Tenet (2020) (1 Viewer)

[TravisR]

With news of AMC and Universal's deal to allow Universal to put their movies up VOD 17 days after the theatrical release, I think the folks who don't want to go to a theater to see Tenet now will be able to see Tenet at home by the end of September. Tenet is with WB but there's no way that they don't get a similar deal too.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Depending on the price point, I would probably pay to rent Tenet in September.

 

[TravisR]

Depending on the price point, I would probably pay to rent Tenet in September.

I think many people will. That will give the movie's inevitably weak box office a real boost. How does WB not tell (not ask) AMC that they're getting the same deal that Universal has? The studios have the theaters by the short hairs. If they don't agree, Warners delays Tenet again and the chains can't open.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

It would have cost me $60 for two IMAX tickets to Tenet.

I would absolutely rent Tenet at the $20 price point that Warner has charged for PVOD rentals during the pandemic.

 

[TravisR]

It would have cost me $60 for two IMAX tickets to Tenet.

I would absolutely rent Tenet at the $20 price point that Warner has charged for PVOD rentals during the pandemic.

I think the only question is when they announce that it'll go VOD. Do they completely screw the theaters and say it before the theatrical release or do they give it some time in theaters before announcing it?

 

[Wayne_j]

I think Nolan would sue Warners if they even thought of violating the 90 day theatrical window. Nolan wants this in IMAX and he won't get any IMAX showings if Warners violates the theatrical window.

 

[Malcolm R]

For the most part, I wouldn't expect them to announce the VOD premiere prior to the theatrical release. It's in the interest of the studio to get as much cash as possible from the theatrical box office.

I would think the 17 day window would be a minimum. If the film is doing well in theaters, they can delay the VOD release. But if a film is not doing much business in theaters, they can get it out to home video quickly.

 

[Jake Lipson]

The problem is that once this starts happening, audiences will catch on, and then it will impact audience decisions about what to see and what not to see in theaters. So, even if they don't announce intent to collapse the window beforehand, it will absolutely be noticed that movies are coming home faster than ever. Although I would take advantage of it for films that come out before the pandemic is over, I think this is a terrible decision which will have long-lasting negative impacts on the future of the theatrical industry. It will be very difficult, if not impossible, to put the genie back in the bottle after COVID if this is a success, which makes the threat to movie theaters more dire than ever before.

 

[TravisR]

I think Nolan would sue Warners if they even thought of violating the 90 day theatrical window. Nolan wants this in IMAX and he won't get any IMAX showings if Warners violates the theatrical window.

They'll still play it. It'll just play to a lot of empty seats. Right now, it's not like IMAX screens have any real other options of movies to play instead. The studios have all the content that theaters need right now. The studios hold all the cards and can set almost any deal they want.

The problem is that once this starts happening, audiences will catch on, and then it will impact audience decisions about what to see and what not to see in theaters.

Yep. Even if there's a studio the decides to stick solely with theaters and market a movie that way, it would just create confusion among the average consumer. People would be looking on iTunes or Amazon for a movie and wondering why it's not there. That wouldn't make them go to a theater, they'd just watch another studio's movie.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I read somewhere that Tenet was filmed 100% with IMAX cameras. If that is indeed the case, of course IMAX is going to be on board with the release. But the shrinking of the theater-to-video is going to be astronomically worse to the long-term health of movie theaters than the pandemic could ever be, even if the pandemic disappeared tomorrow.

 

[Tino]

Has Nolan actually addressed the risks of opening his film during a global pandemic? Has he made any statements regarding caring about the safety of moviegoers worldwide?

 

[TravisR]

Has Nolan actually addressed the risks of opening his film during a global pandemic? Has he made any statements regarding caring about the safety of moviegoers worldwide?

Hell no. If anyone associated with any upcoming movie does, you'll see it because any answer they give will look terrible and they'll be painted as putting money over lives. I'd imagine that publicists won't allow questions regarding the pandemic to even be asked.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Has Nolan actually addressed the risks of opening his film during a global pandemic? Has he made any statements regarding caring about the safety of moviegoers worldwide?

No, he has only written an editorial (back in the spring) addressing his concerns for the exhibition industry and urging governments to help them. He has not made a statement about the safety or well-being of the audience.

 

[Malcolm R]

This is not on Nolan. If the opportunity is available, it's the personal responsibility of each patron to make their own decision whether to attend or not. People are not going to be forced to attend.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Has he made any statements regarding caring about the safety of moviegoers worldwide?

No, but I don't think that means he doesn't care. I think his understandable and valid desire to see movie theaters rebound from this crisis -- which for the record, I also want, too -- is perhaps blinding him to the reality of the situation.

This is not on Nolan.

Of course it is. He's been pushing Warner to release it as soon as possible since the beginning. He is not forcing people to attend, but he certainly is advocating for the film's release in a potentially unsafe period. If he said "We need to move the film to next summer after we hope there will be a vaccine available," that would be the end of it. But instead, he's saying "We need to put it out during a pandemic." Warner Bros. has given him that power, and he is using it.

 

[Tino]

Of course it is. He's been pushing Warner to release it as soon as possible since the beginning. He is not forcing people to attend, but he certainly is advocating for the film's release in a potentially unsafe period. If he said "We need to move the film to next summer after we hope there will be a vaccine available," that would be the end of it. But instead, he's saying "We need to put it out during a pandemic." Warner Bros. has given him that power, and he is using it.

Exactly. And imo shame on him for being so selfish and insensitive.

 

[Jake Lipson]

imo shame on him for being so selfish and insensitive.

I think it's maybe a little more complicated than that. I can only guess at Nolan's state of mind here because I don't know him and therefore cannot speak for him. But I do know many friends of mine, who I thought were smarter than this, who are posting pictures of themselves around social media getting together in groups, without masks and without social distancing. I think that a lot of people feel like the coronavirus isn't something that can affect them if they don't know someone personally who has had it.

It's possible Nolan is thinking in those terms, that theaters can keep people safe with their "enhanced sanitation processes" and stuff they have written about lately around their plans to reopen. Or maybe he hasn't really considered that point. He and I share a love of the movie theater experience and we both want theaters to be able to reopen when it's safe. I think we just have different ideas about what "when it's safe" means. I would like to think that he does not wish to put audiences in danger. But I don't share his apparent faith that movie theaters will be able to function safely at this time. If I were in a position to influence the release of a film I made, I would not want it to go in a theatrical setting until safety was no longer a question.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I kinda see it as being the fault of a lot of people, of which Nolan is certainly one.

It’s a public health emergency and the messaging and guidance we’ve gotten has been inconsistent, particularly compared to other countries. Government’s job is to protect its citizenry, and the lack of clear, consistent guidance creates an atmosphere where different individuals and groups must sort out for themselves information that typically experts are meant to parse for us. Government doesn’t tell automobile manufacturers, “Seatbelts might save lives and we’ve got some research on that but you guys figure it out.” They say, “you gotta put in seatbelts.”

Every studio wants to be back in business. Since Nolan has vocally stated that he wants to go first, the industry has agreed to launch after he does, which is in essence an abdication of leadership. By saying “we’ll wait and see what this guy does,” they’re making it seem like it’s all on him, but it’s really not. If every studio in unison gave up on 2020, Nolan wouldn’t be able to insist on anything. But every studio wants to get back to business so they are all using him as cover, rather than making decisions that would make his position unsustainable.

Individuals bear some responsibility too. As a society, we have in many areas demanded a return to normal, refusing to accept evidence suggesting it is not safe to do so, while simultaneously rejecting safeguards that would make it less dangerous to return to normal life. This creates an opening for reopenings to happen. If there was public pressure to keep things closed, studios would decline to provide product and theaters wouldn’t open.

This seems like the perfect storm where the government isn’t doing its job in full, leading the public to misunderstand and underestimate the true extent of the crisis, leading to an ill-considered demand for the return of normal services.

There is a lot of blame to go around.

As a sidebar, I don’t understand why there are certain groups that seem insulated from the worst effects of this pandemic. It would seem to me that if this affects everyone, it should affect everyone. If businesses aren’t legally allowed to be open, why should they have all of the same obligations as if they could be? If people aren’t allowed to work, why should they be held to obligations that are impossible to fulfill without income? Why should studios be able to expect a return to normal income when no one else can? We’re seeing the very real, very devastating consequences of what happens when you tell people they’re not allowed to make a living, but that everyone they’re responsible to must be made whole regardless. Whatever your politics are, the reality is if you tell people that a) they’re not allowed to work for their own safety and b) all of their bills are still due, you’re going to get people wanting to return before it’s safe because the intangible possibility of getting sick is trumped by the very real certainty of losing everything and then being in immediate danger.

 

[Tino]

It's possible Nolan is thinking in those terms, that theaters can keep people safe with their "enhanced sanitation processes" and stuff they have written about lately around their plans to reopen.

And nothing theaters can do will prevent asymptomatic infected moviegoers from going and infecting others.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

And nothing theaters can do will prevent asymptomatic infected moviegoers from going and infecting others.

That is by far the biggest problem with this virus. I don’t worry about getting it from an obviously suck person who went out when they shouldn’t have. I worry about getting it from someone who doesn’t yet realize they’re sick.

There’s something about our reaction to this virus where it’s almost as if people are taking offense at it. The hardest part of this virus is the simple fact that if you get it, you will spread it for up to two weeks before you realize that you’re sick. People seem deeply offended by the notion that they could be sick and not yet aware of it. People are so defensive about stating they’re not sick. I don’t get it. I find it very easy to say, “I do not think I am sick but I cannot say for sure.”