What we think of as “movies” (traditional theater distribution) will become limited to big-budget “tentpole” movies that anchor a larger media franchise includi

What we think of as “movies” (traditional theater distribution) will become limited to big-budget “tentpole” movies that anchor a larger media franchise including toys, games and other forms of media. The art film world will probably survive as a niche, if for no other reason than they have a dedicated audience — think the same situation with non-digital photography. But art films will likely trend more provocative as the streaming services are also funding a lot of high-concept films. Movie production costs have gotten so low that online streaming is quickly becoming the predominant model. These low costs allow streaming studio heads to diversify across genres and take lots of small risks, which ultimately reduce me the risk to the production company. This increased risk tolerance allows them to give up almost all creative control to the writers, actors and directors. A-list actors and directors are willing to give up a lot of money to get that creative control, so the streaming services still recruit top talent. But by far the biggest cost difference is marketing. The only way studios can justify a $50M marketing budget for a movie is if that marketing also drives additional commercial activity outside of theatrical attendance (games, merch, anticipated sequels, etc.) Streaming services can benefit from a constant, consolidated marketing budget: they can advertise the “new movie of the week” with a sustained ad buy over time while still retaining the brand advertising uplift for the entire service. Global distribution is also waaaaay easier for streaming services. Ultimate takeaway though is that the window release model is dead. Everyone in the media industry has known this for years; and I think that we’ll look back at 2019 as the year that really started to happen for real.