Theaters Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood: The Slow Death of Movie Theaters in the Modern Age

By Hannah Hills, Class of 2024

In Freeport, Nordica Theatre sits at the corner of South St., vacant, as it has been for just over four years. It’s a ghost yard of cinemas past, the building still empty and unbought like many others across the country. Streaming and the internet have completely changed the ways that we consume media. The last movie I saw in theaters was Barbie in the summer of 2023, nearly a year ago. We had to drive towns over for the chance to see it, at my insistence. I wanted to watch it at a big, fancy theater (per Maine standards, meaning Flagship), somewhere that ensured an audience. Not just a sparse scattering of people but something reminiscent of going to the movies as a kid. When every experience held so much importance, joy came easily, and everything felt so much bigger. We could have waited until it was available on Apple TV, but I was so excited about seeing this movie, one so highly anticipated, that I didn't want to. Now, it has been a year since I’ve been in a theater at all. Are movies appealing enough to keep theaters open despite all their flaws and inconveniences? You have to deal with popcorn-covered floors, strangers crossing your path over and over to get to their seats, the outbursts of other guests, and the equally disruptive intermittent dinging of phone notifications. Is it not easier to wait a few months until digital release?

The summer of 2023 was revitalizing for the theater landscape. Barbie and Oppenheimer debuted on the same day, July 21, bringing us the ‘Barbenhiemer’ phenomenon. Many people went out to watch both to add to the existing social media trend, making movie executives everywhere giddy. The premiere of Top Gun: Maverick just the spring before had these theaters and cinemas on a revolving door of box office hits. Nevertheless, they don’t even come close to the financial achievement that Avengers: Endgame brought in 2018. It’s the second highest-grossing box office hit of all time, bringing in a staggering sum of 2.798 billion USD, with only Avatar superseding it. Despite the justified image of movie theater closure after closure, many of these figures indicate the opposite. According to Variety’s list of the highest-grossing movies of all time, 28 of the top 30 came out in the last 15 years, 16 of them in just the previous 7 years (The exceptions are Titanic and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King). It’s admittedly surprising not to see recent hits like The Batman, Elvis, and Dune featured on that list. They were all renowned, capturing the media’s attention for months before they moved on. Given these last few years, is cinema truly thriving, or did the late 2010s see an abrupt upswing in theater performance just for it to as quickly plateau? 

As citizens of one of the least populous states with the oldest average population, we hardly see these enormous sensations in our local areas. It’s surprising even to have a packed theater on the opening night of a highly anticipated film. That’s partly because our local theaters are struggling, facing financial challenges, and legitimately on the verge of closure. The Portland Press Herald covered this issue themselves. Alfred Yebba, one of the former owners of the Freeport Village Station and Nordica Theater, expressed his thoughts on the continued closure, “the decision depends on whether local and national theater attendance gets back to pre-pandemic levels and whether Hollywood will release more high-quality, buzz-worthy films to theaters.” He cites the pandemic as one of the leading causes of theater’s dwindling prosperity. A great example is the juxtaposition between the profitability and recognition of Dune and Dune: Part 2. The original was released in 2021, amid the pandemic, and made $407.5 million at the box office. In contrast, Dune: Part 2, released in 2024, made $710.5 million—a considerable discrepancy, with a discernible explanation. Nordica was only one of the many innumerable theaters to close in 2020, with or without the expectation of a reopening, which many didn’t, regardless. Within the community, Nordica is missed dearly; many people have shared that sentiment with me in writing this article. “I wish they wouldn't (close), though,” Audrey Piltch said.  I really miss having Nordica down the street!” A Variety report estimates that 500 theaters permanently closed because of the pandemic. I’m sure this nostalgia and yearning is familiar to other small towns like Freeport. Much of this news has been brushed aside with the culmination of recent massive hits in cinema. The box office had, at this point, marginally recovered from the lockdown, which was enough to give people hope. 

According to Comscore, in 2022, the North American box office reached $7.4 billion, an enormous sum but significantly less than the over $11 billion in 2019 and 2018. Cineworld, AMC, and Cinemark own about half of the theaters in North America. Cineworld is also the second-largest cinema chain in the world, only behind AMC, and nearly $8.9 billion in net debt. Yes, with a B. Wisely, in late 2022, they filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy. However, AMC isn’t very far behind this figure debt-wise. They are nearly $5 billion in debt, which gains magnitude when you realize that prepandemic brought in annual revenue of $5.5 billion. As much as the 500 number seems insignificant, not even the largest chains have financially recovered. Being pushed into closure due to COVID-19 caused significant damage to these businesses, given the lack of ticket sales and continued expenses. Cineworld is the parent company of many smaller establishments globally, most notably in our area, for Regal Cinemas. Their solutions to the debt issue are optimistic but less so for civilians like ourselves. They hope to close 130 US locations, with 47 of these lease exits already approved. Of the 39 more recently ambling to close, one was the Regal Cinema in Brunswick, Maine, reportedly saving Cineworld $22 million a year.  

Since 2019, the number of total theaters in the United States has decreased by around 3,000, a loss of about 5%, even as Hollywood and production rates have returned to pre-pandemic levels, according to data on CNBC’s website. The theaters, not wanting to become a part of that statistic, must work around the given obstacles and modernize. To do that, companies have been investing significant sums into upgrading the technology of their cinemas and improving their comfortability, even when that means minimizing their audience capacities. Some blatant examples of these investments are recliners instead of the standard auditorium chairs, in-theater restaurants with service brought to you in your screening, more food and drink options, and even showings beyond movies. They have also tackled projector and sound system upgrades. Many of them are even partnering with Dolby for more immersive audio or IMAX for the benefit of a wider screen to achieve this. CNBC noticed that people are willing to pay a premium price for these experiences and additions. According to a quote from Richard L. Gelfond in the New York Times, “About 20 percent of screens — increasingly, experiences like IMAX that make it special and worthwhile — generate 80 percent of the business.” 15% of all tickets sold in 2022 were for premium screenings, even with an average ticket price of $15.92. Naturally, that price is even higher a year later at $17.33. These adaptations are more subtle for smaller chains with less money. Such as strategically placing trailers, putting tickets on sale at certain times, data marketing, and specialized showings or promotions. As well as less popular or successful means like loyalty programs, email lists, and social media marketing. 

“We make movies better,” An iconic but severely misunderstood and unwanted take from Nicole Kidman—but a brilliant example of modern advertising. Since the insistent emergence of technology in everything, how things are marketed has changed considerably. In recent years, we have seen these changes in mass quantities because people have had to make them. Past the pandemic and the resulting economic destruction, people are on their phones so much more. Advertising has changed to account for that. You can’t mindlessly scroll on any form of social media without seeing an ad every few seconds. Yes, TV commercials are still relevant to movies' success, but so are social media marketing schemes, as seen on Instagram and TikTok. Not even to touch on the Nicole Kidman, AMC debacle that premiered in 2021, their first-ever national ad campaign in just over 100 years of business. That campaign cost them nearly $25 million. This advert comes in the aftermath of 98 AMC theater closures throughout the pandemic while only opening 45 to make up for it (mainly by taking over locations owned by smaller chains that couldn't recover from the shutdown). Clearly, their multi-billion dollar debts were catching up to them. Advertising stunts are also getting riskier and more inventive, not just more online. It’s not an entirely new concept, though. It was the primary advertising for the Blair Witch Project in 1999: elaborate missing posters, a website reminiscent of one the characters would make, and interactions in chat rooms and message boards. However, the ones we see now are even more prevalent. They are often in-person and interactive. 

For example, Smile, a 2022 product, made some bold but wise decisions in its marketing techniques. The most significant part of their campaign was sending a few actors to sensational public events and having them smile creepily at the camera. They did this at baseball games: Red Sox vs. Yankees, Dodgers vs. Cardinals, and Mets vs. Athletics. As well as in the background of a live broadcast of Good Morning America. These tickets were likely only a few thousand dollars compared to typical marketing budgets of tens of millions. IT, a 2017 debut based on the iconic Stephen King novel, also utilized similar tactics. Their campaign included the infamous red balloon tied to street sewer drains and the spray-painted words, “It is closer than you think. #ITMOVIE in cinemas September 7.” In addition to the standard promos, they also created an 8-bit game, “It: Enter the Sewer.” Lastly, a recently released movie, Kingdon of the Planet of the Apes, stands out. This stunt occurred in New Jersey’s Liberty State Park, where actors clad in ape suits rode on horseback through the park. In our modern society, people don’t generally find the standard movie trailer or poster entertaining; they are relatively outdated, so these have become almost necessary escalations. My Barbie experience only happened because of the public’s anticipation and excitement. I’m not typically allured by a movie because of a trailer. However, the creative marketing on social media, like the involvement from Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling and engagement from others, grew my interest in the film. And it did bring me to the theater. 

Next comes the issue of streaming. As much as we can acknowledge its accessibility, convenience, and arguably fair price point (emphasis on arguably), it has drastically affected the lifestyle of theaters. People view streaming as a more comfortable, money-saving alternative to theaters, but they miss one of the most important draws of theaters: the experience. People go to theaters because they don't just want to sit in their room alone to watch a movie; with theaters, it’s about community. As Natalie Libby (‘25) said, "I think that movie theaters are a fun outing and one of the best ways to experience a movie for the first time. If I could see Elvis (2022) in theaters again, I would. Movie theaters are magical, and I would hate to see them start closing." Some might rally against this statement, claiming insane prices: tickets, concessions, etc. Surprisingly, the average movie theater ticket, when accounting for inflation, has decreased over time. It doesn't look like it at a glimpse, especially with what I mentioned earlier, but in 2022, the average ticket price was $10.53. Comparable to $10.58 in 2019 or even $11.92 in 1971. These are, in many cases, cheaper than streaming. If you only watch one movie a month, it's a pretty devastating contingency. However, the inverse of this problem is a massive discrepancy in profitability and recognition between movies that go to theaters and movies that go immediately to streaming. For example, Knives Out is, by most standards, a box office hit that brought in $311 million globally in 2019, a year already rife with competition. Only then, for the sequel to be announced, produced, and abruptly labeled a Netflix exclusive. Almost definitively, movies need to go to theaters to profit, let alone be financially successful. The inverse is true as well, obviously, but theaters make only about 40% of the ticket price (excluding concessions and other means of profit) and can only thrive off of highly anticipated movies. 

As A.O. Scott of the New York Times pointed out, “The point of the subscription model, in any case, is to provide inexhaustible algorithmic abundance, a deep and diverse reservoir of content at everyone’s fingertips. The traditional goal was to launch a blockbuster that everyone wanted to see. Now, as long as everyone is watching something, the algorithm will be satisfied.” The surplus of streaming networks: Netflix, Hulu, HBO Max, Amazon Prime, Disney+, Paramount+, and no doubt hundreds of lesser-known options has, inadvertently, lowered the expectations audiences set for television and, in turn, made the turnover rates for production companies that much quicker, because everyone just needs to be watching something. They can put out hundreds of low-budget, poorly written movies every year and still turn a profit, and then later use it for advertising their expansive catalog of mediocre options. Unfortunately, we don’t need more live-action movies created from tenuous threads of Harry Styles fanfiction. Nonetheless, as much as I have ragged on Netflix originals or some parallel, they provide an audience for movies that can’t make it to theaters, like those that cover a niche genre or are produced independently. So, yes, they have a broad and diverse range of options, but it’s a double-edged sword for theaters that need business and risk losing screens because of streaming.

Things have definitely come a long way since I was a kid. Until my early teens, my family was “subscribed” to Netflix’s mailer program. We didn't subscribe to any “real” streaming service until much later. In this service, they would send you one DVD you selected from your queue at a time until, eventually, the two weeks you were allotted were up. You would put the DVD back in the envelope, pull off the strip to reveal the adhesive, seal it shut, and place it in the mailbox to be picked up the next day. This service officially ended only eight months ago. In a modern context, watching the movie you want is, if not more complicated, much more expensive. You often need multiple subscriptions to find the movie or TV show you want. Assuming you don’t want to buy or rent something you’ve never seen from Apple TV. Inflation on its own has increased subscription prices, but from the sheer knowledge of how much people are willing to pay, these content-mongering companies are already given tremendous leeway. Content, even outside of formal means of entertainment, gets needlessly paywalled. These services and subscriptions have become a transparent cash grab for many corporations. Ultimately, no matter how much Hulu shoves down your throat the fact they have live sports, they don’t. If you want to watch sports through Hulu, you must pay a minimum of $68 more per month than their standard $7.99. Naturally, you only have access to these sports because of the added access to Live TV and the removed access to Hulu’s library. 

The issue of theaters' relevance and potential lifespan is a complicated one. They may have fallen out of popularity, but are still crucial in the film industry. They innovate and exceed their bounds as just movie theaters but can’t sell more tickets than they did five years ago. Even as a billion-dollar industry, they can’t claw their way out of debt, but they find themselves in a multi-year streak of record-breaking movies. The blockbuster, most profitable movies always go to theaters, but some of the wealthiest companies in the world are streaming services. It seems like one contradiction after another. If these companies are as instrumental as they seem to be, what is holding them back from being successful? One surprisingly simple answer is COVID-19. Prior to 2020, as has been illustrated, cinema was nearly at its peak. Then the pandemic started, and almost every business had to close intermittently; theaters were no exception. Another potential problem is streaming, but that can’t truly replace theaters either. Movies that go directly to streaming are noticeably less prosperous and underperform in comparison to movies that go to theaters. After all, box office growth is almost universally seen as a measure of success. Amongst the other problems that streaming has and creates. So if that’s not the case, maybe it’s their lack of an audience; this would make more sense, and it’s noticeable even. In childhood, going to the theater guaranteed an audience; they were always full. You’d have to scan the room to find seats where you could all sit together. Now, entire rows are open, and only a handful of people are present. Maybe the nostalgia has just died. Eva Simmons (‘24) wrote, “I miss going to the movies. It was a great time. My fondest memories are watching movies like Avengers: Endgame and Infinity War with my family.”

Theaters have almost been pushed into an impossibility: they must be a more alluring option than streaming. From the comfort of their home, without any predictable interruptions, no mess, no drive. For their sake, theaters have tried. They innovate, find new ways to advertise, and improve. Sometimes, it even works. They attract more people and stay open, avoiding becoming a statistic with little fanfare or relevance. However, momentary success does not mean complete restoration. As thousands of field experts and journalists will tell you, it takes more than just a few solid, sensational movies to keep a theater open, let alone profiting. If this bar is met as it has been in the past few years since COVID, that could be a promising future. The revered late screenwriter Willian Goldman, writer of The Princess Bride, made his opinion quite clear: "Nobody knows anything” regarding Hollywood and movies, “Not one person in the entire motion picture field knows for a certainty what’s going to work.”And as A.O. Scott said better than I could, “Anyone who predicts the future of movies (this writer included) is either bluffing, guessing, or indulging in wishful thinking.”

In part two of this installment, I will look deeper into some student responses and analyze the polling results!