|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Paranormal Activity and theatrical windows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jack Ondracek
Film God
Posts: 2348
From: Port Orchard, WA, USA
Registered: Oct 2002
|
posted 11-12-2009 09:16 AM
quote: Justin Hamaker
At what point does the shrinking window start taking a dramatic bite out of the theatrical release? When we get to that point, does it start to threaten the viability of movie theatres?
If/when we get to that point, I'd expect the chains to sqawk first. They were the ones that put their foot down over day-and-date release to theatres, video and DVD. Many of their locations, especially prime downtown ones, have far more overhead than you or I could imagine, and some of them have stockholders to answer to.
They probably didn't say anything as the window swallowed up much of the sub-run market, because most of them didn't have any operations at that level.
I don't know where the 'tipping point' might be, but I imagine we're heading toward it. It could also be that the studios are testing to see just where that line really is... maybe?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 11-12-2009 02:00 PM
Darryl, the power that exhibitors hold is immense if only they would present a unified front, perhaps form an association where their interests could be codified and presented to the studios. Oh wait, they do, it calls itself NATO. Only problem is, its leaders and evidently its members are a mob of eunuchs and castrati.
How is it that the studios have a "Master Contract" that they demand the exhibitor agrees to and the exhibitor has nothing even resembling his interests in a similar contract? There is no reason NATO couldn't present the conditions under which the exhibitor will play a studio's picture -- in other words, the exhibitor's Master Contract, basicially saying, "these are the conditions under which we will put your title up on our member screens." Either the studio understands the advantage of having 4000 plus screens on which to play its title or he winds up only having the video avenue to release -- see if he can make his 40 million opening weekend that way.
Sure, there would needed to be a back and forth compromise with distribution making their demands and exhibition making theirs, BUT, going way back to when the studio began making their demands, exhibition had the ability to stand face to face and say, no, we don't accept those terms so we will not play your title under those conditions. But instead, when they were looking face to face with the MPAA, exhibition blinked and the "Master Contract" was born.
In my alternate universe, the exhibitor would be the entity presenting the basic terms that the distrib would have to meet in order to get his release up on the NATO member screens. It could have easily been this way....if it weren't for stupid exhibitors who continually fought among themselves and couldn't present a united front. The studios did present that united front and they blink.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic