Entertainment

The cost of the post-pandemic movie

Why you should care about Mulan’s terrible premiere

Published

on

The fate of the Hollywood blockbuster rests on a fingertip. A formerly grandiose affair with celebrities dressing up to the nines, the red-carpet premiere is now an impossibility thanks to the ongoing COVID-19 crisis. On the other side, streaming services blossomed with new titles and exclusives. It was (and is) a great era for the home theater. But the home theater will not last forever. Hollywood is now facing a crisis for the future of the premiere.

If the past year is any indication, Hollywood will, of course, not go down without a fight. Large networks and production houses have released their own streaming platforms to monopolize their content, putting additional weight on a consumer’s budget. Take Disney’s Disney+ or NBC’s Peacock, for instance. Now, a few of these (like Disney and Netflix) make their own blockbuster content as well. We’ve seen Netflix’s streaming-only premieres already. How about Disney’s (or anyone else’s) Hollywood premieres, which often rely on astounding box office numbers?

This week, we got a taste of such a strange premiere scheme. In an earnings call, Disney CEO Bob Chapek detailed the future of a delayed movie, Mulan. Initially premiering in theaters back in March, Mulan was repeatedly delayed because of the continued shutdown of movie theaters. Now, as the company is itching to finally launch it, Chapek announced a hybrid release for the film. Partly premiering in theater in safe countries, the film will also launch simultaneously on Disney+ for unsafe markets.

Now, here’s the catch: the film will cost US$ 29.99 for Disney+ users. Even if you have a subscription already, you have to fork over approximately PhP 1,474 to watch the new film. Of course, the hair trigger response is, “c’mon, Disney; stop haggling money from your customers.” And the response is right. However, there is so much more to this. Mulan can set the stage for an unprecedented era for Hollywood premieres.

Let’s get down to business

In New York, an average movie ticket costs around US$ 15 (approximately PhP 736). Mulan’s price tag is twice as much as a theater ticket. It’s even weightier in cheaper states and, most especially, in the Philippines (where movie tickets are only around US$ 5). Further, you’ll still need an active Disney+ account to access the film, costing an additional US$ 6.99.

(Naturally, it’s impossible to accurately translate the prices to an Asian market since Disney+ has not launched in all of Southeast Asia yet. We can only assume that Mulan’s streaming price is 200 percent of normal ticket prices, whatever it might be.)

Objectively, Mulan’s price is worse than a regular movie ticket. It’s easy to conclude the argument with this statement and head home. However, there is a way to justify the price.

The whole family plus your cow

Now, a single movie ticket typically admits one person. Buying Mulan pays for the streaming privilege which can typically include an entire family. With a 15-dollar average, two people watching the same Mulan purchase is already a break-even point. In the same vein, a family of four obtains double the value of the 30-dollar film price. Even better, a family can watch the film over and over again. And, as any parent who has a Frozen-loving child can tell you, unlimited playbacks is a blessing for your wallet (albeit a curse on your sanity).

Unfortunately, despite the mathematical mind-bending, Mulan’s price is still far from ideal. The movie-going experience is not the same on a streaming platform as in a cinema.

An assumption of equality

A cinema ticket is price of equality. Besides a few slight differences, everyone is paying for the same product. All other things considered equal, a 20-year old college student is paying and enjoying the same experience as a 50-year old CEO. Same film, same seat cushions, same facilities, same projector.

On the other hand, a streaming subscription cannot assume the same thing. A platform cannot control where and with what device a user will watch the movie from. A 20-year old college student watching the film on a laptop screen in a poorly lit dorm room is not enjoying the same experience as a 50-year old CEO watching the same thing in their high-end home theater with Dolby Atmos.

Likewise, the platform cannot assume how many people will watch the film in one purchase. Now, Mulan is a family film. Disney can easily assume that multi-person families will buy and watch the film. However, how will the audiences take the same price tag for a more polarized movie like Christopher Nolan’s Tenet or the next James Bond film?

All of Hollywood knows you’re here

In the same announcement, Chapek hints that Mulan’s price is just a “one-off.” Basically, other films might not follow the same pricing scheme. In a way, it makes sense. Mulan was made with a pre-coronavirus budget. It was expected to make millions from box office tickets. This might be the only way for Mulan to recoup its many losses. In the future, Disney might make films with lesser budgets and lesser expectations.

However, make no mistake; other filmmakers are intently watching Mulan’s performance on streaming. If Mulan succeeds, they can likely charge the same amount without incurring a lot of losses. That said, streaming premiere prices will likely vary from film to film. Even then, this isn’t the last discussion on the future of the film industry.

If the industry hopes to adapt to the new normal, it needs to rethink its strategy even further. Disney is offering only one solution for the problem of streaming. Unfortunately, the brand’s solution leverages a family-oriented release, one that might not appeal to the average moviegoer today.

A price worth fighting for

My suggestion: Implement a tiered premiere price. Not everyone will want to pay the full 30 dollars for a film they’re not wholly interested in. Most will watch it once and forget about it. Some won’t even care about watching it in HD.

Why not implement a pricing scheme based on those different preferences? For example, charge US$ 5 for a standard-definition, one-time playback premiere; US$ 10 for an HD, one-time playback premiere; US$ 20 for a standard-definition, unlimited playback premiere; and US$ 30 for an HD, unlimited playback premiere. In one swoop, a film can appeal to all streaming markets and needs.

Entertainment

Netflix: Kris Aquino makes on-screen comeback with fictional role

Long-time TV icon named “C.H.I.K.A.” of Netflix

Published

on

Long-time popular Philippine TV icon Kris Aquino has made her on-screen comeback as Netflix’s fictional C.H.I.K.A., or “Chief Head of Insights and Kontent Analysis.”

Netflix initially teased the campaign through a post mentioning that they were “hiring” for the said position.

The post also contained a bullet list of descriptions that served as clues. Not long after, the streaming giant bared the former presidential daughter and presidential sister has made her comeback.

A teaser has likewise been released. The fun skit features Aquino in this new fictional role, giving her signature witty commentary inside the Netflix editing room to ensure that the production of local entertainment content is of topnotch quality.

Two more episodes will be rolled out on August 14 and 20.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

New Yorkers compete in Ted Lasso lookalike contest at Apple Fifth Avenue

Futbol is life!

Published

on

Apple Fifth Avenue or Nelson Road? New Yorkers gathered at the iconic flagship store as it transformed into a slice of AFC Richmond for a Ted Lasso lookalike contest celebrating the return of the hit Apple TV+ series.

Dozens of fans arrived in Ted’s signature look, complete with mustaches, visors, blue sweaters, and khakis. Inside the store, the AFC Richmond takeover continued with themed photo opportunities and hidden Easter eggs for longtime fans to discover.

The celebration continued across Midtown and Central Park, where brand ambassadors spread kindness with “Believe” signs, complimentary coffee and tea, a tunnel of cheering Teds for runners, and the Goldfish Zone, where visitors symbolically let go of worries by dropping paper fish into a fishbowl.

Photo by Apple

The takeover marked the return of Ted Lasso, which premiered its fourth season on Apple TV+ on Aug. 5, which arrives more than three years after Season 3 concluded in 2023.

Jason Sudeikis returns as the relentlessly optimistic coach, this time leading AFC Richmond’s newly formed women’s team while reuniting with familiar faces.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Street Fighter special look: Blanka vs. Ryu

Jason Momoa, Andrew Koji’s characters face off

Published

on

Paramount Pictures has released a new special look for Street Fighter featuring Jason Momoa and Andrew Koji.

The short, minute-long clip shows the actors’ respective characters, Blanka and Ryu, in battle.

It opens with a chained prisoner struck by extreme electrical charges, transforming into the green-skinned, electricity-infused Blanka.

He unleashes a fierce roar. Meanwhile, Ryu drops into a fighting stance, but tells Blanka he does not want to fight him.

Forced to defend himself, Ryu then fires a signature Hadouken fireball towards Blanka, as the teaser cuts to the Street Fighter title card.

Street Fighter debuts in cinemas starting October 14. It is directed by Kitao Sakurai and stars an ensemble cast that includes Noah Centineo as Ken Masters, Callina Liang as Chun-Li, Joe “Roman Reigns” Anoai as Akuma, and Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson as Balrog, among others.

The film is set in 1993 when estranged Street Fighters Ryu and Ken Masters are thrown into combat when Chun-Li recruits them for the next World Warrior Tournament.

Continue Reading

Trending