Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Thats kind of cool. I also don't understand why it takes so long for a movie to go on sale after its in the theater. Especially a digital copy. I need Fantastic Beasts. Now.
 
$25 to $50 for a rental while it's in theaters? I'd be in for $25 to $35. Go above that and I'd just wait to rent the movie at a much lower price after it's out of theaters.

For $25 to $35, it's worth it to not have to fight traffic, find a place to park, and deal with a theater that, in many cases, is filthy. Plus, I can sit at home and basically have a bottomless Coke from the 2 liter in my fridge that cost me $1.00 as opposed to paying $5.00 for one drink at the theater.

Once my kid is old enough to want to go to the theater, though, that changes the dynamic and I would be willing to pay upwards of $50. Right now, it's just me and my wife going to movies when there's a movie we want to see and we can find a babysitter.
 
Last edited:
$50 dollars for a rental? i guess thats courageous too

For family of 4 in Canada

movietx4.png

That's $45 before tax for a non-3D show. Plus the mandatory treats and lunch/dinner (depends on the show time). Watching movies in theater can easily cost me close to $100.

I am not saying that I will definitely use this all the time, but it will definitely be in consideration for some kids' movies.
 
One problem I see with this is that the price makes a lot more sense for larger families, while smaller families and single people get the shaft. Since they don't know how many people are watching, everyone has subsidize the costs for larger families/groups.
 
$12-15. No higher (price of an average primetime ticket). Or very, very few people will ever do this unless they're made of money.

Average US household is 2.54 people (so we'll round that up to three) which means $36-45 for just tickets to go see a movie (concessions not included). Convenience is an added value which makes up the difference. The goal of this isn't to make it cheaper than going to a theater (they don't want to discourage people from going to the theaters). It's to give an option to people that want to see a first run movie, but don't want to leave their house.

It's like paying GrubHub to go pickup your food from the local Chinese place because you really want Chinese, but you don't want to leave your house. The overall cost of the meal is more (it's not like Chinese place charges less for take-out orders), but you have the convenience of getting it delivered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ackmondual
I'll need to see what the actual pricing will be if it happens but I like the idea. We have people over to watch movies all the time.
 
Couldn't care less since Apple is one of the only major digital movie renters who still abides by the moronic "30 days to start, 24 hours to finish" rental policy. Amazon, Google, Sony etc all let you have multiple days to finish a movie (or watch it more than once, share it with a family member etc etc).
Yeah, I really hate that 24 hour thing. Even just 36 hours would make a huge difference since that essentially gets you a second night to finish up if you have to interrupt it for any of a thousand reasons. For that reason I very rarely rent from iTunes.
 
I'd pay this if only to avoid going to the cinema where all you hear are foreign students translating the film to their friend, popcorn crunching, sweetie rattling, people kicking the back of your seat and those filthy seats. Bring it on.

This exactly .. I'd pay $100 for not having 'the public' in my theater experience.

Not to mention pausing for whatever.
 
Three people going to the theater can easily add up to $50.

Also, Steve Jobs at All Things D 2010 said he believed that people would be willing to spend "a bunch of money" to watch a first run movie at home before the DVD/blu-ray release.

There's no question some people would be willing to do it. As someone else said, if you've got 6 friends over it actually beats the theater experience assuming you've got a decent setup at home.
 
Only worth it if you have a really good TV to enjoy a movie. I would pay ~$30 for a movie that I can enjoy on my own time, being able to pause, rewind, seems pretty cool.

Very true. If I had the choice of watching a new Star Wars movie at home vs imax I'm picking imax. For certain movies I don't care what the cost are. I almost didn't watch Avatar in the theater and to this day I don't regret paying the money to see it at imax. I had tears in my eyes when beholding the visuals. That can't be reproduced easily at home and I have a 4K TV and a 1080p projector.
But if the 4K Blu-ray version of Rouge One came out at the same time as the theater release I would quickly buy a Xbox One S and watch it 5 times in a row.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ohio.emt
It costs me and my wife $15 x 2 = $30, plus $30 for a babysitter = $60 just to go to the theaters to watch a movie.

$50 is CHEAPER and also much more convenient to be able to watch it at home after the kids are asleep. $50 is well worth it. You have to think about other lifestyles. $50 is not good for a single person. They have cheaper options to see the movie. Other people don't.

It's your fault for having kids.
 
I wouldn't mind paying if I had more of a choice but seems that theatres are locked into certain brands of candy etc. Therefore I presume they are getting big money from these candy companies.

That's not really how it works. I worked a theater is high school and part of college. Realistically, they order the candy from a distributor and can stock whatever they like. Soda is a package deal. You can't really offer coke and pepsi without upsetting people. We could have stocked whatever we wanted and had a huge variety. Ultimately variety leads to people becoming unsure and taking a long time to decide. It also means more inventory and possible outs/shortages. The theater I worked at didn't get any special deal on candy that any other distributor could get. I'm sure some huge national chains get some sort of volume discount but realistically they're still a drop in the bucket compared to what walmart/target sell and for that reason I'm sure the discounts aren't very impressive.
 
This would be cool. The last time I went to the movies the tickets were $30 each (Tysons Corner Mall) for the Dolby Digital experience. It was certainly worth it, though. It was quite luxurious with the giant reclining seats, absolutely spotless and there was a ton of space between the seats.
 
It cost $20 for 2 to go to the theater and $20 for 2 for food and drinks. I don't see the perks here because I'd rather just buy the movie for $20 or watch it on Redbox for $2 about. Maybe $10 imo it would be worth it for some movies but will probably never happen.

Or wait for the 5 buck deals on Itunes and own it. Movies are not worth that kind of money, they just arent. I would happily do without for those prices. Don't care what they paint it as.
 
My God there's some sad people on this site. People OK with paying 50dollars to watch more God damn TV in a house. Surely, it's the experience of going outside of the house, being around other people etc at a cinema?
I think that £4.50 is overpriced to rent a film on iTunes so these price ideas are pure insane - in your own house. Wake up people - seriously, ditch your God damn TVs are get a real life!!!
So many sad people!
 
Would probably get a better response if they had an Apple TV that supported 4K streaming available. Unless they plan on releasing both at the same time.
 
Calm down, it was just his/her opinion

No, if you read all of his posts and his username, he has a vendetta against Tim Cook.

I am actually not defending TC as there is a lot of unfortunate and questionable stuff going on at Apple.

That has not been sorted out yet.

But, that poster has no qualifications whatsoever to run Apple. I have an aversion to keyboard assassins who wouldn't dare to say to a persons face what they are posting anonymously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wondercow
My God there's some sad people on this site. People OK with paying 50dollars to watch more God damn TV in a house. Surely, it's the experience of going outside of the house, being around other people etc at a cinema?
I think that £4.50 is overpriced to rent a film on iTunes so these price ideas are pure insane - in your own house. Wake up people - seriously, ditch your God damn TVs are get a real life!!!
So many sad people!

Thanks for trolling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LatinaC09
I'd use it occasionally for $25. In NYC that's pretty much the cost of going to see a movie anyway and at home I can get whatever drinks or food I want.
 
Can't remember the last time I paid for a movie... I don't think piracy would increase, but the quality of torrents would just be better and you'd get them a little sooner. I don't think $50 seems outrageous, I have a home theater and I could sit down 5 couples comfortably in my basement, we'd all split the price $10/couple and watch it on my 145 inch projector ... but again I don't pay for movies :D
 
$25 Sounds like a good deal to me. Even $50 is cheap.

Movie ticket is $18 , popcorn , candy and a drink is usually $15. If I take a date it's x2




Since when are movie tickets $10 each for adults?


They're $9.35 at the theater I go to, and $5.50 for a matinée. Plus it's a restaurant and they have real food. They have recliner seats and current movies. Where is it $18? Even the Regal and AMC theaters around here are < $10 a ticket. $50 doesn't interest me. $25, maybe.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.