Revamping the Movie Distribution Chain

ianscot writes "Steve Soderberg's latest film will be released in a manner that directly challenges the traditional Hollywood distribution chain. Soderberg's been influenced by Mark Cuban, the dot-com billionaire who owns the NBA's Dallas Mavericks, and Todd Wagner, another dot-commer whose ideas about the movie business are radical departures. Wagner's financing this one. The movie, Bubble, is the first of six that Soderberg will film in HD video; all will be released simultaneously in theaters, as HDNet movies, and on DVDs." From the article: "As independents, Soderbergh and Wagner are willing to talk openly about subjects that are being hotly debated behind closed doors elsewhere in Hollywood. When Disney chief Robert Iger recently brought up the concept of shortening the window between theatrical release and DVD, he was fiercely criticised by the National Association of Theatre Owners."

Just the first step

[moresheth]

In two years, it will read:
"all will be released simultaneously in theaters, as HDNet movies, on DVDs, and for download on iTunesVideo"

Please, get rid of the DVD release zones as well

[pimpimpim]

Good to see that some people in the industry (even from disney!?!) are actually trying to think along with the costumers instead of making their movie-watching lives miserable. Are you paying attention here, RIAA?

This would also be a very good opportunity to get rid of the irritating DVD release zones. I think these zones are ment to align the DVD releases in all countries with the movie releases, which are also shifted around the world (what's actually wrong with one world-wide release date?).
But what they actually do is just give you lots of trouble when anyone outside the US or Japan wants to order a DVD that's only available there (no matter how long ago it was released!), and then has to find a zone-free DVD-player, or heck their existing one, etc.
Just stop with this crap, and you'll have a world-wide market for all your DVD's! Doesn't that sound nice?

Re:Good!

[kfg]

Has the National Association of Theater Owners considered that they have pissed me off, and that's why I don't go to their theaters anymore?

If they don't listen to my criticisms, why should I give a damn about theirs?

KFG

Catching up with reality

[Gallandro]

At least people in the movie business are coming to grips with the reality that people have access to the movie via the internet as soon as it hits theaters anyway. At least this way they can make some money off of it.

The sooner these content producers realize that change in their distribution sceme (and copyright in general) is inevitable and is a Good Thing(R) the sooner we can start seeing more people making more stuff, and more money flowing.

I'm sure there were a few monks who weren't happy about the advent of the Luther bible, but they adapted and the bible is still a number one best seller. The film industry was terrified of the VCR, but now we see more movies getting made by more people and more money flowing. The Internet and "piracy" are just harbingers of another change in progress. Personally, I'm pretty excited for it to finally get here so I don't have to put up with being called a thief for downloading movies that I could legitimately get through my netflix subscription but don't feel like waiting for.

Wheeee!

[ThresholdRPG]

I really hope the movies they make are good ones, and good sellers, or else this little experiment will lengthen the time it takes before this is common practice.

The reality is that the whole process of seeing a movie in a theater continues to lose its luster. It is too expensive. The food and drinks keep getting more and more outrageous in price. It is too inconvenient. Even in pure performance, the theater is losing out - more and more people have equal or superior sound and visual quality in their home theaters.

Also, it is better to sell copies of your movie immediately and eliminate one of the biggest reasons people pirate movies over the internet.

This is a huge boon to people with children. Going to see a movie is a pretty tough task when you have kids (not to mention, the expense is astronomical).

Why Theatre Owners Hate this Idea

[bloodstar]

Primarily because the Theatres only get a tiny fraction of any box office recipts when a movie first opens, then as the weeks pass, their percentage goes up. Sure, they make a ton of money off of popcorn and candy, But when you're paying 7 or 8 bucks to see a movie, 95 - 99 percent of that goes straight to the Movie Companies. So, if the Movie Companies continue to shorten the life of a first run movie, those Theatre owners are going to have to adapt or die.

So they're fighting to maintain some sort of status quo. It's not right or wrong, it's just why they will fight this so hard.

I suppose the next question is, At what point will major, non sucky, movies get released straight to DVD (or whatever media is in vogue)? Currently straight to video is a pretty strong indication that a movie is sucky. How much longer before that will not be true?

Re:Good!

[aussie_a]

I'm sick of paying $7 + $5 for movie popcorn and a drink

A much simpler alternative to revamping the movie distribution system is to merely wait a few months for it to be released on DVD. You know people, not getting what you want IMMEDIATELY isn't a bad thing.

Re:Why Theatre Owners Hate this Idea

[kfg]

when you're paying 7 or 8 bucks to see a movie, 95 - 99 percent of that goes straight to the Movie Companies.

Which is just another way of saying that the movie companies are, themselves, the problem.

KFG

Re:Good, but ironic

[Dot.Com.CEO]

Have you ever considered that the problem might not be with Hollywood or movie theatres but with your fellow citizens' basic inability to act in what would be considered a civilised manner?

Re:Good!

[rkcallaghan]

You know people, not getting what you want IMMEDIATELY isn't a bad thing.

Taken independantly, your sentiment is certainly valid. Taken in the context of the article, on Slashdot, again it's alright -- the slashdot crowd more than most other cliques can tend to wait (or pirate it, and face it, lots of slashdotters do).

But for most people, movies do need to be seen relatively soon as they come out. It's all about water cooler chitchat, and last years or last seasons movies don't cut it.

This should really be taken to heart too -- Slashdot is filled with guys that can't socialize (and hence, get dates). To some degree, that is affected by an inability to realize that if someone asks you about the latest movie; they're trying to start a conversation -- not looking to get preached to about the evil movie industry.

~Rebecca

Advertising over a chunk of time too important

[mattso]

While I think some small, niche, indie films would do fine with a big screen, net, and DVD release at the same time, it is not going to be the next big thing. The main reason has to do with the role nationwide movie theater showings have. If you look at it for a minute, by doing a national release you get a level of publicity above and beyond anything you could ever pay for. Every newspaper in the country runs film reviews for new movies that open. Coming Attraction shows promote films. And there are the theater ran ads and plain show listings that customers look at several times a month. This high level of promotion is also over a period of time, which is very effective at driving the interest in something. Even if the consumer doesn't go to the theater when it is released, when that DVD shows up in stores he has already been exposed to it. Add in the paid promotional events and you end up with (ideally) a profitable big screen run, followed by a profitable DVD run -- not to mention pay-per-view, paid cable, cable, and finally broadcast TV. All of these events launch off that wide scale roll out, it provides a vast amount of unpurchasable publicity.

If you change the model and ship the film just once in several formats, your faced with having to sell the DVD and net versions without all that exposure over the nationwide release. And if the movie theater owners don't keep your movie around (because everyone is just buying the DVD) or they don't buy local newspaper/net ads, you may get less publicity than you might have if you had stuck to the normal schedule. Even if the publicity is identical and no one scales back because it is on DVD too, you still will lose the timed exposure. Like cooking by turning up the heat really high, it may not be as good a meal even if it is cooked the same amount.

The comic book industry has this same problem. Everyone wants to buy the trade paperbacks and skip the monthly issues. Which is fine, but it means giving up six months of exposure and advertising. Since it is going to take six months to make the six issues of the trade paperback anyway, if the monthly floppies can sell well enough to warrant shipping them, them being on shelves is more than worth having. Skipping right to the trade means giving up a whole lot of promotion.

For smaller indie films however it may make a lot of sense. They don't get as much out of the big screen roll out (usually because they only hit limited cities and play on screens that don't do much advertising). A combination DVD and big screen release might actually make the film more money, since mail order DVD's can cover the whole country. But once you cross over to the major studio film, I think the total revenue isn't going to be as much.

Re:Good!

[kentrel]

Who's forcing you to pay $12 for food at the cinema? Eat your dinner at home.

Re:Good!

[kentrel]

Watercooler chitchat? Are you an overweight single 30-something female? At work we talk about old movies all the time from Citizen Kane to Carlitos Way to Apocalypse Now. Some brain dead people only talk about the latest Will Smith oh so hilarious romantic comedy. Why would you want to talk to them by the water cooler? If it was me I wouldn't be drinking from the same tap as them in case their mindless sheeplike behaviour is contagious

A Natural progression

[sane?]

This is just the next step along a path to the distribution of experience. Originally entertainment required you to be physically present at the performance, in the theatre. Film allowed the replication of the experience countrywide, at the same standard. It also allowed more expansive epics to be produced than would have been the case in the theartre. You couldn't get the same level of experience at home with the TV, and hence there was a reason for the movie theatre. With home theatre approaching the standard that the customer sees in the movie theatre, its only natural that there will be another sea change in the business.

To survive the movie theatres have to take a leaf out of the book of the stage theatres and make the total experience something that is worthwhile - something that you can't get at home. There are a few approaches they could take:
- 3D on large immersive screens, to put you in the middle of the action in a way that home cinema can't. We can already see that on the starting blocks.
- lower cost and closer. Reduce the barriers to attendance by making it easier to attend.
- improve the total experience. Turn some of the space over to dining, include discussions and explainations, competitions, free DVD copies - making the film part of a larger event that people are more likely to stump up for. This is akin to the way the stage theatre has become an 'event' rather than a norm.

Whichever direction is taken, its obvious that the status quo has no hope of continuing. Within five years the distribution model will have switched, and with it will go a blurring of the line between TV and movie. Smart theatre owners will be starting to shift now.

Re:Good!

[gmack]

Your falling into the classic "I need to know everything to be interesting" trap.

Watercooler chitchat does not requre shared experiances as much as you think. It can actually be about sharing experiances as well.

"Hey did you see the new movie?"

"no .. how was it?"

And *blam*, you have a conversation. It's that easy.

Going to the Movies is a Social Experience

[midnightthunder]

I realize this may seem odd, but to many of us who are regulars here on slash dot, the 'social experience' is about as foreign as being an alien grey. But, it should not be forgotten that going to the movies is 'an event'. Far far cheaper than going to see a play or attend opera or a concert. Much more easy to schedule on the fly. And the world is full of folks who do not have the paragon of home entertainment systems.

Sure, we can stay home, watch the DVD and have pizza delivered. But it is not the same as seeing a film after a meal in a nice restaurant, with friends away from the house.

So, will some theaters fail and close ? Heck, theaters are always failing and closing. AND new ones are always opening up too. The business model will change. Some will live, some will die, and life will go on.

Meanwhile, the movie industry will short circuit the bootleg business. Why buy a bootleg of uncertain quality, when you can have the real thing now ? Maybe a plea of poverty. Fine, for those who cry poverty there will remain bootleg. For the rest of us, the official release.

YAY !