This may mark a fundamental change in the movies that Hollywood produces / can produce. Can you put $200 million into a blockbuster if your entire potential audience has already paid their $15/mo per household (to be split between multiple releases that month)? No chance to get more money by getting them to come back to watch again, no word of mouth / hype getting more people into the theater - you’re basically capping your movie’s potential revenue at $15 per household, or maybe $7.50, or $5, if they watch other movies that come out that month.Studios may end up regretting it, though. In the long run, will streaming revenue be enough to make up for what is lost from cinemas? In general, I don’t think customers are willing to pay quite as much for streaming content as they do for cinema tickets. Not the same experience.
It may also mean studios, say, not dropping more than one movie a month (like at the start of summer, or holiday season), because they want to spread out the profits over multiple months.
But, in any case, this may spell doom for, say, future Marvel-like movies, if it just doesn’t pay to make them with as large of budgets as they have been doing previously.