Latest Entertainment News Headlines

Netlfix open to playing their movies in theaters

04.24.2017
100%

The atmospheric rise of movie and TV streaming services like Netflix and Hulu has caused many to panic over the future of established institutions – mainly movie theaters. Are they the next Blockbuster Video, doomed to become nothing more than empty buildings for ruffians to graffiti and for the homeless to make their toilet? Probably not, as even Netflix understands that theaters have a place, and are even open to a greater, cooperative relationship with movie theater giants.

As part their first quarter letter to the shareholders, Netflix cited the releases of shows like Marvel’s IRON FIST and stand-up specials from Dave Chappelle have made for an already good year for the company. They then briefly brought up their movie slate, mentioning how the future could see some of their movies also making their way into theaters:

Since our members are funding these films, they should be the first to see them. But we are also open to supporting the large theater chains, such as AMC and Regal in the US, if they want to offer our films, such as our upcoming Will Smith film Bright , in theatres simultaneous to Netflix. Let consumers choose.

This could be great news for movie buffs who believe sitting in a large auditorium is the best way to watch any sort of feature film. The upcoming BRIGHT was made with a blockbuster budget in the neighborhood of $90 million, so watching it on your phone seems like disservice. Smaller films on Netflix, like their tremendous BEASTS OF NO NATION, have gotten limited theatrical runs to qualify for the Oscars, but releasing them on a wider scale could bring them greater notoriety and exposure. However, the “simultaneous” part is what could kill the whole idea.

From a business sense, movie theaters are basically sugar emporiums that offer customers a movie to watch as they increase their risk of diabetes. At the end of the day, they’re not going to waste screens on something that’s already available, say, on Netflix, and it means taking away screen time from something that can actually drive business in. Every weak movie in a theater limits the movie-making potential, so keeping something around for even a week or two that isn't selling tickets is a waste of money. Plus, the phrase "I'll wait for Netflix" is commonplace at this point, because a lot of consumers would rather stay at home than put on pants and go into the world...especially for $12 a person.

At the end of the day, it would be a great option for cinefiles trying to keep the movie theater experience alive, but most consumers are not part of that group. Most people will opt to watch it at home than go for a pricey night out, so if theaters chains do decide to play Netflix movies there are going to have to have some serious conditions attached. I'm all in, for many reasons, but the big reason is because no one should keep Big Willie Smith in a cell phone. For him anything smaller than IMAX is a crime.

Source: Netflix

RECOMMENDED MOVIE NEWS

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

+0
5:09PM on 04/24/2017
How about they release their damn movies on Bku Ray! Why has Beasts of No Nation never hit home video??
How about they release their damn movies on Bku Ray! Why has Beasts of No Nation never hit home video??
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:00PM on 04/24/2017
Can a film make a billion dollars, if it's only released on Netflix? It seems that the only way a film can make the type of money that Star Wars or Avatar makes, is if it is released in theaters worldwide. Releasing in theaters is the only way to make a billion on one film. Right? So why spend 90 million to make a move, and NOT release it in theaters, especially when it stars Will Smith.
Can a film make a billion dollars, if it's only released on Netflix? It seems that the only way a film can make the type of money that Star Wars or Avatar makes, is if it is released in theaters worldwide. Releasing in theaters is the only way to make a billion on one film. Right? So why spend 90 million to make a move, and NOT release it in theaters, especially when it stars Will Smith.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:38PM on 04/24/2017
An original film can't make any money on Netflix, but it can attract new subscription purchases and it can help retain the almost 99 million subscribers that already pay them $9.99 per month. Netflix is a massive business and they are moving away from hosting other studios' content which is very expensive. In the next 5 years, its going to be only Netflix original content on Netflix.
An original film can't make any money on Netflix, but it can attract new subscription purchases and it can help retain the almost 99 million subscribers that already pay them $9.99 per month. Netflix is a massive business and they are moving away from hosting other studios' content which is very expensive. In the next 5 years, its going to be only Netflix original content on Netflix.
4:12PM on 04/24/2017
Well damn. That's a hell of a lot of money a month. With that amount of cash, they're practically printing money. Looks like that really don't need to show their films in theaters. Though I would like to see bright on the big screen.
Well damn. That's a hell of a lot of money a month. With that amount of cash, they're practically printing money. Looks like that really don't need to show their films in theaters. Though I would like to see bright on the big screen.
1:28PM on 04/24/2017
I prefer the Amazon Studios model. Movies like Chi-Raq and Manchester by the Sea get theatrical runs, and then go straight to Prime. But maybe Netflix could pull in audiences who aren't signed up for streaming, if they're careful about what they release theatrically.
I prefer the Amazon Studios model. Movies like Chi-Raq and Manchester by the Sea get theatrical runs, and then go straight to Prime. But maybe Netflix could pull in audiences who aren't signed up for streaming, if they're careful about what they release theatrically.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:52PM on 04/24/2017
What does being a "movie buff" have to do with only appreciating movies in auditoriums
What does being a "movie buff" have to do with only appreciating movies in auditoriums
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+0
11:43AM on 04/24/2017

Let Netflix members see it for free in theaters

That way theaters get to make money from the pop corn mark ups etc.. win win for everybody.

That way theaters get to make money from the pop corn mark ups etc.. win win for everybody.

Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:31AM on 04/24/2017
The problem is that I thought I have seen in past news for this, is that companies don't want to put it in their theater if it IS coming out at Netflix the same day. How would that benefit them? Maybe smaller indie/arthouse theaters would be more open to that, but I swear I saw companies like AMC didn't want to show Beasts of No Nation etc. for that same reason...just because members are paying $10 a month or whatever to watch at home doesn't mean they automatically deserve to see it
The problem is that I thought I have seen in past news for this, is that companies don't want to put it in their theater if it IS coming out at Netflix the same day. How would that benefit them? Maybe smaller indie/arthouse theaters would be more open to that, but I swear I saw companies like AMC didn't want to show Beasts of No Nation etc. for that same reason...just because members are paying $10 a month or whatever to watch at home doesn't mean they automatically deserve to see it first...Netflix can do WHAT THEY WANT, you still can watch at home, you just may have to wait another month...
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
5:46PM on 04/24/2017
I agree, Netflix doesn't have to give it to their subscribers first. Netflix has gone beyond the subscription service, and is now a studio as well. If they want to release in theaters first, that is fine. If they want to maintain an exclusivity to it, make a promise that the movie will debit on Netflix first, before Blu-ray, or that it will hit Netflix same day it leaves theaters. But, as a subscriber, I don't feel Netflix has to provide it to me first, just provide it to me soon.

And I
I agree, Netflix doesn't have to give it to their subscribers first. Netflix has gone beyond the subscription service, and is now a studio as well. If they want to release in theaters first, that is fine. If they want to maintain an exclusivity to it, make a promise that the movie will debit on Netflix first, before Blu-ray, or that it will hit Netflix same day it leaves theaters. But, as a subscriber, I don't feel Netflix has to provide it to me first, just provide it to me soon.

And I agree with another above post, I'd more prefer some consistency with Blu-ray releases of Netflix original programming. I understand keeping it exclusive keeps me a subscriber, but dammit I want to own Stranger Things already!!!
View All Comments

Latest Entertainment News Headlines


Top
Loading...

Featured Youtube Videos

Views and Counting