You say that. And it makes total sense from an Econ 101 standpoint. The problem is, the market has evolved so perversely that you can't really... do that anymore.

For starters, the motion picture industry was basically started to sell air conditioning. yeah there were movie theaters before Carrier cooled one but air conditioning predates talkies by two years. Serials, double features, concession stands, all the rest of it evolved out of the idea that people would pay to hang out in a room that wasn't sweltering. More than that, the theaters didn't really make money on the tickets - the ticket sales go almost entirely to the studios. Same business model as clubs - you pay the band whatever it takes to get them in and then you make your money on the alcohol.

For another thing, the way profits are calculated and the way profits are made are totally different. Nowadays an average movie costs about $120m and P&A (Prints and advertising) is about $60-$70m. Theoretically the average movie should need to make $180m to break even, right? Except there are really only five multinationals making movies and they're vertically integrated to beat the band so while it might cost Warner Brothers $70m to advertise, they're paying themselves through their television, internet, print and radio properties.

Used to be that you used the opening weekend in order to determine the ancillary rights prices on your film, which is where your money is really getting made - broadcast rights, foreign sales, foreign broadcast rights, hotel networks, in-flight networks, etc. Your $120m movie got relicensed again and again and again such that your break-even on Week 1 became a billion dollars by Year 10. But nobody's watching TV anymore, and nobody's really going to theaters (and who can blame them - it's cheaper to go to a baseball game) so that opening weekend is pretty much what you got. You're not going to see an "event" two weeks after everyone else. That lame guy in your Facebook feed who starts every post with "I know I'm the last guy to say this but The Help was great" is not someone to build a business model on. You need to get 'em in the door now or never fucking mind.

Meanwhile, the streaming services don't have to disclose shit. They don't have to tell anyone what you're watching because they don't have advertisers. This is due in no small part to the fact that they've steadfastly refused to tell anyone shit so the advertisers aren't even really trying. Netflix used to play games with getting a major film but nowadays they make bullshit like Bird Box and try and convince you it's major. Disney, meanwhile, knows you'll sit your kids in front of whatever they spew so if putting together the Mitichlorian or whatever the fuck is enough to edge you into letting your 8-year-old watch DuckTales reruns all day it's a win.

And they know - they know - that you occasionally find content that "takes a risk" but mostly you watch Nailed It. You watch Office reruns. And every now and then you sit down on the couch in a solemn manner, dim the lights, think deep thoughts and watch a documentary like you're eating your vegetables because your doctor hates your cholesterol. This is why they put that shit at the top of your feed - your impression of Netflix is that it's a place of deep-thinking vegetables despite the fact that it's a place of Office reruns.

And it's not your fault. If there was mostly decent fucking cinema you'd probably watch it. You could talk to your coworkers about it. You could relate to people on social media about it. But there isn't, so we all sit around talking about Marie Kondo like it isn't the most inane bullshit on earth. And no way, no how, is there any possible way to let the people making this crap know how you feel about it as a viewer.