Movies Are Better At Home . . . No Sh*t
This Business Insider article about why people don’t want to go out to the movies unintentionally explains that phenomenon in its lede: “There are some big, expensive movies coming out this summer, including another Spider-Man reboot and the latest ‘Transformers.’”
So we’re supposed to get excited because the biggest attractions in theaters are a retread and a retread. That’s like McDonald’s and Burger King finding endless ways to spin the Big Mac & Whopper so most Americans don’t catch on that they’re eating the culinary equivalent of dog food.
The BI piece talks about the decline in theater attendance and how people increasingly get their entertainment from streaming services and cable. No need to ponder that one too long either: While it means sifting through a ridiculous amount of crap, you’re more likely to find a gem in the dungheap by going to Netflix, iTunes, Amazon Prime, etc. than you are spending $30 or more to go out to a theater. And more & more people have media systems at home that are at least as good as what’s at the multiplex.
The entertainment in theaters just isn’t that entertaining, and slogging through the summer blockbusters can feel a lot like the Bataan Death March. There’s just more quality to be found—better movies and a better experience—by staying home. People can bemoan the loss of the communal experience, but how much community is there in sitting with a mass of other people to gorge on the movie equivalent of junk food?
Showing better movies in theaters would mean having smaller audiences—1968, the year many believe was the most fertile in movie history also had the lowest attendance. But at least we’d find it more fulfilling, instead of forgetting what we just saw the second we left the theater.
Michael Gaughn—The Absolute Sound, The Perfect Vision, Wideband, Stereo Review,
Sound & Vision, marketing, product design, a couple TV shows, some commercials, and