In mathematical terms: Owning a movie theater is capitalism plus optimism, plus the ability to ignore last season’s box office returns. Last season, let’s see. That’d be summer. The summer of 2024 was bailed out, more or less, by a franchise crossover (“Deadpool and Wolverine,” now just over the $1.3 billion mark worldwide), a better-than-usual Pixar sequel (“Inside Out 2,” heading toward $1.7 billion globally) and a September reboot/sequel (“Beetlejuice Beetlejuice,” this week crossing the $350 million line into profit territory). Even with a boost from the latest low-budget horror title (an effective one, “Longlegs”) to make $100 million, business overall was down 13% from last summer. The release schedule was thinner than usual coming off the settlement of the actors’ and writers’ strikes. There weren’t enough movies. The theater owners’ response? Reinvestment. Last week, the National Association of Theatre Owners trade organization announced a three-year, $2.2 billion capital improvements initiative being undertaken by the largest theater chains, including AMC and Regal, and many smaller but hardy ones. This, NATO officials say, will mean different things to different theaters, including new seats, upgrades to digital projection quality (maybe a little training, too, please!), better sound systems, cleaner, brighter lobbies, a wider array of concessions and an overall attempt to convey the message: We’re glad you’re here, and enjoy the show. Chris Johnson serves as regional representative and executive board member of NATO as well as the CEO of Downers Grove-based Classic Cinemas and its 141 screens in 16 Illinois and Wisconsin locations. I asked him why, coming off that 13% drop after the summer of Barbenheimer, NATO is pushing the familiar, optimistic tale of moviegoing’s resilient future. He acknowledged the challenges ahead. He remembers 2020 and the eerie, unwanted main attraction titled the pandemic all too clearly. His banker didn’t want to lend Johnson money to help keep Classic Cinemas afloat: “I was told, ‘Yeah, I think your industry’s done.’” But it wasn’t. Classic Cinemas stayed afloat and has sailed through harsh economic weather better than most theater chains. Every year, he tells me, the company spends at least $5 million on reinvestment. “Every single year. We’re committed to it. And when we’re hit with all sorts of cost increases, from supply and labor expenses, we try not to pass it on to the guest.” Johnson points to the upcoming Thanksgiving movie week as a sign of hope. “Gladiator II,” “Wicked” (part one of two) and “Moana 2” are going up against each other, wielding three well-known titles people already know. The summer ’23 phenomenon of “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer” will never come this way again, at least in those particular shades of pink and fireball-orange. But Johnson says they proved that “you can have two big releases on the same day, and everybody wins.” NATO marketing materials issued last week under the title “Exhibition Outlook” feature a rosy 2025 forecast, with “no more quiet periods at the box office.” After ghosting movie theaters entirely in the first half of 2024 in favor of a needy streaming platform, “Disney roars back into theatres in Q1 2025 with ‘Captain America: Brave New World’ (February) and ‘Snow White’ (March). Q2 will see a major lift, with 10 titles expected to earn over $100 million at the box office, twice the number of films that hit the benchmark in 2024.” NATO’s tip sheet for later in 2025 cites “the relaunch of ‘Jurassic World,’ reboots of ‘Naked Gun’ and ‘I Know What You Did Last Summer,’ and a new musical from ‘South Park’ creators Matt Stone & Trey Parker.” And 2026 promises a drumbeat of franchise titles, including “The Super Mario Bros. 2,” “Avengers: Doomsday,” “The Mandalorian & Grogu,” “Toy Story 5,” “Shrek 5,” a live-action “Moana,” “The Batman: Part II,” “Fast X: Part 2” and “Lord of the Rings: The Hunt for Gollum.” With the production and release pipeline flowing faster now, theater owners have a reason to believe, Johnson says. And to reinvest. “Reinvestment, in any business, is the only way you’re going to move forward,” he says. A Variety story on that nationwide reinvestment in theaters ginned up a couple of examples of some attention-getting strategies, including adding adjacent pickleball and ziplining to some locations. The regional B&B Theatres chain, operating in 14 states, is trying both. I’m daydreaming about a way to turn matinee showings of “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice” into a nerd triathlon, interpolating both indoor pickleball and a zipline. Here’s my two cents about the theater chains’ $2.2 billion makeover in the making. I’ll single out AMC Theatres as an example because that’s where I see the majority of my mainstream movies. Related Articles Movies | ‘Wild Robot’ creators took story forward by looking back Movies | The trans ‘Will & Grace’ is here, and it’s a Netflix road movie starring Will Ferrell Movies | ‘Megalopolis’ review: Hate it or love it, Francis Ford Coppola’s movie swings for the fences only he can see Movies | ‘All Happy Families’ review: Disappointing men, wised-up women and a Chicago family’s growing pains Movies | In unusual numbers, we’ll be singing and dancing this fall — at least onscreen There are times when I enter an AMC venue and what I experience is not wonder. It’s more like “nothing in particular.” Acceptable. But not wondrous. With all the major chains still in the game, even when we don’t consciously notice the fraying this or the dingy that, or (worse) the incorrect and slightly too-dim projection bulbs being used to inadvertently cloud the brightness of the screen image, well … your brain does register the difference. Over time the experience loses something. And you subconsciously start considering other ways and other places to see a film, or do something else with your time. Theater ownership is a risky business with wildly unpredictable margins. Those margins depend to an important degree on the quality of the theatergoing experience. And that depends on reinvestment. The top item on my wish list, however, has nothing to do with reinvesting in where we see the movies. It’s about reinvesting in the movies. We need more, and I don’t care how many titles in my Netflix queue or my Apple TV morass remain unwatched. We need more in the theaters. The dominant studios and streaming companies, still nominally in the business of developing and making new work in between IP recycling projects, might reflect on the value of the medium-budget and low-budget picture. Lots of them, in fact. Far more than they’re currently making. Marvel is not going anywhere. DC is not going anywhere. “Shrek” is not going anywhere. But we need more, and more without that wearying reliance on worlds we’ve visited too often these last few years. We cannot undo Hollywood’s most conspicuous reason for being. We can complicate and reassess the current scenario, however. The quarterly stockholder blockbuster, whether it’s a Marvel or a DC or a “Star Wars” sequel, is a somewhat forlorn fact of life now. The business of theatrical moviemaking used to be scaled differently, for a different definition of profitability. Is it foolish to imagine getting back to that future? At present, meantime: a theatergoing upgrade or two can pay off, for all of us, if what’s on the screen — familiar or surprising, massive or intimate — lives up to its part of the bargain. Michael Phillips is a Tribune critic.