Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: AMC Entertainment, Regal to Acquire and Release 8-10 Films a Year

This is topic AMC Entertainment, Regal to Acquire and Release 8-10 Films a Year 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=007137

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 03-07-2011, 06:23 PM:

AMC Entertainment, Regal to Acquire and Release 8-10 Films a Year

Source: hollywoodreporter.com

quote:
NEW YORK – Film exhibition giants AMC Entertainment and Regal Entertainment Group are getting into the Hollywood studio business amid a decline in major studio output in recent years.

The two largest U.S. theatrical exhibitors on Monday unveiled the launch of Open Road Films, a new acquisition-focused film distribution venture that they said will concentrate on an array of wide-release movies. Based in LA, the company will distribute approximately eight to 10 movies per year – and not only to the venture partners’ screens. It expects to release its first film later this year, the companies said.

Former Lionsgate and Weinstein Company executive Tom Ortenberg will serve as CEO of Open Road. Most recently Ortenberg founded entertainment consulting firm One Way Out Media.

“Open Road Films will approach movie distribution with discipline, focus and innovation,” said Ortenberg. “With strong support from exhibition we will market and distribute wide-release motion pictures in an effective, cost-efficient manner, playing in all theatre chains across the country.”

“As major studio releases have declined in recent years, Open Road Films will fill an important gap that exists in the market today for consumers, movie producers and theatrical exhibitors,” said AMC president and CEO Gerry Lopez. “We are committed to providing a wide array of movies – year round – that appeal to all of our diverse groups of guests.”

Regal CEO Amy Miles said the joint venture will enable “more great stories to reach the big screen.”

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 03-08-2011, 06:18 AM:

I wonder how important the presentation quality of their own movies will be to them.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-08-2011, 10:14 AM:

It will be interesting to see if it is digital only.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 03-08-2011, 02:35 PM:

Or if they will lock each other out when they have competing theaters close by.

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 03-11-2011, 05:03 PM:

They better not release any movies in scope, since most of their screens are common-width!

Posted by Caleb Johnstone-Cowan (Member # 3710) on 03-11-2011, 08:45 PM:

Surely investing in the product introduces a level of risk in to the business that doesn't exist if you're an exhibitor? Hollwyood can give us a bum film slate some weeks but most theatres should have the flexibility to reduce payroll hours and stock held to reduce the cost of exhibition. If it is your own film that flops there's no escaping the consequences. When I worked for UGC the rumour was they sold off their UK sites because they had produced one or two big-budget films in France that really under-performed.

Posted by Frank Angel (Member # 248) on 03-12-2011, 05:50 AM:

I guess the Paramount Consent Decrees which have been pretty much skuttled over the years are now completely vacated. What's the difference between a distributor owning an exhibition chain or exhibition chains owning a film distribution entity? Won't that present the same conflict of interest? Won't AMC and every other theatre operator see this as a way for those two chains to manipulate film distribution deals in their favor? Isn't that inherantly rife with restraint of trade possibilities which is why Paramount was forced to divest its theatre holdings in the first place? Or has anti-trust become passe at Justice?

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-12-2011, 11:04 AM:

I heard Kevin Smith's new movie's distribution rights was auctioned for the winning bid $1 and was sold to Smith himself, supposedly being so awful nobody else would even touch it...for a dollar! Maybe they should have started there! [Razz]

Posted by Ben Wales (Member # 92) on 03-12-2011, 02:36 PM:

Those of us here in the Uk can remember those 1980's "Classic Epics" Cannon Films at the local Cannon Cinemas! [Smile]

Posted by Jim Henk (Member # 3628) on 03-13-2011, 02:11 PM:

quote: Frank Angel
Isn't that inherantly rife with restraint of trade possibilities which is why Paramount was forced to divest its theatre holdings in the first place? Or has anti-trust become passe at Justice?

As my college US Government class prof used to say, "Nothing is illegal, until it is challenged in court." And he was a lawyer.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 03-13-2011, 08:18 PM:

Well this is quite clearly a punch-back to the 30-day VOD threat from the majors. I hope it is an out-of-the-park success. They'll need to find a blockbuster or two to make that happen though...

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 03-14-2011, 10:52 PM:

AMC distrubeted a movie back in '04 that was played off a dvd on their video projectors and they charged full price...so I doubt quality will be terribly important. I cant remember the name of the movie.

Posted by John Lasher (Member # 968) on 03-15-2011, 09:48 AM:

quote: "Brad Miller"
I heard Kevin Smith's new movie's distribution rights was auctioned for the winning bid $1 and was sold to Smith himself, supposedly being so awful nobody else would even touch it...for a dollar! Maybe they should have started there!

I heard that was his slap in the face to the many struggling independent filmmakers (just like him 16-or-so years ago with "Clerks") who self-distribute route out of necessity, or a desire to protect their work.