Bob Marley doc 'Marley' will release day-and-date on Facebook

Don't expect a film from a major studio to release day-and-date theatrically and on-demand anytime soon. The theatrical window has strong forces protecting it, and too many people are worried that change will drive people away from theatres forever. However, small distributors, who often screen their films in independent theatres, have been pursuing day-and-date VOD releases for a few years now. IFC, particularly, has aggressively pursued the on-demand strategy. Considering the distributor also owns theatres, it can't be all bad for the exhibition side of its business.

So it makes sense that the Magnolia release Marley, a documentary about the reggae musician  Bob Marley, will be the first to be available for day-and-date rental on Facebook. Posters of the famous reggae musician are standard-issue in college dorms, and Facebook has a hold on the youth audience. College students are also less likely to have televisions, and be more open to streaming the film on their computer. Additionally, I bet there a few people who'd like to watch the documentary at home while imbibing in the substance for which the musician is famous--and brag about it on Facebook later. The Facebook rentals will be $6.99, compared to about $12 each for a movie ticket. For those that want to watch the movie on their television, on-demand will be an option too.

Ironically, even though such simultaneous releases shatter the theatrical window, they also profit from it. People won't pay $6.99 to rent a movie once it's on DVD, but they will pay that much to see a movie that's "only in theatres." Couldn't this system just fall apart if too many movies become available concurrently with their release? Simultaneous release can and will be destructive to the traditional theatrical model. Theatres provide something tangible--a big screen, comfy seats, a communal experience--in addition to the intangible. By seeing a movie "first," you get to be the one to talk about it to your friends first, and you won't be left out of the conversation. You also don't have to delay gratification--you can enjoy a "must-see" film right away. On-demand releases charge more because of the intangibles, not the tangibles. You can even add another intangible, "convenience," to the list as well, since parents of young children or people who live far away from movie theatres would get more value out of the experience. Simultaneous releases will only get more popular and continue to evolve. Will they be symbiotic with the theatrical model, or will they devour it?

Sundance horror flick V/H/S picked up for $1 million

I'm not sure I have the guts to watch V/H/S, a horror film currently screening at Sundance. In the grand tradition of William Castle, screenings of the film have been accompanied by reports that people were so scared, they fell ill. THR tempers its report by noting that exhaustion, dehydration, and altitude sickness were later indicated as factors, not the movie's disturbing content.

Paying somewhere over $1 million, Magnolia picked up the movie with plans for a premium VOD release followed by a theatrical release. V/H/S has quite a bit going for it. One, it's a found footage movie, which cleaves to horror's trend for mockumentary and realism, as exemplified by the successful Paranormal Activity franchise. Second, it reminds me of The Ring, another movie with "found footage" as a plot element that was the talk of my high school for weeks and weeks after it came out. Finally, it has five found footage-within-found footage segments created by various directors including horror helmers Ti West and David Bruckner.

I can't say I like very scary movies, but V/H/S sounds too creative to pass up. The framing device is a tape of a group of criminals who are hired to break into an attic and steal some videos. Each of the five videos they watch, however, uses an entirely different recording technique. One is a recorded Skype chat, another uses a secret spy camera hidden in a pair of glasses.  There are also looks at a motel security system and some teens in the woods who can only see the monster through the video camera.

Seeing filmmakers embrace new technology is thrilling. So frequently, movies lag behind new technology. For years after people switched to voicemail, answering machines were used as plot devices.  Conversely, horror movies absolutely ran the idea of "No Signal" into the ground (I love this supercut of the trope), in part because they were forced into answering the question their viewers were undoubtedly asking--why don't they just call for help? Sundance films, particularly, often release just a year or so after their conception, so they're better able to take advantage of new technology or pop-culture trends. I may need to take a deep breath and see V/H/S, if only for its embrace of new technology despite its decidedly retro name.

 

 

Digital movie-watching takes a few more steps towards legitimacy

By Sarah Sluis

Just a few years ago, Internet video pioneer YouTube filled screens with goofy physical comedy, sing-a-longs, and loads of pirated content, from leaked songs to televisions episodes (streamed in part I, part II, part III, etc., to bypass YouTube's length limits) and film clips.  In the years since, studios have been able to successfully remove copyrighted material from YouTube, create vehicles for their content, and attempt to monetize their holdings.  However, feature-length films still have not penetrated the market to the extent of clips (i.e., the five million people that watched Tina Fey as Sarah Palin on SNL two weeks ago) or television shows.  Two deals that came through over the past couple of weeks stand to change the Internet movie landscape.

Yesterday, Netflix announced it had reached a deal with Starz, which holds the streaming rights to Sony

titles, that will allow subscribers to use the "Watch Now" feature to stream newer films.  Earlier this week, Netflix also worked out an agreement with Disney to stream select television shows, including the ubiquitous "Hannah Montana."  Over a week ago, IMDB (owned by Amazon) announced that visitors will be able to watch select movies for free, as a corollary to their online video rental business.

What will this mean for the industry, as well as the viewing options for the consumer?

Online video players still have a ways to go.  Even with a fast Internet connection speed, some poorly designed players skip and go grainy.  Bright spots are vimeo and hulu, which both tout high definition viewing.  While right now the crowded, competitive market is a good thing, it complicates the viewing experience.  No aggregate of internet video exists, leaving viewers to memorize--or guess--the studios and owners of the content in order to watch programming.

With independent distributors like IFC already pairing theatrical releases with TV video-on-demand, and Magnolia releasing director Wayne Wang's companion film on YouTube to promote the theatrical release of A Thousand Years of Good Prayers, Internet film is very much part of the movie release landscape, before, during, and after theatrical release.  Big action films and tentpoles will probably be the last to receive Internet tie-ins or viewing; they're simply so much better in a theatre, and have the added bonus of playing in IMAX and 3D, two formats that have gained prominence recently for their profitability and their increasing number.  As the industry converts to digital projectors, 3D will multiply its availability, since a relatively inexpensive add-on will allow 3D projection.  One potential threat to theatres' supremacy in quality is the home theatre.  Right now, watching Internet video on television is the realm of in-the-know techies or consumers buying add-on or subscription equipment that transmits the image from computer to television.  Expect that to change.  Like the VCR, the Internet will allow studios to grow the profitability of their product, even as it might siphon away funds from other areas or force theatres to intensify the "event" experience of theatre-going to entice audiences.