I agree with the latter, but I continue to roll my eyes at the former.
Do you tell a painter that seeing a photo of their painting and seeing it in person is the same thing
I agree with the latter, but I continue to roll my eyes at the former.
I guess that Box Office Mojo just doesn't have the data for that film apparently for whatever reason. They have The 47th week of the 2020 BO vs the 2019 reflects a take of $9k vs $600k. I wonder if the box office reporting in general is just a mess in a lot of countries right now? As to that movie, my wife is very excited. She's a Fannibal who is Mads obsessed and helped arrange this watch party, lol.There are other exceptions. Over 800 000 people have seen Vinterberg/Mikkelsen comedy Another Round at the cinema in Denmark. That is almost 14% of the population.
Haha yes I read your long, passionate defense of all viewing formats. There is still a right way to watch a movie, and acknowledging that isn't an insult to single moms watching movies on their iPads.
Do you tell a painter that seeing a photo of their painting and seeing it in person is the same thing
Do you tell a painter that seeing a photo of their painting and seeing it in person is the same thing
This is the 💯 the real issue here. Thank you for expressing it so elegantly.I would always say the correct course of action was for AT&T/WarnerMedia to renegotiate and adjust the compensation contracts for ALL its current Hollywood partners - and not just for the Wonder Woman 84 crew - to include BOTH cinema box office returns and HBO Max earnings and THEN make the announcement that their slate of movies would be released simultaneously in both.
I don't think "consumer choice" or "sanctity of cinema" is the issue here at all because simultaneous release if implemented can cater to both. The only question is whether acting in bad faith towards their Hollywood partners is financially and legally worth it.
I don't know how much I'd spread blame out on this, tbh.I definitely could see this going poorly for ATT. It'll be really interesting to see how the numbers do, what the fallout is, etc.
I don't see this move and the way they did it as going well in many ways. But I think the industry is in a weird "growing pains" kind of stage and COVID accelerated it. Growing pains means everyone becomes the worse version of themselves often with Corporate shitting on artist and trying to money grab and many artist trying to refuse that the world is changing and things will go back to normal.
Changes like this are often fights for survivability in a game of musical chairs. There aren't enough seats anymore. So either everyone collectively bargains to figure out a new method, or people scramble for their slice and hope to still be there when the dust settles. Given how capitalism typically works. I expect for the latter, but I do hope for the former (or that the artists come out on top).
I roll my eyes at people who tell me I don't understand a musician because my headphones aren't $1,000s yes.
I would always say the correct course of action was for AT&T/WarnerMedia to renegotiate and adjust the compensation contracts for ALL its current Hollywood partners - and not just for the Wonder Woman 84 crew - to include BOTH cinema box office returns and HBO Max earnings and THEN make the announcement that their current slate of movies would be released simultaneously in both.
I don't think "consumer choice" or "sanctity of cinema" is the issue here at all because simultaneous release if implemented can cater to both. The only question is whether acting in bad faith towards their Hollywood partners is financially and legally worth it for AT&T/WarnerMedia.
Tenet actually got some high numbers in countries where theaters were open this summer, like having the best opening weekend for a Nolan movie in Netherlands. Thus beating The Dark Knight Rises.Are you sure about this? China and Japan are the only two countries having very good box office returns and in the case of Japan it's due to the fact that they've released the biggest movie there of the last 20 years, soon to be of all-time. If you look at other countries where numbers are low, the figures are maybe 1/2 or 1/5th in the case of New Zealand. Flock is not the term I'd use.
I guess that Box Office Mojo just doesn't have the data for that film apparently for whatever reason. They have The 47th week of the 2020 BO vs the 2019 reflects a take of $9k vs $600k. I wonder if the box office reporting in general is just a mess in a lot of countries right now? As to that movie, my wife is very excited. She's a Fannibal who is Mads obsessed and helped arrange this watch party, lol.
The act of releasing a movie in theaters between now and this time next year is asking people to risk their health. There's no way around that. He could delay the movie again but then now the studio is losing money... plus if and when theaters do reopen, they're going to be CROWDED with new films. There are still millions without jobs, people aren't going to afford to see them all. Who is to say movie profits will ever return to normal?He is okay with delays..... he's not asking for you to risk anything.
Nope. That's not what I said. Arguing there is only "one true way" to experience art, is eye rolling to me. Access to the theater experience is, thankfully, more than expensive headphones. Of course directors choose to paint their canvas on a theater experience, but they, ultimately, can only suggest the best experience in their mind. Art is then consumed in multiple ways and the effect on people and culture is varied.So a movie ticket is now a 1000k pair of headphones?
The reality is many film directors absolutely plan their shot composition based on a movie theater screen
That's their canvas.
But we are already talking about October 2021 in the case of Dune. And the studio is losing money anyway, Warner has announced nothing in regards to compensating Legendary.The act of releasing a movie in theaters between now and this time next year is asking people to risk their health. There's no way around that. He could delay the movie again but then now the studio is losing money...
The act of releasing a movie in theaters between now and this time next year is asking people to risk their health. There's no way around that. He could delay the movie again but then now the studio is losing money... plus if and when theaters do reopen, they're going to be CROWDED with new films. There are still millions without jobs, people aren't going to afford to see them all. Who is to say movie profits will ever return to normal?
Look, I have a lot of respect for Denis and a lot of other directors. My dream job is to direct something one day. But I'd never demand the only way to see this is in the cinema during a pandemic. Or harp that the best way to experience my movie is the theaters (cause I needs my points). These directors need to step outside of LA and see how shitty the movie going experience is for most people. Doing this would inform them it's not worth the risk and if given the option to stay home, people will take that.
I could go on and on about the theater experience in South Carolina. Most chains have: dim projectors, out of focus (they do nothing even if you complain), projector screens have holes, people on their phones, projector screens have marks and lines, low volume, and they love stuffing you in the smallest theater room if the movie you want to watch isn't made by Disney. And yet, ticket prices were going up damn near every 6 months. These things force me to go to IMAX/LieMAX... they're the only ones who give a shit.
Again, I really don't understand this defensiveness. I watch movies at home all the time. But I also can recognize that the best version of the film would be in a theater. The Dark Knight looks great on my TV. It would look better on an IMAX, especially the scenes specially shot for the format.Nope. That's not what I said. Arguing there is only "one true way" to experience art, is eye rolling to me. Access to the theater experience is, thankfully, more than expensive headphones. Of course directors choose to paint their canvas on a theater experience, but they, ultimately, can only suggest the best experience in their mind. Art is then consumed in multiple ways and the effect on people and culture is varied.
When people gatekeep art experience I roll my eyes. It, frankly, just doesn't matter that much what people SHOULD do. If people appreciate it through another medium, let them, no one needs to tell them they aren't really enjoying it because they didn't do it the "right" way. There will always be better ways they aren't doing, always be preferences, always be shitty theater experience and amazing at home viewing experiences. It's all nuanced.
I would always say the correct course of action was for AT&T/WarnerMedia to renegotiate and adjust the compensation contracts for ALL its current Hollywood partners - and not just for the Wonder Woman 84 crew - to include BOTH cinema box office returns and HBO Max earnings and THEN make the announcement that their current slate of movies would be released simultaneously in both.
I don't think "consumer choice" or "sanctity of cinema" is the issue here at all because simultaneous release if implemented can cater to both. The only question is whether acting in bad faith towards their Hollywood partners is financially and legally worth it for AT&T/WarnerMedia.
Nope. That's not what I said. Arguing there is only "one true way" to experience art, is eye rolling to me. Access to the theater experience is, thankfully, more than expensive headphones. Of course directors choose to paint their canvas on a theater experience, but they, ultimately, can only suggest the best experience in their mind. Art is then consumed in multiple ways and the effect on people and culture is varied.
When people gatekeep art experience I roll my eyes. It, frankly, just doesn't matter that much what people SHOULD do. If people appreciate it through another medium, let them, no one needs to tell them they aren't really enjoying it because they didn't do it the "right" way. There will always be better ways they aren't doing, always be preferences, always be shitty theater experience and amazing at home viewing experiences. It's all nuanced.
Where am I shitting on artist or people who love the cinema? I said that's a great way to experience it for some?Not one true
But an artist saying to fully experience it see it on the canvas I designed it around is factual.
Interstellar is made for IMAX, that is the best way to experience it.
This weird shitting on artists who love the cinema is really weird
I guess that Box Office Mojo just doesn't have the data for that film apparently for whatever reason. They have The 47th week of the 2020 BO vs the 2019 reflects a take of $9k vs $600k. I wonder if the box office reporting in general is just a mess in a lot of countries right now? As to that movie, my wife is very excited. She's a Fannibal who is Mads obsessed and helped arrange this watch party, lol.
This absolutely matters to consumers even if there's not a need for a detailed awareness; the financial feasibility of a streaming-centric future will put caps on budget maximums and/or a minimum on subscription costs unless the company is willing to take it as a loss-leader to support other revenue streams.Two points:
Denis Villenueve has already stated this is about the integrity of cinema, not as much about money. I think he is full of it.
It is about consumer choice. Only enthusiasts care about the details of these backroom deals. The majority of people just want to watch Day 1 at home. That pandoras box has been opened and it will happen eventually. It will be up to them to decide how to split up the pie, and we don't really care how it works out or if directors are peeved about it or whatever.
I'm thinking about films like Moonlight and the Florida Project or Ladybird and I wouldn't describe them as having "spectacle" at least. But I guess it depends on your definition.weird response. independent cinema is loaded with spectacle, often to a greater and more impactful extent than blockbusters
Where am I shitting on artist or people who love the cinema? I said that's a great way to experience it for some?
I just said stop gatekeeping art.
And no, an artist asking to fully experience it on the canvas is the INTENT of the art created, it is not the final word on how the art is received and interpreted.
Nobody knows what October 21 is going to look like. Nobody. All of this pandemic shit is new.But we are already talking about October 2021 in the case of Dune. And the studio is losing money anyway, Warner has announced nothing in regards to compensating Legendary.
Not one true
But an artist saying to fully experience it see it on the canvas I designed it around is factual.
Interstellar is made for IMAX, that is the best way to experience it.
This weird shitting on artists who love the cinema is really weird
This absolutely matters to consumers even if there's not a need for a detailed awareness; the financial feasibility of a streaming-centric future will put caps on budget maximums and/or a minimum on subscription costs unless the company is willing to take it as a loss-leader to support other revenue streams.
The 'backroom deals' and distribution channel has significant implications on what sort of content people can consume.
Who is actually gatekeeping though.
These artists are just commenting on their love for the cinema and how their work is designed for it.
Dune is alot of things, but there's nothing cookie-cutter about it's handling of chosen one tropes and very little cookie-cutter about it in general.Eh, it's Dune, it's pretty much going to be a cookie-cutter sci-fan chosen-one plot and movie.
This depends on what customers want. You're coming at this with a supposition but trying to portray it as a clear-cut fact.A streaming-centric future is a certainty, end of story. If media companies want to keep profits they will come up with a format that will cater to consumers who want access to stream films day 1. If they can't come up with a format that provides the needed convenience and value to the consumer, someone else will step in and do it for them.
That is how it has worked since the beginning and we have always had good movies being made regardless. If movies that cost hundreds of millions to be made are not sustainable unless people are forced into a theatre, then maybe they should die.
This is nonsense. It's not gatekeeping to acknowledge that if a movie was made for theaters, that a theater is the best way to watch it.Saying the only "true" way to experience the art is in theaters is gatekeeping. Especially when you factor in how shitty a lot of theaters are for a huge amount of the population and how limited access is for some.
It's fine that they designed the movie with that in mind, but to tell people they aren't appreciating the art or the artist because they don't view it in the most perfect of spaces is gatekeeping. It assumes so many things and places oneself in a position of telling others to rise up to a specific standard of consumption or they aren't worthy of the conversation.
I don't think anybody knows which of the two exactly has a larger draw, nor do I think it's something that consumers in general are aware they're actually choosing between.
Saying the only "true" way to experience the art is in theaters is gatekeeping. Especially when you factor in how shitty a lot of theaters are for a huge amount of the population and how limited access is for some.
It's fine that they designed the movie with that in mind, but to tell people they aren't appreciating the art or the artist because they don't view it in the most perfect of spaces is gatekeeping. It assumes so many things and places oneself in a position of telling others to rise up to a specific standard of consumption or they aren't worthy of the conversation.
This depends on what customers want. If customers value large-budget style-productions then future by nature cannot be the future of those movies and there will be continue to be a theatre presence. If studios want to continue generating the same sort of revenue, they cannot revert to a streaming future and won't support it to try and force the existence of theatres. If customers place more value on the convenience of streaming and a variety of lower to medium budget content, then streaming will continue and theatres won't be sustainable.
I don't think anybody knows which of the two exactly has a larger draw, nor do I think it's something that consumers in general are aware they're actually choosing between.
This is nonsense. It's not gatekeeping to acknowledge that if a movie was made for theaters, that a theater is the best way to watch it.
You seem to be taking this personally, or expecting people to take this personally, and for the life of me I can't understand why. Do some of you tie your sense of self to your home theater set ups or something? Is that why folks in these threads are always rattling off the specs of the shit in their living rooms?
I like artists and its very cool they love cinema. That doesn't mean I should support a format which costs me extra money, time, and convenience.
So essentially what you are saying is that models like Game Pass will result in gamers playing mediocre to bad games because the revenue has changed and the content creators cannot adapt. Also that companies like Netflix and Tesla (which are considered to be the among the most innovative companies in the world) will not be able to provide value because they front loaded their businesses and they will have to start making up for their losses by overcharging the customer?
WB is not in for a huge financial hit with dune, legendary bankrolled 75% of the budget. They are doing this to boost HBO max, acting as if that is not their main goal with this is being ridiculous.The act of releasing a movie in theaters between now and this time next year is asking people to risk their health. There's no way around that. He could delay the movie again but then now the studio is losing money... plus if and when theaters do reopen, they're going to be CROWDED with new films. There are still millions without jobs, people aren't going to afford to see them all. Who is to say movie profits will ever return to normal?
Look, I have a lot of respect for Denis and a lot of other directors. My dream job is to direct something one day. But I'd never demand the only way to see this is in the cinema during a pandemic. Or harp that the best way to experience my movie is the theaters (cause I needs my points). These directors need to step outside of LA and see how shitty the movie going experience is for most people. Doing this would inform them it's not worth the risk and if given the option to stay home, people will take that.
I could go on and on about the theater experience in South Carolina. Most chains have: dim projectors, out of focus (they do nothing even if you complain), projector screens have holes, people on their phones, projector screens have marks and lines, low volume, and they love stuffing you in the smallest theater room if the movie you want to watch isn't made by Disney. And yet, ticket prices were going up damn near every 6 months. These things force me to go to IMAX/LieMAX... they're the only ones who give a shit.
Uhhh ok?
Doesn't mean they should cater the release of movies to you.
No artist is required to cater to anyone.
No consumer is required to cater to anyone.
Wherever sustainability for those two realities to exist is what it is.
Well I definitely think your post was nonsense, but trust that I'm not trying to insult you. I genuinely just don't understand how anyone could say that acknowledging that a theater is the ideal format to watch something made for a theater, is gatekeeping, or treat it as an attack on people who prefer to watch at home.I'm not taking it personally at all. I don't care all that much frankly. If you want to project that onto me you are free to do so though. It doesn't effect my life one bit.
I'm not even that much of a home theater geek, I have a nice, but simple setup that most people on any AV forum would consider "basic" and I would be told it's too entry.
But you're really fishing for something to insult me with personally, some of you on this forum really can't get away from personally attacking people with different opinions than their own. But if you want to dismiss my post as "nonsense" go ahead.
Their the ones saying not giving them day 1 streaming is anti-consumer
How exactly are movies made for theaters? How does a director go about making a movie for the theater than say a home theater or cellphone with someone wearing headsets?
Are people advocating for 3D again?