MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

More Of Disney's Alice Mess

Disney is busy selling the notion that it won some victory by getting a deal done with Odeon in the UK to show Alice In Wonderland with a 14 week theatrical window. But it’s not quite that simple. They bought the right to experiment with a shorter window 3 times in the next 2 years, while also giving Odeon improved terms on the split of the box office gross in this shortened window.
My problem with this is that it is neither fish nor foul. Internal estimates of post-theatrical revenues are lovely and all, but what happens to Alice in June really can’t prove anything. No single movie can in a situation like this. And a window for one movie shrinking one month isn’t much of a test of anything either. There simply is no way to measure and to be confident of what is real.
The line someone dropped – and should pick up – that piracy is an issue between theatrical and DVD is just a load of crap. Piracy starts in earnest on Day One of the release of a movie. There are discs on the streets and streams on the web before the first weekend is over.
When you can show me a single person who chooses not to get a film illegally in the first 3 months of release, but then has a deep and abiding need to purchase or download an illegal copy between 12 weeks and 16 weeks, offer them up. And I will still want to quiz them about what drugs they are on.
There is only one market that waits 8 weeks before getting serious about seeing a title and then often finds itself out of luck because the theatrical run has dried up… and it happens to be the very same group that is least likely to download or buy a pirated copy of a film… and is also the least affected by “see it now” pressures… people over 50… mostly women over 50.
When a company acts the way Disney is behaving, there are only three options that I can think of: 1. They are boldly seeking out a new future, 2. They are finding ways to cover their tracks for losses they are projecting, and 3. They are reckless fools who like changing things to see what happens. Your call.
And what I expect out of Alice and the two other experiments? (Disney should pay Odeon even more for creating a structure for the future of their experimentation.) Numbers that are read completely differently by whoever believes in whichever side of the argument.
Charlie & The Chocolate Factory grossed less than 1% of its theatrical gross after Weekend 12. And that was a film with long legs in the current era. So that is a non-starter.
Having more weeks in theaters is not really the issue for exhibitors or the industry. The issue is choosing to shorten the window and everything that has followed. And that is, in my long and strongly-held opinion, suicide for this industry, taking the very real and compelling opportunity of expanding delivery systems for post-theatrical and turning into harder-to-exploit mush.
But that’s just me. (And the lesson that the industry keeps learning every time it decides that it needs dramatic changes in windows.)
And PRESS RELEASE… AMC gets manipulated for a price, as was inevitable, by Disney. Who got the better of the deal, only time will tell.
AMC Entertainment to Show “Alice In Wonderland”
Tickets on Sale Now
Kansas City, Mo. (Feb. 25, 2010) – AMC Entertainment Inc. (AMC), a leading theatrical exhibition and entertainment company, today placed for sale across its entire circuit advanced tickets to “ALICE IN WONDERLAND,” Walt Disney Studios’ upcoming motion picture.
“ALICE looks terrific, and it promises to be the next 3D blockbuster. It is sure to please our guests – many of whom have called and emailed – and help us maintain box office momentum in 2010,” said Gerry Lopez, CEO and president of AMC. “As business models evolve for exhibitors as well as distributors such as Disney, it makes sense to focus on the many opportunities we have to improve our economics, so we can continue to invest in technology our guests want and ultimately, the guest experience in our theatres.”

Be Sociable, Share!

22 Responses to “More Of Disney's Alice Mess”

  1. Wrecktum says:

    It’s a Bob Iger thing. I don’t think Iger cares if he’s leaving money on the table. He considers it the cost of doing business. What that business is is anyone’s guess but his.

  2. EthanG says:

    DP it’s not piracy that starts after day 1 of a major release, it’s DVD piracy, specifically Region 5 piracy.
    Region 5 DVD’s are copies made with a TC machine from an analog source. They do this in Region 5 (Russia, India and Africa) in order to make DVD’s cheaper over there. Unfortunately, because they are produced at the same time as screeners, usually a few weeks after a film is out of theatres, there is a high degree of piracy.
    There are only so many people who will watch a cam-quality copy of a pirated film. There’s no way to measure it of course, but Id wager at least 50% engaged in piracy do so through R5 DVD’s.
    The only way to stop this piracy is to stop using telecine for R5 Dvd’s, or narrowing the window.

  3. EthanG says:

    First paragraph meant to say: while cam and telesync piracy starts after Day 1 of a release, much doesn’t occur until exiting theatrical release.

  4. LYT says:

    In related news, after critics rsvp’ed to the LA Alice screening, we got told a few days later that suddenly, guests were not allowed.

  5. David Poland says:

    Don’t feel too bad, Luke… I wasn’t even invited to that as no one at Disney seems to be able to figure out who in publicity is responsible for me at the studio now.

  6. I had to turn down my non-guest Alice screening, as it’s one of the few that my wife actually wants to see. Oh well, it’s soon enough before the theatrical release that we might as well just wait and see it like regular moviegoers (I find myself doing that more and more as the screenings get closer to theatrical release).

  7. a_loco says:

    DP, as someone who actually downloads movies on occasion (I know), I can tell you that most students and young people wait until the DVD release to download a movie. I’m not sure about Ethan’s R5 stuff, but on most of the mainstream torrent sites, you really can’t get a good quality download until after the DVD release (unless there are screeners out there).

  8. scooterzz says:

    are you guys talking about last thursday’s ‘alice’ screening?…. i ask because, when i called my rep to ask if i could bring my other half, i was told it was absolutely no problem…. and, at the screening, there seemed to be many, many family groups among the hoi polloi ….

  9. EthanG says:

    @a_loco…hope I don’t get in trouble for saying this, but there are already DVD quality copies of “Edge of Darkness” “Daybreakers” and “Book of Eli” on the web because of region 5.
    Another big problem is screeners in general. The most widely circulated copy of “Precious” online is an Independent Spirit award official screener.
    I personally would never consider watching a camera quality copy of a movie…and think people who do are nuts. But boy is it tempting when you have perfect (or nearly so) copies of movies out there weeks before DVD due to screeners and R5. And that’s where the window comes into play…

  10. David Poland says:

    On the other hand, piracy is really a bullshit argument in this regard anyway.
    Yes, piracy is real.
    No, it has almost nothing to do with reduced sell-thru DVD revenue.
    And if the problem is with the system, breaking the system to fix it is not a viable choice.

  11. EthanG says:

    I somewhat disagree. I think DOMESTICALLY it can really hurt DVD sales. It’s hard to prove but “Taken” leaked months before it was even in theatres…and we all know about “Wolverine.”
    Wolverine’s DVD sales to date domestically are off well over 50% from X3. Maybe because Wolverine sucked? But so did X3….
    Taken, meanwhile only outperformed “Tinkerbell 2” by a little bit on the DVD market. The fact its been available online for literally YEARS underlines it.

  12. EthanG says:

    *On the X3/Wolverine DVD sales meant 40% not 50. Box office wise the difference was 24% domestically.

  13. a_loco says:

    Taken was released on DVD in France before it came out in the States, but you probably know that already.

  14. Nope, it was a screening next week.

  15. LexG says:

    Do Anne and Mia paint each other’s toes in 3D?
    I’d pay a THOUSAND DOLLARS to see that.
    TWO HOT-ASS CHICKS, LOOOOOVE Hathaway and Mia is ONE TO WATCH. Not a Burton fan but if they share screen time there will be BOWING.

  16. Joe Leydon says:

    I actually hope Alice is a massive hit, so that Mia Wasikowska becomes an enormous star — and thousands and thousands of her new fans will want to check out her work in That Evening Sun.

  17. If they really cared about screeners getting pirated, they would secretly watermark them. End of story. Instead they throw that stupid “property of” logo up on there and ruin it for critics. How hard is it to watermark it with a number for the group you’re sending it to? For instance…
    I’m in the online film critics society. For all the screeners they send to us, they mark the film with a number or sign specific to our group somewhere within the film. If a DVD gets downloaded to a torrent site and it turns out it’s from the OFCS, they issue a warning and if it happens again, that group gets no more screeners.
    If they want to leave it up to “us” to police embargo breaks, leave it up to us to police something that truly affects the business.
    I also agree torrents don’t affect DVD sales- IF the DVD has really cool stuff with it. Diehard film fans still like to support and be a part of the film experience. I also think many of them pay to see a movie then DL it later to watch it repeatedly.

  18. Wrecktum says:

    So one “property of” burn in ruins it for you? If you cared so much about presentation, you’d go to the theater. Can’t go to the theater? Then your FREE screener with one burn in should suffice.
    Honestly, there are people out there who’d cut off their left ball to be able to get free screeners of movies. “Ruin it.” That’s rich.
    By the way, individually watermarking critic screeners is enormously expensive. Maybe you’d be willing to pay for the additional cost per disc?

  19. I’m just saying that if I’m expected to enjoy a movie, there shouldn’t be a non-sensical PROPERTY OF _____________________ across the middle of the screen through the entire movie. I don’t really care when they fade in at the bottom of the screen now and again, but many now are just plastered up there throughout the duration.
    If it served a purpose or helped deter piracy, I would suck it up. But do you think a filmmaker wants that there? It ruins the movie completely. Also- I don’t live close enough to a city that shows all the movies I want to see. If I’m sent a screener in order to review, shouldn’t it be in the best possible viewing condition? Trust me, if I lived in NY or LA, I’d see everything in the theater.
    And you say individual watermarking is expensive; is it as expensive as the millions studios are losing due to piracy? If you caught a major outlet pirating stuff couldn’t suing them help pay for the cost of watermarking? Seems like a decent use of money, certainly better than flying out fanboys to slather all over your production.

  20. The Big Perm says:

    All watermarking would do is show the general source of the pirated material…so no, that wouldn’t hurt pirates at all. Especially since now a lot of general piracy is someone ripping a DVD or whatever and putting it on the internet for free.
    Of course putting up words on the screen isn’t going to do anything either, like if you put up “Property of Warner Bros” some guys is going to be like “uh oh, I’d better not watch this one, a studio owns it!”

  21. This all reminds me….fellow critics and bloggers: WE MUST DESTROY OUR OSCAR SCREENERS BY MONDAY!!
    As the 10 levels of clicking “YES” to prove you understand as well as the notes on the DVD cover and the emails indicate, we must destroy them since final Oscar voting is March 2. Busy weekend ahead for those we haven’t seen…

  22. Dr Wally says:

    It’s not like a 14 week window is anything like earth-shattering for a modern blockbuster.
    Angels & Demons was rushed to DVD/Blu after 13 weeks in Europe to coincide with the new Dan Brown novel. Not so much of a shrug from theaters.
    Poseidon? 13 weeks in the US. No boycott there.
    Charlie & the Chocolate Factory? 15 weeks.
    The Incredible Hulk? 15 weeks.
    You Don’t Mess with the Zohan? 15 weeks.
    2012? 15 weeks.
    Wasn’t an issue for any of the above, and most of those movies grossed more (at least internationally) than Alice will .Why is Alice being singled out? What else is going on here?

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon