4 ms·

This only involves the top blockbusters. For most other US produced movies the waiting time for releases can easily be well over 6 months. Besides, 6 weeks is

by rickmb 14y ago

This only involves the top blockbusters. For most other US produced movies the waiting time for releases can easily be well over 6 months. Besides, 6 weeks is still a long time in the age of instant global communication. Basically, all the hype and buzz surrounding a film starts well before the release and dramatically drops a week after. After a month, people have pretty much forgotten about it. This hurts sales even without piracy, because the artificially created urgency (why do you thing so many people go see a movie in the opening week?) has gone. There is no alternative for simultaneous release that doesn't hurt sales, piracy or not.

jcampbell1 14y ago
I agree that simultaneous releases are best for sales, but that ignores reality. Lets assume 400 movies are screened per year in NY/LA, 200 widely in the US, and 125 in foreign theaters. It is simply not possible for all 400 movies to have a simultaneous global release. Theater owners must take a "wait and see" approach for many films. I also don't agree with your 6 month figure, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Release dates are widely published. Comedies tend to have the slowest rollout because it takes time to prove that the humor translates well. Even with comedies, I can't find anything where the wide US release is 6 months before foreign releases.
- robryan 14y ago
  Movies like the saw series seemed to do this fine, opened pretty much everywhere one the same day. Sure not every movie can get the same limited screen space, but the big movies that are getting the most online downloads probably can.
- moe 14y ago
  It is simply not possible for all 400 movies to have a simultaneous global release. Theater owners must take a "wait and see" approach for many films. Who cares about theaters? I haven't been in a movie theater in 5 years - it just doesn't appeal to me at all. And I know for a fact that many of my friends who used to be cinema-buffs don't care much anymore either. We prefer to watch films in our home-cinemas now, on a big flatscreen or beamer. Consequently we use the first release in watchable quality that we can get. And often that's from PirateBay. Not because we'd be unwilling to pay $9.99 for a HD movie on iTunes, but simply because most movies appear 6 months earlier on the torrents. If iTunes launched in parallel with the theaters we would buy all movies.
  - thirdsun 14y ago
    You're right. I'm from germany and haven't been in a theater for years but I own a beamer. Additionally going to a theater would involve driving about 50 km just to get there as I live in a rural area. Furthermore I prefer to watch movies in their original language (well, as long as it is english). I wish movie distribution was up to the standards we expect when buying music these days. Ditch DRM, just offer me the files and let me re-download them at any time via my account. Streaming is an option but for me bandwith is limited (speed, not volume) while harddisk space is cheap. Plus XBMC + Apple TV + NAS lets me build up my own film archive. unfortunately and in contrast to the process of buying music we aren't there yet with movies.
  - jcampbell1 14y ago
    > If iTunes launched in parallel with the theaters we would buy all movies. If iTunes launched in parallel with the theaters, the PirateBay would have a pristine copy of all movies in the theaters. If you were a movie maker or a distributor, is something that you would do given the current marketplace? That strikes me as bat-shit crazy. That being said, I think it would be best if the top 100 films had a global release, and were all available on iTunes globally 10-14 weeks later. Hollywood is forced to compete with the PirateBay. At some point, they are going to have to start selling on iTunes as soon as the pirates get a quality copy. I personally love going to the movies, and frankly I think it is a bargain. I spend about $200/year on movie tickets and enjoy it most of the time, and I spend about $1000/year on broadway shows and fucking hate it the majority of the time. There is nothing that gives me the creeps more than when someone breaks into song for no apparent reason. I do love comedy clubs, and $5 admission plus two overpriced drinks is the best deal around. When I have kids and move to the suburbs, my perspective will likely be identical to yours. I fully understand your perspective, and a I think hollywood would be well served to cater to the future myself.
    - DanBC 14y ago
      > and I spend about $1000/year on broadway shows and fucking hate it the majority of the time. Why go if you hate it so much?

by rickmb 14y ago

jcampbell1 14y ago

I agree that simultaneous releases are best for sales, but that ignores reality. Lets assume 400 movies are screened per year in NY/LA, 200 widely in the US, and 125 in foreign theaters. It is simply not possible for all 400 movies to have a simultaneous global release. Theater owners must take a "wait and see" approach for many films. I also don't agree with your 6 month figure, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Release dates are widely published. Comedies tend to have the slowest rollout because it takes time to prove that the humor translates well. Even with comedies, I can't find anything where the wide US release is 6 months before foreign releases.

robryan 14y ago
Movies like the saw series seemed to do this fine, opened pretty much everywhere one the same day. Sure not every movie can get the same limited screen space, but the big movies that are getting the most online downloads probably can.
moe 14y ago
It is simply not possible for all 400 movies to have a simultaneous global release. Theater owners must take a "wait and see" approach for many films. Who cares about theaters? I haven't been in a movie theater in 5 years - it just doesn't appeal to me at all. And I know for a fact that many of my friends who used to be cinema-buffs don't care much anymore either. We prefer to watch films in our home-cinemas now, on a big flatscreen or beamer. Consequently we use the first release in watchable quality that we can get. And often that's from PirateBay. Not because we'd be unwilling to pay $9.99 for a HD movie on iTunes, but simply because most movies appear 6 months earlier on the torrents. If iTunes launched in parallel with the theaters we would buy all movies.
- thirdsun 14y ago
  You're right. I'm from germany and haven't been in a theater for years but I own a beamer. Additionally going to a theater would involve driving about 50 km just to get there as I live in a rural area. Furthermore I prefer to watch movies in their original language (well, as long as it is english). I wish movie distribution was up to the standards we expect when buying music these days. Ditch DRM, just offer me the files and let me re-download them at any time via my account. Streaming is an option but for me bandwith is limited (speed, not volume) while harddisk space is cheap. Plus XBMC + Apple TV + NAS lets me build up my own film archive. unfortunately and in contrast to the process of buying music we aren't there yet with movies.
- jcampbell1 14y ago
  > If iTunes launched in parallel with the theaters we would buy all movies. If iTunes launched in parallel with the theaters, the PirateBay would have a pristine copy of all movies in the theaters. If you were a movie maker or a distributor, is something that you would do given the current marketplace? That strikes me as bat-shit crazy. That being said, I think it would be best if the top 100 films had a global release, and were all available on iTunes globally 10-14 weeks later. Hollywood is forced to compete with the PirateBay. At some point, they are going to have to start selling on iTunes as soon as the pirates get a quality copy. I personally love going to the movies, and frankly I think it is a bargain. I spend about $200/year on movie tickets and enjoy it most of the time, and I spend about $1000/year on broadway shows and fucking hate it the majority of the time. There is nothing that gives me the creeps more than when someone breaks into song for no apparent reason. I do love comedy clubs, and $5 admission plus two overpriced drinks is the best deal around. When I have kids and move to the suburbs, my perspective will likely be identical to yours. I fully understand your perspective, and a I think hollywood would be well served to cater to the future myself.
  - DanBC 14y ago
    > and I spend about $1000/year on broadway shows and fucking hate it the majority of the time. Why go if you hate it so much?