Colin Jacobson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2000
Messages
10,220
Which is why the WWF (the World Wrestling Foundation) changed its name to WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment), as there was confusion with thew other WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature, formerly World Wildlife Fund).
WWF had to sue to get WWE to not be WWF anymore, so it wasn't that genteel an agreement! :D
 

Chris Will

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
1,515
Location
Montgomery, AL
Real Name
Chris WIlliams
This is going to be interesting to watch but, I'm not sure I'll ever pay $19.99 for a rental. If I'm paying that much I want to "own" it.

Personally, as much as I love A-List, I would choose watching movies at home over the theater every time. So, I kinda hope this is very successful and sparks a bigger change for day and date digital releases. If it wasn't for A-List, I would only go to a theater a handful of times a year. Theaters refuse to keep people off their phones, they refuse to shut people up and they over charge for cheap food. My home experience is better in every way except for the size of the screen but, I can live with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brent Reid

Todd Erwin

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
6,261
Location
Hawthorne, NV
Real Name
Todd Erwin
This is going to be interesting to watch but, I'm not sure I'll ever pay $19.99 for a rental. If I'm paying that much I want to "own" it.
So far, it is only Universal that is going the rental route. All other announcements from Warner and Sony have been purchases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tino

Tino

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 1999
Messages
18,658
Location
Metro NYC
Real Name
Valentino
So a pleasant surprise.

I rented The Invisible Man yesterday using a free iTunes rental. I assumed it would only credit me the normal $5.99 charge towards the new release $19.99 rental fee. As VUDU does.

Turns out the entire rental was free. Thanks iTunes!:emoji_thumbsup:

BTW the wife LOVED it!
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
8,439
I still want to see certain movies in the theater. I just wish I had a decent one to see them in instead of the wreck that passes for a theater where I live. I definitely would not pay 20 bucks for a TV rental. In that case, I can wait until it eventually streams for free on some streaming service.
 

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
49,782
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
This is going to be interesting to watch but, I'm not sure I'll ever pay $19.99 for a rental. If I'm paying that much I want to "own" it.

Personally, as much as I love A-List, I would choose watching movies at home over the theater every time. So, I kinda hope this is very successful and sparks a bigger change for day and date digital releases. If it wasn't for A-List, I would only go to a theater a handful of times a year. Theaters refuse to keep people off their phones, they refuse to shut people up and they over charge for cheap food. My home experience is better in every way except for the size of the screen but, I can live with that.
I'm with you, I have far too many movies already in my film library to ever pay $20 for a rental.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BobO'Link

Chris Will

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
1,515
Location
Montgomery, AL
Real Name
Chris WIlliams
What I don't like about rentals from services like iTunes is that you can't apply that price towards purchasing the movie. I think it would be great if they gave you a grace period of like 2 to 3 additional days where you can turn the rental into a purchase minus the rental fee you already paid.

I rarely ever rent from iTunes, instead, I seek out cheap digital codes from the many code re-sellers out there. Although, since the arrival of 4k, code prices have gone up and are not as good a value as they use to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jake Lipson

steve jaros

Supporting Actor
Joined
Sep 30, 1997
Messages
919
Location
Baton Rouge, LA
Real Name
Steve
IIRC, Warner's and Disney are delaying their upcoming tent pole films (Mulan, WW84), they are doing everything they can to make sure they get a theatrical release. Is Universal doing the same? If so, then the policy isn't that much different.

And at $20 a rental, or even a download, I am just not interested in any event. But if others are, then enjoy!
 

YANG

Supporting Actor
Joined
Feb 10, 1999
Messages
576
In the next few hours time, when the clock strikes @ 0000hrs, all Cinemas are suspended of operation by the Government until further notice...
Few other countries are doing the same few days before us... and sooner, it may goes wider, depending on the pandemic situation improvement... Should Hollywood studios still wanna hold on and wait till the day of "green light to operate and screen" comes, they'll be facing bigger losses as all other studios rushes to put out their productions then, folks will have little time to enjoy such a wide supplies.
Streaming is the only way to go!
 

BobO'Link

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 3, 2008
Messages
7,070
Location
Mid-South
Real Name
Howie
I mentioned this today at work. My dept. (IT for the local school - which is closed until at least April 20th) is working as we have mostly separate offices and/or empty buildings and no one else is around - a good time for some general maintenance.

So... the 4 polled said: "I'm not paying $20 to rent a movie - I don't care how new it is. I'll wait until the normal release date and a normal rental price." adding "I can just stream from the services I already have. We don't usually see new movies anyway until they come to one of those services."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jake Lipson

Thomas Newton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Messages
2,080
Real Name
Thomas Newton
Maybe $6 - higher than the usual $2 RedBox Blu-Ray fee, but only half of a $12 movie ticket price since I won't be getting the big screen viewing experience.
 

Jake Lipson

Premium
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
12,228
Real Name
Jake Lipson
$20 makes sense for a family and/or large group that would have paid at least that much for tickets if they were able to go to the theater. It could end up being a discount depending on how many people you were going to bring and how much tickets are in your area.

For those of us who generally watch movies alone, like me, and could get in at the theater for significantly less than $20, then it seems way too high.

I saw today that Focus is releasing their Sundance pickup Never Rarely Sometimes Always on VOD next week with the same pricing model as the other Universal titles. I was looking forward to seeing that in theaters at my arthouse for $6, but I won't pay $19.99 for a rental. Eventually, when it is no longer a new title, I suspect they'll slash the rental price to normal, and at that point I would happily rent it. But I don't want to pay that much for it now.
 

Jake Lipson

Premium
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Messages
12,228
Real Name
Jake Lipson
IIRC, Warner's and Disney are delaying their upcoming tent pole films (Mulan, WW84), they are doing everything they can to make sure they get a theatrical release. Is Universal doing the same?
Fast and Furious delayed by eleven months to next April. Bond (which Universal is handling outside of the U.S.) of course was the first to move, from April to November

However, they are not holding Trolls. Despite having been promoted in theaters for the last eight months. that one will now go directly to VOD on April 10. Universal is still running TV spots saying "In theaters and at home on April 10," like there will be any theaters open then to show it.
 
Last edited:

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
345,134
Messages
4,731,722
Members
141,391
Latest member
smwe16