|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Sony Hack Hits Home
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Buckley
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 525
From: Oxford, N. Canterbury, New Zealand
Registered: Aug 2004
|
posted 12-29-2014 03:18 AM
Quoting the bang-on-the-money Bobby:
quote: Bobby Henderson
If the movie studios release movies onto VOD and home video formats the same time they release the same movies in theaters ALL commercial movie theaters will go out of business. When they go out of business, the movie industry as we know it will go out of business.
As one might expect, there has been a bit of discussion on this on Reddit, and reading it there seems to be one fact that the people don't get.
The theory is that there are movies that one should see at the cinema because that is the only place to do them justice, example, Interstellar, and then there are other movies that the cinema experience brings nothing to the movie.
What folks in the wild seem incapable of understanding is that exhibition cant survive on the few percent of movies that are must-see-at-the-cinema movies. If exhibition is down to a fraction of what it does today, then there is no exhibition business. And VoD and streaming etc wont, as Bobby notes, bring in the bucks that are necessary to keep the production industry going as it is today.
This isn't the first time that VoD has been seen as the saviour of movies, and it wont be the last, but this "experiment" will have everyone that has been clammouring for day and date online release claiming that there was no impact on exhibition. This movie was the exception, not the rule, and if the production and distribution side of the movie business don't get that, well, the end for all is in sight.
This could end up being a very bad week in the history of cinema.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 12-29-2014 09:26 AM
quote: Lyle Romer
Finally, if they ever did go day and date with streaming on major releases, how long do you think it would be until the pirates hack the electronics of a player or TV to be able to record a pristine copy and distribute it no matter how encrypted it is? At some point, the actual picture information is available.
In case of The Interview (which did have to seem crappy DRM to start with), it took them how long exactly? About 6 hours I guess...
No widely deployed DRM scheme has ever survived in the field, yet some studios still seem to believe in magic. HDCP, AACS, you name it, none have survived.
It has been repeated over and over in this topic, but it's clear that the end of the theatrical release cycle the end of the exhibition business as we know it and will also be the end of Hollywood as we know it. Let this messed up release be a lesson and let's hope it sticks somewhere.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcel Birgelen
Film God
Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 12-29-2014 05:33 PM
The exhibition and movie industry are really in the same boat. In my opinion, there's no need for a fixed window between theatrical and video/streaming release. This release window could be entirely dynamic based on the movie's performance. No theater will want to hold on to a movie that isn't performing and there's really no need for the studios to keep pushing for bookings, as it will only block screens for newer, potentially more profitable releases. Sure, there should be sufficient time for a movie to build an audience, but why would you want to wait months for a movie that obviously failed?
The logistics for a video/streaming release are trivial and can be almost entirely dynamic. So if a movie fails in the theater, why bother if it gets pushed to video/streaming early? The other way around is equally true of course. If a movie keeps going strong or needs a little while to get a strong audience, why kill it via an early video/streaming release?
I think the piracy argument for an early release to video/streaming is nonsense. As long as the studios manage to keep their high quality "screeners" under wraps for once... Because those really WILL hurt your bottom line.
Also, the movie industry really shouldn't bother too much about those bootleg copies created with camcorders or other recording gear in the theater. Not that this should be in any way tolerable, but it's rather fighting a lost cause. Any big movie will get "cammed" somewhere around the globe and will make its way to the Internet almost immediately. But I'm entirely certain that almost *nobody* who really watches such dreck would ever pay for a ticket anyway. So while you may cry foul about how much gazillion dollars you're losing to those suckers, in the end you're not really losing anything.
Another great way of keeping piracy at bay and the release window between the theatrical and video release manageable is a quite simple one: Release your movies to theaters on the same day and date or at least in the same week globally... There is no more print availability excuse, the extra time it takes for localizations like subtitling and dubbing are also a weak excuse. Then there are potential conflicts with local releases, but those are also largely moot. If you know, as a local publisher, that a large studio is going to do a major release in a certain week that has a conflicting target audience, why would you even want to compete with this? So, those local productions will almost always be moved out of the way rather automatically.
Another positive side effect is that such a global release will potentially save you millions on extra marketing efforts. The world is a small place nowadays. When the news is filled with how bigshot movie #42 went into premiere in the U.S. but will only be available locally in a month or two, you're losing money...
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 12-29-2014 06:07 PM
quote: David Buckley
The theory is that there are movies that one should see at the cinema because that is the only place to do them justice, example, Interstellar, and then there are other movies that the cinema experience brings nothing to the movie.
What folks in the wild seem incapable of understanding is that exhibition cant survive on the few percent of movies that are must-see-at-the-cinema movies. If exhibition is down to a fraction of what it does today, then there is no exhibition business. And VoD and streaming etc wont, as Bobby notes, bring in the bucks that are necessary to keep the production industry going as it is today.
Those home only viewers are ignoring the financial realities with movie theaters due to their own selfish motivation to avoid spending money at movie theaters. It costs a lot of money to build & operate a modern movie theater. Most theaters don't have profit margins big enough to endure the big drop off in ticket sales certain to occur if customers can see the same movie at home for far less money.
Many, including some movie distribution company executives, have this odd faith commercial movie theaters will still attract enough customers to survive even if movies are released day and date in theaters and on home video formats at the same time.
Proponents of a day and date release model or a minimal theatrical window are not thinking about the drastic ripple effects that will spread from the failure of commercial movie theaters. Obviously, if there are no movie theaters the movie production business will shrink to a far smaller size, making movies far lower in budget and far less compelling to mainstream viewers and perhaps not compelling at all to international viewers. That's a whole lot of revenue gone. The pint sized studios would likely be swallowed up by TV networks and streaming services, with their brands and catalogs the only things of value left to buy.
The negative ripple effects wouldn't stop there. Any business that depends on Hollywood movies for a supply of content would be badly affected. The shake-up would spread to:
• Disc-based movie sales & rentals
• Download-based (VOD) movie sales & rentals
• Netflix & other movie streaming services
• HBO, Shotime & other premium cable channels
• Commercial-based cable channels that show movies
• Cable TV subscriptions (movies are a huge part of it)
• High Speed Broadband Internet (movie streaming)
• HDTV & Home Theater hardware sales
• Portable "media consumption" device sales
• Parts of the video game industry (games based on movies)
• Merchandising businesses (movies provide a lot of content)
• Advertising businesses (no more $100 million marketing campaigns)
The negative effects would alter other parts of the United States' economy, particularly this country's ability to project its own popular culture across the rest of the globe. That would negatively affect related industries like music and fashion. The movie industry does generate some serious technological innovation. Some of the beginnings of popular applications like Adobe Photoshop began in visual effects studios. A radically altered and diminished movie industry could reduce our nation's drive to innovate.
quote: David Buckley
If exhibition is down to a fraction of what it does today, then there is no exhibition business. And VoD and streaming etc wont, as Bobby notes, bring in the bucks that are necessary to keep the production industry going as it is today.
This is what would start the domino effect I described.
Allow me to expose a little bit of hypocrisy in people who watch movies only at home. There's lots of people who have by choice not set foot in a commercial movie theater in years. They have various reasons, some of which are valid, for making that choice. Yet, most of them still watch Hollywood movies. They still see VALUE in movies that were made to play in commercial movie theaters. And that's what they're going to prefer to watch. Some of these home only movie viewers have decent home theater systems. "Home theater" is based very much on duplicating at least some aspects of the theatrical movie going experience.
How much VALUE will the average viewer see in a 2 hour movie made only to watch on TV sets at home?
I'll repeat the guarantee that movie studios will never bankroll a $200 million production and $100 million marketing campaign for a movie that would only play on home TV sets. They'll radically shrink budgets and then take even fewer chances in storytelling that they're already not taking. The content would basically turn to shit and make binge watching a previous season of Duck Dynasty a more compelling alternative.
People know the difference between a real, legitimate movie that played in movie theaters versus something cheaper released direct to DVD or cable. The perceived differences in value are much greater in international markets, like China. Bigger explosions and more elaborate action set pieces do more to sell movies overseas than witty banter between characters. The latter demands too much fluency in American culture. Anyone can understand an epic car chase.
Cable TV programs have been getting better in terms of what some networks are doing with series like Game of Thrones or Justified. But networks like HBO, FX and AMC are still very dependent on Hollywood movie content as a revenue foundation. If we see big Hollywood movie productions disappear they might take a bunch of those big cable TV series right along with them.
quote: Brad Miller
Even at a 3 week delay, MOST movies people would be willing to just wait the 3 weeks for. As it is I can't tell you how many people I hear talking almost every day saying "it will be out on bluray in a few months and I'll watch it then".
I'll go one better: "I'll just wait until it's available on Netflix." There's a lot of people who have no problem waiting a few weeks more if they can watch the same show for a lot less money or even for virtually free as part of a streaming subscription.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
The exhibition and movie industry are really in the same boat. In my opinion, there's no need for a fixed window between theatrical and video/streaming release. This release window could be entirely dynamic based on the movie's performance. No theater will want to hold on to a movie that isn't performing and there's really no need for the studios to keep pushing for bookings, as it will only block screens for newer, potentially more profitable releases. Sure, there should be sufficient time for a movie to build an audience, but why would you want to wait months for a movie that obviously failed?
The problem is customer perception: how long do they think they'll have to wait to pay less to see the movie at home? It doesn't matter so much if a movie already failed financially at the box office. What counts is audience interest to see the movie when it first hits theater screens. If they think they won't have to wait long to see the same movie at home they'll be more than happy to wait and save a lot of money. Even an honestly good movie worthy of box office hit status could be stung by that.
IMHO, movie studios need to increase the length of the theatrical window, especially for their movies generating the most public interest. Getting the big event movie onto home video formats more quickly is only going to reduce theatrical box office performance. If the movie does well at theaters and is allowed a long enough window to have "legs" then it will sell through very well when it finally arrives on home video. If the movie studios do the opposite and rush the movie to home video then customers will happily wait very little time for it to appear on Netflix.
I can go along with releasing crappy movie titles onto home video quickly, but that needs to be done carefully so customers understand it is an exception and not a new normal.
quote: Marcel Birgelen
I think the piracy argument for an early release to video/streaming is nonsense. As long as the studios manage to keep their high quality "screeners" under wraps for once... Because those really WILL hurt your bottom line.
Agreed about the pre-release screener discs and other assets. If I was a studio executive I wouldn't even allow the screeners to be made at all. Anyone needing to see a certain movie prior to release would have to watch it in a screening room via a DCP or another digital master under tight wraps.
OTOH, it's clear people are cracking various kinds of VOD movie downloads/streams.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 17 pages: 1 2 3 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|
Home
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
.
Printer-friendly view of this topic