Schindler's Pissed.

'Labyrinth'. Kitsch. Embedded in the 1980's. Dated beyond belief. Dodgy effects. David Bowie with a platinum mullet type thing and a motive for action that seems no more complex than 'just for shits and giggles'.
Overall, not a great film...............................
Seen it about 20 times.

'Schindler's List'. Epic. Moving. By all accounts, superb.
Seen it once. And that's plenty.

Why? Well, in the case of this obvious example, because one is easy to watch. The other is hard.
But in a wider context, why would I prefer to watch something rubbish than something challenging, something infinitely better made, something that's apparently 'rewarding'?

Malcolm X: Even the cover's worthy

Example : i've owned 'Malcolm X' for over 3 years now. Great reviews, allegedly a classic. Picked it up and read the cover on at least 5 occasions. And, on three of these occasions, i've set it back down in favour of classics such as 'S.W.A.T', 'Old School', and 'Happy Gilmore' (viewing number 6)

Fly Trap: Excellent metaphorical tool

It comes down to this: Laziness. For some perverse reason, it's more appealing time-wise to watch two 2 hour films, than one 3 hour epic. I don't mind paying attention and concentrating bastard hard on a non-linear plot that sucks me in like Venus Fly-Trap and shits me out like a pigeon.

But i want to do it on my terms. If i go to the cinema then by all means Mr. Spike Lee, show me your wares at whatever pace you deem suitable. I've paid for my seat. I ain't leaving.
But when i've selected you off the shelf, ahead of hundreds of others, entertain me mother fucker. I've been at work all day, I'm eating Alpen for dinner, i don't have time for your biblical allegories and what-not. I'm tired and i can easily turn you off and go watch Traffic Cops.

There is, of course, a middle ground, the place where quality and familiarity can meet and be at one without having to be made by Pixar. 'Stand By Me' and 'Back To The Future' are two examples, films that are almost like extended family members, endlessly quotable yet clever enough to deliver for both teens and octogenarians alike. Could, and probably will ,watch them again and again, without moaning or longing not to know what's coming next.

Then there's 'Oldboy', 'The Passion of The Christ', 'JFK', and a million others. More complex, more rewarding pictures on many levels, but undeniably less accessible. Subtitles? Piss off.  Religion? Jog on.

Christmas movie?

There needs to be a compromise, a halfway house which wraps you up like 'Home Alone' yet pokes you in the eye like 'American Psycho'. Popular will never equal quality, and nor should it. It our music charts were reflective of genius, then Chipmunk will have a knighthood come December.
And the next Oliver Stone flick is unlikely to gross anywhere near that of the next Shrek (hear me. There will be more. 857 more), which is fine, expected, and normal.

And if you want to show me 'The Great Escape' at 5pm every Bank Holiday until the end of time, do it, see if i give a shit. But help me out, just a bit. Make the inaccessible slightly less so. I beg of you, don't put the only terrestrial screening of 'Pi' on a 4am on BBC2. I'm keen, not a fucking insomniac.

The Polar Express: Take my eyes, just take them

And until the inaccessible isn't the sole domain of freaks, geeks, the marginalised, and the Jeremy Kyle chaser, then there will be no room for new classics. We will be stuck with 'Babe 2: Pig In The City' every Christmas. Forever.
Bit by bit, little by little, shake it up. It doesn't have mean showings of 'Antichrist' after 'Only Fools & Horses', but it does mean something. Anything. If you make people chase gold in the snow, they'll stay indoors (that made sense in my head)
I don't want 'The Human Centipede' as the New Year's Day movie premiere.
But i won't stand for the The Polar Fucking Express either.