quality. We buy the 96-ounce Big Gulp not because we want 96-ounces of pop, but because it is a bigger value.

Costco and other supper retailers have changed our perception of value. Value is getting what you want, not getting the absolute most for the lowest price. A fine steak costs more than ground beef. If I can get three times as much ground beef as steak for the same price, we feel it is a value. However, if I really want a steak, and it is fairly priced, is settling for more of a cheaper product really value?