The lost art of the Intermission

The film intermission is a practice seen as dated and vintage, preserved for films from when colour on the big screen was new and audiences still enjoyed visiting the cinema weekly. Alex De Paulis explores the intermissions origins, where its gone and why it might be on the rise again.

The intermission has fallen out of fashion in recent decades. Despite some of cinema's greats carrying a weighty fifteen minute intermission in their runtime, the short break has been all but discarded from Hollywood's repetoire in favor of jam packing more action and narrative.

While it can be jarring to have your movie stop for ten to fifteen minutes when you're watching from your laptop in bed, intermissions do have unique role in the cinematic experience.

Lawrence of Arabia, Doctor Zhivago, Spartacus, The Sound of Music, Gone with the Wind, My Fair Lady, all classics in their own right, and all with their own personal intermission card to allow you to stretch, get snacks and complain about that bit you didn't get. ‘Gandhi’ (1980) directed by Richard Attenborough is recognised as the last Hollywood studio film containing a built-in intermission in every screening worldwide.

But now Intermissions are back, if for a fleeting moment. The Brustalist (2024), by Brady Corbet and starring Adrien Brody, began with an introductory "overture" and a fifteen minute intermission, splitting the three and a half hour film into two stomachable portions. Sitting in the theatre, patiently waiting for the film to start and then the break to finish, I began to wonder, what ever happened to the intermission?

Intermissions have their origins in the theatre tradition to allow for the audience a break from the material but also to change stage settings and actor costumes. The practice was formalised in European theatre in the 17th and 18th Century but dates all the way back to the theatrical plays of Ancient Greece and Rome. These breaks served the audience to better ruminate with the performance’s themes. Roman plays often included structured musical breaks and comedy sketches, meaning your day out for the theatre was a complete experience.

In the motion picture years, the intermission was reserved for the sweeping film epics of the first half of the 20th century. It acted as a practical necessity given the historical limitations of film projection. They gave the distributor time to change over the larger reels of a lengthy film, while also allowing the audience to have their own break to visit the concessions stand and restroom. Intermissions were often most prevalent in film adaptations of plays and musicals; however, with the advent of multiplexes and theatres wanting to show as many movies as possible, the intermission was deemed as an obstacle for the studios and distributors. A practice hindering them from making more money — sad trombone noise — and thereby putting a stop to their dreams of winning capitalism. 

Going to the movies has become an event: Movies are getting longer; Chairs are getting comfier; A medium popcorn is depressingly expensive, and people want more bang for their buck. Long epics like The Brutalist are slowly being welcomed by audiences. According to Sherwood News in 2018, the average run time for a Hollywood film has reached 126 minutes, the longest average over a five year period since 1995. Its now a fact that audiences plan to make an evening out of going to the movies. What's fifteen minutes to that 270 minute feature film of the Incredible Hulk's Landlord? I'd at least like to turn to the person next to me to ask what we're even doing here.

Why don't you take a break? Get some water and come back. (Image: Lawrence of Arabia)

But the intermission hasn't completely disappeared. Countries in Europe and South Asia have movie showings with intermissions inserted independently by the distributor. These are unsanctioned, without the proper approval of the director or crew, done in an effort to boost food and beverage sales for the most part. But this haphazard and oftentimes jarring intermission hurts the viewing experience of a movie. I am a firm believer that the intermission doesn’t solely exist to cater to short attention spans; instead it provides space for a discussion about the film to emerge amongst the audience with the action fresh in their mind.

The intermission has the ability to make or break the cinema-going experience. A break that is wrongly placed, too long or too short will kill the emotional investment of the audience. With movies being a communal experience, why not allow for an allotted time halfway through to speak to your cinematic cohort about what you’re seeing?