|
Post by Kapitan on Aug 31, 2020 18:29:17 GMT
Sounds like fun. What I need to know is ... did Steve Vai provide all the little guitar noodling sound effects!?
|
|
|
Post by kds on Aug 31, 2020 18:34:44 GMT
I don't think Steve Vai was involved this time around.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Aug 31, 2020 18:41:49 GMT
I don't think Steve Vai was involved this time around. It's a crime!
|
|
|
Post by kds on Aug 31, 2020 18:55:09 GMT
I don't think Steve Vai was involved this time around. It's a crime!
I always thought it was a crime that Vai's instrumental intro to KISS's version of God Gave Rock and Roll to You, as heard at the end of Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey, was not ever released as an alternate version of the song.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on Sept 16, 2020 15:13:14 GMT
I read an article about the dire state of movie theaters and the movie industry. They were hoping Tenet would be the blockbuster to bring people back to the theaters, but it's only made $30M in TWO WEEKS. That is rough. Apparently, there's not another (potential) blockbuster scheduled 'til November. That's the new James Bond film. And there's the new Wonder Woman film scheduled for December, I believe. Anyway, there's some doubts that theaters are going to be able to pay their rents and keep their doors open.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Sept 16, 2020 15:19:13 GMT
I think this is just speeding up a process that was already well underway. Movie attendance in theaters has to be on a serious decline over the past 20 years anyway.
[time lapse]
This is from a quick Google search and I can't vouch for the source, but apparently the pre-pandemic decline isn't as serious as I'd guessed. While the 1.5 billion tickets sold in the US in 2002 hasn't been topped since, the decline has only gone as low as 1.2 billion in a few recent years, including 2019. That's still a lot--a 300 million decline in tickets sold is 20%--but I would have predicted more like 50%, honestly.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Sept 16, 2020 15:30:24 GMT
Attendance overall has been down pre COVID, but it makes sense. It's expensive to go see a movie that you can watch at home just a couple months later, so there's really not that urgency that there was back in the day when you had to wait six months for a home video release (and in the pre DVD years, most movies were only priced to rent), and a year before the movie premiered on premium cable.
I've no doubt that some theaters will close, and I hate to see people lose jobs, but the industry has been doing some damage to themselves too.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on Sept 16, 2020 15:32:21 GMT
No doubt the studios are grappling with how to get movies to audiences safely, and still make as much money as possible. It'll be very interesting to see if Mulan, which went straight to streaming via Disney+, is deemed a success or not. There's talk of dual releasing movies (both theater and streaming, simultaneously). Ultimately, I think theaters will recover from the pandemic, but things may be getting worse in the immediate future. Not unlike Kapitan's 'college sports' post, the theaters might have bungled their reopening. I just don't think enough people are comfortable going to theaters yet. The movie doesn't matter (Tenet, Bond, Wonder Woman, etc.).
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Sept 16, 2020 15:35:08 GMT
I've no doubt that some theaters will close, and I hate to see people lose jobs, but the industry has been doing some damage to themselves too. There is always that set of competing factors. On one hand, we all hate to see job losses, but on the other hand, it might just be a dying industry. You know, the wagon-wheel industry dried up, too, but we can't indefinitely support those people, either.
One silver lining for those people is, those jobs aren't the result of a substantial investment: no formal schooling or training or anything.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on Sept 16, 2020 15:38:55 GMT
Attendance overall has been down pre COVID, but it makes sense. It's expensive to go see a movie that you can watch at home just a couple months later, so there's really not that urgency that there was back in the day when you had to wait six months for a home video release (and in the pre DVD years, most movies were only priced to rent), and a year before the movie premiered on premium cable. That's playing out on streaming, too. Disney+ priced Mulan at something like $30 (equivalent to a family of 3 attending a theater). Which is logical, but it's steep for an individual to pay. And they are allowing Disney+ members to watch it at no additional cost in 3 months time. So, why not just wait 3 months if you're interested? I'm not sure how that's going to work out for Disney.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Sept 16, 2020 15:53:40 GMT
Attendance overall has been down pre COVID, but it makes sense. It's expensive to go see a movie that you can watch at home just a couple months later, so there's really not that urgency that there was back in the day when you had to wait six months for a home video release (and in the pre DVD years, most movies were only priced to rent), and a year before the movie premiered on premium cable. That's playing out on streaming, too. Disney+ priced Mulan at something like $30 (equivalent to a family of 3 attending a theater). Which is logical, but it's steep for an individual to pay. And they are allowing Disney+ members to watch it at no additional cost in 3 months time. So, why not just wait 3 months if you're interested? I'm not sure how that's going to work out for Disney. I'm sure families, like you said, would be more likely to pay that $30 to watch the movie right away. After all, for a kid, three months might as well be three years. I doubt the movie will make the big profits of their recent releases as a result, but I suspect that being able to release it on their own platform could be more cost effective than distributing to theaters. My concern is the sheer amount of streaming services out there. They say cutting the cord will save money, but if you factor in Amazon, Apple, Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, YouTube Red, etc etc, that adds up really quickly.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Sept 16, 2020 15:58:02 GMT
You nailed it, KDS. The thought at one point was that things would go a la carte, you could "buy" (rent) individual stations or shows for specific things. But that requires one platform with everyone involved. Instead we've got half a dozen semi-prominent platforms each with their own content, sometimes including (at added cost) a la carte offerings in addition to memberships. It may well end up more expensive than cable was, and still with "500 channels and nothing to watch," as my parents always said.
For now I'm still with just Netflix, Prime, and Hulu (through which I have a TV add-on for live TV). No cable beyond the Hulu add-on. I just can't bring myself to get on board with the others. Honestly in the end I may go the other direction and just use less. I barely even watch Prime, but I keep it for the other Amazon services plus occasional, great shows like Mrs. Maisel.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Sept 16, 2020 16:02:10 GMT
No doubt the studios are grappling with how to get movies to audiences safely, and still make as much money as possible. It'll be very interesting to see if Mulan, which went straight to streaming via Disney+, is deemed a success or not. There's talk of dual releasing movies (both theater and streaming, simultaneously). Ultimately, I think theaters will recover from the pandemic, but things may be getting worse in the immediate future. Not unlike Kapitan's 'college sports' post, the theaters might have bungled their reopening. I just don't think enough people are comfortable going to theaters yet. The movie doesn't matter (Tenet, Bond, Wonder Woman, etc.). I know that, personally, going to a movie in a theater is pretty low on the list of things I've missed during COVID. I haven't been to a movie theater since early 2017 (an indoor one at least, my wife and I did see the new Bill and Ted at a drive in). Since restrictions have been lifted, I've gone to beaches, restaurants, and bars, and I would not hesitate to attend a live concert or sporting event. Going to a movie? Meh.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Sept 16, 2020 16:09:27 GMT
You nailed it, KDS. The thought at one point was that things would go a la carte, you could "buy" (rent) individual stations or shows for specific things. But that requires one platform with everyone involved. Instead we've got half a dozen semi-prominent platforms each with their own content, sometimes including (at added cost) a la carte offerings in addition to memberships. It may well end up more expensive than cable was, and still with "500 channels and nothing to watch," as my parents always said.
For now I'm still with just Netflix, Prime, and Hulu (through which I have a TV add-on for live TV). No cable beyond the Hulu add-on. I just can't bring myself to get on board with the others. Honestly in the end I may go the other direction and just use less. I barely even watch Prime, but I keep it for the other Amazon services plus occasional, great shows like Mrs. Maisel.
It's mind boggling how much we pay for television to use a relatively small portion of the options. I have Comcast / Xifinity, and pay a pretty penny. Of course, if I want to watch exclusive content on streaming services, I have to pay even more. But, I can't cut the cord, or I won't be access to Orioles games (thanks to antiquated MLB TV rules on in market games). And on top of this, I don't even have AXS.
|
|
|
Post by jk on Sept 16, 2020 19:38:53 GMT
|
|