That's my point too. Sometimes Apple has input at an early stage and sometimes they don't just like every other streaming company. But that doesn't and shouldn't matter to viewers or awards ceremonies.
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 TV+ Film 'CODA' Wins Best Picture at 2022 Oscars
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That list could be extended to any of their products or services. But equally, many people would humbly disagree with you. You need only look at Apple's services revenue for evidence of that. People don't tend to continue paying for a product or service that they don't enjoy/get value in using. They're the kinds of revenues that most companies can only dream of which speaks volumes about general customer satisfaction (Not folks posting on tech forums).
"Just" buying distribution rights can be no small thing to an independent production. In this context, distribution = publication ("to make public"). Without distribution there's no audience. And that, of course, is the point of making a show (well other than Bialystock and Bloom's scheme to produce a guaranteed Broadway flop). Without an audience there's no money, no fame, and thin prospects for making the next show. The audience may pay-as-they-go (theatrical release, downloads, DVD/Bluray), or the audience may be pre-paid from subscriber revenue (cable/streaming). And, of course in most cases film distribution is a combination of those.
CODA's filmmakers had some very nice things to say about Apple. Some distributors are going to simply buy something and exhibit it unchanged. Others are going to demand "improvements." Some will just throw it against the wall to see if it sticks, others will spent time and money on promotion and marketing. Generally speaking, the more a distributor invests in promoting the film's success, the better chance the filmmakers will have of making another film with a higher budget, even better marketing, a bigger audience, and of course a larger paycheck.
No, Apple did not produce this film, which is why there was nobody from Apple up on the Oscar podium. The finished film's qualities were clear to those who saw it screened by Sundance, hence the bidding war and the high price paid by Apple (and the principal purpose of Sundance is to connect independent filmmakers with distribution opportunities). Considering Amazon was the #2 bidder you can't say that it's just because Apple has more money than anyone else. Apple and Amazon have both invested far more in their Foundation and Lord of the Rings series (respectively), and undoubtedly have far more to say about the production of those projects. This is "merely" a case of a "small" film being recognized for its merits and given a showcase.
Overall, this showcase has worked out very well for everyone. There's glory for all involved, which will pay off in different ways depending upon who they are. For the filmmakers it translates to opportunity to make future projects with better funding. For Apple, which sells Apple TV+ to a worldwide audience (and not only to people who own Apple hardware)... The U.S. subscription price of $5/month translates to $60/year/subscriber. If the success of CODA results in a worldwide increase of 500,000 subscribers, CODA is bought and paid for - a successful advertising campaign. Considering Apple TV+ has an estimated 22 million paid subscribers... that's just a bit more than $1 spent per subscriber from Apple's existing revenue stream. In other words, CODA has already been bought and paid for, so any boost to the reputation and subscribership of TV+ is gravy.
CODA's filmmakers had some very nice things to say about Apple. Some distributors are going to simply buy something and exhibit it unchanged. Others are going to demand "improvements." Some will just throw it against the wall to see if it sticks, others will spent time and money on promotion and marketing. Generally speaking, the more a distributor invests in promoting the film's success, the better chance the filmmakers will have of making another film with a higher budget, even better marketing, a bigger audience, and of course a larger paycheck.
No, Apple did not produce this film, which is why there was nobody from Apple up on the Oscar podium. The finished film's qualities were clear to those who saw it screened by Sundance, hence the bidding war and the high price paid by Apple (and the principal purpose of Sundance is to connect independent filmmakers with distribution opportunities). Considering Amazon was the #2 bidder you can't say that it's just because Apple has more money than anyone else. Apple and Amazon have both invested far more in their Foundation and Lord of the Rings series (respectively), and undoubtedly have far more to say about the production of those projects. This is "merely" a case of a "small" film being recognized for its merits and given a showcase.
Overall, this showcase has worked out very well for everyone. There's glory for all involved, which will pay off in different ways depending upon who they are. For the filmmakers it translates to opportunity to make future projects with better funding. For Apple, which sells Apple TV+ to a worldwide audience (and not only to people who own Apple hardware)... The U.S. subscription price of $5/month translates to $60/year/subscriber. If the success of CODA results in a worldwide increase of 500,000 subscribers, CODA is bought and paid for - a successful advertising campaign. Considering Apple TV+ has an estimated 22 million paid subscribers... that's just a bit more than $1 spent per subscriber from Apple's existing revenue stream. In other words, CODA has already been bought and paid for, so any boost to the reputation and subscribership of TV+ is gravy.
"Coda" in Mexico is on Amazon Prime video
You mean the ones made by big studios with stars under contract so they couldn’t appear in any other studio productions?
Why do so many people have heavily rose-tinted glasses on that make them think that everything was wonderful before this?
Because CODA’s producers had already signed some advanced global deals before Sundance.
Let's face it. We're going to see a lot more theatrical movies being distributed and/or financed by the likes of Amazon, Apple and Netflix. Why? Because they have the cash to finance these projects nowadays and a successful "indie" film builds up caché for these companies.
Indeed. To put it another way, Amazon Prime "bought" this Oscar winner even before Apple did.
Yeah, right on, bro… And email was a slap in the face to written correspondence delivered through traditional hand-delivered postal systems.
Indie films used to be the minority in terms of Scripts and actors, but being that it’s really not about finding ‘top-tier paid actors’, it’s more about the storyline that’s captivating the viewer today. So in that case, there’s loads of market potential for companies like Netflix and Apple to focus more on the content of the story, rather than the paycheck to the highest paid actor.
Case in point: CODA
I can't believe this movie won best picture against Dune and The Power of the Dog, smh...
They paid $25 million for the film and was wondering how many new subscribers they would need to add to offset that. Plus if you never subscribe you may never see it since most streaming services don't or won't sell physical copies of what they own. Some license a film or two (Netflix The Irishman comes to mind). I'll never subscribe and wonder if I‘ll ever get a chance to see this.
Yeah, but avatar sucked despite it’s box office numbers, and the dark knight was good but not exactly Oscar worthy. Seriously, to even consider those films for an Oscar is ludicrous. More so with Avatar, but still.
I have no problem with the fact that a remake can win an Oscar. My only problem is Apple calling it an "Apple Original".
This will definitely give Apple TV+ more street cred.
To be honest I love the
TV experience, as it's so much cleaner, polished and streamlined than the competitors.
I just think it needs a few (even just 2) big hitters tv series and that's it.
We can day Apple TV+ has a small catalogue, and it's true, however the average quality is much higher.
On Prime it was worse, but not horrible, and on Netflix...some very good shows among an endless ocean of crap.
Once again, a couple more high quality shows and Apple TV can really become something big.
To be honest I love the
TV experience, as it's so much cleaner, polished and streamlined than the competitors.I just think it needs a few (even just 2) big hitters tv series and that's it.
We can day Apple TV+ has a small catalogue, and it's true, however the average quality is much higher.
On Prime it was worse, but not horrible, and on Netflix...some very good shows among an endless ocean of crap.
Once again, a couple more high quality shows and Apple TV can really become something big.
Thank you. It took 68 replies to mention this. So many experts and not a single word about the original one.To add a detail, CODA is in fact the American remake of a French movie , named "La Famille Belier". It was a great hit here in France. The lead actor, Louane, was a young singe whose reputation rocketed thanks to the movie.
Clearly not the target demo here. Of all the nominated films, I only saw “Dune,” (meh) and hadn’t even heard of the others including CODA. But that’s been pretty much the case for the last couple of decades worth of Oscars. Yeah, really, really don’t care. But good for the cast and others associated with the film. It has been a long time since the Oscars broadcast could be considered “must see TV.”
Uh huh, they focus on the best?! Yeah right, and I suppose that explains why they have so few paying customers?
They have a couple of great shows, but most are rubbish that only appeals to an extreme minority. And I get the feeling that the extreme minority tastes, i.e., Timmy's personal tastes, are more of a focus than anything else. It's like this service is a vehicle for Timmy's tastes, and perhaps with a sideline attempt to turn the American mainstream mind onto watching this rubbish, by luring it in with sports broadcasting, which won't work, as they will watch the footy, try out one or two other shows, and promptly turn them off in disgust.
Apple is certainly all about making the most... money.
They used to be focused on making the best... 15 years ago.
Now they just make good enough.
I’ll have to watch this. I drove by the set numerous times. The school (Gloucester High School) building is actually Briscoe Middle School in Beverly, MA (near Gloucester). I went there for grades 6-8 from 2007-2010. Beverly has a new middle school now, but it was surreal seeing my old classrooms in a movie.
www.salemnews.com
www.salemnews.com
patch.com
Briscoe declared surplus; city to seek development ideas
BEVERLY — Future reuse of the Briscoe Middle School is moving closer to reality.
Briscoe building transformed into Gloucester High for movie
BEVERLY — The former Briscoe Middle School could soon be turned into housing or a community arts center. But for now, it's taking on the role of a movie set.
Beverly Selling Vacant School To Developer
Harborlight Community Partners will pay $600,000 for the Brscoe school and convert it into affordable housing for seniors.
You need to maybe look up what plagiarised mean. CODA won Best Adapted Screenplay. I'll give you five guesses as to what it was adapted from.