Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Fox to put awards screeners on iTunes for SAG members

This is topic Fox to put awards screeners on iTunes for SAG members in forum Film-Yak 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=8;t=007112

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 01-07-2011, 08:59 PM:

Fox ot put awards screeners on iTunes for SAG members

Source: LA Times

quote:
The Hollywood awards screener is finally catching up with the digital age. In a first for the industry, Fox Filmed Entertainment will make three current releases from its Fox Searchlight movie unit that were nominated for Screen Actors Guild awards -- "Black Swan," "127 Hours," and "Conviction" -- available as free downloads from Apple Inc.'s iTunes to all of the acting guild's nearly 100,000 voting members.

The move could mark the first step in an industry-wide shift toward making digital copies of movies available to voters for all awards, eventually ending the costly, time-honored practice of producing and sending physical copies of their DVDs.

Fox co-Chairman Jim Gianopulos said his studio is also in talks with the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, whose members vote for the Oscars, and with the British Film Academy, about making iTunes downloads available to their voters as well even though they have already been sent DVD screeners.

SAG members will get a code they can use to download the three Fox Searchlight films in high definition and watch them on a computer, iPad, iPhone, iPod Touch, or on television via Apple TV. As with any iTunes rental, films can be watched as many times as the voter wants during a 24-hour period. They will be available from Jan. 7 until Jan. 28, the day votes are due. The SAG awards will be presented Jan. 30.

Studios regularly send DVDs with watermarks -- which identify the video as belonging to a specific person in case it leaks onto the Internet -- to voters in various awards groups. However, Gianopulos said his studio had never before found a way to get screeners to SAG members.

"When you're dealing with this large a number of voters, it's extremely difficult in terms of logistics and would be cost prohibitive to produce and ship screeners to every SAG member," he said, adding that it would likely cost "many millions of dollars" to do so.

The deal, which Gianopulos pitched to and struck with iTunes chief Eddy Cue, will quite possibly prompt other studios to make screeners available via Apple or other digital outlets. That could particularly be true for those whose films are also nominated for SAG Awards and that may feel at a competitive disadvantage.

Screeners have always been controversial in Hollywood, as studios have weighed competing worries about piracy and desires to promote their films to awards voters. In 2003, the Motion Picture Assn. of America unsuccessful attempted to ban screeners. Some studios later participated in a failed test to send Oscar voters special DVD players that could play screeners with stronger copy protection than normal DVDs.

More recently, studios have returned to sending normal discs along with watermarks to crack down on any members who allow their copies to leak online.

iTunes downloads feature much stronger copy protection than DVDs, however, and can only be watched during a 24-hour period, making it easier for studios to showcase their films to voters securely. Gianopulos noted that they could also be useful for people who want to watch a movie on a portable device or before watermarked discs have been produced.

"This could eventually be an alternative for all awards voters to give them access to our films at an earlier stage or while they are traveling," he said. "It's what technology is all about: Giving people more choices to view films while still recognizing that we would always prefer that they see it in a theater if possible."

SAG members will receive an e-mail from the guild and a postcard from Fox Searchlight with instructions on accessing a download code from the studio's website.

--Ben Fritz

Photo: A customer with an iPad at an Apple store. Credit: Paul Sakuma / Associated Press.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-08-2011, 01:03 AM:

[Big Grin]

Might as well hand them over to the hackers.

Why don't they make these lazy asses pick up their sagging tits and go to the movie theatres or even to decent screening rooms to see these films like REAL people?!!

And what a colosal insult to the filmmakers that their work is not going to be judged by people who will actually SEE the film as they created it, but watch some bastardization that lacks the visual impact that the director and cinematographer spent all their creative energy producing and likewise not hear the sound that was laborious created by the sound designer. How can they vote on a film that they HAVE NOT EFFIN SEEN?!

Because no way they remotely say they have seen the filmmakers work if all they are watching is a freakin little shit postage stamp size hand-held piece of crap. Nice going, Academy. [fu]

For shame!

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 01-08-2011, 03:40 AM:

Conviction was available in DVD quality for download and streaming around 20/Dec.
Black Swan on 03/Jan.
127 hours on the 05/Jan.
All decent quality, all freely watchable.

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 01-08-2011, 07:44 PM:

I want to know why Fox hasn't released 127 Hours more widely. According to The Numbers, it was in 103 theatres as of Thursday. According to Fandango, only 2 theatres have it in DFW. And only 6 in 250 miles

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 01-08-2011, 11:03 PM:

quote:
For shame!

Poor decision indeed. Hell, this is even a fail on the part of some filmmakers who allow it to happen. If they were truly concerned about presenting their film with any sort of artistic vision, they'd be sure that it was released to proper cinemas, especially for awards season. It's like James Cameron, and allowing his "film" Avatar to be released in 2.35, 2D and 3D, as well as 1.85 2D and 3D. What the hell is his true vision and intent? If he has one, release it that way and that's it.

Maybe this is why Woody Allen mixes his films in mono: it guarantees that most viewers will always hear the film he way he intends.

AJG

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 01-08-2011, 11:11 PM:

Jonathan, you really aren't trying to figure out the reasoning behind what the suits in Hollywood do, are you? Don't bother -- these are the same people who don't label their digital trailers with the correct name of the movie title because they think they it an stealthy, unbreakable security device that will protect a COMMERCIAL for their film from being seen. [Roll Eyes]

There is no why....there is no wherefore. Reasoning is futile.

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 01-12-2011, 02:47 PM:

No Frank I wasn't, just pissed at Fox for them telling our booking dept that we would be opening it (back in November), then deciding to kick us in the balls.

The best security is a cable tie or velcro. It must be since all digital content comes "secured" with a tie and Tech uses anti-piracy velcro on their films

Posted by Tom Petrov (Member # 1534) on 01-22-2011, 04:13 AM:

I do wonder how one votes for "Best Sound" if they are watching the movie on their little laptop.