Josh-da-man

I didn't see it. The way Matt was talking about it, it seemed like it had a regular theatrical release.

In the last decade or so, the lines have really blurred between a theatrical release, a made-for-tv/streaming movie, and direct-to-video movies.

orangerunner

I don't know the production history with "Behind the Candelabra" but with the talent involved (Damon, Douglas and Soderbergh) this may have been developed as a theatrical release but changing market conditions around that time made it unfeasible, at least in North America.

Maybe it's just my own bias but a theatrical release lends a certain gravity and legitimacy to any film as opposed to a direct-to-video/streaming model. In recent years that opinion is quickly changing as the whole quality independent and mid-range budget film market has been relegated to streaming.

The trend seems to be if a film isn't poised to earn a billion dollars in the world-wide market, it's not worth releasing in theatres.

morriscroy

This ^ !

Another personal bias is the (incorrect) perception of how movies have more "gravity / legitimacy" than television shows.

Coral

Yeah, a movie is a movie regardless of where it's released.
I have no intention of ever stepping foot in a movie theatre again - so I prefer movies to forgo a theatrical release and go direct to streaming so I can see it sooner.

Adam Tyner

Coral

Down 21 straight weeks now.

Alan Smithee

Ever since I started collecting movies, I've differentiated between stuff made for theaters (which is what qualifies to me as MOVIES), stuff made for TV, cable, or straght to video. Even now, with the lines a bit blurred and the theatrical experience being crap, I still give higher priority to watching or buying things that were at least intended to be seen in a theater, and where I hopefully would have seen them first if I had any good theaters in my area. At least before streaming being invented, I would clearly see the production values of productions made for anything other than theatrical release just not being as good. Watching made for TV movies on laserdisc often made them look TOO good.

And back on subject, I went to Target today and there wasn't anything there that even tempted me. They've severely cut back on movies, so I can't buy what they aren't selling. Got a few music DVDs in the mail this week though that I'd been meaning to get before they disappear.

milo bloom

Well, something is keeping physical media going:

https://www.polygon.com/23681111/ani...all-evangelion

Coral

I have to put this under "things I didn't know were still a thing today":

Netflix will shut down its DVD rental business in September

PhantomStranger

Anime fans still love physical media, even if most still employ Crunchyroll or whatever to screen new shows. I have way more anime sets than any other genre.

Adam Tyner

Alan Smithee

:facepalm:

stvn1974

Not looking good at all.

Coral

22!

Yeah, it's only going to get worse.

Kinda surprised that DVD still accounts for more than 50% of the revenue most weeks. I figured with people getting more used to HD quality overall (ie. cable, streaming, youtube, etc.) that even though both formats would decline, DVD would decline more than BD. The split's gotta be like 75/25 in favor of DVD when accounting for unit sales instead of revenue as DVDs are cheaper.

I haven't paid attention, but were there any big movies (ie. did well at the boxoffice) released in the last 10-15 weeks?

Alan Smithee

Yep, I keep saying this but it blows my mind that anyone would still be bothering with regular DVD at this point, unless it was something old that hadn't been released on any better format. Are there still charts that show exactly what titles people are buying?

Went to Target today for everyday stuff and they have yet AGAIN shrunk the movie section in favor of more vinyl LPs. REALLY don't know who's buying those.

Adam Tyner

Yes.

Big-budget blockbuster-types fare better on Blu-ray and UHD when initially released. But generally, the longer a title is out, the more the percentage swings towards DVD. More family-oriented movies and titles with less spectacle also generally do better on DVD. The trends have been the same for ages.

The boring answer is that sales (especially longtail) favor DVD because it’s cheaper, good enough, and so accessible.

Why So Blu?

Alan can't see that, because he believes everyone should be a cinephile. Most folks out there are just casual fans and DVD is cheap and good enough.

Alan Smithee

There usually isn't that big a price difference anymore between DVD and Blu though- that chart is something else, Wizard of Oz is on it and Blu-Ray only accounts for 4% of current sales? That movie has been on video for over 40 years and in fact was one of the very first titles on DVD, I have more editions of it than I can count. I don't know why anyone buying that right now would want it on regular DVD and not even already have it. Aren't most of the people who aren't "cinephiles" streaming now anyways?

Why So Blu?

The average person DOES NOT CARE about that. Also, yes, the average person would probably stream it if available.

Adam Tyner

4% the week of April 9th - 15th. I haven't compared to other weeks throughout the year, but The Wizard of Oz has been an Easter tradition for decades, so I'd imagine that's why it's ranking as high as it is.

For people who are happy with DVD, a $4 premium for Blu-ray is $4 too much.

Assuming the prices at Walmart are the same now as they were a couple weeks ago:

• M3gan (18% cheaper on DVD; $4)
• A Man Called Otto (18% cheaper on DVD; $4)
• Wakanda Forever (9% cheaper on DVD vs. Blu-ray; $2...and 29% cheaper on DVD vs. UHD; $8)
• Top Gun: Maverick (26% cheaper on DVD vs. Blu-ray; $6.50...and 23% cheaper on DVD vs. UHD; $5.50)

Alan Smithee

So are there any stats on how many people are opting for the lower-priced SD streaming/digital options when those are available? I wouldn't consider those in a billion years, most of those look worse than DVDs though HD streaming usually looks far better than that.

morriscroy

Some folks will just stream movies / tv shows, even if they already own the dvd/bluray.

Some folks are simply too lazy to even go through the motions of searching for a title on the shelf, taking the bluray disc out of the package, and putting the disk into the bluray/dvd player. I'm glad our own Alan Smithee is willing to go through the motions of playing discs manually.

morriscroy

Alan can bark whatever batshit crazy stuff he/she wants to say. Nobody is going to stop him/her from doing so.

As far as I'm concerned, Alan is this particular message board's equivalent of the crazy uncle (or aunt) who goes on crazy wild rants all ado about nothing.

morriscroy

(Going back further in time).

When I use to buy a lot of music cds and vinyl records more than 30 years ago, I found that price sensitivity was highly relevant as to whether I would buy a particular title. For example, I would always wait for something to be on the sale racks just to even save a dollar.

Alan Smithee

Hey, those “motions” are part of the joy of it all.

There’s a conundrum however when I have a movie on laserdisc or any lesser format but also have access to it in HD on streaming. I still consider the physical media more legit, even though I can watch the streaming copy bypassing the annoying native interfaces of streaming services and watch those in better quality. I wouldn’t rebuy Blank Check on Blu-ray for instance but can watch it in great quality on Disney Plus, but the laserdisc I got for about a buck is still more permanent.