Theatrical to VOD window shortening | 17-31 Day theatrical window for Uni

[CoolioD1]

have to imagine the other studios will chase a similar deal? seems like a win/win on their end.

[Krissykins]

1 minute ago, CoolioD1 said:

have to imagine the other studios will chase a similar deal? seems like a win/win on their end.

Yeh I’m sure AMC will be up for it, they’re getting a cut of the PVOD. 

[grim22]

3 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

have to imagine the other studios will chase a similar deal? seems like a win/win on their end.

I fully expect all studios to have the same deal with all chains by the next 2 months.

[CoolioD1]

1 minute ago, grim22 said:

I fully expect all studios to have the same deal with all chains by the next 2 months.

wow independent cinemas are fucked huh?

[WittyUsername]

1 minute ago, CoolioD1 said:

wow independent cinemas are fucked huh?

It was only a matter of time, even before the pandemic. 

[grim22]

5 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

wow independent cinemas are fucked huh?

Definitely seems like the next step towards the "All tentpoles all the time" release strategy.

[antovolk]

9 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

wow independent cinemas are fucked huh?

Independent and arthouse cinemas have been contending with day and date for years and have...actually found ways to still compete? Hell here in the UK an arthouse chain has been driving the whole boat for the better part of a decade in the indie sphere.

 

'All tentpoles all the time' aside what this is really moving towards is theatres being a premium experience for enthusiasts. More expensive, less accessible locations wise, but higher quality of both the experience and the audience....

Edited July 28, 2020 by antovolk

[SnokesLegs]

18 minutes ago, MrPink said:

 

In normal circumstances, Bond would still be making good money through Christmas. Skyfall still made some solid cash back in Christmas 2012. Especially with a later date closer to Thanksgiving, I would imagine grosses wouldn't be insignificant. PVOD I'd imagine would probably hit after the new year (around mid January?). But with COVID, anything goes.

Based on what I read on Deadline, it sounds like it’s up to Universal as to which films and how fast they go to PVOD. Bond is very unlikely to be one of the ones that goes to PVOD after 17 days as like you say, it’ll still be making money, it seems like this is more for small or mid budget films that make most of their money in the first couple of weeks and then drop off the radar.

So as a purely theoretical example and ignoring the COVID situation, if The Hunt had come out and bombed on opening weekend, it’s likely that Uni would have pushed it to PVOD in 17 days. This is going to be more for films like that rather than their big hitters. I also wouldn’t expect Halloween Kills to go this route next year as it’s likely to still be making money after 17 days, I know it’s a horror film and will die off early in November, but it’s likely to make a fair amount from opening weekend and in the run up to Halloween itself, and they wouldn’t want to hobble it by announcing it’s going to PVOD in November.

Edited July 28, 2020 by SnokesLegs

[cdsacken]

24 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Yeh I’m sure AMC will be up for it, they’re getting a cut of the PVOD. 

Which will heavily reduce the number of online titles as it makes it harder for them to make money on the online only films. 

 

Universal gets to safe face saying they shortened the window. AMC gets to say no more direct only titles and we get a cut of PVOD. Nice tap dance there by those two.

[cdsacken]

22 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

wow independent cinemas are fucked huh?

Nah. They so fine. 

 

Arthouses with booze will always be supported by communities. I definitely support mine!

[cannastop]

RIP movies.

[filmlover]

The probably inevitable ended up being accelerated by the pandemic, it seems.

[cdsacken]

7 minutes ago, cannastop said:

RIP movies.

Nah just less theaters. Needs to slim down. Too little on profit margin.

[Barnack]

1 hour ago, Krissykins said:

This is a lot more mature than the “we’re not playing Universal films then” argument from earlier in the year. 
 

Will be good for low budget horror movies from weekend 3 onwards. 

I am pretty sure they are still saying that.

[wildphantom]

Whilst it does clearly state that they will keep movies in theaters if they’re doing well, they’re not really seeing the elephant in the room. What will audiences do if they think they can wait a few weeks and watch it at home? 

 

We’re potentially going from a tried and tested system that works, to something that could be a disaster.  I don’t get it personally. 

 

17 days is ludicrous. 

[SnokesLegs]

55 minutes ago, wildphantom said:

Whilst it does clearly state that they will keep movies in theaters if they’re doing well, they’re not really seeing the elephant in the room. What will audiences do if they think they can wait a few weeks and watch it at home? 

 

We’re potentially going from a tried and tested system that works, to something that could be a disaster.  I don’t get it personally. 

 

17 days is ludicrous. 

While I don’t think we’ll see a collapse of this scale, it does kind of introduce the idea that people will avoid a movie In cinemas in the hope that it will underperform and they can see it 17 days later at home.

 

I keep seeing people say this is bad for independent cinemas, but on the contrary I think this might actually end up being beneficial for them, particularly when it comes to getting small/mid budget films faster. Normally the independent cinema I go to has to wait for certain films to finish their run in the bigger chain cinemas, whereas this potentially grants them access to those films 17 days later. 
 

Personally, when I go to an independent cinema, nine times out of ten it’s to see an older classic film anyway, so I think they’ll probably survive. I regularly frequent the Prince Charles cinema in London and aside from the odd newer film, they’re mostly reliant on classics, which are generally always well attended.

I think It’s the big chains that risk getting screwed over by this, it’ll be interesting to see whether the others follow suit.

[cdsacken]

1 hour ago, wildphantom said:

Whilst it does clearly state that they will keep movies in theaters if they’re doing well, they’re not really seeing the elephant in the room. What will audiences do if they think they can wait a few weeks and watch it at home? 

 

We’re potentially going from a tried and tested system that works, to something that could be a disaster.  I don’t get it personally. 

 

17 days is ludicrous. 

How many films do you think will really only wait 17 days?

 

I see this as a win for movie theaters and companies. Films that we expect to do great that bomb get out quickly and the theater makes space for films that don't suck.

 

There are plenty of people that never want to go to the theater and plenty who hate watching movies on a tiny tv or laptop. Personally I'm in-between but there is a not shit chance in hell I would have watched end game on my laptop first or second or third. Same goes avatar 2 once it comes out in 10 years.

[excel1]

Sooo multi-billion Jurassic World finale will be in theaters for 17 days...?

[Eric Atreides]

13 minutes ago, excel1 said:

Sooo multi-billion Jurassic World finale will be in theaters for 17 days...?

It's mentioned that if a movie is playing well and making a lot of money, it won't go to VOD 17 days later and will have a general theatrical run.

[RealLyre]

7 hours ago, lorddemaxus said:

This is so much better than the ideas people on this forum came up with. On the other hand, it does make the industry more reliant on big blockbusters than ever before.

aren't blockbusters the reason this issue started in the first place? if it wasn't for blockbusters, everything else could go to VOD/streaming and still break-even. but because blockbusters are so expensive and studios want to make money on their investments. we have to go with the inconvenience of going to theaters.