Singapore cinema patrons showing symptoms of a hyper-stimulated society?
I have noticed, with great annoyance, that many cinema and theatre patrons in Singapore do two very annoying and anti-social things. They talk – incessantly. And they text on their mobiles – frequently.
Is this inability to sit quietly, to appreciate a reflective deep moment, or to give oneself completely to a production a sad symptom of a hyper-stimulated society? Are people simply bored as soon as the flashing lights and noise on the screen stop, even for a second?
In every single movie and stage production I have been to in the last 3 months, there were people talking, whispering, and texting throughout the shows. I have had to ask people to put their phones away, and also to stop talking. Often after fuming in silence for a good part of the show.
Are these people simply inconsiderate, selfish or lacking in basic social graces?
Or perhaps they don’t appreciate that the quiet moments are as much part of the experience as the rest of the productions?
Perhaps they must fill all silences with chatter? And maybe texting is a national addiction?
If people can’t even sit still and quietly during a two hour performance, what does that say about their ability to say, read a book? Or work through a problem?
Oh course, I am not saying ALL Singaporeans do this. They don’t. But enough do to make themselves nuisances in cinemas and theatres. Maybe it is time the government steps in with a “Shut up and stop texting during shows” campaign…
Possibly Related Posts
21 comments on “Singapore cinema patrons showing symptoms of a hyper-stimulated society?”
Leave a Comment
Noticeboard
Buy my book – 30% off and free shipping within Australia; 15% off and free shipping worldwide!
Are you a solopreneur doing it on your own? Read my articles on Flying Solo.
Are you a small to medium-sized business leader or decision maker? Read my articles on Kochie’s Business Builders.
Follow me on twitter.
Visitor locations: click for details.
I’ve only been to one movie in the last 5 months or so, here in Singapore anyways. I didn’t notice the problem in the Philippines.
I would say it’s another instance of the “me, me, me” mentality that most young Singaporeans have. Young Singaporeans in general think everything revolves around them and making them happy, from talking in theaters, to being rude to people, to not moving to share a sidewalk with oncoming pedestrians. That one really bothers me. I just walk right into them when that happens, purposely throwing my shoulder to clear the way.
I don’t know what’s causing this idea they have that the world is their oyster and everyone else is second best, but I feel bad for them, because they’ll figure it out one day.
It’s indeed a shame. I find the habits of Cinema goers here (Singapore)n extremely annoying… there’s also a tendency to find moments of intense violence amusing whilst comic subtleties wash over everybody’s heads… I now always try and go to Gold Class. It’s 30 odd bucks and whilst the cost doesn’t seem to change the type of patron, the physical layout means I don’t have to sit so close and there are fewer of them!!!
Bradley is right too… it’s me, me, me…
Me and my friends have a theory about the “tendency to find moments of intense violence [or intense horror] amusing”.
For those not in the know, this can come as a disturbing shock. Instead of gasps of horror, Singaporean audiences will simply laugh out loud, seemingly quite involuntarily, in response to intense scenes.
We think this is an example of default human nature at work. When faced with an intensely disturbing stimuli or situation, such as at a funeral, the default response seem to be laughter. It is a way to quickly reduce tension and stress. And perhaps also to avoid having to process the strong emotions.
In other words, they are not laughing because the violence is amusing, but rather because they have no other means of processing or expressing the strong emotions that have arisen as a result of watching the violence.
Is this a sign of a general lack of emotional awareness and maturity?
Read a book?
What is that?
Singaporeans don’t go and watch a movie: they go to an aircon’ed theatre.
There they can can share stinky and noisy food with friends, and all the rest of the activities they cannot do outside because “it is too hot”.
I stopped going to the theatre years ago
In response to Bradley and Carl, it is unfortunately the same damn thing all over Asia. You must however bear in mind that Westerners consider films an art form (the 7th Art), Asian do not and simply because the kind of films they are shown are merely for entertaining the guts not the brain.
In response to Zern (“My friends and I” would have been infinitely more polite!)I strongly suggest a few trips to the psychiatrist to get in touch with your feelings and to get the little robot out of your brain.
Finally, Singaporeans are indeed rude with a total lack of concern for other people;dwellers in Jakarta,Kuala Lumpur, Tokyo,Hong-Kong, Beijing,Shanghai, to name a few cities I know, are equally ill-mannered, alas.
The last thing you said in your comment was exactly what I was thinking Zern.
Singaporeans in general are fairly sheltered for their entire lives. Violence is kept at a serious minimum here. Even petty crime is rare. As a result, Singaporeans could have a lower tolerance to violence, just like a light- or non- drinker with alcohol. So, when they see something very violent or disturbing, they may not know how to react, having had no prior experience dealing with those types of situation.
For example, I spent some years in the US military, and my wife is interested in learning to shoot a rifle. I started explaining the basics to her while we were on the MRT, talking about how to properly clean it, aim it, etc, and then I realized that people were staring at me, and some had moved away.
The fact that Singapore is so safe makes it a fantastic place to live. On the other hand, it could be creating generations of emotionally retarded, skittish, Singaporeans.
I think this could also be why most Singaporeans don’t seem to take life seriously, or appreciate what they have. They’ve never seen the world for what it is. They’ve never seen poverty, or lived where there are high crime rates. You can’t really hold it against them, and I don’t even know if we should, but in a way I pity them because I don’t think they’ll ever fully mature, in the common sense of the word.
@Charles and JP: To be honest I was somewhat concerned with the tone of your comments, and what came across as a level of blanket hostility. I could be wrong…
To be fair, not all Westerners think movies = art. And not all Singaporeans think movies = air-conditioned play time. As for noisy and stinky food, that is unfortunately a global phenomenon in my experience across several continents.
Perhaps Singaporeans do take a different approach to their entertainment (guts over heads); which is perfectly in their right to do so. The majority of people who go to cinemas (in Singapore or elsewhere) do seem to be there to watch the show.
Let’s not forget that the idea of “rudeness” is very much dependent on the observer’s point of view. What is rude to a non-Singaporean may well be quite acceptable within the context of this culture.
As foreigners in this country, it is very easy to approach this society with the same lens and expectations we have brought from our respective home countries. It is easy to make quick unthinking judgements – I know I do it if I am not aware.
The history, culture, social psyche and economic/political situation here is very different than that of say Australia, the UK or the US. Singapore is not even a century old!
@Bradley – interesting point about Singaporeans being overly sheltered. Singapore is a fantastically (or weirdly, depending on where you have come from) safe place to live and work. Safety comes either from greater personal responsibility, enlightenment and awareness; or great control and externally-enforced compliance. I guess there is a price to pay for everything.
The question is – how much safety and shelter is good, and how much is too much? How much exposure (to poverty, violence etc) can or should a society be exposed to so as to promote empathy and anchoring in reality, before it becomes detrimental?
It will be interesting to see how this society and its people will evolve over time. They have come a long way in a short time. There are many unique challenges to overcome, one of which is perhaps the over-sheltering of its people.
There was a level of hostility: not being able to go to the theatre for the last 15 years without wondering how angry I will become while trying to watch a movie made me this way (I seldom get angry, but inside a room for two hours is trying)
Thank god the multiplication of the aircon shopping centres has made the situation a bit beter, yet it is far from perfect, as people think of theatres as their home away from home
Yes Singaporean (and other Asians, except Japanese) laugh in embarrassing situations: my worst nightmare was incessant laughter during “Dead man walking”
Singapore will take a very long time to evolve because the message from the top has always been: go forth and multiply your money, there are charities to take care of others
What a load of racist bullshit. While I empathize with the pain caused by immature Singaporean movie patrons, some of the “analysis” is plain ridiculous.
Bradley, military service is compulsory for Singaporean men. Almost all men spend two to twenty years cleaning and firing their rifles, so take your fake machismo and shove it.
And how are Singaporeans more sheltered than say, a New Yorker? You volunteer for soup kitchens? Twenty years back, most Singaporeans would laugh at the thought that we are middle class, let alone, rich.
And the degeneration of the movie experience had largely to do with the fact that Singaporean kids have more spending money now, and spending it away from their parents. It certainly was not a problem to me 15 years ago.
BTW, when two persons walk into each other on a pavement, only one person has to give way. If both prefer to walk into each, then that’s two instances of “me, me, me”, or does the American always have the right of way?
Well, Jimmy. I hate to burst your bubble, but when two Singaporeans, or three, or four, are walking on the sidewalk and taking up the entire walkway, and don’t move at all to make any room for the oncoming person, then who’s the one who’s being an ass? Or do Singaporeans always have the right of way? And it’s not just me. It’s my wife, who’s from the Philippines. And it’s not just foreigners. I’ve seen Singaporeans do it to each other, regularly running people off of sidewalks because they don’t want to be courteous and share it with other people.
Before you make an ignorant, racist statement like that, you should think about what you’re saying, because it makes you look foolish instead.
BTW, I’ll keep my machismo and you can shove it. I’m just stating facts. I started talking about proper marksmanship and got funny looks and people moved away from me like I was some crazy terrorist or something.
Don’t compare sitting around cleaning rifles to the US Army. There’s a big difference. I’ve done two combat tours. When’s the last time a Singaporean National Serviceman saw action.
Your arrogance is overwhelming, and it’s just that attitude that makes most of Asia thing poorly of Singapore in terms of anything other than what it’s economy can provide.
Jimmy Mun! Where do you see racist bullshit? In fact, you are the one full of shit because you compare Singapore with New York. That’s like comparing kampong with city. At least New Yorkers are not ignorant and full of shit. They’re famous for being openminded and respectful to others, since New York is a melting pot and clearly more significant than Singapore on the world stage.
I have to say, I lived in Singapore, too and I can say I’ve experienced same thing like Bradley. Very well said. And he just told you the truth and you’re the one who plays Singapore’s advocate. It’s always same with you Singaporeans. Whenever someone says something critical of S’pore, you flock in masses and defend your city and always say we are racist or we have no clue, because we’re not born there. Fact is, the biggest idiots are ignorant people like you. Why don’t you read first what people say and think about it. You can’t claim Singapore has no problem what so ever? Chinese Malaysian’s always laugh at you for your kiasu mentality. Ask yourselves, why nobody likes you in the region, I’m talking about ignorant people like you. I’m happy I know many cool Singaporeans, who are well educated and well traveled and who admit that not everything’s fine in Singapore. We who talk about Singapore, were there. Have you been to New York to criticise it? One of the things is also that Singapore never was a city. New York has a history of urbanisation from the 17th century, while Singapore was almost a village some 100 or more years ago. And the Chinese immigrants came from all over, speak all kinds of dialects, have all kinds of habits. You add Indians and Malays into the mix and then you get a new age artificial melting pot, where the government regulates everything to force people to behave the same way, so many fines, such a control state (even online), in HDB blocks there has to be a certain mix of races, the gov imposed ‘Speak mandarin’ inictiatives… Always from top down, always by force. Jimmy, people in Malaysia may not be as rich as Singaporeans, but they are warm polite people, much more than average Singaporeans. And same goes for New Yorkers. And i’m not claiming that the West is perfect. But at least we admit our flaws and don’t bash others who criticise us. If you criticise my country, I’m like ‘whatever’. That’s the difference.
@Charles – I do hear and understand your anger and frustration. Acts of mass random inconsideration (MRI?) leading to the curtailing of my activities can trigger that in me too!
The taking-over-the-pavement thing was first pointed out to me by a Singaporean! So not ALL Singaporean are “like that”.
Making blanket statements about “you Americans” or “you Singaporeans” are not helpful to the discussion.
Saying Singaporeans tend to be more sheltered than people many other countries is simply a statement of fact. Whether we individually attach a positive, negative or neutral connotation to it is our own business.
The Singaporean government has only recently referred to Singapore again as being a “conservative” society. Conservative means unwilling to change, and possessing a great desire to maintain the status quo. This can only mean a more sheltered society – for whatever value judgements you wish to put on it.
I actually admire Singapore’s ability to keep its crime rate so low.
Last night, on the way home from the hawker, at 2 AM mind you, I saw a cab pulled over the side of the road, windows down, and the driver asleep inside. Where else can you do something like that without being robbed, killed, or both?
I can’t say I agree with all of the government’s policies, but maybe in time SIngapore will find a balance between a culture that promotes individualism and expression and a government that maintains this same level of control over crime? That would be nice. I’d love to see cities in the US become this safe to live in. Hell, I’d love to see cities this clean and well maintained in the US too.
So, Jimmy, don’t think I’m being overly critical of Singapore, or hate Singapore or anything along those lines. I could find plenty of flaws to go into about the US, or really anywhere I’ve lived. Every place has its high and low points.
Singapore is beautiful, orderly, well maintained, incredibly safe, a fantastic place to live and a launching point for incredible vacations all over Asia. It’s got great infrastructure and internet, and it has a lot of great people living within its borders. However, there are rude people living here too. That’s not unique to any country.
First of all, I never said Singapore is a perfect place. Nobody can hate Singapore more than a Singaporean can. Singaporeans have no say over how Singapore is run, so I take no pride and assume no shame.
I never disagreed that there is bad Singaporean behaviour in theatres.
I just find the “analysis” flawed with racism, or more precisely ethnocentrism. Would a rich American or Brit be more “exposed” than a “sheltered” Singaporean? I want to know how you can prove that.
Lastly, in recent years, Singapore if flooded with foreigners. In an island of 4.84 million, only 2.5 million are citizens. Out of every two “Singaporeans” you walk into, one of them is probably not. Probably a country bumpkin from Malaysia with no concept of roads since they are the largest set of foreigners here who look and talk like Singaporeans, with a poorer command of english, of course.
@Jimmy Mun:
Let’s not blow the racism trumpet – I note that you started using this word at comment #10.
There was no call to bring in and label the Malaysian as country bumpkins – that is racist.
No one is expressing hatred for Singapore (and you brought up the word “hate”).
We are talking about cinema patrons in Singapore (not Singaporeans per se). And the lead on from that is the relative merits of a more or less sheltered society. No value judgements are being passed on whether this is good or bad.
And this is a discussion, nothing has to be proven one way or another.
Meanwhile, back at the more interesting discussion:
What is the definition of “sheltered”?
Is “sheltered” overall a good thing or bad thing when it comes to the development of a society or culture?
[...] to my post about hyper-stimulated cinema patrons in Singapore – patrons who felt the uncontrollable urge to talk and text incessantly during movies – I have [...]