By MCN Editor editor@moviecitynews.com

NATO Calls for Release of Premium Video on Demand Data

Posted Wednesday, May 4th, 2011 - Comments Off on NATO Calls for Release of Premium Video on Demand Data
Be Sociable, Share!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Washington, DC: May 4, 2011) — The National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO) today called on the movie studios participating in the early-to-the-home “premium” video on demand (VOD) experiment to release sales figures for the movies that have been offered on the platform.

The controversy around the shortened theatrical window involved in the early premium VOD offering has drawn intense interest in Hollywood, the trade and business press, and Wall Street. But has the early VOD offering drawn the interest of the consumer?

“What’s an experiment without data?” asked NATO president and CEO John Fithian. “Every weekend—usually before the weekend is over—the performance of movies at the U.S. box office is reported around the world. Studio executives are working the phones, touting the stellar box office for hit movies and explaining the underperformance of the flops. When it comes to premium VOD—crickets.”

The movies released so far include Just Go With it (Sony), Cedar Rapids (Fox), and Hall Pass (Warner Bros.). The Adjustment Bureau (Universal) is scheduled for release this week. The movies are being released through DirecTV’s Home Premiere at a price of $29.99 roughly 60 days after their theatrical debuts.

About NATO
The National Association of Theatre Owners is the largest exhibition trade organization in the world, representing more than 30,000 movie screens in all 50 states, and additional cinemas in 50 countries worldwide.

Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in Movie City News, Press Releases | Comments Off on NATO Calls for Release of Premium Video on Demand Data

Comments are closed.

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