Empty halls and spectators without seats in Iranian cinemas

The state of Iran’s cinemas in 1403 (2024/25)

Many social science statistics, if examined in a one-dimensional way, may not only present a picture far from reality, but at times make reality appear completely inverted. Cultural statistics, especially in cinema, are even more prone to such errors than other fields. One of the indicators that matters every year to researchers and practitioners in art and cinema is the number of admissions for films screened in cinemas. On the basis of this indicator, Qazvin province, with 344,580 tickets sold in 1403 (2024/25), ranks nineteenth in the country. If this indicator alone is the basis of analysis, it is probably inferred that Qazvin, despite a population equal to or even larger than provinces such as Hamadan, Qom, and Golestan, has a weaker performance. Therefore, it is concluded that the people of Qazvin have less inclination to go to the cinema than residents of these provinces.

Meanwhile, Qazvin province, with a utilization rate of 688 people per seat, ranks first among the country’s provinces. The utilization rate shows the extent to which cinema halls use their capacity and is calculated by dividing the number of tickets sold by the total capacity of the halls or the number of seats. This indicator expresses how effectively the cinema has been able to use its capacity; therefore, the higher the utilization rate, the greater the audience turnout at the cinema. The average utilization rate of cinema halls in the world is typically between 20 and 50 percent of hall capacity. This means that Qazvin province, despite 501 seats and a utilization rate of 688, has reached more than 137 percent of its capacity. This shows that many cinema-goers in Qazvin have in practice not had the possibility of sitting and watching a film on a seat. Zanjan province, too, with a utilization rate of 470 (more than 85 percent of hall capacity), is in the next place, a figure that is very high even on a global scale; figures that are usually recorded only on holidays and during the screening of box-office hits.

The lowest utilization rates also belong to Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad (6), Ilam (19), and Ardabil (38) provinces. In other words, in Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province only 0.007 percent of cinema seat capacity has been used. Also, only 3 percent of the capacity of Ilam province’s cinemas is used. Khuzestan province, too, last year used only 1 percent of its hall capacity and, with 9,464 seats, recorded a utilization rate of 99. On the basis of these data, it can be concluded that the utilization rate and the percentage of cinema capacity used should be considered as essential criteria in budget allocation and cultural policymaking—and cinema policymaking in particular. For example, Qazvin province, because of its high utilization rate, has an urgent need for budget allocation to build cinemas or increase the capacity of existing halls; whereas Khuzestan and Ilam provinces, more than anything, need increased advertising and a strengthening of the factors that attract audiences to the cinema. In addition, for a more root-level analysis, it is necessary to answer this fundamental question: what place does cinema have in the leisure and entertainment experience of the people of each province and culture, and where does the cultural value of cinema and film sit in the hierarchy of cultural classes?