Jump to content

Studios to stream some titles during cinema run (and others going to streaming)


Recommended Posts

Dune was going to massively underperform either way. That film has flop written on it massive neon letters from about 100 miles away. And I say all this as someone who’s a big fan of both the director and the source material.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sarlaccfood said:

No offence, but it just sounds like you don’t like leaving the house to be honest. If you think Steam is comparable to a decent arcade then I don’t think we’re really going to see eye-to-eye on this.


And it sounds like you enjoy just picking parts of statements out so you can more easily make your arguments. At no point did I suggest that Steam is the same experience as an arcade. I miss the Namco arcade more than almost anything else that’s been in my local town and shut down. Nothing is the same as the experience of seeing people play Street Fighter at the arcade.

 

The point I made was that the arcades shutting down didn’t lead to less games getting made or less money being invested in games. You responded by listing genres of games that are still being made and saying they weren’t. What you’re now describing now is the experience of going to the place, which is irrelevant because obviously the when they physical location shuts down the experience changes. The point remains that the physical location shutting down did not lead to there being less games, or less money spent making games, or less diversity and variety. 

 

36 minutes ago, Stigweard said:

 

Broker can keep banging on about how he finds blockbusters garbage in every post but that doesn't change the fact that they are the most popular films and make the most money which again means more money for other projects. Without these "generic boring shit" we won't get interesting new ideas either cause those will make even less money now and studios won't take the risk.


I sure do bang on about the same thing in every post, good job you’re here to post two paragraphs about how special you think the experience of visiting a cinema is. You’re really spicing up the thread with that hot take that we’ve never heard before. 
 

Honestly you just sound like a Disney marketing person, talking about how the massive profits from blockbuster movies definitely fund small, interesting projects whilst adding fifteen Marvel movies to the slate over the next two years. It seems mad to be talking about Netflix’s hit rate when cinema is just as spotty. Again my opinions on how shite it is to have a hundred Star Wars movies is as irrelevant as your opinion that most of what Netflix puts out is rubbish. The point is that Netflix are managing to spend money making movies, often smaller ones, which means companies to do not need giant movie profits to fund movies. Any discussion of the relative quality is as pointless as arguing about that always is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what Broker, I can't be bothered. You're right of course, everyone else is wrong :slowclap: Talking about hot takes like you don't stink up so many thread with yours :rolleyes:

 

1 hour ago, Harsin said:

Dune was going to massively underperform either way. That film has flop written on it massive neon letters from about 100 miles away. And I say all this as someone who’s a big fan of both the director and the source material.

 

Sadly you're probably right, which is super sad, just look at Blade Runner 2049.

 

They should have called it Star Wars: Dune considering Star Wars ripped off so much from it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ste Pickford said:

I don't think I buy this idea that good / interesting movies only exist as a side effect of blockbusters, and that if blockbusters stop being successful, cheap movies will no longer be made.

 

Obviously its not the case for everything. Of course you'll still get independent films, hense why they're called independent films but without success from 20th Century Fox you don't get Fox Searchlight. I don't think we'll see interesting blockbuster ideas either which is a massive shame. I enjoy the MCU and what not but having new and interesting blockbusters like Edge of Tomorrow is a must too. Not sure how many of them we'll see going forward of the big money franchises aren't making as much.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the flip side to that is the tools to make film are basically in your pocket these days. Who knows what will be possible in a couple of years or so? Beyond money and structure, what point does the studio really serve the artist?
 

I’ve no idea how the future is going to pan out but I’m pretty certain if people have a cinematic vision they will still make films, and get them made.

 

I have zero interest in ‘blockbusters’, of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nifta said:

Coleford? Is that still open? Grew up in Ross in the 80s/early 90s and used to go there a lot. Assumed it would have closed years ago!

No this was the Palace in Cinderford. It's amazing, not been there in about 18 months but if I get the chance I'd get there again. Really hope it's okay.  Well they appear to have put their prices up, £4 now!

assets.simpleview-europe.com.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

What interesting smaller movies are, say, Disney making that will no longer exist if their blockbusters suddenly bring in less money? Don't they basically only churn out Marvel/Star Wars/Pixar/live action remake blockbusters these days anyway? I fail to see what we would lose if they started bringing in less money per movie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Majora said:

What interesting smaller movies are, say, Disney making that will no longer exist if their blockbusters suddenly bring in less money? Don't they basically only churn out Marvel/Star Wars/Pixar/live action remake blockbusters these days anyway? I fail to see what we would lose if they started bringing in less money per movie.

 

Why is everyone focusing on Disney so much when the biggest decision on streaming films has been made by WB and Universal?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Majora said:

What interesting smaller movies are, say, Disney making that will no longer exist if their blockbusters suddenly bring in less money? Don't they basically only churn out Marvel/Star Wars/Pixar/live action remake blockbusters these days anyway? I fail to see what we would lose if they started bringing in less money per movie.


Yeah Disney aren’t the best when you look at it like that, but they don’t make everything in-house. They employ thousands of outside companies to make their films, so there’s a much wider affect than simply “money from Marvel movie=invest in new indie project”.

 

(Copy and pasted from the other thread where a bunch of grumpy old dads were celebrating the death of cinemas :P):

 

There’ll be plenty of crew that will have cut their teeth on a marvel movie or two and then gone on to make something completely different and interesting. The big films really help make the film industry a much more viable career for loads of people and allows companies like VFX studios, costume designers and prop workshops more financial wiggle room to work on more risky projects that might not have the budget.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/12/2020 at 07:45, Broker said:

Nobody, which I suspect the cinema chains, the studios and the people in here who sound like those adverts at the start of films going on about how special the cinema experience is all know. There’s plenty of beautiful, interesting stuff to watch on Netflix that didn’t need a ridiculous budget and wasn’t aiming to milk a billion dollars out of people. I used to love the cinema, but since being priced out of it I’ve found that it’s not something I really miss. I’m sure the ones that reopen when the pandemic dies down will be eagerly driving up ticket prices, food prices and forcing you to sit through even more adverts. 

 

The Broadway cinema in Nottingham is less than a tenner a ticket.

 

Less than seven quid for members.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stigweard said:

 

Why is everyone focusing on Disney so much when the biggest decision on streaming films has been made by WB and Universal?


Ok let’s look at WB and the movies they’ve moved to streaming: 

 

Wonder Woman 2: franchise sequel to the only half decent film in a series that has failed constantly and cost billions

 

Suicide Squad 2/Reboot: franchise sequel to widely hated movie from the same series with director from other superhero franchise movie

 

The Matrix 4: sequel to franchise from 20 years ago

 

Dune: second cinema adaptation of one of the most popular sci-fi books ever written

 

Godzilla vs King Kong: mashup of two of the oldest movie franchises in the world

 

Space Jam 2: second sequel to a Nike advert

 

The Conjuring 8: endless horror franchise #231

 

The Sopranos Prequel: prequel to highly regarded TV how trying to turn that into a franchise

 

In The Heights: attempt to cash in on mega successful musical by adapting an earlier musical by the same author

 

Judas and the Black Messiah: An interesting original film!

 

Mortal Kombat Reboot: Reboot of movie series based on game that was briefly popular in the nineties

 

Tom and Jerry CGI: film adaptation of ancient cartoon with apparently indefinite appeal

 

King William: I’ll give this original interesting film as well, although it’s Will Smith starring as the Dad of famous tennis players Venus and Serena Williams so it’s not exactly a bad bet 

 

Little Things: An interesting original film 

 

Those Who Wish Me Dead: An interesting film based on a very popular novel

 

Reminiscence: an original film strapped to Hugh Jackman to try to sell its dull premise

 

Malignant: a “new” horror film from the producer of Saw, the conjuring and insidious 

 

Cry Macho: an original Clint Eastwood movie

 

Its pretty clear that the vast majority of the money they make from giant franchise films gets ploughed back into the same thing, and they’ll even spend a lot of money on new movies in franchises that have consistently disappointed. They could fund a hundred small original movies off the back of one big blockbuster and they’ve got four for an entire year.

 

21 minutes ago, Isaac said:

 

The Broadway cinema in Nottingham is less than a tenner a ticket.

 

Less than seven quid for members.


Yeah I was made to see what a wang I was being about The Broadway previously and have been there the last two times I paid for movies. I absolutely don’t want Broadway or similar small independent cinemas to die, but I don’t think they’re in as much danger from the switch to streaming, as they rarely have lines out the door when they do show big movies and their main business is showing things the big cinemas would never show because they’re too busy stuffing every screen with Marvel movies. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Vimster said:

No this was the Palace in Cinderford. It's amazing, not been there in about 18 months but if I get the chance I'd get there again. Really hope it's okay.  Well they appear to have put their prices up, £4 now!

assets.simpleview-europe.com.jpg

Blimey, never even knew there was a cinema in Cinderford. Just remember this place in Coleford.

 

3691492_407a5518.jpg

 

 

 

Still sad the old Roxy cinema closed down in my home town of Ross. I saw Empire Strikes Back there and I think it closed not long after.

 

https://www.ross-on-wye.com/images/places/ross/entertainment/roxy/FrntFacade8.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Broker said:

Mortal Kombat Reboot: Reboot of movie series based on game that was briefly popular in the nineties

 

11 was the second biggest selling game in the US last year. It's hardly a dead franchise. Not that I'd want to see the film mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The decision by WB seems like them wanting to have their cake and eat it too really.

 

Bring in compelling content for their nascent online service, while having the backstop of cinema distribution. And the fact it only affects America, where HBO Max is something they actually are trying to sell just confirms that.

 

If Disney follow suit, then that would be the real sign of the apocalypse for cinemas. Without compelling content, the cinemas are dead, as Cineworld's shutting of their cinemas to save money due to lack of blockbusters being made available to screen amply demonstrates. Old films and indies don't interest enough people willing to pay money to watch them, the cinemas need Hollywood to survive, while Hollywood is thinking it doesn't necessarily need the cinemas to survive going forward.

 

WB sacked a bunch of executives in charge of distribution recently too, which industry pundits said was a sign of the changing priorities of Hollywood and how they need to adapt.

 

https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/hollywood-layoffs-streaming-future-1234838650/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, mushashi said:

The decision by WB seems like them wanting to have their cake and eat it too really.

 

Indeed.  It seems that they haven’t even cleared the move with their production partners for the movies.

 


It would be a bit insane if Legendary doesn’t have a say after it paid for 75% of the budget.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want more evidence for the way things are going, Disney just unveiled their production slate for the next few years and it’s 80% Disney+

 

People can make all the nostalgia based arguments they want, the companies are going to go for the massively growing market over the one that’s declined for decades and was being propped up by China.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/12/2020 at 16:44, Timbuktu said:

Indeed.  It seems that they haven’t even cleared the move with their production partners for the movies.

 


It would be a bit insane if Legendary doesn’t have a say after it paid for 75% of the budget.

 

Whatever deal they have with WB isn't in their favour, WB cockblocked a potential deal with Netflix aswell.

 

The stories coming out about this HBO Max idea paint a picture of AT&T wanting to sacrifice their film division in the pursuit of what they see as the future. They didn't bother asking any of the people involved in the films they are now moving to HBO Max and are apparently not even compensating them for this change in release plans.

 

Quote

It also leaves out a long-standing Hollywood maxim: Content is king. And content comes from artists who aren’t always motivated purely by money. Says an agent who represents extremely important talent with business at Warners: “You had a decades-long legacy as being known as the most talent-friendly studio. Now you’ve gone from that to a studio that in starburst colors lit up a sign that says, 'We don’t give a fuck about talent.’”

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/christopher-nolan-rips-hbo-max-as-worst-streaming-service-denounces-warner-bros-plan?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/07/business/media/warner-bros-hbo-max-movies-pay.html

 

Also it isn't only Christopher Nolan thinking AT&T/WB just dumped on him from a great height, an open letter from Denis Villeneuve:


 

Quote

 

I learned in the news that Warner Bros. has decided to release “Dune” on HBO Max at the same time as our theatrical release, using prominent images from our movie to promote their streaming service. With this decision AT&T has hijacked one of the most respectable and important studios in film history. There is absolutely no love for cinema, nor for the audience here. It is all about the survival of a telecom mammoth, one that is currently bearing an astronomical debt of more than $150 billion. Therefore, even though “Dune” is about cinema and audiences, AT&T is about its own survival on Wall Street. With HBO Max’s launch a failure thus far, AT&T decided to sacrifice Warner Bros.’ entire 2021 slate in a desperate attempt to grab the audience’s attention.

 

 

 

https://variety.com/2020/film/news/dune-denis-villeneuve-blasts-warner-bros-1234851270/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

 

 

 

 

On 12/12/2020 at 10:40, RubberJohnny said:

If you want more evidence for the way things are going, Disney just unveiled their production slate for the next few years and it’s 80% Disney+

 

People can make all the nostalgia based arguments they want, the companies are going to go for the massively growing market over the one that’s declined for decades and was being propped up by China.

 

I think at least in Disney's case, COVID taught them the lesson to diversify as most of their businesses were hit hard by the pandemic. Unlike WB, they haven't dumped their cinema blockbusters on Disney+ yet, just the trash they knew wasn't good enough.

 

Now if they stopped making blockbusters for cinema distribution and started spending that money on Disney+ content instead, that would be a more interesting sign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it’s becoming clear that rather than a canny sign-of-the-times business move, the hbo max plan is more of a bodged appeasement of a “want Netflix now” demand from shareholders. 
 

Being mostly tv shows, I think the only thing the Disney announcements prove is that they’re doubling down on streaming rather than giving up on cinema. As it stands it looks like they want to do both. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d assume pre-Covid, Disney’s plan was to continue putting out films across their estate that dominated the box office AND make enough ‘TV’ content for Disney+ that meant all those people going to the cinema to watch Marvel and Star Wars And Pixar amd Disney stuff got locked into paying £8 a month every month because of all the content.

 

I’m sure, ideally, they’d like that to still be the case post Covid.

 

Make over a billion at the box office for Black Panther 2 while  everyone is subscribed to Disney+ for the year for all the series they’ve announced.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope that some of this year's films - even the ones that have since become available for home viewing on BR/DVD/streaming - get cinema re-releases when it's safe to go back.

 

I still hope that my first viewings of Tenet, Onward, Soul, Wolfwalkers, Wonder Woman 1984, and Bill & Ted can take place in a cinema! (And at this rate, it won't be safe to see No Time To Die on its initial release either...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a time recently when the ludicrously good Vue offer (£4.99 any seat any time) combined with Meerkat codes meant that me and some friends could meet up after work in town and go and see a film, just for the sake of a get together and having something to do.  We saw Terminator Genesis, knowing it was likely to be shit, and it was, but you know, it's fun to see how shit it is with your own eyes, for the sake of £2.50. In town, that's not enough to get you half a pint of beer, but it does get you 2 hours of cinema.

 

But it opened my eyes to many films I would not have gone to see otherwise, and off the top of my head, Ghost Stories, The Invisible Man, The Robocop remake, all really good film experiences (yes, even Robocop was fun on the big screen) for £2.50, and all those films I watched later at home and didn't enjoy nearly as much.

 

The cinema experience is irreplaceable, and the best home cinema speakers and a 65" TV still doesn't come close.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, dumpster said:

 

The cinema experience is irreplaceable, and the best home cinema speakers and a 65" TV still doesn't come close.

 

I want cinema to return as much as the next person but whenever I go to the cinema I'm always amazed how bad the picture looks compared to my OLED and the sound at home is much better because there's no cunt having to explain every aspect of the movie to their bored partner.

 

The only time the picture is good is if you pay the extra for the fake IMAX screen. You're also more likely to have a crowd that's there to actually watch the movie. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the company came up with a term to easily distinguish between the 70mm format and the large screens you see licensed to the likes of Cineworld then it wouldn't be a problem. I've got no problem with fake IMAX, it's my preferred way to see a film locally. I just use the term so people know I'm not talking about the proper IMAX screens. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LeighCb said:

Can someone explain what fake IMAX is please? 

 

It's a brand, so I don't understand what people mean. It's like saying fake Dolby or fake BBC. Or is it fake because they produced a digital version of their own technology?

Real IMAX is much bigger and a different aspect ratio, so stuff shot for real IMAX loses some picture in fake IMAX.

 

1HURgZM.jpg

 

kfaMQeX.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The IMAX screens I've seen at cineworld use the correct IMAX aspect ratio for films shot that way, so none of the image is cropped. There can't be more than a few screens in the UK showing actual 70mm film and the size of the screen will just vary depending on the space in the building. Anyway, just curious. I must have been lucky at the couple I've been to. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/12/2020 at 20:17, Ork1927 said:

I’d assume pre-Covid, Disney’s plan was to continue putting out films across their estate that dominated the box office AND make enough ‘TV’ content for Disney+ that meant all those people going to the cinema to watch Marvel and Star Wars And Pixar amd Disney stuff got locked into paying £8 a month every month because of all the content.

 

I’m sure, ideally, they’d like that to still be the case post Covid.

 

Make over a billion at the box office for Black Panther 2 while  everyone is subscribed to Disney+ for the year for all the series they’ve announced.

 

 

 

I think that is the current expectation from them. Their own internal forecasting expects the streaming services they own (Disney+/ESPN+/Hulu) to only become profitable in 2023 or 2024. It would have to be insanely profitable on its own to directly replace the $13 Billion box office revenue they generated in 2019, which then generated a whole lot of secondary income as it trickled down to the other traditional release outlets most films rely on to make a profit.

 

HBO Max by comparison to Disney+ is struggling to attract paying customers, so having to firesale their valuable cinema content is more understandable as a strategy. They just seem to have gone about it in the worst way possible in terms of pissing off the content producers they rely on to make it in the first place :P

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.