
Kiribé Editor
July 4, 2026
2 min read
The debate about the future of theatrical exhibition has been mostly about what studios should do — it should also be about what viewers can do.
Most of the recent conversation about the future of theatrical exhibition has focused on what the studios should do — release films first in cinemas, respect the theatrical window, invest in mid-budget cinema. All of that is worth arguing about. But there is a smaller conversation that deserves more attention: what audiences themselves can do, and what obligation viewers have to the exhibition infrastructure they claim to value.
Cinemas do not exist independent of the audience that attends them. They exist because a specific number of people, on a specific number of nights, decide that a fifteen-dollar ticket and a half-hour commute is worth the specific experience of watching a film in a room with strangers. When that decision stops being made, cinemas close, and the closure is permanent in a way that most cultural infrastructure loss is. A theatre that shuts does not usually reopen.
This is not a plea for guilt or nostalgia. It is a practical observation. The theatrical experience has real costs, and its survival depends on a critical mass of people willing to pay them. Every reader of an editorial site like this one has, arguably, a small obligation to attend cinema more frequently than the average consumer if they want the ecosystem to continue existing. That obligation is not moral, exactly. It is closer to civic — the same kind of obligation that keeps public libraries funded.
The counter case is that audiences are not responsible for keeping alive an industry that has, in many cases, made itself less welcoming. Theatre chains have raised prices, cut concessions, and reduced screen counts for adult drama; the audience is arguably reacting rationally to a worse product. All of that is true, and none of it changes the underlying dynamic. If the audience stops attending, the infrastructure is lost regardless of whose fault the decline was.
What audiences can do, in practical terms, is small but cumulative. Attend one more film a month in a cinema than they would otherwise. Buy the ticket rather than the streaming rental for the mid-budget adult drama they meant to see. Take a friend who has never been to an arthouse cinema. Support the local independent theatre rather than the multiplex chain when both are showing the same title. None of these actions saves the industry alone. All of them together, at scale, are the only thing that will.
Share
Kiribé Editor
Editorial Desk
Published by the Kiribé editorial desk, covering culture, cinema, and the intersection of art and society across the African continent and beyond.
Read next

Criticism after the algorithm
The recommendation engine has quietly displaced the critic as the primary gatekeeper — and film culture is worse for it.

Why we still need the mid-budget movie
The film industry's argument against the mid-budget theatrical release is an economic one — and it deserves a cultural rebuttal.
Join the Conversation
Stay Ahead of the Story
Subscribe to Kiribé for premium entertainment journalism, exclusive interviews, and cultural commentary delivered weekly.