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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Who Needs Theatres Anyway? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Who Needs Theatres Anyway? Thomas Dieter Expert Film Handler Posts: 234 From: Yakima, WA Registered: Jun 2004 posted 10-04-2005 10:39 PM                     Who Needs Theaters, Anyway? The major movie studios are stepping up their production of movies intended to go directly to the home video market, Home Media Retailing reported Monday. Universal Studios Home Entertainment president Craig Kornblau told the publication, "We have a $24 billion business that consumers absolutely love ... and yet there is very little content made only for this business." Many of the new features being produced for DVD release are being described as "franchises" -- essentially sequels to successful films. Last week, Universal launched "Universal DVD Originals" with Carlito's Way: Rise to Power, a sequel to 1993's Carlito's Way. On Dec. 27, the studio will release the DVD sequel American Pie: Band Camp, starring Eugene Levy. Sony plans to release Single White Female 2: The Psycho on Oct. 25 and 8MM2 on Nov. 22. New Line is planning sequels to 1994's 8 Seconds and last year's The Butterfly Effect. And Paramount Home Entertainment President Meagan Burrows told the publication that the studio is "in the process of developing a new [DVD] comedy label." Well, it looks like not only do studios want to put projectionists out of a job, but they also want to put the entire business out of exsistance. This is horrible. Granted, some of the movie that have been coming out are perfect for DVD release as they aren't even worth the time to thread them. But American Pie: Band Camp? That might just something the theatres need to keep bringing in money, and a sequeal to The Butterfly Effect? That would be awesome. Both were good movies in their own genre. Looks like theatres are going to test the stand of time once again as someone attempts to put them out.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-04-2005 11:22 PM                        Calm down dude. They are just doing what Disney has been doing (with success) for years: Putting out sequels that they know are inferior products on DVD rather than in theatres. This is not such a bad thing. I'd rather see movies that are nearly guaranteed to blow chunks go right to video -- it means we don't have to wast time on them. American Pie: Band Camp? And Eugene Levy is the main star? Come on. You know it's going to suck. It's like Police Academy VII. (What is it with Eugene Levy anyway? He's everywhere these days.) Butterfly Effect? It was a flop (well, at least, not much of a grosser.) It did better on video than in the theatres. So a video release makes sense. 8 Seconds? The people who want to see this piece of crap are always glued to TV screens anyway, so why bother with theatrical? And, it's guaranteed to suck too. And so on.  |  IP: Logged Shane Cooper Expert Film Handler Posts: 232 From: Little Rock, Arkansas Registered: Jun 2004 posted 10-05-2005 12:02 AM                     I agree that movies like this deserve to go straight to video. Carlito's Way: Rise to Power? I remember seeing a trailer for this in the theater earlier this year and laughed at all of the comments from others in the theater and Puff Daddy strutted through the trailer. I do have to disagree on Butterfly Effect being a flop or low grosser. 58 Million on a 13 million-dollar budget is pretty profitable. A sequel would be a hit for that January-April / August-October lull.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-05-2005 12:30 AM                        What the movie cost to make isn't the yardstick in this case...it's what it grossed. If it'd been an art film or a documentary, then 58 would be great, but this was a high profile, highly promoted film and Ashton Kutcher was a hot item at the time...58 million is a middling performer at best. They were hoping for much more, I'm sure.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 10-05-2005 12:42 AM                        We actually did quite well with it in a few locations. A lot better than some other crap that grossed twice as much.  |  IP: Logged Jesse Skeen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1517 From: Sacramento, CA Registered: Aug 2000 posted 10-05-2005 01:23 PM                     Well, porn's been straight-to-video for over 15 years now...  |  IP: Logged Joseph L. Kleiman Master Film Handler Posts: 380 From: Sacramento, CA Registered: Apr 2005 posted 10-05-2005 01:28 PM                     There's absoulutely nothing new about straight to video, lower budget sequels. It's been going on for well over a decade.  |  IP: Logged Paul Linfesty Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1383 From: Bakersfield, CA, USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 10-05-2005 03:28 PM                     Interestingly, they actually opened this "Carlito's Way" sequel as an "Exclusive Theatrical Engagement" in L.A. at a Landmark arthouse (Westside Pavilion) last Friday, several days after the video was released. this 4-plex normally shows the "artier" of arthouse pics, so the booking is doubly bizarre. Does this somehow give this release more "legitimacy"? I would have thought to do that, it should have opened at least before the video release.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 10-05-2005 06:14 PM                     Maybe they opened the show in that one theater so it could technically qualify for Oscar consideration (as if it will win any). The Oscars do have a problem nominating anything that plays on TV before it plays in any movie theaters. One of the most irritating examples of how that policy can be bad was their snubbing of Linda Fiorentino's performance in "The Last Seduction." Many critics cited her performance as clearly the best of that year. But the movie played on HBO before getting a limited release in theaters later that year.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 10-05-2005 08:33 PM                        Are direct-to-video movies even eligible for an Academy Award?  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 10-05-2005 08:40 PM                     Not if they play on TV first. There might be an exception in the documentary category. (off topic - but as of this writing, the Chicago White Sox just beat the Boston Red Sox in Game 2 of their ALCS Division Series. The White Sox now lead 2 games to none)  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 10-05-2005 11:31 PM                        But what if they are never broadcast, only existing on DVD and LaserDisc?  |  IP: Logged Michael Gonzalez Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 790 From: Grand Island , NE USA Registered: Sep 2000 posted 10-05-2005 11:39 PM                     quote: Mike Blakesley What the movie cost to make isn't the yardstick in this case...it's what it grossed. Which has always been stupid if you ask me. Right now any movie that grosses over 100 million, no matter what it costs to make and promote, is classified as a "Blockbuster". To me if a movie cost 200 million to make and only makes 100 million back, that movie is a bomb pure and simple. The yardstick SHOULD be cost vs gross. A real blockbuster should be any movie which more than doubles its cost. I would have no problem with a 5 million dollar art film being classified as a blockbuster for making 10 million in theaters.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 10-05-2005 11:44 PM                     quote: Joe Redifer But what if they are never broadcast, only existing on DVD and LaserDisc? I don't know. Maybe only "Chained Heat," the awesome women in prison movie, will exist on DVD (if it's on DVD at this point; it was on Showtime in the 1980's when I was in high school and I loved it) -and thus be nominated for "Best Tits of All Time in a Women In Prison Movie" category. Sybil Danning rocks, I tell you. Well, at least she rocked at that time. But the Academy feels unless it plays at LaMelle's (or whatever the art house du jour theater is in favor within Los Angeles) combined with them getting a VHS tape Fed-Ex-ed to them ('cuz lotsa Academy memberz probably haven't moved up to DVD yet) then IT DOES NOT QUALIFIEEEEEE!!!  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-05-2005 11:45 PM                        quote: Michael Gonzalez The yardstick SHOULD be cost vs gross. A real blockbuster should be any movie which more than doubles its cost. I agree with you. That's why I said, "in this case."  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

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.