• MimicJar@lemmy.worldEnglish
      25·
      15 hours ago

      There was a thread a few weeks ago discussing the decline of theatres. The one, and only, suggestion from theater owners was to have a 90 day minimum theatre time before films moved to streaming/physical media.

      At the time that idea seemed silly to me. Usually if I want to see a film, it’s opening weekend I see it. Maybe the second week, but usually before the second weekend.

      But this film is leaving theaters less than a week after release? I saw Mickey 17 was announced to be leaving before being in theaters for 2 weeks.

      I guess I understand the complaint from theatre owners now. Maybe 90 days is too long but shit you gotta draw a line somewhere. You gotta give films a chance if you want theatres to stay open.

      So many films post pandemic have their “Exclusively in theaters” taglines, but for how long?

      • Dagwood222@lemm.eeEnglish
        24·
        15 hours ago

        When Star Wars first came out it ran in the theaters for two years.

        Gone With The Wind ran at one theater in Georgia until 1969.

          • niktemadur@lemmy.worldEnglish
            4·
            3 hours ago

            Yes they did, indeedy!

            Take MGM during the heyday of the old studio system, it had almost 30 soundstages on the lot, always active or under construction and would be cranking films out constantly, and that doesn’t include location shooting around the wildly different environments near LA - deserts and chaparral, forests and mountains, etc.

            Now add to that Warner, RKO (later renamed to Universal), Paramount, United Artists, etc.
            Directors and stars were under contract for wages, would be in several films each and every year.

            Now add to that all the lower budget studios cranking out cheap-o b-movies, mostly horror and noir.

          • Dagwood222@lemm.eeEnglish
            5·
            4 hours ago

            Movies used to be a lot cheaper to make. Taxi Driver cost about $1.5 million back in 1976. Faster Pussycat Kill Kill was made for about $45,000.

            Quick lesson. The old model was to open a major movie in a prestige theater [ie Radio City Music Hall] where it would run for as long as it was profitable. After that it would go to smaller houses, and eventually become a double bill. People waited on line for years to see ‘The Exorcist’ because it was only showing at a few places.

            Jaws was the first summer blockbuster. The studio planned to open it up in a lot of theaters on the same day. The plan worked. About the same time, the VCR started becoming popular. Thise two things changed the way movies got distributed forever.

            • niktemadur@lemmy.worldEnglish
              3·
              2 hours ago

              Now there’s some food for thought… The Exorcist could have been the first modern blockbuster, it had all the ingredients, only it was one year too early, the immediate precursor before they tried what they did with Jaws.

              • Dagwood222@lemm.eeEnglish
                1·
                10 minutes ago

                It was rated “R” I think they’d have gone with something that people would bring kids to see.

                Interesting thought though.

        • reddig33@lemmy.worldEnglish
          6·
          12 hours ago

          Studios didn’t own the streaming or broadcast TV channels then. Now they make more money by selling the property through channels they own and control.

    • snooggums@lemmy.worldEnglish
      34·
      17 hours ago

      It was released last Friday in the US, so this would be less than a week in the theaters. It was number 5 or so for the last week as well, so while it wasn’t a monetary success out of the gate it wasn’t like it pulled in zero dollars.

      Heck, word of mouth could have worked in its favor, but guess we will never know. At least it was released instead of thrown in the trash like Coyote vs ACME.

      Fucking Zaslav.

      • drzoidberg@lemmy.worldEnglish
        10·
        17 hours ago

        I thought this was one of those straight to streaming movies. Had no clue there was gonna be a theatrical release.

        • snooggums@lemmy.worldEnglish
          12·
          15 hours ago

          It was originally produced as a direct to hbo/max movie, then sold to a small distribution company who didn’t do much advertising.

          Max also pulled all the old Looney Tunes shorts from max, because apparently cartoons that were originally aimed at adults in theaters isn’t media for an adult audience that max is going for.

          I think the Warner Bros executives don’t have a sense of humor and therefore hate Looney Tunes.

  • De_Narm@lemmy.worldEnglish
    28·
    17 hours ago

    Never heard of it, looked it up and apparently it just came out on the 14th. That’s not even a full week till wednesday.