While I'm sure there is pent up demand to go back to theatres, there just aren't that many movies to watch. And I think enough people are opting for the at home streaming option that it will affect box office numbers. It's a shame, I really did enjoy going to the theatres.
It isn't just about the giant screen for everyone. For many in my circle, the only reason they still go to the theatre is because you can see things when they release. If they had an option for same day streaming (as covid has provided in some cases), they will drop the theatre completely. The quality of TVs and sound systems at home can provide a better visual/audio experience than many theatres.
There's rarely if ever two movies a month I'm interested in watching let alone going to the theater to watch. Even if there were the ancillary costs for going to the theater push those costs up.
Theaters have to compete with my living room. I don't even have some crazy setup but I have a big screen and comfortable seating. I can not turn the audio volume to deafening levels. I can pause if I need to use the bathroom. I also have access to food and drinks that don't cost a small fortune.
Back when watching a movie at home meant a VCR connected to a 13" TV with an iffy coax signal, a theater was a very good option. Unfortunately for theaters my home option has gotten better and their offerings have gotten worse. At the very least their offerings have diverged from my interests.
As someone who has loved going to see "classic" movies in the theater, it's a different experience than watching them at home. I'm not going to the theater because I don't have the movie, but because I want to see it on the big screen, with other people, and get that movie experience. For movies that came out before my time, it's been amazing. For example, I've seen Wrath of Khan so many times at home, but it was nowhere as good as seeing it on the big screen. I wonder what the numbers say on how many people won't buy a movie or stream it just because their theater decides to show it (and usually it's a very short run, like a one night or weekend).
I'm not sure pent-up demand is really a reasonable expectation in this case. People couldn't go to the cinema for a while so they watched things via streaming. It's not like when cinemas were open again they were going to rush in and gorge themselves on overpriced popcorn.
Yes, I have a decent home theatre, and my partner and I enjoy watching shows and movies on it most nights we're home.
But going to a beautiful old cinema to watch a classic movie on a huge screen, is a whole different experience, and one that most movie enthusiasts relish from time to time, regardless of what setup they have at home.
No matter how affordable/practical it is to build a home theatre for many of us here, it still won't be for many people, and we can still find it sad that the ability to experience old movies in the kinds of theatres where they were originally shown is being wound back by changing corporate interests.
> Most people who go to see a movie could just as easily watch it at home without much less enjoyment or sound or visual quality.
Whether most people could enjoy the home experience as much is an interesting point of debate, but there's no question that the sound and visual quality are lower in >>99% of homes. Very few people have good surround-sound systems. Even fewer have truly large screens for viewing. I have a 50-inch TV at home, and I love it, but it doesn't compare to a 20-foot screen.
I think theaters will remain relevant for some time to come. Until the "ten-foot-experience" at home means a ten-foot screen, people will probably remain interested in seeing movies at the theater.
This is sad as it appears to be the beginning of the end of moviegoing as a mainstream pastime. Watching a movie at home simply isn't an equivalent replacement and it has nothing to do with the size of the screen. Going to the theater is a social experience. You simply can't replicate the experience of seeing Captain American catch Thor's hammer in a sold out crowd on opening weekend. Also going to a theater is a purpose driven choice in a way watching a movie at home is not. It allows you to focus all your attention on a movie that simply can't easily be replicated at home.
I'm fairly sure theaters won't be going anywhere. You can't have the ability to watch a 20 foot by 20 foot projection of a movie at home, no matter how cheap the technology gets unless you have a massive backyard and a projector or a huge room in your house you weren't using anyway.
For many, including me, going to a cinema is to treat ourselves and have a good time. If all I wanted was to watch a movie, I could've done that at home.
As home theaters get bigger and better, I feel like movie theaters are going the wrong direction trying to amp up the experience. Sure, they can ride the Marvel movies for a while and catch people who need to be there opening weekend, but the core viewers have been chipped away.
I think there are two ways forward: return to the crummy old theater model of playing classic movies day and night (why don't any multiplexes have 1 screen dedicated to this?) Curation is key as well as choice. It would be bice when there are 8 crappy movies at the theater to see "Die Hard" and "The Godfather" playing so there is always an option for people that just want a night out.
Which is the second point: movie theaters are one of the last remaining "things to do" on a normal night that is kid-friendly and group-friendly. Malls are gone (or profoundly dead) and movie theaters are one of the last options. Although I feel like the concept of "going out" is itself maybe dying.
Not everyone has room or space for amazing AV for movies. So I feel sad this will hurt movie theaters. I would much rather be watching Dune safely in a theater than watching in OKish AV at home.
I still quite like going to a theater, the experience is much different than watching a movie at home. In a theater I am much more focused on the film being shown, the screen is large and crisp, the speakers overwhelm – it's much more a celebration of the artwork than almost any typical home environment. On the other hand, I also like watching movies at home because I like sitting with my dog and being comfortable.
In that sense, it's almost ridiculously obvious why Hollywood doesn't like Netflix... it minimizes the "big screen experience". Imagine if we all replaced fine art galleries with mobile phone apps. Would anyone be surprised if masterworkers of paint and sculpture got upset about that? Of course not! They work on mediums that are designed to be experienced in a very specific spacial context. A director like Christopher Nolan, whether you like him or not, designs his movies specifically to be seen on 80ft wide projections with 100 speakers all around you. Anything less than that and, in his eyes, your mission is now to render his movie meaningless.
All this said, I really think the directors' gripes are misplaced. Netflix didn't kill theaters... theaters killed themselves. Rising prices, gouging on food, maintaining massive floorplans that require massive leases of land. If going to the theater to see a movie wasn't, by and large, a $50+ excursion for a family of 4 to eat garbage food and struggle to find seats then maybe we wouldn't all be staying at home?
While yes a theatre experience is more "grand" I think I'm not alone in saying that I've watched more movies at home in the last year alone than I have spent on theatre tickets. What they'll lose in "quality" they will most definitely make in quantity. Ease of access to the content will lead to higher viewership.
Good point. Most of my movie consumption these days is via streaming services.
I am fortunate enough to have a home cinema room with a projector and some pretty beefy audio gear hooked up. But most of the time we watch in the lounge where it’s a more casual affair.
reply