Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: UK cinemas threaten Alice in Wonderland boycott

This is topic UK cinemas threaten Alice in Wonderland boycott 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=002320

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 02-11-2010, 05:22 PM:

With the window for DVD release ever shrinking, some folks are ready to do something about it.

According to an article here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/feb/11/disney-alice-in-wonderland-burton

"UK cinema chains may boycott Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland
A dispute with Disney over the release window could see Alice in Wonderland barred from Odeon, Vue and Cineworld screens
Adam Dawtrey
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 11 February 2010 14.52 GMT

The UK's biggest cinema chains are set to boycott Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, due out on 5 March, because of a dispute with Disney over the release window.

Disney wants to cut the gap between the theatrical opening and the DVD release to just 12 weeks, down from the standard 17 weeks. The big exhibitors refuse to book any film that doesn't have a guaranteed four-month theatrical run.
If neither side climbs down, the 3D film will not play at any Odeon, Vue or Cineworld site across the country, representing 95% of the UK's 3D screens.
That means Disney would forfeit a substantial amount of the film's projected £40m UK box-office gross. It will be tricky for the studio to explain that to Burton, who lives in London and shot Alice In Wonderland largely in Devon and Cornwall.
The film stars Johnny Depp, Mia Wasikowska and a largely British supporting cast, including Helena Bonham Carter, Matt Lucas, Stephen Fry, Michael Sheen, Alan Rickman, Christopher Lee and Barbara Windsor.
However, Disney said the royal charity premiere at the Odeon Leicester Square will go ahead regardless, because that isn't a commercial booking.
The studio previously attempted to shorten the theatrical run of Up in order to release the DVD before Christmas, but changed its mind after the exhibitors threatened to pull A Christmas Carol from their screens in retaliation.
This time, however, Disney has given the exhibitors advance warning of its intentions. A studio source described the 12-week deal as a "take it or leave it" proposition that is not up for negotiation.
Disney's distribution chiefs, Chuck Viane and Bob Chapek, have flown in from Hollywood to talk to British exhibitors over the next couple of days. But sources say the studio is not offering more favourable revenue-sharing terms to tempt them to accept the shorter window.
Odeon and Vue have already pulled all trailers and promotional materials for Alice in Wonderland from their cinemas, and have stopped selling advance tickets. Cineworld, as a public company, is taking a more cautious line and is still promoting Alice in Wonderland on its website, but is understood to be equally robust in its rejection of the shorter window.
Disney is also cutting the theatrical run for Alice in Wonderland in the US and Italy, where most exhibitors look likely to accept the studio's terms.
This is part of a global strategy by Disney CEO Bob Iger to shorten some of its theatrical releases, in a bid to maximise its home entertainment revenues, combat piracy and minimise its marketing costs.
The studio says that films take 97% of their box office in the first eight weeks of release, after which they largely disappear from cinemas. It argues that making consumers wait another two months before they can buy the DVD legitimately just presents the pirates with an "exclusive window."
Exhibitors counter that bringing forward the DVD release will reduce the audience appetite to see films on the big screen, which could lead to cinema closures, particularly in smaller towns.
Disney is using this summer's football World Cup as its pretext for cutting short Alice's theatrical run. It argues that audiences won't go to the cinema during the World Cup in their usual numbers, so it makes sense to pull Alice in Wonderland early.
But UK exhibitors argue that a family film such as Alice in Wonderland is less threatened by the World Cup than other titles."

WOW!!!
[Eek!]

Could you ever see NATO taking such a stand??

This will be interesting to see how it all plays out. Who will blink first?

Posted by Jonathan M. Crist (Member # 413) on 02-12-2010, 09:34 AM:

Never happen in the US. Theatre owners here have no cojones. They are so afraid of losing even one lousy dollar that they just get out the tube of lube and bend over anytime the studios say so.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-12-2010, 10:07 AM:

quote: John T. Hendrickson, Jr
Could you ever see NATO taking such a stand??

LOL! NATO would probably find a way to praise the studios for having such a short window.

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 02-12-2010, 11:52 AM:

Something similar happened in Spain a long time ago when Buenavista wanted to play hardball with the cut in some Christmas film. In retaliation, >60% of screens in Spain didn't play another summer Buena Vista comedy (one of those "scary movie" types).

Plus took them to court.

Disney lost. Of course.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-12-2010, 12:19 PM:

There is talk that Disney might "throw a bone" to exhibition in the form of a lower film rent. Of course this is just another way they are going to screw the smaller places that don't play the film on the break. Apparently digital cinema isn't putting us out of business fast enough for them.

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 02-12-2010, 03:11 PM:

There are a few points here that really worry me.

The main one is that Disney are showing their opinion of exhibitors by wanting to shorten the [dlp]

window. When won't the studios realise that a boffo boxoffice release multiplies the "must have" dvd factor manyfold.

So Disney are willing to shorten the release run on "Alice" anyway? That's nice of them.

If I was Tim Burton I'd be spitting chips and rip Disney a new A-hole regarding the way they are treating his work. This shows contempt not only for the artists involved but also the Cinema industry as a whole.

But the REAL concern I have is that the bone that Disney are willing to throw the exhibs will end up the butts of the cinema operators.

All this comes down to is the studios consider all form of theatrical exhibition as a liability and a drain on studio profits. Why give exhibs a cut when the studios can grab a higher % of the take via early [dlp]

release?

..and this is where the crunch will come. If even ONE studio gets their way with early windows then we can kiss goodbye any influence theatrical release will have on release policy, because then there will be little financial reason to release theatrically and it will give unfounded credence to their arguments.

So they use piracy as reasoning for early [dlp]

windows, eh?

Well, listen to this studios- Get it into your heads that it is the screeners and pre-release copies that are the root of your piracy problem-NOT theatrical exhibition.

Oh, and one more thing- I don't see Fox bitching about theatrical takings. Quite the opposite. How often has Avatar's boxoffice takings been used as promotion?
Answer: Every [sex]

ing day Fox advertise the boxoffice takings have been masterfully using this as a prime advertising tool.

Are Fox bitching about piracy as the B.O takings climb skyward even though every torrent site has Avatar available for download?

Mike may well have this nailed.

The so-called Industry-Saving Digi rollout hasn't killed off exhibs quickly enough, so let's screw them from other side.
This is a pathetically greedy aspect of the Movie industry that rivals Sony's pox-ridden attempt to give exhibs a cost reduction on [dlp]

gear if they have pictorial evidence of destroyed 35mm equipment.

[fu]

Sony.

Many public opinion polls rate politicians, reporters and used car dealers as the most despised occupations around.

Might just add Studio Executive to that list.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 02-12-2010, 03:51 PM:

quote:
The main one is that Disney are showing their opinion of exhibitors by wanting to shorten the [dlp] window. When won't the studios realise that a boffo boxoffice release multiplies the "must have" dvd factor manyfold.

:

All this comes down to is the studios consider all form of theatrical exhibition as a liability and a drain on studio profits. Why give exhibs a cut when the studios can grab a higher % of the take via early [dlp] release?

..and this is where the crunch will come. If even ONE studio gets their way with early windows then we can kiss goodbye any influence theatrical release will have on release policy, because then there will be little financial reason to release theatrically and it will give unfounded credence to their arguments.

I'm not following this logic.

If a long and successful theatrical window really does benefit the home video release that much, then shortening the window too greatly will end up hurting the overall revenue, and the window will lengthen on future releases until it reaches a balancing point.

I can understand why theaters resist shortening the release window any amount, but I don't agree with the reasoning you put forth.

Marketing rules dictate that you get the most effect from any efforts put forth by keeping the brand current in the minds of the audience. After the first week or two of release, most marketing is done for the movie, and then it becomes a long wait for the home video release to do more marketing. If the second release comes faster, that marketing effort can benefit from the first (theatrical) release more greatly. Wait too long, and you have to re-establish everything all over again.

If the shorter window results in more successful home video releases, it will lend credence to the very valid belief that the shorter window was a good idea.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-12-2010, 05:12 PM:

quote: Scott Jentsch
If a long and successful theatrical window really does benefit the home video release that much, then shortening the window too greatly will end up hurting the overall revenue, and the window will lengthen on future releases until it reaches a balancing point.

That's correct, and that's just what happened over the past few years. The theatrical-to-DVD window has been hovering in that 16-week area for about 3 years now. That's still too soon, but doable for all except maybe the sub-sub-sub-run locations.

So now here comes Disney wanting to drop it to about 12 weeks "on one or two pictures a year." (Meaning their super-blockbusters, probably.) This is supposed to allow them to move the DVD release into a season where sales are better -- in the case of Alice, it puts the DVD release into the early summer, rather than mid-summer when sales are slower due to people having less TV time.

This is just the start of a slippery slope. We all know Alice is going to do great out of the box. So they'll have their 200 million or whatever gross. Then the DVD will sell well, due to the better season of release. So it's only a matter of time until they start moving more of their DVD release dates into that 12-week time frame "since the Alice experiment was so successful."

Posted by David Zylstra (Member # 4230) on 02-12-2010, 06:20 PM:

quote: Jonathan M. Crist
Theatre owners here have no cojones

Well, most theatre owners don't - problem is that if there was a boycott in the US there might be too many exhibitors willing to book the film and get all the business the boycotters would miss.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-12-2010, 07:24 PM:

Disney and the others are trying these various new tactics so they can move more DVDs and Blu-Rays. They are concerned that DVD sales have dropped around 15% in the last year. Why can't these people see what the real cause is? I don't have a degree in marketing and I'm just a little piddly small town theatre owner, but I can describe the cause of the DVD sales drop in just two words:

Netflix

Redbox

Why can't these people making millions of dollars a year see that? [Confused]

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 02-12-2010, 07:41 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
Why can't these people making millions of dollars a year see that?

Because its too simple of an explanation and they get paid millions of dollars to solve complex problems (so they think).

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 02-13-2010, 05:23 AM:

quote: Scott Jentsch
If the shorter window results in more successful home video releases, it will lend credence to the very valid belief that the shorter window was a good idea.

Thats my point. The shorter window WILL be a good idea if you are a studio looking to cut on expenses and percentages for exhibitors. This will be at the expense of theatrical exhibition boxoffice receipts which is a nonsensical approach as the Avatar example indicates.

My point is that [dlp]

needs good theatrical pre-publicity in order for the comsumer to weed out the shit from the shinola - and by it's nature, a shorter window will reduce theatrical takings substantially.

To pracie -

Big boxoffice (standard window long run) = high publicity and high percentages for exhibitors AND high video grosses.

Low boxoffice (shortened window short run) = lower percentages for exhibitors and high video grosses due to fresher product identification.

This is my take on it. I may be way off the mark though.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 02-13-2010, 08:55 AM:

Maybe Disney thinks Alice will tank. They've seen it; we haven't. Louis

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 02-13-2010, 02:10 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
but I can describe the cause of the DVD sales drop in just two words

I can sum it up in one word:

Economy

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-13-2010, 04:03 PM:

DVD sales were going down before the economy tanked. Besides, they are cheap enough that if it wasn't for Redbox and Netflix (and iTunes and other download services to an extent), I think sales would still be about where they were.

Posted by John T. Hendrickson, Jr (Member # 849) on 02-13-2010, 06:56 PM:

Don't the studios always do what's best for the studios, and [sex]

the exhibitors?

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-14-2010, 01:48 PM:

I don't know why they don't just release a movie day and date on video and get it over with. You know that's what they're leading up to anyway.

Posted by John Eickhof (Member # 323) on 02-14-2010, 02:07 PM:

Ya know Mike, that wouldn't be a bad idea! at least some of the smaller venues could purchase high end consumer video projectors then run the feature off DVD or BluRay and the hell with the distributors! It would be entertaining to see the FBI trying to cite and prosecute several thousand thatre owners!! Another waste of our tax dollars!!!

Posted by Ian Parfrey (Member # 5122) on 02-14-2010, 02:44 PM:

Got it in one.

The exhibition chain is a pain in the studios arses, and if they can short circuit any expensive profit drain on their bottom dollar, they will. This is the studios ultimate aim but it has one major flaw-: Theatrical exhibition is used by the movie goer as a bullshit detector. If a movie tanks at the cinema, it most likely will do so as well on dvd release.

The two methods of distribution are not mutually exclusive- they feed and support each other but with a major difference... theatrical exhibition does not need [dlp]

as a crutch and can operate independently, whereas [dlp]

gets the lions share of the benefit from a successful theatrical run.

And no matter how hard manufacturers and content providers try, the public LIKES getting out of the house and interacting socially, whether it be in a cinema, restaurant, sporting event or whatever. It would be folly in the extreme to steer the public towards staying at home to watch movies at the expense of theatrical boxoffice reciepts because as the public has shown time and again that it will go to where the entertainment and value for $ is.

One day the studios will see this but I'm not putting my home on it just yet.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 02-14-2010, 06:29 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
I don't know why they don't just release a movie day and date on video and get it over with. You know that's what they're leading up to anyway.

At least one distrib, IFC, releases theirs on Video On Demand simultaneously or before the theatrical release. Admittedly, small niche art films, but they may be the cutting edge.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 02-14-2010, 06:56 PM:

How long has Hurt Locker been on video now? 3 weeks? A month? More? We just got it in again at my theater... for the 4th time. Maybe the 5th. We opened it on the break and it keeps coming back. You would think it would do poorly this time. Nope, doing better than ever. There are many $1 Redboxes within walking distance of us with this movie. Oh, and did I mention that we are a full price theater as well? I think the secret is to release it on video BEFORE releasing it in the theaters. Oh, and have a bit of Oscar buzz, but still...

Posted by Galen Murphy-Fahlgren (Member # 4535) on 02-15-2010, 01:08 AM:

Joe, I reckon that may have something to do with the fact that it was released unusually early in the year for an Oscar nom, and really held up. I have only played it for one run thus far, but I am on my second run of An Education.

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 02-15-2010, 10:18 AM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
I don't know why they don't just release a movie day and date on video and get it over with. You know that's what they're leading up to anyway.

I think we'll see that happen within several years, but it's actually going more slowly than I would have expected when this topic has been raised here in the past.

The movie industry is a rare situation where a segment of the industry enjoys exclusive access to the product for a set period of time. Movie theaters benefit from all of the marketing efforts put into a theatrical release, and moviegoers have no legal choice of where to see a new movie except in a movie theater.

I think this is an incredible opportunity for theaters to deliver a great experience to their customers. This opportunity may not last forever, and any theater that does not seize that opportunity is squandering their future prospects.

quote: Ian Parfrey
And no matter how hard manufacturers and content providers try, the public LIKES getting out of the house and interacting socially, whether it be in a cinema, restaurant, sporting event or whatever. It would be folly in the extreme to steer the public towards staying at home to watch movies at the expense of theatrical boxoffice reciepts because as the public has shown time and again that it will go to where the entertainment and value for $ is.

It's all a matter of percentages. What percent of the potential audience fits into that category, vs. what percentage falls into a category of movie fan, but doesn't get out of the house for whatever reason? Marketing people are going to look at that segment and see if they can figure out how to tap into that audience in some way.

But, this case with Alice in Wonderland is just trying to take advantage of momentum and timing for the video release to maximize revenue. I think there are some movies that are impulse buys and where timing is everything. Wait too long, and no one is going to be interested in any great number. This is probably one of those types of movies.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-15-2010, 10:38 AM:

Disney (and Warners) are now saying that they will just need to do this with a couple of movies a year so they can get the DVD into the market place during the hot DVD selling times of the year. So, a major blockbuster that comes out in September might have a late November video release to take advantage of the Christmas season.

They are saying they need to do this, as a "tradeoff" for releasing tentpole titles in the off months like September, October, March and April.

Sounds OK on the surface but I still don't think it will do anything to fix the "sagging DVD sales." Only nuking Redbox and Netflix would do that, and even that might not work.

Posted by Patrick de Groot (Member # 858) on 02-15-2010, 03:54 PM:

In The Netherlands the same thing is happening. Alice is boycotted from all cinemas. It even made it as tv news item. They said cinemas in other (Europe) countries are doing the same thing. I think Disney will change its mind before the release. However, advertising is removed. So it looks like serious business.

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 02-15-2010, 06:33 PM:

At least one of the big 3 here in the US is uncertain of whether or not they will be showing it, according to a close personal friend(and they are usually accurate).

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 02-15-2010, 08:09 PM:

Another reason to boycott this film is Disney's refusal to offer 35mm prints in 3D in spite of the cost to them being minimun just to force the downgrade to digital of exhibitors for its own benefit.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 02-16-2010, 11:13 AM:

quote: Julio Roberto
Another reason to boycott this film is Disney's refusal to offer 35mm prints in 3D in spite of the cost to them being minimun just to force the downgrade to digital of exhibitors for its own benefit.

That may be a bit extreme right now. Disney sort of painted themselves into a corner, pushing their "Disney Digital 3D" as hard as they have. If Technicolor signs up some screens and Disney sees them full of everyone else's films, I'd bet they'll come around eventually.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 02-18-2010, 05:08 PM:

Cineworld cinemas have issued a statement that they have resolved the issue and will be showing Alice.

Link : web page

-------------------------------------------------------
Alice in Wonderland 3D to be Shown at Cineworld

--
Cineworld is delighted to announce it will screen Disney and Tim Burton’s highly anticipated Alice in Wonderland nationwide on over 150 screens. The film will be released on the 5th of March in both 2D and 3D.

After much speculation around whether or not major cinema exhibitors in the UK would play the film, Cineworld has reached an agreement with the Walt Disney Company UK.

Cineworld Chief Executive Steve Wiener comments “we are extremely pleased to have reached a satisfactory compromise on this matter. As leaders in 3D we did not want the public to miss out on such a visual spectacle. As the success of Avatar has shown there is currently a huge appetite for the 3D experience”.

Cineworld has made significant investment in installing a total of 163 digital screens across its entire estate. A significant increase to the Cineworld Digital Estate is planned and will be announced once finalised.

The investment to date has led Cineworld to having one of the largest 3D estates in the UK. Cineworld uses technology from RealD, the world leaders in 3D, in 150 of its digital screens enabling it to show 3D movies to over 40,000 customers at any one time.
---------------------------------------------------------------

I wonder if Vue and Odeon will follow?

Posted by Sam Cat (Member # 3532) on 02-21-2010, 04:44 AM:

This is starting to get interesting. I saw on the web today that AMC in the states may also boycott Alice.

Warner brothers are also saying that they want to reduce the window on Guardians of Gahoole.

I think that these decisions could stop millions of dollars being invested in exhibition on new fitouts, renewing chairs, and lack of funds for cinema operators going into new ventures.

Imagine what is going to happen with Gahoole. We will be screening it and all the stores will have signs up saying buy it on dvd for christmas. It seems like they are looking to make cinemas market their product and supermarkets market their product at the same time.

The window is the only thing protecting the cinema business.

They are saying that they are reducing the window because cinema had record boxoffice and dvd sales didn't.

What they aren't saying is that when dvd sales were doing better than cinema they were still decreasing the window. This is just an excuse. It seems like they don't want cinema to outgross dvd's. They are happier the other way around.

With 3d tv's coming out shortly cinemas may not be able to hang onto their audience in the future as well. The home market will evuantually over take again with larger, cheaper plasmas, cheaper downloads etc just give them time.

Cinemas will always need protection. When tv came out the window was alot bigger than 4 months and cinemas still closed down.

They have stated that dvd is more profitable than cinema. But if they lose say 10% from cinema and give 10% to dvd they will make more than 10% profit.

If the distributors want to look at short term profit then they will lose in the long term and so will we. As our leases are going to keep going up, our labour will keep going up and our profits will keep going down.

I think that one of the reasons dvd sales are down is because people are preferring to buy tv shows and not dvd's. That is my opinion. It could just be a phase for one or two years. But I don't think they should hurt one business for the sake of another.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 02-21-2010, 05:38 PM:

Ezydvd's AVATAR page

Sucks.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-21-2010, 08:33 PM:

quote: Sam Cat
With 3d tv's coming out shortly cinemas may not be able to hang onto their audience in the future as well.

I'm not so sure about that. A 3-D movie demands more of your "attention" than a regular TV show to get the full effects. When you watch 3-D in a theatre, the lights are off, and the screen is the only thing your attention is on.

In most people's houses, the TV screen is much smaller, there is other stuff in the room visible if the lights are on, and people aren't expected to "be quiet" as much, so you have more distractions. The screen doesn't fill as much of your field of vision. I personally think 3-D will be a MUCH less satisfying experience in the home.

Besides the jury is still out as to whether 3-D will be a continuing force, or something people will tire of eventually.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 02-22-2010, 07:48 AM:

The studios need to be doing the opposite and encouraging higher box office grosses. The reason that DVD sales are dropping have nothing to do with theatrical windows. Somehow a couple of years after DVD became available, the studios convinced people to buy every movie they wanted to watch.

It took a few years but finally people realized that there is no reason to spend $15 - $25 (more for blu-ray) to own the vast majority of movies. How many movies (other than kids TV/Babysitter movies) are people going to watch more than 3 times. Forget Netflix and Redbox, even at regular Blockbuster rates you could rent 3 times for the cost of purchase. With Netflix and Redbox out there it makes no sense to buy any DVD or Blu-Ray except of the very rare extremely good movie like "The Dark Knight".

I also don't understand this ridiculous concept that there are "slow DVD sales" time periods where they can't release the DVDs. The reason for the slow sales periods are due to the titles that are typically available in those time periods. If good titles are released people will buy them in the same quantities they would at another time of the year.

The only exception to this is the Holiday shopping season. Since people are buying gifts they will buy more DVDs/Blu-Rays in early December.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-22-2010, 01:29 PM:

It's all because they have these overpriced "suits" who have to justify their jobs, so they have to come up with some "fixable" reason for the DVD sales decline, which will allow them to take some action to fix the "problem." Since they can't do anything about rentals, they move on to the next thing, even if it means screwing with some other segment of the business.

I am still amazed that film companies haven't figured out SOME way to get a piece of the DVD rental pie. It just seems dumb that they sell a DVD to a store for $15 or less, and the store rents it hundreds of times at $2 a night or whatever. Stores should have to submit "boxoffice reports" and pay a fee for each title that's out of the store. Then you'd see the filmco's profits go back up. Of course that model would never work for the stores, I guess.

Meanwhile the theatres pay 60% or more for LESS content.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 02-22-2010, 02:06 PM:

Maybe they are looking at the rental equation wrong. Instead of a "buy only" window they should have a rental only window but during that window they charge a lot more for the disks or take a 50%+ cut of each rental (with a minimum rental price or for legal reasons I guess their cut would have to have the minimum).

I guess by law once they go on sale for $15, a rental outfit can just buy the disks and do whatever they want with them.

Posted by Sean McKinnon (Member # 612) on 02-22-2010, 02:12 PM:

wow, I always assumed the stores had to pay a percentage to the film co. thats nuts!

Posted by Todd McCracken (Member # 4718) on 02-22-2010, 03:05 PM:

Yeah, that would be in line with the old video store days where the firs 60 or so days of release for home market was a very expensive "rental window" release. When my brother used to run a video store clients would freak when he slapped down a 200$ charge for a lost tape in first week of release, and they would not believe that's what the store actually paid though often it was.

Posted by Pete Naples (Member # 761) on 02-22-2010, 03:13 PM:

Alice in Wonderland will not be shown in Odeon cinemas

Mia Wasikowska in Alice in Wonderland
Mia Wasikowska plays a teenage Alice in Tim Burton's 3D film

Tim Burton's new film version of Alice in Wonderland will not be screened at Odeon cinemas in the UK, Ireland and Italy, the cinema chain has confirmed.

The move is in response to the Disney studio's plan to reduce the period in which it can only be shown in cinemas from the standard 17 weeks.

The plan would allow Disney to release the film on DVD at the end of May.

Odeon said it would "set a new benchmark, leading to a 12-week window becoming rapidly standard".

Cineworld cinemas will show the movie, however, after reaching an independent agreement with the Disney studio.

The Vue chain is also understood to have reached an agreement with Disney, details of which are due to be announced shortly.

Odeon's decision will not affect the film's Royal premiere on Thursday, which is coincidentally set to take place at the Odeon Leicester Square in central London.

Tim Burton talks about his experimentation with his latest film, Alice in Wonderland

Nor will it affect its plans to show the film in Spain, Germany, Portugal and Austria - territories where Disney intends to observe the normal DVD release window.

Starring Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter, Alice in Wonderland sees the novel's heroine return as a teenager to the magical kingdom for more surreal adventures.

Inspired by the works of Lewis Carroll, the film also stars Helena Bonham Carter, Anne Hathaway and Britain's Matt Lucas.

The Odeon & UCI Cinema Group is Britain's largest cinema chain with more than 100 sites nationwide. Cineworld and Vue are the second and third biggest.

Together they represent just under two-thirds of all cinema screens in the UK.

'Need for exceptions'

It is the amount of time that separates a film coming out in cinemas and its release on DVD that is at the centre in this dispute.

In the UK, the window for theatrical release is 17 weeks. In the case of Alice in Wonderland, Disney wants to reduce that to 12.

TOP FIVE UK AND IRELAND CINEMA CHAINS
Odeon - 107 sites/834 screens
Cineworld - 74 sites/758 screens
Vue - 63 sites/608 screens
National Amusements - 21 sites/274 screens
Ward Anderson - 24 sites/206 screens
Source: UK Film Council

Disney told the BBC that one of the main reasons for the decision was to bring the film to customers more quickly, thereby helping to beat piracy.

It said if a cinema stopped showing a film before the 17 week exclusivity period, the audience did not have a legitimate way to see the movie - potentially leading to piracy.

It said it had agreed to take this approach with a limited amount of movies every year in certain countries.

Bob Chapek, Disney's president of distribution, has said the company remains "committed" to theatrical windows.

However, he believes there is a "need for exceptions to accommodate a shortened time-frame on a case-by-case basis".

Odeon, though, believes such a move will damage not just its business but that of all cinemas in the UK.

"The negative impact on cinema attendance that such a reduction in the window will have will threaten the continued existence of many cinemas, especially the smaller and medium-sized cinemas."

Odeon also highlights the additional costs the chain has incurred making its screens suitable for 3D movies.

"Odeon/UCI has invested considerable sums of money, especially in the UK, over the past 12 months to install digital projection systems in its cinemas," it said.

Opposition

"The proposed reduction in the window on a high-profile 3D title like Alice in Wonderland undermines the investment made."

Disney also faces opposition in Belgium, the Netherlands and the US over its plans for this title.

Anne Hathaway in Alice in Wonderland
Anne Hathaway co-stars in the film alongside Johnny Depp

It is not the first time, however, it has attempted to make overtures in this area.

Last year, the company attempted to reduce the theatrical window of Up, the hit Pixar movie named best animated feature at the Baftas on Sunday.

In that instance it dropped its plans after UK exhibitors threatened not to screen another of its titles, A Christmas Carol, later in the year.

Neither is Disney the only studio to have faced opposition over theatrical exclusivity from UK cinema chains.

In 2007, Odeon and Vue removed Ben Stiller comedy Night at the Museum from their cinemas after 20th Century Fox shortened its theatrical window to 13 weeks.

The Cinema Exhibitors' Association, the body representing the interests of around 90% of UK cinema operators, has not commented on this latest case.

Speaking "in general terms", though, it said it "strongly" supported the maintenance of "a clear and exclusive window between a film's theatrical release and its release on other platforms".

"The CEA believes maintenance of the window will ensure that audiences continue to enjoy the widest possible range of films in their intended environment, the cinema theatre."

LINK

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 02-25-2010, 09:43 AM:

It looks like the boycott threat between UK cinemas and Disney has ended as of Wednesday.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 02-25-2010, 12:18 PM:

I've got an idea. How about in return for only a 12 week theatrical window, the film rental is a 45% aggregate? For a 16 week window it goes to normal. Or maybe negotiate a scale that the longer the exclusive window, the higher the film rental.

Honestly probably the best compromise would be something like:
-14 week exclusive theatrical window
-followed by 4 week theatrical/high price PPV/VOD (like $40 per view)
-followed by 4 week DVD/Blu-ray on sale with $5-$6 PPV/VOD
-followed by open for Netflix/Redbox and low priced digital download.

Even Avatar with the best legs in a very long time will be mostly played out after 14 weeks. Nothing will play 6 or 7 months like Titanic or Jurassic Park anymore with the mega wide releases even if the theatrical window went back to a year or more.

Posted by Michael Brown (Member # 890) on 02-25-2010, 12:43 PM:

Now Odeon are in. So that's everyone.

-----------------
The ODEON & UCI Cinema group is pleased to announce that following detailed negotiations with the Walt Disney Company Ltd an enduring agreement has been reached encompassing all the different aspects of both companies' commercial relationship.

ODEON is pleased to announce that it will now be showing "Alice in Wonderland" beginning March 5th in its cinemas in the UK, Ireland, Italy, Germany, Portugal and Austria.

As a result of this agreement, ODEON is pleased to confirm that it will be able to continue with its plans for significant investment in new cinemas, in digital technology in 3D capability and the other exciting developments designed for the increased enjoyment of all its customers.
------------------------------
link

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 02-26-2010, 05:13 AM:

So much for United We Stand.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-26-2010, 10:45 AM:

I want to know what Disney had to "give" in order to get that deal. Or was it more along the lines of, "You will play Alice with the 12 week window, or else we will do the same thing with Toy Story 3."

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 02-26-2010, 02:30 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
I want to know what Disney had to "give" in order to get that deal. Or was it more along the lines of, "You will play Alice with the 12 week window, or else we will do the same thing with Toy Story 3."

Forget that, it was probably more like "You will play Alice with the 12 week window or else you won't play Toy Story 3 period".

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 02-26-2010, 07:55 PM:

Distributors want to avoid releasing a tentpole to Cinemas or DVD in Europe (and Asia but less so) during the World Cup which will make a massive dent in to the exhibition and homevid markets this summer. In Europe the games are every day almost at 5pm and 8pm, and most people will be at home or in the pub or a bar watching them. My guess is the closest thing you have in the USA is the Super Bowl but it doesn't hit you maybe three or four times in two weeks like England playing will to us.

This is just to provide you guys with some context to the topic and not to comment on it which wouldn't be appropriate in my position, even though it has been resolved.

Posted by Jim Ziegler (Member # 86) on 02-28-2010, 04:54 PM:

quote: Sam Cat
With 3d tv's coming out shortly cinemas may not be able to hang onto their audience in the future as well.

I wouldn't worry about home 3D. That dinosaur jumping out of the screen is pretty impressive on a 40 foot screen, but on a 40 inch one, well, it's not so impressive...

I don't think the studios want to kill exhibition. It is, frankly, not in their financial interest to do so. Theatrical exhibition followed by dvd sales basically allows them to double dip - they get to sell you a ticket, and then a couple months later, they sell you a disc. If everything was day and date, they would miss out on a lot of the double sales opportunity.

Honestly, Disney's logic is sound, as Mr. Spock would say. If we want major product in the off season, we are going to have to accept that Studio will want to realase the dvd at a time that will maximize it's sales as well.

Posted by Andy Muirhead (Member # 712) on 03-01-2010, 08:12 PM:

quote:
quote: Mike BlakesleyI want to know what Disney had to "give" in order to get that deal. Or was it more along the lines of, "You will play Alice with the 12 week window, or else we will do the same thing with Toy Story 3."

Forget that, it was probably more like "You will play Alice with the 12 week window or else you won't play Toy Story 3 period".

I think the only thing that makes sense is a percentage deal.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 03-05-2010, 12:16 PM:

quote: Darryl Spicer
I can sum it up in one word:

Economy

I'm not sure I buy that. I might buy that for expensive new releases, but for catalog titles, there are an amazing number of great DVD titles selling for as little as $5. I rarely pay more than $7 for a DVD title. In a bad economy, I think it's more likely for someone to take this route than take the family to a theater.

As far as the studios go, IMO they are committing suicide by shortening the theatrical window. Titles that don't have strong theatrical distribution will tank on video. It's still the theatrical presentation and the marketing behind it that makes a film "important". Sure, they'll increase their cash flow a bit by moving up the video release and this way the theatrical marketing campaign will also apply to the home video release, but it's still a really big mistake for the long run, IMO, especially when they decide to do this even before they know how well the film is going to do.

They'll destroy the theatre business and then they'll wonder why their home video sales suck and why consumers have moved away from narrative film forms to YouTube videos in much the same way as the TV audience gave up on most dramas and traditional comedies in favor of reality shows.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-05-2010, 01:07 PM:

For an economy that is in a recession the attendance sure jumped last year at least in our area. I do think the economy is a factor in lower DVD sales because it has forced places like Walmart to lower their prices on DVD's and Blurays. Now I know that Walmart has offered DVD's for less than $10 for a few years, but a lot of those titles were either full screen titles or titles I wouldn't buy at any price. I saw some bluray titles that walmart sells for $10 or less that are selling for $20 or more at Best Buy. So yes I think the economy right now has a bigger effect on sales than renting does.

It is also becoming more of a rare thing to see a title play longer than 12 weeks at one location. I would have to say that the average would probably be around 4 to 8 weeks for a 16 screen location. The oldest title we are playing right now is Avitar going on it's 11th or 12th week. Next in line after that is Crazy Heart going on it's 5th week. I am not a supporter of reducing windows and definitely not a supporter of Day and Date releasing.

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 03-05-2010, 01:19 PM:

We are still running Blindside, and just got rid of Chipmunks and Precious. We've had 5 films since the beginning of last summer last 15 weeks or longer.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 03-05-2010, 01:27 PM:

The reduction in DVD sales is mostly due to Netflix and Redbox. Why buy a DVD that you are only going to watch once anyway if you can rent it for $1. If you want older titles you can watch several a month for under $10 from Netflix. That's why I think the studios should try and encourage more viewing during theatrical release. The studio revenue per viewing is going to be a lot higher in the theater. It takes a lot more home viewings to get that same revenue and with the trend towards the cheapy rentals I don't know if the market is big enough. i.e. 100 million redbox rentals of a title will only net the studio $50 million where 25 million theatrical tickets will net the studio around $100 million.

If I were a studio head my windows would be something like:

-16 week Theatrical Window where each admission would give me around $4.00 in revenue on average.
-4 week VOD/PPV only priced in the $15 or so per view with a 50% revenue share where I'd probably net around $2.50 or so per set of eyes per view.
-4 week DVD/Blu-ray on sale for full price (not the $10 wal mart special)
-After that 24 weeks is up then it would be available for Netflix/Redbox and discounted sales

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 03-05-2010, 01:36 PM:

quote: Jonathan Althaus
We are still running Blindside, and just got rid of Chipmunks and Precious. We've had 5 films since the beginning of last summer last 15 weeks or longer.

That will happen if you have to split titles with a competitor.

Posted by Dave Macaulay (Member # 813) on 03-12-2010, 12:21 PM:

Piracy isn't all about saving a buck or two or getting a movie at home before the studio wants you to. The pirate DVD experience is often better than the official DVD. I am sick of being treated like a criminal when I buy a genuine DVD: hey, FBI and Interpol... I JUST BOUGHT THIS REAL GENUINE LICENSED DVD, NOT A "COUNTERFEIT"! . Then being forced to endure a series of previews and crap. This poster sums it up perfectly: