4 ms·

I wonder how much of that is because the movies themselves changed vs everything else that has changed. Back in 2002 most people still watched tv on CRT that we

I wonder how much of that is because the movies themselves changed vs everything else that has changed. Back in 2002 most people still watched tv on CRT that were very small by today's standard and had very low resolution. You either had to go out and rent a movie, rewatch something you had recorded or bought or watch whatever was on and enjoy the ads. Now we have a huge choice of movies and tv shows at our finger tips any time. Yes, the screen is still much smaller than in the cinema but I also sit much closer. I can pause the movie when I need a bathroom break. I can eat and drink what I want. A movie has to be really good for me to want to spend $40-$50 on going to see a movie with my wife. No travel required, no sitting through ads, no risk of someone in the audience being obnoxious. I used to go to the cinema quite a bit. Now I only go once every 1-2 years to see something on IMAX that I hope will really benefit from it. In recent years that was just the two Dune movies and most recently the F1 movie. Unfortunately, even the biggest IMAX theater in my area is still not what I'd consider a proper IMAX like the Metreon in SF so I'm always underwhelmed. Not sure if that's because this IMAX is too small or because even IMAX stopped being amazing due to growth and improvement of other screens. I used to watch a lot of smaller movies in the cinema. That's stopped entirely. With any movie the question now is how long till we just can watch it at home. Smaller movies which I'd be more willing to support frequently even seem to skip the few months where you have to rent them and go straight to streaming. So unfortunately even less incentive to go to the cinema. Culture around it doesn't help either. Friends used to recommend movies that they watched in the cinema. I can't even recall when that happened last.

cultofmetatron 1y ago
> Yes the screen is still much smaller than in the cinema I recently got a a pair of XR glasses (ray neo 3). Pretty much replicates the full cinema experience. Only downside is it isn't a shared experience.
- FredPret 1y ago
  Can you read text for long periods on those?
  - cultofmetatron 1y ago
    I won't recommend it for doing any kind of coding. its workable but far from ergonomic. That said, my pair is perfect for streaming shows and playing video games. Im going to wait till a system with true spatial anchoring and 4k come to market. I think at that point, Id be willing to use it as a virtual monitor.
    - FredPret 1y ago
      Noted. > Im going to wait till a system with true spatial anchoring and 4k come to market. On that day, I'm taking my iPhone, a keyboard, and those future glasses and will work from under a tree.
toast0 1y ago
> Not sure if that's because this IMAX is too small or because even IMAX stopped being amazing due to growth and improvement of other screens. IMAX broadened the licensing about 10-15 years ago. I'm not an IMAX person, but people who are complained a lot about it at the time.
qoez 1y ago
I genuinely without rose colored glasses think the obvious explanations is true which is that movies simply became worse since 2002 vs now. Look at the movies released 1999 vs 2024 and the reason fewer people go out to watch them is obvious
- satyrun 1y ago
  I was going to say, were movies really that good in 2002? Catch Me If You Can Gangs of New York The Pianist City of God Yes, yes they were lol. It is almost hard to believe those all came out in the same year. Imagine in 2025 having to pick if you want to see The Pianist or City of God? It is just so unthinkable
  - ajmurmann 1y ago
    Even if you thought another movie was gonna be as good as City of God right now, do you think you'd be as likely to actually go to the cinema to see it as you were in 2002 or might you simply wait, safe $20 and a trip and watch it at home 3 months later? I think both factors play a role and they have synergy as well. Fewer people go to the cinema -> smaller market and less incentive to take risks -> fewer people go to the cinema -> ...
- acdha 1y ago
  I think there’s a lot to that. It feels both like the market shrunk in the sense that they’re competing with options which didn’t exist back then but also two other interesting changes: very expensive movies need the international market to be really profitable which limits creativity somewhat (more social norms to stay within, many topics to avoid) and also leads to uncreating safe bets. The other big change was that streaming services sucked up a lot of audience & creativity, but aren’t tracked in box office revenue and also have different goals and weird relationships with their audiences (e.g. Netflix is so quick to cancel that some people never watch an incomplete series).

cultofmetatron 1y ago

> Yes the screen is still much smaller than in the cinema I recently got a a pair of XR glasses (ray neo 3). Pretty much replicates the full cinema experience. Only downside is it isn't a shared experience.

FredPret 1y ago
Can you read text for long periods on those?
- cultofmetatron 1y ago
  I won't recommend it for doing any kind of coding. its workable but far from ergonomic. That said, my pair is perfect for streaming shows and playing video games. Im going to wait till a system with true spatial anchoring and 4k come to market. I think at that point, Id be willing to use it as a virtual monitor.
  - FredPret 1y ago
    Noted. > Im going to wait till a system with true spatial anchoring and 4k come to market. On that day, I'm taking my iPhone, a keyboard, and those future glasses and will work from under a tree.

toast0 1y ago

> Not sure if that's because this IMAX is too small or because even IMAX stopped being amazing due to growth and improvement of other screens. IMAX broadened the licensing about 10-15 years ago. I'm not an IMAX person, but people who are complained a lot about it at the time.

qoez 1y ago

I genuinely without rose colored glasses think the obvious explanations is true which is that movies simply became worse since 2002 vs now. Look at the movies released 1999 vs 2024 and the reason fewer people go out to watch them is obvious

satyrun 1y ago
I was going to say, were movies really that good in 2002? Catch Me If You Can Gangs of New York The Pianist City of God Yes, yes they were lol. It is almost hard to believe those all came out in the same year. Imagine in 2025 having to pick if you want to see The Pianist or City of God? It is just so unthinkable
- ajmurmann 1y ago
  Even if you thought another movie was gonna be as good as City of God right now, do you think you'd be as likely to actually go to the cinema to see it as you were in 2002 or might you simply wait, safe $20 and a trip and watch it at home 3 months later? I think both factors play a role and they have synergy as well. Fewer people go to the cinema -> smaller market and less incentive to take risks -> fewer people go to the cinema -> ...
acdha 1y ago
I think there’s a lot to that. It feels both like the market shrunk in the sense that they’re competing with options which didn’t exist back then but also two other interesting changes: very expensive movies need the international market to be really profitable which limits creativity somewhat (more social norms to stay within, many topics to avoid) and also leads to uncreating safe bets. The other big change was that streaming services sucked up a lot of audience & creativity, but aren’t tracked in box office revenue and also have different goals and weird relationships with their audiences (e.g. Netflix is so quick to cancel that some people never watch an incomplete series).