I have never seen a movie with descriptive video in the theaters, but that may change soon. A federal judge has ruled that theaters are violating the ADA if they don't accommodate their deaf and blind customers with close captioning and descriptive video.
What I have to say to this is that it's about time. I think this issue is of extreme importance especially now that 3-d movies are becoming more popular. I've tried to get the theater to give me a discount when seeing a 3-d film since I get nothing more out of the film than if I saw it in 2-d, but they won't budge. This to me is discrimination. There have even been times when I've chosen to not see a film with friends and family because I think it's unfair for me to have a premium fee when I don't get premium content. Having descriptive video included may help me feel differently about this issue.
The last two 3-d films that I saw in the theaters both have descriptive video, but since my theater in town doesn't have the equipment, I just got robbed of my money instead. Maybe the next time I want to go see a film that I know has descriptive video, but the thither doesn't have the equipment I'll let them know that that they're required by law to install the equipment. This ruling makes me feel it's my duty to never see another 3-d film in the theaters until I have access to the descriptive video track.
Now that the law is on our side, what do you think is going to be the best way to get theater owners to install the equipment we need? If you've seen a film in the theaters with descriptive video, what was your experience like?
Posts
How to Wear Red Lipstick
-
How to Wear Red Lipstick *from wikiHow - The How to Manual That You Can Edit
*
Zarpor.com says that red lips are the quintessential sexy look but getting
it...
1 week ago
I live in such a small town they just recently got one screen with 3D. I use descriptive video on DVDs but I have yet to see a movie in the theater with it or even have it as an option. Maybe this ruling will speed things up a bit.
ReplyDeleteOn the flip side, movies are already so expensive as to be prohibitive as family entertainment, which is a shame since that is what they have always been intended to be: entertainment accessible to all social classes. Now that the law requires additional accessibility equipment it will probably drive the prices even higher, making it less possible for everyone to enjoy movies. I'm not sure if it would be better to have cheap movies in less posh theaters that everyone can afford or super-accessible, ultra high tech theaters that only the wealthy can access. That is how things are headed, in my view.
It's about time!
ReplyDeleteI'm not so sure this ruling is a good thing. Accessibility and advocacy is great, but there's already a stereotype that blind people are whiny and have a sense of entitlement. My worry is that, by forcing theaters to install DVS, rather than educating them on the perks of doing so voluntarily, such a belief will be strengthened.
ReplyDeleteTo be clear, I'm not saying that we ought to be happy with what we have and call it a day. I am instead, advocating action through education, or, like one man did in Nebraska, fundraising to allow his theater to install the equipment.