Rory Fish

Gen Z is saving Cinema: So why is our industry still making movies for their parents? I was standing outside a multiplex in LA on a Friday night a while ago, early for a screening with a friend, doing the thing you do when you are early for a screening, which is loiter near the posters and pretend to check your phone. In front of the poster for the film I was about to see, a group of seven Gen Z kids were photographing each other. Not quickly. They were doing a proper shoot! Someone had brought a second outfit. One of them was directing the others into the right light. There was a running commentary being recorded for somebody’s story. The whole production took, I am not exaggerating, around twenty minutes. Then they went in, bought an embarrassing quantity of snacks, and I watched them file into the same screening I was about to sit in. What the fuck just happend here? I stood there with my lukewarm coffee, trying to fight off the jet lag, and had one of those small, slightly humiliating professional moments where you realise the industry you have spent a quarter of a century in has fundamentally changed underneath you while you were looking at some Chinese microdrama that super convincingly makes the case that theatrical is fucked. Because the obituary had already been written. You have read it. I have, in weaker moments, helped write it. Drumroll: Streaming killed the theatrical habit. Badum-tssss. The phone generation could not sit still for two hours in the dark. The cinema was a nineteenth-century technology, a thing nobody under thirty would pay fifteen bucks to experience when everything ever made was available on the device in their pocket before they had finished deciding what to watch. It was such a good story, so confidently told with the texture of something obviously true. It has also turned out to be almost entirely wrong, and the kids in front of the poster were the first clue I had been paying attention to that I did not yet understand. Here for those of you who don’t believe me: is what the numbers actually say. Gen Z cinema attendance grew twenty-five percent in 2025. Eighty-seven percent of them went to a theatre at least once in the past year, which is a higher share than any other generation, including the ones who grew up on theatrical as the default. Forty-one percent went six times or more. For comparison, only thirty-nine percent of adults over sixty-five went at all. IMAX hit 1.28 billion dollars globally, a forty percent jump, with Gen Z driving a disproportionate share of it. The generation raised entirely on streaming, on TikTok, on infinite frictionless on-demand content, is now the primary customer keeping the cinema alive? That requires an explanation that goes considerably deeper than “they just like movies.” And the explanation... is hidden in my most recent article on Substack https://lnkd.in/dWDptM8y

54

10 Comments

🚀 The latest edition of GDX IQ is live and we're breaking down how top brands, sports, and entertainment leaders are using next-gen technology to deepen engagement and unlock new audiences.

7

I’ve been thinking a lot this week about how film schools should approach AI. Not just how to teach the tools — but how to teach students to remain deeply human while using them. Having taught at University of Southern California and Cal State Long Beach's School(s) of Cinematic Arts, I’ve seen firsthand how quickly storytelling mediums evolve. Film became digital. Production became distributed. The web reshaped audiences entirely. AI feels like another one of those moments. And honestly, I don’t think the answer is pretending it isn’t happening. USC, in particular, has been expanding conversations around AI and storytelling recently through new initiatives exploring the future of media, generative tools, and creative workflows. That’s important. Because students entering the industry now won’t just need to know how to operate cameras or edit timelines. They’ll need to understand systems, workflows, ethics, authorship, collaboration, and how to maintain taste and point of view in a world where generation becomes easier and easier. Ironically, I think AI may make some of the most human creative skills even more important: Judgment. Empathy. Taste. Curiosity. Knowing what’s worth making in the first place. The schools that get this right won’t just produce people who know how to use AI. They’ll produce storytellers who know how to think with it without losing themselves in the process. Curious how others in education and media are approaching this moment.

9

The $55 billion leveraged buyout of Electronic Arts, led by Silver Lake, Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, and Affinity Partners, didn’t just make headlines as the largest leveraged buyout in history. It reframed a deeper question: Who are today’s entertainment companies really being built for? EA, home to legendary franchises like The Sims, FIFA, and Battlefield, has long been a pillar of gaming culture. But with rising development costs, shifting monetization models (from mobile to free-to-play), and the pressure of delivering quarterly returns, the public markets began to feel more like a constraint than a catalyst. Going private offers its new owners the freedom to reimagine EA without being boxed in by investor expectations. In my Private Equity course, we’ve been exploring how deals like this come together: who funds them, why certain companies become attractive targets, and how ownership changes can alter a company’s trajectory. Microsoft’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard in 2023 was a landmark moment for gaming’s value. However, what stands out here is the long-term vision: EA isn’t just being flipped for financial gain, as it’s being repositioned for global growth, backed by sovereign wealth and patient capital. The deal also speaks to the globalization of entertainment financing. Gaming, like music and film, is no longer a regional product; it has become a global cultural export. Sovereign wealth funds and cross-border investors are shaping the creative industries at a massive scale, signaling that capital is not just chasing growth but shaping the future of entertainment itself. EA's change also ties directly into the work I'm doing in my TRF Capstone, where I'm learning how to mold creative ideas into scalable businesses. EA’s next chapter raises the same questions we ask when launching entertainment ventures: How do you preserve identity while scaling? Will EA double down on live-service models, invest in AI-driven development, or rethink how it engages creators and fans? As someone interested in the intersection of media, tech, and finance, this moment is exciting. EA’s transformation reminds us that entertainment companies aren’t static; they evolve with the capital structures, partnerships, and strategic vision backing them. Whether in gaming, film, or music, the ability to adapt creatively and operationally is what defines success in today’s fast-changing landscape. #EntertainmentBusiness #StrategicThinking #MediaTechFinance Hamilton Atelier

36

1 Comment

Insightful piece from Lawrence Peryer worth reading. He breaks down the various categories of companies in ticketing and more importantly asks pertinent questions about potential solutions. "Though the industry and consumers have not caught up to it yet, these taxonomies have broken down and become less relevant. For example: Primary ticketing companies often have their own secondary marketplaces or fan exchanges. Sometimes these are in conjunction with their clients as revenue participants, sometimes not Oftentimes secondary ticketers are getting tickets directly from the events (increasingly facilitated by technology integrations with primaries), which makes them distributors of primary tickets, not aftermarket resellers Most exchange platforms also have marketplaces where fans can buy and sell tickets to events beyond just the ones the platform is partnered with. Who is what in this new world and what are we supposed to be asking for in regulation?"

19

2 Comments

In 2013, Tyrone Jue, Communications Director for the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, was tasked with something most people would quietly dread. The city needed public support for a $2.7 billion sewer overhaul. Hundreds of miles of aging pipes were deteriorating beneath San Francisco. Facilities weren’t seismically stable. It was critical infrastructure, but completely invisible to the people paying for it. And that was the problem. How do you get people to care about something they never see? The expected approach would have been straightforward. Formal messaging. Educational campaigns. Maybe a town hall or two. The kind of communication people tend to tune out before it even begins. Instead, they did something different. They put humor on the backs of city buses. “Your #2 Is My #1.” “No One Deals With More Crap Than I Do.” “You Can’t Live a Day Without Me.” It worked. People noticed. They took photos. They shared it. Conversations started happening in a way they hadn’t before. Even tours of a wastewater facility filled up, with hundreds of people signing up out of genuine curiosity. That doesn’t happen because people suddenly care deeply about sewer systems. It happens because something finally made them pay attention. Jue later said they knew a traditional PSA wouldn’t resonate. So they stopped trying to sound official and started trying to sound human. That’s the shift. Humor didn’t take away from the seriousness of the issue. It made people open the door to it. And that’s what I see again and again in organizations. When we loosen the grip on sounding polished and perfect, we make space for something better. Real connection. Real attention. Real engagement. Sometimes the fastest way to be taken seriously is to stop taking yourself so seriously. #HumorConnects

9

3 Comments

There’s a conversation worth having around California’s updated production tax credit and who continues to be left out. Reality and unscripted television remain excluded (with the exception of competition shows), despite being one of California’s most productive, scalable, and culturally influential sectors. At a time when producers are navigating shrinking license fees, shorter episode orders, and tighter margins, the ongoing omission of this entire category raises real questions about the long-term viability of keeping these productions in-state. Reality television has been a foundational part of California’s production economy for decades. These shows generate thousands of jobs, support local vendors, keep post facilities running, and increasingly require the same physical infrastructure as scripted content. They might look different with faster schedules, leaner teams, and alternative storytelling structures but they are no less real in terms of economic impact. Still, they continue to sit outside the framework of the tax credit. There are real complexities here. California’s employment laws, particularly around independent contractors and participant treatment, have created significant litigation risk. And while many of us support strong labor protections, it’s also true that the cost of unionizing reality productions, especially under today’s economics, often tips a show from feasible to unmakeable. It’s not about resisting unionization or avoiding fair pay. In many cases, the math simply doesn’t work. When license fees are reduced, episode counts are down, and timelines are compressed, the margins disappear and producers are left choosing between moving production out of state or not producing the show at all. This isn’t an argument for a workaround (although I could make one—but not here). But maybe it’s time to consider whether there’s room for a variance a thoughtful policy mechanism that: ·  Acknowledges the real jobs, vendors, and infrastructure unscripted television and streaming support ·  Incentivizes producers to keep these productions in California ·  Supports sustainable production work Earlier this week, my partner Mitchell Federer asked me to look at our current slate and see which shows were actually being made in California. The answer was… very few. And that’s not a choice producers are eager to make—it’s one we’re often forced into by the current structure. This isn’t a complaint, and it’s not a demand. It’s an invitation to broaden the conversation with the hopes this new offering to producers will be expanded. The industry has evolved. So should the policy frameworks that support it. If we want to keep this sector and the thousands of Californians it employs from slipping away, we need to be open to new models that reflect how content is actually made today. Would love to hear how others in the creative, policy, and production communities are thinking about this. What am I not seeing?

20

1 Comment

I had a hunch about a mistake young people make early in their careers so I decided to look at the data. It's common to take a job and then about two years in, the lure of more money or title, or even just the sense of opportunity, folks jump to a new job. So I went through a lot of Linked In profiles and followed a bunch of young people who did that. And what I found (and it's hard to do this statistically so this is a mix of anecdotal and analysis) was that in general, jumping at opportunities every two year proved to be LESS effective to career growth. For the most part, it's an illusion. There are exceptions of course and also good reasons - but exceptions aside, why is this? It has less to do with loyalty and more to do as follows - it takes about two years for someone to get really good at their job. That's the time it really takes to absorb an organizational culture, build internal and external relationships and figure out what works. At that critical moment, the people who stay now have a super power. And they start to accelerate and get promoted at a faster rate. And then people who jump ship for a company in a similar field or similar job go all the way back to the beginning of the line at a new company. Now they have to spend two more years to get that super power. So at the end of four years in one place, the right person with the right ambition has had the opportunity to really grow their career and their portfolio of responsibility. Trust and relationships is a huge part of it. And the job hopper maybe they got a quick raise but often times they've hopped again. This has been documented in Boris Groysberg’s “portability of stars” research, which finds that when high-performing people move, performance often drops because a big chunk of “talent” is actually embedded in the old firm’s systems, colleagues, client access, and platform. The study was (Groysberg, Lee, & Nanda (2008), Management Science — “Can They Take It With Them? The Portability of Star Knowledge Workers’ Performance.”) What it found in plain English was that stars who switch employers see an immediate performance drop, and it persists for ~5 years. The decline is worst when they move to firms with “lesser capabilities.” There are a lot of good reasons to switch jobs (look at my own career). If you are in a dead end job, have a bad boss, or want to change careers for example, that makes a lot of sense. But when a recruiter calls at the two year mark, for more money, and you're probably less than ten years into your career, I am seeing that that very often does not pay off. Just at that moment when you're able to make a difference internally after investing time and building trust, you chase short term money. I hope this helps people make decisions, because the career trajectory aspect is way more nuanced and way more impactful oftentimes.

124

23 Comments

Like Evan Shapīro, I'm also a fan of Roku's prediction that "the ad-free viewer will go extinct." Maybe it's because our insights team created it! Back in 2020, this seemed like a pipedream, as CTV was touted as a haven for those seeking ad-free subscriptions. But in 2026, ad tiers abound, and every TV streamer will be reachable by video ads. Full report here -> https://lnkd.in/eJCn-Vyg

10

2 Comments

FANS IN THE FAST LANE One BIG sign that Mainstream Media & the Creator Economy are merging: Creators are on TV everywhere! Sarah (Warner) Harms from Roku talks here about why Creators are doing SO WELL on Roku: 👨🏻‍🎨 Creator content on the Roku Channel is up 78% YoY. 👨🏻‍🎨 In 4Q, in some or large part due to a BIGLY Creator push by all of them - as a group FAST BEAT Netflix for total share of TV in the US for the first time. Netflix and YouTube may be focused on each other, but if they’re not careful, (today’s hot take) the FAST channels could overtake them both! This interview is part of a new series I co-produced with Roku Advertising - where Sarah, Alan Wolk of TVREV, and Michele Donati from Horizon Media all weigh in about the big things that will shape media in 2026. Wanna know what they said‽ Click around and find out! https://lnkd.in/g7SWWgUr

114

18 Comments

Post-layoff efficiency isn’t about doing more with less: it’s about doing the *right* things with the *right* people. In a world where studios are operating with leaner teams, every single hire becomes strategically critical. There is zero margin for a 'miss.' This is where 'Surgical Recruitment' comes in. We don't just fill seats; we find the force multipliers who can carry the weight of a leaner, faster organization. If your team is lean, your recruitment needs to be precise. #GamingRecruitment #GameDev #Leadership #SurgicalRecruitment #GameRecruiter

1

🗣️ When the interviewer isn’t human… I posted a little while back about having gone through an AI-led voice interview - and it was, honestly, unsettling. No follow-up questions. No acknowledgement. Just a perfectly modulated voice reading a script and waiting for my response. As someone who’s spent years in Talent Acquisition, I couldn’t help analyzing it as it happened. Was the system capturing keywords? Tone? Pauses? Or just ticking boxes? This week I saw that Phenom launched a new “Conversational Voice Screening Agent”; a tool that supposedly adapts its questions and tone based on the type of role being hired. In a pilot, it helped reduce time-to-hire by about a day and boosted candidate engagement. Impressive metrics, but it raised a bigger question for me. (https://lnkd.in/dcdcPtGX) Efficiency is easy to measure. Empathy isn’t. And while automation helps eliminate repetitive tasks - sourcing, scheduling, initial screening, I’m not convinced we should let it replace human warmth in those early moments. In markets like the UAE and GCC, where multilingual hiring and personal connection are so vital, the risk is that candidates start to feel like they’re talking at the process rather than being part of it. AI in recruitment is here to stay. The question is how we design it; as a wall between candidates and recruiters, or as a bridge that makes every human interaction more meaningful. 💬 Have you ever done an AI interview yourself? What stood out - efficiency or emptiness (or something else)? #TalentAcquisition #AIinRecruitment #CandidateExperience #FutureOfWork #RecruitmentTechnology #EmployerBrand

4

1 Comment

Transparency is one of the most underrated qualities a team can have. Been thinking about it a lot this week, and very grateful for every person I've worked with who practices it without being asked.

18

Actors spend hundreds on headshots before they know what those headshots need to say. That's the wrong order. A casting director looking for a specific quality will forgive rough materials if they can see what they need. A casting director wading through hundreds of submissions for a generic role will cut you for an outdated headshot without a second thought. The threshold shifts depending on what they're looking for. Most actors invest in polish before they've done the harder work of understanding their own type. The materials end up looking professional but saying nothing specific. And in a crowded field, that's worse than rough materials that say exactly the right thing. The article (link in comments) explains how the specificity spectrum works and what it means for where you put your time and money:

29

10 Comments

What happens when the "Big Moment" arrives and it changes nothing? In "Los Samaritanos", Denver faces Hot Shot—a man of "Old Wealth" who represents everything Denver thinks he wants. But after two decades of waiting for a breakthrough, Denver realizes that the "moment" he’s been chasing is hollow. THE STATEMENT: "I’ve waited over 20 years for this moment. And after 20 years, it’s worse than I imagined. This changes nothing." We spend our careers building toward a specific "Architecture of Success"—a promotion, a title, a financial milestone. But if we aren't careful, we arrive at that destination only to find it doesn't solve the internal hunger. True leadership isn't just about reaching the goal; it's about making sure the goal is actually worth the 20-year wait. Sometimes, the "victory" is realizing that the change you need can't be bought with a Cadillac or a new zip code. Fragment by: Sandra Daley-Sharif (@SandraDaley) Visuals: Denver and Hot Shot / The Arizona Storm Have you ever reached a long-term goal only to realize it didn't change the things that mattered? How do you pivot when the "Dream" doesn't match the reality? #TheDaleyFragments #SuccessRealities #LeadershipGrowth #LosSamaritanos #Pivoting #InternalSuccess #TheArchitectureOfSuccess #ArizonaThunder

1

A hopeful sign that feature films may soon return to California in greater numbers. According to the ProdPro Report on Active Development, there are 95 titles in active development or preproduction in California for the first half of 2025, with budgets over $10 million. This is presented as "more than New York, Georgia and New Mexico combined,” signaling a strong pipeline. Note, California also just had the 1st application window for TV earlier this month, and with animation, competition shows, and TV/Less than 30 minutes now qualified, we should expect even more production in California in the next 6 to 12 months. Entertainment Partners California Film Commission FilmLA California Production Coalition ProdPro https://lnkd.in/gJf8W7fe

50

4 Comments

Hello Friends and Colleagues, I know many incredibly talented people are navigating career transitions right now. As the weeks turn into months, I also know how easy it is for patience and hope to wear thin. I’m right there with you. While the market is undeniably challenging, I don't believe we should have to face it alone. Our collective experiences are our greatest assets, and we’re often more resilient when we’re part of a pack. If you’re looking for a partner in this transition, my DMs are open. I’m happy to: • Be a soundboard: Brainstorm your next move or vet new ideas. • Review & Refine: Provide a fresh set of eyes on your resume or portfolio. • Talk Tech: Swap tips on AI fluency and how to leverage new tools in your workflow. • Share Intelligence: Exchange insights on what we’re seeing and hearing in the current landscape. • Just Listen: Sometimes, you just need to talk to someone who truly "gets it." Let’s be partners in this. Feel free to reach out—I’d love to connect and support each other. #Networking #CareerTransition #Community #AIFluency #JobSearch

169

21 Comments

The Joystick Philosophy: Why I Started Treating My Career Like a PS2 Mission Growing up, the stakes felt absolute. Whether it was navigating the Star Wars Trilogies on my PS2 or surviving a legendary run of Halo on the Xbox 360, the mission was the only thing that mattered. My cousins and I would trade controllers, perfecting every frame and every move from sunrise until the early hours of the morning. We didn’t call it "professional development" back then. We called it winning. But somewhere along the road to adulthood, many of us lost that iterative spark. We replaced "mission-oriented" drive with "task-oriented" survival. We began to view friction as a deterrent rather than a level-up mechanic. Recently, I’ve decided to reclaim that controller. I’ve begun treating my work through the lens of those early gaming marathons. This isn't about "gamification" in the cheap sense; it’s about a fundamental shift in perspective: 1. Skill Sharpening: Every difficult meeting or complex strategy is just a boss battle designed to reveal a weakness in my current build. 2. Building Resistance: Just as we pushed to see how long we could survive "Legendary" mode, I now view high-pressure seasons as training for professional endurance. 3. The Craving for the Next Level: Iteration isn't a chore; it’s the only way to unlock the next map. Studies in neurobiology suggest that this "flow state"—the one we accessed so easily as children—is actually triggered by a specific balance of challenge and skill. When we view work as a series of missions rather than a mountain of obligations, our capacity for "high-friction" effort scales exponentially. The drive didn't disappear. It just got buried under the weight of being "serious." I’m curious—when was the last time you approached a professional hurdle with the same relentless iteration you used to give your favorite game? How do you view the "levels" of your life and work?

6