Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > DVD Discussions > DVD Talk
Reload this Page >

Are DVDs going to become the main source of profit for movies?

DVD Talk Talk about DVDs and Movies on DVD including Covers and Cases

Are DVDs going to become the main source of profit for movies?

Old 06-20-05, 08:50 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 23,487
Received 195 Likes on 151 Posts
Are DVDs going to become the main source of profit for movies?

As many trade papers and news bytes have pointed out, the attendance at movie theaters has started to slip. Many attribute this to theaters not providing that great of an experience anymore, and that home theater system sales are on the rise along with WS tvs.

I also have noticed that a lot of movies nowadays tend not to make their budget back from their domestic theatrical run, but their DVD sales. Films such as The Punisher and The Bourne Identity did so-so and rather well at the box-office respectively, but it was apparently the sales and rentals of their DVDs that allowed for sequels to be greenlit. Furhtermore, it seems that many directors in their interviews list working on the DVD for the movie that they currently have in theaters as their next project.

Basically, it seems that a movie's theatrical release is just one part of its life, with the DVD becoming the final step.
Old 06-20-05, 09:09 PM
  #2  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 1,721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe the more we transform our entertainment centers into theatres (HD Tvs, DTS, etc) the more popular DVDs will become until eventually the only reason people will have to go to the movies is to see the film sooner. Even with that the theatrical release to dvd release will become much shorter as time progresses
Old 06-20-05, 09:51 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
Posts: 1,819
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I know that with dvd I have virtually cut out going to the theater for an encore of almost any movie. I love going but I figure I've experienced it on the big screen and why waste another $6-$8.25 (depending on matinee or evening) when that will go nicely toward the dvd when it comes out. With such a short window between theatrical & dvd release as soon as I know whether or not I want it in my library I'm not about to waste money on a second trip. I do go to a lot of matinees and sometimes see a movie that might be 50/50 whether I'd like it to see if it warrants a dvd purchase. Also, my popcorn at home is a helluva lot cheaper.
Old 06-20-05, 11:02 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DVD sales were worth what? $15 billion last year. Theatrical box office in the United States was what? $9 billion last year.

We may already be to the point where home video is the profit center for Hollywood (there was a story in Variety about that very point a few months ago that noted something like 80% of films lose money on their theatrical run with half of those going into profit once home video is added in).
Old 06-20-05, 11:03 PM
  #5  
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Do you ever see a time when all movies will be direct to DVD? That is, no more movie theaters, and no theatrical releases anymore. Kind of far fetched, I know but I've heard from more than a few people how much they hate the movie-going experience. If they represent a significant portion of society, then direct-to-DVD might become more common. Personally, I think the movie-going experience is so engrained in our culture, that I doubt it would ever fade away. Direct to DVD would also feed the video pirates, cutting into profits.

Last edited by Dark_Sithlord; 06-21-05 at 01:14 AM.
Old 06-20-05, 11:41 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,147
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
That would be a sad day when movies just go direct to DVD. When I think of direct to DVD, I think crap movie. So even if the movie is something like Schindler's List, if it goes right to DVD, in my eyes, its no better than Starship Troopers 2.


I think Hollywood should keep movies off of DVD for longer periods of time after the theater release. This way, it gives people more of a reason to go to the theater. Instead of having to wait 3-4 months, make the wait 12 months.
Old 06-20-05, 11:56 PM
  #7  
DVD Talk Hero
 
PopcornTreeCt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 25,913
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by resinrats
That would be a sad day when movies just go direct to DVD. When I think of direct to DVD, I think crap movie. So even if the movie is something like Schindler's List, if it goes right to DVD, in my eyes, its no better than Starship Troopers 2.


I think Hollywood should keep movies off of DVD for longer periods of time after the theater release. This way, it gives people more of a reason to go to the theater. Instead of having to wait 3-4 months, make the wait 12 months.

I agree. I think movies should take longer to get to DVD as they can use that time to make a better DVD the first time around. I also agree that movies shouldn't go straight to DVD. Even though I'll skip going to the theatre I like knowing the movie was worthy enough to play in one.
Old 06-21-05, 12:00 AM
  #8  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: a mile high, give or take a few feet
Posts: 14,839
Received 219 Likes on 175 Posts
If theaters would let me drink beer, I would probably go more often. Until then, I'll watch movies at home with a beer and a steak.
Old 06-21-05, 12:01 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk Legend
 
chess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 20,804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by resinrats
That would be a sad day when movies just go direct to DVD. When I think of direct to DVD, I think crap movie. So even if the movie is something like Schindler's List, if it goes right to DVD, in my eyes, its no better than Starship Troopers 2.


I think Hollywood should keep movies off of DVD for longer periods of time after the theater release. This way, it gives people more of a reason to go to the theater. Instead of having to wait 3-4 months, make the wait 12 months.
I, for one, am glad the studios think otherwise.

I wouldn't go to the theater more...I'd just wait longer...which would suck...and I'd blame you.
Old 06-21-05, 12:04 AM
  #10  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
UAIOE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: LV-426
Posts: 6,598
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I think the problem is that theaters don't feel "special" anymore.

Why should one drive and pay to get an experience you can get in your own home and with little possibility of interuptions?

Don't get me wrong...i like the theater experience, but theaters have lost thier "magic" and i have to be very picky about what i see in the theater.
Old 06-21-05, 09:10 AM
  #11  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Relocated to Bot-Hell
Posts: 11,819
Received 239 Likes on 175 Posts
Theaters would be great if it weren't for the other people.
Most of the time I catch myself saying, "My HT sounds better than this theater"
Old 06-21-05, 09:37 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Mr. Cinema's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 18,044
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I'm just glad they didn't go the "rental pricing" route, like some of us were fearing a few years ago.

But as far as The Bourne Identity goes, I'll attribute its sequel getting made because of the first one's $120 mil gross and excellent word of mouth.
Old 06-21-05, 10:07 AM
  #13  
boe
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why I like watching a DVD
I get to watch the movie at home without taking out a mortgage to buy some popcorn,
No one ever kicks the back of my seat
The sound is always at just the right volume - the audience is not deaf!
I don't have to search to find a good seat
For the price of 2 tickets, I can buy the movie to own!

Why I like the movies
Feels like you are doing something other than sitting around at home.
Old 06-21-05, 10:33 AM
  #14  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: I have always been here.
Posts: 1,917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If the studios waited any longer they let the pirates slip in on the sales. The shorter waits are due to their knowing that 2 months in the theatre is enough, hell, some boots beat the premiere. People who are going to the theatre go in the first month of release. The second month is for low end theatre (I have one that charges $2). Everyone knows that the food consession is where the profit is, not the movie, for the theatre owner.
Old 06-21-05, 01:24 PM
  #15  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dark_Sithlord
Kind of far fetched, I know but I've heard from more than a few people how much they hate the movie-going experience. If they represent a significant portion of society, then direct-to-DVD might become more common.
They do represent a significant portion of society and have since the advent of television. Last weekend's $135 million box office would translate into roughly 21 million people going to the theater (at the average ticket price of $6.40, which is the current average according to Box Office Mojo). That's roughly 7% of the U.S. population. You could double that and still be a small percentage of the population going in any given week.

Even Titanic, the highest grossing movie of all time, drew less than half the population of the U.S. to the theaters (and that's assuming no one saw it twice, which is obviously not the case) through its entire run.
Old 06-21-05, 02:32 PM
  #16  
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
irony...

this is ironic considering that the studios essentially tried to kill the home video market back in the early '80s
Old 06-21-05, 02:49 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk Legend
 
LorenzoL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 23,722
Received 460 Likes on 373 Posts
I still can't see movie studios giving up on the movie theatres experience. Personally, I still be willing to watch some movies in the theatres.
Old 06-21-05, 05:16 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 23,487
Received 195 Likes on 151 Posts
IMO, the only movies I have seen this summer that needed a theater for the full experience are Star Wars and Batman Begins, and Batman might have been just as impressive on a home theater system with the right equipment. Everything else could have waited. Not sure how War of the Worlds will turn out.

One thing is for certain, the DVD is becoming more of a big deal for the major releases, and all studios want to have their summer blockbusters available for the Christmas rush, so they seem to make judgment calls on their theatrical success quicker than they used to do. Back in the old days it would take about three weeks before they would determine whether or not a film was a disappointment (unless it just landed with a resounding thud). Nowadays, unless the movie opens at #1 AND shatters some records in three days, they call it a disappointment.
Old 06-21-05, 05:32 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Pa
Posts: 11,956
Received 15 Likes on 13 Posts
They will not abandon theatrical releases as long as they can make money. The one thing they seem to be doing is picking their theatrical release films much more carefully though. No studio will give up making 100-300 million theatrically if they can get it.
Old 06-21-05, 06:08 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 6,459
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I think the final step is multiple Dvd releases.
Old 06-21-05, 06:55 PM
  #21  
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,830
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Dr. DVD
IMO, the only movies I have seen this summer that needed a theater for the full experience are Star Wars and Batman Begins, and Batman might have been just as impressive on a home theater system with the right equipment. Everything else could have waited. Not sure how War of the Worlds will turn out.
image quality is a factor for me, so every film, imo, benefits from a theatrical exhibition. DVD resolution is about 8x lower than that of a film print and 4x lower than a 2K DLP projector. detail, contrast, color -- all are better theatrically. admittedly, ive been spoiled by LA theaters such as ArcLight and The American Cinematheque so many of the things people complain about in here (bad sound, bad projection, disrespectful audiences, etc) are an extreme rarity. besides, i like seeing a film with an audience. it's one of the few community experiences we have left. and frankly, a film like Batman Begins wouldn't have been as much fun without an audience cheering along with it. my two cents.
Old 06-21-05, 08:28 PM
  #22  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 23,487
Received 195 Likes on 151 Posts
Originally Posted by Cygnet74
image quality is a factor for me, so every film, imo, benefits from a theatrical exhibition. DVD resolution is about 8x lower than that of a film print and 4x lower than a 2K DLP projector. detail, contrast, color -- all are better theatrically. admittedly, ive been spoiled by LA theaters such as ArcLight and The American Cinematheque so many of the things people complain about in here (bad sound, bad projection, disrespectful audiences, etc) are an extreme rarity. besides, i like seeing a film with an audience. it's one of the few community experiences we have left. and frankly, a film like Batman Begins wouldn't have been as much fun without an audience cheering along with it. my two cents.

FWIW, audience mark-out moments are the only reason I go see event movies like Batman and Star Wars at the first possible showing. I know I will be with an audience that will respect other filmgoers 100%. On the flipside, I prefer to see smaller movies with as small an audience as possible because nothing is worse than being cramped in a theater with a bunch of antsy people who don't enjoy the movie. Almost all artsy releases are something I would most likely see only on DVD if it weren't for the buzz some of them get from this place.
Old 06-21-05, 11:29 PM
  #23  
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BigDan
They do represent a significant portion of society and have since the advent of television. Last weekend's $135 million box office would translate into roughly 21 million people going to the theater (at the average ticket price of $6.40, which is the current average according to Box Office Mojo). That's roughly 7% of the U.S. population. You could double that and still be a small percentage of the population going in any given week.

Even Titanic, the highest grossing movie of all time, drew less than half the population of the U.S. to the theaters (and that's assuming no one saw it twice, which is obviously not the case) through its entire run.
Thanks for doing the math, BigDan.

Given a choice between watching a first-run movie in the theater or at home, I would choose home for the vast majority of movies if only to forego the cost of everything (parking, babysitter, snacks, tickets, and usually dinner). However, having said that, there are some movies that just beg for the presentation of a big screen theatrical release.

I suppose what I was trying to ask in my initial post was whether studios can make the same profits from a direct-to-DVD release versus a theatrical release, plus DVD release later on. I guess it depends on the movie. I really have no idea. I just wanted to throw it out there since it tied into the original poster's question about DVDs becoming the main source of profit.
Old 06-22-05, 12:06 AM
  #24  
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Theatrical releases will always be a huge part of the revenue for the movie industry in my eyes, because the average moviegoer is oblvious to the crimes that are being committed against them. I am ALWAYS the only person in the entire theater to complain about the painfully low sound levels, lack of surround sound, slight off-focus presentation. In an entire theater-full of people for a showing of Polar Express that sounded like it was through a 1930's radio, I was the only one to complain, and subsequently leave after it was not fixed.

The average moviegoer will be satisfied with a garbage presentation, giving cinematic releases total immunity from the "bad presentation" card.
Old 06-22-05, 12:58 AM
  #25  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 1,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dark_Sithlord
I suppose what I was trying to ask in my initial post was whether studios can make the same profits from a direct-to-DVD release versus a theatrical release, plus DVD release later on. I guess it depends on the movie. I really have no idea. I just wanted to throw it out there since it tied into the original poster's question about DVDs becoming the main source of profit.
I would think it would be an uphill battle for a direct-to-DVD release simply because the business is so geared toward theatrical release first. The stigma against a movie without a theatrical release still exists (and the biggest promotion still comes during the theatrical phase) and it's less likely the free promotion (talk shows, Access Hollywood-type stuff, newspaper reviews, etc.) would occur for a straight-to-DVD release to anywhere near the degree it does for a large-scale theatrical release.

I think it could be possible to have a large-scale direct-to-DVD release, though. Start with a mid-range sequel with some sort of "name" actor and advertise it as heavily as a theatrical release would be and maybe they could generate the sales needed to make it a big success.

The problem is that doing so would essentially be leaving money on the table as a theatrical release with DVD later probably means more revenue overall than just a DVD release (for one thing, a lot of DVD buyers are people who saw the movie in the theater. You only get to get money out of them once in a DVD-only situation).

The cost to the studios to do a theatrical release are relatively small (assuming they'd have to advertise essentially equally for a successful direct-to-DVD release), and that cost is going to largely disappear as theaters move to digital projection. There's really no reason not to keep putting movies in theaters even though the DVD market is bigger.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.