Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Oct 17, 2019 2:13 pm



Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
 The hidden world of on-demand profits 
Author Message
Pure Phase
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am
Posts: 34867
Location: Maryland
Post The hidden world of on-demand profits
A nice Dissolve article. Worth reading, in my opinion, so I thought I would share:

Quote:
Since we launched The Dissolve last July, one of the most persistent challenges we’ve faced is how to deal with Video On Demand—what to cover, when to cover, and how to cover it. This has meant sorting through the thicket of semi-major indies and marginalia, and a catch-as-catch-can assortment of VOD release strategies that include day-and-date (movies released simultaneously in theaters and VOD), day-before-date (VOD before theatrical), and VOD only. Every week, I feel like I’m part detective, part curator: Just finding out what’s coming out on VOD, much less who’s representing it, can be a hassle, even before dealing with the issue of what actually merits coverage.

While the digital age has changed the entire movie industry dramatically, the rise of VOD has changed the indie business most acutely. Recently, Steven Spielberg and George Lucas held court at the USC School Of Cinematic Arts, where among their dire predictions—the implosion of the “tentpole” blockbuster paradigm, a theatrical experience more akin to Broadway shows or football games than multiplexes, brain implants—they talked about the migration of personal or niche-oriented movies to VOD. “What used to be the movie business, in which I include television and movies,” said Lucas, “will be Internet television.” For Hollywood, such a future is still several steps away; for indies, however, the future is now. It doesn’t take Lucas’ Kreskin routine to see that people are watching new movies at home—it just a couple of clicks on iTunes or Amazon.

And yet we know nothing.

Certain fundamental changes have happened in the independent market as a result of VOD. Moviegoers are changing their habits. Distributors are changing their release strategies. And to accommodate all parties, arthouses are changing their projection booths and their programming in order to survive. We can safely guess that these changes are profound and transformative, and that the indie business will continue to evolve (or devolve) at a breathless pace. We can guess these things, but we can’t really know them with any kind of precision, because they can’t be quantified. And that’s because the money generated by VOD rentals is almost never disclosed. Figuring out what’s successful or unsuccessful on VOD—or the overall viability of the format, period—is like being lost in a wilderness within a wilderness. And the powers-that-be aren’t passing out flashlights.

I’m generally not much of a box-office watcher, because I have no stake in a given movie’s financial performance, other than wanting to see more (or less) of its kind in the future. But lately I’ve been keeping an eye on independent genre films, in part because nasty little thrillers, noirs, and horror films are my lifeblood, and in part because they’ve always struggled against more genteel arthouse fare. Too small for the multiplex, too rude for the older crowd that truly drives arthouse box office, these films strike me as the first residents of the “Internet TV” universe Lucas describes, and what incomplete information we do have seems to confirm it.

As the canary in the coal mine, I looked to Jeremy Saulnier’s terrific thriller Blue Ruin, which won acclaim from many, including myself, for recalling the Coens brothers’ Blood Simple in mining dark comedy from messy, amateur criminality. Though Saulnier and his star/muse, Macon Blair, weren’t established names by any means, the film arrived in theaters with every possible advantage: It was a sensation at Cannes, where it won the FIPRESCI prize at Director’s Fortnight and got snapped up by Radius-TWC, the division of The Weinstein Company. It spent the better part of a year touring the festival circuit, including TIFF ’13, where it was a premier buzz magnet among my colleagues. And reviews were stellar when it finally came out in late April: 95 percent on Rotten Tomatoes, a 77 Metacritic score.

According to Box Office Mojo, Blue Ruin grossed $32,608 on seven screens on opening weekend, which averages out to a relatively anemic $4,658 per screen. To date, it’s made about $250,000. Does that mean it’s a box-office letdown? A few years ago, the answer would be an unequivocal “yes.” But Radius-TWC released Blue Ruin day-and-date, and it’s entirely possible that it made a quiet fortune in digital rentals from interested parties from Albany to Walla Walla who couldn’t make it out to the seven theaters premièring the movie. (Not to mention those who lived right around the block, but chose to watch it at home anyway.) After opening weekend, the Radius-TWC Facebook trumpeted the fact that Blue Ruin “brought its vengeance down on the iTunes chart… where it landed in the Top 10, beating out films like The Hunger Games and Gravity.” That certainly sounds lucrative, but what does an iTunes Top 10 appearance mean in terms of actual dollars and cents? A lot? A little? More than such a film could have ever made in the bad old days when it would be released in theaters only? Or less?

We don’t know, and we aren’t likely to know any time soon, despite the efforts of some indie leaders like Cinetic Media’s John Sloss, the veteran entertainment lawyer and sales agent, who co-founded the digital distribution company FilmBuff, and has argued vociferously in favor of VOD transparency. Sloss has been responsible for what little data we have on VOD numbers, which he prefers to see reflected in “multi-screen gross,” a figure that combines the theatrical and VOD numbers. The three examples provided here—Escape From Tomorrow, Man Of Tai Chi, and Spark: A Burning Man Story—are too paltry a sample size from which to draw any conclusions, but the VOD numbers for the Keanu Reeves kung-fu movie Man Of Tai Chi, which are 15 times the theatrical take, show a staggering potential. But again: Does that mean that independent genre films thrive on VOD? Or does Reeves’ star power account for the disparity?

Currently, we can only speculate. This weekend, Ti West’s The Sacrament comes out in limited release after spending a month on VOD. On the strength of films like The House Of The Devil and The Innkeepers, West is one of the biggest names in indie horror, and the day The Sacrament was released on VOD, the film was a trending topic on Twitter. That indicates some wide base of support, but I’d guess the film opens well short of Blue Ruin numbers in theaters, given the month-long drain of potential viewers and the fact that theatrical releases for indie genre films seem increasingly nominal. The $100,000 total that the found-footage anthology V/H/S collected in theaters doesn’t make a compelling argument for a sequel, nor does the pitiful $21,800 collected by the ABCs Of Death anthology, but sequels to both were turned around in a hurry.

The company releasing The Sacrament and the V/H/S movies, Magnolia Pictures, has spearheaded the move toward day-and-date and day-before-date releases, overcoming strong resistance from theater owners by snapping up Landmark Theatres, the country’s largest arthouse chain, and forcing other independent theaters to fall in line. Independent filmmakers have been going on barnstorming tours to eke out a little more money by making ordinary shows into special-appearance events; I did one last year with a bleary-eyed Shane Carruth, who in addition to self-distributing Upstream Color, was doing Q&As in New York for morning showings. As for the theaters, they’re having to improvise to make up for lost grosses, either by making the experience special (gourmet food, alcohol, special events, etc.) or by getting in on the distribution game themselves, as in the case of Drafthouse Films and Music Box Films. The sad irony for most independent theaters is that the digital projectors they spent so much money to install have become a symbol of their obsolescence.

The decline in theatrical box-office generally—and indie genre films specifically—can be quantified, and there are people more qualified than I to study the trends more thoroughly. (Paging FiveThirtyEight.) But until we get the other side of the equation and understand precisely the degree to which viewers are migrating to VOD, any statements about the independent-film business can only be expressed in anecdotes and generalities. Distributors have compelling reasons to keep the numbers under wraps: Hiding failures is appealing, and hiding successes even more so, lest filmmakers seek their own piece of the action. For now, as these tectonic plates shift, all we can do is feel the ground moving under our feet. What we lack is a seismograph.


http://thedissolve.com/features/exposit ... d-profits/

_________________
ImageImageImage

1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game


Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:45 pm
Profile
Pure Phase
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am
Posts: 34867
Location: Maryland
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
I would love, love, love if reporting of on-demand earnings became commonplace. It fascinates and frustrates me. The great film Filth, for example, just opened to a paltry 7k from two theatres after a month of availability on Amazon, iTunes, and cable boxes nationwide. Based on the theatrical opening number, it is easy to say, "What a flop." But how much did it earn on demand? How does this overall number compare to Magnolia's investment in the film's domestic distribution rights? It drives me up the wall we do not have easy, crisp access to the answers.

_________________
ImageImageImage

1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game


Mon Jun 02, 2014 12:59 pm
Profile
Forum General
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 8:30 am
Posts: 7033
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
It's been coming. There are less and less indie films or limited release films making much money ($1m+) at the box office for years.

So it's really just a wide release market, and even then, numerous movies continue to fail. It's funny isn't it? That there will always be quality in the market of all kinds. There'll never be everything good or everything bad but there has to be at least something good or something bad.

I'm sure a lot of crap goes straight to video but when movies like Vampire Academy and Bad Words and Sabotage also start opting for VOD, which I'm sure is coming, then the variety decreases further. It's really quite fascinating.

Here, and in many Asian countries, Hollywood blockbusters are ones that people go out of their way to see, whilst dramas and its ilk are not "worthy" enough. Less bang for your buck unless of course it's really good/WOM phenomenon. But we surely cannot be seeing a day where they try to release blockbusters every weekend. Something has to let up and there isn't enough money to go around as it is.

It's going to be a bumpy ride.

_________________
Calls
Ghost Rider + Clash of the Titans = 2x Wrath of the Titans + Ghost Rider 2
Lorax over Despicable Me
Men in Black 3 Under 100m
Madagascar 3 Under 100m
Rise of the Guardians over 250m


Mon Jun 02, 2014 1:38 pm
Profile WWW
Defeats all expectations
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 5:04 pm
Posts: 6067
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
It's good to see more indie films are able to rely less on the traditional distribution system. Less constraint could mean more freedom.


Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:28 pm
Profile
now we know
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm
Posts: 63725
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
So Man of Tai Chi earned $1.5m on VOD?

Still shit.

But yeah, I'd also be interested to see numbers. They don't even have to be accurate, maybe they could even be presented in the form of a theatrical box office multiplier, and that would be enough for me -- just something to gauge the overall success.

_________________
#RAMBO5 ... 20th SEPTEMBER 2019


Mon Jun 02, 2014 6:32 pm
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 20441
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
I'm a big fan of this, but still the guy doesn't know enough. I just went a Premiere this weekend and the DP was so proud that our film is beyond Bluray Projection which most of these films get. But to still get a theatrical projection not only helps ID films, but also Digital films in general. I think that really is the dream of someone that films a film in Digital as weird as that sounds. But there is so much profit out there that accounts for the loss in DVD sales, that I do hope it becomes public Knowledge. For Instance I can only beg my friend for data here and there but I always go for the Stallone/ Scwarci flops first and they are doing quite well that it needs to be taken into account.

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Wed Jun 04, 2014 5:03 am
Profile
now we know
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm
Posts: 63725
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
You never post that data here, though.

_________________
#RAMBO5 ... 20th SEPTEMBER 2019


Wed Jun 04, 2014 5:06 am
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 20441
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
I am not allowed to but Bullet to the Head, Last Stand and Escape Plan made more on VOD than domestically. Most made about 9-14 million first week, None more than 45 million though, but that doesnt include WW

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Wed Jun 04, 2014 5:17 am
Profile
now we know
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm
Posts: 63725
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
As if anyone would know! You just talk a good fight but never back it up with numbers. You're the sort of guy that says he knows all these famous people because it can never be proven otherwise.

_________________
#RAMBO5 ... 20th SEPTEMBER 2019


Wed Jun 04, 2014 5:26 am
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 20441
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
I told my closest friend about this site and they use it for box office data and what not. It's really my only indulgence. I know you think I hate you Algren, but that's not true at all. I'm just having fun here for a long time, and never want to stop. Just trying to give my two cents to things I've been lucky enough to know, much like Dark Shape who always gives script info the best he can.

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Wed Jun 04, 2014 5:32 am
Profile
now we know
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm
Posts: 63725
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
Your only agenda is to push your little Fordy when anyone mentions anything about the 80s.

_________________
#RAMBO5 ... 20th SEPTEMBER 2019


Wed Jun 04, 2014 5:47 am
Profile
On autopilot for the summer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 20441
Location: Walking around somewhere
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
Ok, sure. Ford hasn't really starred in any ODM since the boom but ok, it's been 6 years since his last starring role.

_________________
Image

Chippy wrote:
As always, fuck Thegun.


Chippy wrote:
I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!


Wed Jun 04, 2014 6:04 am
Profile
Forum General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:53 pm
Posts: 8585
Location: Syracuse, NY
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
Go home, Algren. You're drunk.

_________________
Top 10 Films of 2016

1. La La Land
2. Other People
3. Nocturnal Animals
4. Swiss Army Man
5. Manchester by the Sea
6. The Edge of Seventeen
7. Sing Street
8. Indignation
9. The Lobster
10. Hell or High Water


Wed Jun 04, 2014 5:48 pm
Profile YIM WWW
Pure Phase
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am
Posts: 34867
Location: Maryland
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
Thegun wrote:
I'm a big fan of this, but still the guy doesn't know enough. I just went a Premiere this weekend and the DP was so proud that our film is beyond Bluray Projection which most of these films get. But to still get a theatrical projection not only helps ID films, but also Digital films in general. I think that really is the dream of someone that films a film in Digital as weird as that sounds. But there is so much profit out there that accounts for the loss in DVD sales, that I do hope it becomes public Knowledge. For Instance I can only beg my friend for data here and there but I always go for the Stallone/ Scwarci flops first and they are doing quite well that it needs to be taken into account.

This is borderline incomprehensible.

_________________
ImageImageImage

1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game


Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:08 pm
Profile
Wallflower
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am
Posts: 33213
Location: Minnesota
Post Re: The hidden world of on-demand profits
I would kill to see digital rental numbers. They need to start reporting them. I really would love to see what Veronica Mars did on digital.

_________________
Image


Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:24 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 15 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.