my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Ground Level   » Skipping the movie theater altogether? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Skipping the movie theater altogether? Tom Petrov Five Guys Lover Posts: 1121 From: El Paso, TX Registered: Jan 2003 posted 11-08-2010 11:22 PM                    Wasn't sure if this was Ground Level or Afterlife as it really is in the middle. I don't see it ever getting off the ground. Skipping the movie theater altogether? The movie theater experience is not for everyone, but people who want to see a new film when is released generally have to make the trek to see it on the big screen. Now, though, Time Warner may be coming out with a service that will give premium video-on-demand to consumers, offering them the chance to see movies while they are in theaters in their very own home, according to Yahoo News. The catch? Although Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes did not discuss price points, industry reports indicate access to these "premium" films might run anywhere from $30 to $50 each. Studios have been trying to find ways to increase profits during a time when more people are getting their movies via services like Netflix. Giving moviegoers the opportunity to skip the theater and see the film in their own home may be just the trick. Studios' rationale is that the cost of premium video-on-demand films for home viewing will appeal to home movie watchers looking for family entertainment: although the cost might be prohibitive for a movie fan who wants to watch an art-house picture in the middle of the night, a family of four enjoying some rated-G or rated-PG fare in the comfort of their own living room might be getting off cheap. Movie theater tickets are now routinely $10 apiece: after parking and oh-so-expensive theater snacks, a high-prices video-on-demand version of a movie still in theaters might have a strong appeal. The service could launch by summer 2011. Link  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 11-08-2010 11:32 PM                        I usually skip the theater altogether by waiting for the Blu-ray release. I don't have (and hopefully will never have) cable TV, so video on demand isn't a good solution for me. Maybe if non-subscription services would offer it on demand it would be.  |  IP: Logged Tom Petrov Five Guys Lover Posts: 1121 From: El Paso, TX Registered: Jan 2003 posted 11-08-2010 11:37 PM                    quote: Joe Redifer I usually skip the theater altogether by waiting for the Blu-ray release. I don't have (and hopefully will never have) cable TV Really? I alway see movies in theatres. I almost see everything there is. 85% of the movies I will see. No kids movies and no stupid sequeled horror. I don't have cable tv. No need for it.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 11-08-2010 11:42 PM                        Unless I have direct control over the presentation quality of a theater I find myself getting annoyed at things like dirt, scratches (when watching film) and also something that is prevalent at the majority of theaters around here: Piss-poor EQ. There is one lazy-ass theater around here which puts their lights down cue at the BEGINNING of the attached trailer. This shouldn't annoy me, but it does. It's just crappy presentation in my book.  |  IP: Logged Don Furr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 509 From: Sun City, Ca USA Registered: Nov 2002 posted 11-09-2010 06:25 AM                     I'm with Joe on this. I'd pay $30-$35 in a heart beat for a BD delivered to my house on a new movie that I really want to see. All I need is a couple of neighbors to chip in and the ticket price really comes down. And by the time I sell them popcorn and a can drink the movie has cost me nothing!!! Yeah...I'm loving this idea.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-09-2010 11:11 AM                        Some clarification is necessary: - The $30 would not be for a BD; it would be for video-on-demand, therefore you need a cable or satellite connection (and hope you don't get any dropouts or interruptions). - The availability would be about 30 to 45 days after the theatrical release, not day and date. - Because it's VOD, as I understand it you'll just be able to watch it once. For the kids to be able to watch that Disney movie 300 times, you'll still need to wait for the DVD or BR. (Am I wrong on this? ) I think it will be a rocky road, because the big reason they're doing this is to recapture all the dollars people used to spend on DVDs. In reality, the studios will make even less money than they do now because the majority of people will still wait for the DVD/BR to come out so they can get it for a dollar at Redbox; and people like Don will invite 8 friends over to watch the movie on VOD, dropping the studio "take" per viewer dramatically. And, exhibitors will either demand a much-lower film rental or refuse outright to play a movie that's going to VOD in 30 days. "Marginal" movies will suffer, but hyped-up blockbusters will make a lot of money on weekend 1 and then drop like a hot rock.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 11-09-2010 01:34 PM                     I don't think this premium VOD thing is a good idea at all. It's not going to create any new revenue stream; it's just going to dilute the existing ones. It may hurt theatrical ticket sales and could even hurt video sales too. The only business I see gaining anything at all with premium VOD is home improvement/decorating businesses. You don't want your house looking like a pig sty to guests if you're going to have them over to chip in and watch a premium PPV show. I think any self-professed movie fan should see at least a few movies every year in commercial theaters to help support that side of the industry. Without the movie theaters most of the movie industry would implode on itself through a series sad yet fairly predictable events. With every movie made for TV the consequences for the industry could be really serious and spread to a lot more than just the movie industry itself. Think of how much broadcast and cable TV networks rely on showing Hollywood movies, typically major releases with big budgets and/or big stars, movies that played in movie theaters. They would have a hell of a programming void to fill. It would be particularly tricky to fill if every movie is "direct to DVD" (provided packaged media formats like DVD and Blu-ray even survived such a paradigm shift). TV networks are already in some considerable trouble as it is. DVR use is ruining some of the value of commercials to advertisers. Faster Internet connections and improved streaming could seriously harm the ad business for a lot of local TV stations. It takes a lot more than the ads sold during a local newscast to keep a small TV station financially afloat. Hollywood studio produced movies represent a big part of the United States' pop cultural identity to the rest of the world. It's part of how the United States and "the west" in general influences much of the rest of the world. If America's movie industry were reduced to a shadow of its former self then countries like China and India would have a big opportunity to exploit. With all of that being said, I don't go to the theater as often as I did several years ago. There's a variety of reasons for that. Disruptive audience members present the biggest problem. In the 1990s I drove to Dallas and Oklahoma City somewhat often to see movies at good theaters. It costs a lot more to do that now thanks to gasoline prices. Some of those good theaters in DFW were demolished. Finally, so many more of Hollywood's movies are sequels, re-makes and send-ups of TV shows. I have a hard time making the decision to drive across town to see that kind of fare, much less drive 100 or 200 miles. IMHO, Hollywood studios need to concentrate on two things: 1. Make better, more original movies, 2. Improve the movie-going experience in theaters. If studios would do more to concentrate on those two things they would improve their revenue on every release platform. A great movie going environment will make even a mediocre movie a little less mediocre and improve its chances for sale, rental or repeat viewing on TV.  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 11-09-2010 05:21 PM                     Stuff like most documentaries and small setting dramas will benefit from VOD when their name is still fresh. I see a lot of documentaries which I am thinking of watching but have no wish to trek to some small indie theater to watch. By the time it shows up on cable, I have forgotten about it. I subscribe to a lot of pay channels and they do such a crappy job of showing documentaries and small indie movies. And that includes IFC. Is there a reason it takes a year for a documentary to show up on tv? Stuff like comedy standup films and non-nature documentaries were good for the theater at one time. But now, they can benefit from being viewed at home as soon as they have gthe buzz.  |  IP: Logged Mitchell Dvoskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1869 From: West Milford, NJ, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 11-09-2010 06:34 PM                     It will not be successful at that price point. Further, it is going to be bootleggers heaven.  |  IP: Logged Mike Croaro Master Film Handler Posts: 394 From: Millbrae, CA Registered: Apr 2005 posted 11-09-2010 06:41 PM                     "...generally have to make the trek to see it on the big screen." I love the use of the word "trek" so as to imply that a simple drive to the movie theatre is a long arduos journey! Mike  |  IP: Logged Ky Boyd Hey I'm #23 Posts: 314 From: Santa Rosa, CA, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-09-2010 08:37 PM                       VOD is an interesting animal. Will it replace going to the theatre? For some yes? In the arthouse world we've been dealing with simultaneous release of films to theatres and via VOD from Magnolia, IFC, Strand and others for a couple of years now. Interestingly, it hasn't hurt the box office on these films and has in fact, in my opinion, enhanced the awareness of the films. Flawless with Demi Moore and Michael Caine enjoyed a highly successful theatrical run while on VOD as have other titles. But the arthouse world and its niche pictures are a totally different animal than the usual 2,000 to 3,500 screen saturation release from a Hollywood major. And price point matters. I believe, but again, I may be wrong, that the price point for the Magnolia, IFC and Strand titles is in the $12 to $15 range varying by cable system, etc. I still believe in seeing movies in movie theatres. There is something about sharing the common experience of watching a film in the dark with a group of strangers that cannot be duplicated in the home environment. Yes there are distractions in the theatre sometimes. Can we ever truly eliminate all of them? No. But the distractions in the home environment and the conveniences of stopping the flick for bathrooms, snacks, phone calls or whatever, change the experience. I believe this change is fundamental in its nature, but others will have differing opinions. As all forms of filmed entertainment (movies, tv, etc) become more cross platform and mobile, everyone in this industry must work to ensure that the movie going experience remains excellent for those who wish to consume movies that way.  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 11-09-2010 09:14 PM                     Does anyone really think the studios care if THEATRES stop making money? As long as THEY get THEIRS everything's cool. I'm generalizing here but I don't think today's movies are worth seeing in a theatre -- maybe I'd be more inclined if ticket prices weren't so damn high, and if presentations were better, and if audiences were better-behaved than they are today. So, nowadays...I watch TV at home. Or I watch an old movie at home. I'd go to the movies if I could see the movies I grew up watching. Now, about this $$$ VOD scheme -- I don't think so -- I'm not gonna pay $100+ per month for cable so I can then pay a ton of money (on top of that) to watch one stupid movie at home -- if I wanted to be overcharged, I'd just go to the movies... ...and where's all the concern about PIRACY!?  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 11-09-2010 11:39 PM                     I think art house theaters are a different animal. If they're not being seriously hurt by simultaneous VOD release there's a few possible reasons why. Some art house theaters capture the loyalty of a niche customer group. Certain indie film fans think they're doing some kind of small service to society by actively supporting movie theaters who show independent film. There's a certain overlap with people who like seeing revivals of classic movies in theaters. It's not going to matter so much to these people if the same movie is available to rent (at a possibly high price) on VOD. There's also the matter that many independent films don't have big marketing budgets. Chances are reasonably good many customers don't know the same movie is playing on VOD. They just know they went to the art house theater and this one show they never heard of looks interesting enough to see. I'd like to know how well some of the movies featured on HD Net Movies are doing in art house theaters. HD Net Movies often has "sneak preview" one-time showings of certain shows before they're made available to theaters. And they make the same movie available on VOD before the theaters get the show. The one time only thing is pretty funny. If I'm interested in watching the movie I just record it on my DVR and then watch it when I get around to it. That reminds me, I still haven't watched that movie Surveillance and I recorded that "sneak preview" off HD Net Movies several months ago!  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-10-2010 01:20 AM                        quote: Manny Knowles I'd go to the movies if I could see the movies I grew up watching. But that's one point of owning a movie on video. So you can watch an old favorite whenever you want. The movie theatre is the place to see NEW stuff. I will grant you that there are a lot of movies that aren't worth seeing. But this isn't exactly a new phenomenon. For proof, just go to our website and look at the show calendars (in the Pictures section). Pick a decade. Doesn't really matter what time frame you choose, in most months there's one, maybe two good ones, and the rest are pure crap. Just like today.  |  IP: Logged Mike Spaeth Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1129 From: Marietta, GA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 11-10-2010 12:21 PM                        Manny, Movie theatres haven't gotten more expensive. Since 1967, they've pretty much kept pace with inflation. In 1967, an average movie ticket was $1.20. Adjusted for inflation, this is a $7.63 ticket in 2009. In 2009, the average price for a movie ticket was $7.50. Seems pretty reasonable to me...  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.