James Cameron, Peter Jackson, more protest video-on-demand in open letter

Some of Hollywood’s biggest names have gathered to protest studios’ agreement with DirecTV to release films as soon as eight weeks after a their theatrical releases. (The current release window stands at four months.) On Wednesday, the National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO) released an open letter criticizing studios for agreeing to offer video-on-demand while movies are still in theaters, a move they feel could hurt “the financial model of our film industry,” according to the letter. Some of the famous names who have signed the letter? Michael Bay, Kathryn Bigelow, James Cameron, Guillermo del Toro, Peter Jackson, Todd Phillips, Brett Ratner, Robert Rodriguez, and more. “Major
 studios
 are
 struggling
 to
 replace 
the 
revenue 
lost 
by 
the
 declining
 value 
of 
DVD
 transactions,” the letter reads. “
Low‐cost
 rentals
 and
 subscriptions 
are 
undermining
 higher
 priced
 DVD
 sales
 and
 rentals.
 But
 the
 problem 
of
 declining
 revenue
 in
 home 
video
 will 
not 
be
 solved 
by 
importing
 into 
the 
theatrical
 window 
a
 distribution 
model
 that
 cannibalizes 
theatrical 
ticket 
sales.

” (The studios who have agreed to the VOD policy: Sony, Universal, Fox Searchlight, and Universal.)

The letter also threatens that the move — which could offer the films VOD for just $30 — could lead to the loss of “hundreds of millions of dollars” in revenue, and the closing of several theaters. “The
 competition
 for
 those 
screens 
that 
remain 
will
 become 
that
 much 
more 
intense, 
foreclosing 
all
 but 
the
 most
 commercial
 movies 
from
 theatrical
 release,” says the letter. “
Specialty 
films
 whose 
success
 depends 
on 
platform 
releases
 that
 slowly
 build
 in 
awareness
 would
 be
 severely 
threatened
 under 
this
 new
 model.
 Careers
 that
 are
 built 
on 
the
 risks 
that 
can
 be 
taken 
with
 lower 
budget
 films
 may
 never 
have
 the
 chance
 to
 blossom 
under
 this 
cut‐throat
 new
 model.
” As a result, NATO is asking to be included in these talks, to weigh in on how VOD could change the industry.

DirecTV issued the following statement to EW in response to the letter: “We believe Home Premiere, through its new, early window will give more people a chance to enjoy the movies, and an additional promotional bump (in between windows) that will benefit theaters. Overall, it’s a positive for the entire industry and movie fans.” Sony and Fox Searchlight have not immediately responded to EW’s request for comment. Universal and Warner Bros. are not commenting on the letter.

Tags:

Comments (192 total) Add your comment
Page: 1 2 3 7
  • Monty

    Please.
    These two guys aren’t rich enough as it is?
    They’re guilty of churning out their big hit cash cow movies into multiple editions on DVD and gouging the consumer at the same time.
    Go home and sleep on that mattress of money, dopes.

    • Rush

      They make money regardless of the deal. But both got their start in low budget productions, so that’s where their loyalties lie. They can also afford to piss off the executives organizing this deal which this letter is surely to do.

      • Monty

        It’s unfair that you haven’t been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

      • (The Real) Monty

        Get your own name

      • Metallica

        I agree with Monty (the first one).

      • Full Monty

        Here Here!

      • (The Full) Monty

        “What about me?”, he says typing in the buff.

      • Monty Python

        I fart in your general direction

    • washington

      They aren’t petitioning for themselves, didn’t you read the article? Small theaters will be effected. This is not just about the big films. Duh.

      • Colin

        Thank you! The conclusion no one seems to have mentioned yet…just another opportunity for people to bash famous people. This entire deal will destroy movie theaters – the ultimate film experience. I am totally against it and I’ve also been against the shrinking window between theater and DVD. Oddly enough though, The Tempest (2010), which was released in theaters this past December, will be released September 1…does anyone know where this is coming from? A poor box office performance?

      • Grim

        Cameron is a horrible person but I agree. Technology has been summed up to make lazy Americans even lazier

    • monty burns

      its me monty burns! i like sleeping on a bed of money.

  • Nate

    VOD for $30! That’s more than the ptice of a ticket to see a movie in theaters. As far as I’m concerned, James Cameron and the rest are making a big stink over nothing. Sorry, but theaters are on the way out. I’ve gotten to where I enjoy watching movies at home a lot more. If you have a blu-ray player, a widescreen TV and a surround sound system, you’re getting the same experience as the movie theater without people talking, babies crying or idiots shaking their popcorn bags to evenly distribute the butter. Movies aren’t like live theater where you have to be there to experience the connection between the actors and the audience. In that case, you see something different each night. The King’s Speech is the same performance on Blu-ray as it is at the AMC showplace, and if this VOD agreement brings us one step closer to just releasing everything on disc and download and by passing the theaters, fine with me. I only go to the movies because I’m too impatient to wait for “The Dark Knight” or “Scre4m” to arrive on blu-ray. If studios can make more money this way (and as long as the writers, directors and actors and everyone else gets their cut) then I don’t see what the big deal is.

    • John

      Thanks Nate for saving me the troubling of typing the same thoughts.

    • Channing

      $30 is indeed more than the price of a movie ticket. However, invite over a couple of friends and the per-person cost rapidly drops. Supply your own beverage, toss in a couple bucks each for pizza, and you end up with a much cheaper evening than going to AMC.

      • justin j

        That is a great point! Just think a four person family can easily rack up a hefty price tag on seeing a movie in the theater.

      • ENRIQUE

        you also save on GAS by not leaving your home!

      • Fred

        However, if you think things through: If everbody would toss in a couple of bucks, you could take these $30 and by 2 Blu-rays, which you could keep afterwards and even rewatch. But of course studios like selling stuff for money, which can take away fast. And I don’t know why Peter Jackson is complaining. If he would care for anything else beside his bank account, he would stop the 178 releases of the LOTR-trilogy coming out and finally release a blu-ray version which has the theatrical AND extended cut and which – thanks to blu-ray – does not take more space than the extended cut alone, therefore making two separate editions totally obsolete and solely based on greed.

      • Kris

        Plus with popcorn/pop, you’re spending more than 20 dollars for one person. It’s not THAT steep when you think about it but I think the directors are right. This will certainly affect theatre attendance and low-budget films which would suck.

    • Huffy

      Its pretty clear that you don’t know what may be at stake. There’s a reason why so many directors are protesting this, and it isn’t because they’re greedy. James Cameron and Peter Jackson are going to be able to get studios to pay they tons of money to make the movies they want to make regardless of how said movies are sold. It could however have very negative consequences for up-and-coming filmmakers. That’s who they’re trying to stick up for. Studios are desperate and are jumping on anything they think may make them a quick buck (hello 3D) without thinking of the long-term consequences. That’s what this letter is asking: think things through more and bring NATO into the mix.

      • Fred

        “Think things through more”? Maybe James Cameron should say that to himself. Because if he really cares about other people, why is he wasting other people’s time with his movies?

      • Brittany

        I love movies, but we were doing fine without them. I would be just fine if the movie industry went down. Enough with actors and directors being paid enormous amounts of money and millions being spent on make believe stories while people are literally starving. It’s a sad thing when thousands are spent to make cgi robots and explosions while the amount of people starving throughout the world has exceeded one billion. Not to mention the enormous tax cuts that filmmakers get to produce movies in certain states, tax money that could go towards actually helping the residents of the state.

    • Jessica

      The reason people go see a movie (other than the obvious watching the movie) is for a night out. For example, what about parents who want a night away from their kids, or a couple out on their first date. It is not the same experience when you are sitting at home on your couch. It is very clear that we live in a society based on consumption, that we want to see as many movies as quickly as possible. I for one am guilty of drilling through my netflix queue. However, watching a movie at home is a much less personal experience. You say that there are less distractions but really there are more. In an auditorium, majority of the distractions (people eating, drinking, moving around) fade into the background and become white noise, however at home, you can be on your computer, making dinner, texting, talking, doing a million other things, besides watching the movie, to the point where the movie becomes the background noise for you. People who watch too much on demand become consumers of movies who watch a movie so they can say they have seen it, but don’t really recall any of the important elements of the film that make it art. In a theater, the film can consume you so that you are aware of the little details that a director may include that really make the story.

      Furthermore, you say that you can sit at home with your big screen TV and your surround sound and it’s the same thing. A) It’s not. Unless you have an 60 foot TV, it’s not the same thing. and B) I don’t know many people with a setup that compares to the one you describe. Also, I get really sick of people who say the price of going to the movies is too high then they go spend $3000 on a TV and a few 1000 more to complete the set up. Do you know how many movie you would have to see to make up the price difference. You are getting so screwed on that deal. Plus, even if you did the math, paying $30 for a movie is going to offset your numbers quite a bit. And, even if you buy a state of the art TV, it’s still going to be obsolete in 5 years.

      Why don’t you just suck it up, leave your apartment, and spend the 10 bucks to go see your movie?

      • Anthony

        THANK-YOU! FOR ONCE SOMEONE I CAN AGREE WITH!

      • migilicuty11

        Thanks Jess I’m in argeement. Going to the theater is supposed to be a different experience. It doesn’t carry the same magic it used to in the 20s and 30s where it was a grand spectacle and you got all dressed up and fancy. I wish it was like still. I’m 25 and I feel like I belong in a different time. I live in a small town and we have a 70 year old theater with one screen and a few screenings of only a couple movies a week, which has a different feel than a cineplex. Plus, those movies played where I live wouldn’t get to see the light of day with this VOD. Those filmmakers of those films as well might as well hope to get a job as a go-fer in the future if this happens. So, because a portion of people have had a couple bad experiences in the past at theaters that’s enough reason to kill them off? I highly doubt any of these people have a bad experience EVERY SINGLE time they go. The cinema is supposed to be a special way to view films. Plus, all this bullcrap technology is making society more introverted. Everything can be delivered to your home now-a-days, even groceries, medicine, etc. Why are we supposed to be secluded to our homes like this?

      • Liz

        My favorite movie theatre is a little 4 screener that shows one big mainstream movie and 3 indies at any time. It’s the only theatre that I’m willing to spend $12 to see a movie at. It’s not about the movie, it’s about the experience. The people that go to this theatre are polite, they don’t litter all over the floor, they don’t check their cell phones constantly, it’s a fabulous place and I would be sad if it closed. It’s the mom & pop of movie theatres in my city and I’m gonna support it to the very end.

      • tomrd16

        Wow, I rarely comment in here but finally I can agree with someone. It’s not just about saving money and watching the movie, it’s also about actually going out and do something instead of sitting at home.

    • greg the jedi

      Its far better to see a film at home because of the rudeness of other audience goers

      Ive only been to 4 films this year..wheareas 10 years ago, id go to 50 films a year because people today are texting, emailing, on the cellphone and talking during the movie…I didn’t pay $12 for that. Plus, parents bring their 5 years old to rated R films and they are crying and kicking your chair and head.

      I always wait for dvd/blu ray of a film I wanna see.

      Its extremely rare that I go to theatres now.

    • Mako

      Too bad most of your generation never thinks long term effects. You want “instant gratification”. If and when theaters start to die – you will have less movies being made. Especially the ones you probably already Torrent anyway. So YOU LOSE BUDDY!! Such the smart thinker.

      • Bridget

        This is how the theaters lose business. If people would be considerate (I know, how ridiculous) then maybe going to the movies wouldn’t be so distasteful. Theaters: tighten up the rules and boot the rude ones! Parents: raise your kids to be respectful of others! There are still a lot of great theaters that could be successful if the changes were made.

      • Eivel

        You are doing it girl!! I have made a promise that I am going to FitBloggin Next year! Do you have any idea where it will be???Nope! I think they are still dnicdieg. I vote for Atlanta!

    • Thom

      Agreed. You know what would save movie theaters?

      Making the experience better! Get bouncers for ushers, get rid of obnoxious audience members, have 21 and over showings, make the picture quality better and crank up the sound, etc.

      THAT’s what will save the movies.

    • Ian

      I love going to the movies, but I tend to only go during the week instead of on the weekends, to avoid obnoxious audiences.

      Interestingly, it’s not the studios that will kill theaters, it’s the THEATER OWNERS themselves that are killing theaters.

      If they would provide a trouble-free experience, there would not be such a chorus of people bemoaning how terrible audiences are these days.

    • Megan

      Come on, the whole “small theatres will close” is an afterthought in the article, framed by “also”. If people really think that this is not about greedy multi-millionaires not wanting their big, fat bank accounts to be affected, then you deserve all the carp Hollywood churns out.

    • carlosdev

      The big deal is that no matter how good your system is, you’ll never be able to replicate what’s available in any halfway decent movie theater between screen size, brightness and sound system wattage.

      There’s also seeing a movie with an audience. Shared thrills and laughter create synergy which feeds on itself and makes the experience more intense.

      The problem with VOD is that it further creates a society that is isolated; people sitting behind computer screens and de-socializaing, interacting with people only digitally. While I agree that the financial model for the film industry is bound to change with new technologies, I still think theaters are important and even those who are anti-social can benefit from getting out of their living rooms once in awhile.

    • Richy

      You aren’t getting the same experience as the cinema, on a wide-screen television, FFS! I have bluray, HD projector, and a 12.5 foot screen and the cinema is STILL the best place. I only turn out for big movies, though, like Inception. However, the cinema experience CAN be ruined by idiots who pay $20 to play with their mobiles in the dark. At least at home, mobiles are banned outright in my home cinema, and so is overtalking dialog, rattling lolly bags, and other annoying habits.

    • Delon

      @Nathan, i completely agree. A decade ago i used to see over 100 movies at theatres in a year. Now that number rarely hits 5(This year i’ve only seen 1 movie at a theatre so far and that was because it was a one time screening at a film festival). For a great majority of films home viewing is superior to theatre going. I don’t want to sit on an uncomfortable seat in a dark room for two hours with bunch of a-holes who don’t have film watching etiquette. Besides, depending on the quality of your TV you are able to catch much more detail.

      • Delon

        I have to add that last year i saw Raymond Depardon’s 1990 film Captive of the Desert on a giant theatre screen which was a magnificent movie going experience. The film is not available to rent, it is tour-de-force film-making full of mesmerizing wide shots that were meant to be seen on a giant screen. It was a true cinematic experience which would make you bow for its incredible artistry. I was floored. There was no way, no way at all that i would have the same experience had i watched it at home. Films like that deserve to be seen at a theatre, but for something like Kids Are Alright you shouldn’t walk more than from your bedroom to your living room.

  • Nate

    I know there are a lot of grammar police on this site, so I want to let everyone know (in case they don’t already) that I meant to say “price” not “ptice” and “bypassing” instead of “by passing”.

    • jojo

      THEN PROOFREAD YOUR WORK!

      • Nick

        It’s a comment, not a novel. It is not a “work”!

      • Fred

        Your shift key seems to be broken.

      • biji

        you’re an idiot.

  • Rob

    The problem is right now it is only Direct TV. So you need to gett hat if you want it.

    Problem is that it will hurt some of the smaller films. The ones people dont’ hear about.

    there is still a question if they are going to make more money by doing this or is it taking money away from them. stue studios are worried that streaming and such is hurting dvd sales. So their solution is to release it on Direct TV on demand before the dvd therefore cutting more into dvd sales and movie ticket sales?

  • Glenn Garman

    I disagree. There’s something about watching a movie in a darkened theater with a crowd of people that can’t be duplicated in a home theater. I’ve watched movies both ways and sometimes there, no difference, but go see a comedy in your home theater and the experience is totally different than it is in a crowded theater.

    • Allison

      I completely agree with you, Glenn. I think there is still an experience to be had going to a theater to see a movie. Not everybody has a big-screen, uber-awesome TV, or the room to invite a big group of friends over to watch a movie on it. Plus, when you watch something at home, you’re more likely to miss big moments.
      There are some movies I would never go see in a theater (unless it was a late-run dollar theater, in which case it would be cheaper than renting the DVD), like rom-coms, but some movies deserve a big screen and the undivided attention one commands.

      • Hawk

        You’re right: There is something about watching a film in a darkened theater with a crowd of people: ambient noise. I’m on the fence about the topic… I would have to know more about the long term effects before I made a decision, but I do agree that theaters are going to crap and nobody seems to care.

    • Bryan

      Of course, there is nothing like paying $20-30 for two people to enjoy a romantic evening of wading through a sticky mess, people around you talking through the movie, and the guy 3 rows down answering his phone at a pivital moment.

      • Megan

        What’s a “pivital” moment?

      • Daniel

        Why don’t you just try a different theater? Movie theaters are like any other business – if you don’t like your experience in one, go to another one. If you got bad service at one restaurant would you feel like the entire restaurant industry deserves to die? Many of us greatly enjoy our movie-going experiences because we’ve actually found good theaters to go to and those theaters don’t deserve to get pulled under just because there are a few bad ones.

    • DK

      amen Glenn. I don’t have DirectTV, so it doesn’t affect me, but watching a movie in a theatre is the best way to watch new movies

  • Doctor Who Fan

    Totally agree that this is shouldn’t happen, look what happened to the music industry with replacing CDs with MP3. We are basicaly stuck with trash and a handful of talent. Nothing replaces the in theather experience (even without the 3D) and not everybody has the whole ‘theather’ experiance at home. I go to the movies at least 3-5 times a month and watch movies at home. I have a Netflix subcription (DVD + Wii) and 2 premium channels, plus 4 blu-ray players and 2 42’+ plasmas with surround sound. I stil love going to the movies. If you don’t like other people in the theather go during the week is nearly empty.

    This is going to totally ruin the movie business again just like the music industry.

    • Maggie

      If you only have 2 TVs how do you watch 4 movies at a time on all your blu-ray players? I have to assume your point is to watch whole movie series at once. Tonight at Doctor Who Fan’s house: Aliens 1-4! Tomorrow night: Lethal Weapon! Woo!

      • Doctor Who Fan

        The BD player include the one on my PC and Laptop .. and yes to sum it up I watch lot of movies in lots of different locations and formats . .and find my favorite is the theather.

    • Mick

      Doctor Who, you don’t really make any sense. By going from CD’s to MP3’s, we have put power back into the hands of the consumer. The record industry used to force us to pay $12 to hear 3 good songs on one CD, now we pay about $3. The music industry is in the gutter because the executives refuse to admit their inability to discover true talent. They are literally blaming the consumer for their taste in music.

      • RolfMaul

        By,”putting the power back into the hands of the consumer”, we have destroyed the music industry. And then by saving ourselves all this money, we have treated ourselves to really crap music. The “3 good songs” that are on that album, are what the artists use to get you to listen to their other songs. You mean to say you’ve never had the sheer pleasure of discovering a song on an album that wasn’t a hit? One that no one seems to appreciate as much as you, and therefore you have a song that seems way more personal than any hit they might have because it is your song. Good artists, are usually trying to tell a story with an album, that shows what they were going through at the time of creation. So now you have this industry, where to make money, you have make commercial POP hits.
        The same thing is happening to the movie industry. Movies are made for the theater. And the home, as great as your setup might be, is merely trying to recapture some of the magic you can get there. Just having the power to pause your movie makes it a different experience.
        The thing that’s the most scary, is the implication on the future of our civilization. Where no one leaves their home for anything. There’s a huge world out there. Be brave and explore it once in a while.

    • Alex

      I agree these guys are probably overpaid. But there a host of others, too that will suffer. Whomever made the comparison to CDs to MP3s is correct. The music industry is sad now. I suspect all music will be geared to live audiences because the only ones you will be able to hear on tvs and movies will be whomever the industry wants which will be about 5 different acts. I wish I could just buy a new CD I like and listen to it in a stereo. Now, that’s mostly gone.

      I think the movie industry is going down and that’s sad.

      The pop culture industry will soon be dead. Thanks, Internet.

  • Brian Wallace

    I agree with the people commenting. $13-$17 for a ticket. $20 for concessions. Rude people talking and carrying on in the theater and most of all, unoriginal, cliched movies that are mostly sequels or re-treads of other movies.

    How dumb to they think we are with this 3-D/frame-rate BS. It’s just an excuse to charge more. They mine as well call it 4-D because it wastes our TIME!

    The movie industry would rather completely collapse and cease to exist, rather than LOWER PRICES. So therefore…

    Bye-bye movie industry. It’s may be a long slow death but it’s dying. This summer is going to be ROUGH. There may be some blockbusters here and there but Hollywood has to face two facts:

    1.) Due to high theater prices and no inforcement of rules, it’s a lot easier, cheaper and more enjoyable to watch movies in the comfort of your home.

    2.) Free movies are out there on the internet. You just have to have the right friends and/or know where to look.

    Bye-bye movies as we know it. Enjoy the ride down. Say “Hi!” to the music industry when you’re down there. Movies are made for movie-goers and we’ve had enough.

    Brian

    • Jessica

      The reason ticket prices are high is because the studios gouge the theaters and refuse to rent them movies if they don’t comply. It has nothing to do with the theaters. The theaters hardly make anything from ticket sales. Most of it goes to the studios. The reason concession prices are so high is because that is how the theaters make their money. With all of the technological advancement going on in cinema right now, the theaters are just trying to keep up. 3D and digital projectors cost thousands of dollars each.
      If you don’t want to pay $20 for concessions then don’t buy them or bring your own. But don’t complain about it.
      Plenty of people can go 2 hours without eating.

    • Jessica

      Also, most movies these days cost over $100 million to make. If you steal them from the internet, whose going to pay for that? That money comes from somewhere. Do you think we are going to continue to have great movies when no one is left to pay for them? If the movie industry does collapse, what are you going to do for entertainment what youtube clips of a farting dog? Because that’s what you are going to be left with. Also, I imagine you ate going to say something like “well some movies shouldn’t be made because they suck”. And I agree. The movie industry is essentially a democratic one, sometime they make awful movies. It’s all trial and error. Sometimes, they make sequels to movies that don’t deserve it. When going to the movies, you are essentially voting with your money. If you don’t like a movie, don’t see it, and tell your friends to do the same. Chances are it could fail and they won’t make a sequel (like GI Joe) if you like a movie tell your friends and maybe they will make more. The reason they keep making Transformer movies and Fast and the Furious movies is because people go to them. The industry is scared of risk taking so theyre more likely to put money into a sure thing.

  • Mal

    Why would I pay $30 for a video on demand that I can’t even have a hard copy of, when I can go to the theater for $10?

    • Jason

      You’re right, individually it wouldn’t make sense. However, for a family of four (or a group of friends) it’s a lot cheaper especially if you count snack costs.

      • Lauretta

        Hello Ava. My name is Eric. I am building your wbitese and this is my first Message of Hope . I know you are very young right now, but you are a very strong little girl. God has a plan and a great future for you. You have caused a great many people to pause and take into account all that they have to be thankful. One day, God will make us all understand, but for now, we all have to keep faith in your recovery and pray for God’s healing power to overcome you. I can’t wait to meet you and see first hand the joy and spirit you behold. To George and Ann Marie, I’m just one of thousands that will do anything to make your road ahead a little smoother. Please delegate your needs to God’s angels that enter your life in the days, weeks, and months to come. God Bless You Both.

  • joe director

    Hello, I am a richer than needed director. But I feel as though video on demand would keep me from revenues I could otherwise have and I won’t stand for it! Nevermind that people can’t agora $11 bucks a ticket (here’s looking at you Regal) I wants my moneys!

    • Maggie

      I’m right with you there, I can’t agora $11 bucks either.

    • Jessica

      The directors aren’t fighting for themselves, they are fighting for the future of their industry. It is the studio heads that want more money.

  • Paul

    The last 2 times I’ve been to a movie theater it has been a horrible movie experience. No. 1: people smell and increasingly have little respect for anyone else. No. 2: everyone has a phone now so there’s lot’s of glow clouds around which is distracting. No. 3: it costs $8 for a tub of popcorn! Dang! I’m willing to wait for the DVD. Movie theaters are indeed in big trouble. Maybe the movie biz should find a new more viable financial model that takes advantage of electronic delivery rather than try to “get the toothpaste back in the tube”.

  • Jason

    Watching a movie in a theatre > watching a movie at home.

    I hope I never live to see the day when everyone stops going to the theatre.

    • Jackie

      I agree. I’ve seen all of the ‘Harry Potter’ movies opening day at the movie theatre, and there’s just something about being there with a bunch of fans who are revved up and excited to see the movie! Even if it’s not an “event movie”, like ‘Harry Potter’ on opening day, going to the movies kind of feels like an event in itself.

      • Doctor Who Fan

        True that! I saw a mid-night screening of HP 7.1 it was amazing!

  • James Franco

    Personally, I like this idea. I’ll shell out 30 bucks to watch a new movie at home on my flat-screen. I dont necessarily mind the idea of theaters numbers dwindling either.

    At $30 a pop, studios will still make their money, and I wont be asked to pay $7.50 for a bag of popcorn anymore

  • Trouble

    Cinema tickets are too expensive and that’s the real reason less people are going. I am disgusted that such rich directors like Del Toro and Jackson, and the richer than Midas James Cameron, are still bleating about not getting enough money.

    They need to get real and see that the world is in the grip of a depression and people just don’t have the spare cash to stuff *their* pockets even more.

    Stop being greedy people and get a grip; you’re all insanely rich and really don’t have a thing to complain about. Try being grateful instead you’re so lucky.

    • Maggie

      I think that people should consider that these big-time directors aren’t just being greedy but are actually concerned about the future of the movie business, and especially movie theatres. I don’t think James Cameron and Peter Jackson are worried about their own wallets but are, admirably, using their status as very successful filmmakers to try to prevent something that they believe will be damaging to all filmmakers, big and small.

      • Mike

        I work at a theater and I would hate directTV to take more jobs away. This doesn’t just effect big directors with lots of money.

      • Marc

        Two terms that seem to keep popping up here are ‘business’ and ‘industry.’ One commenter says “MP3s have ruined the music industry,” while another says “this plan will ruin the movie business.” To this I say: so what? Ruining an industry doesn’t ruin the art.

        First of all, the new music model may mean that artists are making less (boo hoo), but they can produce more and reach the consumer directly, cutting out the middle-man. Frankly, I think that will help cull the ranks of bad artists because only those really dedicated to the craft will be willing to expend the time and energy to produce for lower returns. Those people will, I suspect, be better artists. (So quit yer griping, Bon Jovi.)

        As for films, the direct-release model may mean that some theaters will close. It doesn’t necessarily follow that ALL theaters will close. At the moment, they’re almost like Starbucks – you can’t spit without hitting one. Culling their ranks doesn’t mean that those who want to go won’t be able to, it just means they may have to walk a block farther. I, for one, am less inclined to go to a theater now just because of the idiots with cell phones. They don’t melt into white noise, as one poster claimed – they distract and command your attention every time they whip out the damned thing to check the latest vapid post to Facebook. At home, the distracts are mine, and are therefore can be controlled by me: it’s perfectly OK to tell my son to shut up so I can hear. In a theater, people tend to get upset if you call them on their idiocy. (Because let’s face it, they paid $12 a ticket too so they have every right to disrupt everyone else’s viewing experience, right?)

        No, there’s nothing wrong with this suggested VOD model. It’s a win-win: those who want to view in theaters still can, and those who want to view at home can as well.

      • Trouble

        If a night out at the cinema didn’t cost a second mortgage, more people would go. it really is that simple.

        For me, my husband and 13 year old daughter to go to cinema, with a box of popcorn and a hotdog we could easily clear about £40/$66 – most people just don’t have that kind of cash to spend on a single night out these days. Oh and I live in the north of the UK, prices in london can be double or even triple that.

        The directors are not looking out for the cinemas; they’re looking out for themselves otherwise they would be pressuring the companies to lower ticket prices to encourage people to attend – but to do that they’d have to get less for their movies and less for themselves; that won’t happen.

      • Samy

        What i don’t realize is atllacuy how you’re no longer really much more smartly-preferred than you might be right now. You’re very intelligent. You recognize thus significantly with regards to this matter, produced me personally imagine it from so many various angles. Its like women and men aren’t interested unless it is something to accomplish with Lady gaga! Your personal stuffs outstanding. At all times care for it up!

    • Daniel

      Directors make money for making a movie, not for how long it stays in theaters. They don’t get a new check for each extra week their film spends in a theater and it’s only in specific, uncommon deals that they get a cut of the profits. The only bottom line that this will effect is the STUDIO’s bottom line, and consequently that will also effect the types of projects that studios are willing to bankroll. Basically, if studios only allow a small theatrical window, they’ll only pay for movies that make the bulk of their money in its opening weeks. James Cameron and Peter Jackson have huge opening weekends so they’ll be unaffected, but they also both started out on small-budget cult films that no studio would ever be willing to make if they adopt this system. It’s the James Camerons and Peter Jacksons of the next generation that will be hurt by this.

    • Tyler

      Leo You will want to make sure you are taking care of tignhs with your low back. I would suggest hitting the mwod to find tignhs that you can do to help with this situation.You will determine the number of repeats taking into account your ability to maintain proper mechanics for the time or distance. Maintaining proper mechanics will also help not to aggrivate your low back. Yes, stay with the prescribed distance or time on tempo/tt wods. You may want to enter a 5K or 10K as you are training for your marathon as a check in and it will allow you to see if any changes are needed to how you prepare on race day.

  • Le HIROSHI

    I’m not American-based, so my comment in a sense is irrelevant. Anyway, . . .

    – –

    Matter-of-factly, it won’t hurt me a moviegoer. But studios should show class for the good olden days between them and the traditional theaters. The sad thing as it seems is that it all boils down to what the studios believe to be the best to tackle with piracy problems; ironically, leeches might still prevail, their karma sadly fallen upon the theater owners.

    – –

    As for the side-note movie experience, I own a huge flat screen and some nice audio systems, but I think nothing could ever beat the in-theater receptive event at the end of the day.

  • Movies

    I don’t go to movies at the theater as it is. If movies were available on DirecTV sooner, I’d be more likely to see them since they’ll still be pretty fresh in mind. In my case, the movie industry would get more of my $ this way. Quit the whining already.

    • Aslan

      If there wewre any good films being produced, I might be inclined to go to the cinema. Thanks to Cameron and Jackson, the only thing being produced are meaningless computer games mislabelled as films. Avatar? Give me a break. Lowest common denominator crap.

    • Rosmery

      God, please bless this iuuetbfal child and help make her better. Please stay with the family and help them through this difficult time.Baby Ava, Our prayers are with you. There is not a day that you don’t cross my mind so stay strong baby girl we are all pulling for you.

Page: 1 2 3 7
Add your comment
The rules: Keep it clean, and stay on the subject - or we may delete your comment. If you see inappropriate language, e-mail us. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field.

When you click on the "Post Comment" button above to submit your comments, you are indicating your acceptance of and are agreeing to the Terms of Service. You can also read our Privacy Policy.

Latest Videos in Movies

Advertisement

TV Recaps

Powered by WordPress.com VIP