Hollywood Enters Oscars Weekend in Existential Crisis (theculturenewspaper.com)

by RickJWagner 543 comments 170 points
Read article View on HN

543 comments

[−] WarmWash 62d ago
My fiance mentioned we haven't gone to see a movie in theaters in years and it would be fun to go.

I checked what was playing and:

2 tickets, 2 sodas, 1 popcorn.

$86 dollars.

Don't know if I'll ever go to a conventional movie theater again.

[−] tyjen 62d ago
The last movie we attended people were incredibly disruptive throughout the film, to the point that it was difficult to focus on the film. Some people enjoy screaming, laughing, and talking as part of the experience, but it's apparently been normalized beyond my tolerance threshold. Add in the cost and overall movie quality decrease of Hollywood productions, and it's difficult to justify.

Presently, we watch foreign movies at home 95% of the time and maybe a Hollywood production when they manage to find their roots and create something worth watching.

[−] bloomingeek 62d ago
Sort of off topic, but almost the same can be said for music concerts. During slower or softer songs, people can be heard talking and laughing loudly. I get it, they paid their money, same as us, but we didn't pay to hear them.
[−] dylan604 62d ago
A couple of years ago, I went to see Echo & The Bunnymen open for Violent Femmes. I had seen the Femmes multiple times, but was really excited to see Echo. These two old biddies that sat in front of us talked the entire show. In between bands, one of them dropped their purse without noticing. I picked it up and offered in exchange for the purse if they wouldn't mind talking through the next act. They were shocked at the nerve and said they didn't talk that much. I then told them all about their kids and their school work and other nonsense that I had to endure. The looked at each other like "oops". To my luck, the show was not sold out, and we moved down our row to get away from them. I obviously gave the purse back
[−] krn1p4n1c 61d ago
You never would’ve had this problem at a Mötorhead concert.
[−] pizza 62d ago
[flagged]
[−] pclmulqdq 62d ago
People call the classical music audience prudish for demanding quiet during performances, but IMO when you go to a concert it should be ok to shush people who talk during the quiet parts.
[−] butlike 61d ago
On the one hand, you're at a social experience. On the other hand, aren't you supposed to have your senses engaged in a shared experience? The interpersonal conversation diminishes that. On the other other hand, as long as you're having fun and not doing harm, do whatever. As the Master of Ceremonies, I love it. On the other other other hand, talking pushes up the noise floor, making louder concerts a necessity. A louder concert is more dangerous to your hearing.
[−] snapcaster 61d ago
This is so antisocial. Just go listen to it by yourself in your room if human presence is annoying
[−] jpc0 61d ago
There is a difference between us all experiencing a shared artistic experience and us hearing about your kids while we are trying very hard to share an artistic experience.

I wouldn't complain much about people singing along to a ballad or such but yapping, you can go do that somewhere else.

[−] butlike 61d ago
I'm so split on this. Ultimately I think I land on: "if there's chairs, engage in the shared sensory experience. If it's GA standing room only, it's a party and do whatever."
[−] dpark 61d ago
This is the typical reply of the inconsiderate. “If my behavior is so problematic, then you should stay home.”

The problem isn’t with “human presence”. It’s with the select few who can’t or won’t control their own behavior out of respect for others.

[−] PaulCarrack 61d ago
[dead]
[−] butlike 61d ago
As a musician I ask if the music is so fragile it can't stand up to some extraneous background noise, is it really worth listening to?

Also, if the music feels bad enough to where people find talking to each other more pleasant than listening, isn't that the fault of the 'sensory experience?'

[−] dpark 61d ago
It really depends on the music and the background noise? Talking (more likely yelling) in the middle of a rock concert? Probably not an issue. I’m wearing earplugs anyway. Holding a conversation in the middle of a quiet passage during an orchestra performance? Everyone near you wants you to shut up.

It’s like people talking through a comedy show. Saying something quietly to the person next to you? Whatever. Talking loudly for 20 minutes? Get the fuck out. Go talk to your friends at a bar and let people who came to hear the act enjoy the act.

> if the music feels bad enough to where people find talking to each other more pleasant than listening

But then leave. If you don’t like the show, it’s totally fair for you to just get up and go. Talking through a show you don’t care about and disturbing people who do want to be there? Why?

[−] BrenBarn 62d ago
Curious if you have a sense of how long this has been going on. My perception is that various sorts of rudeness and inconsiderateness have been on the rise for a while, but really jumped post-COVID.

Some of it is minor but just suggests to me that many people lack any sense that they should be aware of others around them. Just today I was walking down the street and a woman was stopped, in the middle of the sidewalk, staring at her phone. She was in front of a shop door but not right in front of it, so she was half-blocking both people passing on the sidewalk and people trying to get into the store. I see this kind of thing so often now, in store aisles, on sidewalks, etc., and a part of me wants to go up to these people and inform them that there are other people around them and that if they want to take a moment to look at their phone they should step to the side.

[−] lewispollard 61d ago
Definitely post-COVID. I remember going to see bands in between or just after lockdowns ended, and even the bands were taken aback by the change in audience behaviour, commenting on it. Lots of self-entitled behaviour, talking and even yelling out during quiet moments, people walking up to the stage during a seated Nick Cave concert demanding to hand him stuff or shake his hand - I remember him saying "wow, you guys really forgot how to behave over the last couple of years". Now it just seems to be normalised that crowd behaviour is worse, more self-entitled. I'm not sure what's driving it - whether people who previously weren't going to gigs decided, during lockdown, that they wanted to go out and do stuff more, but just had never learned the etiquette, and/or social media making the experience about the individual rather than the performance.
[−] gspetr 61d ago

> many people lack any sense that they should be aware of others around them.

It's not "people". One half of all people grows up playing contact sports or at least have some form of rough-and-tumble with their homies in schoolyards. This half also knows that you can get punched if things get too rowdy.

The other does not. Almost all of the entitled road blockers are in this category.

[−] rayiner 62d ago
I went with my daughter to see Taylor Swift in Tokyo. It was an amazing experiences. Swift fans prefer recording Tokyo performances because fangs don’t sing along to the music or talk during the performance.
[−] shiroiuma 62d ago
I saw Avatar 3 here in Tokyo where I live. It was great! I saw the Dolby 3D version. Popcorn was pretty cheap, tickets were reasonably priced, the audience was as quiet as the dead.

I've seen several other movies (normal ones, not 3D/IMAX/etc.) here since I moved here, and they were all the same. Audiences here have excellent behavior.

We're planning to see Project Hail Mary this weekend when it comes out, this time on IMAX.

[−] DoesntMatter22 61d ago
Japan is a whole other level of respectful. I have seen a movie in the US in 10 years because when I go people are on their phones or talking
[−] maleldil 62d ago

> don’t sing along to the music

What's wrong with that?

[−] 0_____0 62d ago
inconvenient for the purposes of recording, sounds like
[−] rambojohnson 62d ago
A couple years ago I went to a county fair because someone said the pie judging was worth seeing. I’ve been to fairs before but never really watched the judging part. They had all the pies on this weird low table, like not quite a kid’s playset table but close, so people leaning in to look kept bumping it with their legs and thighs without noticing, and after a while one of the pies just slowly started sliding toward the edge every time the table got nudged until it eventually tipped off and landed upside down on the floor while the judges were busy debating crust integrity on another pie.

I picked it up and put it back and they still gave it third place.

[−] dctoedt 59d ago
The Beatles famously stopped touring, and stuck exclusively to studio recording (apart from the Abbey Road rooftop concert), in no small part because they got tired of not being able to hear themselves sing or play due to all the girls' screaming.

https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/why-did-the-beatles-stop-tourin...

[−] dawnerd 62d ago
Just went to a very small show, 200 tickets but lots of no shows. Maybe 100 people there total. The folks at the bar were so rude to the talent just loudly talking over them. I just don’t get it.
[−] snapcaster 61d ago
Couldn't disagree more. It's a social experience, it's so unfun and antisocial to have some go to a large gathering of humans and get annoyed when their presence is detectable. Go listen to the song by yourself in a room
[−] ozim 62d ago
With current TV setups or projector technology I basically have cinema in my living room.

As a kid who grew up in 90’s I would say it is easily better than what cinema had back then.

I don’t have that high expectations of sound/video as many people will point out that streaming kills the quality but for all its worth still much better than what I need to enjoy a movie.

[−] alwa 62d ago
The last time I chose to watch a movie in a theater instead of the comfort of my home, I went for the raucous audience aspect of the experience.
[−] mark_l_watson 62d ago
Well, rude behavior stemmed from lack of empathy for other people who have to listen to them. I am sorry you had that bad experience.

Off topic, but since I retired a few years ago, I go to movies all the time but I go during the week and catch movies between 11am to 3pm. Theaters are almost empty, but just enough other people in the theater to feel like a shared experience. I see about five or six movies a month, and my wife goes with me about half the time. I worried that my local theater would go out of business until we went to a Saturday night movie and all 16 theaters seemed busy, will wall to wall people in the huge lobby area.

So, I hope the movie industry survives in close to its present form. I share your fondness to foreign films, BTW.

[−] next_xibalba 62d ago
This is why I no longer go to the theater. The norms around how one behaves in theaters have been destroyed (at least to my preferences).
[−] justinclift 60d ago
If you haven't seen it already, then Wind River (from 2017) is pretty good: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5362988/

Well, it suited my tastes anyway. :)

[−] alsetmusic 62d ago
This is why I strongly endorse buying a projector if the space allows for one. Changed the home experience. I thought I might be making a mistake when I bought my first (720p) years ago but I'd never go back to a traditional television.
[−] longislandguido 62d ago
Most if not all the ticket price goes directly into the studio's pockets.

So the theatres stay alive by selling concessions.

I'd wager everyone here complaining about prices would also wax poetic about how theatres don't "pay a living wage" to the kids scooping popcorn and would immediately drive home in their $100k Rivians or Teslas so they can give a one star review on Yelp or complain on Reddit about the bathrooms or floors being dirty or sticky.

These same people wouldn't bat an eye at paying $14 for a food truck grilled cheese and leave a tip.

You can't have it both ways.

[−] Jtsummers 62d ago
Where is that? Tickets here are only $7-10 each (except maybe some IMAX or similar showings) and two drinks and popcorn would be $15-25 for two people (size dependent). This is in Colorado.

EDIT: I was going off of memory, but matinee/child/senior pricing is apparently $9.75 at the theater I usually go to, evening is $13.25 (I never go in the evening, had forgotten what that price was). They have a two drink and popcorn combo for $22.10. So the worst case of evening prices (again, not considering IMAX, just regular screens and seats) for two with that combo is $48.60. That's not cheap, but it's not $86 either. And if you're willing to share the drink and go to a matinee you can cut the price to $34.80. This is a Cinemark, a pretty big theater chain.

[−] g947o 62d ago
Then I guess you aren't familiar with the 20 minutes of trailers, 1 minute of Cocacola ad and 2 minutes of other completely irrelevant content before the movie actually begins.
[−] JoeJonathan 62d ago
Not a conventional theater, but I recently went to Vidiots in Los Angeles and enjoyed myself so much I went back a week later. The location I went to has two theaters—37 seat and 270 seat, both with comfortable seating and an excellent picture/sound. Most people who go are kind of movie nerds, so everyone was super respectful. And they don't really play blockbusters, so you don't get that kind of crowd. They seem to be doing well, and I really hope the model works and is reproducible.

Oh, and it was $11 for one of the tickets, $13 for another. I don't remember how much a beer cost, but it was on par with (and maybe less than) local bars.

[−] femiagbabiaka 62d ago
Support small theatres, you won’t get charged like this.
[−] ctkhn 62d ago
What theater is that at? Sounds like a mega chain like AMC or Regal. The local indie theater we go to in one of the 5 largest American cities has never been over $15 per ticket and adding popcorn and a drink is maybe $10 more on top.
[−] bradlys 62d ago
The people going to movies regularly are playing a different game.

The prices you see upfront like this are for "suckers". People who come in, don't think about price, and just pay whatever the cost is. McDonald's is like this now too.

People who are concerned about price though - they use the app, they get deals, and so forth. I've gone to movies and done the same thing - two tickets, two drinks, 1 popcorn and it was $30. This is because these movie theaters run "deals" all the time for this stuff.

You'll have to get used to this paradigm as it's the main way everything is priced now. There's not going to be a "one price for everyone" thing anymore. It's going to be dynamic and different pricing for everything.

[−] jdprgm 62d ago
Where do you live? I'm in a HCOL area and just checked that same combo for a Friday night premiere and it's more like ~$70.

The markup on concessions has always been a thing but it really is just insane to think the unit economics on 2 sodas and a popcorn must be like 50 cents and selling it from $26 (in my area). Clearly they must make the most money this way but it is just crazy that anyone outside of significant disposable income even considers buying concessions. It's priced in such a way where anyone outside of the top 5% income brackets should just laugh at the price and view it as an extreme luxury good and not ever even consider buying anything.

[−] bena 62d ago
Our local AMC theater would be $13 a ticket, $8 a drink, and $11 for popcorn (rounding up and assuming the largest sizes, although the prices are in a narrow band so the price difference between the least and most is under a dollar).

So, we’re looking at $53. Which is $33 less than wherever you’re at.

I also don’t know how standardized prices are across all AMC venues. So while Pokopia costs $70 everywhere, the same may not be true of theater tickets and concessions.

But yeah, it’s typically why we try to avoid theater concessions, because they’ve always been overpriced

[−] pjmlp 61d ago
That is the problem, everyone complains about Netflix, Prime and co, but going to cinema currently can pay for a couple of months in subscriptions.

I get the experience and that there are employees to pay, and such, but if companies want people to still go the movies, they need to ramp those prices down in some way.

In Europe I only go to alternative cinemas which happen to be part of the movie pass network, called Gildepass in Germany.

[−] Tadpole9181 62d ago
It's not even price for me - I'm happy to pay for an experience. I'm more annoyed that the theater is basically the worst place to watch a movie now.

The silver screen has a contrast ratio in the hundreds. A $300 consumer TV now looks significantly better than the blurry, muted, and muddled projector image.

Then the audio at theaters is always totally blown out and overly bassy and siblant. Fine for action, I guess, but it makes listening to dialogue exhausting.

And unless you get your favorite seat, you have to watch the movie skewed. God forbid you get a seat in the front and have to crane your neck the whole hour.

Meanwhile I can stay home, not deal with driving 20 minutes and interacting with the public, pay less, eat better food, get blitzed with friends, talk with my wife, have better visuals and audio, etc. Other than nostalgia, there's just no reason at all to go to a movie theater. It's become kind of outdated in an era of modern TVs to me.

[−] treis 62d ago
This isn't why Hollywood is dying. Hollywood is dying because it's cheaper to make movies elsewhere. We're (probably) still going to have movies for a long time. In the same way that we still have cars long after Detroit "died".
[−] AbstractH24 62d ago
I still go to arthouse movies regularly, mostly because it forces me to give them undivided attention

Although, I’ll admit I go way less often than two years ago when I was full time WFH. Which begs the question if I just went for a reason to leave the house

[−] opan 60d ago
I don't wanna come off as defending any of this, but even 20 years ago I'd bring my own snacks or eat nothing at the movies, the stuff they sell was always considered overpriced. So I'd definitely skip the sodas and popcorn.

That being said, I don't go to theaters anymore either. I'd rather watch stuff from the comfort of my home, at any hour of the day. If I have to wait a few months for web/BD releases, no big deal. I have plenty to watch in the meantime.

[−] pheouk 61d ago
Regals unlimited pass and their snack saver has made movies a no brainer for me and my friends coupled with their monthly themed events showing older movies we almost always have multiple things we want to see and often go multiple times a week, especially during the gloomier winter months!

At last check i was at almost 25 visits this year, just saw F1 again on saturday and off to see Project Hail Mary tonight

[−] raydev 62d ago
I remember my parents complaining about how expensive concessions were when I was a kid in the 90s too, and sometimes we would hit the gas station first and stuff snacks in my mom's bag to sneak them in to the theater. They also complained about prices if we couldn't do the Tuesday matinee.

Not sure anything's changed. The movie theater experience has always been expensive and I think your bill is pretty much in line with inflation.

[−] jemmyw 62d ago
I don't mind the higher price. The place near me is a small cinema and not a chain, the food is excellent and they bring it to your seat. And if you go during the week it's pretty quiet. I'm sure they make most of their money from the restaurant anyway. There's another place like it a bit of a further drive but it to be even quieter, most times we've been it's just us.
[−] the_af 62d ago

>

2 tickets, 2 sodas, 1 popcorn.

Skip the sodas and the popcorn. Go eat before or later. It still won't be cheap, but at least the meal will be better!

[−] freetonik 62d ago
Here in Finland this would cost about 50 euro, which is still a lot, but for me the main reason to never go to a movie theater again is that even after paying all of this money, the first 15 minutes is filled with advertisement, then 15 more minutes of movie trailers, then some "IMAX" or whatever intro video. By the time the movie starts, I feel like I've been watching tiktok for a day.
[−] jghn 62d ago
For a long time now I've felt that there's only situation where it makes sense. That's movies where it is something about it would make it much more enjoyable on IMAX or similar with a professional sound system. So something in the visual spectacle category.

For any normal movie I'd rather just watch it from my couch. But for the once in a while, over the top, blockbuster I'll still go to a theater.

[−] onlyrealcuzzo 62d ago
You can see live theater (albeit without concessions) for less than that.

I'm not sure who is going to the theater or why, but I hope they are enjoying themselves!

[−] projektfu 62d ago
Where I go it's about $33 for two tickets bought online and probably $20 for those snacks, though we usually share a drink and a popcorn. The theater is still usually empty.

The market-clearing price is nearly zero except for some new releases. Oppenheimer was sold out in its first weekend, for example.

Anyone who went to movies before about 1999 remembers them being a lot more popular.

[−] fhdkweig 62d ago
I don't know where people get these crazy prices. Try to find a little hole-in-the-wall theater. I like the local Landmark Cinema. It is about $8 a ticket and I skip on the junk food.

There is another theater on the other side of town that does midnight showings of Rocky Horror Picture Show. Those kinds of places are also cheap.

[−] Swizec 62d ago

> 2 tickets, 2 sodas, 1 popcorn. > $86 dollars. > Don't know if I'll ever go to a conventional movie theater again.

We almost never go to regular theaters anymore. IMAX feels worth it for something like F1 or Top Gun where it’s all about the visual spectacle, otherwise meh.

We go to Alamo Drafthouse a lot tho. A little pricey but the experience of watching a movie in comfy seats over a fairly decent restaurant dinner is fantastic for certain kinds of movies. Peaky Blinders was the most recent. Tommy Shelby paired with a good cocktail or two, fantastic.

Also I don’t know how Alamo achieves this, but people there are really good about noise and other bullshit. I think it’s because they do in fact kick people out for being annoying.

[−] jasonlotito 62d ago
$20 for the tickets. $20 for 2x soda and popcorn, but they've always been on the expensive side compared to tickets.

Tickets are a bit more for IMAX.

Less than an hour outside Philly. The theater is recently renovated too and has nice recliner seats, and everyone has their own armrest.

[−] tomcam 61d ago
Fine. You get to miss the novel pleasures of filthy floors, constant use of bright cell phones, and vigorous conversations during the movie
[−] desireco42 62d ago
I can confirm this, it is stupid how much just basic outing to watch a movie costs. I have 3 kids... I am in Chicago but it is like this everywhere
[−] snthpy 62d ago
Different currency, same conclusion. Plus add on the cost of the baby sitter and the fact that TVs now provide a home Cinema experience.
[−] goatlover 62d ago
Eat somewhere cheaper right before watching the movie in a theater. The concessions are way overpriced.
[−] khazhoux 62d ago
Can you break down the prices?

Because my local AMC has tickets right now at $20, and soda+popcorn is another $20.

[−] nabbed 62d ago
I stopped going sometime mid-2000s, not because of the cost or the quality of movies, but because of the quality of my fellow movie watchers, who were pretty awful to be honest (at least in Silicon Valley at the time):

- Lord of the Rings: a family came in after the movie started with a cluster of helium balloons, each of which eventually got loose and floated around the theatre. A small balloon creates an outsized shadow on the screen when it floats in front of the projector (e.g., sometimes a third of the picture would disappear).

- A Beautiful Mind: Several guys, in different spots in the theatre, would wait for a quiet moment in the movie and say loudly "Oh my beautiful mind". One guy had a squeaky seat, so each time he said his bit, he would squeak his chair 5 times.

- Panic Room: Two people directly behind us just laughed hysterically at seemingly every line in the movie.

Also, the advertisements went on too long (20 minutes maybe?) and were also rock-concert loud.

Last night, I watched Wolfs (Apple TV) in my living room with my spouse and we enjoyed it. It's not a great movie, but it's good, there are no ear-splitting advertisements, and the audience is well behaved.

Edit: Later in the 2000s I did see a few Coen brothers films in the theatre, and those were good experiences, but I still avoided the theatre for the most part.

[−] m463 62d ago
we did the same thing and had to sit far right 2nd row because you need reservations long ahead of time to sit far enough back somewhere near the middle

meanwhile I saw a 50-inch tv at costco for $239, and a 98-inch tv for $1299

[−] xadhominemx 61d ago
I spend much less than that at a chain theater in Manhattan.
[−] stackedinserter 62d ago
And out of 2 hours experience, 30 min is ads.
[−] LightBug1 62d ago
WTF? Where are you based?

Cheapest tickets are £2.50 where I am in London. Maybe £4.50 at a stretch. £10 worse care scenario.

Granted, I don't know about sodas and popcorn, as we always bring or eat beforehand.

Having said that, home theatre is hard to beat but I'd still check a cinema every so often just to experience the group vibe. Nothing beats the collective vibe around a great movie - and worth the risk of shitty neighbours. Maybe I just love cinema.

[−] lordmoma 62d ago
if you love cinema enough
[−] Detrytus 62d ago
You can watch a movie without popcorn, you know. Not only cheaper but also healthier. This American obsession with popcorn always seemed weird to me.
[−] mancerayder 62d ago
Personally, I don't understand why people go to see films with a bunch of strangers and a nod to the HN crowd: with potentially disruptive or reactive people that distract the enjoyment. Unless it's some sort of film festival or a premiere where the director is there, movies are for teenagers and parents with children.

I'm not talking about the 1990s Times Square theaters with a whole other 'type' of audience, eh, member.

[−] nipperkinfeet 62d ago
It is surprising that such a large number of people continue to fall victim to fraud at the cinema. High-quality televisions and sound systems are now available at a reasonable price. It has been 12 years since I last attended a movie screening. All content will be available on-demand within a month of the theatrical release. Popcorn maker at home and drinks.
[−] delichon 62d ago
The little dinosaurs are ignoring the great big elephants in the room: gaming. The article doesn't mention it. The market for video games in 2024 was around $225B, compared to movies at around $33B. Hollywood has worked very hard not to realize that their industry has become niche and have succeeded.

My last week may be an indicator. I've watched zero TV or movies but have spent about 40 hours helping a small colony of scrappy hard working beavers survive on post apocalyptic earth. Steam got my money, Hollywood didn't.

[−] awongh 62d ago
The cultural relevance of movies, and American made movies isn't going anywhere anytime soon, but I think the economics of streaming is finally playing out in the loss of the geographical concentration of power in Hollywood and California.

This is the endgame of the feedback loop of streamers causing industry consolidation... the direct connection of dollars people spend to sit in a theatre seat was slowly declining, but now I think it's gotten so small that it no longer matters- and once the whole box-office feedback loop disappears a lot of the economics of how films are produced are being forced to change.

One of the reasons that people have loved to make fun of Hollywood for literally it's entire existence (besides the fact that the meta talk is self-indulgent artist stuff) is that making movies with so much money and waste is fundamentally ridiculous.

The optimistic viewpoint is that maybe new AI production tools will trigger a re-democratization of creative movies in the next wave, like in the 70s and the 90s indies.

[−] the__alchemist 62d ago
My 2c: They should stop concentrating on appealing to the broadest audience. Formulaic heros' journeys, franchises, predictable characters acted by the same narrow set of the the most-attractive people etc.

Safety and mass-market appeal over creativity.

For contrast: Books, non-AAA video games, and movies from smaller studios still produce high-quality, creative efforts I continue to be excited about. Big-budget movies (and games), and Netflix shows are mostly bottom-feeder stuff.

[−] jimbo808 62d ago
Maybe I'm insane or it's my age, but I can't watch new movies/shows without just seeing propaganda agendas at every turn. Really kills it for me.
[−] rdtsc 62d ago
There just aren’t as many good new movies. Most movies we watch at home are from decades ago. If we didn’t have streaming maybe we’d go to the movies more often, but it’s hard to say.

A few movies we watched are not worth the money. To stay afloat they have to raise ticket prices, but if we’re paying so much, the movie better be absolutely outstanding, and the are just not usually, so we stopped going.

[−] socalgal2 62d ago
If Sinners and One Battle After Another are up for movie of the year then it's no wonder no one is going. One is a fun but ultimately forgettable horror action movie. The other is a movie that just based on its major theme would attract less then half the country and even in those remaining is a very polarizing movie. It's up for best picture because to preach, not because it's actually good.
[−] xyzelement 62d ago
I started watching 1960s era movies with my kids and I understand why Hollywood had the power at the time. Entertainment and solid values crafted into a "picture".

I can imagine back then eagerly awaiting a new release. Now, who cares. Some depressing trauma story of someone I can't relate to or rehashed superhero flick. Yawn.

[−] artyom 62d ago
Nobody else to blame but themselves. Of course, Hollywood is full of narcissists so they'll blame everyone else, e.g. streaming, prices, etc. but the reality is of the last 10-15 years of mainstream US cinema is:

- Scripts that sound more like an HR meeting than a good story.

- Blockbuster superhero movies that are all the same movie.

- Lots of remakes that added modern CGI flare and destroyed the artistic value of the original.

- As consolidation of studios happens, way more "safe" stories that aim to not offend anyone. I think the only one able to get away with it right now is Tarantino.

Prices, streaming, theaters, etc. -- they're all accessory to the problem. People went to the movies for enjoyment, why would they go to endure them? There's no cultural collective experience anymore in the sense of going to see Lord of the Rings or Matrix with your friends for the first time.

Also this is happening throughout all media. Music and video games have the same kind of discussions.

[−] rishabhaiover 62d ago
So many more products are competing for finite attention now. And the solution to that problem is not to productize your commodity imo, art created for the sake of selling is not art.
[−] ks2048 62d ago
Everyone is complaining about movie theater prices. But, I'll also complain about streaming prices. I want to watch The Secret Agent and it's $9.99 to rent on Apple TV. It doesn't seem to make sense in comparison to month all-you-can-watch subscription prices.
[−] cadamsdotcom 62d ago
What if all the good stories have been told? I conjecture Hollywood is out of ideas but there’s plenty new if you look elsewhere.

Recently watched a fantastic Chinese movie: Upstream (2024) - a dramatized view of a culture driven by algorithms where everyone is plugged in but opportunity does exist if you work hard. Optimistic and pessimistic, with an underdog you want to see win, and a bunch of beautiful human and touching moments. Highly recommended.

Hollywood will keep going maybe in a smaller form. It’s ok for industries to change or run out of steam, and it’s ok for new to replace told. It’s ok for a place to run out of stories to tell, because new stories will get told by others in other places.

[−] rimbo789 62d ago
Good riddance. It won’t be missed. Very little of Hollywood benefited humanity - it was mostly a tool of the rich and governments to propagandize. It was just an another opiate for masses. It was built on ruthless exploitation of labour and consumers.
[−] Firehawke 62d ago
I was already complaining about the price when it was only $30 for two tickets, two drinks, and popcorn. To think it's more than double that now!

Add in the fact most anyone can have access to a pretty good quality 60" display. It's not as large as the theater, but it's pretty good-sized, has better color reproduction than a lot of older (read: less-maintained) theaters' gear, and you don't have to deal with people using their phones or talking over the movie.

Lastly, let's just consider that for most people the number of movies you'd actually want to watch on a yearly basis has probably decreased in general while the cost of actually producing those movies has skyrocketed-- it's the same problem with AAA gaming. Your costs are so high that if a movie/game isn't an immediate massive hit, you're doomed.

Yeah, the bottom has dropped out of that market entirely. Gaming will be saved by indie and AA games, but I'm not sure if there's anything like that for movies; sure, smaller films exist but distribution, etc. doesn't really have anything like Steam.

[−] danpalmer 62d ago
People like to point at prices and bad audience behaviour for the downfall of cinemas, but I'd suggest that it also comes down to availability and home experience.

When I was growing up we went to the cinema regularly, but the only options for watching a film were VHS rentals and the cinema, both of which required going out. Films were rare. Sometimes there would be a film on TV, but it would have ads every 20 minutes, and our TV was a relatively small CRT.

Now I have nearly every film made available to me to watch within minutes on a huge screen, in a quiet room, that doesn't smell, with no ads, at the time I want, without going out, and I can pause it to go to the toilet or get a drink rather than having to hope I don't miss anything. And I don't have a home cinema setup, I have a <$1k TV and <$200 speakers, no surround sound, very basic, very accessible.

The only time I go to the cinema now is for IMAX because that passes the bar of better than I have at home as a whole package.

Cinemas just suck.

[−] bdz 62d ago
I watch a film every single day since Covid. There are great films everywhere every year. I'm not american but the sooner you ignore the american cultural imperialism is the better (or at least the films that don't premiere at competition festivals). There is a whole world outside of America.
[−] cubefox 62d ago
The most interesting part:

> North Americans are going to the movies about half as often as they used to a decade ago, based on the number of tickets sold at cinemas in the US and Canada.

50% down in just 10 years is massive.

[−] pkorzeniewski 62d ago
I haven't been in cinema in the past ~10 years and to be honest I wouldn't care if no more movies were ever made, simply because there are hundreds, if not thousands, amazing movies made since the beginning of the cinema that I didn't watch. Most of the new movies are crap anyways, so why waste time and money when I can watch a classic movie instead which has a much higher probability of me enyjoing it.
[−] Apocryphon 62d ago
Every time there’s an article about the “good ol’ days of Hollywood” I like to trot out this comic strip- looks like last time I posted it was five years ago:

https://web.archive.org/web/20201112024059/https://www.gocom...

Hollywood has been a franchise and licensed IP sequel/remake/reboot farm since the ‘80s, since Star Wars and Jaws blockbusters killed off the experimental period of New Hollywood. And even before that it was Cecil B. DeMille bombastic productions and westerns and musicals everywhere. The movie industry has always been characterized by crowd pleasers.

[−] bananamogul 62d ago
As if the world needs more video content.

There's already enough movies and TV shows to keep me busy for the rest of my life. If they stopped making movies and TV shows tomorrow, I wouldn't get through everything I would be interested in watching before I died.

And neither would you.

[−] dinkumthinkum 62d ago
Hollywood has been going through a similar cultural problem that gaming has. They have been extremely woke, and I'm sorry that people won't like that, and they have made movies to make far left critics happy instead of audiences. Not all are like this but this has dominated the industry. There have been some big moneymakers in recent years an the industry could try to make movies for audiences again but they have gotten into this space where they have to make the Academy happy. There was those Danish filmmakers at a press conference talking about their movie set in the 1700s, or something like that, and the press were whining about the lack of diversity in a historical Nordic film. I think if they decide to make movies people want to see and stop using Millennial vernacular in all script writing, they will see people wanting to watch movies again.
[−] beepbooptheory 62d ago
One small thing I noticed.

The best movie of this year, a film called Sirāt, was in part funded by a grant from Spain's Institute of Cinematography and Audiovisual Arts [1]. Another incredible one this past year, a Brazilian film called The Secret Agent, was funded by various grants and institutes as well [2].

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir%C4%81t 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Secret_Agent_(2025_film)

[−] bryan0 62d ago
The only reason I like going to the theater now is to see movies in "4dx". It's a ridiculous format where the seats move and there are other special effects including air, water, and smoke which are custom edited for each chosen movie. It's like a combination between a movie and one of those amusement park rides. I think most people hate it, but my kids and I enjoy it. Tickets are ~$30 each though.

Otherwise I would just rather watch a movie on the couch at home. They come to streaming so quickly there's no problem waiting for it.

[−] everybodyknows 62d ago

> ... California doubled the annual assistance it gives to film and TV productions to $750 million to stop them from fleeing the state.

750M/38.9M = $19.28 per resident

Why can't we call a taxpayer subsidy by its right name?

[−] righthand 62d ago
The promise er sorry propaganda used to be “attend the big blockbuster movies so they can spend the extra money on riskier indie films”. Essentially trickle down for the movie business. Here we are.
[−] chuckadams 62d ago
I put more stock in the the Sundance and Cannes jury prizes: even if they're comprised of the elites who can afford to go to these festivals, they've still got far more artistic sense than the ossified corporate board that the Academy has always been.
[−] niemandhier 61d ago
Hollywood moved into the “exploitation” phase of its optimisation problem: Sequels, prequels, spinoffs, remakes.

If a movie costs O(Billion) to make, you need to be sure to at least earn back 1.x times the investment, the only way to do this is to play it safe.

[−] tonetegeatinst 62d ago
Iv had some movies I wanted to see but had to wait for them to appear online via youtube, apple, PBS, or DVD.

Niche films / indie films don't get shown everywhere and unless your sometimes willing to drive over 150+ miles you just have to wait.

[−] mpalmer 62d ago
Another victim of the efficiency of the market.

Market forces know no culture except what consumers pay for. Absent real care, stewardship and focused investment, the product will always get cheaper.

And of course consumers' tastes are under attack from another direction: their attention spans.

Some load-bearing pillars of human culture are weakening.

[−] dwd 62d ago
As a kid I often went to the drive-in with my family. Completely different experience to a theatre, but one that I remember fondly.

The sound was always tinny and in mono from the small speaker you hooked on the window, but it was fun and very cheap.

[−] t1234s 62d ago
Most recent in theater movie I was was "F1" because I thought the audio experience would be worth the ticket price. While the audio was good, seat quality was sub par, popcorn stale and soda was from a Freestyle machine (YUK!)
[−] eitau_1 62d ago
Here's a great video-essay on adjacent topic: Why The Movies Don't Feel The Same Anymore

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoldOz5YyAw

[−] Animats 62d ago
One new problem for theaters is that entertainment now comes in other time formats than the 1-3 hour movie or the hour-long TV show. Netflix is not constrained by the need to push groups of people through a movie theater.
[−] chairmansteve 62d ago
There was a bubble when all the new streaming services started making content, now there's a bust.

Attendance drops at movie theatres is irrelevant. Most people have watched movies and tv shows at home for years.

Hollywood will be fine.

[−] woeirua 62d ago
$100 to go to the movies for a family of four. No thanks. There’s no mystery why the movies are dying. They’ve priced themselves out and then they give away the product on streaming several months later anyways.

If they want theaters to come back then they’ll have to put movies behind a paywall again.

[−] ideashower 62d ago
I went to the recent re-screenings of the Lord of the Rings movies -- and maybe 30 minutes into the first film, I realized I'd never actually seen it in a theater before. It was glorious.

There seems to be a lot of gloating in this thread from people who haven't been to a theater in many, many years -- lots of disgust at the idea of a movie ever being a communal, social experience. I get the annoyance of other moviegoers talking or otherwise disturbing the movie, but you have no idea what we're missing when big films don't have big individualized social moments to match.

We can't go two hours without picking up our phones. We don't deserve the great experiences movie theaters once gave us.

[−] philwelch 62d ago
They have no one to blame but themselves, judging by the quality of Hollywood movies in recent years.
[−] willmeyers 62d ago
I mean when you have Larry Ellison and other goons pledging investments in these major studios, it's no wonder people who actually enjoy watching movies don't want to give their money+time to watch some dumbed down bottom of the barrel slime that AI has decided people will sit through.

Thankfully, filmmaking is becoming more and more independent. It's never been easier and cheaper to make a movie and share it to millions of people on YouTube or Vimeo. Why go through Hollywood, investors, or give money to festivals for a chance at success when you can just upload the thing and see what happens?

[−] iammjm 62d ago
Actors being this wealthy and famous has always been a mystery to me. Oh so you are a good looking person that recites other people's words for money while faking emotions? And you can take as many takes as you can and your fuckups will be corrected in post-production anyway? Well I guess the work you do totally merits the hundreds of millions of dollars you've amassed. Like even kicking a ball or whatever makes more sense to me because there is an objective measurement of what it means to do it well, while with actors its mostly about sympathy or preference
[−] fuzzfactor 61d ago
The red carpet wasn't even as red as it was during legendary times.
[−] kmfrk 62d ago
A few years ago, someone on Twitter had a really cool proposal for how to revamp the entire format of the Oscars, even taking the importance of commercials into account, but I can't for the life of me find it anymore.
[−] thefounder 62d ago
The main issue was the content the movie industry produced which looked like a lot like some AI slop. I think the DEI lecturing was another nail in the coffin. Unless that changes and they magically add something new to the cinema experience I think they will keep diving into irrelevance because now everybody can produce AI slop.
[−] throwaway81523 62d ago
I can hardly wait for "vibe cinema". Type in a prompt and a 2 hour epic AI slop film comes out. Not much different from Hollywood is now making the hard way.
[−] andrewstuart 61d ago
It’s because most movies are shit and boring - to be blunt.
[−] gogasca 62d ago
[dead]
[−] SadErn 62d ago
[dead]