Listen, going to a movie is *going*.
As in, effort. Yes, money, but also time.
- You have to drive or take a train
- You have to stay out late if you're a working person
- You have to commit 1.5-2.5 hours
- You have to deal with significantly increased costs for the comforts of refreshments, even a simple drink if you get thirsty
- It's actually quite a pain in the ass
- And of course the ticket cost
With TV?
- "Can't find anything good to watch" means a waste of a few minutes at most
- There's no transit time or other significant preparation
- You can pause at any time and return; there is no set time commitment
- Food and drink = cheap
- You can multi-task with that time
- If you "abort" a show, you can immediately do something else, and you've not lost an investment of time, money, whatever
Basically, you're investing a lot (time, money, effort, lost convenience) to go see a movie. So you want to know if it's going to suck so that you're not stuck wasting all of that investment or having to sit through something you don't enjoy just so you *don't* waste all of that investment.
In combined costs if you have, say, a spouse and a kid and the kid gets thirsty or wants a snack, it's going to cost something like $50-$60 minimum, more if you have to pay to park, which is, like, half a year of Netflix.
People don't care about TV ratings but they do care about movie ratings for the same reason they don't bother to research pencils before they buy a 10-pack at the store but they do research fountain pens before they buy one. Anytime something costs an order of magnitude more, and involves significant additional investments beyond that, people are going to want value for money.
Make new releases $1.00 PPV and show them via streaming in living rooms and people will stop caring about reviews for movies, too.