I believe that the decline of the Oscars can be attributed to the disappearance of the types of movies they were originally meant to highlight. The ideal Oscar nominee used to be a high-middlebrow film, aiming for true artistry and often achieving it, designed to be seen on the big screen with famous actors, striking cinematography, and a memorable soundtrack. These movies were not overly challenging for art-house audiences nor simplistic comic-book blockbusters, but were instead meant for a broad audience of mature viewers. In the past, Oscar races featured conflicts that captured the interest of all moviegoers, such as "Titanic" vs. "L.A. Confidential" or "Saving Private Ryan" vs. "Shakespeare in Love." This is why this year's Academy Awards ceremony, with its changes and 10 best picture nominees, feels like the end of an era. Many of the nominees fit the mold of the type of movies that the Oscars desperately need to thrive. "West Side Story" will be directed by Steven Spielberg, updating a classic musical. "King Richard" is a sports movie that is elevated by a powerful performance from Will Smith. "Dune" is an epic adaptation of a science-fiction classic. "Don't Look Up" is a significant film featuring Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Lawrence. "Drive My Car" is a three-hour Japanese film that explores the intricate relationship between a widowed actor and his young female chauffeur. Alright, perhaps the last one mentioned appeals to a more specific audience. However, this year's nominees include well-known actors, prominent directors, and traditional Hollywood genres. Despite this star power, most of the films were not well-attended in theaters. When the nominees were revealed in February, nine out of the 10 had earned less than $40 million domestically. The only outlier was "Dune," which barely surpassed $100 million domestically, ranking as the 13th highest-grossing movie of 2021. In total, the 10 nominees have collectively only made about a quarter of the earnings of "Spider-Man: No Way Home" at the domestic box office. Despite Hollywood's attempts to revive old successes, the public's interest seems to have waned. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly affecting films popular with older audiences, likely contributed to this. If not for the challenges posed by the delta and omicron variants, movies like "West Side Story" and "King Richard" might have performed better. Many of the best picture nominees were released simultaneously in theaters and on streaming platforms, with "Don't Look Up" finding success on Netflix after a brief theatrical release. This unique crisis has accelerated a technological shift, prompting a reflection on the current state of the industry. Certainly, non-superhero movie box office earnings are expected to recover in 2022, and the best picture nominees for next year will likely see a slight increase in theater revenue. However, in the grand scheme of Hollywood's history, it is evident that the Oscars are on the decline and we may be witnessing the end of traditional movies as we know them. This doesn't mean that films will disappear altogether, but rather that the era of movies as the primary form of American entertainment and culture is coming to a close. The film industry will continue to produce entertaining stories for audiences, but the iconic status and influence of movies may be fading. The end of the dominance of big screen entertainment has been anticipated for a long time, with the rise of television, VCRs, cable TV, and Hollywood's nostalgia for its own past. Despite the success of TV in the 1960s and '70s, it was seen as disposable compared to movies. The advent of VHS tapes allowed for a new way to enjoy films, but the focus remained on funding big screen productions. The emergence of prestige TV in the '80s and '90s marked a shift in the industry. However, if you desired true glory, genuine fame, or lasting artistic recognition, you still needed to showcase your work in movie theaters, producing self-contained works of art on a grand scale and gauging the reactions of critics and audiences. Succeeding in this endeavor could lead to becoming a figure like Robert Altman or Bruce Willis, who both made successful transitions from television to film. On the other hand, failing in this leap, as seen with Shelley Long and David Caruso, served as a cautionary tale that proved the unique challenge and status of movies as a separate entity from television. The late 1990s marked a period of transition as computer-generated effects advanced, hinting at a new era of cinematic marvel. Indie cinema helped to develop a new group of filmmakers. The year 1999 is often considered one of the best years for movies, with films like "Fight Club," "The Sixth Sense," "The Talented Mr. Ripley," "Election," "Three Kings," and "The Insider" contributing to this reputation. This year also saw an increase in Oscar viewership, especially after the success of "Titanic" in 1998. The movies of this era were seen as a rite of passage for teenagers, with memories of being turned away from R-rated films and the excitement of seeing more mature movies like "Eyes Wide Shut." And the initiation was not only about entering adulthood in general, but also about becoming fluent in a specific common language. Certain movies, such as "Austin Powers" and "The Matrix" (1999 once again!), were essential for social interaction as a college student, in order to understand the jokes and references that connected an entire social world. However, what followed was complex as various factors were at play, yet simple in that they all led to the same outcome - movies losing their revered status and becoming just another form of entertainment. One positive outcome of this shift was a surge in creativity on television, particularly during the "Sopranos" era of HBO, which allowed small screen entertainment to rival movies in terms of high-quality acting, writing, and directing. The other changes were somewhat unclear. Globalization expanded the market for Hollywood movies, but the global audience preferred simpler storytelling that could easily be understood across different languages and cultures. The rise of the internet, laptops, and iPhones personalized entertainment and made it more accessible, but also led to people watching on smaller screens and in isolation, rather than in theaters. Special effects allowed for visually stunning scenes and previously impossible stories to be told on the big screen. However, the focus on effects-driven blockbusters empowered fan culture, sometimes at the expense of traditional cinema elements. The rise of teenage culture in Western society has influenced Hollywood in two significant ways. One direction has led to a focus on superhero movies and other familiar properties targeted towards teenage audiences, while the other has resulted in an increase in content production for home entertainment and streaming platforms, blurring the lines between movies and television shows. The internet has taken over as a space for adult initiation, replacing the role that movies once played in American culture, which is now hard to imagine. With a wide variety of entertainment choices available and the repetitive nature of popular movies, it is unlikely that a few hit movies can serve as a universal cultural reference point. The idea of a movie star as a larger-than-life figure is becoming outdated, with superhero franchises often overshadowing the actors themselves. The types of genres that used to create a strong connection between actors and audiences, such as non-superhero action movies, historical epics, broad comedies, and meet-cute romances, have all declined quickly. While serialized television shows can create a bond between viewers and a specific character, this connection doesn't transfer as easily to the actor's other work as the larger-than-life personas of movie stars did. Male actors from TV's antihero era are often forever associated with their characters, like Tony Soprano, Walter White, Don Draper, and Al Swearengen. Female stars in recent serialized shows, like Jodie Comer in "Killing Eve" and Anya Taylor-Joy in "The Queen's Gambit," have not been able to bring their audiences with them to their film projects. Despite this, it is important to appreciate what this era has brought us, including the exceptional work of Comer and Taylor-Joy on TV. The abundance of content is remarkable, and serialized television dramas have storytelling capabilities that even the biggest movies lack. In our recent week of television viewing, my wife and I have been switching between the captivating basketball drama "Winning Time" and Amanda Seyfried's excellent performance as Elizabeth Holmes in "The Dropout." Next week, we plan to watch the long-awaited third season of Donald Glover's "Atlanta." While not all new content is as engaging, the quality of TV entertainment available now surpasses what was offered on cable 20 years ago. However, these TV productions are distinct from movies due to their lesser cultural impact, smaller stars, diminished communal influence, and the fact that stories crafted for television screens inherently lack certain artistic elements present in movies, such as the grand scale of the moviegoing experience, larger-than-life acting, and immersive cinematography, music, and sound editing. This is evident in comparing films like "Dune," "West Side Story," and "Nightmare Alley," which offer vastly different experiences in a theater versus at home. It is appropriate that the Oscars this year have marginalized awards for score, sound, and film editing, as the trend of movies being made for streaming platforms suggests a decreasing importance placed on audiovisual immersion. Additionally, the condensed storytelling format of serial television currently dominating our era lacks the power achieved through artistic exertions in cinema, where an entire story must be told in one go without the promise of future seasons or episodes. This power is what makes the greatest movies feel more complete than most long-form television series, which can often suffer from unnecessary seasons or episodes, as seen in shows like "Lost" and "Game of Thrones" that were derailed by not having a clear destination planned in advance. While a great movie can be seen as its own world, providing viewers with a complete and immersive experience, the potential artistic benefits of longer works should not be overlooked. Despite the character development and psychological depth achieved by shows like "The Sopranos" over time, films like "The Godfather" are still considered more flawless works of art. In a world where multiplatform content dominates and the small screen holds more influence than the big screen, fans of perfection may need to adjust their expectations. Restoration and preservation are the two key concepts being discussed here. The idea of restoration does not involve trying to recreate the landscape of 1998, but rather envisioning a future where older style, non-comic book blockbuster films become more financially viable and appealing to audiences. One potential factor that could contribute to this shift is the changing geopolitical landscape, with China and Russia becoming less welcoming to Western films. This could lead to a resurgence of movies with a more specifically American appeal, aiming to achieve success with smaller budgets rather than relying on massive global box office earnings. The current theatrical experience is focused on maximizing revenue through trailers and ads before showing high-budget movies, making moviegoing less appealing for adults. Some theaters are trying differential pricing to offer a more tailored experience for different types of movies. For example, making the experience for non-Marvel movies more accessible by offering lower ticket prices, fewer previews, and a simpler trip to the theater. This could help fill the empty seats in struggling multiplexes and increase ticket sales for non-Marvel movies. However, because there are limits to these hopes, lovers of The Movies must also consider preservation. This involves recognizing their role as similar to enthusiasts of theatre, opera, or ballet, who have long known that certain forms of artistic experiences require support and patronage to endure. In today's culture, it is important to cultivate mature tastes alongside those of adolescents. Support for movies should focus on two main areas: making it easier for theaters to show older films that may be overlooked by streaming services, and encouraging corporate entities to release classic titles from their vaults. Secondly, there is a focus on incorporating exposure to exceptional cinema into a well-rounded liberal arts education. Despite the current challenges facing the liberal arts, integrating 20th-century cinema into the curriculum can serve as a bridge connecting contemporary young people to the artistic traditions that influenced the development of film. This emphasis on high-quality cinema provides institutions with an opportunity to prioritize excellence over simply trying to stay relevant in today's academic landscape, which often involves superficial engagement with popular culture. A pivotal moment in my own cinematic education occurred during college, when I watched "Blade Runner" and "When We Were Kings" in a lecture hall as part of a course on heroism in ancient Greece. In 1998, I was still being exposed to the dominant popular art form of American culture. Nowadays, a student in the same position would be encountering an art form that is more in the past. This is also true for many other important cultural works, from ancient classics to more recent literature. Even if the decline of movies cannot be undone, there is still cultural life beyond this type of "death". It is now our responsibility to determine how rich and diverse this cultural life will be.