› ›

007 heading to streaming? Amazon buys MGM for $8.45 billion!

1…1718202223…30

Comments

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    It'd be nice if Amazon funneled their billions into making films, and then exerted absolutely no other influence at all.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,152
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    It'd be nice if Amazon funneled their billions into making films, and then exerted absolutely no other influence at all.

    Seconded!
  • Universal_Exports83Universal_Exports83 Scotland
    Posts: 60
    All of the films were on Amazon Prime earlier in the year and then removed. They are now all back on for a "limited" time. And then will be removed again.

    Does anyone know why they are doing this?

    I think I can answer my own question? But is it purely to continue the sales of the box sets and individual blu-ray and DVD's?

    Although streaming seems to be the way to go these days. The rabid fandom of "Bond" means most of us will want to have a collection.

    It just seems like a really great hook to draw in potential subscribers... "We have all the Bond movies."
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Universal_Exports83 wrote: »
    All of the films were on Amazon Prime earlier in the year and then removed. They are now all back on for a "limited" time. And then will be removed again.

    Does anyone know why they are doing this?

    I think I can answer my own question? But is it purely to continue the sales of the box sets and individual blu-ray and DVD's?

    Although streaming seems to be the way to go these days. The rabid fandom of "Bond" means most of us will want to have a collection.

    It just seems like a really great hook to draw in potential subscribers... "We have all the Bond movies."

    Probably helped make the anniversary feel even more special, when they’re just bringing back films they had available in the past. Doesn’t impress me.
  • Universal_Exports83Universal_Exports83 Scotland
    Posts: 60
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Universal_Exports83 wrote: »
    All of the films were on Amazon Prime earlier in the year and then removed. They are now all back on for a "limited" time. And then will be removed again.

    Does anyone know why they are doing this?

    I think I can answer my own question? But is it purely to continue the sales of the box sets and individual blu-ray and DVD's?

    Although streaming seems to be the way to go these days. The rabid fandom of "Bond" means most of us will want to have a collection.

    It just seems like a really great hook to draw in potential subscribers... "We have all the Bond movies."

    Probably helped make the anniversary feel even more special, when they’re just bringing back films they had available in the past. Doesn’t impress me.

    I would even like them to explain how it works? Is there a strategy? How long do they stay up? 30 days? 60 days? If so, why is that? Is there a time limit on when they come back onto the platform? Will it only be for "special" events or anniversaries? Will they always come on in a complete "dump" i.e. all the films at the one time? Or are they planning a "Sean Connery season" or a "Roger Moore season"?

    It just seems all so haphazard. And you would think having them all on there would be a great draw for potential new subscribers.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,382
    What's haphazard about putting all of them on the anniversary? Seems incredibly simple and straightforward to me.
  • Universal_Exports83Universal_Exports83 Scotland
    Posts: 60
    As well as Prime Video I am also an Amazon music subscriber and all of the official soundtracks have been removed. Although "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" is still there.

    Does anyone know why that is?

    At the bottom of the record it says:

    "2003 Danjaq, LLC/MGM"

    Was the music rights not part of the sale?

    Unlike Prime Video, at least to the best of my knowledge, titles (i.e. albums) don't seem to come and go the way movies are added and then removed on Prime.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Universal_Exports83 wrote: »
    All of the films were on Amazon Prime earlier in the year and then removed. They are now all back on for a "limited" time. And then will be removed again.

    Does anyone know why they are doing this?

    I think I can answer my own question? But is it purely to continue the sales of the box sets and individual blu-ray and DVD's?

    Although streaming seems to be the way to go these days. The rabid fandom of "Bond" means most of us will want to have a collection.

    It just seems like a really great hook to draw in potential subscribers... "We have all the Bond movies."

    We’re seeing this with the Star Trek films where every now and then they leave Paramount+ for a period because there were still existing deals in place with other streaming services or networks that would get Paramount titles exclusively. This is why the platform always promotes “Every Trek Series” rather than the films. The only way Paramount could put an end to that and make the films permanently available on their perform is if they simply buy off all the contracts, which may be too expensive.

    It would not surprise me if this will be the same case with MGM titles coming and going on Prime. Keep in mind, Epix still exists and there’s been no plans to discontinue that service as of yet.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,538
    Universal_Exports83 wrote: »
    All of the films were on Amazon Prime earlier in the year and then removed. They are now all back on for a "limited" time. And then will be removed again.

    Does anyone know why they are doing this?

    I think I can answer my own question? But is it purely to continue the sales of the box sets and individual blu-ray and DVD's?

    Although streaming seems to be the way to go these days. The rabid fandom of "Bond" means most of us will want to have a collection.

    It just seems like a really great hook to draw in potential subscribers... "We have all the Bond movies."

    It is likely that pre-existing streaming deals are still in place. Prior to the Amazon/MGM merger the films would regularly stream for a limited time bouncing around Prime, Netflix, Hulu, Tubi, etc.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,152
    This is one reason I'd always prefer a physical format. You pay for it once, it's yours and you watch it when you want to, not when they say you can.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    Venutius wrote: »
    This is one reason I'd always prefer a physical format. You pay for it once, it's yours and you watch it when you want to, not when they say you can.

    It really is that simple.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Venutius wrote: »
    This is one reason I'd always prefer a physical format. You pay for it once, it's yours and you watch it when you want to, not when they say you can.

    Physical media FTW.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    Pardon me, do you have Bond on streaming?
    I use physical media.
    Better still.
    Until it goes wrong...
  • HildebrandRarityHildebrandRarity Centre international d'assistance aux personnes déplacées, Paris, France
    Posts: 482
    If the Bond films were turned into Prime Video exclusives, it may be a boost to Amazon Prime subscriptions, but it would also limit their appeal to a small share of the mainstream audiences. These things are supposed to be part of the cultural landscape. They need to be in theaters, on physical media, on regular TV and on streaming services, including, but not limited to, Prime Video. I wouldn't see the point, after decades of being ubiquitous through reruns on cable that have kept them in our collective mind, of putting them on an exclusive service for good (or years at least). It wouldn't help the next episode.
  • ByRoyalDecreeByRoyalDecree
    Posts: 784
    HildebrandRarity wrote: »
    If the Bond films were turned into Prime Video exclusives, it may be a boost to Amazon Prime subscriptions, but it would also limit their appeal to a small share of the mainstream audiences. These things are supposed to be part of the cultural landscape. They need to be in theaters, on physical media, on regular TV and on streaming services, including, but not limited to, Prime Video. I wouldn't see the point, after decades of being ubiquitous through reruns on cable that have kept them in our collective mind, of putting them on an exclusive service for good (or years at least). It wouldn't help the next episode.

    Very true. I think keeping the entire collection exclusive is more than enough.
  • Since62Since62
    Posts: 1,630
    mtm wrote: »
    What's haphazard about putting all of them on the anniversary? Seems incredibly simple and straightforward to me.

    A new spy film series:
    "Hazard. Hap Hazard."
    "Ohhh, Hhhhap..." (kissy kissy kissy)
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,629


    Let’s see what happens.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,587
    When the films were available on prime, I found myself watching them there instead of my blu rays. Simply because of laziness of not having to turn on/off my Playstation and wait for the menus etc
  • RevelatorRevelator
    Posts: 2,917
    delfloria wrote: »
    Nice poster except that Connery should be in the middle position.

    At least he's better off than poor Dalton, who's been relegated to the third row!
    Venutius wrote: »
    This is one reason I'd always prefer a physical format. You pay for it once, it's yours and you watch it when you want to, not when they say you can.

    I've also heard that the streaming versions of many films have inferior visual quality to the Blu-Rays.
  • Red_SnowRed_Snow Australia
    Posts: 2,538
    MGM Employees Offered Contract Extensions As Amazon Fold-Up Takes Shape – The Dish
    https://deadline.com/2022/11/mgm-employees-extensions-amazon-1235176344/
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    Posts: 554
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Universal_Exports83 wrote: »
    All of the films were on Amazon Prime earlier in the year and then removed. They are now all back on for a "limited" time. And then will be removed again.

    Does anyone know why they are doing this?

    I think I can answer my own question? But is it purely to continue the sales of the box sets and individual blu-ray and DVD's?

    Although streaming seems to be the way to go these days. The rabid fandom of "Bond" means most of us will want to have a collection.

    It just seems like a really great hook to draw in potential subscribers... "We have all the Bond movies."

    We’re seeing this with the Star Trek films where every now and then they leave Paramount+ for a period because there were still existing deals in place with other streaming services or networks that would get Paramount titles exclusively. This is why the platform always promotes “Every Trek Series” rather than the films. The only way Paramount could put an end to that and make the films permanently available on their perform is if they simply buy off all the contracts, which may be too expensive.

    It would not surprise me if this will be the same case with MGM titles coming and going on Prime. Keep in mind, Epix still exists and there’s been no plans to discontinue that service as of yet.
    Even every show up to Enterprise is still on UK Netflix.
  • Junglist_1985Junglist_1985 Los Angeles
    Posts: 1,032
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-23/amazon-plans-to-invest-1-billion-in-movies-for-theaters?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&leadSource=uverify wall&mibextid=Zxz2cZ
  • zb007zb007 UK
    Posts: 87
    I've also heard that the streaming versions of many films have inferior visual quality to the Blu-Rays. [/quote]

    I thought everyone knew that streaming will never have the same rate as the disc unless someone can correct me on that streaming is inferior to watching the actual disc ?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    Well you can stream in 4K so that would already be better than bluray, but if you make like comparisons the disc probably is still better, but inevitably the streaming technology will catch up to disc, if it hasn’t already.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited November 2022 Posts: 5,970
    So will we be seeing the classic MGM logo and an Amazon logo at the beginning of future films?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    Ugh, god, probably.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,466
    Is it reasonable / logical to blame Amazon for the lack of an updated DVD / Blu-Ray box set of all the films including NTTD? Crazy it still hasn’t happened a year on.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    I think it is reasonable to put the blame on them, they have zero incentive to release these films physically if the alternative is that people have to subscribe to their service.
    I know Amazon doesn't really have any creative control over Bond (allegedly), but they probably do have some control over releases and such.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,183
    Denbigh wrote: »
    So will we be seeing the classic MGM logo and an Amazon logo at the beginning of future films?

    It’s possible they may just stick with the MGM logo. After all, when Disney bought Marvel and LucasFilm, their movies never opened with the Disney castle. Amazon branded films may stick to streaming while MGM films are purely theatrical.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,547
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    Denbigh wrote: »
    So will we be seeing the classic MGM logo and an Amazon logo at the beginning of future films?

    It’s possible they may just stick with the MGM logo. After all, when Disney bought Marvel and LucasFilm, their movies never opened with the Disney castle. Amazon branded films may stick to streaming while MGM films are purely theatrical.

    Good point, and I hope you’re right.
Sign In or Register to comment.