The future of film distribution... The extinction of the studio.

harcourt22

harcourt22

Member
Hey, guys I'm new to the forums here but I really felt compelled to get your opinions on something that I've been thinking about for a long time. I've started to notice that recent statistics show movie theaters are experiencing record lows in terms of ticket sales. People simply aren't going to the movies like they used to. The movies were once a place to spend every single friday night. You could go with your friends, watch a great movie, and eat all the popcorn you could fit. Nowadays for the average family of four to see a friday night movie with popcorn and soft drinks costs upwards of $60.00. With the downturn of the economy families can't afford to spend every week at the movies. The same for DVD sales. DVDs aren't selling like they used to. More and more these days I here "I'll wait for it to go to iTunes." or "I'll just rent it from Redbox." People don't want to have to store an actual disc they want to be able to stream any movie to any device they have handy at any time. A lot of people I know just choose to take all of there DVDs, rip them, and save them in iTunes to stream to their apple tv or iPhone.
One trend I don't think will disappear anytime soon is the web series. The popular web series "Video game High School" (VGHS) created by popular youtuber Freddiew went completely viral online with a total number of views being over 10,000,000! People LOVE the web series especially teenagers who follow a certain youtuber avidly. VGHS found it's niche among teens who love to game. Freddiew was able to have complete creative control over the project because it wasn't funded by a giant studio it was funded by us on kickstarter! The web series contains the perfect blend of the three things we, the consumer want…

1. Instant streaming. We can watch on our own time.
2. Personalized entertainment. We watch things that appeal to us.
3. Cheap. We don't have to have a complicated billing service to enjoy our content.


iTunes, Netflix, and Hulu are quickly running DVDs and even blu-rays into the ground. The moment independent, fresh, and, talented people enter the world of independent consumer funded content, they gain an audience. Now when I talk about independent consumer driven content I don't mean a twelve year old running around his yard filming himself chasing his cat, I mean SERIOUS quality content. Enabling creators full creative license opens up a world of possibilities.
Right now you might be wondering how the good content is separated from the bad content, "If everyone is making a series and releasing it to the web won't 90% of it be crap." Yes. And that 90% won't gain an audience and it will crash and burn thus filtering out the good content from the bad. Independent films are taken seriously and soon I believe "web series" won't be a term associated with Gangnam style and Charlie bit my finger, but instead a respected medium that will lead us into a new generation of fast, cheap, creative content that is ultimately just plain fun.
Please leave any thoughts, arguments, or questions below.
;)

Here's some popular web series

Left 4 Dead- http://www.youtube.com/colinandconnor

VGHS- http://www.rocketjump.com/category/vghs

Dr0ne- http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6BF5DAE7D4915461


I'm not saying all of these are great but they are proof of concept. I chose these because they all had TINY budgets.

Enjoy!
 
Last edited:
I perfer buying the dvd rather than getting it through Itunes or redbox, I use netfilx more for tv series with so many tv shows its hard to keep up with all of them and their a little to expensive to buy on dvd. I like to collect movies and with Itunes and all the other digital ways to watch movies I really can't do that.
 
Web audience participation isn't an indicator of good or bad, at all. It's an indicator of exposure, creator like-ability, and niche appeal.

In a "market" where you don't have to pay for anything, everything looks a lot more appealing.
 
Kholi said:
Web audience participation isn't an indicator of good or bad, at all. It's an indicator of exposure, creator like-ability, and niche appeal.

In a "market" where you don't have to pay for anything, everything looks a lot more appealing.
Click to expand...
I agree but who's to say what is "good" or "bad" it's all a matter of what you prefer.
 
harcourt22 said:
I agree but who's to say what is "good" or "bad" it's all a matter of what you prefer.
Click to expand...

harcourt22 said:
Right now you might be wondering how the good content is separated from the bad content, "If everyone is making a series and releasing it to the web won't 90% of it be crap." Yes. And that 90% won't gain an audience and it will crash and burn thus filtering out the good content from the bad.
Enjoy!
Click to expand...


Well, haha, you kinda did. Just because something doesn't find a popular enough audience to earn backend doesnt' make it bad, it just means that it wasn't popular. Hence why everyone's trying to cut in on each other's fan film slash video game meta geek territory on the web.

It's low hanging fruit, easy to get anyone interested as long as you reference someone's intellectual property.

At this point, those people you listed could branch off and do something completely alien to their current content and lose a large portion of their viewership, but enough would stay to justify it.

ALL of them will share the same beginning, though: we used a famous video game or comic book character to get where we are now.

That doesnt make it good, in fact most of that stuff is bottom floor, entry level material. It just means someone wants to consume it for free.
 
DVD, even broadcast television - I cant see it has any future

There was some great blahney blog entry on sony (or some other) people talking about the amount of rekitting the industry need to go to 4k

whats the problem - distribute by download - no need to rip up all the cable networks kit - its dead anyway

The big bind.. how does this all get policed - when people nick and distribute any content the value goes

It needs proper policing to work.

At that point we are all equal, big studios, indy films, cat videos

S
 
The basic model I see..

for a biggee (skyfall?) - post a trailer

for an unknown - post a teaser

People say they would not pay - BS - watch 2 parts of The Killing and you would pay to see the next one..

S
 
Wel, it's not that people won't pay... if you have non public broadcast television you already pay. If you have HBO or any similar access, you pay even more, and if you have HULU plus or Netflix etc, then you pay something else.

It's not about people not willing to pay, people ARE Willing to pay... we already do so, begrudgingly or in the case of wanting to watch the final season of Breaking Bad, happily.
 
I feel like you are touching on two separate though related industries, content creation and content distribution. With regards to content creation, the big studios aren't going to disappear because no one is going to be able to crowd source a 'Hollywood movie' type budget and there is no lack of demand for the movies and TV shows Hollywood kicks out. For example, Netflix (by and large Hollywood content) produces more internet traffic than YouTube and Hulu (also mostly Hollywood content) is more profitable than YT (which isn't saying that much 'cause YT isn't profitable at all). YT is also trying to garner more deals with established studios and production companies because that's where the money is (this is of course rubbing many long time YT content creators the wrong way as they feel like they are getting shafted).

With regards to content distribution, this is where I see most of the disruption happening though I think we'll still have physical media as an option 10-15yrs from now. Broadcast and cable TV will see more and more erosion from online delivery but I don't think they will disappear entirely until affordable, robust and fast enough broadband has the same reach that b'cast & cable have. Overall I feel like the future will continue to be more and more fragmented. The days of something like movie theaters, 3 TV networks or DVDs dominating distribution are over, there are just too many players and other forms of entertainment (I even think Netflix's most dominant days are behind them).
 
In the past entertainment was bulk. Everyone went to the theater to see the same movies and tuned-in every week to watch the same TV shows. That still happens. My friends and I all watch Walking Dead for example and then we all talk about it on facebook, sometimes for longer than it took to watch the episode. So lets be honest, we aren't just competing with other movies and TV shows theses days, we're competing with facebook, pinterest and youtube videos about smart phone teardowns and philosophical debates. Not your typical traditional programming anymore. Today people indulge in their niche interests.

Hell even look at this forum. It's a form of entertainment that is competing with the films we make. Taking eyeball time away from those films. Most people here won't even watch your film unless you say you shot it on the latest and greatest camera everyone wants. That is what indulges their niche interest, not the story you're telling with your film. You'd probably have more success making a killer trailer with a GH3 and selling the 1 hour behind the scenes documentarty about how great the camera is. You don't even have to make the film the trailer is about.
 
adkimery said:
I feel like you are touching on two separate though related industries, content creation and content distribution.
Click to expand...

Well if all the content is stolen and distributed for free it has to impact the creation budgets. If auto theft was un-policed then it would impact the car makers would it not? Content theft just does not seem to be taken seriously (by 'the authorities')

What is the ratio of stealing to being prepared to pay? - I dont know, Im certainly happy to pay, dont peruse downloading sites, but am amazed to see whole, proper movies on youtube.

I get the feeling that youngsters are more on top of the tech of getting stolen content, and have less qualms about it.

--

As for creation of content, lets assume there is a paying market, Im sure the distribution will become more available to all (like 'anyone' can write an sell an app) so content will be made by many, how the studios fare in that environment is really up to them.

The BBC is an interesting example of this, 'anyone' can make a news website, but the established BBC have still done this best one. Of course that is partly down to budget but not entirely, there are other well funded organisations (like newspapers) who could have competed with them.

As long as the studios stick to selling their core skillset (making/funding big complex movies) they will be fine. If they bury their heads in restrictive distribution practice then they are done for.



S
 
Last edited:
Blurays aren't going to go anytime soon, especially 3D ones, how are you going to get 40GB worth of visual data over our crappy internet connections? Maybe I'm just a stickler for quality, if I'm buying a Bluray, it not just because I want 1080p, but because I want it as close to ideal as possible on my big expensive TV.

This is similar to the mp3 vs lossless argument, except that instead of comparing a 5mb vs. 25mb stream, we're talking about 1GB vs. 30GB - one of these is far less viable. HD YouTube videos are generally under 250mb in size, can you imagine the level of compression needed to get it there?

What is the ratio of stealing to being prepared to pay? - I dont know, Im certainly happy to pay, dont peruse downloading sites, but am amazed to see whole, proper movies on youtube.

I get the feeling that youngsters are more on top of the tech of getting stolen content, and have less qualms about it.
Click to expand...
It depends on whether you care about the actual content, or the quality of the content being shown. I know it sounds strange, but I wouldn't watch something in SD for free if I could pay to watch it in HD instead; even if it's something I really want to watch. In that respect, I wouldn't pirate a film unless it was as close to perfect as I can find, but downloading a 40GB file is a stretch in both bandwidth and storage, just not worth the time and inconvenience for me or anyone I can think of. I also cringe when I have to listen to compressed audio unless I can't get it any other way.
:violin: YMMV.
 
I think you are a fairly extreme case - not in a bad way - just in how you represent the market - I dont think you do in any way more than a stereo nut does, or a vynyl buyer (yes I have a Linn Sondek)

Now I dont like compression but I know younger people who aquire content and it looks pretty good to me, especially on a laytop or a 27 imac

Id say its OK h264 not ultra compressed

Download times are getting faster, surely there is software to have it in the background overnight, while you are at work or whatever

Really who needs physical media (apart from a few 'freaks') - I just cant see it, and once that goes then the playing field is 'flat' between the cat video, the indy and the studio.

S
 
Kholi said:
Wel, it's not that people won't pay... if you have non public broadcast television you already pay. If you have HBO or any similar access, you pay even more, and if you have HULU plus or Netflix etc, then you pay something else.

It's not about people not willing to pay, people ARE Willing to pay... we already do so, begrudgingly or in the case of wanting to watch the final season of Breaking Bad, happily.
Click to expand...
I completely agree but What percentage of their time do people make a point to sit down and watch a prescheduled tv show? Maybe once a week.
 
If there was anything worth watching on TV. Maybe Game of Thrones, but it's like 10 episodes every summer. Also I have bookshelves full of tapes. Anyone remember tape? Ok, I'll shut up now.
 
Kolor-Pikker said:
If there was anything worth watching on TV. Maybe Game of Thrones, but it's like 10 episodes every summer. Also I have bookshelves full of tapes. Anyone remember tape? Ok, I'll shut up now.
Click to expand...

ummm.. Walking Dead, Breaking Bad, Boardwalk Empire, American Horror Story, True Blood. There's a lot of good quality stuff out there. Certain episodes of any of these series puts most of what's on the silver screen to shame. Django Unchained has been the only thing in a good long while at the cinema that I've walked out thinking "Now that was a good movie well worth the $17 we spent.
 
Hmm I'll have to see those. Living in Russia means I can't discover good shows by accident. Seeing anything on TV here by accident typically results in sudden loss of brain cell count.
 
I can bring a younger perspective to the mix here, and I can tell you that most younger people don't care all that much about incredible quality, because they've grown up in a "compressed world", and that will only expand. Many young people (who do a fair share of the pirating of content), have spent most of their teen years consuming content via the web, and now netflix and similar services. Does that mean they don't appreciate high quality? No, but most are perfectly content with some .h264 DVD rip off the internet (and as morgan said above, those usually look fine on a laptop, desktop, or mobile device, which are the primary consumption devices for most young people). The US lags significantly in our Broadband capabilities, but I'd wager in the coming years that will change, companies have to realize the power of online consumption, and internet providers have to come into the mix. Whether it's a government mandated "utility", or just because they see dollar signs, we will see a day when BluRay-quality content can be download in a matter of minutes, but that's still a ways down the track.

I live in Knoxville, TN, which is the corporate home of Regal Entertainment (and we are one of the largest consumers of movies per capita in the US), and our theaters are jam packed a majority of the time. Granted Regal has a "flagship" theater right next to the most affluent area of town (average income 150-300k). There is definitely an audience for large scale content, and nothing the average consumer has access to can match it.

I see this as a golden age in a way. Hollywood can maintain it's status as the producer of "blockbusters" that the average budget filmmaker can't produce, whether due to budget issues, or staff issues. While we also have platforms to produce content for the masses, get noticed semi-easily, and even perhaps make a few dollars. Instead of worrying about hiring a distribution company, we can work deals with Netflix, iTunes, etc, or simply put our content on youtube for free.

Studios will continue to exist for years to come, they may go away someday, but I can't see that day coming anytime soon. People still love that big-budget experience, and people love having loads of original, homemade content that they can also consume. We are in a society that is consuming 24/7, and there's plenty of room for everyone.
 
I think there is a place for cinema.

I mean you can buy beer and dance at home but its not the same as going to a club. Same thing a 50FT screen and a big audience can be great.

But I think the big income must come from sales of downloads, and that is not clear with the piracy nicking 50-99% (?) of the market, unpoliced??

And of course big companies will be the only one to be able to venture capital complex movies - again thats threatened by piracy IMO

S
 
Kolor-Pikker said:
Blurays aren't going to go anytime soon, especially 3D ones, how are you going to get 40GB worth of visual data over our crappy internet connections? Maybe I'm just a stickler for quality, if I'm buying a Bluray, it not just because I want 1080p, but because I want it as close to ideal as possible on my big expensive TV.

This is similar to the mp3 vs lossless argument, except that instead of comparing a 5mb vs. 25mb stream, we're talking about 1GB vs. 30GB - one of these is far less viable. HD YouTube videos are generally under 250mb in size, can you imagine the level of compression needed to get it there?


It depends on whether you care about the actual content, or the quality of the content being shown. I know it sounds strange, but I wouldn't watch something in SD for free if I could pay to watch it in HD instead; even if it's something I really want to watch. In that respect, I wouldn't pirate a film unless it was as close to perfect as I can find, but downloading a 40GB file is a stretch in both bandwidth and storage, just not worth the time and inconvenience for me or anyone I can think of. I also cringe when I have to listen to compressed audio unless I can't get it any other way.
:violin: YMMV.
Click to expand...

Seems to work just fine for me using my Apple TV. Nice crisp 1080p on my 73in Dlp. Or jump into the other room and stream to the 60in LED. Or jump into my office and stream to my 200in projection. They all look great. Streaming is the future and we just have to get used to it.
40 gigs download? Have you heard of cloud based storage?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top