Malcolm Owen
Apple will be making some of the movies it commissions for Apple TV+ available to view at cinemas, a report claims, with the streaming service seemingly following in the footsteps of rivals Amazon and Netflix by pushing for a theatrical release of its films.
Apple as a number of feature-length films in production, with a view to airing them on Apple TV+. However, rather than going directly to the small screen, Apple may instead get the movies into theaters for a few weeks, before being made available to view via the streaming service.
Sources speaking to the Wall Street Journal claim Apple has been in talks with cinema chains and consulted with an entertainment executive on the theatrical release plan. It is thought the early outreach to the theater industry will help it attract major directors and producers to its productions.
The scheme is similar to techniques used by Amazon and Netflix to get their films to a wider audience, and not just its subscribers, though with somewhat different results.
Netflix has apparently caused tension by asking theaters to release its movies at the same time they are available on the streaming service, while theaters typically insist films do not become available online until at least three months after their theatrical debut. Discussions about showing contenders for film awards have reportedly fallen apart over the exclusivity issue.
Amazon is somewhat more forgiving on exclusivity, with major films like "Manchester by the Sea" being given a three-month window while smaller titles have a two-week theater run. It is believed Apple's negotiation plan is more like Amazon's than Netflix.
If the report is true, this could mean productions like the collaboration with A24 on the Sophia Coppola-directed "On the Rocks" will make it to theaters.
The theatrical releases are apparently not being viewed as a money-earning opportunity, but rather one to build prestige and the Apple TV+ brand. Having a theatrical release plan will also help Apple in negotiations with directors, such as the reported $500 million bid for "Lost" creator J.J. Abrams, one which ultimately failed with Abrams going to WarnerMedia in a deal worth half the amount.
Launching on November 1, Apple TV+ will provide a wide variety of original TV shows and movies to subscribers at $4.99 per month. Customers who buy select Apple products will be eligible to use the service free for a year.
-m.jpg)
Christine McKee
Amber Neely
14 Comments
It doesn't matter all that much if a film is available three months after or pretty much immediately available for streaming while offered in theatres. Most likely anyone going to see it in a theatre is either not an AppleTV+ subscriber or wants to enjoy the film in a theatre setting. In either case, that the film is available for streaming is beside the point.
You might be able to argue that a few weeks in theatres prior to streaming availability might draw in that percentage of folks who simply have to see the film ASAP but waiting months to launch streaming is of no value because that group who have to see the film as quickly as possible would not be waiting months to see the film. If more than a few weeks in you haven't gone to see it, you're either not interested or are fine with waiting for streaming availabilty.
It makes sense to offer up films worthy of theatre distribution for that distribution in addition to offering streaming access in that there is potential for additional revenue. Being as such material would represent a small portion of the offerings that a service like AppleTV+ would provide, there is no great risk that bringing such films to theatres would reduce take-up of AppleTV+. Meanwhile, theatre access, I would think, ought to be dictated the same way it is dictated for any theatre offering. If people are willing to pay to go see a movie, keep showing it. If this led to Apple having a film cost be paid off via theatre distribution, if not generate a healthy profit, that would make it worthwhile, never mind being able to offer filmmakers theatre distribution of their work.
Really, Apple would be crazy to not explore this option and theatre chains would be making a mistake to not entertain this possible source of lucrative titles. This has the potential to be a win/win scenario.
Theatrical releases of streamed movies are a good thing for a few reasons. 1. Award show acceptance. 2. Allows everyone a chance to see it on a massive screen with an audience 3. Allows people not subscribed to Apple TV+ an opportunity to see the film, should they wish to. I hope the trend continues for all streamed services. Part of me is happy with JJ not accepting the Apple deal. Siloing all this content away has its downsides. Apple should also consider releasing some content on physical BD media, too. Some people out there may like to own one or two films within needing to subscribe to a service. The more options for the content, the better.
If there are sequels planned/hoped for with some of the titles, it might be interesting to theatrically release the first, and then (only) stream the subsequent releases once the interest it piqued.
Cant disagree with any of the points made here so far. Any film that wants to get awards needs a theatrical release, otherwise it is just seen as a made for TV movie, and they don't have a good rep.