Fox President Of Alternative Programming Mike Darnell To … 
FIRST BOX OFFICE: ‘Fast & Furious 6′ Easy … 
NBC Sets Oklahoma Tornado Benefit Concert For May 29 
Cannes: Directors’ Fortnight Honors ‘Les … 
SHOCKER: Tom Cruise Exits ‘Man From … 
A+E Rebuild: BBC’s Jana Bennett To Run Bio And LMN … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Hannibal’ Hits Low, … 
‘Katie’ Shakeup: Rachel Miskowiec Replaces … 
Hammond On Cannes: French Hero Jerry Lewis On His Return To … 
Cannes: Another Jewelry Heist? $2.6M Necklace Missing After … 
Hammond On Cannes: Leo DiCaprio’s Moon Trip Tops … 
Specialty B.O. Preview: ‘Before Midnight’, … 
2012-2013 Season Network Rankings: CBS Sweeps In Final … 
Full 2012-2013 TV Season Series Rankings 
TOLDJA! Paramount Pocketing $190M From Disney For Marvel … 
‘Good Morning America’ Hits 19-Year Viewership … 
MGM Buys ‘Modern Family’ Producer Ben … 
‘Fashion Police’ Writers Chant On Picket Lines: … 
Universal Makes Seven-Figure Deal For ‘The School For … 
Steven Soderbergh Will Interrupt Retirement To Direct And … 
Cannes: EOne Announces Itself As Player In U.S. … 
Comcast-Uni Testing ‘Tower Heist’ At $59.99
Cinemark Threatens Boycott Of ‘Tower Heist’ Over Early VOD Experiment
Theater owners seem resigned to the fact that Universal will run a premium video-on-demand test of its upcoming film Tower Heist – but are determined to push back the date, now scheduled for just three weeks after November, 4 when it opens in theaters. Negotiations continue as exhibition companies link arms: Three small regional theater chains have joined Cinemark in refusing to book Brett Ratner’s caper movie starring Eddie Murphy and Ben Stiller if Universal proceeds with plans to offer it for $59.99 three weeks after the debut to roughly half a million cable homes in Atlanta and Portland, Ore. California-based Regency Theatres, Galaxy Theatres and Detroit-based Emagine Theatres as well as some small exhibitors representing some 50 screens around the country have also refused to book the movie, the LA Times reported. Exhibition companies feel that they already swallowed a bitter pill earlier this year when four studios announced a deal with satellite broadcaster DirecTV to make some movies available via VOD for $29.99 — but 60 days after their theatrical debut. Theater owners wanted to draw the line at 90 days. Anything less, they feared, would encourage many ticket buyers to wait and watch hit films in the comfort of their living rooms.
Loading ...
Someone explain to me what moron would pay $60 to watch this at home. Then explain to me what moron is afraid of the first set of morons taking their theatrical business away.
i’ll be honest, if my kids were older and they wanted to see this, i’d rather pay $60 to see it at home than almost $80 to see it in a theater with people talking on their phones and talking throughout it. well, not this. a good movie.
Versus waiting a few months, and paying 9 bucks to watch it at home?
My thoughts exactly, except that I wouldn’t even pay $9. My wife and I just watched X-Men: First Class today for the grand total of $1.09 (RedBox).
Originally released on 6/3 and I’m seeing it 4 months later for like 98% off what we would have paid to see it in a theater (approx. $28 + parking, etc.?). Next week we’ll catch Bad Teacher and the week after that, Captain America.
Yes, please.
that’s the main reason we don’t go to the movies much anymore. if there was something that came out that we didn’t want to wait for, however, the VOD service does make some sense. i wouldn’t do it all the time, but every once in a while? why not.
Who ever pays for this service is a true idiot!!! $59.99 UNBELIEVABLE!
There’s no way it’s worth $60 to watch a new release alone at home. But if I have a decent home theater, I invite 5 of my quieter friends, charge them $10 a piece, and ban cell phones for the duration of the screening…well, that might be worth it. It’s all about being able to control your viewing experience. At a movie theater I have no control whatsoever.
Also, if one of your friends are talking too much and you ask him to be quiet, he’s probably not going to knife you in the pancreas.
The theatrical experience has become a nightmare. Talking teens, texting tweens, uncomfortable seats, soaring snack prices.
$60 is a bargain if you’re splitting the cost with friends or for a family of four (this is a PG-13 movie after all). You save gas money, snack money, and the time it takes to shuttle back and forth). No wonder theaters are scared. Instead of complaining, lift your standard of service and lower your exorbitant ransom demands for snacks. Otherwise going to the cinema will become a esoteric hobby.
I agree! I go to movie theaters 2 or 3 times a week and I’m about to call it quits over the people — both adults and teens — that are constantly texting during movie screenings. It’s grown from a once-in-awhile nuisance to a constant annoyance.
Theater owners need to post somebody inside the theater to enforce this. It’s making the movie-going experience insufferable. I can afford the $18 movie ticket prices here in LA, but I’d rather stay at home if I’m going to be annoyed by constant cellphone use.
Do the studios realize that none of us outside Hollywood have that kind of cash?
I wouldn’t see it for free.
interesting that the studio chose the 3 week number, since that’s about the time the splits start to turn in favor of theaters
Except most deals are done as a flat aggregate deal close to 50% now. You know just enough to be dangerous buddy, how about you leave the business talk to the companies involved.
Hmmm. Let’s see. Universal is cherry picking this particular movie. Why?
a) They figure it will bomb in the theater marketplace. So this way they have a built-in excuse for the shareholders.
b) They really want to break this barrier. So they chose a movie they realized would do poorly to test the home video marketplace.
c) They will decide and conduct surveys that prove people liked the idea but the price point was too high. So next time a movie will be $50. Then $40 ….
d) Developing another way to cheat working people of their residuals (maybe) while taking our the middleman in their product chain??
e) Increase public awareness of a new straight to streaming video marketplace.
f) All the above.
Look at it this way: Invite a bunch of friends over for drinks and dinner; fire up the HDTV; no overpriced concessions; no irritating commerials beforehand; crystal clear presentation and sound in most cases; and (based on your pals) it’s hoped an obnoxious-free audience.
Now is it worth $60, providing the film is entertaining?
Cinema will survive. Airport-like movie terminals will die.
Thankfully.
If Ben Stiller came to my house, cooked me dinner, and then gave me a check for 60 dollars, i still wouldn’t see this movie. It looks GOD AWFUL.
This movie looks really bad. This must be a head fake with trying to sell it for 60 dollars on VOD.
60 dollars is still a lot of money for any film
Leave it to Universal to assume there are enough morons out there to pay $60 to watch-of all thing-a Brett Ratner movie!
Who running this place, NBC…oh, wait a minute.
In other news, NBC is trying out a new plan to charge a subscription fee for viewers to see “The Tonight Show w/ Jay Leno”!
“We really think this is an exciting new way for viewers to see Jay, and a fresh idea to pump up revenue”, said NBC in a press release.
I remember a time when VHS tapes of movies cost that much and more to buy… But no sane person on this planet will pay $60 bucks to see ANY movie at home a month or two early. Especially a Ben Stiller bomb like that.
In what bizzarro universe are some of you people living in thinking $60 bucks is a great deal?
Wait 2 months and you can see it for $1.09 at Redbox or less if you turn around 8 discs a month with Netflix.
Are people really that willing to pee money away or has the entire industry lost their minds about the amount of money average working people are willing to spend on entertainment?
And people wonder why pirating is rampant? $60+ to see a movie may be one reason. Perhaps the VOD industry, Film Industry, and Exhibitors need to get real about the perceived value of their wares.
Theater owners are dumb
Have 5-10 people over for a little movie watching party on your Hugh end movie system bam 60 like that