Weinsteins Want Miramax Name Back 
'Saw 3D' vs 'Paranormal Activity 2' Battle … 
TV TUG OF WAR: It's Ellen vs Simon, And … 
Robert De Niro Returns To CAA From WME; Jane … 
Fox Wins Studio War For Robert Rodriguez' … 
Weinstein Co Gets "New Lease On Life"? 
Nicole Kidman Hires Angelina's Manager 
So What Are The Hot Films At Sundance? 
Huge $70M Settlement In TV Writers Age … 
TOLDJA! Momoa Chosen 'Conan' Barbarian 
Oscar Campaign Badmouthing Has Begun! 
Once again, Big Media shows that it doesn't want to share its profits with anyone else. Today's action by the MPAA representing the major movie studios undercuts the entire process of theatrical release. It would put the struggling theater chains virtually out of business.
Washington, D.C. – In a filing today with the Federal Communications Commission, the Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. (MPAA) reinforced the benefits of allowing studios the option of sending movies fresh from the box office to tens of millions of American households.
“Many of us love movies, but we just can’t make it to the theater as often as we’d like. That is especially true for parents of young children, rural Americans who live far from the multiplex and people with disabilities that keep them close to home,” MPAA Chairman and CEO Dan Glickman said. “Having the added option to enjoy movies in a more timely fashion at home would be a liberating new choice.”
In its filing, which was in response to letters of opposition filed by the group Public Knowledge, the MPAA said: “grant of the waiver would for the first time allow millions of consumers to view high-value, high-definition theatrical films during an early release window that is not available today. MPAA has explained that release of this high-value content as part of an earlier window, especially with respect to movies released for home viewing close to or even during their initial theatrical run, necessarily requires the highest level of protection possible through use of SOC.”
SOC, or selectable output control technology, would allow televisions with digitally secure interfaces to receive first-run, high-definition content from a cable or satellite provider. Using SOC protects content because it essentially disables non-secure, analog outputs to avoid illegal circumvention and distribution of copyrighted material. These outputs would be disabled ONLY with respect to the proposed new content, and this technology would NOT have any impact whatsoever on the ability of existing devices to receive all of the content that they get today. Consumers will continue to have access to everything they have today, including DVDs, Netflix, etc.
The MPAA filing noted: “By Public Knowledge’s odd reckoning, however, no consumer-oriented technological breakthrough ever could be introduced to American homes unless and until every single American home had access to the same opportunity at the same moment in time. That is a recipe for holding every innovation hostage until the last consumer adopts a new technology.
“Under Public Knowledge’s approach, the Commission would have taken decades to permit television stations to broadcast in color, since millions of American homes already had purchased black-and-white sets when color broadcasts were introduced in the 1950s. Indeed, whenever innovative technologies bring consumers new and better opportunities to media content, there is always a lag between when early adopters take advantage of these opportunities and when they become ubiquitous.”
Glickman added: “I, like most movie-goers believe the best way to enjoy a movie is to go to the theater with friends and share a communal laugh or adventure together. But I also believe there is ample room for additional choices that satisfy consumer demand to enjoy movies in diverse new ways. If allowed by the FCC, I believe this new choice will be just one of many exciting innovations to come that benefit consumers and sustain the future of this unique creative medium.”
Loading ...
Are they going to change Rule 12 now?
Yes. This was predicted years ago. About time. May the FCC approve it!
To clarify, studios envision the early window will not harm the theatrical distributors and will give consumers a new option to consume film content. If you look at articles about this in the press, the early window would be at minimum two months after theatrical release, when the vast majority of films have been kicked out of the theaters. The idea would be to capture the market of people who don’t go to the movies but are willing to pay a premium for an early home entertainment window (e.g. parents with kids, home theater buffs, etc.)
If its 2 months then fair enough most movies finish their run by then,but if its opening day forget it!
and how convenient for the studios that the biggest cuts for actors, writers, and directors occur during a movie’s theatrical run.
Exactly, it the end of the glamor, mystery, gossip and creative fule that made the movie industry.
That is just wrong,wrong wrong of the mpaa,this would be the beginning of the end of the cinema going experience and give piracy another string to their bow wholesale.
Sorry, but it’s hard to feel sorry for big theater chains which have gotten consistently worse over the years. They sealed their own fate with bad service, poor projection and sound, nasty food, and apathetic staff who refuse to do anything about rude audience members texting and talking during a movie. People should have the option of going out or staying home, especially when quality home theaters are becoming more common. If anything, this competition will force theater owners to step up their game. Sure it might kill off the bad chains, but good ones which actually care about the viewing experience (like the Arclight) could potentially thrive, and it might make going OUT to the movies special again. I never thought I’d say this, but GO MPAA.
I can’t give you a big enough “Hell yeah!” for this. I completely agree, 100%.
COULD NOT AGREE MORE CHUCK!
This is insane. Stabbing your primary, and most effective distribution channel in the back does not make any commercial sense. Theatres are the only distribution channel that cannot be pirated and downloaded. DVDs can be copied and downloads ripped – the theatre experience cannot be recreated at home. Why would the studios want to do anything that would further endanger the beleagured chains? History has shown that when times get tough the best way to survive is to innovate and collaborate, not to get the knives out and cut each other’s throats.
What a wonderful theatrical experience! I get to sit next to strangers who don’t know enough to shut up and turn off their phones. They smuggle in aromatic food and insist on disturbing everyone by arriving after the feature starts because “we don’t like to watch commercials.” They kick the chairs and congratulate themselves when they recognize cameos.
Sad to say, I have to agree with you here, George. I’ve been a lifelong movie goer (I’m 45) but going to the movies the past few years has been brutal and expensive. The texting, the commenting on the movie, etc.. enough already.
And that’s in LA, too. At an awards consideration screening of A Single Man some punk had the temerity to come in ten minutes after the first reel started spinning and ask me to move over a seat so he could sit next to whatever nubile and willing young thing he was hanging with, and when I told him he was interrupting my movie, he called me an a-hole. They got seats next to each other in front.
If he’s reading this, next time show up early if you want sweet seats. Rude.
Oh, and A Single Man was ill-written, ill-directed, ill-edited and incredibly self-indulgent. At least the first 30 minutes or so. It was so bad, I walked out.
Honest question: Why does the MPAA have to concern itself with the business models of another industry? If there’s more demand for its product in a different business vertical, why shouldn’t it move into that vertical? If I was paying to build cars and one dealership is selling more cars than another, is it betrayal or just good business sense to give the better selling dealer more cars more quickly?
This will be interesting. Major chains already are very strict on video and VOD windows. To move theatrical into a 15-30 day window will upset the entire jury rigged structure. Who gets hurt more -home video, theatres or producers? One more step into making filmed content advertiser supported and free like TV-maybe the logical outcome.
But it’s hardly a problem of sharing profits-the theatrical system is rarely a profit center and is almost always a huge expense that must be witten off very quickly.
It will be intersting.
Spoken by a true idiot who really knows nothing about the industry. What do you think drives the business? It will stop being cinema and become just TV.
“Big Media” already shares lots of its profits: talent, etc. Watching first run features at home would be an enormous convenience to many consumers and may ultimately expand audiences. Theatrical runs would continue – theatre chains would likely shrink. So what? As for SOC, it won’t stop piracy, and if Hollywood has learned anything from the music business, it would realize DRM solutions are a distraction from the challenges ahead.
As a parent of 2 young children who used to see most movies the Friday of release, I would welcome the chance to avoid $85.00 on a babysitter. I see 80% less films theatrically these days and that’s money neither the studios nor the exhibitor is getting anymore.
Mr. Glickman,
As a blind person with mobility problems who lives in a rural area I would like to tell you to shove your false, self serving “concern” for me in each and every putrid orifice of your greed riddled anatomy. There are plenty of ways for even the most seriously disabled to get to films if they want to, those that cannot under any circumstances likely have similar issues making it as difficult to enjoy films at home, and even small theater chains are more than happy to make reasonable accomodations to allow their disabled patrons to get in the theater and enjoy the movie. After reading how you are trying to use me and others like me in this attempt to destroy an entertainment institution that I personally hold dear, I find myself overcome with the need to bathe several times in hopes of getting the slimy feeling off of my skin. Going to the theater, despite the stress and effort required is one of the things in my life that helps keep me from becoming an agoraphobic shut-in and you want to take it away, using me as one of the excuses for doing so, for the enrichment of yourself and your cronies. While bringing down the theater system might put more money in your pocket in the short term, it could very easily turn the entire industry into one big direct to video wasteland, destroying what little remains of a great art form. Instead of shooting yourselves in the foot for short term gain, you should be thinking of ways to build the theater experience back up. I don’t know why corporate brains have such trouble with the concept of long term thinking. if you help make the theater chains, big and small more profitable and attractive to moviegoers in the long run your books will flow with much more black ink. Instead you look for the immediate gain without any care for the long term consequenses and try to make yourself look like a real hero to the poor masses who neither want nor need your self-serving efforts.
This will only hurt the little guy. People who live in a big city do not care they have a regal house or AMC but to people who want the smaller chains are in for a surprise the day of a small town having a movie will be gone forever
I think studios need to go back to an all theatrical model, like they had in the 70’s. Just stop putting anything out on DVD or VOD or this SOC bull – like the pirates won’t be able to bust that open. Piracy is bad, but it’s worse when Tower Records closes. The trouble with VOD is there’s limited shelf space, from the point of view of studio.
Good call. While we’re at it, we should all go back to riding horses instead of cars — no more nasty greenhouse gases. I miss the old tack and feed store.
This was bound to happen eventually. Let’s be honest: who goes to theaters these days? Teenagers (the malls do close at 9), twentysomethings on dates (good to have something to do that doesn’t necessarily require talking on those first few dates), and families with young kids (it’s cheaper than Chuckie Cheese and gets the kids out of the house).
People over 25 without school-age children don’t go to the theater; they put things on their netflix queue. The people who go to the movies will still go because it’s a social event; this is mostly going to attract people who don’t go to the movies anyway.
And if movie theaters want more people to go, then try making it more adult-friendly. Like, have ushers to tell those texting teens to put their damn cells away or take crying babies out into the hall. Have decent snacks (especially if you’re going to charge an arm and a leg for them). Otherwise, I have a great home entertainment system, and when I do go out, I have lots of other options.
This is great news. The theater going experience is annoying and expensive and has driven away hardcore cinephiles like me. There are no “grand theaters” worthy of landmarking which were built in the last 50 years so if AMC shuts down a few buildings… so what? The potential upside could be real competition so that the theaters have to LOWER PRICES.
In case you haven’t heard, price is everything these days. Seeing a marginal but good movie for $4 or $5 versus a blockbuster AVATAR for $12 makes more sense then their current pricing which permits only blockbusters and teen horror to thrive.
I think this is great news, other than profit participants (actors/writers/directors/producers) will get f-ed. But the lawyers will straighten that out eventually.
Well, it all started with the first Betamax machine and here we go! The move from theater to home has been in the works for 30+ years. People are linked, wired and Wi-fied with their wide screen and suround sound and with more Blu-ray players with internet streaming being the most popular choice….well, what do ya think?
What is the difference between what this will do and a ’straight to DVD’ release?
For millions of movie fans, the theatrical “cinematic” movie experience is not so special. I used to be a strong proponent of the philosophy that the best way to experience a movie was in a theater with an audience. I no longer feel that way, and haven’t for years, and I’m not alone. It’s not the MPAA’s job to keep movie theater chains in business. Theaters that understand how to present a “quality” communual viewing experience (like the ArcLight in LA) will find a way to stay in business, as many people will always prefer theaters and theaters are popular for other reasons (a night out; time with friends; romantic dates, etc). But millions of folks like me, can’t wait to watch first run movies on a 50-inch Plasma screen at home, with the food and beverages of my choice, and to share the experience with a handpicked audience of friends.
The last time I went to a grown-up first-run movie I sat in a crowded house next to a senile old bastard who had to repeat every line of dialogue to his deaf wife. I could have gotten up and moved, but decided to sit and suffer and memorize the experience so I would never go again. (A friend convinced me that all my previous bad experiences were flukes, and talked me into it. That friend knows better now.)
Even though I don’t have a fancy system, I enjoy movies on my 24 inch iMac screen, sitting in my own comfortable chair with headphones. I don’t have to sit near people who smuggled in food or were too cheap to get a baby sitter. I get to eat my own healthy dinner, start the movie when I want, and pause it if I need to go to the bathroom.
Somehow, i think I can live without the audience experience.
MPAA must realize that not EVERY household in America has or can afford Home Theater HD systems or the peripheral technology to provide a household with the equivalent movie going experience one gets in a theater especially with the new 3D productions and IMAX. The MPAA has, to me, been an archaic organization for decades. I think the FCC should consider disbanding the MPAA altogether, let the studios take responsibility for themselves and their product and stop dictating to the movie going public what they think they should see!
I used to love going to the theater. the big screen and surround sound were amazing.
Now, you have to suffer getting eyes and ears burned out prior to the film by endless ads and promos. I like promos, but once the film starts, you’ve already been flashed, bumped and thumped.
It’s like going to McDonalds before eating at a fine dining establishment, or doing beer bongs before a wine tasting.
MPAA screws everyone. Any student of theaters vs. studios is not surprised at this.
If the movie’s really special, I’ll suffer the ads and boom-boom, but if it’s not a sci fi epic, home with the blu ray.
This is mostly a non-story. Going out is an American pastime. Going out to eat, going out to the movies, it’s never ever going away. It may diminish as people find more convenience at home with digital distribution, but this experience of going out and even sharing the experience with an audience is woven into the fabric of our way of life.
What would be a groundbreaking story is if the industry finally decides to innovate in the internet age, instead of clinging to old world business models on disc-based media sales. Thankfully, we have Netflix and iTunes able to get us part way there. The best thing the movie industry could do for themselves… lead the effort to repeal the DMCA.
Why can we digitize our music library, but not our movie library? Why do we have to dig through discs? It’s archaic. Give me a break.
If the entertainment industry had even a fraction of the foresight that Apple had, they would be making all that money on digital downloads. People want convenience. What we want, when we want it. If the industry can’t offer it, someone else will.
Dan Glickman just sold his soul to save his job. You see Dan is not his own man- he’s just a puppet for the studios. Dan does whatever it is that the studios want so he can keep his ultra cush-cush job.
Oh Dan, say it ain’t so- but you can’t because it is so. Tisk Tisk Dan on ya.
Hey, great! Let’s just finish killing off the movie business!
We’ll all be working in television much sooner than I thought.
…but isn’t the common wisdom that the television industry is dying too? Or is that just network television?
This is an idea that is way past its time. For some movies, I would have paid $25 bucks to see it at home the first night I could.
The Studios must have looked at the record companies and said ” I don’t want to end up like them!” It’s about time and should be the day of release it’s available at home for a premium. This will only kill The DVD business. This all should be on demand. This kills piracy and adds a lot more revenue for the studios.
I do remember the labels being worried about the chains , Tower Records and Musicland, if they went and embraced digital downloads – guess what – they went bankrupt anyways.
About time someone listened to the consumer.
Cool idea. Now all I have to do is point my video camera at the tv and shoot the screen. no digital security lock out and no analog problem here. the people who will download it won’t care either.
I absolutely guarantee you that SOC will be cracked before the first TV with SOC hits the stores!
He who stands in the way of change only has himself to blame for being left behind…
Interesting.
The implications are unclear without more information on contracts studios have with movie-houses. Discount movie chains would be severely hurt by such a proposition in the long term.
Unless there were geographical restrictions (unlikely they’d give small chains such consideration) — the studios have every reason to ride the wave of their PR machine and release to consumers bypassing as many as people as possible.
It’s a story because the content-protection is part of an obvious studio-system power grab from current channels.
RIP DVDs and movie theaters. The music business has already shown that digital delivery is the future. It’s the only way to beat the pirates and Redboxes.
Can’t this industry simply not compete and be quiet about it!? Why this need to treat customers like criminals. They assume we share their lack of respect for copyright.
Make the film and release it worldwide on all platforms at once. You get VOD, PPV, cinema, DVD, download, etc. while a particular property is most heavily promoted. Stop trying to put scarcity to a medium that isn’t!
I can’t tell you how often I leave a theater wanting a DVD release to take home. Their inability to change saves me money because by the time the industry decides to make it available – I either don’t care or have forgotten about it!
It’s hard to be surprised at this but it’s depressing nonetheless. Movie fans will definitely invest in best possible home viewing experiences but the whole notion of what has been cinema is dying on the vine. I agree that theatre-going is starkly more unpleasant than it was even just 15-20 years ago but I attribute that more to the complete breakdown in civility in our society and a generation empowered to believe that that is always a virtue.
Oh gullible MPAA. Whatever protection methods they think they have will be cracked. You think business is bad for movies now? If this goes through, anybody with basic computer knowledge can download illegal high def versions of the films rather than pay for them at all. I can’t believe we’re looking at a future where I will have to tell my kids what seeing a movie in a “theater” was like. Brilliant idea MPAA.
Hey, we eat our young. And our old.
Question is now could the major cinema chains like Regel,Cinemark,AMC file a complaint against this rule twelve? Becouse this affects thier earnings. What was the MPAA thinking? They should be helping and encouraging the cinemas not destroying the enterprise.
I often watch theatrical quality features on my large home screen via HBO, Showtime, etc. Some of these direct to the home films are fantastic, yet I seldom hear friends discussing them at parties or coffee shops. What makes a spectacular a production a movie, as opposed to a TV show, is simply the fact that they opened in a movie theatre first. Take that step out of the equation and all you have left is another made for television film. Goodbye Panavision, Cinerama and Imax – you’ll be missed.
Not sure if I agree with the MPAA’s decision. I remember a line from “The Majestic” …
“…I mean, this television thing. Why would you want to stay at home and watch a little box? Because it’s convenient? Because you don’t have to get dressed up, because you could just sit there? I mean, how can you call that entertainment, alone in your living room? Where’s the other people? Where’s the audience? Where’s the magic? I’ll tell you, in a place like this, the magic is all around you. The trick is to see it.”
Hurray! Sure skip the theatres and see what happens to the movie business. What makes a film a “movie” is simply the fact that it’s been exhibited in theatres first. Take that step out of the equation and all you have left is another product produced for HBO, Showtime or an On Demand cable system. I strongly doubt that Star Wars, Ben-Hur or The Dark Knight would have astonished or thrilled anyone if the only place they’d ever viewed these spectacular productions was at home with the phone ringing, the dog barking and the kids screaming.
Goodbye Cinerama, Imax and Panavision. You’ll be missed.
Releasing it straight to consumers will not stop piracy. Whoever wants it free now, will want it free then.
Unfortunately, I agree with the state of theaters. They have to up their game to compete with home entertainment systems.
Not everyone has a Grove, or Arclight.
home entertainment is getting the ax with the straight-to-the-viewer-screenings
It’s called progress folks. At a time when theaters are already embracing impossible to duplicate at home 3D technology, this shouldn’t come as a surprise.
There will always be a market for celluloid. And theaters. The options will always grow, like they are here.
Atom bombs are also an example of progress,but we dont need those either.
The nice part is the studios won’t be weighed down by paying actors any meaningful residuals with the new delivery platform under the SAG contract handed to them by Ken Howard and Kate Walsh and Neddy Ned Ned.
Of course this is something no one could have seen coming–unless they were paying attention, I mean. Although professional actors may not even notice since we’re are so swamped now that we’re all “back to work.”
Elvis has left the building.
So long Hollywood…
If the release window is collapsed, gone are the movie stars and excitement of the big screen. All film actors will be relegated to being television stars. The allure of Hollywood will be killed.
I have a top notch home theatre system but, first and foremost, I’m a fan of movies and movie theatres. That’s why I installed the entertainment system to begin with and was moved to work in this industry.
Glickman, you are truly a low class individual. I certainly hope you do not plan on showing your face at any conventions or functions that honor and celebrate film, and the business of showing movies.
The theaters have been “dead man walking” ever since the digital age began. It’s a matter of time. The TV manufacturers are already working on getting 3D going on home sets. Yes, to some degree it is a pity as there is a useful social role for them, and it is going to cause a huge commercial real estate bust when they go out of business, but it is going to happen. Probably still about 10 years out tho.
I’ve got a 60″ TV in this house I paid less than $1,000 for. Yeah, it won’t work with this, but the point is the price trend for “theater size” TVs is going to continue to make this kind of thing more attractive (even if it can’t replace the “first date” experience or “night out for the parents” experience).
Notafanofdan said:
“Dan Glickman just sold his soul to save his job. You see Dan is not his own man- he’s just a puppet for the studios. Dan does whatever it is that the studios want so he can keep his ultra cush-cush job.
Oh Dan, say it ain’t so- but you can’t because it is so. Tisk Tisk Dan on ya.”
How is this in an way a critique? Or ’soul-selling’? And why wouldn’t he say it’s ’so’?
Dan’s “cush-cush” job *is* the head lobbyist on behalf of the studios. That’s his job description – to maximixe studio’s profits and freedoms under federal legisislation. I don’t think that ou understand this basic fact.
Frank I agree with u on that. With home theatres now u virtual have the cinema in your den. Now the cinema chains need to ramp up the quality ante too.
If people in this industry want to show that they have some real integrity, then members of the Producers Guild, WGA, DGA, SAG, and every other union connected to the film biz ought to unite and take action against the MPAA. Weather it’s a “boots on the ground” style protest, harsh and public open letters decrying this action, or just plain old public statements that give the MPAA a proper tongue lashing. As most people will tell you, it’s not the studio heads and movie stars that will be affected by this. It’s the “little people” who count on big box office numbers to continue to fund the studios that give them gainful employment.
Sadly, I believe this event is unescapable. That’s the way progress progresses. So, my suggestion is to implement pricing the cost of watching movies through any delivery system as a floating price, similar to shopping for merchandise. What the market will bear, you know? When the distributor first releases a movie let them charge as much for it as they want. If they think they can get $100 for a certain type of experience, let them get it. But if no one is willing to pay that price, they will need to lower it until they get the expected crowds who are willing to pay the price to view. Avatar might bring in $25 a pop for two months, then average out around $7 for the rest of the year. “This Is It” could get $200 for the first couple days, then it’s deposited in the Dollar Bin.
8 weeks is about the time a first run film goes into 2nd run, so it’s going to hurt is the small independent operators!
Honestly, this is just progress, and I am very happy it’s happening. I love the big screen, and I love going to the movies, but due to having kids, we rarely are able to schedule the time out. Somebody’d be getting a lot more of my money if this were an option.
The consumers want this and are willing to pay. It’s the movie theater owner’s responsibility to figure out how to compete with this sort of progress. If they’re struggling, then that’s their challenge to overcome, not ours. The smart ones will survive unless that method of movie watching’s time has come–which it hasn’t.
So basically the studios want to turn movies into television. Each studio will get a bandwith and use the pay per view model if this goes through. It won’t, but it’s quite amusing that television, which movies tried to destroy will now be the model for their own diminishing returns. D.
It’s about time.
This is a good thing, believe it or not. So many smaller films fail, or don’t get the chance at a theatrical release, when they have to compete with bloated $200+ mil ‘tentpole’ movies. This will open the door once again for the $5-$12 mil budgeted film to be a viable option (something that’s been sorely missing since the mid 90’s). Smaller inventive films that would never justify a theatrical release may in fact find a huge ‘at home’ audience.
I see the day when studios actually have whole divisions dedicated to ‘at home’ first-run movies with smaller budgets and more inventive ideas at work.
Just sayin’…
The MPAA could do this now, they don’t NEED to wait for SOC. How many millions of TV’s would need to be replaced to even take advantage of this new window?
If they want to release first run movies directly to consumers, great. But don’t break my TV while you’re trying to do it.
I stopped going to movie theaters when they started showing commercials before the movie. The reason I went to the movies was to AVOID seeing commercials. If you want me to sit in a theater as a captured audience and show commercials, than reduce the ticket price or PAY me to sit and watch your movie.
I don’t even buy DVD’s anymore. The last movie I went to see in a theater was Transformers II, and that was the first time I had stepped foot inside a movie theater in over 2 years.
The prices to see a movie are crazy, and the prices to purchase candy or anything else inside the movie theater is off the charts.
For me to take my wife and two grand kids to the movies can cost upwards of $45 to $50 dollars, something I am no longer willing to pay.
I rent my DVD’s or watch HBO, the price I pay for my cable and internet service combined is nuts. Asia has internet speed that is 4 to 6 times faster than mine is, at 1/3 the price.
Greed is the name of the game in this country, and this is a perfect example of that greed. What these greedy bastards will do is sell the movies at a discount and then triple the prices under some guise or another in about a year.
Best bet, HBO or rent the movie when it comes out. I just get really picky about what I want to see these days, and won’t even bother to see most of these movies anyway, high priced actors performing badly, and I have to pay $$$ so they make 2o million for a picture….BAH HUMBUG!!!!!!
I once was a small theatre owner. The studios always gave the big chains lots of advertising dollars. The small guys got none. The big studios always had sweetheart deals with the big guys. We got none. The studios did everything in their power to hurt the small exhibitor. So I sold out several years ago because I was smart enough to see the writing on the wall. The studios don’t care about anyone but themselves. When digital projection came about, they said they would not subsidize exhibitors because they never had helped exhibitors in the past. I never watch movies on DVD or on television. It is just not the same as the big screen. There are still many like me but the studios have finally shot themselves in the foot. Their revenues will decline both in theatres and in home markets. They will saturate the market. As any person knows who has any intelligence, a saturated market drives prices down. Although that may be good from a consumer standpoint, it does not bode so well for the studios. I laughed when Disney began releasing their classic pictures like Bambi to DVD. They lost the opportunity to continue to re release the picture year after year in theatres at a much higher revenue stream in the long run. In the short run they made a lot of quick money. I hope they invested it well because in the long run it has cost them. They are short sighted and greedy. The overpaid actors are going to get theirs too. They have made egregious sums of money for substandard acting skills and they have also made a ton of money in the short haul. Their wages will hve to go south. saturation of the market is not going to be making them rich. No more glamorous screenings of new movies in big theatres. Obviously by the comments in this column there are a great many pinheads who don’t see the big picture (no pun intended) just like mr glickman. Mr. Glickman is so ignorant that he does not realize that he may have just put himself out of a job. Why would the studios need the MPAA anymore if they release to households. The MPAA was a nazi like organization used to help victimize the theatre owners by the studios. With the major theatre owners losing almost all of their power (money) there will be no need for an MPAA. So to all of the unions, actors, producers, big shot executives, etc. etc. etc. say goodbye to your jobs because the big studios will no longer have a need for you. I once had a 20 th century fox studio exec tell me how the big studios wanted to get rid of the small theatre owners. I asked him why and he told me that all of the movies could be booked out of hollywood and all of the various film exchanges could be closed at a big cost savings to the film companies. Not long after that in a consolidation effort, he lost his job. There will be massive reductions of staff at the various studios. They will no longer need most of the support staff they have now. Many of the fools that think that this is a good idea (just like glickman) will lose their jobs. Further, there will more consolidation of the current studios. I would predict that only Sony, Disney, Warner, and possibly paromount will exist. The other smaller studios will be swallowed up or be driven out of business. This is a perfect case of be careful what you wish for. Some of the execs that think this is a brilliant idea will lose their jobs. So Mr. Glickman, maybe for your next job you can go to work for the unions. In that position as an advocate for the unions maybe you can figure a way to replace all the union positions with robots. Then all of the workers who needed you to represent them would not need a union anymore. That would mean that you would lose that job also. And so it is with much amusement that I bid farewell to the movie industry as we know it. I would like to bid farewell to large and small theatre chains alike. Farewell to most of the executives working for the big four. I would leave you with one last thought. It has always I repeat ALWAYS been the theatre release which helped to hype video sales. In many cases had there been no theatrical release, no one would have heard about a particular picture. Without the theatres to hype the video release, video sales will not do as well. It reminds me of an old three stooges skit, “MOrons from Moronica”
Guys, this is the beginning of the end. It is a very alarming development. This paves way for the end of theatrical screenings.
It is bad enough that single screen theaters are closing all over the world and impacting their neighborhood’s cultural and social scene. It’s happening everywhere from Washington DC to London to Dubai. Multiplexes are bing built but the screens by and large are shoeboxes, irrespective of the sound quality.
I grew up in the 70s and enjoyed standing in line around the corner, the anticipation of a film on a massive screen, be it DEER HUNTER or EXORCIST or TOWERING INFERNO, whether at the now closed Plaza Cinema in London, or the ‘Palacio De La Musica’ cinema in Madrid or the closed ‘Cinema’ at 5000 Wisconsin Ave in DC.
There are a few major theaters left, the Uptown in DC, Odeon Leicester Square or the Empire in London, or the Ziegfield in NY, among others – they should be saved and not torn down or turned into multiplexes.
Nothing, no home theater set up beats watching a major blockbuster on a large single screen theater (IMAX cannot even duplicate the quality and sound of the 70mm prints we all grew up with – I miss checking the papers and looking for 70mm prints of flicks such as STAR TREK II or TEMPLE OF DOOM, it wont ever be the same again).
Maybe I am a sentimental fool, but I certainly don’t want to order flicks at home day and date with the theatrical openings, if people cannot make it to the movie theaters then they can wait a few months and get the DVD or BD, or hit Netflix. What’s the big deal?
I realize that the movie screens these days are full of nuisances (cell phones, commercials etc) but I’ll take that over watching a flick at home.
This kind of piracy is disgusting and destructive, and it must stop, as it sounds like a perfect way to kill the movie business off altogether. That is wrong, since, no matter what most people these days claim, nothing beats going to movies (especially great ones) and seeing them as they’re meant to be viewed; on the great big, wide screen, in a real movie theatre with the lights down low! Plus, it provides a real opportunity to get out of the house and have a shared experience with other people, whether one knows them or not, if only on a temporary basis.