Milad Balisini – Radio Zamaneh – January 20, 2022
Following the public screening of the film Atabay, directed by Niki Karimi, in recent weeks, many residents of Turkish-speaking cities in Iran have flocked to cinemas to watch the movie, primarily due to its use of the Turkish language. With over 4 billion tomans in sales, Atabay has become one of the highest-grossing films in the country. However, many fans from these same cities have voiced their concerns online about the lack of cinemas in their hometowns. Some social media users have reported traveling to neighboring cities to watch the film, while others have written about their town’s cinema being abandoned for years. This article aims to highlight the benefits of cinema, its significance, and the disparities in the distribution, capacity, and quality of cinemas across Iran's provinces.
The Benefits of Cinema
Cinema is considered the most complex and powerful art form in the contemporary world, offering numerous benefits to individuals and society at large. It undeniably has a profound impact on people across the globe. Cinema serves as an escape from reality, alleviating the monotony of daily life. It fosters socialization by breaking down interpersonal barriers and bringing people closer together. Most importantly, cinema enhances imagination by presenting the world through the director’s perspective, inspiring viewers to expand their own thinking and creativity.
In this way, cinema contributes to intellectual growth. It also helps individuals better understand their lives, those around them, and the functioning of society and culture. Cinema can shed light on political and social issues, open new perspectives on thought, emotion, and life, and introduce audiences to different cultures worldwide. It familiarizes viewers with diverse forms of art and the lifestyles of people in other cultures.
From emotional dramas to action-packed thrillers, cinema draws its ideas and imagination from the environment. The imagery created by cinema aligns with social ideals for recreation and entertainment. Yet in Iran, cinema faces numerous structural challenges, such as censorship. Reports suggest that between 1981 and 2011, over 200 films, despite obtaining the necessary permits and completing production, were banned from screening for various reasons (Movahed, 2012). Strict restrictions are imposed on films addressing gender and religious discrimination, environmental issues, ethnic tensions, and the use of non-Persian languages. Nevertheless, cinema remains deeply influenced by Iran’s social dynamics.
A film not only provides visual entertainment but also narrates the social, economic, and political structures within which individuals live. Thus, equating film solely with entertainment is a mere jest.
The Experiences of Going to the Cinema
It is essential to distinguish between cinema as an art form and going to the cinema as a social activity. According to research titled Cinema Is Dead, Long Live Cinema! Understanding the Social Experience of Contemporary Cinema Attendance conducted at Ghent University in Belgium, being among a group of strangers who simultaneously share cultural practices is regarded as a positive aspect of the cinema-going experience.
This longitudinal study, conducted over four years (2013–2016) with 472 respondents, concluded that visitors perceive cinema as a form of social leisure. Participants highlighted the excitement, relaxation, and joy derived from watching films in a group as the most significant experiences of cinema-going. The study emphasized the importance of the social interaction facilitated by cinema attendance. Visitors engage with the space not only visually but also socially, transforming the cinema into a communal environment.
Although the study focused on modern multiplex cinemas, its primary interest lay in the social dimensions of cinema-going rather than advanced facilities. According to the researchers, space takes precedence over location in the cinema-going experience. Respondents described cinema attendance as a social activity that created a sense of belonging to an imagined community immersed in meaningful collective experiences.
As Lies Van de Vijver explained, this study sought to understand the social nature of cinema-going in an era dominated by convergent media cultures. Open-ended surveys questioned 472 young viewers about their past and present movie-watching experiences. The findings revealed that recognizing specific performative actions led to a tangible understanding of cinema experiences, with the spatial dimension emerging as a key factor.
The social experience of cinema-going is shaped by actions (shared leisure activities), communication (the unique heterogeneity of the audience), and adaptation (shared, predictable experiences). The social space of cinema is less about specific viewer participation and more about the unique heterogeneity and predictable communal experiences among anonymous audiences. Together, they form a community of social actors who share a common set of cultural practices.
Historically, cinema-going has proven to be a significant social factor. For nearly a century, it has been an extraordinary escape from routine. Cinema experiences are realized through immersion in film and participation in a social event, offering a unique type of shared social experience.
Cinema-Going and Social Health
Cinema-going, as a form of leisure, can be tied to human social health. Social health, as a dimension of overall health, depends more on social and economic factors than medical or nursing interventions. "Social health emphasizes dimensions of well-being related to an individual's connection with others or the community in which they live" (Keyes, 2007: 10).
From this perspective, cinema-going can be seen as beneficial to social health. Participation in any form of organized leisure, not just cinema-going, facilitates emotional release, inadvertently promoting social well-being. Emotional release, referred to in psychology as catharsis, was theorized even in ancient Greece as a way to manage and "release accumulated emotions and feelings." Tragedy and comedy plays were given significant attention, and amphitheaters were built for performances, festivals, and music events based on this theoretical foundation.
After the Middle Ages, tragedy plays, particularly Shakespearean works, gained prominence in the 16th century and have since become integral to the cultural and artistic catharsis of Western societies, alongside opera. Festivals, carnivals, and other communal gatherings also hold great importance in this regard.
Thus, cinema and cinema-going play a valuable role in the mental and emotional well-being of societies, a role that is significantly lacking in marginalized regions of Iran.
Statistics of Cinemas in the Country
Chart 1: Per Capita Cinema Halls by Province
 |
| The source of the data is: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, Cinema Organization, and Audiovisual Affairs (2019). |
As the title of Chart 1 indicates, this chart shows the per capita cinema halls broken down by province. In simpler terms, it represents how many people in each province are served by one cinema hall. To calculate this data, the population of each province, based on the 2016 census, was divided by the number of cinema halls in that province. It is worth mentioning that the total number of cinema halls in the country is 572. Accordingly, based on the 2016 census, there is one cinema hall available for every 139,731 people in the country.
Among the provinces, Yazd, Tehran, and Semnan have the highest per capita availability of cinema halls. Conversely, Sistan and Baluchestan, West Azerbaijan, and Zanjan have the lowest per capita availability.
In Yazd Province, there is one cinema hall for every 66,972 people; in Tehran Province, for every 69,464 people; and in Semnan Province, for every 78,040 people. On the other hand, in Sistan and Baluchestan Province, there is one cinema hall for every 693,753 people; in West Azerbaijan, for every 544,202 people; and in Zanjan, for every 528,730 people. Essentially, the per capita availability of cinema halls in central provinces is about ten times higher than in peripheral provinces.
Chart 2: Seats and Capacity of Cinema Halls by Province
 |
| Source: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, Cinema Organization and Audiovisual Affairs (2019) |
Chart 2 illustrates the number of cinema hall seats in the 31 provinces of the country relative to their population. This chart calculates how many people in each province are served by one seat in the cinema halls of that province, based on the 2016 census. In simpler terms, Chart 2 shows how many individuals per province are allocated one cinema seat. To compute this data, the population of each province, as per the 2016 census, was divided by the total number of cinema hall seats in that province.
Given that the total number of cinema seats in the country is 148,010, there is one cinema seat available for every 540 people in Iran.
According to this chart, the provinces of Semnan, Yazd, and Tehran have the highest per capita availability of cinema seats, while Zanjan, Sistan and Baluchestan, and Qazvin have the lowest. Specifically, in Semnan Province, there is one cinema seat for every 278 people; in Yazd Province, for every 285 people; and in Tehran Province, for every 294 people. Conversely, in Zanjan Province, there is one cinema seat for every 2,235 people; in Sistan and Baluchestan, for every 2,167 people; and in Qazvin, for every 2,084 people.
In other words, central provinces have approximately ten times more cinema hall seats per capita than peripheral provinces.
Chart 3: Quality of Cinemas in the Country by Province
 |
| Source: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, Cinema Organization and Audiovisual Affairs (2019) |
Chart 3 shows the quality of cinemas in the country by province. Cinemas in Iran are categorized into four levels: modern, excellent, first-class, and second-class. Second-class cinemas are only found in two locations in Tehran Province: "Farakh" Cinema (1962) in Tehran city and "Qods" Cinema (2005) in Varamin, Tehran Province. The majority of cinemas in the country are of the first-class category.
However, Tehran Province, with a total of 66 cinemas, has the highest number of modern and excellent cinemas, with 20 modern cinemas and 33 excellent cinemas. Following Tehran, Khorasan Razavi Province, with 4 modern cinemas, has the highest number of modern-quality cinemas in the country. Additionally, Isfahan Province, with 9 excellent cinemas, ranks second after Tehran in terms of excellent cinemas. Fars Province, with 15 first-class cinemas, has the highest number of first-class cinemas in the country.
Chart 4: Ratio of Public to Private Ownership in Iranian Cinemas
 |
| Source: Faraj, 2020 |
Chart 4 shows the ratio of public to private ownership in cinemas and film screening venues across the country. "Of the 356 film screening venues in Iran, the private sector has 82 cinemas, 129 halls, and 35,101 seats in the form of individual ownership, and 41 cinemas, 187 halls, and 31,211 seats in the form of corporate ownership. The public and institutional sector owns 233 cinemas, 322 halls, and 96,174 seats in the country’s cinemas. In conclusion, 35% of the film screening venues in the country are privately owned, while 65% are owned by the government or semi-governmental entities" (Faraj, 2020).
Conclusion
The shortage of cinemas in peripheral areas of Iran does not imply that the residents of those areas do not watch films by any means or for any reason. There has been no specific research on this matter, and we also do not have information in this regard. However, what is clear is that residents in central areas, with more and even better cinemas, have a higher chance of watching films in cinema halls compared to residents of peripheral areas. Watching a film on television, a laptop, or a personal computer is quite common, while going to the cinema is an event—a cultural event defined by the aesthetic choice of films that are worth spending money on and the participation involved.
Due to the high share of government ownership in film screening venues across the country, it can be concluded that the government has no intention to invest in cinema in the peripheral regions of the country. Additionally, due to the 35% private ownership of cinemas nationwide, it can be said that the residents of peripheral areas may not have enough income to afford cinema tickets, or there may not be adequate infrastructure in those areas, which has ultimately led the private sector to refrain from investing in the country's marginalized regions. In other words, the limited private investment in cinemas, especially in the peripheral areas of the country, indicates that the private sector, due to widespread poverty in those regions, has given up on running cinemas and profiting from them in the country’s peripheral areas.