UPDATE, 12:25 PM: The resolution of the spat between Universal and theater owners comes after a week of what we’re told were “dozens and dozens and dozens” of phone conversations exhibition company chiefs had with Universal Studios president Ron Meyer and chairman Adam Fogelson. Some theater owners were surprised this morning when they learned of Universal’s decision to scrap the premium video-on-demand experiment with Tower Heist. The exhibition companies had not made a specific concession, though Cinemark was joined by several smaller circuits and National Amusements in saying it would not screen the movie if the VOD plan — set for two cities, Atlanta and Portland, Ore. — went forward. But it’s considered noteworthy that the statement from the National Association Of Theatre Owners says that the trade group “recognizes that studios need to find new models and opportunities in the home market, and looks forward to distributors and exhibitors working together for their mutual benefit.” In a separate statement, Regal CEO Amy Miles reiterated the theme saying: ”We understand and respect Universal’s interest in finding a successful model for ancillary markets and we remain willing to assist Universal, and our other studio partners, in developing a strategy that is acceptable and productive for both parties.”
(Washington, D.C. and North Hollywood, Calif. – October 12, 2011) In response to Universal’s decision to cancel its planned release of Tower Heist to the home on Video on Demand just three weeks after its theatrical debut, National Association of Theatre Owners president and CEO John Fithian stated, “NATO would like to thank Universal for responding to various theater owners’ concerns and cancelling the PVOD test it was contemplating. They have been engaged with individual exhibitors on this test, and while it was something that many theater owners could not ultimately support, the open and collaborative nature of the dialogue is appreciated. NATO recognizes that studios need to find new models and opportunities in the home market, and looks forward to distributors and exhibitors working together for their mutual benefit.”
EARLIER:
LOS ANGELES, CA, October 12, 2011—Universal Pictures today announced that in response to a request from theater owners, it has decided to delay its planned premium home video on demand (PVOD) experiment in which Comcast digital subscribers in Portland and Atlanta would have had the opportunity to rent TOWER HEIST on demand just three weeks after its theatrical release on November 4, 2011. Universal continues to believe that the theater experience and a PVOD window are business models that can coincide and thrive and we look forward to working with our partners in exhibition to find a way to experiment in this area in the future.



Pushovers.
It’s a good idea. Theaters need to get their act together.
Every time distribution tries to do something like this, exhibition makes them look like a bunch of little bitches. Remember what happened to Soderbergh’s “Bubble”?
This decision was likely made for a lot of reasons including the early screenings of Tower Heist which failed to create positive buzz and public reaction against the ridiculous price they set. So they turned a potential failure into a positive by telling the theatre owners that Universal was responding to their concerns.
No risk without reward. For once I’m siding with the studio. Who’d have thunk it?! In this crazy, unknown digital media world, you have GOT TO TRY NEW THINGS. Theatre owners are scared, sure, but these kinds of new ventures are worth trying. Old Models do not work anymore.
Among the many reasons theater owners objected to this was how bad the picture really looks from the trailers. If audiences have a chance to see it VOD (for a ridiculous price) and discover what a dog this film relly is, then no one will see it in the theaters weeks later.
TOWER HEIST is more suited to TV movie status and will do nothing to imrpove Murphy’s lackluster career of late. (He is playing a character that Billy Ray Valentine and Axel Foley made fun of in earlier, more sucessful films.)
Academy, how’s your 2012 hosting decision looking now? Dont’ worry, as they said in Chicago and Boston “there’s always next year”.
Hm, well I think it looks pretty funny. What’s your agenda?
Eddie’s performance looks really really bad in the trailers. Maybe these are the parts of the movie that didn’t make it to the final cut.
Otherwise, Tower Heist looks like Ratner is under-utilizing his cast strengths. Good heist comedies are hard to make, that’s why there haven’t been many good examples. The Hot Rock (Redford and Keitel) a long time ago is one of those few.
Otherwise, “carthy” is spot-on.
The plan was to release this on VOD three weeks AFTER it hit theaters.
Chicken!!
They went for it alone… if several studios had done it as a team, they would have felt less pressure, maybe they wouldn’t have given up.
Maybe they are waiting for Ultra Violet to make a more meaningful test, in alliance with other studios this time?
This early VOD thing is inevitable, one way or another.
Yep – Theater owners are scared. It should have been $29.99 after one month for a limited window. I bet you a decent amount of people would have tested it. Plus, these are only a couple of markets they were going to beta test. Just thinking: Family movies still do well. Look at Lion King. What an interesting case study. Release an old title in 3D at the theater then offer it on Blue Ray one month later. There needs to be different types of models out there to appease the consumer as well as the exhibitor
If theater owners don’t wise up and get in on the new way content is distributed they will be ghost towns……….a novelty space…….like arcades from the 80′s.
Maybe this was a decoy ploy by the studio to simply increase awareness of the film, knowing that the early VOD was never going to happen in the first place? Hello? McFly?
I don’t think this is a response to exhibitor pressure – Universal realized that this God awful film will need all the money it can get for the theatrical release.
Why even bother to show Tower Heist in theaters? Just send it straight to DVD, where it belongs…
The theater owners are right on this one. This would be just one more decline on a slippery slope. This was a smart one to dig in their heels over.
Forget about the quality of Tower Heist. This is bigger than that. If cinemas refused to improve the cinemagoing experience by stationing ushers in each screening to kick out texters and talkers, people are gonna stop going. Nobody shuts the fuck up anymore during a movie. Sometimes I politely ask people to be quiet, but I always expect a fist or two to fly my way. It’s just not worth it.
Sorry, theaters. You had a good run and you won this battle. Congrats on delaying the inevitable.
$60 isn’t that hefty of a price tag for so family of three or more when you consider what it costs to go to a movie theater, park, and buy popcorn and a drink. It’s too much for a single or a couple, sure. But even then it’s almost worth it to avoid dirty theaters with outrageously priced concessions, ride audiences, and near-deafening levels of sound.
Guess we now know who wears the pants in this relationship.
I dont get why so many people here are sucking dick for the studio. I’m glad the theaters took a stand at preserving the theactrical experience. It just goes to show that if you got balls and stand up to the big corporations, you can succeed. Now if only the entertainment unions would do the same.
For those who complain about movie theaters, please shut up and just deal with the fact that they will live on.
For years, theaters had a monopoly on the “theatrical experience” – but as the cost of the home theater equipment goes down, they’ll have to learn to live with the consequences.
I predict home Imax to be common in twenty years. Maybe even less.
I think your theory is total bullshit and as for the talking in the thetater, DEAL WITH IT instead of whining like a baby. Now go back and suck Universal’s dick
I won’t have to “deal with it” soon.
I don’t get it either. Considering how people traditionally look down on movies that go straight to DVD, that’s all we will be left with in the long run. If the theaters die, then the whole industry changes in terms of prestige. Movies and movie stars will no longer exist if all we have are network TV, cable and VOD/streaming.
There’s nothing wrong with trying to increase new revenue streams, but to do it in a way that may belie the heart of the industry seems like a mistake.
Hah, and the theater circuits aren’t large corporations?
A little too expensive, and a little too soon. Just a matter of time though. Right now many people are just catching on to the idea of watching IPTV or VOD via an OTT like Apple TV, Roku or Boxee – or viewing streamed movies via there xbox360, iphone, android, bluray, whatever. Right now there are 3 million roku boxes expected to be sold by year’s end, and logitech is entering market with there GoogleTV device. Imagine when there are 30 million rokus sold and googleTV & AppleTV are household names. Then release Avatar 2 via streaming 3D IPTV for $39.95 3 weeks after opening weekend. In a society that just bought 1 million iphone 4s units in one day, I think the market is there. Problem is, so are torrent pirates. The bean counters will have to figure the ROI curve out on that one. @StarfieldFilms
Anyone ever heard of the 90-10 split? That’s when for the first few weeks a film is out the studio takes about 90% of the profit made on BO sales and the theaters take about 10%, everyone already knows theaters make most of their money on concession sales. After the first few weeks the percentage shifts in the theater’s favor and they take a larger and larger share until the end of the movie’s run. So, for studios to release a VOD experience only 3 weeks after opening day they are effectively double dipping into the profit and taking money (both BO and concession) away from theaters during the only real time they make BO money off the film. Were the theater owners a little over zealous in their outcry to boycott this film? Perhaps, but they’re right to be at least concerned about a plan that would marginalize their role in the entertainment industry.
LOL! This is hilarious. Worrying about something that wouldn’t have mattered at all. No reasonable person would drop $60 bucks to rent this 3 weeks later.
If it’s a big event movie like Dark Knight, people still want to go out and see it in the theater.
If it’s not an event movie, and people want to save money, they’ll likely just wait for the DVD and rent it for $5 bucks.
This idea might have a chance if they released it on day and date of general release, or charged $29 bucks tops.