Thanks for this, Matt. I'm intrigued by your response, especially the framing that I'm telling audiences what they should be doing. I wonder if you could help me understand where in this excerpt you shared I place responsibility on individual moviegoers? From my perspective, I'm really focusing on institutional transformation - how theaters (alongside industry regulation, film studios etc) can evolve to better serve existing audiences, rather than suggesting audiences need to change their behavior.
I think your gym reference might actually support what I'm trying to say. You mention most people don't particularly enjoy going to the gym, seeing it mainly as a means to an end. But haven't we seen modern fitness studios completely transform that narrative? The rise of places like Peloton, climbing gyms, and boutique pilates studios happened because the industry realized fitness can be genuinely enjoyable when designed thoughtfully around what different communities want and need.
These successful fitness concepts have managed to turn exercise from something that feels like obligation into an experience people genuinely look forward to. They didn't do this by somehow convincing people to "like working out more" - they reimagined the entire experience to connect with different audience segments. I see similar possibilities for cinema. It's how perspectives on therapy and mental wellbeing have evolved in recent years too.
I think the challenge isn't that audiences only want pure entertainment (we already have plenty of options for that, yet theaters continue struggling). Perhaps it's more that the current theatrical model tends to treat all films and all audiences in roughly the same way, creating experiences that don't fully resonate with the diverse ways people connect with movies. When I suggest cinemas could function more like cultural gyms, I'm really imagining more choice and personalization, not less.
Final thought: I wonder if there's an unnecessary division being created between meaning and enjoyment here? The theatrical experiences that seem to be thriving today suggest these qualities often enhance each other. Just ask anyone who's experienced a Tarantino marathon at Alamo Drafthouse or a Studio Ghibli retrospective at their local arthouse. They're not suffering through some cultural obligation - they're having the time of their lives. I appreciate you engaging with these ideas - conversations like this help us all think more deeply about the future of theatrical experiences that clearly matter to both of us.
Thanks for this, Matt. I'm intrigued by your response, especially the framing that I'm telling audiences what they should be doing. I wonder if you could help me understand where in this excerpt you shared I place responsibility on individual moviegoers? From my perspective, I'm really focusing on institutional transformation - how theaters (alongside industry regulation, film studios etc) can evolve to better serve existing audiences, rather than suggesting audiences need to change their behavior.
I think your gym reference might actually support what I'm trying to say. You mention most people don't particularly enjoy going to the gym, seeing it mainly as a means to an end. But haven't we seen modern fitness studios completely transform that narrative? The rise of places like Peloton, climbing gyms, and boutique pilates studios happened because the industry realized fitness can be genuinely enjoyable when designed thoughtfully around what different communities want and need.
These successful fitness concepts have managed to turn exercise from something that feels like obligation into an experience people genuinely look forward to. They didn't do this by somehow convincing people to "like working out more" - they reimagined the entire experience to connect with different audience segments. I see similar possibilities for cinema. It's how perspectives on therapy and mental wellbeing have evolved in recent years too.
I think the challenge isn't that audiences only want pure entertainment (we already have plenty of options for that, yet theaters continue struggling). Perhaps it's more that the current theatrical model tends to treat all films and all audiences in roughly the same way, creating experiences that don't fully resonate with the diverse ways people connect with movies. When I suggest cinemas could function more like cultural gyms, I'm really imagining more choice and personalization, not less.
Final thought: I wonder if there's an unnecessary division being created between meaning and enjoyment here? The theatrical experiences that seem to be thriving today suggest these qualities often enhance each other. Just ask anyone who's experienced a Tarantino marathon at Alamo Drafthouse or a Studio Ghibli retrospective at their local arthouse. They're not suffering through some cultural obligation - they're having the time of their lives. I appreciate you engaging with these ideas - conversations like this help us all think more deeply about the future of theatrical experiences that clearly matter to both of us.