Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Lost In Translation both in first run theatres AND on DVD...

This is topic Lost In Translation both in first run theatres AND on DVD... in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=001037

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 02-03-2004, 12:04 PM:

I'm curious to know what other film-tech-ers think and feel about Lost In Translation being released on DVD this week. I mean, it's still playing in all first run houses here in San Francisco and still drumming up decent business.

Will the DVD release hurt future box office receipts?

Are they trying to market to both the movie theatre crowd and the stay at home crowd at the same time? Is this something we're going to have to expect going forward?

Should they have waited until after the Oscars to release the DVD?

Posted by Christopher Seo (Member # 7) on 02-03-2004, 12:37 PM:

That sucks! We have actually been doing really good business with it these past few weeks. Well, just for that, I hope it doesn't win any Oscars, forcing Sofia Coppola to retreat into her father's shadow. [Big Grin]

Posted by Jonathan M. Crist (Member # 413) on 02-03-2004, 12:51 PM:

In Hollywood economics the video dollars now far surpass theatrical rentals. Look for more of this sort of thing to come.

Sony releases Mona Lisa Smile on video on March 9th - a little more than 2 1/2 months from its initial December 19th release date. [Frown]

Posted by Brad Allen (Member # 470) on 02-03-2004, 01:06 PM:

I may be all wet and I hope I am, but I have believed for sometime now that the film co's are working hard at training the consumers to wait for Dvd's. Since the time that DVD sales surpassed theatre gross's, I think the trend has increased.
Theatres today are simply another promotional tool for DVD, pay-per-view, etc. As HD tv's become more the norm, I'm afraid their plan will really start to work. As a new owner myself of a 60" HD Tv, I see first hand how this may happen. A DVD on HDTV puts most multiplexs to shame, at least the ones around here. Definitely a film in HD beats the pants off of all the local cinemas.
On the other hand, the planning for the DVD release obviously starts during production. Production is changed for the benefit of the DVD, and probably the release date for the DVD is set, before the film ever hits theatres.

You can see some of this trend working by very few films having any legs in theatres these days. Of course, it doesn't help that most films are total crap.

Hope I'm wrong, but I don't like the trend.

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 02-03-2004, 04:36 PM:

Our business on Lost in Translation has actually increased these past two weeks. We are holding it next week and we will see how it does.

I have always thought that films shouldn't come out on video for a year after initial release.

However I propose a new business model, since the film distributors are using the theatres as a promotional tool for the DVD release, how about we charge them for the privilege. I don't propose that we stop paying film rental, but how about a kickback based on how soon the film comes out on video. So Lost in Translation is coming out on video, the theatres still playing it should be compensated for lost revenue.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-03-2004, 08:01 PM:

"Lost in Translation" never made it to my town (like so many other indie films). So I plan to rent the DVD tonight, along with "American Splendor."

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-10-2004, 12:02 PM:

Make that First Run, Sub Run and DVD. In the Chicago suburbs you can see it for 8.75 or whatever the typical first run house charges or drive a few miles and catch it for two or three bucks.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 02-10-2004, 12:58 PM:

At what point will a lawsuit be filed against a distributor for this practice? Would it stand up in court?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-10-2004, 01:12 PM:

We've had it since it opened (and the print is still mint), though this might be the last week.

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 02-10-2004, 02:20 PM:

We are actually OPENING Lost in Translation this week. Figure that one out.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 02-10-2004, 05:26 PM:

quote:

Ian Price: Our business on Lost in Translation has actually increased these past two weeks. We are holding it next week and we will see how it does.

Last Wednesday (2/4) our evening show of Lost in Translation sold out hard. We had to turn people away. (850 seat house.)

The afternoon show sold about 300 seats. We usually only get a few dozen people at that time. The only reason we have an afternoon show is for the elderly crowd who don't want to go out late at night.

So... 1150 out of a possible 1700 (68%) isn't bad for a movie where the DVD is just hitting the shelves. No?

Posted by Jonathan M. Crist (Member # 413) on 02-10-2004, 06:14 PM:

As a second run operator I sometimes find that if I am playing a movie when the video is about to be released, it sometimes helps my theatre business if there is a large TV buy for the video release. And there has been a lot of TV ads recently for LIT.

Posted by Dick Vaughan (Member # 540) on 02-11-2004, 03:08 AM:

It only opened in the UK on Jan 9 and we opened with it last Friday. God I love these delayed overseas release dates [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 02-11-2004, 03:38 PM:

Yeah, I just realized this, too! My friend said he saw it, and I asked at what theaer. He said on DVD, so I thought he got a screener bootleg or something... no, he bought it at the store!! WTF?!?

I think it's a dumb idea, but then again I guess they want as many people to see it before oscars as possible and expanding the release weekly won't cut it.

Still, it's a slap in the face to exhibitors. "Thanks for booking our print, but we don't really need you anymore. Hope it does well at your theater." [Mad]

Ian has a great point about compensation. If they want to pull this crap, the 90/10 should flip flop so that EXHIBITORS get the 90. That will teach 'em!

Seems like all Bill Murray movies have had odd releases lately. Last I remember was Rushmore being delayed, then released limited, then expanded, then out of theaters, then back in to limited theaters, then added a few more screens, then out to video. I remember building it up on three different occasions at the 18 I was at.

So is this the "fastest-to-video" release we've had? Not counting videos that are later released to theaters like "Left Behind."

=TMP=

Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 02-11-2004, 06:04 PM:

Lost in Translation gross Tuesday, January 27 to Monday, Fabruary 2 $7,037. Before video release.

Lost in Translation gross Tuesday, February 3 to Monday, February 9 $4,178. After video release

Somebody owes me $3,000! [Mad]

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-11-2004, 10:46 PM:

At what point will a lawsuit be filed against a distributor for this practice? Would it stand up in court?

And the tort would be what?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 02-13-2004, 12:02 AM:

Our print of Lost in Translation (which we have had since 9/12/2003) left tonight and will be _opening_ tomorrow at another first-run theatre (at first run prices, no doubt). Amazing.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 02-13-2004, 02:12 PM:

I agree with Steve K.

I don't see how a lawsuit is appropriate.

A producer/distributor has the right to release the movie in whatever fashion is deemed appropriate.

Theatre operators have a certain degree of choice in the matter of whether or not to show certain movies.

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-13-2004, 07:18 PM:

Isn't it week by week (except maybe for those who just opened it)? And hasn't the impending DVD release been known for some time? So I don't see an issue.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-13-2004, 07:20 PM:

Having seen the movie first on DVD, I would now like to see it on film. The main reason is more image detail. I would like to see more image detail in a lot of the shots of the Tokyo cityscape. Lots of cool looking signs. And I would like to see more image detail in this shot (good graphical composition for the title card BTW):

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-14-2004, 02:17 PM:

For those who haven't seen LiT, that is the first thing you see after the Focus Features logo fades out. When I started doing press screenings back in August I was telling everyone

SOMEDAY ALL MOVIES WILL OPEN THIS WAY!

There is no other nudity in the film.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 02-14-2004, 05:17 PM:

Actually, there is one other point in the film showing off a bit of skin (a scene inside of a strange topless bar).

The nudity in "Lost In Translation" is easy to forgive. I consider this movie FAR MORE DECENT than most Hollywood releases. You don't have people blasting each with gunfights or committing acts of cruelty upon one another for the value of a sick joke. The main characters of this movie have good hearts and care about each other in a way more admirable than what we typically see in films (the typical thing being two pretty people screwing each other's brains out).

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-14-2004, 08:52 PM:

Quite right; I should have said no more from SJ.

Posted by Dean Kollet (Member # 1789) on 02-15-2004, 08:37 PM:

I don't know why....but the DVD has Dolby Digital AND DTS....our print only had Dolby and IMDB lists is as only having Dolby....why do they do that....all recievers that have DTS have Dolby...makes no sense...

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 02-15-2004, 09:17 PM:

Unless their policy has changed IMDb's information about feature motion pictures refers to the film version. The USA release (and probably elsewhere as well) is SR•D only.

While home Dolby Digital is pretty much the same as is used on film (just a different bit rate) home DTS has nothing to do with theatrical DTS except that they are put out by the same company.