Personally I think $19.99 is a good price point for these new releases.
Not sure the math works out though for the studios where they could potentially make 300-500 million globally on these big releases.
As of now, the studios are discussing that VOD will be somewhere around $19.99 for a 48 hour period.
But the difference is that in the bigger cities, it's at least $18.99 a ticket with IMAX coming in around $25-30 a ticket, so studios would definitely lose money by going VOD because they won't have multiple tickets per person.
It makes more sense for Disney (Onward & Frozen) and Uni (Invisible Man and The Hunt) to release on Disney+ or VOD because they're at the end of their theatrical runs.
So if WW 2 goes VOD instead of a theatrical, they're basically saying that this movie sucks, which jibes with everything I've heard about it. [Reply]
The trailer looks great, this is one I am looking forward to if the Theaters are open this summer. My only worry is that the trailer is better than the actual movie. Even if so you get to look at Gal Gadot for a few hours, could be much worse! [Reply]
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990:
I guess this means that No Time to Die, Black Widow and Quiet Place II are good?
The James Bond series is too high profile to send to VOD. There will always be an audience for the character and since this is Daniel Craig's final outing, the box office is expected to be quite high.
Marvel has such an excellent track record and generally speaking, don't any cash flow issues, so they can sit on this movie indefinitely.
I'd be a little more concerned if I was a producer or studio releasing A Quiet Place II. While it was a low budget film that turned into a bit of a global phenom, it's pretty rare that sequels to those types of movies live up to expectations.
IMO, they'd be smart to wait a full year to release this film in the theaters because even if the theaters chains reopen this summer, people will most likely avoid films of this nature due to the current crisis. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Predarat:
The trailer looks great, this is one I am looking forward to if the Theaters are open this summer. My only worry is that the trailer is better than the actual movie. Even if so you get to look at Gal Gadot for a few hours, could be much worse!
If her new outfit was a g-string I would pay to see it, otherwise... meh [Reply]
'Wonder Woman 1984' is on the move once again, with Warner Bros. shifting the superhero sequel's release date out of summer. #WW84https://t.co/agRYpsdNRt
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties:
can gal stop doing stupid superhero junk and start doing some avant-garde art films where she gets her tits out?
Has a woman super hero actress ever showed the goods before she was cast in a major role? The only one I can think of was Olivia Munn but she was just a part of the X-Men film. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Has a woman super hero actress ever showed the goods before she was cast in a major role? The only one I can think of was Olivia Munn but she was just a part of the X-Men film.
Pretty sure Brie Larson did early in her career? [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Has a woman super hero actress ever showed the goods before she was cast in a major role? The only one I can think of was Olivia Munn but she was just a part of the X-Men film.
The supergirl one, Melissa Benoit or whatever did. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Buehler445:
The supergirl one, Melissa Benoit or whatever did.
She's gone further than that, with some of those fappening leak picks from a few years back, but only sicko's would look at those. I've certainly never done anything like that. I wouldn't ever condone such behavior. I mean, I don't even know what it is I'm talking about. Somebody at work told me about it. Or I read it online. Or I had a dream about it. [Reply]
