Warner Bros Releasing 2021 Films to Theatres and HBO Max on the Same Day

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.


Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

cboath

Master Member
It would be if they weren't sitting on it for a year. If they released the movies earlier on stream yea makes sense, that's the only way to get them out now and still get some dosh back. But it doesn't make sense to me to wait until December 2021 so that they can release the movie in theatres and then release it on streaming platform at the same time. Who's gonna go to the cinema apart from fanatics like me to see it there? It feels like undermining themselves but maybe I'm wrong. Bottom line is I wanna see Dune badly and I'm really worried that the second part will be axed if this one flops.

The wait is to purposefully string it out. By doing it over the course of the year you make people keep the subscription longer/year round in order be able to see the next thing. Dump it all now and people watch it all and cancel in a 4-6 weeks.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

JoeG

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Thankfully Mulan is now free on Disney+, I wonder if Disney will stop the $30 price tag on theater movies given WB/HBO's announcement

Doubt it. Disney+ isn't having nearly as tough a time as WB getting subscribers. Like I said, this is mostly about getting more people to subscribe to HBO Max. The pandemic/theatres being closed was pretty much a non issue for this decision. Plenty of people who had a stake in these films box office performance would've been happy to wait it out until they could be released theatrically. That's what is going to spark all the lawsuits. People missing out on their back-end deals.
 

HMSwolfe

Sr Member
Doubt it. Disney+ isn't having nearly as tough a time as WB getting subscribers. Like I said, this is mostly about getting more people to subscribe to HBO Max. The pandemic/theatres being closed was pretty much a non issue for this decision. Plenty of people who had a stake in these films box office performance would've been happy to wait it out until they could be released theatrically. That's what is going to spark all the lawsuits. People missing out on their back-end deals.
Disney’s “brand” is a whole lot stronger than Warner Bros., in the sense that you can clearly pick out a “Disney” film. You can’t necessarily do that with a WB film, barring stuff like DC, so they are struggling with the concept of a monopoly distribution of WB content.
 

JoeG

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Disney’s “brand” is a whole lot stronger than Warner Bros., in the sense that you can clearly pick out a “Disney” film. You can’t necessarily do that with a WB film, barring stuff like DC, so they are struggling with the concept of a monopoly distribution of WB content.

Absolutely. They also confused the hell out of people with the name considering there was already HBO Go and HBO Now. I still see people talking about they won't get HBO Max because they refuse to pay for cable/satellite TV again.
 

Laspector

Master Member
Well, what exactly do you have to have to get it? I have cable, a TIVO and a Roku. Roku doesn't have it, Tivo doesn't have it. I subscribe to Amazon Prime, Disney+, and Netflix.

I gotta buy some other piece of crapstick or a xbox or something to get it? I don't want some stupid app to watch it on my phone or laptop. If it is not on my TV, what's the point?
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

cboath

Master Member
I'd check them out on the web to see where they say the app is avaiable. I know there were two places that weren't carrying it - i think it was Roku and Amazon.

According to their site (i did it for you :) ) it's on amazon fire TV, androidTV, android, apple TV, google chromecast, ipd, iphone, ps4, samsung smartTV and xbox one (i'd also imagine the next xbox and ps5 as well)
 

joberg

Master Member
Great read, thanks for sharing
From the Director who restored the original negs of "2001 A Space Odyssey"(y)(y):cool::cool::notworthy::notworthy: A fan and connaisseur of the medium of film and film making. Theaters are going to exist for a niche of real fans of the medium. Image, Sound, Story...PERIOD!
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

cboath

Master Member
I can sort of see both sides of it. I say sort of in that I totally see the point of directors and actors, etc. I can only sort of see the WB side of this. They can't continue to finance stuff and let it set on a shelf indefinitely until everyone feels things are normal. Contrary to the CAA letter, a vaccine going wide in Q1 or Q2 isn't going to set things back to complete normal by June. It just won't. There will be plenty of holdouts and even those getting it won't all return to normal movie going status that quick. You're probably looking at another year before movie attendance would be close to 'normal' again. You can't stack up two years worth of films while continuing to make more and not making anything back. The sort of is, WB could have played up that side if it were true, yet didn't. Seems as if the decision was solely 'we can't release these for a while, so let's eat the profit we would've made and dump on our new streaming service to drive demand by giving it something no one else has, first run flicks. I'd wager most of those against it would be much less upset if it went the Disney and others route of putting in HBO Max, but, charging 30 bucks per view.
 

yaris

Sr Member
I refuse to see a big screen movie in cinemas anymore unless I can go to the Gold Class lounge, but even then there's some idiot on their phone talking and the ticket price is $50.

A big screen TV in the comfort of my own home watching a new relase movie....perfect.

Cinemas had their time, just like Amazon is killing retail shopping assets.....they were expensive and ripped us off for years.....go to any shopping centre and it's full of empty shops.
 

HMSwolfe

Sr Member
I can sort of see both sides of it. I say sort of in that I totally see the point of directors and actors, etc. I can only sort of see the WB side of this. They can't continue to finance stuff and let it set on a shelf indefinitely until everyone feels things are normal. Contrary to the CAA letter, a vaccine going wide in Q1 or Q2 isn't going to set things back to complete normal by June. It just won't. There will be plenty of holdouts and even those getting it won't all return to normal movie going status that quick. You're probably looking at another year before movie attendance would be close to 'normal' again. You can't stack up two years worth of films while continuing to make more and not making anything back. The sort of is, WB could have played up that side if it were true, yet didn't. Seems as if the decision was solely 'we can't release these for a while, so let's eat the profit we would've made and dump on our new streaming service to drive demand by giving it something no one else has, first run flicks. I'd wager most of those against it would be much less upset if it went the Disney and others route of putting in HBO Max, but, charging 30 bucks per view.
WB is right in wanting these films to make any money back, but they did wrong by using that as an excuse to prop up a rightfully failing streaming service, without giving any advance notice to the parties involved and no choice either. Not to mention, in some cases, I don’t think they had a real right to make such an authoritative decision about some of these films. I think I read that Legendary financed like 75% of Godzilla vs. Kong and Dune. Not to mention the obvious piracy issue. Filmmakers and actors and such are right to be worried about the prospect of piracy if all films go straight to streaming.
 

cboath

Master Member
WB is right in wanting these films to make any money back, but they did wrong by using that as an excuse to prop up a rightfully failing streaming service, without giving any advance notice to the parties involved and no choice either. Not to mention, in some cases, I don’t think they had a real right to make such an authoritative decision about some of these films. I think I read that Legendary financed like 75% of Godzilla vs. Kong and Dune. Not to mention the obvious piracy issue. Filmmakers and actors and such are right to be worried about the prospect of piracy if all films go straight to streaming.
It's why i said i sort of see their side. Problem was the exercised too much authority on their own without talking to anyone or giving anyone a choice in the matter. If you list everything you could possible do wrong in making a call like this, they checked off every single box on the list.

if someone else is footing 75% of the bill, YOU don't get 100% of the decision making power there.

From the sound of it, no one but Patty Jenkins and WW got the WW deal. They were consulted and paid. Maybe the others will come release time, I don't know. But if so, it's just another aspect of the process WB totally screwed the pooch on.

All they had to do is say we don't want to make this call but we feel we have no choice. We can't sit around and not bring in any money, we have to release what we have to keep things going. I don't know that that would be entirely true, but you that's how you'd need to play it publicly and privately. If you're really in bad shape, offer to sell the rights back to the other side for the minimal profit you're likely to make in this scenario.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Top