It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I remember when it would take at least a year, often longer, for the home video to come out, and many times there would be a hold back on sell-through, as long as a year, in order to give rental a chance to make a few bucks first.
What about the not so good old days of the 80s where you had to wait TWO YEARS for the latest Bond to come out on video and five years onto TV!
It made you enjoy the cinema moore!!
Credible numbers are always hard to find, but my data shows the theatrical run is, across the board, still more revenue generating than home video.
Skyfall: $304M+ Cinema, $99M Home Video
Granted, these are US market only (as those are the only decent numbers I could readily put my hands on this morning) and we don't know the relative profit margin for the studio of one over the other. We do know that typically 40-60% of tickets sales go back to the studio (and exceptionally as much as 90%, as was the case with Phantom Menace). Given the hype I'd guess that Skyfall was able to command on the higher side of that. I doubt Home Video can boast any better margin which makes the disparity even greater.
But who rents these days? The days of Blockbuster etc. are gone.
umm...everybody I know. Ever heard of iTunes?
No :)
So do I. I just submitted a manuscript for an essay on the subject. But we are fans and collectors ($7B in DVD+Blu-ray sales in the US alone last year), but we arnt the only ones watching movies at home.
I would love to read that! Yeah I forget that people watch movies in other ways at home :) I don't understand people who think there's little difference between Blu-Ray and DVD.
In my experience they are the ones still clinging to a 27" Trinitron tube, or one of the (horrible) early, small, sub-HD flat panels....grossly misaligned...and they sit a mile away from it. :)
Indeed the numbers show that for a given title DVD sales are still for the most part on par with the Blu-Ray counterpart (sometimes exceeding it). Clearly we connoisseurs remain a minority.
I still use a PC with over 5TBs of storage so I can store the files if needed. My internet plan for example, only includes 250GB of data per month. Factor in a few HD movies, tv shows, youtube, netflix, game downloads(25-60GB for new releases), and system updates, and you have a real problem. You run out of data with these ridiculous data caps providers slam you with.
I'm glad they provide the VUDU digital copy with most of the new blurays purchased, but honestly it's of very little use to me right now. Maybe in the future when the scam of data caps has run its course I will be able to stream everything. For now, I will continue to rip my blurays that I purchase and watch the movies that way.
1.) Sony 4K UHD TV
2.) Thundering sound system
and most importantly,
3.) Remote control with a Mute button for the title sequence.
The popcorn will be ready...
To quote Sean, behind the wheel of the DB5...."Patience 007, patience..."
There is some streaming content available from Amazon, Netflix, and You Tube currently, and Amazon has been releasing more of late.
Considering how good image quality is on a 4K set with 1080i source material, such as the remastered Connery discs, I'm eagerly anticipating Spectre's release in the spring, and hope it does bring a variety of special features (Making of, etc.) with the feature.
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/120215_1154