Movies & Cinema during the Pandemic? Catch-all Discussion (1 Viewer)

[jcroy]

Wasn't the New Mutants film the recent "sacrificial lamb" of late?

 

[TravisR]

As I've said, I understand that no one in Hollywood wants to toss an expensive movie to the wolves, but I remain concerned that if studios let theaters go under - which seems highly likely when the total weekly US gross is around $11 million - that there will be no theaters to use when COVID does recede!

We're going in circles but I really think that the problem is that too much of the U.S. audience isn't willing to go back yet and no amount of big movies can fix that. If Tenet did fairly well in Europe and Asia and not as well in the U.S., it seems to me that concern over the virus is keeping Americans out of theaters. The studios can't keep releasing movies for the next year or so that they know are going to lose money just to keep theaters on life support. I think one of two things will happen- studios will either have to buy theaters so they have a place to play their movies or the studios have to figure out a way to get the audience to go to PVOD. Believe me, I hate that I think there's a real chance that the theater chains might die.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Wasn't the New Mutants film the recent "sacrificial lamb" of late?

I don't think so. From what I understand, Disney inherited it when they bought Fox and they never really wanted to release it anyway.

It was a "problem child" film and I think Disney was probably relieved to be able to dump it at the start of reopening, as it gave them an excuse for its low box office that they'd lack during normal times.

Besides, "Mutants" came out pre-"Tenet". I've advocated at least one semi-major movie a month, but "Mutants" hit screens less than a week before "Tenet", so it didn't achieve that...

 

[Colin Jacobson]

We're going in circles but I really think that the problem is that too much of the U.S. audience isn't willing to go back yet and no amount of big movies can fix that. If Tenet did fairly well in Europe and Asia and not as well in the U.S., it seems to me that concern over the virus is keeping Americans out of theaters. The studios can't keep releasing movies for the next year or so that they know are going to lose money just to keep theaters on life support. I think one of two things will happen- studios will either have to buy theaters so they have a place to play their movies or the studios have to figure out a way to get the audience to go to PVOD. Believe me, I hate that I think there's a real chance that the theater chains might die.

As I've said, the fact "Tenet" underperformed doesn't prove that people won't go back. It proves they wouldn't go back a month ago for a movie without big stars that wasn't part of a franchise.

You can't take one underperforming movie and claim it proves anything. It's one piece of data, but because Hollywood won't try again, we don't have any additional data to add.

 

[TravisR]

As I've said, the fact "Tenet" underperformed doesn't prove that people won't go back. It proves they wouldn't go back a month ago for a movie without big stars that wasn't part of a franchise.

You can't take one underperforming movie and claim it proves anything. It's one piece of data, but because Hollywood won't try again, we don't have any additional data to add.

I admit that one movie isn't proof by any means but looking at Tenet's percentage of business that came from Europe and Asia, there's a much bigger than normal difference (85% came from international versus 15% from the U.S.). I think that is a strong indication that not enough of the U.S. audience is willing to come back yet because if it was just a bad ad campaign or lack of stars, the percentages wouldn't be so heavy in favor of the international market. It's fair to say that the audience actually came internationally but didn't in America.

 

[Malcolm R]

There are a number of films that have been hits worldwide but relative flops in North America, even during the best of times.

 

[TravisR]

There are a number of films that have been hits worldwide but relative flops in North America, even during the best of times.

It happens but I think in this case, the reason it happened is because the virus is undeniably less controlled than it is internationally.

 

[Malcolm R]

I guess we'll never know since the performance of only two films of questionable interest is no proof either way.

 

[TravisR]

I guess we'll never know since the performance of only two films of questionable interest is no proof either way.

It may not be proof but it was still enough for every studio to bump every major release they have for months.

 

[Malcolm R]

If they're waiting for a "sure thing," it will be years before we see any new films released and theaters and some of the studios may go bankrupt in the meantime.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I still think what I thought before: If the theaters want a big tentpole movie to come out this year, the way to make that happen is to agree to a simultaneous VOD release or very short exclusivity window so that the studio has an opportunity to make money from both the people who will go out and the people who won't in the same time frame.

Hocus Pocus is going to be the #2 movie of the weekend, besting the gross of The Empire Strikes Back last weekend. It is available on Blu-ray, and UHD, and Disney+, and it has also aired on cable this weekend on Freeform. This demonstrates that the people who are going to the theater now will still go to the theater even if the film is also available on other platforms. So I don't think the theaters have anything more to lose at this point. They might as well go out on a limb if it will help them survive.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I admit that one movie isn't proof by any means but looking at Tenet's percentage of business that came from Europe and Asia, there's a much bigger than normal difference (85% came from international versus 15% from the U.S.). I think that is a strong indication that not enough of the U.S. audience is willing to come back yet because if it was just a bad ad campaign or lack of stars, the percentages wouldn't be so heavy in favor of the international market. It's fair to say that the audience actually came internationally but didn't in America.

I agree there, but then again, it's not unheard of for movies to disappoint or outright tank in the US but thrive elsewhere.

There are plenty of movies that look like bombs based on US performance but that turned a good profit because they were embraced internationally.

Also, theaters had been open longer in the other territories. In the US, the theaters that played "Tenet" when it debuted had only opened a couple weeks earlier.

That's why I view "Tenet" as the riskiest of the bunch, as it came out when potential viewers had no idea whether open theaters would pose a real health risk.

Now that they've been open about 6-7 weeks, it seems like less of a threat.

As far as I know, no outbreaks have been traced to movie theaters in the US. Possible that it's happened, but I feel pretty sure that some people on this thread would've posted that info if it'd happened.

In theory, this would make audiences more willing to see Bond or "WW84" or "Black Widow" now than they would've 5-6 weeks ago.

In reality, we'll never know, because the studios bailed, but I have to imagine that 6-7 weeks of (apparently) COVID-free operation would win over people who feared for their safety back in August/early September.

Anyway, my theory seems unlikely to be tested - at least not until Thanksgiving, when Disney may release "Soul".

If they do release it and it tanks, I'll admit I'm full of crap!

But if it's a hit, I demand everyone kneel before me!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

It may not be proof but it was still enough for every studio to bump every major release they have for months.

I think studios are just sheep. No one wants to take a chance, and since WB tried and semi-failed, they're all terrified that they'll follow.

I think the studios are being totally myopic, so worried about one "flop" that they'll risk the entire industry's failure.

If alive, JFK wouldn't add a chapter to "Profiles in Courage" about Hollywood circa 2020!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I still think what I thought before: If the theaters want a big tentpole movie to come out this year, the way to make that happen is to agree to a simultaneous VOD release or very short exclusivity window so that the studio has an opportunity to make money from both the people who will go out and the people who won't in the same time frame.

Hocus Pocus is going to be the #2 movie of the weekend, besting the gross of The Empire Strikes Back last weekend. It is available on Blu-ray, and UHD, and Disney+, and it has also aired on cable this weekend on Freeform. This demonstrates that the people who are going to the theater now will still go to the theater even if the film is also available on other platforms. So I don't think the theaters have anything more to lose at this point. They might as well go out on a limb if it will help them survive.

Agree. I think that "17-day window" thing is the perfect solution for the current situation.

Maybe studios think they can't charge the $30 or whatever they've asked for the A-list VOD movies if they appeared in theaters first?

Dunno. Makes no sense that they'd totally skip theaters if they can still get $$$ pretty soon via VOD.

Sure, maybe Disney thought viewers would pony up $30 for "Mulan" if it only existed on Disney+ and they wouldn't do so if the movie appeared on screens for 17 days prior.

I suspect that whatever $30 purchases they lose to theatrical would be balanced by the theatrical gross over that period. The folks shelling out $30 were never gonna go to theaters, so there's no cannibalization.

The only reason I can think they won't pursue this is because they prefer to hoard big movies for that magical theoretical day when Everything Is Normal Again.

Which may never come - not if all the damned theaters went out of business because they couldn't attract enough audiences to pay $12 to see 30 year old movies on the big screen!

 

[Jake Lipson]

Maybe studios think they can't charge the $30 or whatever they've asked for the A-list VOD movies if they appeared in theaters first?

When the pandemic first began, Universal moved The Invisible Man, Emma and one other title I forget to PVOD and charged $19.99 for a 48-hour rental. Those had previously appeared in theaters before anyone knew that theaters were potentially unsafe, so it didn't stop them from charging that.

The issue I have with the PVOD titles is the 48-hour rental period. The price is not so much the issue. If I am going to pay that much, I want to have unlimited access to the film. I actually think Disney's price point for Mulan, where you get to continue accessing the film after you pay the $30, is very fair. The only reason I didn't pay that for Mulan is because I think Mulan looks bad. But if it was a film I wanted to see, I would be glad to pay that amount. if they did the same thing for Black Widow or Soul, I would play along, for sure.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Regal is closing down:

Cineworld “Considering The Temporary Closure” Of U.K. Cinemas & U.S. Regal, No “Final Decision” Yet – Update

Update Sunday AM: Cineworld has addressed and clarified the gloomy news out there about the chain shutting down its UK venues and U.S. No. 2 circuit Regal in a tweet this AM. “We can confirm we are considering the temporary closure of our UK and US cinemas, but a final decision has not yet been...

deadline.com

Deadline is also confirming in that article what @TravisR suspected a while ago when Universal moved up the release of The Croods sequel.

It’s not official yet if Disney is moving Pixar’s Soul off its Nov. 20 release date, but we hear Universal is sticking with its Nov. 25 release of Dreamworks Animation’s The Croods: A New Age, which is expected to be a shortened window release so that the movie can debut over the year-end holidays on PVOD.

 

[TravisR]

But if it's a hit, I demand everyone kneel before me!

This is a rare time when I'm truly hoping I'm wrong. I spend most of my day saying how I was wrong about some thing or another so I hope this is yet another time when I don't know what the hell I'm talking about.

Agree. I think that "17-day window" thing is the perfect solution for the current situation.

The problem for exhibition is that the 17 day window is Pandora's Box. Once people get used to seeing new movies that way, there's no way that studios would just stop releasing movies PVOD because it's a revenue stream so whenever theaters can operate at normal business levels again, their take would be cannibalized by PVOD and they'd be in dire straits again.

Regal is closing down:

Cineworld “Considering The Temporary Closure” Of U.K. Cinemas & U.S. Regal, No “Final Decision” Yet – Update

Update Sunday AM: Cineworld has addressed and clarified the gloomy news out there about the chain shutting down its UK venues and U.S. No. 2 circuit Regal in a tweet this AM. “We can confirm we are considering the temporary closure of our UK and US cinemas, but a final decision has not yet been...

deadline.com

That probably means that AMC will be closing after this week or next. Hopefully, that can allow theaters to stretch their money long enough to stay alive until we get to a point where studios will release movies again.

 

[Wayne_j]

Regal dominates the theater count in my region of NY. I guess if theaters were to reopen in NY nothing would change.

 

[Keith Cobby]

Looks like the cinema era is coming to an end, hastened along by the news about Bond. Unreleased films will start to become stale and then their release dates will bunch up too much if as reported they are released in Spring 2021. Eventually the studios may decide to stream to cut their losses and generate some revenue. We may have seen the last of the mega budget films. Doesn't look too promising for the Avatar sequels, 'straight to video' for them!

 

[TravisR]

Doesn't look too promising for the Avatar sequels, 'straight to video' for them!

Movies like that are exactly why studios will buy theaters if the chains go bankrupt.