Apple Negotiating to Offer Rentals for Movies Still in Theaters, but at a Price

[GeneralChang]

I wish they'd lower the price of regular iTunes movie rentals. Why can I rent an actual physical disc from Redbox for $2, but renting a digital copy from iTunes cost $4?

Because Apple has to pen actual content distribution deals with the distribution companies who would much rather you purchase than rent, while Redbox can kinda spit in their faces and just buy discs from box stores.

It's actually all kinda a horrible mess. Because Hollywood.

 

[eyeseeyou]

I wish they'd lower the price of regular iTunes movie rentals. Why can I rent an actual physical disc from Redbox for $2, but renting a digital copy from iTunes cost $4?

I think the extra $2 is worth skipping the drive to redbox + rental fee plus the ride back to return the disc.

 

[cliffster82]

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.

I get the point completely. You're probably right. I think in *most* instances, a person/couple is going to see that they can rent the "new flick" for $39 (or 29, or 49), and they're then going to say "are you kidding me?!" At least in the theater I'm paying for an experience. My living room is not an experience. And they have better audio..

There's got to be a fine line. Maybe it is 20 bucks (price of HD purchase). My intuition tells me people will compare to what stuff costs on iTunes, not theater seats. I'm likely wrong, who knows. It certainly is a cool idea. I can't typically go to movies (kids), so I would definitely consider this, just not for 50 bucks!

 

[GeneralChang]

$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.

Or unless they have more than one person they're paying for (families).

 

[StayPuft]

Since when are movie tickets $10 each for adults?

Costs more than that in some places.

 

[Tompkinson]

Would you have the guts to meet the man and tell him to his face what you have been wasting your posts on?

I like the phrase "wasting your posts" ;-)

 

[iChrist]

$50 dollars for a rental? i guess thats courageous too

Eddie 'Cue the fool' is negotiating, he still thinks he has any sort of leverage.

 

[GeneralChang]

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.

Even from the perspective that there are plenty of movies my family wouldn't want to watch with me, I don't think it would be difficult for me to round up four friends who did and get them all into the same room for two hours. We'd all save money and hassle.

 

[reyesmac]

Playing movies at home that have been in the theater only one day would allow people to create the best looking, best sounding CAM copies of the movies still in theaters before their first weekend box office numbers roll in. This would create a whole new subsection of pirates that would not even bother to ever see the movie at all in the theater because the cam copy is almost as good as the DVD copy. It will also cut down on repeat viewings because the home CAM copy will be good enough to satisfy the need to rewatch the movie.

I think they will settle on selling movies that have been in theaters for 3 weekends already, or however many weekends they usually need to make their money back. That will cut down on the hit from the great CAM copies this will create.

They had problems with digital music stores because the MP3's were good enough. They fixed that by making the purchase of songs so convenient and affordable that you didn't have to pirate to listen to music. But the movie industry does not want to give up its hold on how much it charges so I don't think its ever going to be cheap to see a hot new movie.

 

[ohio.emt]

$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?

Heck my local first run theater is $5 a ticket. You can get your ticket a large popcorn and drink for $11.35

 

[Scott6666]

Maybe they can build a new ATV with a built in web cam, machine count the # of people watching (average over time maybe) and bill you per person!

 

[jimthing]

really just priced my wife and 2 kids for standard= $58 and Imax = $ 87.00 without any concessions

View attachment 676782

Sorry to be pedantic, but $58.86 rounds UP to $59, not down to $58.

 

[KanosWRX]

Needs to be a high bit rate possibly 4K/HDR and support Atmos and DTS:X . Then I'll pay what I know they will be asking... probably a 40 dollar one watch rental.

 

[Bubba Satori]

So, straight to DVD becomes straight to iTunes.

 

[GeneralChang]

Heck my local first run theater is $5 a ticket. You can get your ticket a large popcorn and drink for $11.35

I haven't been able to do that since the 90's... Where do you live? How's the housing market there right now? Are the schools decent? How about employment opportunities?

 

[TB422]

How can Apple price a rental with such a wide range of regional differences? In Chicago we pay about $15 for a first run movie. According to Variety the 2016 average ticket is $8.73. So does the entire country pay an average price? Do costs vary by location?

 

[TurboPGT!]

FINALLY. I've been advocating this for years. Going to see a movie in the theatre is not just expensive, but is very difficult for people with busy schedules, and children.

$50 to rent a movie that is in theaters and not available through any other means is perfectly reasonable and would be extremely popular.

I wouldn't do it for every movie, but for instance: SW Rogue One is about to come out. I'm certain that its going to be weeks before the stars align properly that I can take the wife to go see it.

If I could instead rent it myself and watch it one night once everyone is bed...you can bet I would.
[doublepost=1481151539][/doublepost]

Wow, $50!!!!?! That's insane.

Why?

If I wanted to go see a movie tonight, it would cost me at least that much for my ticket, my wifes ticket, my kids ticket, popcorn, drinks, gas, etc. etc. We'd probably have to eat dinner out too.

Its not the least bit insane.

 

[zukeveui]

$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?

In Europe its around 12 euros on everage, sometimes a bit more, sometimes a bit less.

 

[Armandodj]

Lol! This funny $25 $50 for new movies I rather buy the Blu ray or the 4K format for $24 bucks and watch the movie on my own whenever I want to in my own home theater. Apple you most be tripping!!!!

 

[sir1963nz]

Seems like every few months this same topic comes up but with a different potential streaming partner.

Cost for Me + SO + baby sitter > $50 so I'd be interested if this ever actually came to market. I wouldn't do it frequently, but I'd do it for movies I really wanted to see.

I already don't.
I have stopped going to the movie theatre because of the cost. I am willing to wait for 3 or so months for the DVD to come out.
Having the DVD I can play as often as I like for 2/3 the cost of going to the movies seems a much better deal, especially as I can pause it, rewind it, replay it when ever I choose.

I even frequent the local 2nd hand shops and buy used DVDs for $2-$5 for movies I dont currently own.

Too many movies are just special effect wankfests with sod all story line (Superman vs Batman) and I am glad I only wasted $5 + 2 hours of my life on it.

There is ZERO chance I will pay that kind of premium just so I don't have to wait a few months, and in the meantime, all the reviews come out and I know if the cost is worth even the DVD.

 

[Macs4u]

Why don't you just stop trying to put every tradition out of service Apple?? People love going to the cinema. Just forget the idea.

 

[macduke]

As a young parent, the whole point of the movies for us is to get away from the children and not worry about keeping them alive for a few hours. Since having kids, time is flying by so fast that I don't even realize when most movies are in theaters. For example, I'm a Star Trek fan, but completely missed the new movie launch this summer. One day I see it pop up on iTunes and so I just buy the thing. I was so confused why it was already out on iTunes but that's parent life for you. I don't know if the actual period between theatrical and home release has shortened over the years, but it sure feels like it.

Another problem I see with this is ticket pricing in non-coastal areas. We live in the midwest and the two of us can still get tickets for $7/person and it's rarely over $9-10/person. $14 on a big screen beats $25 at home any day. $25 makes more sense if you get a big group of people together to watch a movie. $50 is insanity. The only way I'd be willing to pay anywhere near $50 is for day one Star Wars Episode 8, if I'm feeling really sick and can't go to the theatre, and I also get to keep the movie indefinitely. I guess I'm just too cheap, but it's also why I like living in the midwest where I can have a big home and nice wooded yard for cheap. I still don't rent movies on iTunes unless we're snowed in because it's just too expensive. Redbox is only $2 for a blu-ray and they are everywhere.

 

[Mac 128]

Lol! This funny $25 $50 for new movies I rather buy the Blu ray or the 4K format for $24 bucks and watch the movie on my own whenever I want to in my own home theater. Apple you most be tripping!!!!

Whenever I see posts like this on a topic as easy as this -- and there are many on this thread -- I feel like I should add the person to my ignore list, since I'm unlikely to agree with, or be interested in their opinion as it relates to Apple, or anything else.

Seriously, is it that hard to do the math for what an evening out costs for a family of four, or even a couple, much less the hassle and inconvenience, to see a brand new movie only in theaters for the next 3-6 months before it arrives on home video?

While $50 to see a movie may not be worth it to you, there's an instant value for many, many others.

You either spend the money to see the movie in theaters, or you wait until it comes out on video. The only difference is whether the experience of going out and seeing it is worth the same expense to stay home and see it. For many, it will be.

 

[dlewis23]

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.

IDK what movie theater your going to but yea, $10 isn't even a kids ticket where I am. Its $18 - $22 per adult where I am depending on the theater or time you go.

At $20 - $25 this would be a good deal, $50 is just too much.

 

[trifid]

As a young parent, the whole point of the movies for us is to get away from the children and not worry about keeping them alive for a few hours. Since having kids, time is flying by so fast that I don't even realize when most movies are in theaters. For example, I'm a Star Trek fan, but completely missed the new movie launch this summer. One day I see it pop up on iTunes and so I just buy the thing. I was so confused why it was already out on iTunes but that's parent life for you. I don't know if the actual period between theatrical and home release has shortened over the years, but it sure feels like it.

Another problem I see with this is ticket pricing in non-coastal areas. We live in the midwest and the two of us can still get tickets for $7/person and it's rarely over $9-10/person. $14 on a big screen beats $25 at home any day. $25 makes more sense if you get a big group of people together to watch a movie. $50 is insanity. The only way I'd be willing to pay anywhere near $50 is for day one Star Wars Episode 8, if I'm feeling really sick and can't go to the theatre, and I also get to keep the movie indefinitely. I guess I'm just too cheap, but it's also why I like living in the midwest where I can have a big home and nice wooded yard for cheap. I still don't rent movies on iTunes unless we're snowed in because it's just too expensive. Redbox is only $2 for a blu-ray and they are everywhere.

From another fellow trekkie, peace and long life friend. I agree, personally if I really want to see a movie I'll see it on day 1, otherwise I can wait a few months.

In the mean time there are thousands of other movies that I haven't seen yet.

This $50 after 2 weeks seems like extremely niche appeal that no one is going to care about.

I'd even find it embarrassing to tell my family/friends that I'm paying $50 for the movie.