Hacker News Reader

Comment by RBr | Hacker News Reader

It's not a big surprise to realize that mass-market movie theaters will soon have the same fate as local movie rental shops and chains such as Blockbuster.

The only people who don't seem to understand that digital distribution will soon be the only way to make money on media are large content marketing companies.

It's an "all or nothing" battle where folks who understand that this is the future of media distribution also know that a few rogue firms, films or artists won't be able to solve the problem of piracy. If every firm, every artist, everyone who is currently making any money from content understood that new ways to monetize digital content existed, we could move beyond leaked DVD Screeners and the current state of piracy.

People will pay for content... but today, they will pay on their own terms. It doesn't mean giving it away for free, it means changing the current model.

View on HN

I don't know, theaters still have a period of exclusivity, and it's possible for studios to implement tighter controls for things like screeners, so it's not quite the same as an example where a business has to compete against a studio-sanctioned digital release.

I personally still enjoy going to the theater, and I don't mind paying for the experience. I think theaters are going to have to focus more and more on the experience in the future. If studios ever do start to do digital releases on the same day as theatrical releases, then all the theaters will have is their ability to provide a first-rate experience. It's like a lot of things, making a customer happy can and will bring in business.

The problem is these screener DVDs are available much sooner than traditional DVD releases since they usually go out to critics and/or people judging for awards. Especially the last 3-4 years, many of the big Oscar award contenders have been ripped weeks or even days after the theatrical release which seriously cuts into the exclusivity period enjoyed by theaters.

My comment on the other response to my original comment somewhat addresses what you're talking about. My argument really rests on studio-santioned exclusivity. I'm talking about the mass market, not the few who know how to download rips of screener DVDs.

And my point about it being possible for studios to implement tighter controls for screeners still applies. If it becomes too big of a problem (fiscally), the studios can band together and implement some sort of DRM solution. I'm sure they can partner with a DRM vendor to implement a solution for which they control the accounts, but, as I said, ripping screeners would have to cut into their bottom line enough for them to justify the cost of building such a system.

This simply isn't true.

I just watched RED a few days ago (in my home) and it just opened 2 weeks ago, if that.

Ditto on Monsters, which I saw before it opened around here.

And tonight I'll be watching Social Network, which is in the theaters everywhere but it's just not convenient for me to drag my gf and her 6 and 9 year old to see a movie they won't want to sit through (well she will, but the kids, not likely).

I'd be willing to pay for this privilege - aka watching in the comfort of my own home - but they leave me no choice in the matter.

Well, you're probably not the norm.

The original comment was talking about the video shops' demise due to sanctioned digital distribution, you're talking about piracy. (I'm not debating piracy)

Video shops ran into problems first with Netflix and then with digital distribution. Movie theaters will be okay as long as they maintain their period of studio-sanctioned exclusivity.

2 Years ago I'd agreed with you, but more and more of my regular non-hacker friends are doing this now.

Let's face it, it's just not that hard to install Vuze and hit piratebay for all your torrent needs.

I've never heard of Vuse, and I've never downloaded a torrent of a movie, but maybe I'm not the norm at this point.

> I'd be willing to pay for this privilege - aka watching in the comfort of my own home - but they leave me no choice in the matter.

I'm always stunned by this argumentation - because in fact there are other choices: you could just not watch the particular movie at all or wait until it's available for home entertainment. Both perfectly legal and (what I think is the key point) in the latter case the people who worked to produce the stuff you're so eager to consume get some kind of compensation.

But you go the third way and choose to watch a pirated copy - that's up to you, but please don't tell anybody you're "forced" to do that.

I don't think you understand his argument fully: he would like to be able to do it the legal way, but it is simply not possible at the moment. In other words, there is demand which is currently filled only by the illegal channels. While it isn't the most noble way to go about it, it's the only option possible in his case. Compare that to iTunes, for instance: music available at greater convenience than through torrents and the like. Or to games: an easy worry free download versus having to look for ways to obtain the game, wait for it to download, and often mess about with copyright protection.

direct to dvd is back

it's the entitlement defense. He feels that it's his right to watch the movie in any way that he sees fit and because it's so easy to just download it, there isn't much incentive to wait for it to come out on legally.

Maybe I'm going to the wrong theaters. Maybe I'm just that much closer to grumpy old man. Lately my theater experience is crying babies (not just at kid's movies), mouth-breathers incessantly pawing at the bottom of their feed buckets, fiddling noisy wrappers and cellphones opening.

It's about on par with an R5 that has shitty audio. It would be nice if theaters focused more on experience and novelty.

Thanks to OP for announcing the release :)

I enjoy going to a theater as well... but eventually, the only theaters that will exist will be high-end, classy joints like Gold Class Cinemas (http://www.goldclasscinemas.com/).

When I want to see a movie in a theater, I want to receive the best experience possible.

If the movie isn't worth seeing on a high-end screen, with high-end sound in a high-end facility, I want to download (and pay for) a good quality copy of the movie. Recently, I've seen Inception, Avatar, and a couple of other movies that between the sound and the picture deserve an experience.

The Social Network is a great movie that does not deserve an experience. It's a entertaining mockumentary that I really enjoyed watching - I did not miss anything by foregoing the theater. When the DVD comes out, I'll buy it.

"I enjoy going to a theater as well... but eventually, the only theaters that will exist will be high-end, classy joints like Gold Class Cinemas (http://www.goldclasscinemas.com/)."

Think of teens and parents. They're not going to pay for classy cinemas. Any both go for reasons other than just seeing the film.

At $30 a ticket, Gold Class Cinemas seems reasonable for both Teens and Parents to enjoy a movie that they want to see in a theater.

I get what you're saying: Teens use theaters as a social meeting point and I agree. However, I look at the number of people seeding The Social Network and I compare that against the Saturday night attendance at my local theater and it's not hard to forecast the winner.

Cinemas sell an experience, not the content itself. I don't think that even the most expensive home cinema setup could replace them.

I don't see why any of this would affect piracy, beyond perhaps saving someone the step of ripping a Screener DVD.

Facebook should partner with Hulu, etc to provide hyper relevant video. Facebook TV, Facebook Video, etc. Clone Google TV but have content rolled in served by linking a facebook account.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com