There was a short period of time in the late '90s when a few small groups of people had an idea for the future of cinema. With ever-advancing computer technology, the advent of digital moviemaking, and this newfangled internet thingy that had only recently risen to prominence, they thought the future of cinema was 360º photography - videocameras with lenses that could capture data from a complete 360º, leaving the viewer to decide what to watch, and when, by controlling the framing from a computer while the movie unfolded.
This was a very stupid idea. I remember downloading a 360º movie from either ifilm.com or atomfilms.com -- two pioneering websites for independent short film distribution, neither of which exists anymore -- and confirming what I'd already expected: this was not a good way to watch a movie. The camera just sits immersed in a scene, completely static, while things happen all around it. And somehow you, as the audience member, are supposed to know where the interesting thing is taking place. It was difficult to control and, in those days of ultraslow internet, took way too long to download.
Filmmakers are always looking for a way to draw the audience into a story, and get them to engage with what they're seeing. This was not the way to do it.
But every good technology has its place. For example, Google uses 360º cameras for their Street View app. But the first time I ever saw a smart use of a 360º camera was back in 2001, when Three Rivers Stadium was imploded. Now there's a situation where having the option to look in any direction at any time is going to be useful and interesting.
There was plenty of video to choose from on YouTube. Every news channel, of course, had an aerial view of the implosion. There were also long views. Here's a really good angle from Station Square with absolutely no interference.