PREMIUM VOD MOVES FORWARD, BUT CAMERON, BAY, PJ, DEL TORO AND MORE SIDE WITH THEATERS

 

Um, I'd rather just see it at the dollar theater then for a fraction of that or wait and purchase it. Not worth paying that price for such a limited timeframe IMO.

Well I fucking hate the theater going experience so im all for sometihng like this. However im not paying 30 dollars 60 days after release. Hell you wait another couple weeks and it's out on blu-ray which costs me nothing through Netflix. However something like 10 bucks a week or 2 after it's release........certainly something I would be into. Also it is helping certain films. Take the movie Super for instance. There isn't a theater near me playing it. So normally I would just wait until it hit Netflix and that would be that. I was able to get it OnDemand while it was in theaters and now I can buy the blu. 

I love going to the theater, and in California I had some beautiful theaters to choose from. Now I live in the northern edge of nowhere, where there are only two theaters to choose from and they're owned by the same people, so all I can see is whatever super wide release is currently playing. If it wasn't for vod, theres no way I could have seen 13 Assassins or Hobo With A Shotgun. I hope that more movies go vod, and I hope they do so day and date with their theatrical releases. I really don't want to have to wait for blu rays of all the cool smaller movies that are coming out.

30 bucks is an unreasonable price point for the service being discussed here, though. But I had absolutely no problem paying iTunes 10 bucks to rent 13 Assassins, and will gladly shell out for the blu ray when it hits.

Why would I pay $30 to have the movie available for only 48 hours?!?!?  And two moths after its theatrical release?  I will never use this distribution system because......

 

 

1.  I can buy two tickets (myself and my wife) to a movie at evening price for $17.50 ($23.50 if it is 3D).  I'm saving almost $7 or more this way.

 

2.  I can wait for the 4-5 month post-release window and just blind buy the damn thing on blu-ray for $20-25.  This way I am saving $5-10 and can watch it whenever I want.

 

3. Netflix.  'nuff said.

 

 

This is coming from a new parent who doesn't have too much time to go out to the movies.  If I'm not willing to make time to see a new film in theaters, then I can wait a few months for it to hit home video.  At that point, I will either just blind buy it or Netflix it.  There is no way in hell that I would pay $30 to watch something VOD two months after its release, no matter if I have it for one day or a couple.  Hell, I probably wouldn't pay $15.

I ordered Hobo With A Shotgun a few weeks back off Playstation network. I don't regret the decision.

 

I'm pretty much in agreement with most here about this. This business model just does not make sense.

 

I saw Unknown a few weeks ago at a 3$ dollar theater and was happy to.

 

Also recently my local AMC megaplex actually lowered their weekend prices from 12 bucks to 10.

When Cameron, Bay, and Ratner actually decide to make a movie I think is worth going to see at a theater, then I will care what they have to say.  Come on Del Toro, Jackson, don't associate yourselves with those guys.  Ratner and Bay actually have the nuts to describe the films they make as "Art Form"?  

 

As has been pointed out, this is a poor product and pricing model. $30 for a a day or two with a two month old film? ugh.  What the hell are first run theater owners getting worked up about?  I can't remember the last time I saw a mega multiplex that kept any movie more that a month at the longest.

 

What world are those director's living in were "art" films, or low budget independent films with no major corporate backing ever have a chance at your local cineplex?  I always have to wait for Blu Ray or OD to see those anyway.  I call major Shenanigans on that argument Mr. Cameron.

 

It's like watching the collapse of the record industry all over again, except much loader and much slower.

I think some people, especially in the letter are vastly overestimating the effect this will have.  Cannibalizing theatrical revenue?  The majority of theatrical revenue is pulled in during the first month or so of release is it not?  Hell, don't most movies not even stay in theaters for two months?  I believe the average is 3.5 weeks, as Jackson said.  I don't think that studios are really seeing this as a huge money-earner, or if they are, that's a dumb thought.

 

Unless it's going to get people to not go to the theater and then wait two months to pay more to see it on a smaller screen, it's not really cannibalizing from theaters.  If it was day and date that would be one thing, and maybe that's the real worry, but until then, this is a niche move at best.  Simply putting the same content on yet another screen.

I'll re-iterate... Paying MORE LATER and then NOT owning a copy? Sounds terrible.

 

If this effects the home video release schedule or raises home vid prices, I'll be PISSED.

Isn't the real issue (that Renn already pointed out) that the move sets a precedent that the filmmakers and theaters don't like?  It's not all that appealing now, but it is all baby steps towards a day-and-date multi-platform release that isn't as expensive.

Nick and I have a good discussion on this topic in tomorrow's video wrap up. Look for it, with your face.

Yeah, you're right. I guess I'm secretly hoping that if it gets ignored (no one buys), it'll go away (they'll give up). Foolish.