18 ms·

How will movies, as we know them, survive the next ten years?

90 points by olvy0 7y ago

foolzcrow 7y ago
They wont. The propaganda is so heavy in movies now that the scripts are terrible and by extension movies are too. Hollywood is too busy pushing a race war to realize we dont like their movies anymore
bsenftner 7y ago
This is about how will theaters and the big marketing machine required for feature film cycles to continue. "Movies", as they call it, is an extensive economic driver from the marketing to the consumer alone. The streaming services have no where near the marketing expense of a feature film studio, and the self produced content from "studios" like Netflix, Amazon, and even Hulu compares far too well to the "Hollywood studios" for consumers to care. I wager in 10 years theaters will be in the same place as malls are now - dead, dying and empty.
jger15 7y ago
Good read - Jenkins' commentary especially Matthew Ball's Netflix series is a great companion: https://redef.com/original/netflix-misunderstandings-pt-1-netflixs-content-budget-is-bigger-than-it-seems https://redef.com/original/netflix-misunderstandings-pt-1-ne...
dcolkitt 7y ago
One hypothesis, which I think is worth considering, is that maybe short-form video is just fundamentally more compelling than long-form video media. Think TikTok vs. 150 minute feature films. Before modern technology there was major overhead, to both consumer and producer, when selecting any single piece of media. Producers had to acquire expensive filming equipment, go through an arduous editing process, and negotiate distribution. Consumers had to pick out what they were going to watch next, possibly travel to a venue, or at least jump through a bunch of hoops to load the next playback media. It would make sense for the economics to bias towards long-form video media, even in the face of consumer preference for short-form. It would be absurd to release a 2 minute feature film to play in theaters. It'd even be absurd to schedule a 2 minute broadcast television slot. Even a 2 minute video is pushing it on a streaming service, unless there's a very good algorithm that the user's happy to delegate auto-playback to. Otherwise the overhead of picking the next video is on par with the video length itself. Maybe most of us would prefer just to watch a hundred one minute videos, instead of a single full-length movie. It's just the technology to make this happen is just arriving now. Again, I'm not sure if it's true. But if you're in media, you definitely can't blind yourself to this possibility.
- CodesInChaos 7y ago
  On the other hand TV series with stories spanning many episodes have become more popular. While individual episodes (40-60 mins) may be shorter than a movie, they're only convenient stopping points, like chapters in a book, not separate installments. So I don't think the problem is that long-form is undesired.
- tines 7y ago
  This sounds like "Maybe most of us would prefer to just think 100 tiny thoughts, feel 100 tiny emotions rather than one large thought, one complex emotion", and I think you're probably right, which is probably sad. After all, isn't the point of movies to spur you to think thoughts and feel feelings you wouldn't have thought and felt otherwise?
  - watwut 7y ago
    Shows that run multiple seasons are among the most popular. I mean shows like Westworld, Game of Thrones etc - and they have way more complex emotions and stories then typical theater movie. Theater movies have usually simple story.
    - tines 7y ago
      It seems like we both agree that length implies complexity which was all I was trying to say, so we're on the same page.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- ghaff 7y ago
  Short-form and long-form are essentially different media. (I'd add that serialized long form, aka prestige TV, seems to be doing pretty well right now at least at the top of the pile.) Short-form media has always been harder to monetize. We've had the technology for a long time to sell individual short stories, articles, etc. It doesn't seem to work very well. (Tangent. Why can't I buy an arbitrary short story on Kindle?) Most authors of 300 page books don't make much money either but there does seem to still be a fairly robust writing and publishing pipeline there.
samfisher83 7y ago
The whole title is the following: How Will the Movies (As We Know Them) Survive the Next 10 Years? I think big tent pole movies will still be there because they bring in the audience. Small budget horror movies will exist because even if they didn't make money they didn't cost a lot of money. I think the medium priced movies are going to in trouble. People complain about why all we get are remakes and superhero movies, it appears people aren't going to see new IP in 80-130 million dollar range.
- kibwen 7y ago
  > people aren't going to see new IP in 80-130 million dollar range We might as long as it's an adaptation from a medium with a lower barrier to entry, e.g. Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings.
CM30 7y ago
By accepting that event cinema is the only thing the movie industry has left in its favour right now. As they say in the article itself, many people watch maybe four films a year, and usually stick to those with the highest profile. So I think that's really what film as a medium is going to be in future. It's going to be the place you watch the next Avengers or Star Wars or James Bond or what not. The place for big picture films with million dollar budgets and rosters brimming with A listers, and nothing else beneath that. Or okay, maybe indie cinema may exist on the fringes or something. But fact is, the industry has probably got to accept that low/medium budget films are pretty much history, and they've been replaced entirely by streaming services and sites like YouTube. Still, it's not all bad news. No, if you want bad news, that's probably the future of television. That's on the way out right now, is probably going to completely supplanted by streaming services like Netflix in future, and as a format has pretty much no advantages over the internet whatsoever. Seriously, could you imagine trying to selling the experience of watching TV in a society that already has the internet? You couldn't. It objectively be a worse solution for most people. So yeah, I think film is probably gonna be reduced a bunch of blockbuster films by large studios mixed with some arthouse works, and TV is probably just going to be completely replaced by streaming services and video sharing platforms.
- ghaff 7y ago
  >It's going to be the place you watch the next Avengers or Star Wars or James Bond or what not. The place for big picture films with million dollar budgets and rosters brimming with A listers, and nothing else beneath that. That's mostly been me with going to theaters for a very long time. And I do watch a fair number of movies. Presumably, for lower budget movies, direct to streaming becomes more common although it's hard to say what that means in terms of what works economically. Anecdotally, many years ago, I was in the film group at school and we had 4 different movies over a weekend, filled large auditoriums etc. My understanding is that there are now occasional film showings but, as a whole, this doesn't exist any longer. A lot of going out to see movies in a theater is habit. Take the habit away and you can see a big fropoff.
  - amyjess 7y ago
rjf72 7y ago
Like they've survived the past 20. Hollywood ticket sales have been declining sharply since 2002. [1] That's also the year that their inflation adjusted profits also peaked. Hollywood started making more and more awful movies while trying to argue that 'this is what people want.' Well, it clearly wasn't, isn't, and won't ever be. Nonetheless they'll continue down their current trajectory because they think they're right, as this article emphasizes. Here's an extremely relevant article about Hollywood. [2] Hollywood has been one of the earliest adopters of active utilization and commercialization of "AI technologies". Scripts are actively analyzed using machine learning systems to try to predict profits. Guess what the AI says? Stuff that made money in the past will keep making money, and things that didn't won't. And what do we get out of Hollywood? Repetitive rubbish whose only novelty is tossing in some identity politics to, in this article's phrasing, offer a "more representative portrayal of the world in which we live." More to the point, think about some of the all time greatest movies (as well as money makers). Here's [3] a list of the top 10 by gross. Tellingly, only 3 of the top 10 were made after 2000. But now consider the other films - Gone with the Wind, Titanic, Star Wars, The Sound of Music, ET, The Ten Commandments, etc. These films were all, if not extremely unique, certainly not derivative rubbish. Now look at the 21st century films and you'll see a whole bunch of generic superhero movies and sequels. Even if not the product of AI, it's certainly the product of a mindset that's no different than a profit oriented regression analysis of the past - the less glorified truism of what "AI analysis" is. Maybe the biggest problem with Hollywood is summed by one sentence in the AI article I referenced: “[AI analysis] takes a lot of the risk out of what I do.” No, it just makes you comfortable releasing crap that you'd otherwise recognize as crap. Interestingly the producer that gave that quote ended up releasing two mega-flops after the article and has not released anything since. It's not like we've even scratched the surface of possible ideas, but Hollywood has become uncreative, lazy, and averse to any and all risk - to the point that they'd rather drown than try something else, so long as it happens slowly. [1] - https://www.the-numbers.com/market/ https://www.the-numbers.com/market/ [2] - https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/06/business/media/solving-equation-of-a-hit-film-script-with-data.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/06/business/media/solving-eq... [3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films#Highest-grossing_films_adjusted_for_inflation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films...
- 7y ago
velcrovan 7y ago
I thought this was going to be about the fact that movies are stored on hard drives that are going to fail, and in formats that aren't going to be readable in ten years.
JKCalhoun 7y ago
I would love to see theaters with $4 tickets. Not the whole crowded, "experience" that cineplexes have become, more akin to the art-house theaters that I remember. Plenty of indie and thoughtful films could make a little lucre that way. Better than no return at all. I've sat out of the whole superhero franchise for, what, over a decade or so now? Can't stand movies-by-the-numbers.
- jvagner 7y ago
  I think the theater experience has changed pretty radically, unfortunately, the selection of movies.. haven't. Here in Reno, the Cinemark chain put in the luxury loungers (far fewer seats per theater) and seat selection. With the movie club, you pay $8/movie for all tickets plus get a discount on snacks. Honestly, that's pretty fair. I hate the superhero moment we're living through right now... some likable actors don't seem to show up ind event movies anymore because they're cashing the DC/MCU checks. What I wish every time I go to a theater: * Ditch the stupid Coca-Cola commercials. If we have to sit through those every time we have to go to a theater, we stop going to a theater. * Theaters are set up for digital nowadays, per Fandom and certain fight events. Dig up some legacy films and show indie/classics/other films far more often. Or, make sure other movies play, even during the day on weekend... the theater is empty, why didn't Apollo 11 ever play in my town? * Fix your movie chain marketing emails. They all, universally, suck. * Tell us when the movie starts, not when you start the advertising (yeah, I know it's 15 minutes of trailers/commercials). Not even to go into the "some movies would be better as HBO/ Netflix/ Showtime series" ...
  - kibwen 7y ago
    > the theater is empty, why didn't Apollo 11 ever play in my town? Heh, now there's a new promotion opportunity: "Show up at the theater and your party is the only one there? Select what movie you want to be shown from our immense backlog!" Sort of like no-show ticket deals on flights.
    - humanrebar 7y ago
      I think they should do screenings for more intimate groups. Do couches, coffee tables, etc. Like karaoke rooms. But compete by giving more flexibility about time and selection. Maybe even offer blockbuster TV shows, so you can book a Stranger Things party with a group. I think IP licensing might be the biggest problem there, which would mean that Hollywood is stepping on its own tail to some degree.
mti27 7y ago
The (Russo?) comment about multitasking brought to mind a discussion at work last month about AI taking over. I asked my younger 20-something co-workers if they had ever seen the movie "War Games".... One of them watched it and said he liked the movie, but when discussing specifics ("How about that big steel door in the side of the mountain!?") it was obvious he missed a lot of details due to multitasking. Netflix seems pretty smart in catering to this behavior, in that they removed on site reviews so just scan/skip/previewing a movie is the easiest way to see if it's good.
Bakary 7y ago
We already spend so much time at home that there might be a pushback with the next generations where they try to find any excuse to have an event outside its confines. That said it will probably be augmented VR reality in the street or something of that nature.
growlist 7y ago
It's the old chestnuts that firstly the home cinema experience is now pretty close to being equal in AV terms, and secondly I don't have to deal with a scuzzy cinema, overpriced tickets and idiots talking/on their phones. What would draw me back would be a really high class experience with great films, great food, alcoholic drinks, a beautiful classy interior, and maybe a bar downstairs for a drink or two after the film. That could overall make a real lovely evening of the entertainment. Add in a creche/dog sitting to make it parent friendly. Don't know if it's economically viable though.
- jpindar 7y ago
  That exists. Search for "Dinner Cinema" or "Cinema Pub". They vary in quality of course.
temp-dude-87844 7y ago
Many of the paragraphs are painful to read, and not just because, as Ava put it: "when I hear people being so rigid and so strict about certain forms and presentations, it just reminds me of that "Simpsons" cartoon, "Old Man Yells at Cloud" -- but also because there's a clear sociocultural gulf between the kind of semi-fictitious art-seeking, high-culture but low-access-to-celebrities Sundance fan for whom many of the interviewed appear to target their works and the kinds of people who actually exist in their potential audience. It's as if their target person, whose lack of access to the actual movie festivals where these films are first shown, is made whole by urban theatres in culturally-thriving cities, with these theatres serving as a democratizing force of access, so that the viewer can ponder the topics and messages in the film and reflect on its lessons for themselves and their communities -- while they seem oblivious to the fact that technology and online distribution have democratized access not just for dopamine-cravers whose tastes they seemingly find lacking, but also for their target groups. The fact is, in the history of public art and entertainment, there has never been a time where access to one's idealized audience was easier. Some filmmakers have demonstrated that they can successfully leverage these new channels to make their works have more of an impact, than they would have had otherwise, while others seem to writhe in discomfort as they try to articulate their displeasure with a world that no longer matches their preferred where of scarcity was the norm, their societal role was clearly seen as provoking emotion and critical thought, and they had leverage over the venues that would dole out the privilege of this access.
wayoutthere 7y ago
What we think of as “movies” (traditional theater distribution) will become limited to big-budget “tentpole” movies that anchor a larger media franchise including toys, games and other forms of media. The art film world will probably survive as a niche, if for no other reason than they have a dedicated audience — think the same situation with non-digital photography. But art films will likely trend more provocative as the streaming services are also funding a lot of high-concept films. Movie production costs have gotten so low that online streaming is quickly becoming the predominant model. These low costs allow streaming studio heads to diversify across genres and take lots of small risks, which ultimately reduce me the risk to the production company. This increased risk tolerance allows them to give up almost all creative control to the writers, actors and directors. A-list actors and directors are willing to give up a lot of money to get that creative control, so the streaming services still recruit top talent. But by far the biggest cost difference is marketing. The only way studios can justify a $50M marketing budget for a movie is if that marketing also drives additional commercial activity outside of theatrical attendance (games, merch, anticipated sequels, etc.) Streaming services can benefit from a constant, consolidated marketing budget: they can advertise the “new movie of the week” with a sustained ad buy over time while still retaining the brand advertising uplift for the entire service. Global distribution is also waaaaay easier for streaming services. Ultimate takeaway though is that the window release model is dead. Everyone in the media industry has known this for years; and I think that we’ll look back at 2019 as the year that really started to happen for real.
superqd 7y ago
What won't be obvious, but at some point will tip over and wreak havoc on the industry, will be AI generated films. You might think of the poor quality deepfakes when I say that, but we are in the baby stages of something far more powerful. Imagine if it was possible to autogenerate a script/story, then autogenerate scenery, music and humans to play out that story. There is AI work already going on in each of those areas, and as the quality improves, it will become an obvious next step to put it all together into a single Movie Machine, of sorts, that can remix existing movies (I think the first wave), and/or synthesize movies completely from scratch based on various parameters you provide (e.g., 'a movie like star wars, but with an all female cast', or 'an inspiring movie about dogs', etc). It is not a matter of "if" this day will come, but simply "when". I think 10-15 years is very possible. We'll have audio software that generates all the music we could want in a single app, have a single book app that generates any novel in any genre we want, or creates videos/movies we want from a single application. How could humans compete with their 1-5 movies a year against a computer app that could generate 5 movies a minute? I think it could easily find its way into Youtube first, as there is much less to lose, and far more to gain, from short videos that capture attention. With apps used by content creators to create music, or help with VFx, etc, to eventually generating entirely new videos without requiring the content creator to do any work, and they will jump at the chance if it gets them more subscribers. There will come a day, when there is a really popular film, that was completely created by a computer. That day will come not in a 100 years, but in the next decade or two.
- Mountain_Skies 7y ago
  That will also take away Hollywood's ability to be gatekeepers and tastemakers. That power distributed throughout the population will be a huge change.
- tomjen3 7y ago
  My guess is that it will be everything but the story that is auto generated for a long time. We already have this human does not exist etc, but creating a compelling story hasen't happened so far -- the closest thing we have had are automatic newspaper writers, so maybe documentaries? (Oh God, then it will be impossible to figure out if a given documentary is true or made up).
jshaqaw 7y ago
Event movies for teenagers sell lots of popcorn and candy. Sophisticated indie movies for adults don't. A huge amount of the profit margin at the theaters is driven by the concessions counter. This drives which films the big theaters want to show.
- humanrebar 7y ago
  I bet indie films sell hipster beer, wine, and cocktails, though.
ken 7y ago
Isn't this true of every medium? When's the last time you went to a concert of a local musician, or a small theatre play, or bought a book that wasn't already a bestseller? I work in the arts and I can probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of people I know who have been to a theatre to see something smaller than "Hamilton". The internet is here so everything must scale. If you're not serving a billion people you're a failure.
andrew_ 7y ago
Disappointed that "cost" only appeared once, and neither "ticket" nor "price" appeared in the article. Ticket prices for movies at the theater are absurd. It's an experience that we've lost, and it's been buried under ludicrous consumer costs.
- ghaff 7y ago
  People have been complaining about movie ticket prices for decades. Average inflation-adjusted ticket prices are pretty much the same as they were in 1970. http://collider.com/movie-ticket-price-inflation-statistics/ http://collider.com/movie-ticket-price-inflation-statistics/
  - aries1980 7y ago
    $8 would be nice, but it is around £16 in London: https://booking.cineworld.co.uk/booking/8110/37196/0974ddb0944c11e98d2e3ba71e5bb233/tickets https://booking.cineworld.co.uk/booking/8110/37196/0974ddb09...
    - ghaff 7y ago
      And London tickets probably cost a lot more than the US average in 1970 too. Certainly, in NYC movie tickets have tended to cost quite a bit more than the suburban theater norm.
- bradstewart 7y ago
  I pretty much only go to movies on a Wednesday evenings and Saturday mornings these days. Cheaper and less crowded.
galkk 7y ago
I'm going to cinema to experience the movies the way, I can't experience them at home: at enormous screen, with great sound. By doing that, I'll select movies that will utilize that, and it's, naturally, blockbusters with great special effects. I don't need to go to cinema to see drama or comedy or anything else, I can easily do that from the comfort of my own house.
- dawnerd 7y ago
  Somewhat the same as you. Even though I have a very expensive home theater setup, it just can't compete with the theaters, plus theres the whole not wanting to wait for a bluray release - which might not even have the same quality or audio. Plus A-List is really cheap
smattiso 7y ago
The unfortunate consequence of this is that some previously viable types of movies won't make financial sense in a mostly streaming world. Spending 50 million dollars to produce a comedy only to have it end up on Netflix competing directly with thousands of low budget comedy TV shows and indie films isn't going to work. Would a movie like Austin Powers be able to make money today?
- boh 7y ago
  Yes it would. You'd make money in the theater and then get preferable terms from Netflix. Look up Kevin Hart for examples.
- rhino369 7y ago
  Austin Power's would probably make money today, but it probably wouldn't be made. Because it's impossible to only make "good movies," especially when you are working without an established fanbase or franchise, for every Austin Powers you make, you get 2-3 shitty high budget attempts that flop. We should also ask ourself if high budget comedies are really necessary. You could do Austin Powers on a cheap budget and it would probably only reduce the quality a bit. So maybe it's not the end of the world if the Austin Powers movies of the future are lower budget and on TV.
seattle_spring 7y ago
It's a bummer this is happening in a major way internationally too. Wandering Earth was maybe the worst movie I've seen in 10 years, yet China is falling over itself saying it's the best "Sci-Fi" ever made. Once Asia only churns out Michael Bay garbage, it'll all be over.
- TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
  I thought it was fascinating. It took a lot of the tropes everyone takes for granted in US blockbusters and China-fied them. Seriously jarring. When you see a different culture trying to do them, it makes you realise just how just how unconvincingly stiff and nationalistic those tropes are. I don't know if that was deliberate. If it was, it was a much cleverer movie than it appeared to be.
lubujackson 7y ago
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.
- m23khan 7y ago
  Malls are gone? Serious? Here in Canada they are getting more and more jam packed with more upscale retailers and ever growing crowds. Heck, check out Square one mall in Mississauga, ON -- the place is booming for last 10+ years. Heck, even the crappier (2nd class) malls have been putting on the proverbial lipstick and targeting hip food retailers thus inviting younger crowds dating and chilling. The only malls that seem to die off are the ones who were opened in places which are not progressing economically (for example low-income neighborhoods) and they never took off to begin with nor has the neighborhood improved economically.
  - 0xffff2 7y ago
    The death of malls in the US is a well-known phenomenon. https://time.com/4865957/death-and-life-shopping-mall/ https://time.com/4865957/death-and-life-shopping-mall/
  - ghaff 7y ago
    In the US, the situation seems pretty bifurcated. Upscale malls (mostly urban or near-urban) are generally doing pretty well. Bigger/better mid-market malls in the suburbs of relatively affluent cities are still mostly doing OK too. But you don't even need to go to low income areas. The mall that is nearest me in a smaller city about 40 miles from Boston has anchor stores that are pretty much all retail chains that are cratering (Sears, JC Penny, Toys R'Us). The grocery store and Home Depot in the complex are always busy but the actual mall and other small stores are a ghost town. It's not exactly an upscale area but it's not depressed. (Heck, there are Tesla chargers in the parking lot.)
anderber 7y ago
I never go to the movie theater except for when I'm in a town that has an Alamo Drafthouse(https://drafthouse.com/ https://drafthouse.com/). The experience of good food, drinks and great curated movies is awesome. It's not just going to the movies, it's an evening out. I hope they continue to do well, and when they do decide to come to my town, I'll be there very often. Last movie I saw there was Black Panther. Instead of ads before the movie, they had a retrospective/documentary on the history of Black Panther in the comics. They know movies, and do them right.
- baddox 7y ago
  It's interesting how people are looking for very different experiences at the cinema. I haven't tried the Alamo Drafthouse in SF yet, but I am generally not a fan of the hip cinemas. The food and drink is generally a huge distraction during the movies, and the seating and screen technology is usually not a top concern. I really just want the best screen and nice seats, and sad as it may be, it's really just the big cineplex chains that deliver on that. As far as movie curation goes, that's certainly a weakness of the big chains, but at least in SF I have been shocked at the variety of foreign/indie/classic films that show up at the AMC and Cinemark if you pay attention to showtimes.
  - blhack 7y ago
    The drinks at Alamo aren’t distracting like at a dinner theater. And that isn’t the allure anyway. The people who run Alamo have concentrated so hard on customer experience that it’s almost embarrassing to the other theaters. 1) Nobody takes your ticket. Buy it online and walk directly to your seat. 2) no advertisements for liposuction of real estate before the movie starts. The media playing while you wait is interesting clips that are relevant to the movie you are about to watch. When I saw “hackers” there, it was a bunch of hilarious old computer ads from the 90s, music videos of the soundtrack, etc. 3) if you talk, text, or arrive late you get kicked out. People follow this rule. 4) There might be some alternative revenue stream[1] but it doesn’t feel that way. It feels like you exchange money for a ticket to a movie. Honestly Alamo feel less hip, and more like it’s run by cranky old cinema buffs that want you to shut up and pay attention during the movie. It’s like a theater for adults. [1] at other theaters it feels like they don’t care about you buying a ticket, and the ticket is really just an excuse to sell you extremely expensive popcorn.
potta_coffee 7y ago
Hopefully they don't survive...current state of Hollywood's output is garbage, IMO. I'm definitely not the target audience for what they're making. Currently re-watching all the old Spaghetti Westerns, they're better entertainment than any recent movie I can think of.
m23khan 7y ago
IF I may assume, majority of the people commenting here are 25+. I am sorry but movie theaters are not targeting you as primary audience. Why? You are an adult, you are likely to enjoy somewhere with alcohol/adult-food, in adult-only setting and somewhere you can get better value for your 'hard earned' money. Sure, you MAY catch that marvel flick but how many times do you really anticipate really watching a movie at cinema during the year? See, with marvel and superhero movies and with chick flicks and raunchy over-the-top comedies, who are they targeting? You? Give me a break! They are targeting the youth! The ones 16-22, you know the ones who are mostly students and have awkward social lives to begin with and the ones who are likely to religiously follow the movies, later buy the related merchandise and talk about it for long time in their gatherings. And for kids below 16, there is a healthy stream of cartoon movies that Pixar, Disney and the like keep doling out to the masses -- case in point, the next Toy Story or Pets movie. Because for that age group (22 and under), cinema is the biggest bang for the buck AND the cheapest night-out with friends (spend around 10 dollars for movie ticket followed by cheap pizza slice and can of cold drink before heading home).
- 0xffff2 7y ago
  If this is true, why does virtually every theater I've been to in the last 5 years serve craft beer and cocktails?
  - m23khan 7y ago
    did you go to cineplex or iMAX? Those are the ones I am talking about. Otherwise, I dunno, maybe the locality/jurisdiction/state you live may have laws allowing for alcohol in cinemas.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - Larrikin 7y ago
      Every theater I've been to in Chicago has had alcohol, often times full bars. The cheap student targeted ones with the lumpy seats and the fancy off Michigan Avenue ones as well.
sonnyblarney 7y ago
The newer cinemas are too much like a grotesque plastic theme park. Buzzling lights, games, fast food. They are like 'Chucky Cheeze'. No thanks. How about nice, quaint theatre? Maybe a coffee shop out front. Popcorn, soda, candy, beer/wine in respectable containers. And somewhat reduced price on the entry. $25/head is just not worth the outing.
- strictnein 7y ago
  Arcades and a myriad of junk food have been in theaters for 35+ years now, so I'm not sure what you mean by "newer".
pjmorris 7y ago
With a title like 'How will movies survive?' and an opening like "There were 350 more movies released theatrically in the United States last year than there were when “Avatar” came out in 2009.", I think the question has, unintentionally, been answered. Movies are doing fine. A multitude of options for reaching and watching films has made room for more kinds of films and given viewers better access. About twenty years ago, some co-workers were predicting that home theater technology would make the public movie theater obsolete. My counter-arguments at the time were that there would always be room for seeing movies with the best possible light and sound (better than the best home theaters), and there would always be room for seeing movies together, not just your friends, but a large group. I feel like there's something special about sharing the audience reaction (FTA,"That social aspect of sharing a movie with friends and strangers and family, that’s such a strong part of our tradition."). There's certainly something special about seeing a movie with a date who's not yet comfortable coming to your house. I don't, yet, see a reason to update my viewpoint. Movies will survive.
- m463 7y ago
  It would be nice to know the numbers. Are people spending less or more? How are individual movies doing, and movies in general? Or: how big is the pie, and how big are the slices?
soulofmischief 7y ago
None of this really matters; Or rather, this consolidation is only laying the groundwork for the real change coming. Once deepfake tech is so good that we can create hyper-realistic performances at a fraction of the cost (both in terms of effects and salary), the game is really on. Over time big studios and fans alike will adjust to the idea that a movie doesn't need real actors to be good. Maybe it needs real actors to sell the star system Hollywood has milked since the 20's. But they don't need to be present for filming, and salaries will adjust accordingly. Many ticket-selling actors will just become celebrity icons and nothing more. You thought the lip-syncing phenomenon of celebrity pop acts during the 80's-00's was bad? Just wait until we are having the conversation about whether an actor can really act or if it's just CG. In fact, many small studios will survive because of this; like the underground music scene, they will represent "real" cinema with "real" acting. But this will come with massive paycuts and lifestyle adjustments. And higher ticket prices for fans of real cinema. Underground acting will become what theatre is now: a chance to test your meddle and artistic credibility, at the cost of fame and fortune. It's crazy that something as artistically extravagant as movie-making scarcely lasted a century, compared to other mediums. Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat was released in 1896. By 2026 the days of real cinema will be in rapid decline, and if the progress made in the last two decades are any indication, by 2046 it will be all but gone from big studio productions.
- funkymike 7y ago
  Deepfake tech could make a big difference in film editing. Film 15 takes and it doesn't matter if none of them is exactly what the director wants because they could make the perfect take out of the others. The top actors will end up with "natural takes only" clauses in their contracts. It has pretty big implications for film awards as well. Can an actor get an award if their performance was altered? What does good directing mean if they don't have to get the actors to perform as well as it ends up on the screen?
- tomjen3 7y ago
  Interesting tangent there: with CGI that good, you could mix and match across time. A rom-com with Brie Larson and Humpry Bogart?
beat 7y ago
My primary theater is a local nonprofit, running carefully curated art-house stuff, both new and old, with some popular classics putting butts in seats to help fund the more exotic fare. A couple of weeks ago, I got to see my two favorite Coen brothers films on big screen that way. We also have an outstanding second-run within walking distance of our house - a 1950s-built theater that has been meticulously maintained and never cut up, so it has comfy seats, great sound, and a gigantic screen. It fills up in the evenings, mostly neighborhood people walking there, so it has a community feel. There are other variations of "art house theater" in town too, all doing pretty well. They're not the ones suffering. It's the chain theaters at the mall that are suffering. Sure, I live in hipster paradise (aka Minneapolis), but you can find similar facilities at many other cities.
- mywittyname 7y ago
  My friend's wife volunteers at one of these in a ~500 person town that's smack in the middle of Trump Country. So it isn't just hipsters that have a taste for nostalgic movies/theaters. Though, I suspect they play more Fist Full of Dollars stuff and less Rocky Horror Picture Show.
wyoh 7y ago
> J.J. ABRAMS > > When you have a movie that’s as entertaining, well-made, and well-received as “Booksmart” not doing the business it should have [the teen comedy underperformed at the box office despite critics’ raves], it really makes you realize that the typical Darwinian fight to survive is completely lopsided now. The fact that critics, a very insular group of people, liked the movie doesn't mean it is good or will please the public at large. Booksmart is a prime example of the « Get woke, go broke » adage.
- TylerE 7y ago
  By adage, you mean thing the alt-right chants with no basis in fact?
  - wyoh 7y ago
    Nothing to do with the alt-right boogeyman. Not every person right of AOC is alt-right.
- galkk 7y ago
  It's like saying > When you have a movie that’s as entertaining, well-made, and well-received as “Ghostbusters (2016)” not doing the business it should have [the teen comedy underperformed at the box office despite critics’ raves],
TheMagicHorsey 7y ago
I think we should consider whether the American movie theater experience is really the best way to share video entertainment in a communal fashion. One anecdote to consider: Back in 2005 I went to India on business. While there in the city of Hyderabad, a local contractor that I was working with invited me to visit the village where his grandparents lived. We went to the village which was several hours drive from Hyderabad (something like 8 hours or more ... I don't remember exactly). The village was a completely different environment than Hyderabad ... very humid, but green and beautiful. And very few people spoke English there (which is relevant as you'll see). In that village there was a kind of communal video hall run by a local entrepreneur. He basically had computer projector (I think it was 720p resolution ... nothing fancy) connected to a computer and a rudimentary PA system. Starting at around 6pm or so, after people in the village had had their supper, he would start showing films. It was whatever he felt like showing or whatever people paid him to play. My host was kind of a big man in the village, since he was from the city, and much more well to do. He was shown a lot of deference. My host asked the theater owner to play a movie that I would enjoy ... and the theater owner decided to play Rambo. It was very clear that everyone in the village had seen the movie before ... probably many times before. People talked with each other during the film. Some of the men were smoking (which I wasn't a fan of). And it was hot and humid. But god damn if it wasn't the best action movie screening of my life. Everyone was commenting and cheering for Stallone ... and nobody knew what the hell Stallone was saying directly ... but there was kind of a really bad audio running in Telugu on top of the English audio ... which I can only assume was a local translation recorded over the original audio. At one point Stallone has a bow and arrow and shoots a guy with a grenade tip ... and the guy explodes. Not something I'd want my kid to see ... but there were kids from 5 to 15 cheering and hollering like he'd scored a goal in a tournament or something. Really an enjoyable experience. Maybe we just need smaller, nearer, more locally tailored theaters.
Aardwolf 7y ago
What's different about the next 10 years than the last 10 years?
Animats 7y ago
One key problem is mentioned in that article - having to make movies phone-screen compatible. The user just can't see the details on the tiny screen, no matter how many pixels the screen has. That limits you to close-up shots and vague backgrounds. I'm waiting for the first theatrical release in vertical video.
kennyloginNTH 7y ago
Alamo Drafthouse type accommodations (alcohol, increased food options) are already integrated in many old theaters (minus the tables at seating). It only marginally improves attendance and customer experience. We seem to be moving away from communal space as a society in USA (failing malls, theaters, and other community shopping/work/recreation spaces). I'm not a fan anymore of isolating every human needs/experiences and charging a service for each (Netflix, Tinder, Facebook, Grubhub, texting).
aaron695 7y ago
The Chinese market has the most control over Hollywood. It is the reason for the large amount of franchises and sequels. Soooo you need to see how they mature. They are perhaps in the 80's still (Google how they are remaking all the 80's movies without acknowledgement ;) ) But they advance far faster than the west since they have the way forward planned. So as they mature the market will mature again.
MuffinFlavored 7y ago
I feel like the majority of good movies came out before 2000. The Dark Knight is an exception. https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?groups=top_250&sort=user_rating,desc https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?groups=top_250&sort=user_... There are very few good movies coming out anymore. When is the next Pulp Fiction or The Godfather going to come out? It is very hard to get excited for whatever is being released these days. It's just not even comparable/close.
- dumbfoundded 7y ago
  The Lord of the Rings trilogy comes to mind. The trilogy set a record for academy awards.
  - MuffinFlavored 7y ago
    What notable has come out since then?
    - dumbfoundded 7y ago
      Children of Men, The Incredibles, Inception, Toy Story, Lala Land. Just a few off the top of my head. I'm not sure what genres you like but I cannot imagine you haven't enjoyed a significant number of movies over the past two decades.

90 points by olvy0 7y ago

They wont. The propaganda is so heavy in movies now that the scripts are terrible and by extension movies are too. Hollywood is too busy pushing a race war to realize we dont like their movies anymore

bsenftner 7y ago

This is about how will theaters and the big marketing machine required for feature film cycles to continue. "Movies", as they call it, is an extensive economic driver from the marketing to the consumer alone. The streaming services have no where near the marketing expense of a feature film studio, and the self produced content from "studios" like Netflix, Amazon, and even Hulu compares far too well to the "Hollywood studios" for consumers to care. I wager in 10 years theaters will be in the same place as malls are now - dead, dying and empty.

jger15 7y ago

Good read - Jenkins' commentary especially Matthew Ball's Netflix series is a great companion: https://redef.com/original/netflix-misunderstandings-pt-1-netflixs-content-budget-is-bigger-than-it-seems https://redef.com/original/netflix-misunderstandings-pt-1-ne...

dcolkitt 7y ago

One hypothesis, which I think is worth considering, is that maybe short-form video is just fundamentally more compelling than long-form video media. Think TikTok vs. 150 minute feature films. Before modern technology there was major overhead, to both consumer and producer, when selecting any single piece of media. Producers had to acquire expensive filming equipment, go through an arduous editing process, and negotiate distribution. Consumers had to pick out what they were going to watch next, possibly travel to a venue, or at least jump through a bunch of hoops to load the next playback media. It would make sense for the economics to bias towards long-form video media, even in the face of consumer preference for short-form. It would be absurd to release a 2 minute feature film to play in theaters. It'd even be absurd to schedule a 2 minute broadcast television slot. Even a 2 minute video is pushing it on a streaming service, unless there's a very good algorithm that the user's happy to delegate auto-playback to. Otherwise the overhead of picking the next video is on par with the video length itself. Maybe most of us would prefer just to watch a hundred one minute videos, instead of a single full-length movie. It's just the technology to make this happen is just arriving now. Again, I'm not sure if it's true. But if you're in media, you definitely can't blind yourself to this possibility.

CodesInChaos 7y ago
On the other hand TV series with stories spanning many episodes have become more popular. While individual episodes (40-60 mins) may be shorter than a movie, they're only convenient stopping points, like chapters in a book, not separate installments. So I don't think the problem is that long-form is undesired.
tines 7y ago
This sounds like "Maybe most of us would prefer to just think 100 tiny thoughts, feel 100 tiny emotions rather than one large thought, one complex emotion", and I think you're probably right, which is probably sad. After all, isn't the point of movies to spur you to think thoughts and feel feelings you wouldn't have thought and felt otherwise?
- watwut 7y ago
  Shows that run multiple seasons are among the most popular. I mean shows like Westworld, Game of Thrones etc - and they have way more complex emotions and stories then typical theater movie. Theater movies have usually simple story.
  - tines 7y ago
    It seems like we both agree that length implies complexity which was all I was trying to say, so we're on the same page.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
ghaff 7y ago
Short-form and long-form are essentially different media. (I'd add that serialized long form, aka prestige TV, seems to be doing pretty well right now at least at the top of the pile.) Short-form media has always been harder to monetize. We've had the technology for a long time to sell individual short stories, articles, etc. It doesn't seem to work very well. (Tangent. Why can't I buy an arbitrary short story on Kindle?) Most authors of 300 page books don't make much money either but there does seem to still be a fairly robust writing and publishing pipeline there.

samfisher83 7y ago

The whole title is the following: How Will the Movies (As We Know Them) Survive the Next 10 Years? I think big tent pole movies will still be there because they bring in the audience. Small budget horror movies will exist because even if they didn't make money they didn't cost a lot of money. I think the medium priced movies are going to in trouble. People complain about why all we get are remakes and superhero movies, it appears people aren't going to see new IP in 80-130 million dollar range.

kibwen 7y ago
> people aren't going to see new IP in 80-130 million dollar range We might as long as it's an adaptation from a medium with a lower barrier to entry, e.g. Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings.

CM30 7y ago

By accepting that event cinema is the only thing the movie industry has left in its favour right now. As they say in the article itself, many people watch maybe four films a year, and usually stick to those with the highest profile. So I think that's really what film as a medium is going to be in future. It's going to be the place you watch the next Avengers or Star Wars or James Bond or what not. The place for big picture films with million dollar budgets and rosters brimming with A listers, and nothing else beneath that. Or okay, maybe indie cinema may exist on the fringes or something. But fact is, the industry has probably got to accept that low/medium budget films are pretty much history, and they've been replaced entirely by streaming services and sites like YouTube. Still, it's not all bad news. No, if you want bad news, that's probably the future of television. That's on the way out right now, is probably going to completely supplanted by streaming services like Netflix in future, and as a format has pretty much no advantages over the internet whatsoever. Seriously, could you imagine trying to selling the experience of watching TV in a society that already has the internet? You couldn't. It objectively be a worse solution for most people. So yeah, I think film is probably gonna be reduced a bunch of blockbuster films by large studios mixed with some arthouse works, and TV is probably just going to be completely replaced by streaming services and video sharing platforms.

ghaff 7y ago
>It's going to be the place you watch the next Avengers or Star Wars or James Bond or what not. The place for big picture films with million dollar budgets and rosters brimming with A listers, and nothing else beneath that. That's mostly been me with going to theaters for a very long time. And I do watch a fair number of movies. Presumably, for lower budget movies, direct to streaming becomes more common although it's hard to say what that means in terms of what works economically. Anecdotally, many years ago, I was in the film group at school and we had 4 different movies over a weekend, filled large auditoriums etc. My understanding is that there are now occasional film showings but, as a whole, this doesn't exist any longer. A lot of going out to see movies in a theater is habit. Take the habit away and you can see a big fropoff.
- amyjess 7y ago

rjf72 7y ago

Like they've survived the past 20. Hollywood ticket sales have been declining sharply since 2002. [1] That's also the year that their inflation adjusted profits also peaked. Hollywood started making more and more awful movies while trying to argue that 'this is what people want.' Well, it clearly wasn't, isn't, and won't ever be. Nonetheless they'll continue down their current trajectory because they think they're right, as this article emphasizes. Here's an extremely relevant article about Hollywood. [2] Hollywood has been one of the earliest adopters of active utilization and commercialization of "AI technologies". Scripts are actively analyzed using machine learning systems to try to predict profits. Guess what the AI says? Stuff that made money in the past will keep making money, and things that didn't won't. And what do we get out of Hollywood? Repetitive rubbish whose only novelty is tossing in some identity politics to, in this article's phrasing, offer a "more representative portrayal of the world in which we live." More to the point, think about some of the all time greatest movies (as well as money makers). Here's [3] a list of the top 10 by gross. Tellingly, only 3 of the top 10 were made after 2000. But now consider the other films - Gone with the Wind, Titanic, Star Wars, The Sound of Music, ET, The Ten Commandments, etc. These films were all, if not extremely unique, certainly not derivative rubbish. Now look at the 21st century films and you'll see a whole bunch of generic superhero movies and sequels. Even if not the product of AI, it's certainly the product of a mindset that's no different than a profit oriented regression analysis of the past - the less glorified truism of what "AI analysis" is. Maybe the biggest problem with Hollywood is summed by one sentence in the AI article I referenced: “[AI analysis] takes a lot of the risk out of what I do.” No, it just makes you comfortable releasing crap that you'd otherwise recognize as crap. Interestingly the producer that gave that quote ended up releasing two mega-flops after the article and has not released anything since. It's not like we've even scratched the surface of possible ideas, but Hollywood has become uncreative, lazy, and averse to any and all risk - to the point that they'd rather drown than try something else, so long as it happens slowly. [1] - https://www.the-numbers.com/market/ https://www.the-numbers.com/market/ [2] - https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/06/business/media/solving-equation-of-a-hit-film-script-with-data.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/06/business/media/solving-eq... [3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films#Highest-grossing_films_adjusted_for_inflation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films...

7y ago

velcrovan 7y ago

I thought this was going to be about the fact that movies are stored on hard drives that are going to fail, and in formats that aren't going to be readable in ten years.

JKCalhoun 7y ago

I would love to see theaters with $4 tickets. Not the whole crowded, "experience" that cineplexes have become, more akin to the art-house theaters that I remember. Plenty of indie and thoughtful films could make a little lucre that way. Better than no return at all. I've sat out of the whole superhero franchise for, what, over a decade or so now? Can't stand movies-by-the-numbers.

jvagner 7y ago
I think the theater experience has changed pretty radically, unfortunately, the selection of movies.. haven't. Here in Reno, the Cinemark chain put in the luxury loungers (far fewer seats per theater) and seat selection. With the movie club, you pay $8/movie for all tickets plus get a discount on snacks. Honestly, that's pretty fair. I hate the superhero moment we're living through right now... some likable actors don't seem to show up ind event movies anymore because they're cashing the DC/MCU checks. What I wish every time I go to a theater: * Ditch the stupid Coca-Cola commercials. If we have to sit through those every time we have to go to a theater, we stop going to a theater. * Theaters are set up for digital nowadays, per Fandom and certain fight events. Dig up some legacy films and show indie/classics/other films far more often. Or, make sure other movies play, even during the day on weekend... the theater is empty, why didn't Apollo 11 ever play in my town? * Fix your movie chain marketing emails. They all, universally, suck. * Tell us when the movie starts, not when you start the advertising (yeah, I know it's 15 minutes of trailers/commercials). Not even to go into the "some movies would be better as HBO/ Netflix/ Showtime series" ...
- kibwen 7y ago
  > the theater is empty, why didn't Apollo 11 ever play in my town? Heh, now there's a new promotion opportunity: "Show up at the theater and your party is the only one there? Select what movie you want to be shown from our immense backlog!" Sort of like no-show ticket deals on flights.
  - humanrebar 7y ago
    I think they should do screenings for more intimate groups. Do couches, coffee tables, etc. Like karaoke rooms. But compete by giving more flexibility about time and selection. Maybe even offer blockbuster TV shows, so you can book a Stranger Things party with a group. I think IP licensing might be the biggest problem there, which would mean that Hollywood is stepping on its own tail to some degree.

mti27 7y ago

The (Russo?) comment about multitasking brought to mind a discussion at work last month about AI taking over. I asked my younger 20-something co-workers if they had ever seen the movie "War Games".... One of them watched it and said he liked the movie, but when discussing specifics ("How about that big steel door in the side of the mountain!?") it was obvious he missed a lot of details due to multitasking. Netflix seems pretty smart in catering to this behavior, in that they removed on site reviews so just scan/skip/previewing a movie is the easiest way to see if it's good.

Bakary 7y ago

We already spend so much time at home that there might be a pushback with the next generations where they try to find any excuse to have an event outside its confines. That said it will probably be augmented VR reality in the street or something of that nature.

growlist 7y ago

It's the old chestnuts that firstly the home cinema experience is now pretty close to being equal in AV terms, and secondly I don't have to deal with a scuzzy cinema, overpriced tickets and idiots talking/on their phones. What would draw me back would be a really high class experience with great films, great food, alcoholic drinks, a beautiful classy interior, and maybe a bar downstairs for a drink or two after the film. That could overall make a real lovely evening of the entertainment. Add in a creche/dog sitting to make it parent friendly. Don't know if it's economically viable though.

jpindar 7y ago
That exists. Search for "Dinner Cinema" or "Cinema Pub". They vary in quality of course.

temp-dude-87844 7y ago

Many of the paragraphs are painful to read, and not just because, as Ava put it: "when I hear people being so rigid and so strict about certain forms and presentations, it just reminds me of that "Simpsons" cartoon, "Old Man Yells at Cloud" -- but also because there's a clear sociocultural gulf between the kind of semi-fictitious art-seeking, high-culture but low-access-to-celebrities Sundance fan for whom many of the interviewed appear to target their works and the kinds of people who actually exist in their potential audience. It's as if their target person, whose lack of access to the actual movie festivals where these films are first shown, is made whole by urban theatres in culturally-thriving cities, with these theatres serving as a democratizing force of access, so that the viewer can ponder the topics and messages in the film and reflect on its lessons for themselves and their communities -- while they seem oblivious to the fact that technology and online distribution have democratized access not just for dopamine-cravers whose tastes they seemingly find lacking, but also for their target groups. The fact is, in the history of public art and entertainment, there has never been a time where access to one's idealized audience was easier. Some filmmakers have demonstrated that they can successfully leverage these new channels to make their works have more of an impact, than they would have had otherwise, while others seem to writhe in discomfort as they try to articulate their displeasure with a world that no longer matches their preferred where of scarcity was the norm, their societal role was clearly seen as provoking emotion and critical thought, and they had leverage over the venues that would dole out the privilege of this access.

wayoutthere 7y ago

What we think of as “movies” (traditional theater distribution) will become limited to big-budget “tentpole” movies that anchor a larger media franchise including toys, games and other forms of media. The art film world will probably survive as a niche, if for no other reason than they have a dedicated audience — think the same situation with non-digital photography. But art films will likely trend more provocative as the streaming services are also funding a lot of high-concept films. Movie production costs have gotten so low that online streaming is quickly becoming the predominant model. These low costs allow streaming studio heads to diversify across genres and take lots of small risks, which ultimately reduce me the risk to the production company. This increased risk tolerance allows them to give up almost all creative control to the writers, actors and directors. A-list actors and directors are willing to give up a lot of money to get that creative control, so the streaming services still recruit top talent. But by far the biggest cost difference is marketing. The only way studios can justify a $50M marketing budget for a movie is if that marketing also drives additional commercial activity outside of theatrical attendance (games, merch, anticipated sequels, etc.) Streaming services can benefit from a constant, consolidated marketing budget: they can advertise the “new movie of the week” with a sustained ad buy over time while still retaining the brand advertising uplift for the entire service. Global distribution is also waaaaay easier for streaming services. Ultimate takeaway though is that the window release model is dead. Everyone in the media industry has known this for years; and I think that we’ll look back at 2019 as the year that really started to happen for real.

superqd 7y ago

What won't be obvious, but at some point will tip over and wreak havoc on the industry, will be AI generated films. You might think of the poor quality deepfakes when I say that, but we are in the baby stages of something far more powerful. Imagine if it was possible to autogenerate a script/story, then autogenerate scenery, music and humans to play out that story. There is AI work already going on in each of those areas, and as the quality improves, it will become an obvious next step to put it all together into a single Movie Machine, of sorts, that can remix existing movies (I think the first wave), and/or synthesize movies completely from scratch based on various parameters you provide (e.g., 'a movie like star wars, but with an all female cast', or 'an inspiring movie about dogs', etc). It is not a matter of "if" this day will come, but simply "when". I think 10-15 years is very possible. We'll have audio software that generates all the music we could want in a single app, have a single book app that generates any novel in any genre we want, or creates videos/movies we want from a single application. How could humans compete with their 1-5 movies a year against a computer app that could generate 5 movies a minute? I think it could easily find its way into Youtube first, as there is much less to lose, and far more to gain, from short videos that capture attention. With apps used by content creators to create music, or help with VFx, etc, to eventually generating entirely new videos without requiring the content creator to do any work, and they will jump at the chance if it gets them more subscribers. There will come a day, when there is a really popular film, that was completely created by a computer. That day will come not in a 100 years, but in the next decade or two.

Mountain_Skies 7y ago
That will also take away Hollywood's ability to be gatekeepers and tastemakers. That power distributed throughout the population will be a huge change.
tomjen3 7y ago
My guess is that it will be everything but the story that is auto generated for a long time. We already have this human does not exist etc, but creating a compelling story hasen't happened so far -- the closest thing we have had are automatic newspaper writers, so maybe documentaries? (Oh God, then it will be impossible to figure out if a given documentary is true or made up).

jshaqaw 7y ago

Event movies for teenagers sell lots of popcorn and candy. Sophisticated indie movies for adults don't. A huge amount of the profit margin at the theaters is driven by the concessions counter. This drives which films the big theaters want to show.

humanrebar 7y ago
I bet indie films sell hipster beer, wine, and cocktails, though.

ken 7y ago

Isn't this true of every medium? When's the last time you went to a concert of a local musician, or a small theatre play, or bought a book that wasn't already a bestseller? I work in the arts and I can probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of people I know who have been to a theatre to see something smaller than "Hamilton". The internet is here so everything must scale. If you're not serving a billion people you're a failure.

andrew_ 7y ago

Disappointed that "cost" only appeared once, and neither "ticket" nor "price" appeared in the article. Ticket prices for movies at the theater are absurd. It's an experience that we've lost, and it's been buried under ludicrous consumer costs.

ghaff 7y ago
People have been complaining about movie ticket prices for decades. Average inflation-adjusted ticket prices are pretty much the same as they were in 1970. http://collider.com/movie-ticket-price-inflation-statistics/ http://collider.com/movie-ticket-price-inflation-statistics/
- aries1980 7y ago
  $8 would be nice, but it is around £16 in London: https://booking.cineworld.co.uk/booking/8110/37196/0974ddb0944c11e98d2e3ba71e5bb233/tickets https://booking.cineworld.co.uk/booking/8110/37196/0974ddb09...
  - ghaff 7y ago
    And London tickets probably cost a lot more than the US average in 1970 too. Certainly, in NYC movie tickets have tended to cost quite a bit more than the suburban theater norm.
bradstewart 7y ago
I pretty much only go to movies on a Wednesday evenings and Saturday mornings these days. Cheaper and less crowded.

galkk 7y ago

I'm going to cinema to experience the movies the way, I can't experience them at home: at enormous screen, with great sound. By doing that, I'll select movies that will utilize that, and it's, naturally, blockbusters with great special effects. I don't need to go to cinema to see drama or comedy or anything else, I can easily do that from the comfort of my own house.

dawnerd 7y ago
Somewhat the same as you. Even though I have a very expensive home theater setup, it just can't compete with the theaters, plus theres the whole not wanting to wait for a bluray release - which might not even have the same quality or audio. Plus A-List is really cheap

smattiso 7y ago

The unfortunate consequence of this is that some previously viable types of movies won't make financial sense in a mostly streaming world. Spending 50 million dollars to produce a comedy only to have it end up on Netflix competing directly with thousands of low budget comedy TV shows and indie films isn't going to work. Would a movie like Austin Powers be able to make money today?

boh 7y ago
Yes it would. You'd make money in the theater and then get preferable terms from Netflix. Look up Kevin Hart for examples.
rhino369 7y ago
Austin Power's would probably make money today, but it probably wouldn't be made. Because it's impossible to only make "good movies," especially when you are working without an established fanbase or franchise, for every Austin Powers you make, you get 2-3 shitty high budget attempts that flop. We should also ask ourself if high budget comedies are really necessary. You could do Austin Powers on a cheap budget and it would probably only reduce the quality a bit. So maybe it's not the end of the world if the Austin Powers movies of the future are lower budget and on TV.

seattle_spring 7y ago

It's a bummer this is happening in a major way internationally too. Wandering Earth was maybe the worst movie I've seen in 10 years, yet China is falling over itself saying it's the best "Sci-Fi" ever made. Once Asia only churns out Michael Bay garbage, it'll all be over.

TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
I thought it was fascinating. It took a lot of the tropes everyone takes for granted in US blockbusters and China-fied them. Seriously jarring. When you see a different culture trying to do them, it makes you realise just how just how unconvincingly stiff and nationalistic those tropes are. I don't know if that was deliberate. If it was, it was a much cleverer movie than it appeared to be.

lubujackson 7y ago

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.

m23khan 7y ago
Malls are gone? Serious? Here in Canada they are getting more and more jam packed with more upscale retailers and ever growing crowds. Heck, check out Square one mall in Mississauga, ON -- the place is booming for last 10+ years. Heck, even the crappier (2nd class) malls have been putting on the proverbial lipstick and targeting hip food retailers thus inviting younger crowds dating and chilling. The only malls that seem to die off are the ones who were opened in places which are not progressing economically (for example low-income neighborhoods) and they never took off to begin with nor has the neighborhood improved economically.
- 0xffff2 7y ago
  The death of malls in the US is a well-known phenomenon. https://time.com/4865957/death-and-life-shopping-mall/ https://time.com/4865957/death-and-life-shopping-mall/
- ghaff 7y ago
  In the US, the situation seems pretty bifurcated. Upscale malls (mostly urban or near-urban) are generally doing pretty well. Bigger/better mid-market malls in the suburbs of relatively affluent cities are still mostly doing OK too. But you don't even need to go to low income areas. The mall that is nearest me in a smaller city about 40 miles from Boston has anchor stores that are pretty much all retail chains that are cratering (Sears, JC Penny, Toys R'Us). The grocery store and Home Depot in the complex are always busy but the actual mall and other small stores are a ghost town. It's not exactly an upscale area but it's not depressed. (Heck, there are Tesla chargers in the parking lot.)

anderber 7y ago

I never go to the movie theater except for when I'm in a town that has an Alamo Drafthouse(https://drafthouse.com/ https://drafthouse.com/). The experience of good food, drinks and great curated movies is awesome. It's not just going to the movies, it's an evening out. I hope they continue to do well, and when they do decide to come to my town, I'll be there very often. Last movie I saw there was Black Panther. Instead of ads before the movie, they had a retrospective/documentary on the history of Black Panther in the comics. They know movies, and do them right.

baddox 7y ago
It's interesting how people are looking for very different experiences at the cinema. I haven't tried the Alamo Drafthouse in SF yet, but I am generally not a fan of the hip cinemas. The food and drink is generally a huge distraction during the movies, and the seating and screen technology is usually not a top concern. I really just want the best screen and nice seats, and sad as it may be, it's really just the big cineplex chains that deliver on that. As far as movie curation goes, that's certainly a weakness of the big chains, but at least in SF I have been shocked at the variety of foreign/indie/classic films that show up at the AMC and Cinemark if you pay attention to showtimes.
- blhack 7y ago
  The drinks at Alamo aren’t distracting like at a dinner theater. And that isn’t the allure anyway. The people who run Alamo have concentrated so hard on customer experience that it’s almost embarrassing to the other theaters. 1) Nobody takes your ticket. Buy it online and walk directly to your seat. 2) no advertisements for liposuction of real estate before the movie starts. The media playing while you wait is interesting clips that are relevant to the movie you are about to watch. When I saw “hackers” there, it was a bunch of hilarious old computer ads from the 90s, music videos of the soundtrack, etc. 3) if you talk, text, or arrive late you get kicked out. People follow this rule. 4) There might be some alternative revenue stream[1] but it doesn’t feel that way. It feels like you exchange money for a ticket to a movie. Honestly Alamo feel less hip, and more like it’s run by cranky old cinema buffs that want you to shut up and pay attention during the movie. It’s like a theater for adults. [1] at other theaters it feels like they don’t care about you buying a ticket, and the ticket is really just an excuse to sell you extremely expensive popcorn.

potta_coffee 7y ago

Hopefully they don't survive...current state of Hollywood's output is garbage, IMO. I'm definitely not the target audience for what they're making. Currently re-watching all the old Spaghetti Westerns, they're better entertainment than any recent movie I can think of.

m23khan 7y ago

IF I may assume, majority of the people commenting here are 25+. I am sorry but movie theaters are not targeting you as primary audience. Why? You are an adult, you are likely to enjoy somewhere with alcohol/adult-food, in adult-only setting and somewhere you can get better value for your 'hard earned' money. Sure, you MAY catch that marvel flick but how many times do you really anticipate really watching a movie at cinema during the year? See, with marvel and superhero movies and with chick flicks and raunchy over-the-top comedies, who are they targeting? You? Give me a break! They are targeting the youth! The ones 16-22, you know the ones who are mostly students and have awkward social lives to begin with and the ones who are likely to religiously follow the movies, later buy the related merchandise and talk about it for long time in their gatherings. And for kids below 16, there is a healthy stream of cartoon movies that Pixar, Disney and the like keep doling out to the masses -- case in point, the next Toy Story or Pets movie. Because for that age group (22 and under), cinema is the biggest bang for the buck AND the cheapest night-out with friends (spend around 10 dollars for movie ticket followed by cheap pizza slice and can of cold drink before heading home).

0xffff2 7y ago
If this is true, why does virtually every theater I've been to in the last 5 years serve craft beer and cocktails?
- m23khan 7y ago
  did you go to cineplex or iMAX? Those are the ones I am talking about. Otherwise, I dunno, maybe the locality/jurisdiction/state you live may have laws allowing for alcohol in cinemas.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - Larrikin 7y ago
    Every theater I've been to in Chicago has had alcohol, often times full bars. The cheap student targeted ones with the lumpy seats and the fancy off Michigan Avenue ones as well.

sonnyblarney 7y ago

The newer cinemas are too much like a grotesque plastic theme park. Buzzling lights, games, fast food. They are like 'Chucky Cheeze'. No thanks. How about nice, quaint theatre? Maybe a coffee shop out front. Popcorn, soda, candy, beer/wine in respectable containers. And somewhat reduced price on the entry. $25/head is just not worth the outing.

strictnein 7y ago
Arcades and a myriad of junk food have been in theaters for 35+ years now, so I'm not sure what you mean by "newer".

pjmorris 7y ago

With a title like 'How will movies survive?' and an opening like "There were 350 more movies released theatrically in the United States last year than there were when “Avatar” came out in 2009.", I think the question has, unintentionally, been answered. Movies are doing fine. A multitude of options for reaching and watching films has made room for more kinds of films and given viewers better access. About twenty years ago, some co-workers were predicting that home theater technology would make the public movie theater obsolete. My counter-arguments at the time were that there would always be room for seeing movies with the best possible light and sound (better than the best home theaters), and there would always be room for seeing movies together, not just your friends, but a large group. I feel like there's something special about sharing the audience reaction (FTA,"That social aspect of sharing a movie with friends and strangers and family, that’s such a strong part of our tradition."). There's certainly something special about seeing a movie with a date who's not yet comfortable coming to your house. I don't, yet, see a reason to update my viewpoint. Movies will survive.

m463 7y ago
It would be nice to know the numbers. Are people spending less or more? How are individual movies doing, and movies in general? Or: how big is the pie, and how big are the slices?

soulofmischief 7y ago

None of this really matters; Or rather, this consolidation is only laying the groundwork for the real change coming. Once deepfake tech is so good that we can create hyper-realistic performances at a fraction of the cost (both in terms of effects and salary), the game is really on. Over time big studios and fans alike will adjust to the idea that a movie doesn't need real actors to be good. Maybe it needs real actors to sell the star system Hollywood has milked since the 20's. But they don't need to be present for filming, and salaries will adjust accordingly. Many ticket-selling actors will just become celebrity icons and nothing more. You thought the lip-syncing phenomenon of celebrity pop acts during the 80's-00's was bad? Just wait until we are having the conversation about whether an actor can really act or if it's just CG. In fact, many small studios will survive because of this; like the underground music scene, they will represent "real" cinema with "real" acting. But this will come with massive paycuts and lifestyle adjustments. And higher ticket prices for fans of real cinema. Underground acting will become what theatre is now: a chance to test your meddle and artistic credibility, at the cost of fame and fortune. It's crazy that something as artistically extravagant as movie-making scarcely lasted a century, compared to other mediums. Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat was released in 1896. By 2026 the days of real cinema will be in rapid decline, and if the progress made in the last two decades are any indication, by 2046 it will be all but gone from big studio productions.

funkymike 7y ago
Deepfake tech could make a big difference in film editing. Film 15 takes and it doesn't matter if none of them is exactly what the director wants because they could make the perfect take out of the others. The top actors will end up with "natural takes only" clauses in their contracts. It has pretty big implications for film awards as well. Can an actor get an award if their performance was altered? What does good directing mean if they don't have to get the actors to perform as well as it ends up on the screen?
tomjen3 7y ago
Interesting tangent there: with CGI that good, you could mix and match across time. A rom-com with Brie Larson and Humpry Bogart?

beat 7y ago

My primary theater is a local nonprofit, running carefully curated art-house stuff, both new and old, with some popular classics putting butts in seats to help fund the more exotic fare. A couple of weeks ago, I got to see my two favorite Coen brothers films on big screen that way. We also have an outstanding second-run within walking distance of our house - a 1950s-built theater that has been meticulously maintained and never cut up, so it has comfy seats, great sound, and a gigantic screen. It fills up in the evenings, mostly neighborhood people walking there, so it has a community feel. There are other variations of "art house theater" in town too, all doing pretty well. They're not the ones suffering. It's the chain theaters at the mall that are suffering. Sure, I live in hipster paradise (aka Minneapolis), but you can find similar facilities at many other cities.

mywittyname 7y ago
My friend's wife volunteers at one of these in a ~500 person town that's smack in the middle of Trump Country. So it isn't just hipsters that have a taste for nostalgic movies/theaters. Though, I suspect they play more Fist Full of Dollars stuff and less Rocky Horror Picture Show.

wyoh 7y ago

> J.J. ABRAMS > > When you have a movie that’s as entertaining, well-made, and well-received as “Booksmart” not doing the business it should have [the teen comedy underperformed at the box office despite critics’ raves], it really makes you realize that the typical Darwinian fight to survive is completely lopsided now. The fact that critics, a very insular group of people, liked the movie doesn't mean it is good or will please the public at large. Booksmart is a prime example of the « Get woke, go broke » adage.

TylerE 7y ago
By adage, you mean thing the alt-right chants with no basis in fact?
- wyoh 7y ago
  Nothing to do with the alt-right boogeyman. Not every person right of AOC is alt-right.
galkk 7y ago
It's like saying > When you have a movie that’s as entertaining, well-made, and well-received as “Ghostbusters (2016)” not doing the business it should have [the teen comedy underperformed at the box office despite critics’ raves],

TheMagicHorsey 7y ago

I think we should consider whether the American movie theater experience is really the best way to share video entertainment in a communal fashion. One anecdote to consider: Back in 2005 I went to India on business. While there in the city of Hyderabad, a local contractor that I was working with invited me to visit the village where his grandparents lived. We went to the village which was several hours drive from Hyderabad (something like 8 hours or more ... I don't remember exactly). The village was a completely different environment than Hyderabad ... very humid, but green and beautiful. And very few people spoke English there (which is relevant as you'll see). In that village there was a kind of communal video hall run by a local entrepreneur. He basically had computer projector (I think it was 720p resolution ... nothing fancy) connected to a computer and a rudimentary PA system. Starting at around 6pm or so, after people in the village had had their supper, he would start showing films. It was whatever he felt like showing or whatever people paid him to play. My host was kind of a big man in the village, since he was from the city, and much more well to do. He was shown a lot of deference. My host asked the theater owner to play a movie that I would enjoy ... and the theater owner decided to play Rambo. It was very clear that everyone in the village had seen the movie before ... probably many times before. People talked with each other during the film. Some of the men were smoking (which I wasn't a fan of). And it was hot and humid. But god damn if it wasn't the best action movie screening of my life. Everyone was commenting and cheering for Stallone ... and nobody knew what the hell Stallone was saying directly ... but there was kind of a really bad audio running in Telugu on top of the English audio ... which I can only assume was a local translation recorded over the original audio. At one point Stallone has a bow and arrow and shoots a guy with a grenade tip ... and the guy explodes. Not something I'd want my kid to see ... but there were kids from 5 to 15 cheering and hollering like he'd scored a goal in a tournament or something. Really an enjoyable experience. Maybe we just need smaller, nearer, more locally tailored theaters.

Aardwolf 7y ago

What's different about the next 10 years than the last 10 years?

Animats 7y ago

One key problem is mentioned in that article - having to make movies phone-screen compatible. The user just can't see the details on the tiny screen, no matter how many pixels the screen has. That limits you to close-up shots and vague backgrounds. I'm waiting for the first theatrical release in vertical video.

kennyloginNTH 7y ago

Alamo Drafthouse type accommodations (alcohol, increased food options) are already integrated in many old theaters (minus the tables at seating). It only marginally improves attendance and customer experience. We seem to be moving away from communal space as a society in USA (failing malls, theaters, and other community shopping/work/recreation spaces). I'm not a fan anymore of isolating every human needs/experiences and charging a service for each (Netflix, Tinder, Facebook, Grubhub, texting).

aaron695 7y ago

The Chinese market has the most control over Hollywood. It is the reason for the large amount of franchises and sequels. Soooo you need to see how they mature. They are perhaps in the 80's still (Google how they are remaking all the 80's movies without acknowledgement ;) ) But they advance far faster than the west since they have the way forward planned. So as they mature the market will mature again.

MuffinFlavored 7y ago

I feel like the majority of good movies came out before 2000. The Dark Knight is an exception. https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?groups=top_250&sort=user_rating,desc https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?groups=top_250&sort=user_... There are very few good movies coming out anymore. When is the next Pulp Fiction or The Godfather going to come out? It is very hard to get excited for whatever is being released these days. It's just not even comparable/close.

dumbfoundded 7y ago
The Lord of the Rings trilogy comes to mind. The trilogy set a record for academy awards.
- MuffinFlavored 7y ago
  What notable has come out since then?
  - dumbfoundded 7y ago
    Children of Men, The Incredibles, Inception, Toy Story, Lala Land. Just a few off the top of my head. I'm not sure what genres you like but I cannot imagine you haven't enjoyed a significant number of movies over the past two decades.