Would You Pay $50 to Watch New Movies at Home?

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
While most people I know would gladly pay $50 to watch new movies at home, you know for a fact theater owners aren't going to go for this at all. Also, the first time one of these movies showed up as a cam version on a pirate site all hell would break loose. :(

Five years ago, major studios attempts to offer first-run movies in the home months early set off a fierce standoff with theater owners. Now, a startup backed by Sean Parker of Facebook and Napster fame is trying to encourage Hollywood studios and exhibitors to wade back into those controversial waters. Called the Screening Room, the company offers secure anti-piracy technology that will offer new releases in the home on the same day they hit theaters, sources tell Variety.
 
Ya, I definitely wouldn't do it, unless I got a bunch of ppl over. I'd buy one kickass projector and audio system for it. Course, I don't really care if I see it release day or a couple months later on bluray.
 
Nope, nothing worth spending that much money on even in a month.
 
No, that's WAY above the price my wife and I spend to see a film in theaters. Doesn't make sense for us.
 
For a 1 time use viewing that I need a $150 box to use... No Thanks.

However, I would be willing to pay $50 for Netflix-esque streaming from Theatrical Release until DVD release. Then get a DRM free copy or a Blu-Ray.
Like a pre-order with a bonus.
 
I can pay $5 to see a movie on a Monday evening the first week it's released. There would be no way in hell I would even consider $50 to see it at home.
 
Fuck me, $50 per view?! No way in hell. $50/month subscription service? Maybe.
 
krotch said:
Ya, I definitely wouldn't do it, unless I got a bunch of ppl over. I'd buy one kickass projector and audio system for it. Course, I don't really care if I see it release day or a couple months later on bluray.
Click to expand...
It is how I feel about it. Meh, I can wait. Especially now as spring and summer are getting here, I tend to watch less movies anyways.
 
Steve said:
Two $10 tickets, two drinks and a popcorn is damn near $50. So for me and my friends, this would be cool. There are so many problems with this idea (from an industry stand point) that this will never fly. :(
Click to expand...

And parking.

Ofc, I have gone to a theater to see a movie only 3X in the last maybe 10 years.
 
I few years ago when I had the projector I may have considered it, but now with a 50" Plasma, I wouldn't.
 
The answer is--- Depends on the film.
Say Star Wars: The Jedi get bent; fans would have a private viewing party and gladly pay that rate.
Films like Good Burger 3. Uh, wouldn't see it if you paid me $50.
 
Steve said:
Two $10 tickets, two drinks and a popcorn is damn near $50. So for me and my friends, this would be cool. There are so many problems with this idea (from an industry stand point) that this will never fly. :(
Click to expand...
I went to see some movie in 3D with a friend and his dad, and all said and done it was $85 for the tickets, drinks, popcorn, and a couple of candy boxes.
 
$50 is way to much unless you have a 80"+ screen, lots of seating, and are inviting the family/neighbors over to split the costs.
 
Concessions have gone through the roof at the AMC Theater we go to. I went there last week after not going for quite some time, and they have a Bar in there, so you can get alcoholic drinks.
 
Nope.
That's what our bill total is when the wife and I go to Movie Tavern and have a lightish lunch and a couple drinks.
Movie Tavern is the way to go.
 
a perfect scam for the gotta have it now, super hype generation, wish I'd thought it up.
 
It's a really interesting idea. I can't stay awake through a one hour TV show, but I'm sure some people would go for it. After suffering through record profits year after year Hollywood has to do something.
 
Nope. For my whole family (4 people), we can get tickets and popcorn/soda for around that price at the good theater. Almost half that on $5 night.

Lower the price, and sure. I'd go for it. $30 a show? Yes. $50? No way. Too high. But, it'll be high to make the theater owners happy. Lowball them, and shit will hit the fan.

PeaKr said:
a perfect scam for the gotta have it now, super hype generation, wish I'd thought it up.
Click to expand...

Get off my lawn! Welcome to technology. My Grandpa said the same thing with VCR's and shit. Just lazy and wanted to watch things on our time and not when it's on the TV. Yes, it's the gotta have it now generation. That's the point of technology - to make our lives better, more efficient, etc. so we can do less work. Work smarter, not harder.
 
Hmm, I could pay $15-$20 for the two of us to see a new movie in theaters with a giant screen and much better sound system than I do - not to mention it gives me an excuse to take the Mrs. out for a nice evening - or I could pay $50 to see it in my home on my 42 inch streaming over my crappy internet connection + $150 initial setup fee. No thank you.

This MIGHT appeal to some who have a full-blown theater style media room where friends can come over to view it with you, and a great internet connection to ensure the super high quality streaming occurs without buffering or degradation, but it's certainly a niche market, to say the least.
 
If I'm not mistaken there is already some high end pricey device that does this. Let me shake the internet.... something like a 4K DVR you can play first run movies on, for hollywood types.

And while there is no way I would pay $50 per viewing, the math kinda works out. Consider my local Cinemark has afternoon matinee for $9. Add a soft drink and popcorn and that approaches $20 real quick.
 
No no no. Even If I pay $11 a ticket for me and my wife, that's $22. Plus we go to the movies very rarely, say 2-5 times a year so its a treat, so we splurge on a Jumbo popcorn and big ass drink for a grand total of around $12 as well. That's $34 plus tax plus a bit of gas. We almost always go on like a Tuesday night several weeks into a movies release as well because we hate crowds.

It's nice to get out now and then and see a movie on that absurdly large screen with the booming sound. I have a 55" Vizio at home with no sound bar. Definitely not worth saving $15 to give up the theater experience I think.
 
Guess this is going to be the unpopular opinion but: all of you factoring in the drinks/popcorn/candy shouldn't, those are not *required* for seeing the movie and as such should not be calculated (or even mentioned honestly). Things like parking (people pay for that? not here) and other *required* expenses should obviously be factored in.

*ducks for cover* :brb:
 
I have 110" screen and a projector. I also have friends. I know people would be willing to chip in to have a screening party vs. having to all sit silently and motionless at a theater. I'd be down for sure.

And on the piracy thing. It wouldn't be a cam version. HD rips would show up immediately.
 
ir0nw0lf said:
Guess this is going to be the unpopular opinion but: all of you factoring in the drinks/popcorn/candy shouldn't, those are not *required* for seeing the movie and as such should not be calculated (or even mentioned honestly). Things like parking (people pay for that? not here) and other *required* expenses should obviously be factored in.

*ducks for cover* :brb:
Click to expand...

I understand your point, but to me its a package deal. It's an event, a night out, a splurge. If I am going to go to a movie a few times a year I am getting that heart clogging "butter" all over that delicious popcorn. It is part of the price in my opinion. You can't go to the beach without getting sand in your ass.
 
I don't really understand this price point.
A movie costs what, at most 15$, or min maybe like 3-4$ special matinee price.
50$ is way overboard. What exact costs are they defraying? It should be cheaper for them because no theater, no cleaning, no employees, no projector.
For only internet bandwidth it's multiples of profit of what they normally rake in.
I bet they would have clauses where it can't be a performance, only a private viewing. Thus inviting all your friends over to watch something would be technically against the rules.
 
Hell no. It costs me about $0.30 in gas to get to the closest theater and $8.50 for a ticket. I'm not going to pay five-and-a-half times as much money just to watch in the comfort of my own home on comparatively inferior A/V equipment.
 
No way would I pay that. I have a pretty respectable home theater and a big TV, but I can buy multiple Blu-Ray movies or rent dozens of disks or On Demand movies for that price.
For my wife and I to go to the Alamo Drafthouse and order food and beers (with the movie) is in the $50-60 ballpark...and their setup beats the pants of mine or anyone else's.
Not sure I'd pay more than $15-20 for a first run movie at home. Especially with how quickly they turn around the home editions now.
 
ir0nw0lf said:
Guess this is going to be the unpopular opinion but: all of you factoring in the drinks/popcorn/candy shouldn't, those are not *required* for seeing the movie and as such should not be calculated (or even mentioned honestly). Things like parking (people pay for that? not here) and other *required* expenses should obviously be factored in.
Click to expand...

I factor in the whole experience. That's what I'm paying for watching a movie in the theater. When I go alone, I don't get any food or drinks. When I take family, I do. I have a good selection of food and drink at home, and can make good popcorn.


d_stilgar said:
I have 110" screen and a projector. I also have friends. I know people would be willing to chip in to have a screening party vs. having to all sit silently and motionless at a theater. I'd be down for sure.
Click to expand...

Damn. How far do you sit from the 110"? I have a 106" and am looking to upgrade to a 125" (and Dolby Atmos). I sit 14' from the screen. I have people come over to watch the big blockbusters when they are released. Nice screen, decent audio, great LFE, beer, snacks, popcorn. It's fun. I could easily spread out the cost of a $50 movie. I couldn't with my family...
 
MrTroy03 said:
I understand your point, but to me its a package deal. It's an event, a night out, a splurge. If I am going to go to a movie a few times a year I am getting that heart clogging "butter" all over that delicious popcorn. It is part of the price in my opinion. You can't go to the beach without getting sand in your ass.
Click to expand...

If you are considering it a "package deal", then you need to add the price of those same snacks for the same home viewing. They will be cheaper for sure, but still need to be included.
 
No way. The theater I go to is awesome. It has 70 and 80 foot screens and the upstairs is 18 and over only. It's nice to go out as an event. I think it is a better experience for cheaper.
 
The "theater experience" is uncomfortable seats, bad viewing angle, 30 minutes of commercials blaring at me, some texting dolt sitting in front of me, a spoiled child kicking my seat but excused because the parent claims he's got adhd, popcorn at $10 for 4 ounces, $8 for 12 ounces of Coke, some woman's querulous voice raised to ask a plot question, and topped by a ticket that costs $15.

I've spent a lot of money on a home theater...NOT to pay a lot to watch a movie.
 
$150 for the box and $50 per movie? HaHaHaHaHa. I'm fine with going to the theater on a Tuesday or Wednesday night and paying $5 to see a movie. 90% of the time I'm the only person in the theater.
 
Lets See, 5 bucks for subway and pray you dont get slashed in the face (NYC), plus the traveling time.
The ticket can go as high as 21 bucks (NYC), plus 10 or 15 for pop corn.
Lastly, dealing with some asshole whom might think is a great idea to be on his/her cell phone, kicking your seat, talk loud or any other fun things.

I'm more than happy to pay the 50 bucks. And if I have ONE guest willing to share the price, I will be already winning.

So yes, where do I sign?
 
Count me in the "no thanks" category, too. I'm just fine waiting a few months and paying $1.50 for RedBox, thankyouverymuch.
 
$50 per show is too much. Plus $150 for the set top box and who knows what sort of dumb arbitrary lock in stuff that will require or limitations it may force on you or whatever. You know that if this did get on store shelves they would find a way to milk it even more than this.

I rarely have the time to go see a movie with two young kids in the home and work full time, so I would pay for the privilege of my wife and I watching a new movie at home, but not this much. $50 without any additional hardware...maaaaaybe if we both really really really want to watch it badly. Probably still too steep though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top