Back in 2019, critically acclaimed filmmaker Martin Scorsese, know for cult classic films such as Goodfellas and Taxi Driver, became an internet phenomenon because of his opinion on cinema. He mainly focused on how big budget film productions, such as Marvel films, take up most screenings in movie theatres. This limits opportunities for independent films, or what he calls “narrative cinema”, to be screened in major theatre chains, causing them to become unnoticed and not celebrated enough. Through this statement, he unintentionally created the “cinema is dying” meme, which is widely used by cinephiles across social media in a comical tone whenever bad news is announced in the film industry, but it has to come to a point where the joke might end up being a reality.
In October 2025, the successful movie production company Warner Bros. Studios put itself up for sale. The top bidders for the company were Comcast, which already owns Universal; Paramount Skydance; and the well known steaming service Netflix. On December 5th, the news broke and disrupted not only movie lovers across the globe but filmmakers as well, when Netflix won the bidding war and acquired Warner Bros. for $82.7 billion. Although, movie firms buying other firms is not new to the industry, as seen with Disney acquiring Fox and Amazon acquiring Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), the news disrupted people far more than previous deals, creating fear among movie lovers about the future of cinema.
Before we begin discussing how this acquisition could affect movie productions as well as movie lovers who enjoy going to the cinema to escape from reality, let’s take a quick recap of Netflix’s history. As we know, Netflix originally started as a physical media rental service before transforming into an online streaming platform. After acquiring streaming rights to films and TV shows for limited periods, Netflix released its first original production, Lilyhammer, a Norwegian-American series, which later led to the production of House of Cards. The company then took another step forward into film production with Beasts of No Nation (2015), and the rest is history. Netflix initially focused on producing recognisable independent films before move on to high budget productions, collaborating with acclaimed filmmakers and actors. At one point, Netflix productions did not even receive nominations at the Academy Awards, but the release of Martin Scorsese’s The Irishman (2019) changed everything. Following this, more filmmakers such as David Fincher and Guillermo del Toro began releasing their films through the platform.
Some may ask, if Netflix is a very profitable and successful business, what is the concern with Warner Bros. being acquired by them? The main issue with this deal comes from the plans and ideologies of Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos. One simple way to explain Netflix’s views on films is that they are anti-movie theatres and prefer audiences to watch films comfortably at home, claiming that the “movie theatre model is outdated” and that “Netflix is saving Hollywood”. Although Netflix is famously known for critically acclaimed films such as the Knives Out sequels and, more recently, Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein, these films had very limited theatrical releases and were shown in a very restricted number of cinema chains due to mainstream cinema chains’ opposition towards Netflix.
Ted Sarandos’ main initiative, when asked about the future of cinema, is to reduce the number of people visiting theatres, as Netflix would prefer audiences to prioritise watching films at home. At the moment, independent filmmakers are already struggling to distribute their films across many cinema chains nationally and internationally, as mainstream theatres mainly prioritise big budget productions. This is one situation where cinephiles often find themselves thanking streaming services such as Netflix, Prime Video and Mubi, as they use their platform to stream films that struggled with theatrical distribution. However, in the United Kingdom at least, cinema chains such as Curzon and Everyman Cinemas provide audiences with the opportunity to watch these films on the big screen rather than at home. One example of a film impacted by limited screenings is Benedict Cumberbatch’s recent film The Thing with Feathers. The film was distributed by Vue International, one of the biggest chains in the UK. While the film being only exclusive to Vue Cinemas was not the main issue, the limited number of screens and showtimes was the biggest problem. This was because the film opened on the same weekend as Wicked: For Good, and cinema chains naturally prioritised screens and showtimes for the major blockbuster of the weekend.
Some may argue that independent drama films can easily be enjoyed at home, as they do not rely on “striking visuals”. However, many fear that even mainstream big budget films that feature the so called “striking visuals” could face very limited theatrical runs and instead be prioritised for streaming service viewership and subscriptions, which is already happening. Warner Bros. currently holds the rights to the DC Comic Film Universe, Denis Villeneuve’s Dune series, and in 2025 has distributed critically acclaimed films that focus on high technical achievement, such as Sinners, and One Battle After Another. Although some of these films were box office failures, many audiences have expressed appreciation for their technical work, particularly the cinematography, highlighting that these films are meant to be experienced on the big screen.
A personal example would be my experience watching Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar (2014). I had the privilege of experiencing the film in 70mm IMAX at the BFI IMAX. Witnessing the film on such a massive screen was one of the most unforgettable cinema experiences of my life, and I now refuse to watch it at home on television, as it would not feel the same. The Dune series has also been very successful, with audiences praising its technical achievements and describing it as one of the best cinematic experiences they have ever witnessed. With a third Dune film currently in development, the question arises: will we now be expected to experience this film at home on Netflix? Or what about the Matt Reeeve’s sequel The Batman: Part Two?
Although there had been no official confirmation from Ted Sarandos or Greg Peters regarding their plans, given Netflix’s history with films, this is a very upsetting time for cinemas and cinephiles. This situation could also lead to a strong possibility of cinema chains shutting down. Cinema attendance is already decreasing, with casual moviegoers describing it as an “underrated hobby”, so it would not be surprising if people later regret not going to the cinema and wish that cinemas had never closed down. This shift would not impact the film industry creatively but would also cost many people their jobs, not only within the industry itself but also those working in cinema chains. And for what cost?
The acquisition of Warner Bros. by Netflix represents more than just another corporate merger, it points to a possible turning point for the future of cinema itself. Streaming has undeniably made films more accessible and has given many projects a platform they might never had otherwise, but accessibility should not come at the cost of the theatrical experience. Cinema has always been more than just content, it is a shared cultural experience shaped by scale, sound and collective emotion, bringing together people across the country and across the globe who share the same interests and form new, long lasting relationships. If visually ambitious and culturally significant films are increasingly redirected towards home viewings, the loss would go beyond box office figures to filmmakers, cinema workers and audiences alike. The real concern now is whether the industry can move forward without abandoning the spaces, experiences and communities that made people fall in love with films in the first place.
