Would You Pay $30 (£18) To Watch A Cinema Released Movie In Your Home?

[interestrateripoff]

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/cinemas-at-war-with-studios-over-plan-to-screen-films-in-homes-2278043.html

Under the studios' scheme, which will be launched in the US, customers would pay $30 (£18) to rent a single movie digitally. Though this is a relatively high price for an individual film, they believe it is cost-effective for families for whom the convenience of watching from the sofa rather than the cinema would be a prime incentive. There is also speculation that Google will sign deals with Sony and Universal to stream films through YouTube in competition with iTunes and Amazon.

Californian satellite broadcaster DirecTV has already launched its own premium video-on-demand service, showing the Sony-made film Just Go With It starring Jennifer Aniston just nine weeks after its cinema debut. It made no recognisable impact on the film's big-screen performance, but cinemas are nevertheless concerned that in time it will be harmful to business.

Studios are pursuing the idea of video-on-demand to combat falls in DVD sales and rental revenues, now 40 per cent lower than at their peak. It would also reduce the attraction of pirated discs and downloads.

I'm amazed at the stupidity of the people running the film studios, they actually think charging $30 a time to watch a film will get people buying and will somehow cut piracy!!!!

Now if your going to charge me say £10 a month to watch unlimited movies when I want I'd probably subscribe to it, although this would mean all the studios coming together. However to watch one movie for £18 the studios are definitely trying to take the proverbial.

Anyone here think $30 is a bargain, although obviously if this gets rolled out to the UK the price undoubtedly be around £25 or even £30.

Quite how they think such a bargain price will stop piracy is beyond me.

[ken_ichikawa]

Film studios made the same mistake over 15 years ago with Laser discs.... Laser discs were £40+ and were often used by CHinese people for Karaoke machines.

Or they are flat thinking, i.e. if a family go to the cinema they have to pay for 4 tickets at £5 each and for the petrol to go there. Therefore if we consider the same thing happening at home people'll pay £4.5 each and save on petrol. Flat thinking never ever works! Its like punching figures into excel and increasing one part of the equation without considering the other to get a target price/earning or whatever.

Either that or they are taking account of future inflation.

[bendy]

4 tickets would probably be around 25 quid now, assuming their's some brats discount. petrol, popcorn drinks etc. and you're looking at £45ish for a family film.

assuming the UK price at £20 per movie, then it'll be family takeaway at around £20ish saving you around a whopping fiver.

i'll stick to the leeching thanks.

oh, and take out the family element as my situation does (just me and the missus) and it's a complete disaster.

[timebandit]

How about pop up cinemas, going with todays trendy city folk of having pop up restaurants, hookah cafes, brothels and crack dens.

[winkie]

No, in a word.

[Lagarde's Drift]

They also forget the fact that people still like to congregate with strangers to watch a film, paying or not.

VCD, LD, DVD, Internet HD, home cinemas, every step of the way there have been snake oil salesmen saying that this will replace the cinema. If the studio bosses are stupid enough to believe it, then more fool them.

To save money, instead of paying full price at the usual cinema, people will move towards cheaper viewings at independents, free viewings of old films or outside viewings in parks etc.

[Mrs Bear]

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/cinemas-at-war-with-studios-over-plan-to-screen-films-in-homes-2278043.html

I'm amazed at the stupidity of the people running the film studios, they actually think charging $30 a time to watch a film will get people buying and will somehow cut piracy!!!!

Now if your going to charge me say £10 a month to watch unlimited movies when I want I'd probably subscribe to it, although this would mean all the studios coming together. However to watch one movie for £18 the studios are definitely trying to take the proverbial.

Anyone here think $30 is a bargain, although obviously if this gets rolled out to the UK the price undoubtedly be around £25 or even £30.

Quite how they think such a bargain price will stop piracy is beyond me.

No.

If there's anything I really want to see, I like to see it on the big screen first.

With a bag of Maltesers.

[Riedquat]

If you want the experience of a film at the cinema you've got to go to the cinema. If you're happy to watch it at home then wait for the DVD (downloading it from somewhere aside). I don't see the point in paying that sort of premium just to watch a film at home a bit quicker.

[Lagarde's Drift]

No, the price is way too high. If it was £10 then I'd definitely consider it as the experience may be better for me at home. As others have pointed out they're clearly thinking about families and it being cheaper for them but what percentage of box office takings come from families as opposed to singles or couples?

And what proportion comes from gaggles of teenagers who would absolutely die if they had to watch films at home with their parents.

[Gone baby gone]

Movie at home = £18

Bittorrent at home = nowt

I'll keep using Bittorrent thanks. It even has the latest releases in HD ahead of the UK retailers half the time!

The cinema provides a better audiovisual experience than 99.99% of homes.

[MC Fur Q]

no

i'm happy to wait for it to come out on sky movies. that costs enough thank you.

['Bart']

They also forget the fact that people still like to congregate with strangers to watch a film

Not me, not even if they keep quiet.

Watching a HD movie on a decent modern large TV beats the pants off watching it in the cinema. Sharper, better colours, better quality seating, pause/rewind if necessary.

The cinema "experience" is vastly overrated these days IMO.

OK, in the days when home entertainment was a 21 inch, 405 line mono sound B&W TV, fair enough, but some of today's modern multiplex screens just barely count as "the big screen".

(Sheffield Odeon is particularly bad in this respect, Cineworld way better.)

Anyway, here's how to recreate the "magic" of the cinema at home.

STEP ONE: Buy your sweets at a reasonable price in the supermarket, then take out a crisp tenner and proceed to flush it down the toilet. Your wallet now has that "just emptied" feeling you get at the local Odeon.

STEP TWO: Replace your normal chairs with some designed to make your buttocks go numb after about an hour.

STEP THREE: Alter the colour balance and contrast to get that "washed out" look that the cinema produces (sorry, I don't know if there's a way to get the essential "slightly out of focus" look as well).

STEP FOUR: Drive to a sink estate and recruit 3, 4 or 5 chavs and invite them to sit behind you, talking loudly and playing with their mobile phones.

STEP FIVE: Tape some adverts off the TV and download some movie trailers. You'll need about 25 minutes worth in total. Play this before the movie you're watching. Remember, no fast forwarding allowed!

STEP SIX: Take the price of a blu-ray that's been out a while (say £10) and subtract that from the cost of transport/overpriced tickets and then flush that same amount down the toilet.

Congratulations, you have just experienced the wonder of a trip to the cinema in your own home.

['Bart']

If you want the experience of a film at the cinema you've got to go to the cinema.

No longer necessary (see post above).

[Lagarde's Drift]

Well maybe you should move to bristol then, lol.

The watershed is fast becoming a favourite destination in this weather. Dinner, drinks by the river, film for about 7 quid a ticket. No chavs, and good films too.

Compare that with the cost of a good home cinema, and the cost of dredging your own canal and I know which one id choose.

[interestrateripoff]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/may/03/film-industry-turmoil-as-dvd-sales-drop

More whining from the film industry.

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

This looks like a business model dreamed up by a back office accountant in isolation from the field operations/sales.

The point of going to the cinema for a new release is because it is meant to be an event, anyone can watch a film at home anytime for a lot less, and just because its a premier doesn't mean it will feel that different from sitting at home watching TV. Most people will think sod that, I'll wait 6 months for it to appear on Sky/Netflix /Lovefilm etc.

['Bart']

More whining from the film industry.

a decline fuelled partly by a lack of hits and the timing of Easter – but also by the start of what appears to be an irreversible change in consumer habits

Have they factored in a lack of cash?

['Bart']

Dinner, drinks by the river, film for about 7 quid a ticket. No chavs, and good films too.

Sounds good, but I'm way too curmudgeonly for such social interactions.

[Tiger Woods?]

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/cinemas-at-war-with-studios-over-plan-to-screen-films-in-homes-2278043.html

I'm amazed at the stupidity of the people running the film studios, they actually think charging $30 a time to watch a film will get people buying and will somehow cut piracy!!!!

Now if your going to charge me say £10 a month to watch unlimited movies when I want I'd probably subscribe to it, although this would mean all the studios coming together. However to watch one movie for £18 the studios are definitely trying to take the proverbial.

Anyone here think $30 is a bargain, although obviously if this gets rolled out to the UK the price undoubtedly be around £25 or even £30.

Quite how they think such a bargain price will stop piracy is beyond me.

Alternatively, wait 12 months and rent it for £1 or buy the DVD from the bargain bin for £3...or if you are really tight and can hack the commercials, watch it on TV for nothing in 18 months.

[ken_ichikawa]

Alternatively, wait 12 months and rent it for £1 or buy the DVD from the bargain bin for £3...or if you are really tight and can hack the commercials, watch it on TV for nothing in 18 months.

Heh check for wireless sender signals as well. I fitted a wireless TV sender the other day and almost all of the channels on the channel selector thing on the back were already taken up by other people.

Hell from where I am sitting right now I can tune into 3 wireless CCTV cameras.

[DTMark]

If you want the experience of a film at the cinema you've got to go to the cinema. If you're happy to watch it at home then wait for the DVD (downloading it from somewhere aside). I don't see the point in paying that sort of premium just to watch a film at home a bit quicker.

Ordinarily, I'd agree with you. But the evidence is to the contrary perhaps; people will download stuff from iTunes despite the prices being a complete ripoff. On top of that you have to pay for the broadband access too.

Same with Sky - "I couldn't go without Lost and 24" - well, just buy the box set then a year after it comes out. Will only cost you the price of one month's Sky subscription. "But I can't wait that long"... Personally I can't fathom out why anyone has Sky since it brings nothing new, just UK Gold and mostly dire American dumbed-down crap to the UK, but it's very popular and at a point of near market saturation.

The biggest barrier to VOD (Video on Demand) is the shambolic broadband infrastructure the country has. It should be a massive growth area, but it's one Sky can't expoit usefully, only Virgin Media cable can do it, and that's only available in half the country.

I'm sure I remember reading very recently that playing computer games is now a more popular past time than watching films and listening to music so that should be borne in mind.

[bendy]

STEP THREE: Alter the colour balance and contrast to get that "washed out" look that the cinema produces (sorry, I don't know if there's a way to get the essential "slightly out of focus" look as well).

8 pints and a few shorts will give that effect.

[Riedquat]

Ordinarily, I'd agree with you. But the evidence is to the contrary perhaps; people will download stuff from iTunes despite the prices being a complete ripoff. On top of that you have to pay for the broadband access too.

Same with Sky - "I couldn't go without Lost and 24" - well, just buy the box set then a year after it comes out. Will only cost you the price of one month's Sky subscription. "But I can't wait that long"... Personally I can't fathom out why anyone has Sky since it brings nothing new, just UK Gold and mostly dire American dumbed-down crap to the UK, but it's very popular and at a point of near market saturation.

The biggest barrier to VOD (Video on Demand) is the shambolic broadband infrastructure the country has. It should be a massive growth area, but it's one Sky can't expoit usefully, only Virgin Media cable can do it, and that's only available in half the country.

I can't grasp the Sky thing either, although it does give you a few things that you can't get on ordinary TV - mostly things that you used to be able to. I've also never grasped why people are happy to pay a fortune for Sky and still get bombarded with adverts either.

I've no intention of ever having anything to do with Virgin Media either, mostly out of irritation at the about of junk that they shove through my letterbox.

[The Masked Tulip]

Will your ‘digital locker’ be UltraViolet?

http://www.hecticshoot.com/2011/04/18/will-your-%E2%80%98digital-locker%E2%80%99-be-ultraviolet/

[Gone baby gone]

Will your ‘digital locker’ be UltraViolet?

http://www.hecticshoot.com/2011/04/18/will-your-%E2%80%98digital-locker%E2%80%99-be-ultraviolet/

This is a step in the right direction. Who would bother to buy a physical DVD or CD these days and have to go to the effort of ripping it when you can just download from a torrent for nothing?

If you actually get the physical media + booklet, etc AND have access to the item digitally for evermore, it sounds a little more tempting.

They need to do that with with eBooks. Right now if I buy a paper or hardback novel from amazon, apart from it often costing much less than the kindle version, I would have to buy the kindle version separately if I wanted that. Now ok, they made a lot of money from chumps who re-bought their entire album collection in CD format, but those happy days are over. Most people have wised up and aren't going to rebuy the same content in different formats.

As it happens there are many good sources of copyrighted eBooks available to download for nothing...