[deadderek]

Bottom line, more money can be made via streaming than was EVER made in cinemas.

[Kingpin]

I'd love for a tie-in book or comic instead of a video game. Ghostbusters: The Video Game set the bar maybe too high for all games to come after it. I really enjoyed the Ghosts From Our Past book for ATC. I'd kill to see them do something similar like Egon's journal or logbook for Afterlife. Doesn't look like it's in the cards but IDW doing an adaption of Afterlife could have been neat.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see a reissue of Tobin's Spirit Guide with the Afterlife cover.

The other major issue here that the streaming giants haven't even attempted to resolve is the increasingly likely possibility that US households get frustrated by having to choose between so many streaming services.

This was something I was going to raise. We're already seeing some frustration from consumers who are finding the streaming/on-demand marketplace is getting more and more crowded, and less and less affordable.
The early days of Netflix worked because there was a lot of content in one place... Now that everyone wants a piece of the Netflix pie, and the studios are yanking back their properties to put on their own streaming services, it's breeding frustration with traditional/less online viewers.

...Like my family. We were frustrated that initially Star Trek: Discovery was going to be a CBS All Access release rather than a traditional release like previous Star Treks. Fortunately we were able to watch it when it was shared by Netflix, which my brother had.

And then you have the customers who have signed up to one service, but find that a show they were watching has emigrated to another, like The Expanse which moved to Amazon after Netflix cancelled it. We were met with the option of missing it, or subscribing to Prime, which didn't offer much beyond The Expanse to make the subscription cost justifiable.

-

And what happens if the physical cinemas do die out... Do you end up having to purchase a yearly subscription to MGM, Sony, Paramount to see their latest films?

Because I'm not sure that model will cut it in the long term, because what happens if a studio has a year of lousy releases?

I like the James Bond, Star Wars, Star Trek movies, along with a smorgasbord of one-off productions from a whole slew of studios. One of the appealing things about the current cinema model is that I can discover films I might not've expected to enjoy... I like going to the cinema despite how expensive it's gotten... But I wouldn't be prepared to pay regular subscriptions to multiple studios if I'm likely to only see a few films each year I actually enjoy.

Case in point: I adore the How to Train Your Dragon films and enjoy the first two Shrek films. But The Croods? Madagascar? Boss Baby? Hard pass.

The model may have to eventually evolve to something different, but after the year we've had, and the impact of the pandemic in the years to come? The consumer wallet might not be able to support all these TV streaming services, let alone the movie studios starting up their own options.

Bottom line, more money can be made via streaming than was EVER made in cinemas.

That's a pretty bold claim.

[Alphagaia]

Because we all know bookmaking in Hollywood is super trustworthy. Honest!

[timeware]

To Mikey's response, Theaters aren't ready to go the way of the dino's just yet.

My city has a small theater which I hope survives this pandemic. As convinient streaming has become I miss blockbusters. I miss just walking into the store, renting a game or movie, then grabbing the pop corn and candy on the way out. Hell, my first job was at a blockbuster.

Now we have to go through walmart with the temptation of going over budget. Red box just isn't the same.

Streaming will make theaters money, but not as much as a regular theater. I don't want to see afterlife go the way ATC did with a lackluster marketing campaign which is why I think a dual release is to Afterlife's advantage.

[RichardLess]

I'm sorry, but you guys are all so wrong. Most, if not all, industry experts are all ready calling it.

Watch this video and get back with me. Look at those numbers...

https://youtu.be/PA2zU7CuNPk

Disney made 11 billion dollars in profit in 2019, that includes EVERYTHING they own (theme parks, movies, merchandise, etc). Netflix has 193 million global subs, which gives them 23 billion dollars in revenue. But they spent 14 billion on licensing fees. 10 billion on original content, 4 billion in sales and operating costs. So Netflix in 2019 actually lost money here. But Netflix will be fine.

So Netflix in 2019 $
$ 23 billion dollars revenue
-14 billion licensing fees
-10 billion original content
- 4 billion operating costs
Equals a 5 billion dollar loss (but again netflix will be fine overall).


Now plug in those Disney plus numbers. If they get Netflix level subs (which bringing in the MCU films will do). It's projected that by 2023 Disney plus will have over 200 million subs.

Disneys overall profit in 2019 11 billion
Disney projected profit on Disney plus (once they get Netflix's level of subs) is 24 billion.
But here's the kicker, they DONT have any licensing fees. 10 billion on original content (films and shows), operating costs 7 billion.

$24 billion
- 7 billion operating costs
-10 billion in films and shows
Equals a profit of 7 billion dollars. Which that's just Disney plus!!! Again Disney made 11 billion off of everything in 2019. So they have the potential to make the same or more off of streaming than they do off of cinemas.

I know a lot of you are rooting for theaters because of the experience, I get that. But your backing the losing horse. These are ACTUAL numbers, actual statistics. Warner brothers dropped the gauntlet, Disney will follow suit (people are already expecting Disney to announce Black Widow on Disney Plus as soon as Dec 10). Once Disney makes the shift, it's game over man. Paramount will follow suit, and that just leaves Sony and Universal. Universal cant because they signed a contract with AMC earlier in the pandemic. So they are left out at the moment. Paramount has their own service. So that really only leaves Sony. I'm telling you guys now, expect Afterlife on Netflix. Itll be in theaters as well, but it'll be on Netflix.

Bottom line, more money can be made via streaming than was EVER made in cinemas.

“Netflix Will be fine”. Netflix is loosing 5 billion dollars a year now when competition is only going to heat up. Netflix is loaded with debt.

Do you see the problem here?

Netflix LOST money. Disney made money.

Now what did Disney do in 2019 that Netflix didn’t? They released movies in theatres!

You are looking at this in all the wrong ways. Do you understand that a company would want those 193 million subs AND release movies in theatres? It’s not a “I can’t get those 193 million subs if I’m still making movies for theatres!” The goal is both. It’s not in any companies best interest to limit the amount of money they can make.

Again, the math is real simple. You can do one thing and limit the amount of money you can make, or you can do two things & have practically unlimited potential.

This isn’t about holding on to a business that doesn’t work or backing a losing horse. The theatrical business model works for companies like Disney.

No one is saying streaming isn’t changing the game. Of course it is. It’s taking the more risky films like The Irishman or mid budget auteur films like Mank and giving them a home. But the big budget 200 million dollar 4 quadrant blockbuster? The ones studios want to hit that billion dollar mark? That ones they want a direct ROI on? Those aren’t going anywhere.

And again, we are focusing on Disney. Disney+ is available worldwide. HBO Max is exclusive to one market. The 2021 HBO Max distribution plan isn’t happening anywhere else. That changes the ball game a bit.

Heres how Disney sees this. They can release cheaper, less expensive Star Wars content & MCU content, things like The Mandalorian, Falcon & The Winter Solider, Wanadavision. That will drive up subs. They can release the prime stuff in theatres, make a billion dollars worldwide, then have it come on Disney+ which then again, drive up subs.
That’s a winning formula.

If COVID hadn’t happened this conversation wouldn’t even be happening. Covid is a once in a generation pandemic. That’s what’s driving these decisions. It’s reactionary not strategic.

[MikeyJ122]

To Mikey's response, Theaters aren't ready to go the way of the dino's just yet.

My city has a small theater which I hope survives this pandemic. As convinient streaming has become I miss blockbusters. I miss just walking into the store, renting a game or movie, then grabbing the pop corn and candy on the way out. Hell, my first job was at a blockbuster.

Now we have to go through walmart with the temptation of going over budget. Red box just isn't the same.

Streaming will make theaters money, but not as much as a regular theater. I don't want to see afterlife go the way ATC did with a lackluster marketing campaign which is why I think a dual release is to Afterlife's advantage.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not rooting for theaters to go away, quite the opposite. Besides, I think this will actually be a GOOD thing for theaters. Will more than half of them die? Yes. But the ones that remain, will have to step up their game. If you want people to come to your establishment and watch a film, as opposed to watching it at home, you better have some incentives. So I expect the remaining theaters to REALLY be on their A game, which for us consumers is a good thing. This whole thing is a WIN for consumers, more options better it is.

At the end of the day, I just want to enjoy new films. This isn't just about Afterlife (although I'm looking forward to that more than anything else). But I WILL sign up for HBOmax now, a new movie every three weeks, count me in. I could care less about Wonder Woman, but I want to watch it now, because it's NEW. We haven't seen many new films in almost a year (yes there have been a few, but not many).

[MikeyJ122]

I'm sorry, but you guys are all so wrong. Most, if not all, industry experts are all ready calling it.

Watch this video and get back with me. Look at those numbers...

https://youtu.be/PA2zU7CuNPk

Disney made 11 billion dollars in profit in 2019, that includes EVERYTHING they own (theme parks, movies, merchandise, etc). Netflix has 193 million global subs, which gives them 23 billion dollars in revenue. But they spent 14 billion on licensing fees. 10 billion on original content, 4 billion in sales and operating costs. So Netflix in 2019 actually lost money here. But Netflix will be fine.

So Netflix in 2019 $
$ 23 billion dollars revenue
-14 billion licensing fees
-10 billion original content
- 4 billion operating costs
Equals a 5 billion dollar loss (but again netflix will be fine overall).


Now plug in those Disney plus numbers. If they get Netflix level subs (which bringing in the MCU films will do). It's projected that by 2023 Disney plus will have over 200 million subs.

Disneys overall profit in 2019 11 billion
Disney projected profit on Disney plus (once they get Netflix's level of subs) is 24 billion.
But here's the kicker, they DONT have any licensing fees. 10 billion on original content (films and shows), operating costs 7 billion.

$24 billion
- 7 billion operating costs
-10 billion in films and shows
Equals a profit of 7 billion dollars. Which that's just Disney plus!!! Again Disney made 11 billion off of everything in 2019. So they have the potential to make the same or more off of streaming than they do off of cinemas.

I know a lot of you are rooting for theaters because of the experience, I get that. But your backing the losing horse. These are ACTUAL numbers, actual statistics. Warner brothers dropped the gauntlet, Disney will follow suit (people are already expecting Disney to announce Black Widow on Disney Plus as soon as Dec 10). Once Disney makes the shift, it's game over man. Paramount will follow suit, and that just leaves Sony and Universal. Universal cant because they signed a contract with AMC earlier in the pandemic. So they are left out at the moment. Paramount has their own service. So that really only leaves Sony. I'm telling you guys now, expect Afterlife on Netflix. Itll be in theaters as well, but it'll be on Netflix.

Bottom line, more money can be made via streaming than was EVER made in cinemas.

“Netflix Will be fine”. Netflix is loosing 5 billion dollars a year now when competition is only going to heat up. Netflix is loaded with debt.

Do you see the problem here?

Netflix LOST money. Disney made money.

Now what did Disney do in 2019 that Netflix didn’t? They released movies in theatres!

You are looking at this in all the wrong ways. Do you understand that a company would want those 193 million subs AND release movies in theatres? It’s not a “I can’t get those 193 million subs if I’m still making movies for theatres!” The goal is both. It’s not in any companies best interest to limit the amount of money they can make.

Again, the math is real simple. You can do one thing and limit the amount of money you can make, or you can do two things & have practically unlimited potential.

This isn’t about holding on to a business that doesn’t work or backing a losing horse. The theatrical business model works for companies like Disney.

No one is saying streaming isn’t changing the game. Of course it is. It’s taking the more risky films like The Irishman or mid budget auteur films like Mank and giving them a home. But the big budget 200 million dollar 4 quadrant blockbuster? The ones studios want to hit that billion dollar mark? That ones they want a direct ROI on? Those aren’t going anywhere.

And again, we are focusing on Disney. Disney+ is available worldwide. HBO Max is exclusive to one market. The 2021 HBO Max distribution plan isn’t happening anywhere else. That changes the ball game a bit.

Heres how Disney sees this. They can release cheaper, less expensive Star Wars content & MCU content, things like The Mandalorian, Falcon & The Winter Solider, Wanadavision. That will drive up subs. They can release the prime stuff in theatres, make a billion dollars worldwide, then have it come on Disney+ which then again, drive up subs.
That’s a winning formula.

If COVID hadn’t happened this conversation wouldn’t even be happening. Covid is a once in a generation pandemic. That’s what’s driving these decisions. It’s reactionary not strategic.

Did you read my post? Netflix lost money based on it's $14 billion in licensing fees. Disney doesn't have to worry about that.

No matter the film, box office tickets are a question mark. Look at the DC movies, they all haven't been super successful. Yes the days of 1 billion at the box office are most likely over. But if Disney can make $200 million per month in sub fees, that's guaranteed money (that covers the cost of most films). Which they WILL get that once the MCU hits D plus. Do you really think studios want to gamble on the box office, when they can get a sure thing? Let's not forget, of those billion dollar box office films, theaters are taking somewhere between 30-50% of the cut. So just because Avengers made over a billion at the box office, that's not all profit. Plus add in advertisement, etc.

I'm telling you guys, more money can be made streaming. Would this EVEN be a conversation if the big studios didn't know this? Why would Warner EVEN do this, if they didn't already know they are going to be profitable? It's the future.

[MikeyJ122]

I'd love for a tie-in book or comic instead of a video game. Ghostbusters: The Video Game set the bar maybe too high for all games to come after it. I really enjoyed the Ghosts From Our Past book for ATC. I'd kill to see them do something similar like Egon's journal or logbook for Afterlife. Doesn't look like it's in the cards but IDW doing an adaption of Afterlife could have been neat.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see a reissue of Tobin's Spirit Guide with the Afterlife cover.

The other major issue here that the streaming giants haven't even attempted to resolve is the increasingly likely possibility that US households get frustrated by having to choose between so many streaming services.

This was something I was going to raise. We're already seeing some frustration from consumers who are finding the streaming/on-demand marketplace is getting more and more crowded, and less and less affordable.
The early days of Netflix worked because there was a lot of content in one place... Now that everyone wants a piece of the Netflix pie, and the studios are yanking back their properties to put on their own streaming services, it's breeding frustration with traditional/less online viewers.

...Like my family. We were frustrated that initially Star Trek: Discovery was going to be a CBS All Access release rather than a traditional release like previous Star Treks. Fortunately we were able to watch it when it was shared by Netflix, which my brother had.

And then you have the customers who have signed up to one service, but find that a show they were watching has emigrated to another, like The Expanse which moved to Amazon after Netflix cancelled it. We were met with the option of missing it, or subscribing to Prime, which didn't offer much beyond The Expanse to make the subscription cost justifiable.

-

And what happens if the physical cinemas do die out... Do you end up having to purchase a yearly subscription to MGM, Sony, Paramount to see their latest films?

Because I'm not sure that model will cut it in the long term, because what happens if a studio has a year of lousy releases?

I like the James Bond, Star Wars, Star Trek movies, along with a smorgasbord of one-off productions from a whole slew of studios. One of the appealing things about the current cinema model is that I can discover films I might not've expected to enjoy... I like going to the cinema despite how expensive it's gotten... But I wouldn't be prepared to pay regular subscriptions to multiple studios if I'm likely to only see a few films each year I actually enjoy.

Case in point: I adore the How to Train Your Dragon films and enjoy the first two Shrek films. But The Croods? Madagascar? Boss Baby? Hard pass.

The model may have to eventually evolve to something different, but after the year we've had, and the impact of the pandemic in the years to come? The consumer wallet might not be able to support all these TV streaming services, let alone the movie studios starting up their own options.

The thing you are forgetting is you can sign up for one month at a time. You don't have to commit to a yearly subscription. You want to watch the new Star Trek movie (for example), you sign up to Paramount's CBS service, watch the movie you want, then the rest of the programs for one month as a bonus. So you got to watch the movie you wanted, plus extras for a one month sub. Then you can cancel and go to a different service, etc. It's not that big of a deal. Will the 50 and older crowd be a little lost? Yes. But the younger crowd will eat it up.

[Kingpin]

But if Disney can make $200 million per month in sub fees, that's guaranteed money

It's not guaranteed money if people are having to cancel their subscriptions to make ends meet after being furloughed, or their jobs being downsized entirely.

The thing you are forgetting is you can sign up for one month at a time. You don't have to commit to a yearly subscription. You want to watch the new Star Trek movie (for example), you sign up to Paramount's CBS service, watch the movie you want, then the rest of the programs for one month as a bonus. So you got to watch the movie you wanted, plus extras for a one month sub. Then you can cancel and go to a different service, etc. It's not that big of a deal. Will the 50 and older crowd be a little lost? Yes. But the younger crowd will eat it up.

I appreciate the suggestion, but looking into it CBS All Access isn't even available in the UK beyond some sort of gift card loophole. Plus I've got all the other Star Trek films and series that I'd want to see on DVD.

My brother and I will be watching the latest series once the pandemic restrictions are loosened, and we're able to meet up in each other's houses again.

[tylergfoster]

Disney made 11 billion dollars in profit in 2019, that includes EVERYTHING they own (theme parks, movies, merchandise, etc). Netflix has 193 million global subs, which gives them 23 billion dollars in revenue. But they spent 14 billion on licensing fees. 10 billion on original content, 4 billion in sales and operating costs. So Netflix in 2019 actually lost money here. But Netflix will be fine.

Now plug in those Disney plus numbers. If they get Netflix level subs (which bringing in the MCU films will do). It's projected that by 2023 Disney plus will have over 200 million subs.

Some huge, and fairly obvious holes to be poked here, and the biggest one is this: yeah, maybe Disney made $11b in profit in 2019, and...they also had 7 movies that grossed over $1b each at the global box office. Avengers: Endgame went as high as $2.7b. There is the possibility that Disney+ has 200m subs in 2023...but it's entirely hypothetical and over two years away.

With Disney losing a huge amount of money on closed theme parks and no possibility of any 2020 billion-dollar grossers (plus no guarantee of any 2021 billion-dollar grossers), the idea that a streaming service that has only managed 73.7m subscribers in the middle of a pandemic is something Disney can safely bank on to turn in $7b profit anytime soon is nonsense.

Also, as RichardLess said, you're very hand-wavey about the fact that Netflix has been in debt for some time now, which is a question mark that many have raised. You say they'll be fine, but eventually they'll have to take care of that debt, and it doesn't feel like subscriber growth is going to be the secret to that success.

Also, for the record, here's an interview over at Vox with WarnerMedia CEO Jason Kilar about the HBO Max plans. Not even he argues that this is going to make them more money than opening theatrically. He also notes that Warner actually pays a licensing fee even for Warner content.

https://www.vox.com/recode/22151073/war ... rrefresh=1

[RichardLess]

“Netflix Will be fine”. Netflix is loosing 5 billion dollars a year now when competition is only going to heat up. Netflix is loaded with debt.

Do you see the problem here?

Netflix LOST money. Disney made money.

Now what did Disney do in 2019 that Netflix didn’t? They released movies in theatres!

You are looking at this in all the wrong ways. Do you understand that a company would want those 193 million subs AND release movies in theatres? It’s not a “I can’t get those 193 million subs if I’m still making movies for theatres!” The goal is both. It’s not in any companies best interest to limit the amount of money they can make.

Again, the math is real simple. You can do one thing and limit the amount of money you can make, or you can do two things & have practically unlimited potential.

This isn’t about holding on to a business that doesn’t work or backing a losing horse. The theatrical business model works for companies like Disney.

No one is saying streaming isn’t changing the game. Of course it is. It’s taking the more risky films like The Irishman or mid budget auteur films like Mank and giving them a home. But the big budget 200 million dollar 4 quadrant blockbuster? The ones studios want to hit that billion dollar mark? That ones they want a direct ROI on? Those aren’t going anywhere.

And again, we are focusing on Disney. Disney+ is available worldwide. HBO Max is exclusive to one market. The 2021 HBO Max distribution plan isn’t happening anywhere else. That changes the ball game a bit.

Heres how Disney sees this. They can release cheaper, less expensive Star Wars content & MCU content, things like The Mandalorian, Falcon & The Winter Solider, Wanadavision. That will drive up subs. They can release the prime stuff in theatres, make a billion dollars worldwide, then have it come on Disney+ which then again, drive up subs.
That’s a winning formula.

If COVID hadn’t happened this conversation wouldn’t even be happening. Covid is a once in a generation pandemic. That’s what’s driving these decisions. It’s reactionary not strategic.

Did you read my post? Netflix lost money based on it's $14 billion in licensing fees. Disney doesn't have to worry about that.

No matter the film, box office tickets are a question mark. Look at the DC movies, they all haven't been super successful. Yes the days of 1 billion at the box office are most likely over. But if Disney can make $200 million per month in sub fees, that's guaranteed money (that covers the cost of most films). Which they WILL get that once the MCU hits D plus. Do you really think studios want to gamble on the box office, when they can get a sure thing? Let's not forget, of those billion dollar box office films, theaters are taking somewhere between 30-50% of the cut. So just because Avengers made over a billion at the box office, that's not all profit. Plus add in advertisement, etc.

I'm telling you guys, more money can be made streaming. Would this EVEN be a conversation if the big studios didn't know this? Why would Warner EVEN do this, if they didn't already know they are going to be profitable? It's the future.

I don’t even know where to start.

“Once the MCU hit Disney+”. The MCU is on Disney+. From Iron Man to Endgame. What are you talking about?

Your logic is...flawed. “I’m telling you guys”. You keep saying the same thing over and over. You really think movie studios want to give up the potential of a “Joker” or “Deadpool” style success? Look how much The Joker cost to make. Look at how much it made. Tell me again what company what give up that profit? Especially when it’s landing on HBO Max anyways. Think about it.

Why would Warner’s do this? Did you read my post? It’s about...stock prices. If you’ve read any financial analysis on Warner’s plan there is major concern. AT&T has 161 billion in debt. It’s a short money solution. HBO Max sputtered out of the gate. This will get them subscribers but loose them money. All those movies cost ALOT of money.

Yes Disney doesn’t have licensing fee’s. What’s your point? No one is saying Disney isn’t going to make a profit. But they won’t make the kind of profit they’ve been making if they skip a theatrical run.

Again, you keep ignoring the fact that theatrical, in 2019, was still a big business. It’s not like streaming is keeping people away from theatres. This isn’t like the music industry. One thing didn’t supplant the other.

If you don’t think movies will make a billion dollars again...I don’t know what to say. They will. After COVID is over(if the theatre companies can hang on) people will return to movie theatres. Just like they will return to restaurants.

I’ve been thinking of a comparison to make to show how your logic is flawed. And while this isn’t a 1:1 maybe it will give you a better idea of why your thinking isn’t quite right. Let’s use McDonald’s. Right now I can order McDonald’s on my phone and get it to my place within 15-20 minutes. I don’t have to leave. It’s the same food. Now that’s a nice new revenue stream for McDonald’s. So does that mean they’ll close indoor dining and go to carry out only? No. It’s just an extra revenue stream. Well it’s a similar thing with movies. Streaming is just an extra revenue stream. It’s not meant to replace anything. It keeps these companies robust and able to adjust.

[SpaceBallz]

I guess we'll see how the HBO Max experiment goes I suppose. They claim it's "only a 1 year contract" but I think we all know they're doing it for a year just to see if it was a good idea or not.

[mrmichaelt]

Yeah, I'm in the same ballpark as Richardless in not thinking streaming won't replace theaters. At best we'll some natural selection Darwinsim. Some theaters will die, some will live and evolve. If they wanted streaming services to replace theaters, the costs of the subscriptions or rentals for a movie would be way higher. But they really can't or they'd lose people. But to replace a theater they have to match the proceeds from one ticket per person in a theater. Right now, Mulan was like $30 when it came out on Disney+? For example. So that's about two movie tickets for two adults to a regular showing at a theater. But then how many people are in the house who didn't pay anything at all for the streaming service or rental and are watching the movie for free? That is really how theaters will always make more money than the streamers, imo. A ticket per head. Streamers can't do that.

[MikeyJ122]

What you guys are failing to realize is theaters might not be able to survive this "1 year experiment." The theater industry is nowhere near strong enough to with stand what's going on (both covid and streaming). I suppose, in a perfect world where nothing has to change, than why change? But we don't live in a perfect world. When covid is over, it's VERY possible that 50% of all theaters currently are just gone. That's also playing a role into studios switching to streaming.

I'm not just making this stuff up, or trying to win an argument or anything of the sort. I'm relaying information that ive heard from people that cover the industry, or have insider info, etc. They all seem to saying that it's just the changing times, it's technological advancement. At some point, technology changes what was considered the "norm." Whens the last time you listened to a CD? Last time you watched a VHS? Whens the last time you rode in a horse drawn carriage? Something new happens and replaces what was. Elon Musk is working on satalite internet that would allow everyone in the world internet ANYWHERE in the world. That's a game changer.

Streaming is the future of films, it just is. It will bring films into people's homes, wherever they are. From what I've heard, the ONLY light at the end of the tunnel for theaters is Avatar 2. If James Cameron can provide a unique theatrical experience again, that'll bring people in. But then future films will have to be filmed in a similar way, and none of them have truly done what the first Avatar did, so that doesn't give me a lot of hope for things post Avatar 2. Especially when it's easier and cheaper to make a film for a streaming service.

[Kingpin]

Whens the last time you listened to a CD?

Last week. The soundtrack for a film released in 2017.

And another I know I'll be listening to in the future: the mix CD I made of Christmas music which we'll be playing in the house for Christmas, if not my workplace's alternate Christmas meal, should it go ahead (Because I don't have music streaming on my phone).

CDs might be (slowly) on the way out but they're not as dead as VHS casettes.

[RichardLess]

What you guys are failing to realize is theaters might not be able to survive this "1 year experiment." The theater industry is nowhere near strong enough to with stand what's going on (both covid and streaming). I suppose, in a perfect world where nothing has to change, than why change? But we don't live in a perfect world. When covid is over, it's VERY possible that 50% of all theaters currently are just gone. That's also playing a role into studios switching to streaming.

I'm not just making this stuff up, or trying to win an argument or anything of the sort. I'm relaying information that ive heard from people that cover the industry, or have insider info, etc. They all seem to saying that it's just the changing times, it's technological advancement. At some point, technology changes what was considered the "norm." Whens the last time you listened to a CD? Last time you watched a VHS? Whens the last time you rode in a horse drawn carriage? Something new happens and replaces what was. Elon Musk is working on satalite internet that would allow everyone in the world internet ANYWHERE in the world. That's a game changer.

Streaming is the future of films, it just is. It will bring films into people's homes, wherever they are. From what I've heard, the ONLY light at the end of the tunnel for theaters is Avatar 2. If James Cameron can provide a unique theatrical experience again, that'll bring people in. But then future films will have to be filmed in a similar way, and none of them have truly done what the first Avatar did, so that doesn't give me a lot of hope for things post Avatar 2. Especially when it's easier and cheaper to make a film for a streaming service.

Theatres not being able to withstand COVID is a different conversation from “Movie studios will make more money with streaming”. 1 is a valid concern, the other is make believe. Personally I think movie theatres are too big to fail from the pandemic. I don’t know if a government bail out or a massive corporate consolidation will occur but I think theatres will still be here. Now that it’s legal for movie studios to own theatres once again, maybe that’s the way forward. So long as there’s money to be made, investors will be there. And there will be money to be made. People are itching to get out and live life they way they used to back in the good ol days of....last year.

This isn’t an “either or” sort of thing. I work in the industry and I can tell you that whoever is relaying this information to you is full of it. Streaming is the future...of home entertainment. It has and will continue to change the industry. No doubts there. Less & less films will be released theatrically but the movie theatre will still be the place where new Batman & Star Wars movies debut 2, 5, 10 & 15 years from now. You know how I know this? You know what these doom and gloom prognosticators are missing?

People like going to the movies. People like getting out of the house. It’s one of the less expensive ways to spending an evening out for a couple hours. So long as it’s possible to spend 100 million and make a billion, movie theatres will be here. Trust me. I’m not making this up to win an argument or anything of the sort. I’m relaying information I know to be true from people who’ve worked in this industry for longer than you’ve been alive. (Sorry. I couldn’t resist)

Again...these arguments have all been had before. They were wrong when television was invented. They were wrong when cable TV came out, they were wrong when VHS was a thing. And they are wrong now. Every single one of those paradigm shifts all became a new source of revenue. It’s the same with streaming.

People still go to concerts despite being able to listen to the music at home. Yeah very few people purchsse CD’s anymore. But that’s a physical media trend. The music industry was always an “at home” experience besides concerts. And guess what? Those still happen and are still very profitable.

Spotify didn’t kill Broadway or rock concerts. Streaming won’t kill movie theatres or the theatrical experience. I don’t understand how any person who genuinely knows how the movie industry works & it’s history will think otherwise.

[timeware]

At some point, technology changes what was considered the "norm." Whens the last time you listened to a CD? Last time you watched a VHS? Whens the last time you rode in a horse drawn carriage?

Lets see...That one time in band camp I used a horse drawn carriage to return my vhs tape before it was over due at midnight. I broke my glass slipper in the process and sprained my ankle. Then I realized the ambulance wasn't playing Free Bird from a CD, it was being played on an 8 track player!

(Sorry couldn't resist the cinderella joke. It just popped in there.)

[robbritton]

Whens the last time you listened to a CD?

Last week. The soundtrack for a film released in 2017.

And another I know I'll be listening to in the future: the mix CD I made of Christmas music which we'll be playing in the house for Christmas, if not my workplace's alternate Christmas meal, should it go ahead (Because I don't have music streaming on my phone).

CDs might be (slowly) on the way out but they're not as dead as VHS casettes.

yeah, sorry Mikey, but we've literally got Merry Christmas: 25 festive Favourites on the CD player as I type. There was a Spotify playlist on yesterday, but the CD player plays less havoc with my rendering, so here we are. I bought an album on cassette the other week too. Suggested Friends. It's really good!

[Hairy Biker]

My town is getting a new 6 screen cinema in addition to the old 8 screen cinema.... Just saying.

[Alphagaia]

What 'he fails to realize' is that he is asking the wrong crowd, hehe. We are mostly all old farts who still own CD's. Just bought one for my kid for longer drives. (No tablets while we drive).

I have no stake in this conversation. Carry on!

[Hairy Biker]

TBF he is asking the wrong crowd, hehe. We are mostly all old farts who still own CD's. Just bought one for my kid for longer drives. (No tablets while we drive).

I have no stake in this conversation. Carry on!

I still use an early model Ipod and buy vinyl.

[BRD 527]

I got a 20yr old Sony Walkman

[RichardLess]

I got a 20yr old Sony Walkman

Did anyone else picture a Walkman from the 1980s before you realized “oh shit. It’s 2020, 20 years ago was 2000”?

Excuse me while I go bang my head against the wall whilst crying about the futility of time

[Davideverona]

Vynils are coming back again. Just saying.

[deadderek]

Seems like Sony is sticking to the March release for Morbius. Jared Leto just recorded a new short video before the trailer. Interesting.

Let's hope this bodes well for our June release date.

[JonXCTrack]

Vynils are coming back again. Just saying.

I don't know that it ever really went away completely. CDs were the rage in the 90s, and then MP3s in the 2000s (thanks to Napster and Limewire mostly). But vinyl, besides having an antique/collector attribute, also sounds better to some people.

https://www.cnet.com/news/why-do-lps-sound-so-good/

[BRD 527]

I got a 20yr old Sony Walkman

Did anyone else picture a Walkman from the 1980s before you realized “oh shit. It’s 2020, 20 years ago was 2000”?

Excuse me while I go bang my head against the wall whilst crying about the futility of time

Haha I hear you sorry about that!

I found it a few weeks ago while working on cleaning out the basement of my familys old house it was "new" in the orignal packaging dated 2000. Its silver and has built in AM/FM!

[tylergfoster]

What you guys are failing to realize is theaters might not be able to survive this "1 year experiment." The theater industry is nowhere near strong enough to with stand what's going on (both covid and streaming). I suppose, in a perfect world where nothing has to change, than why change? But we don't live in a perfect world. When covid is over, it's VERY possible that 50% of all theaters currently are just gone. That's also playing a role into studios switching to streaming.

I'm not just making this stuff up, or trying to win an argument or anything of the sort. I'm relaying information that ive heard from people that cover the industry, or have insider info, etc. They all seem to saying that it's just the changing times, it's technological advancement. At some point, technology changes what was considered the "norm." Whens the last time you listened to a CD? Last time you watched a VHS? Whens the last time you rode in a horse drawn carriage? Something new happens and replaces what was. Elon Musk is working on satalite internet that would allow everyone in the world internet ANYWHERE in the world. That's a game changer.

Streaming is the future of films, it just is. It will bring films into people's homes, wherever they are. From what I've heard, the ONLY light at the end of the tunnel for theaters is Avatar 2. If James Cameron can provide a unique theatrical experience again, that'll bring people in. But then future films will have to be filmed in a similar way, and none of them have truly done what the first Avatar did, so that doesn't give me a lot of hope for things post Avatar 2. Especially when it's easier and cheaper to make a film for a streaming service.

Nobody's denying that streaming is the future of films, but the problem is two-fold: the consumer isn't there yet, and the industry isn't there yet. Streaming has to settle on a delivery system, pricing structure, etc. that is as reliable and consistent as the theater industry was when it became the dominant form of film distribution for the public to put that kind of weight on it. Until the culture is truly onboard with streaming over theatrical, then the streaming future hasn't arrived yet, and we're obviously not there because theaters are still unquestionably the bigger moneymaker.

As for the industry, the future of films is also going to look drastically different than the industry does currently. For example, I would strongly suspect that groundbreaking progress in film production will be a huge step toward streaming, because making a movie would become significantly cheaper. There was that brief period where "digital backlot" films like Sky Captain and Sin City were a big deal. I'm sure there will be a point at which something like this could be close to or completely photorealistic, and cheaper than building a set or shooting on location.

At this particular juncture, it's true that theaters are in an extremely bad position, but ultimately, I think the industry wants theaters to survive, and I expect they will. Whether that's some major investor stepping in to save AMC because they believe people will return to the movies in 2021, or studios relaxing their cut to help theaters out, or something like what AMC is currently getting, which is a percentage of streaming revenue for the film's that Universal opens in theaters and then puts on digital 17 days later, like Freaky, who knows. Maybe all of the above. But I'm 100% positive that if you asked studio executives if they'd rather go all streaming or have theaters safely reopen, it'd be the latter.

Here's an article in Deadline about the legal challenges Warner Bros. might face over the HBO Max deal, which goes into how much this is costing Warner Bros., specifically in the "back-end deal" range. Key quote: "What’s wrong with this, per the dealmakers? It’s a loss leader for everyone...and the compensation isn’t at all weighted by the number of paid HBO Max subscribers that are added by this bold move, or by the benefit to the WarnerMedia stock price, which is the reason WarnerMedia has done this."

https://deadline.com/2020/12/warnermedi ... 234651283/

[Dr.D]

Just a small tidbit, Legendary Pictures is fighting WB over the digital release of Godzilla vs Kong. Not happy with being cut out of the decision making process.

[Alphagaia]

The plot thickens