Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: This is how rich people watched Furious 7 last weekend

This is topic This is how rich people watched Furious 7 last weekend 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=002899

Posted by Harold Hallikainen (Member # 5405) on 04-08-2015, 07:41 AM:

http://www.theverge.com/2015/4/7/8361475/prima-cinema-luxury-movie-watching-furious-7

$500 per movie, $35k equipment, 40GB per movie, 10-bit 1080p 4:2:2

In the world you and I know, there are basically two legitimate, legal opportunities to catch a new flick. First, of course, there’s the theater, where we pay anywhere from $10 to $30 for the privilege of sitting in a velour seat of dubious sanitation next to talkers and texters hell-bent on ruining the experience, all while our shoes stick to years’ worth of petrified Coca-Cola, popcorn, and Sno-Caps. The next opportunity comes several weeks to several months later, when titles make the transition to on-demand streaming services, and eventually to other premium services like HBO and Netflix.

That’s about it. Unless you’re an oil baron or a venture capitalist, that is.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 04-08-2015, 08:30 AM:

Back in the early 90's our projectionist would sometimes work at very rich people's houses in Palm Beach to run first run, 35mm at a similar per movie cost. They are making a big deal out of the digital version of the same thing that's been going on for decades.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 04-08-2015, 12:56 PM:

The movie file is only 40GB in size? What file format and encryption methods are being used? The article says it's "Fort Knox secure" but I'm not sure I buy that.

Also, the article is flat out wrong about that thing being THE way rich people watch movies. The REAL way rich people watch movies is they get a DVD or Blu-ray screener disc from the studio (for free) and then one of their kids or friends borrows the disc and uploads it to torrent sites for everyone else to enjoy before the movie arrives in theaters.

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 04-10-2015, 01:43 AM:

I read about that a while ago- and I seriously thought the thing about the thumbprint ID was a joke.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 04-10-2015, 01:58 AM:

The author is an idiot. He doesn't know that physical media even exists. He says: "The next opportunity comes several weeks to several months later, when titles make the transition to on-demand streaming services, and eventually to other premium services like HBO and Netflix." What about DVD and Blu-ray, dumbass? And if it comes to HBO and Netflix AFTER on-demand streaming services, then just what the hell are HBO and Netflix?

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 04-10-2015, 02:24 AM:

The author is also an idiot with this:

quote: Harold Hallikainen
there’s the theater, where we pay anywhere from $10 to $30 for the privilege of sitting in a velour seat of dubious sanitation next to talkers and texters hell-bent on ruining the experience, all while our shoes stick to years’ worth of petrified Coca-Cola, popcorn, and Sno-Caps.

(1) The average ticket price is around $7.50, not "$10 to $30"

(2) Velour seats? What decade is this person from?

(3) Dubious sanitation? I'll grant this can sometimes happen but I think that's the exception rather than the rule

(4) Talkers and texters: Again, it IS a problem but it's not like 100% of the other patrons in a theater are talking and texting. And, I wouldn't be surprised to see "rich people" talking and texting too.

(5) The whole sticky floor thing is really pretty much a thing of the past. I can't remember the last time I was in a theater where the floors were sticky. And even if there is some sticky-ness, it's probably from earlier in the day, not "years worth of petrified."

Do these problems exist? Yes, but they're certainly not the norm -- this is just a sensationalizing author trying to be all important.

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 04-10-2015, 02:47 AM:

I have met so many "rich" people (in quotes) who have built these grand home theater rooms and fill it up with kitchy, fake movie memorabilia then equip them with off the shelf equipment.

It seems to me that these people really don't care about the real movie experience. They just want to make themselves feel special.

Much as I like the idea of a traveling theater setup that brings the best equipment (or at least better equipment) I just can't help thinking that this is more of the same... people who just want to make themselves feel special.

All of the other talk about movie theaters being "this way" or "that way" and comparing their home setups is just that, talk, AFAIAC. More bullshit.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 04-10-2015, 12:10 PM:

quote: Randy Stankey
I have met so many "rich" people (in quotes) who have built these grand home theater rooms and fill it up with kitchy, fake movie memorabilia

You can't have a proper home theater without a Casablanca poster somewhere. Or a clock made out of an 8mm film reel.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 04-10-2015, 12:53 PM:

quote: Harold Hallikainen
In the world you and I know, there are basically two legitimate, legal opportunities to catch a new flick.

[snip]

That’s about it. Unless you’re an oil baron or a venture capitalist, that is.

Or you're in the movie industry, and thus have access to the Bel Air Circuit. If you are and do, you'll have a DCP server and theater projector in your home, just like the actual theaters do, and receive DCPs and keys for them.

So as Harold points out, this gadget is clearly aimed at people who are very rich; but specifically, very rich people who have no personal or professional connection to the movie industry.

I'm surprised that there are enough customers for it to make it viable. As a general rule, very rich people unconnected to the movie industry tend to spend their time making lots of money rather than sitting around watching films. But I guess these folks must exist.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 04-10-2015, 01:27 PM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
I'm surprised that there are enough customers for it to make it viable. As a general rule, very rich people unconnected to the movie industry tend to spend their time making lots of money rather than sitting around watching films. But I guess these folks must exist.

The rich guys aren't supposed to buy this gizmo for themselves. They're too busy hustling, earning those Benjamins. The gadget is meant for their entourage to enjoy. I almost said "posse."

Posted by Carsten Kurz (Member # 5396) on 04-10-2015, 08:08 PM:

Looks as if that thumbprint authorization isn't actually the latest technology to boast around:

2010 article:

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/studios-ponder-most-premium-vod-them-all-22470/

'Security would be tight, too. One proposed system would require the user to supply a thumbprint in order to watch the movie.'

- Carsten

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 04-11-2015, 06:43 AM:

"Ft Knox security." That is a good one on so many levels.

Posted by William Kucharski (Member # 7246) on 04-22-2015, 02:11 AM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
I'm surprised that there are enough customers for it to make it viable. As a general rule, very rich people unconnected to the movie industry tend to spend their time making lots of money rather than sitting around watching films. But I guess these folks must exist.

For most any engineer at Facebook or Google or a variety of other Silicon Valley companies, this system is pocket change.

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 10-04-2019, 06:06 AM:

It has been 1626 days since the last post.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-04-2019, 06:06 AM:

Bump. This appears to be dead, or at least moribund. The web site is now essentially blank, and there appear to have been no releases for a while.

I guess there just aren't enough people who want to pay $500 to watch a movie at home.

Posted by Amrik Singh (Member # 8384) on 10-04-2019, 09:55 AM:

I believe Uber Rich are paying much more than $500. Yeah primacinema's status is unclear at present but there are two day and date providers at present for home theater viewing.

Bel Air Cinema : Note it is not bel air circuit but cinema and its extremely expensive.You can check details at www.belaircinema.com/welcome
It requires professional cinema set-up.It supported by all studios and charges $5000 per movie. They supply DCP with keys. They Operate world-wide.

Red Carpet Home Cinema : www.redcarpethomecinema.com
It works with any AV System. Hardware they supply costs $15000. They charge $500-$3000 and allow 2 viewings in 36 hours.They are supported by Paramount, 20th Century Fox, Warner Bros. plus 2 Mini-Majors. Their presence is only in few cities of USA.

I want to mention about a third company though I am not sure if they will succeed www.xcinex.com/#/product

You can have a look at them at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzEevbT3Eeg

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-04-2019, 12:13 PM:

Interesting. I think that the biggest problem with this service is the pricing: it needs to be high enough to avoid angering cinema owners, but low enough to make the service sufficiently popular to generate enough revenue to keep the distributors interested in providing the service.

I actually kind of doubt that there is a sweet spot here. How many people are willing to pay $1k to watch a movie? If there are one hundred people who do that and the studio gets a 50% take, that is only $50k--hardly enough to make any of this worthwhile for the big distributors. For that price, one could probably rent out a real cinema for a private screening, anyway.

There are probably many people who would pay $50 to watch a movie with one of these services, but cinema owners would (rightly) be upset with anyone who tried it.

Meanwhile, the (few?) people who bought a Prima Cinema box now have a $35k doorstop.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-04-2019, 02:42 PM:

There have been several attempts that I've read about (e.g. the ones Amrik mentions), over the last decade or so, to market systems intended to enable home viewing of movies currently on theatrical release for people who don't have the connections to get onto the Bel-Air Circuit, but for a price that is high enough to ensure that the size of this market remains small enough not to provoke theater owners into protesting (as Scott points out). The problem seems to be that this also ensures that it remains small enough not to be commercially viable.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 10-04-2019, 07:43 PM:

$500 to watch FURIOUS 7? Pluh-eeez. Just goes to prove, being super rich doesn't save one from being super stupid.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 10-04-2019, 09:22 PM:

Of course, they are probably all in The Biz and can write it off as a business expense.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 10-04-2019, 10:20 PM:

It took me a while to realize that the posts were from 2015. Before I noticed that, I was going to write that I didn't believe it was as successful as they were saying and that I hope it failed. Well, I guess it did. Good.

Years ago, I was invited to a Halloween Party at the northern Long Island home of a very, very rich lawyer. The kind of home with original Picassos all over the walls. And a home theater that looked like Radio City Music Hall. This was before Blu-ray.

The owner brought us down to the theater, which was indeed beautiful and was featured in a book about incredible home theaters. But the owner didn't know how to operate his own theater and he had to get his son to demonstrate it, so I don't think it was used much. It actually wasn't very good from a presentation standpoint. The picture and sound were both sub-par compared to a good movie theater of the day.

But there are people who have too much money so I thought just maybe I was wrong and this $500 a movie thing would work for CEO's, drug dealers, etc. I'm glad it didn't.