M. Night: Shorten the window over my dead body
Filed under: Tech Stuff, Distribution, Exhibition
The box office slump. It's like this spectre hanging over Hollywood, like a big, goofy sheet ghost. Various pundits – most notably, Edward Jay Epstein of Slate – have opined that the only way to solve the problem is to close the window: make films available for home viewing shortly after, or even at the same time as, their theatrical release. But now one major Hollywood filmmaker has announced that if the studios shorten the window, he's jumping out. Speaking at ShowEast this week, M. Night Shyamalan blasted the owners of second-tier distribution models for chasing the cash. "It's greed. It's heartless and soulless and disrespectful," says the Artist Often Referred to as Night. "And of course, cable
companies are behind it, and internet companies. They need their
product. But they have to wait their turn. Wait for the thing to finish
its life."Some say that the major turning point in the window wars was Steven Soderbergh's deal with Mark Cuban and 2929 Entertainment, through which the Oscar winner will produce six films on High Def video for simultaneous three-platform release. Though Night's claim that "If you inspire audiences, cinemas will be packed" seems a little Pollyannaish, the Cuban/Soderbergh plan is going to take awhile to prove itself. I liked Bubble, but it doesn't strike me as the most commercial film; in fact, it's probably the least marketable thing Soderbergh has worked on in awhile. We actually probably need films like Shyamalan's to test the simultaneous release model. Or, at the very least, Ocean's 13.
Tom Cruise and J.J. Abrams Reunite for 'Mission Impossible 4'
'Big Top Pee-Wee': The Original Benicio Del Toro Wolfman
Spin-ematical: New on DVD and Blu-ray for 2/9
Watch This: Brilliant Oscar-Nominated Short 'Logorama'
Chris Nolan to Lead 'Superman' Reboot!?
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-11-2005 @ 11:48AM
CHRISTINE R. DEEGAN said...
I"ll tell you whats "Heartless, Disrespectful and soulless" . When a person like me, that was cleaning the very tiolet seats the cast and crew sat on everyday.Found herself without a job one evening after returning home from work " I was not welcomed back" WHY? BECAUSE I WOULD NOT TAKE THE HEAD SECURITY GUYS SEXUAL ADVANCES.I dont think he even thought about my two younger daughters i have to feed, and take care of.I seen many security women come and go, now i know why....Thats "Heartless, soulless, and disrespectful" . MR NIGHT..THEY ONLY CARE FOR THE MONEY.NOT THE HUMAN BEING.
Reply
11-11-2005 @ 8:59PM
Finished.Law.School said...
^^That person^^ seems to have some serious unresolved issues...
Reply
10-28-2005 @ 1:44PM
B said...
Maybe Night should worry more about making good movies and less about where his movies will be seen. Is the "shocking twist" any less obvious if I see a movie in the theater as opposed to on DVD?
Reply
10-28-2005 @ 3:12PM
Daniel Burns said...
"Night" couldn't hold Soderbergh's jock strap. This one-hit-wonder shouldn't be running his mouth when he could be learning the craft.
His opinion is irrelevent.
Reply
10-28-2005 @ 7:08PM
Porchland said...
A simultaneous, multi-platform release is without question better for consumers than a graduated release pattern whereby a movie comes out in theaters, then on DVD, then on pay cable. (How can choices be worse than not having choices?)
The only issue, then, is whether it's good for movie theaters, rental companies, pay cable, actors, directors, producers, distributors, etc. The fact that there are some major overlaps among these categories complicates things, but it really comes down to what makes the most financial sense. Will a simultaneous, multi-platform release make more money for X than a graduated release pattern? If yes, good for X; if no, bad for X.
I suspect it could be good or bad for distributors, actors, directors, etc., and probably bad for movie theaters, rental companies and pay cable. The content guys get their ultimate return on investment a lot faster, and they maximize their promotional budget but not splitting it into three "windows," but they lose a lot of repeaters that might see a movie at the theater and then watch it later on DVD or pay cable.
Pay cable probably gains the most, since they close the biggest gap. Rental chains probably gain in the short run but ultimately lose ground to pay cable. Movie theaters definitely have the most to lose, since they get the exclusive window now.
Reply
10-29-2005 @ 3:26PM
Robert Newton said...
If the theatres insisted on being the only place where you can buy the DVD of the movie you just saw (and at a discount for ticket buyers), it could work. Of course, the video stores would suffer (more than they already are suffering.)
And Mr. Shamalamadingdong should be required to acquire a license to practice irony.
Reply
10-29-2005 @ 3:31PM
Robert Newton said...
If the theatres insisted on being the only place where you can buy the DVD of the movie you just saw (and at a discount for ticket buyers), it could work. Of course, the video stores would suffer (more than they already are suffering.)
And Mr. Shamalamadingdong should be required to acquire a license to practice irony.
Reply