Bad Projection Is Ruining the Movie Theater Experience

[James Gardiner]

Die out, ridiculous. It's like saying restaurants will die out as we all have kitchens.
Cinema will contract to meet a lower demand. But a healthy demand. Sure, we may need to lose 30-40% of the locations/screens. But that still means a hell of a lot of cinemas and screens.
The model of running a cinema will change, and the expected higher returns experienced over the last 30 years will have to be tempered. It will not be as profitable.

But if the studios stopped putting its finger on the scales, we could have a lot of cinemas all over the place. For example, eCinema in NZ, a lot of smaller businesses installed domestic projectors and e-playback units. It did well, and still is.

For example, if the streamers can make money sending a few movies to a player in a persons home for $20 per month... We could surly cut some cruft of the business of cinema and still offer a reasonably priced experience. Policy and MG, no longer make sense.

[Marco Giustini]

Die out, ridiculous. It's like saying restaurants will die out as we all have kitchens.

When I go to a restaurant, I pay for something I cannot make at home, either because I am not able of doing it or because I don't have the time or equipment.
There are more good restaurants than good cinemas.

The problem with Cinema is that we can now buy a very large OLED panel and have basic decent sound in our homes. Picturewise, even a proper cinema would struggle with an OLED. Soundwise, cinemas still win but you have to search for a good one.

Going to a cinema is now very expensive particularly if you consider popcorns etc.

When I walk into a cinema which looks old, smells bad, the image is barely doing 1600:1, brightness is low, there is a silver screen and the sound is just worse than my soundbar, I might just think to go to the restaurant the following time.

[Bruce Cloutier]

You do realize that this is not limited to theater nor entertainment. There is a pervasive decay throughout society. A physicist would think it an effect akin to that of Entropy. Things change and nothing is forever. You would hope that things would actually change for the better. Um, we need to realign that vector. But the rolling population on the planet (each generation coming to power) blinds us to the past. It is just us old guys, who can step back and view our own timeline of experience spanning the generations, that recognize how good things once were and what is happening. They just think us grumpy, techno-phobic and delusional.

That said, the cinema used to be an escape. It was a place where the movie took you into a different world and all of society's irritations became mute. But no. There are still commercials forced upon you; prices are painful; And, the environment unwelcoming.

That is not to mention that we are being driven to fear our neighbor and to not feel safe around others. Where we once made an effort to get out and meet people and to enjoy life together, we now all cower in our homes staring at our phones. We have eliminated TRUST.

Nothing in this thread from the OP on is a surprise. We're whining and looking to commiserate with our peers. We all see the symptoms. Let's address the problem somehow.

We need less GREED and more PRIDE.

Just saying.

[Ryan Gallagher]

Speaking of generational perspectives... I think it's easy for us that grew up in the "TV is a Central Fixture of the household" span of generations, or those that witnessed that transition, to imagine a world where everyone is building decent quality viewing experiences at home because the technology is available. True, film buffs, along with the generations that perceive the larger screen as the defacto desired viewing experience may be doing so... but there are one or two entire other generations coming up behind them that may be used to viewing everything on a tablet or phone sized screen, and that be normal for them. Their content sources are not traditional and a big OLED TV might be the last item they purchase for a new apartment rather than the first, if they even choose to own such a display at all. They are just as likely to watch movies on a PC gaming monitor (which are also quite impressive albeit smaller).

If the cinema industry can survive long enough for those generations to become independent customers... what the cinema is capable of offering may once again become interesting and vastly different than what they maintain at home, even though they could if they wanted to. Getting that "escapism" vibe back may be the key to locking it in for the TV-less generations... if you can get them (and us) to put down those tiny screens for long enough to notice.

[Ed Gordon]

You do realize that this is not limited to theater nor entertainment. There is a pervasive decay throughout society....

...We need less GREED and more PRIDE.

Good point Bruce. I am old enough to remember when getting on an airplane to travel was a special event. People dressed in their "Sunday Best", the seats were wide and there was lots of leg room. Instead of a bag of peanuts, we were given a full hot meal.

Now you have to be rich enough to buy first class.

Remember when a young person could afford to buy a house? Now you can't afford the rent for a studio apartment.

End Rant...

[Tony Bandiera Jr]

Like I've said a million times before on here, Digital was NOT the solution to anything other than saving the STUDIOS money. It has cost exhibition tens of times more money over the long haul and did little to REALLY improve presentation. Why?

Because the cinemas "Doing Film Right" ^TM also for the most part did Digital right, those who didn't do film right saw an initial improvement in image quality... that rapidly went south for the exact same reasons their film presentations did. (Looking at you American Monkey Cinema, the trashbin of cinema chains. I serviced independent locations and chains better run, with far better presentations than AMC)

But the REAL REASON no one goes to theatres anymore: The studios continue to grind out total that isn't even worthy of home video release. Until they do a complete 180 and go back to telling CHARACTER DRIVEN, DRAMATIC AND COMPELLING STORIES (WITHOUT WOKE AGENDAS), WITH GREAT ACTORS AND DIRECTORS AND CINEMATOGRAPHERS WHO KNOW HOW TO SHOOT FILM, then nothing will change.

Many of my friends and colleagues who have passed away recently were fortunate to have been involved in the literal Golden Age of cinema, when the films were mostly excellent, and the theatre's management cared more about presentation, the magic of the experience, and having the best sound and picture, as well as clean, tastefully decorated lobbies and auditoria, clean restrooms and courteous staff (even though they were still teens). I got to see a few of those when I started in this industry, but the latter half of my career was watching the train wreck in real time.

I haven't been to a cinema now in close to two decades. My last visit was "Titanic" on first run, (sadly at an AMC one of my friends worked at) and you know what? I don't miss it. The last major film I was even remotely interested in was "Top Gun Maverick" which I first saw on streaming and now have the Blu Ray.

[Mike Blakesley]

I have this friend who I've known for about 30 years who used to go to lots of movies with his wife, and we used to hang out a lot and even travel together. In recent times they have grown apart from my wife and I, mostly due a change in their lifestyle; they have a teenage daughter, and thus they started spending more and more time with the parents of her friends. All of them are so busy with their kids' sports and other activities (and to be honest, a lot of post-event partying) that none of them go to movies anymore.

So I was talking to this friend recently, and he mentioned they'd just gotten a new 75" TV and I said "I guess that's why you never go to movies anymore," and he said it's nothing to do with the TV or the theater; he said "we've just gotten out of the habit." I suspect that's true for a lot of people.

So you've got all these factors:

- There is the perception that it's so expensive to go to the movies. (Which it isn't, compared to other entertainment, but that's what people THINK.)

- There's the knowledge that if they do miss a movie at the theater, it'll be out on video in about 2 weeks. (That's not true either, but it's what people THINK.)

- Within a couple of weeks they've likely forgotten about it, because there are ten thousand other things to watch - not just movies, but TV shows, TikToks, YouTubes, Facebook Reels, etc.

- Every time a big movie title comes out early on home video, it peels off a few more people from the group who would have seen it in the theatre...and before you know it they're "out of the habit."

- Then you have writers spewing stuff like this:

Now, the theater is a battlefield of broken concentration. Soda barrels slosh like oil drums. iPhones blaze like distress flares in a storm. Audience etiquette, once an unspoken pact, has decayed into oblivion.

...which is basically a lot of exaggerated horseshit. They make it sound like going to any movie in any theater anywhere is going to be an experience akin to some level of hell. Some form of it CAN be true, but usually isn't, but people read it, and every article like this moves a few more people into the TV camp.

Into this mix, add the magic ingredient that most of the movies these days aren't that great. Stir it all up and it's a recipe for disaster.

The economic argument is stupid because people are comparing the cost of a night at the movies to the cost of their TV and Netflix subscription. Well, that's apples and oranges. You're comparing a night at home watching TV to a night on the town. A better comparison would be a night at the movies vs. a night at a play. Suddenly the movie is the bargain.

The video window argument... well, that's the studios' fault and continues to be their fault. They devalue their own product from the moment it hits the theater screens. They give a movie ONE DAY (the release date) and then the promotion machine shifts full-bore into promoting the video release. Even the posters say "ONLY IN THEATERS NOVEMBER 24." Of course you and I know that it really means "starts" instead of "only," but the subtle message is "it'll be on home video in a couple minutes, folks."

So now thanks to two months worth of underperforming movies, but with some bright spots over the holidays, we are now in for another round of media reports on the "latest attempts by theaters to bring people back to the movies."

[Stefan Scholz]

There always have been crappy cinemas. Your AMC is like your local McDonald's... come at the right time and place and have a good experience, come at another time and maybe other place and the food is lukewarm, the coke is watery, the fries aren't salted, the burger looks like it had a bad love affair with a forklift and the entire place looks and feels like a daycare where the workers have fled the premises...

But honestly, what's keeping me from going to the cinema isn't so much the AMC experience, it's simply the lack of movies I want to see... And no, I'm not going to pay for slop that barely qualifies Netflix's quality standards.

Or to quote a local exhibition chain in modified speech: "If it's the right movie you're always in the wrong theatre." Or "If it's the theatre, you're always in the wrong movie".


The theatre halls that offer ok-ish standards do not show the film program I want to see. And those movies I am interested in are shown at times I can't attend, either early afternoon or late at night, in an unappropiate hall, or at a "remotest" location.
Like in the Dolby halls, the choice of program only includes the highest grossing titles, not the ones making best use of the capabilities.

[Ryan Gallagher]

Or to quote a local exhibition chain in modified speech: "If it's the right movie you're always in the wrong theatre." Or "If it's the theatre, you're always in the wrong movie".


The theatre halls that offer ok-ish standards do not show the film program I want to see. And those movies I am interested in are shown at times I can't attend, either early afternoon or late at night, in an unappropiate hall, or at a "remotest" location.
Like in the Dolby halls, the choice of program only includes the highest grossing titles, not the ones making best use of the capabilities.

That phenomenon is by no means limited to the film going experience, or new. You'll find it true in music concerts, broadway productions, etc etc. It all depends on where your tastes for art and culture fall on the spectrum. Most of the music I really care to see performed live is in small clubs that can barely maintain their PA and have the same tired stage wash lights they've been rocking for a decade.

Is the spectacle of a Talyor Swift concert interesting? Yes. But only as a spectacle. Same for some of the biggest broadway hits. The resources and technology seem to favor the mass market tastes for spectacle still, and really always have. Roman Colosseum Naval Battles anyone? The Sphere?

With that distinction in mind there are really two forms of cinema. Cinema as entertainment/spectacle, and cinema that has it's roots in fine art, the latter not having access to the resources of the former, either in production or in exhibition.

[Stefan Scholz]

That phenomenon is by no means limited to the film going experience, or new. You'll find it true in music concerts, broadway productions, etc etc. It all depends on where your tastes for art and culture fall on the spectrum. Most of the music I really care to see performed live is in small clubs that can barely maintain their PA and have the same tired stage wash lights they've been rocking for a decade.

Is the spectacle of a Talyor Swift concert interesting? Yes. But only as a spectacle. Same for some of the biggest broadway hits. The resources and technology seem to favor the mass market tastes for spectacle still, and really always have. Roman Colosseum Naval Battles anyone? The Sphere?

With that distinction in mind there are really two forms of cinema. Cinema as entertainment/spectacle, and cinema that has it's roots in fine art, the latter not having access to the resources of the former, either in production or in exhibition.

We are responsible for a number of arthouse screens, that we equipped with projection and sound. They all meet certain minimum standards, we said. If you're going to order an immersive audio project from my planning, it will always be as close to the recommended configuration as possible, and never using the minimum configuration slider setting in the tool. Yes, sometimes there are restraints, that make a full config impossible, then it is time for consultation with the, e.g. Dolby guys to find a compromise as close.

I remember an installation, where a projection manufacturer sales person turned up, looking the results. I got my feedback, You were installing a "Porsche" here for these people. All they need from the movies they screen would have been a "Smart cabin scooter".
Also true, but assures they meet minimum standards for each movie, and people do notice the difference of extremely contrasty, 4 k images over standards with low contrast and low light. They notice clear audio, that never goes into saturation/ distortion, over those systems that finally go into into non linear over a threshold.

And yes, this also applies to concert venues, musical theatre venues, and even stage play venues or even houses of worship.

[Ryan Gallagher]

We are responsible for a number of arthouse screens, that we equipped with projection and sound. They all meet certain minimum standards, we said. If you're going to order an immersive audio project from my planning, it will always be as close to the recommended configuration as possible, and never using the minimum configuration slider setting in the tool. Yes, sometimes there are restraints, that make a full config impossible, then it is time for consultation with the, e.g. Dolby guys to find a compromise as close.

I remember an installation, where a projection manufacturer sales person turned up, looking the results. I got my feedback, You were installing a "Porsche" here for these people. All they need from the movies they screen would have been a "Smart cabin scooter".
Also true, but assures they meet minimum standards for each movie, and people do notice the difference of extremely contrasty, 4 k images over standards with low contrast and low light. They notice clear audio, that never goes into saturation/ distortion, over those systems that finally go into into non linear over a threshold.

And yes, this also applies to concert venues, musical theatre venues, and even stage play venues or even houses of worship.

For sure some art-house type venues get the best equipment too, and depending on the business/org/funding apparatus, might even be more likely to get it now than their counterparts. However in a very commercial plex that has a couple premium screens, as you pointed out "right movie wrong theatre", the likelihood of a non-blockbuster title that could really benefit from the improvements of HDR and immersive audio etc, being mastered for or shown in such rooms, is still an outlier (until they are all such rooms?).

[Steve Guttag]

When it comes to my immersive systems (Dolby Atmos®), yes, I don't hit the "K-Mart" button. If the goal is to save money, then we can skip Atmos® and stick with 7.1 and save $150K real easy. Because, as you chip away at the system, reduce the channels, kull/pair, what you end up with is a very expensive 7.1 system that nobody will hear as an immersive. Thus far, 100% of the Atmos® systems I've designed have had 5-screen channels and I'd say average over 50 channels...including screening rooms. They all have baffle walls too. Because, again, the goal of putting in such a room is to make such an impression that the average movie goer perceives enough of a difference as to gain value in their purchase...enough to come back again. I think it is telling that those of my clients that have put in one of my Atmos® systems in commercial cinemas, have now sought to increase their screen count with them. They draw a disproportionate amount of patrons as compared to their normal theatres.

If you are in a non-competitive market (with respect to other cinemas...we call compete for patron's time/money), it would be hard to justify immersive sound and other PLF like items.

Even our most thrifty theatres, in my opinion, put out a decent presentation for picture and sound. Even if that is just 5.1 audio and a 2K picture. It isn't hard to put in value engineered systems that also perform. Granted, one can dip too far into the value. If you put in a projector with a 1600:1 sequential contrast ratio, that is a crap picture without contrast. You can fix that. What some do is put in a gain screen to try and hide one problem with another. I think speakers are getting more tricky now. There is far less emphasis on them than in earlier decades. There are good speakers out there but I question how many of the choices are made. Big names like JBL don't show at CinemaCon and I'd say that they've been contracting their line more than advancing it. We all know that QSC has heavily trimmed their line, prior to the sale to MIT and stopped showing at CinemaCon (at least regularly). Dolby has been a bright spot in that they've been developing high-quality speakers. Naturally, I have a bit of a USA bias as that is where I'm located. There are certainly other speaker companies out there doing fine work but are less prevalent here. Meyer has just released a dedicated cinema speaker but that isn't for budget friendly cinema.

[Stefan Scholz]

Steve, it can make a difference in immersive setups, but for the average mix a well designed 3(5).4.1 array ("7.1") is an even better evolving effect, than a cheap immersive setup.
At one time, I was visiting the head of a local mixing facility, which does DolbyAtmos® mixes. He pointed out, that our local guys mainly know "TV", and eventually 5.1. If I tell then, they pay for 7.1, the answer is, "can we pan a car to the rear speakers?"" And if we tell them, you have paid for immersive/Atmos®, I got the answer, "oh, yes, ah ...... then put the title music into the ceiling".
This applies to smaller Euro productions, and certainly not for international productions.

Every venue must have decent image and a sound system capable of digital dynamic range and LFE requirements. Some doing projects want to get away with a single low frequency enclosure. When adjusting, you might reach the level required in measuring, but without feeling any deep frequency. Going clustered dual improves a lot, and going for 4 cabinets, it is perfect, level reached, and movement felt. Go for bass management for the surrounds, and even some lesser capable front systems benefit from bass management.
LFE cabinets are reasonable, you do not need to buy expensive brand names.

[Ed Gordon]

Kids and preteens may reinvigorate the theatrical movie business, at least according to a new study by entertainment researchers NRG.

The report found that Gen Alpha, which consists of children born from roughly 2013 to 2025, is more interested in seeing movies in the big screen than older consumers. Roughly 59% of members of that generation said they enjoy watching movies in theaters more than at home, compared to 48% of Gen Z (people born between 1997 and 2012), 45% of Millennials (people born between 1981 and 1996) and Gen X (people born between 1965 and 1980). The study’s authors suggest that the ubiquity of smartphones and streaming services has made younger consumers more interested in a night out at the multiplex.

Source: https://variety.com/2025/film/news/g...ft-1236502260/

Once they get to the theatre, children want different things than their parents. For them, moviegoing is deeply social, according to NRG’s study, and the single most powerful driver of their behavior is spending time with friends and family.

For as long as theatres have existed, kids have gone there to hang out. Until they couldn’t. In 2020 and 2021, a century of established habits was suddenly disrupted.

When family movies went directly to streaming, the industry feared that PG audiences wouldn’t come back when they could just stay home.

But in a dramatic twist, Gen Alpha now prefers theatres more than Gen Z, millennials or Gen X. If anything, they’re hungry for experiences that are more theatrical. They want immersive screenings—think IMAX , 3-D, Sphere. What they don’t want is to immerse themselves in phone screens.

“They’re not looking to replicate what they can get in their living rooms and bedrooms,” said Fergus Navaratnam-Blair, NRG’s vice president of trends and futures. “They’re looking for something that gives them a reason to disconnect.”

They’re also looking to engage in “participatory fandom.” PG releases meet that demand. Even theater-averse Netflix supplied Gen Alpha with limited theatrical runs of “ KPop Demon Hunters.”

Source: https://kanebridgenews.com/hollywood...en-so-popular/

Do your observations agree with this study by NRG?

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

You could build the best cinema in the world, but streaming services (and the stupidity of Hollywood) are still going to steal more than half the business that it would otherwise have. I can certainly see some famous single screens surviving. But over the next ten years the big complex's are going to go the path that many indoor malls have taken.