MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Three Studios Set 28 Day DVD Window… Three Left

March 23What WB is signaling – and other studios will follow – is that after 28 days in post-theatrical, everything is the long tail… negligible revenues (aside from the wholesale DVD sales needed to fill the pipeline). But the heat of demand is over. That is the point at which they are fine with everyone buying discs at wholesale prices and distributing them as widely as they like with no additional revenue for the studio.
Until titles hit that that 28 day window, buy it or pay the studio a per-rental price.

So now Fox and Sony have followed. The three majors holding out are Disney – which is Apple-committed – Universal – which is still in play and probably getting a lot of guidance on this from Kabletown – and Paramount, which is Sumner Redstone’s Paramount, facing yet another moment of industry transition that it could have led instead of weakly following… eventually.
The only one of the studios holding out that concerns me is Disney, which is showing an interest in being the leading window-breaker. But they are not dumb people. They have to understand that there is middle ground. What I would expect to see next is a move by them to make Apple’s iTunes the only rental outlet in the new 28-day window.
All that said, there is a new twist. “These studios will provide new enhanced payment terms to Blockbuster in exchange for a first lien on Blockbuster Canada Co.’s assets.” It’s a little murky, but it smells to me like these four studios are looking at a backdoor acquisition of this established Home Ent brand to use as their group outlet – which, of course, they couldn’t possibly be colluding to do – for the Home Entertainment First Window

Be Sociable, Share!

One Response to “Three Studios Set 28 Day DVD Window… Three Left”

  1. NV says:

    Dave
    The Blockbuster announcement has more to do with reduced MGs. Sony has a deal with both Redbox and Netflix that has no 28 window.

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