Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Movies Could Premiere in Cinemas Weeks Before Being Released on Apple TV+
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh not just marketing materials. Flat out lying to shareholders via disingenuous accounting. They are claiming that as $60 worth of services revenue, when given away for free.
You’ll need to connect some dots for me there, pal.
For me it looks like they know exactly what they are doing.
The issue with doing this goes back decades. Content owners and distributors have had deals in place that make if difficult or very expensive to license content. These deals are per market, not country. In the US, Amazon, Netflix etc sometimes has to negotiate with multiple entities for content. This is the main reason distributors have been heavily going towards original content.
even Live TV broadcast companies (cable/satellite) have started producing original content. People always blame Pay TV providers for increase in their monthly bills. Most don’t realize it’s the content owners rights issue that causes the increase.
Releasing in theaters isn’t “risky”, because it will build demand for titles and a streaming service people haven’t heard of yet.
They are claiming no such thing. Nor are they ”giving it away for free” - you need to buy a device, which is not free.
I’m guessing this has just as much to do with marketing (if Apple wins an Oscar that will be great marketing) and the requests of the actors or technical artists. Actors benefit from Oscar nominations and wins as well. Telling someone to spend so much time on a project that is ineligible for some awards may put some actors off and Apple is looking for big names... just a guess. Plus - I don’t believe it will impact AppleTV+ sales much at all. I think it will increase marketing and public interest in the service.
Not sure how this is a step forward.
Many times when movies are announced, I'm excited. Then when they come out in theaters 2 months to 2 years later, they often don't warrant a theater visit. By the time they're on the what-used-to-be-a-dollar-theater, excitement has waned even more. Then when they hit Apple TV for "Purchase only (Rental coming soon)" I'm even less excited, and pissed off because I can't rent it. Then by the time I can rent it, I just don't care anymore because I'm excited about 20 other movies that are coming out soon. Then the cycle repeats.
Movies need to be available on Apple TV when they are ready to be shown to the world. Period. Charge more money if you want. But make them available. You never know what someone's initial excitement is worth to them.
Many times when movies are announced, I'm excited. Then when they come out in theaters 2 months to 2 years later, they often don't warrant a theater visit. By the time they're on the what-used-to-be-a-dollar-theater, excitement has waned even more. Then when they hit Apple TV for "Purchase only (Rental coming soon)" I'm even less excited, and pissed off because I can't rent it. Then by the time I can rent it, I just don't care anymore because I'm excited about 20 other movies that are coming out soon. Then the cycle repeats.
Movies need to be available on Apple TV when they are ready to be shown to the world. Period. Charge more money if you want. But make them available. You never know what someone's initial excitement is worth to them.
Too many idiots ruining what is now, quite an expensive experience. Phone screens dazzling, chatting away. Why pay lots of money to be irritated? I miss the impact of seeing movies on the big screen, that's why the first chance I get, I'll have a dedicated cinema room in my house.
I used to love going to the theater once a week but stopped because the local theaters don’t play the sound volume loud enough to drown out the sound of noisy patrons. So now I try to only go to IMAX films because they always play the audio loud.
Apple's core business (hardware sales) is slowing. That's why they've been trying to grow their services business. That's what this would fall under since content from it goes on their Apple TV+ streaming service.
Licensing content and making as much of it available under 1 service like what Netflix was trying to do would be best for customers since we wouldn't have to subscribe to multiple services.
But everyone wants to control their content now which means Apple might not be able to get a show or movie for their Apple TV+ service. Studios are either keeping it for their own service or they're making hundreds of millions from licensed it out to another streaming service (Netflix reportedly paid over $500 million for an exclusive 5 year streaming deal for "Seinfeld" while NBCUniversal paid $500 million for "The Office" and WarnerMedia (AT&T) paid $425 million for "Friends").
That's a good amount of money when Apple is already spending between $8 million and $15 million per episode and they get to keep and do whatever they want with it afterwards (put it on their own service; license it out to another streaming service; sell downloads and physical discs of an entire season) and keep the money to themselves.
All the streaming services (Netflix, Amazon, etc) do this with their 'important' films. They find a small-run couple theaters to screen their movie for the required three weeks, then launch it worldwide on their service. Usually hardly anyone even hears about the theatrical run. It's just a way around the Academy's outdated rules, and has no impact on the way people will receive the movies or Apple's service.
Exactly right. I prefer the experience of my home theater system for the reasons you mention.
For the same reason product quality/reliability ratings are important. It helps to attract viewers. It helps to grow the careers of actor, actresses, writers, producers, etc.
Get AMC A-List and see at least one Premium showing, i.e. IMAX or Dolby Cinema, a month and you break even. I love going to the cinema since MoviePass *RIP* and A-List made it reasonable again.
Yes. It's in the WSJ article
Among Apple’s first major theatrical releases is Sofia Coppola’s “On the Rocks,” which stars Rashida Jones as a young woman reconnecting with her eccentric father, to be played by Bill Murray. Apple is eyeing a mid-2020 release, perhaps following a premiere at a high-profile event such as the Cannes Film Festival, people familiar with the situation said.
“On the Rocks” is being produced through Apple’s partnership with A24, an independent film production company known for such art-house releases as the best-picture winner “Moonlight” and “Hereditary.” Apple and A24 signed a multiyear partnership last year.
Apple has also talked with movie theater representatives about a documentary called “The Elephant Queen,” which it plans to release this year. The documentary—about an elephant leading her herd across Africa—is slated to debut Nov. 1 on TV+ and also air in theaters so that it is eligible for awards consideration, according to people familiar with the plans.
Yep. Been doing it for awhile. People don't realize that, in addition to the over 30-40 announced series, there is much more going on. Here's one example
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/15/app...reement-with-a24-to-make-original-movies.html
Much to the chagrin of the Apple Hate Club, Apple TV Plus will start out as the number 1by far streaming service in the world THIS YEAR, with over 200 million subscribers, and with what they have in the pipeline to keep rolling out already will keep them there, with billions of revenue pouring in.
Last edited:
Absolutely stupid. Screw the studios. Apple should take away all of their profits and drive traffic to its own platform. Why have an AppleTV+ if you can't get Apple's own releases first? Stoopid stoopid stoopid. Apple is the 800lb gorilla here and it should start acting like one.
Fire that moron Eddie Cue and someone please tell him that he has fatty liver disease.
Fire that moron Eddie Cue and someone please tell him that he has fatty liver disease.
i think this decision has to do with enticing major Directors and Producers into working with apple's platform.
not just for these people to be able to compete for Best Director, or whatever, but also due to the whole community of workers in the film industry wanting to be seen as supportive of what is considered as good for the industry and for the industry's workers as a whole.
in 2019, to still have this dichotomy of Film and (what is called) TV is amazingly stupid.
really rediculous to be talking about distribution technique (movie house or internet), projection technique (projector or pushed pixels), etc.
many years ago there was snobbery against tv actors. no longer.
there are two factors that are important: actors' ability to draw viewers, and content's ability to draw viewers.
film, movie, short, video, series, mini-series, tv program.
what does the word TV actually mean anyway?
netflix has tv series. apple tv has films.
TV in the original sense of the meaning tele (long distance) vision as a word has new appeal due to its ability to project content over the net. not as a way to differentiate itself from the world of "films/movies".
not just for these people to be able to compete for Best Director, or whatever, but also due to the whole community of workers in the film industry wanting to be seen as supportive of what is considered as good for the industry and for the industry's workers as a whole.
in 2019, to still have this dichotomy of Film and (what is called) TV is amazingly stupid.
really rediculous to be talking about distribution technique (movie house or internet), projection technique (projector or pushed pixels), etc.
many years ago there was snobbery against tv actors. no longer.
there are two factors that are important: actors' ability to draw viewers, and content's ability to draw viewers.
film, movie, short, video, series, mini-series, tv program.
what does the word TV actually mean anyway?
netflix has tv series. apple tv has films.
TV in the original sense of the meaning tele (long distance) vision as a word has new appeal due to its ability to project content over the net. not as a way to differentiate itself from the world of "films/movies".
Last edited: