Carmen Macri
Words by Carmen Macri
Back in the good ol’ days, catching a movie trailer meant sitting through cable TV commercials. If it piqued your interest, you’d eagerly mark your calendar for the release date, rally your friends (or call up a hot date) and hit the theaters. You’d splurge on popcorn that could buy a small island and a soda with enough sugar to power a small town. You’d settle into your seats to endure 20 minutes of previews — that might be better than the movie itself — and have yourself a movie night.
These days, hitting the theater is a rare treat, maybe once every blue moon, and only if a film is truly exceptional enough to resist the urge to wait for its streaming debut. I’ve lost count of the times I’ve excitedly suggested catching a movie, only to hear my friend’s all-too-familiar refrain: “Let’s just wait until it’s on Paramount.” Talk about a buzzkill. No, I want to see Barbie in IMAX.
Before it was streaming services, it was DVD rentals. Remember that big blue Blockbuster building that could be found on almost every corner of town? It comes as no surprise that my generation hardly remembers it. Streaming services began building popularity in 2007 when Netflix made the switch from renting DVDs to launching the first popular video-on-demand service. Only a few short years later, Blockbuster filed for bankruptcy and ultimately closed up shop in 2014.
A recent study from Dartmouth shows that in 2018, 28% of consumers preferred to watch a movie for the first time in theaters while only 15% chose streaming services. Shortly after when the world fell into quarantine, I’m sure we can all guess what happened, right? Those in favor of catching a movie in the theater dropped to 14% with 36% choosing to stream movies at home instead. By 2021, 78% of US consumers had subscriptions to one or more streaming services.
When streaming services burst onto the scene, it was a no-brainer why they caught on like wildfire. Financially, it just made sense to stay at home instead of shelling out for a trip to the theater, especially with subscription prices ranging from $9.99 to $12 a month, while a single movie ticket could set you back around $11. Plus, the added bonus of uninterrupted TV time, free from those commercial breaks just when the plot thickens — who could resist? But that was then, and this is now, where the cheapest subscription for any service now has those pesky commercial breaks and if you pay to have the upgraded package, the price nearly doubles. So, why are we all still so hellbent on them? At this point, it’s just glorified cable TV.
The convenience is nice, I won’t lie, but after so long I prefer quality over quantity. One of the biggest issues with Streamageddon is now that it is this massive entity in every home across the globe, they need to keep up with the demand — which usually calls for new movies or shows to be released biweekly. This, in turn, is the cause for so many horribly written, horribly cast and overall horrible movies that have been released recently on streaming apps (I’m looking directly at you, Netflix) or the constant remaking of old classics. Rather than coming up with new, interesting stories, we have resulted in remaking movies or TV shows … worse. I mean, how many “Avatar the Last Airbender” remakes need to be made? After the first movie flopped, producers should have just taken the hint.
Streaming platforms are all about that binge-worthy content, driving creators to pump out entire seasons at lightning speed to keep viewers glued to their screens. This rush often means sacrificing quality for quantity, as the pressure to churn out episodes can lead to formulaic shows that cater to the broadest possible audience — usually ending with no one enjoying it. This obsession with mass appeal can result in a standardization of content, where originality takes a backseat to safe bets and tried-and-tested formulas.
Streamageddon has brought with it a reliance on data and algorithms to guide creative decisions. Instead of following artistic vision, creators may find themselves at the mercy of viewer metrics, pressured to conform to trends and genres that promise the biggest returns. This data-driven approach can limit experimentation and risk-taking, stifling the kind of innovative storytelling that pushes boundaries and captivates audiences.
Unfortunately, it’s too late for us. We are all hooked and there is no real way out. The convenience is just too nice for some people to look past, even though this convenience has come at a cost to the traditional cinematic experience. Theater attendance is dwindling and their revenue is steadily declining. Many theaters have had to scale back operations due to a lack of attendees. But it’s not just about the money. The disappearance of the cinematic vibe signals a change in culture, stripping away that feeling of togetherness and thrill that accompanies catching a flick on the big screen.
There’s something special about sitting in a darkened theater, surrounded by fellow moviegoers, as the story unfolds before your eyes. The collective gasps, laughter and applause create an atmosphere that simply can’t be replicated at home. I’ll never forget when I saw “Avengers: Endgame” in theaters and the uproar that occurred after Captain America caught Thor’s hammer. Or during “Spiderman: No Way” Home when both Andrew Garfield and Tobey Maguire made an appearance. That doesn’t happen when you are sitting alone on your couch.
In May of 2022, Dartmouth conducted another online survey with 2,210 respondents. The survey was regarding the current popularity of movie theaters. The results showed that 41% of respondents rarely go see a movie at the theater, they prefer to wait until it’s up on a streaming site.
So what do we do? Do we wait for cinema to wither and die out?
Follow FOLIO!