Defiant Theater Owners Are Refusing to Play “Star Wars: The Last Jedi”

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
For Rian Johnson‘s “The Last Jedi,” Disney is forcing theaters to agree to secret terms that many theater owners are calling “the most onerous they’ve ever seen.” The company will receive 65% of revenue from ticket sales, the highest percentage a Hollywood studio has ever demanded. They’re also forcing theaters to screen the film in their largest auditorium for at least four weeks.

If any Last Jedi movie theaters break any condition of the agreement – pulling just one screening from the schedule, for example, or even advertising the movie before Disney gives their approval – the studio will charge a 5% penalty fee, raising their take to a staggering 70% of ticket sale revenue. But tiny one or two-screen theaters in small towns would actually be hurt by keeping The Last Jedi in theaters for four weeks and not being able to screen other releases on those screens instead.
 
What if they make the ticket prices really cheap, but charge an extra fee for “premium seats”? That’s technically not part of the ticket and they would still make the same profit (y)
 
If it's important to you, tip your theater staff the difference. Sure that brings the price up but be honest it's not like the lot of us are going to skip such a Blockbuster.
 
They have the highest money making franchises right now. Between their own IP, Pixar films, Marvel, and Lucasfilm they rule the roost.

These theater owners are only hurting themselves and they will most certainly cave.

Already have my ticket. :p
 
I understand about being upset about the 65% thing, but I suspect they would play it in on the largest screen for a month anyways.
 
I understand about being upset about the 65% thing, but I suspect they would play it in on the largest screen for a month anyways.
It's BS because it blocks all other releases for the next month from playing on the big screen. In a big town, that might not matter, but where I'm at and most theaters are 1 to 3 screens, that really really sucks.
 
I understand about being upset about the 65% thing, but I suspect they would play it in on the largest screen for a month anyways.

Depends on the area and how many theaters. Star wars might last a month but then look how fast almost all movies get released on disc or digital rental/download services now. Force Awakens was on sale in stores only 4 months after release. They can only get away with this because its disney/star wars and January is usually dead for big releases. Too bad for any other movies coming out around Christmas though.

Hollywood is so desperate to max out their income they put 30 day delays on rental services like redbox and netflix, while offering early digital downloads through comcast etc..
 
i am willing to bet within the next 10 years there will be an epic effort to break up these all powerful media conglomerates
 
Disney Studios didn't think this one through too well...should have stated that larger theaters (>7 or 8 screens) would have to schedule it 4 weeks on their largest screen. Small theaters will suffer when everyone that wants to see it in the theater has seen it and these theaters can't get people back in for whatever movies are releasing after TLJ.
 
I blew my budget subscribing to GenMay.
I'm waiting for the MKV :p

I used to love spending my money at the theaters, but the quality of the movies were getting so bad I was starting to wish I didn't go.
I give hollywood $0 of my money since 2010. No NETFLIX, no Amazon prime, no HULU, and no satellite or cable. I just strap on my eye patch and go ARGH!
 
Do theaters not pay a licencing fee to show movies? I never understood how it worked I guess and assumed ticket sales went to the theater and the theaters just paid a fee to show the movies..
 
And those theatres will be losing probably the biggest revenue stream of the year.

Not defending Disney here at all but unfortunately if you want to show their content, I guess you play by their rules.
 
For previous Star Wars movies, the studio has required 64% of the revenue from ticket sales and four week commitments, but typical Disney movies only require a two week commitment.

The outrage... for 1%

Sure its heavy handed, and if owners stick up to them good for them... The title and tone seem a bit over the top for the actual increase.

Profits are tight maybe the straw...
 
And those theatres will be losing probably the biggest revenue stream of the year.
Not defending Disney here at all but unfortunately if you want to show their content, I guess you play by their rules.

Um, you're tying up your screen for 4 weeks...and giving most of the money away, you're basically hoping people eat a shit-ton of popcorn and guzzle soda. Disney probably figures within 5 years nobody will go to a theater anyhow..
 
That is ridiculous but I dont care I'm not going anyway... going to wait to watch it on my 65" 4k with my surround sound
 
If I thought it wasn't going to be a terrible movie I'd go. But I have zero faith that rapeywood is going to make any remotely good movies ever again.
 
Do theaters not pay a licencing fee to show movies? I never understood how it worked I guess and assumed ticket sales went to the theater and the theaters just paid a fee to show the movies..

no. they might pay something up front to get the movie to start with but then they have to give a percentage of ticket sales. The first week or two that could be between 55 - 65% then after a few weeks drops to 35-45%. then after a month or so the theater might get to keep most of the money. for larger blockbusters like this terms like this aren't that uncommon and they might demand up to 64% (pervious high it seems) for the entire run. This is why food and drinks cost so much as that is how theaters make their money since they have to give so much to the distributors.
 
Fuck those guys. One of these days someone will get pissed off by the assholes running Disney, eBay, Amazon and whatnot. And when the front page is "largest mass killing in history at *insert big company name*" I for one won't shed a single tear.
 
Wait one second.... am I supposed to feel sorry for the theater companies in all of this.

The ASSHOLES who charge me 5 bucks for one watered down drink.... 5-10 bucks for a tub of popcorn.... an extra couple bucks if I actually want real butter on it and not liquid yellow stuff. That half the time can't be bothered cleaning the theater between showings.

Seriously fuck them... perhaps the story really should be. Asshole theater owners who normally take 40-50% of hollyoos total gate... showing a product they have ZERO of their own fucking money invested in, yet still feel somehow we haven't paid them enough, so they can jack concessions to 800% above cost.

Really what is the absolute worst thing that happens to a theater if a movie bombs... they break even that is what. Even if they sell half the seats and only 1/4 of those people fork over their ticket cost in food, at 70-80% margin. They break even. Hollywood takes all the risk.

Really I do honestly mean this.... fuck the theater owners. Ya wait till the Blu ray comes out and give Disney 100% of the profits when you watch it in your in home theater. :)

In this case it sounds to me like Disney is telling the large chain theaters to join them in the risk. Play it for 4 weeks min... and take a mere 35% of the gate for yourself. Hell ya I am feeling really really bad for them. Only 35% of 500-800 million.... I mean they are going to go broke if they keep that up. :rolleyes:

(no I'm not joking... the theater owners are parasites) :) ok I'm half joking... but only half.
 
Lower the price of the movie ticket to $1, raise the price of popcorn and sodacokepop. Now you only pay 65 cents to Disney.

Also lol at the people suggesting people boycott. Disney fans are as addicted to their Disney stuff as apple fans, star wars fans are a cut above all that. They have always over paid and never complained about it. They will go see this no matter what.
 
Send Disney a message... don't go see this movie. Simple as that.
Good luck with that message getting through the thick skulls of the “me first, me second and me last that demand instant satisfaction “ sheeps.

Oh wait, they can’t hear you, since they are in line waiting for a damn phone...
 
All four of us who care about this sort of thing will not make a difference. Not to mention the theater owners will cave. They are way down in revenue this year, and they need that Star Wars money.
The ones that are balking won't cave. If you have a single screen or worse, if you operate in a relatively small town, having Star wars for a month is not worth it. I don't know if it was the original WSJ article or a different publication, but one theater owner said, he'd serve the entire market in 1 or 2 weeks and the rest of the time, he'd play to an empty house.

Honestly, I'm surprised more megaplexes don't balk, because your'e required to show it on your biggest screen(s) for a month. It's crazy to tie up your largest screens from 12/15 to 1/15. By the time Xmas Day comes around, if you haven't seen star wars, you probably don't care.
 
<---Have not seen a Disney "Star Wars" movie.
so your only a slave if you choose to be
No Lucas, Marvel, Pixar or disney flix? Really? I don't think I went to see the pixar flick this year (wasn't it cars 3?), but I definitely saw Marvel movies and will likely see Thor tomorrow or later this week.


Lower the price of the movie ticket to $1, raise the price of popcorn and sodacokepop. Now you only pay 65 cents to Disney.
Also lol at the people suggesting people boycott. Disney fans are as addicted to their Disney stuff as apple fans, star wars fans are a cut above all that. They have always over paid and never complained about it. They will go see this no matter what.
I don't think that's allowed. I'm pretty sure that studios can set a minimum price. My guess is that the $5.00 tuesday that many theaters ran was allowed by studios and only for that specific day, but if someone has knowledge, I'd be interested to know for sure. I just know when I was in SD the theater had sign about no longer being able to do something (can't remember exact verbiage, but studios were mentioned), but they could still do $5.00 tuesday.
 
Last edited:
The ones that are balking won't cave. If you have a single screen or worse, if you operate in a relatively small town, having Star wars for a month is not worth it. I don't know if it was the original WSJ article or a different publication, but one theater owner said, he'd serve the entire market in 1 or 2 weeks and the rest of the time, he'd play to an empty house.

Honestly, I'm surprised more megaplexes don't balk, because your'e required to show it on your biggest screen(s) for a month. It's crazy to tie up your largest screens from 12/15 to 1/15. By the time Xmas Day comes around, if you haven't seen star wars, you probably don't care.

Really what opens in december other then SW that they are worried about showing on their Imax / ultraavx / ultragreatestbiggest ever screens anyway ?

Jumanji ? opens 5 days later... they where not going to bump SW off their big screens for that anyway.

Pitch Perfect 3.... yep I'm sure it makes sense to show that on your imax screen 2 weeks after the SW opening.

The other studios all made a Great big hole for Star wars anyway. Jumanji is the closest thing to big screen competition in December. Everything else opening wouldn't have displaced SW anyway.

Even the small theaters whining... although I get their point, really they don't have a slate of December movies from other studios that would have made them any more money anyway.

Agreeing to put SW on your screen for a month is hardly the deal breaker here. Lets all get real these guys want a bigger cut. Its that simple Disney said you'll take 35% of the profit... and they all said WHATT no no no we normally get 40%. When your talking about a movie that is going to gross north of 500 million domestic 5% is a pretty big fucking deal. Considering Disney has likely sunk 300-400 million into this movie in production and marketing... I think they should take their massive 1/3+ cut of the grosses and be very happy Disney is making SW movies again... cause without Disney Novembers biggest grossing flick would have been what Daddy's Home 2 ??? and Decembers would have been a Jumanji remake with the Rock / Jack Black. I think they should be pretty damn happy with 35% of an actual blockbuster... after their normal 40-45% they just made off Disneys Thor.
 
Last edited:
Really what opens in december other then SW that they are worried about showing on their Imax / ultraavx / ultragreatestbiggest ever screens anyway ?

Jumanji ? opens 5 days later... they where not going to bump SW off their big screens for that anyway.

Pitch Perfect 3.... yep I'm sure it makes sense to show that on your imax screen 2 weeks after the SW opening.

The other studios all made a Great big hole for Star wars anyway. Jumanji is the closest thing to big screen competition in December. Everything else opening wouldn't have displaced SW anyway.

Even the small theaters whining... although I get their point, really they don't have a slate of December movies from other studios that would have made them any more money anyway.

Agreeing to put SW on your screen for a month is hardly the deal breaker here. Lets all get real these guys want a bigger cut. Its that simple Disney said you'll take 35% of the profit... and they all said WHATT no no no we normally get 40%. When your talking about a movie that is going to gross north of 500 million domestic 5% is a pretty big fucking deal. Considering Disney has likely sunk 300-400 million into this movie in production and marketing... I think they should take their massive 1/3+ cut of the grosses and be very happy Disney is making SW movies again... cause without Disney Novembers biggest grossing flick would have been what Daddy's Home 2 ??? and Decembers would have been a Jumanji remake with the Rock / Jack Black. I think they should be pretty damn happy with 35% of an actual blockbuster... after their normal 40-45% they just made off Disneys Thor.
They get 40% for a week, maybe 2, but it goes up after that. In this case, they give up more and they never get more until the movie is a week or 2 after it's expiration date. I can only hope that the Galaxy only puts it on one screen, so at least one of their big screens is available for other movies.
 
no. they might pay something up front to get the movie to start with but then they have to give a percentage of ticket sales. The first week or two that could be between 55 - 65% then after a few weeks drops to 35-45%. then after a month or so the theater might get to keep most of the money. for larger blockbusters like this terms like this aren't that uncommon and they might demand up to 64% (pervious high it seems) for the entire run. This is why food and drinks cost so much as that is how theaters make their money since they have to give so much to the distributors.

It's higher than that, the first week it could be in upwards of 90% going to the studio. That's why concessions are so damn expensive, it's also why the growing trend of dinner and a movie is spreading like wildfire. They don't have to share that.
 
Back
Top