Going to watch it at home.
"Video on demand surges as theaters reel" by Ty Burr | Globe Staff November 02, 2014
Good thing they are receiving $80 million in taxpayer funds that they can roll over for their pieces of trash.
That's why we are not going. The big screen is a great draw -- when there is something worth seeing, not sickening garbage.
Seen a good movie lately? Chances are it wasn’t in a movie theater.
The way Americans take in filmed entertainment has been undergoing a sea change. Although box office for October was healthy, the movie exhibition industry is still struggling to get out from a woeful summer in which revenues were down 15 percent. The expected excuses — rising ticket prices, seasonal competition from the World Cup, too many sequels and remakes (too many of which stank) — don’t disguise the fact that something bigger is happening.
I'm already looking to change the channel. The last thing I want to see on a Sunday morning is waa-waa from Hollywood.
Video on demand is the way most people watch movies now: at home with a flick of the remote, on laptops or smartphones with the tap of a finger, renting or buying films through their cable on-demand menus, through subscription services like Netflix, or via iTunes or Amazon Instant Video.
******
The revolution in home entertainment, in which we binge-watch TV series until they seem like one long telenovela, or cruise YouTube and other sites for short-form laughs, is transforming our patterns of consumption, and the content corporations are racing to keep up.
I'm so out of the main$tream. All I'm doing is reading and blogging about the Bo$ton Globe.
Even Facebook is getting into the game, announcing a series of short films based on the “Twilight” movies. The brand is king; where you access it doesn’t really matter anymore.
Where does that leave the movies, a medium that has held on for over a century, through the arrival of sound, television, and the Internet?
If VOD continues its advance, all that may be left for the multiplex chains are the major franchise properties: Comic book heroes like the Avengers, young-adult series like “The Hunger Games,” and anything that involves the destruction of a major American city in 3-D. The chains will be our national Circus Maximus; they’re halfway there already.
All the more reason to stop frequenting them. Who wants to watch the same old $hit all the time?
And the art houses? Will they still have a viable economic model as their core audience of devoted cinemaphiles gets older and the kids stay home....
“It’s uncertain. There is a fear factor,” and who cares? I'm sure the wealthy will always be able to afford them.
What happens when the dwindling audience still dedicated to seeing a film on the big screen — instead of the glowing rectangle in their home or hand — ages out?
The movie house will close and life will go on.
It’s hard not to wonder if the experience of watching movies as we’ve known it for over a century has finally begun its final slow fade.
Which is what I'm going to do with this piece. Wake me when its over.
--more--"
"Video on demand, or VOD, is expected to be a $45 billion market."
Oh, now I $ee why it got the front page treatment.
Related: Despite cord cutting, cable TV’s future looks very familiar
I don't watch CBS or HBO alone.
How one couple beat the cable company
Antennas like Aereo?
