New proposed movie streaming service - Your thoughts!!!

dublinman1990

It's meant to be called The Screening room. The way it works is that people in the U.S. buy a new set top box for $150 in which they can rent movies for a hefty $50 each. The important bit in this information is that the movie will be released in the same method as a releasing a new game on Steam; i.e The same movie will be released on the service at the same time as in the cinema.

There is more information from two articles written from Variety on the new service.

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/studios-exhibitors-consider-revolutionary-plan-for-day-and-date-movies-at-home-exclusive-1201725168/

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/steven-spielberg-j-j-abrams-peter-jackson-sean-parker-screening-room-1201728374/

One of the proposed new movies; If and when the service goes ahead; will be the upcoming movie Justice League Part 1.

http://batman-news.com/2016/03/09/the-screening-room-sean-parker/

I think this service in a way is very useful for people who are looking not to pirate a movie from the internet. But the proposed cost of $50 for each rented movie on paper does seem very expensive for anybody and an unnecessary cost because it does not seem to have much value in the end.

Does anybody else see the merits of this coming to launch?

Fysh

dublinman1990 wrote: »

It's meant to be called The Screening room. The way it works is that people in the U.S. buy a new set top box for $150 in which they can rent movies for a hefty $50 each. The important bit in this information is that the movie will be released in the same method as a releasing a new game on Steam; i.e The same movie will be released on the service at the same time as in the cinema.

There is more information from two articles written from Variety on the new service.

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/studios-exhibitors-consider-revolutionary-plan-for-day-and-date-movies-at-home-exclusive-1201725168/

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/steven-spielberg-j-j-abrams-peter-jackson-sean-parker-screening-room-1201728374/

One of the proposed new movies; If and when the service goes ahead; will be the upcoming movie Justice League Part 1.

http://batman-news.com/2016/03/09/the-screening-room-sean-parker/

I think this service in a way is very useful for people who are looking not to pirate a movie from the internet. But the proposed cost of $50 for each rented movie on paper does seem very expensive for anybody and an unnecessary cost because it does not seem to have much value in the end.

Does anybody else see the merits of this coming to launch?

I like the idea, but not any of the proposed implementation, which smacks far too much of "too many cooks". If I pay to stream a film at home, it's because I don't want to/can't get to a cinema to see it. So charging me a prohibitive rate that non-optionally includes two cinema tickets for the film in question is a totally backwards move, IMO. Not a hope in hell would I pay that kind of money to stream a film just because it's also out in the cinema at the same time.

On top of which - a dedicated set top box for $150? Pffft. It should either be something I can run on a computer of my choice or a ~$50 box, IMO. They don't have to like it but that's the state of the market.

Chain Smoker

dublinman1990 wrote: »

But the proposed cost of $50 for each rented movie on paper does seem very expensive for anybody and an unnecessary cost because it does not seem to have much value in the end

If someone buys a film on this service, it's fairly easy to estimate at least 4 people will watch it, which brings you to around the price of four movie tickets. When you're paying that much for what can qualify as a night out, it's a lot more reasonable. Sean Parker is living in some kind of lunatic billionaire bubble to think this whole thing adds up.

I'm amazed this has gotten any kind of attention at all. From what I've gathered, they've been seriously overstating the major studio interest.
Out of their minds if they think a special box will make it piracy proof too. Sure at the very least you'd have some really well done cam rips available immediately.

dublinman1990

Fysh wrote: »

I like the idea, but not any of the proposed implementation, which smacks far too much of "too many cooks". If I pay to stream a film at home, it's because I don't want to/can't get to a cinema to see it. So charging me a prohibitive rate that non-optionally includes two cinema tickets for the film in question is a totally backwards move, IMO. Not a hope in hell would I pay that kind of money to stream a film just because it's also out in the cinema at the same time.

On top of which - a dedicated set top box for $150? Pffft. It should either be something I can run on a computer of my choice or a ~$50 box, IMO. They don't have to like it but that's the state of the market.

I agree with what you're saying there. If a box for $150 came into my own home and it would have to be connected online. Forget it, already it's a big waste of money. I only buy movies on Blu-rays for cheap rates so I can say to them to stuff the $50 rental and the $150 box.

It's also going to compete with Netflix, Amazon Prime, Apple TV, iTunes, Chromecast, Sky Store, UHD downloads from Vidity HD's and DVD's/Blu-rays if it ever comes to fruition. This is already a huge market to gain market share and to be relevant for customers trying to look at different options.

It's aim to get rid of piracy does sound encouraging but if people are happy with the entertainment they already receive then they won't be happy with changing over.

I have other ways to keep myself happy with home entertainment. Thanks all the same.

Sad Professor

Even at that price, there's a definitely a market for this. For people with children going to the movies is a big deal. 50 USD will be a deal for them.

For the rest of us, not so much. But it has to be prohibitively expensive because otherwise the exhibitors will boycott the studios. As it stands they are offering to pay theatres 40 percent - for doing nothing. And they will still boycott this. In fact, they'd be crazy not to. They would be signing their death warrants.

But the main reason this won't happen is because of the piracy concerns.

loyatemu

Sad Professor wrote:

Even at that price, there's a definitely a market for this. For people with children going to the movies is a big deal. 50 USD will be a deal for them.

Going to the movies with kids is an outing, its not just about the movie. I don't think this is a runner.

bur

If it means better quality "downloads" sooner, all for it.

The Randy Riverbeast

Too expensive. Going to the cinema as a couple can cost between 20 with an offer up to 30 without. If Im not seeing a film in the cinema it is because I have no interest or I'm not interested enough to spend 30 euro to see it. While it might work out fine for a family, as a couple it is cheaper to just go to the cinema or pirate it. It would need to be 10 euro max for me to be interested.

Sad Professor

loyatemu wrote: »

Going to the movies with kids is an outing, its not just about the movie. I don't think this is a runner.

Good point. In fact, the same is probably true for couples, groups of friends, and well, filmgoing audiences generally these days. Going to the cinema is a social/leisure activity and the movie itself isn't that important.

This service is probably aimed at the people who don't go to the cinema anymore or do so reluctantly – mostly because they hate the multiplex experience. The problem of course is that if they are currently prepared to wait 90 days to a year for the film to become available on their preferred platform, why would they suddenly start paying $50 to see it early?

I still say there's a market for this but at the upper-end and mostly amongst people who really hate the multiplex experience. But I don't think it's going to happen because the exhibitors aren't anywhere near desperate enough to allow it.

Oafley Jones

The cost is absolute bargain as opposed to what's out there now. This isn't a new concept. If you've a spare 30 odd thousand dollars hanging around you can already avail of this. Cost of movies is also a couple hundred dollars minimum.

jester77

I like the idea, but not sure of its long term potential. It's the sort of service I would only use 2-3 times a year for a movie I would really want to see, and have a few mates around and make an evening of it. But you can't beat the big screen experience unless you have serious money (6 figures) to blow on a dedicated home cinema. But having the option is fantastic.

Wedwood

This is more likely to be used by people with their own Projector home cinemas who want to want their own 'big night in' with new releases.

Can't see the value/benefit of this on a 55 inch plasma, when you could bring your gang to the cinema for the same price.