ie8 fix
madison

Time Warner CEO: New movies to your living room for $50 by mid-2011

By | November 5, 2010, 5:24am PDT

Movie studios have been vague about their plans to offer new films in homes via video on demand, but Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes has recently detailed his company’s vision for the service.

Bewkes says that Time Warner movies that are still in theaters will be offered in living rooms by the middle of 2011. He says pricing will be roughly $50 for new flicks, which at first blush seems extremely high, though when you factor in the cost of several movie tickets, popcorn, drinks, and so on, it may be a deal if you have a group of people watching with you. Then again, you’re watching it on your HDTV instead of a giant screen and missing the whole movie-going experience.

The fallout from Time Warner’s plans could be considerable. For instance, Bewkes says his company would examine whether the timing for making its films available to DVD-rental services like Netflix and Redbox should be lengthened from the current 28 days after their DVD release date. Theaters owners will howl in protest, especially since they’re in the midst of spending considerable sums to add new 3D screens to their venues.

Nonetheless, Time Warner seems committed to this new strategy, which is in response to fewer people going to new movies and more people watching films through pay TV’s on demand options, DVD rentals, and online streaming. Consumer will ultimately decide if paying $50 to avoid movie theaters that they’re already going to less frequently is a viable way to catch new films. Do you think it is? Let us know in the Comments section.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Sean Portnoy is a freelance technology journalist.

Disclosure

Sean Portnoy

Sean Portnoy is a freelance technology journalist; currently, all work that Sean does is on a contractural basis. Sean has also written corporate communications documents for CA.

Sean does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Sean Portnoy

Sean Portnoy started his tech writing career at ZDNet nearly a decade ago. He then spent several years as an editor at Computer Shopper magazine, most recently serving as online executive editor. He received a B.A. from Brown University and an M.A. from the University of Southern California.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
39
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

yeah
akbarzpro 21st Nov
@jimoro yeah, good luck with that. it's very cheap. i like it

Terpopuler , RCTI Online , Mivo TV , Contoh Surat Lamaran Kerja
Not no, but HELL no. The only advantage is you don't have the ignorant folks tapping away on their cell phones and the incessent munching of popcorn around you. I'll wait for the regular PPV option or (preferrably Netflix streaming..) If they enhanced that option to include 99% of their library and/or more new releases, I would pay a little more for my monthly subscription.
@JT82
Deal Special dari KrisKros.com
Deal Special dari KrisKros.com
Deal Special dari KrisKros.com
0 Votes
+ -
Well, there are certain benefits
Peter Perry 5th Nov 2010
Pricing of course requires no less than 5 people watch the movie and of course you can pause the movie for bathroom breaks... Then you won't have some rude kid who thinks he is funny ruining the movie (you can smack the kids in the living room).

On the other hand you are now encouraging me to just wait for the disc to be released because it will be cheaper and you will own the movie later on.

Of course if this guy said, $65 and you get the bluray when it releases then that might work.
Not sure what kind of "crack" they are smoking in Hollyweird, but it must be really good stuff if they think this kind of pricing will fly with consumers.
0 Votes
+ -
Is most of their stuff
Economister 5th Nov 2010
@RandyMichael

worth watching at all? Even if free?
0 Votes
+ -
@RandyMichael

... if it was an "event" kind of movie. It would be great to throw a party and watch a new movie cheaper than if everyone went to the theater.

Even if I was watching it by myself, it's better than sitting in a theater with obnoxious peopl yelling at the screen, talking to each other, chomping popcorn with their mouths open, talking on their cell phones and texting during the whole movie. $50 is a bargain!
There is no way under THIS sun that I'll pay fifty bucks to watch anything over PPV. This is at least twice as much as I'm willing to spend for a movie.

What universe are these people living in?
0 Votes
+ -
One more thing...
clfitz 5th Nov 2010
The article states:
"Nonetheless, Time Warner seems committed to this new strategy, which is in response to fewer people going to new movies and more people watching films through pay TV?s on demand options, DVD rentals, and online streaming."

I thought a free market meant the law of supply and demand was in effect. Being die-hard capitalists, you'd think these guys would think of that. If it didn't cost so much to see a movie in the theater, maybe more people would go.
I stopped going to the movies because it is too expensive. I am certianly not going to pay even more just to see the movie at home. I will be waiting for the movie to be on disk. Then I can own it forever for only $20 and I can watch it as may times as I want with as many people as I want, I could even loan it out.

The only thing I see coming out of this is that movie pirate no long have to go tho the theater to copy new movies, they can now do it from their home. How will recording a TV screen with a camcorder be any different then recording a theater screen? In fact many people have mini theaters in their homes so it may be the same.
@ryanmc You hit the nail on the head! How can these people continue to be so out of touch?
@ryanmc

I agree the pricing is way too high. But I kinda doubt this will help the pirates unless the movie industry is incompetent (which I know shouldn't surprise me).

If I were deploying this tripe, I'd individually (and invisibly to human eyes) watermark the scenes. If a torrent was found of it, I could send it through an image analysis program, and determine the cable system and individual serial number of the showing. The agreement with the cable systems would require them to report the name, address, and phone number of the subscriber if I were to provide them the showing serial number and the torrent as evidence.
0 Votes
+ -
Bwahahahaha DOA!
pjboyles 5th Nov 2010
These guys are completely out of touch with reality.
0 Votes
+ -
It thought about really big blockbuster movies that have a HUGE fan base; a new Star Trek, Harry Potter, Twilight, etc. movie. These are more events than just a movie. This would give an option to hold a house party and show that movie and share the cost and party food. Unless it is the movie event itself that would be the fun.

I cannot see regular movie releases being worth the $50 prict tag, when a few weeks later it will be on cable/satelite for $4.99 pay per view. grin
$50? Really??? Good luck with that...
0 Votes
+ -
yeah
akbarzpro 21st Nov
@jimoro yeah, good luck with that. it's very cheap. i like it

Terpopuler , RCTI Online , Mivo TV , Contoh Surat Lamaran Kerja
I prefer to go to the theatres. It is an experience to go there and meet up with friends. Also, I go to a theatre with very large screens. Even the best home theatre system is not going to be as cool as. I'll stich with the theatre
0 Votes
+ -
Wrong target audience
SteveMak 5th Nov 2010
In my mind, the dad with a family of 3 kids is far less likely to be the guy with a home theater, video streaming, etc. He may even have a hard time syncing up his iPod. The folks who are streaming savvy are unlikely to be shelling out $50 a pop at the theater anyway, so there is no savings to be realized by doing this at home.

As others have said, these guys aren't competing with the "family out to the theater" model, they are competing with the "video on demand at home" model, and all they are offering is faster availability of material for 10x the price. I predict few takers in this game.
@SteveMak
As an IT professional and father of three kids, this could definitely make sense. It woudl cost much more to take the whole family out to the movies and we could enjoy it and as someone else said, take bathroom breaks for the kids!

And why would a father of three kids not be technologically savvy? I probably was working with technology when you were in diapers! happy
I guess you might be one of the 6 people who buy into this product wink

re "I probably was working with technology when you were in diapers!" -- That depends on which half of the previous century you were born in.
@SteveMak
Second half of the century so maybe not?
@SteveMak are you serious? Did with 3 kids that can't sync their iPod? Who do you think is running technology companies--high school super-geeks? Who do you think really has the money for this entertainment? That's right, dads with 3 kids who know how to sync their iPod, and their home theater, and are streaming savvy.

As a dad with a 3 kids who is streaming savvy, enjoys movies, but realizes the cost of either paying for 5 tickets and candy, pop corn, and other crap my kids would want or the dinner and babysitter my wife would want $50 is a barging for a first run movie playing on my schedule. (Which is more hectic than any average guy without three kids that I know.)

You may not be the taker but I think most of my peers with similar circumstances are more than willing to use this as an alternative to family movie day or date night when the schedule is tight.
0 Votes
+ -
Wrong target audience
SteveMak 8th Nov 2010
With all due respect (no sarcasm intended) to contributors such as Frankmjr and marc@..., I believe your description of yourself is the *exception* to Joe Q. Public, as opposed to being typical of the masses. Let's give this "$50 per movie rental" some time to test the waters, and we'll see if I am out to lunch, or if there simply aren't sufficient numbers of folks like you in our population to make this offer a permanent part of the menu. Time will tell. Cheers!
0 Votes
+ -
They are on the wrong wave length!
normc@... 5th Nov 2010
As a retired person, I can wait a long time for a movie to come out to the Targets and Wal-Marts to get them on the cheep. I remember the days when VHS tapes were very pricey and I just waited. It is expensive to keep up with technology i.e. tapes, DVD,s, blu-rays, streaming and now yet more expensive streaming. I am still waiting a little longer before I get an HD TV as all this moves very fast.
0 Votes
+ -
Good Idea if we earn mega-millions like Bewkes
ebhb2004@... Updated - 5th Nov 2010
If I earned what Bewkes earns, yes I'd pay $50 for a movie, just so I wouldn't have to mingle with "common people" Other than that, he needs to make an emergency appointment with the nearest available shrink. If I were on Time Warner's board I'd have to seriously consider his viability as the CEO.
I'm like the other people on here in thinking that this is an idea that will have an extremely short life. I won't pay that amount to see a live concert from a band or musician I like; why would a studio head think I'd be willing to spend $50 for the "privilege" of seeing a new movie on my TV at home?

My visits to movie theaters are few and far between, primarily because there just aren't that many movies worth the trouble, at least in my view. The idea this studio head is proposing is stupid. It will make it even less likely that I'd spend anything on their products, not more likely. What _are_ those people smoking, anyway?
No way.

There isn't a movie being produced now even worth $50 to see.
$ 50 for a year of new movie! I may also not interested.....
Someone at TW doesn't understand the law of supply and demand. I can easily wait for FIOS on demand or Netflix -- and I still go to movie theatres where I can assure you part of the reason for reduced demand is high prices.
0 Votes
+ -
50 bucks for a movie won't fly unless its UFC
syleishere@... Updated - 5th Nov 2010
Actually what I do is I go on cheap nights during week to movies I really want to see. So you pay only for ticket and get popcorn and drink free. Its just nice to get out of the house for a good 3D movie. I am not as willing to drive to theatre to watch a movie in 2D, I can do that from home, I can also watch movies in 3D at home, but I enjoy the bigger picture for good movies.

Other than that our only option is just download the movie free once it hits DVD, and use netflix for more of a selection on nights where we have exhausted all our new movie titles.

Lets face it, certainly only the computer geeks of families know how to utilize ps3's and such to stream movies to their TV's however the trend I have seen happening is the computer geeks of the families burning DVD's for their other members to watch.

AOL has the biggest market share in my opinion to get people back to the theatres, where are the starwars, iron man, superman, transformers etc movies we love so much.
YOu literally have lineups for those movies, we go to the theatre to "escape" from our lives, we want to see "heros" not be reminded of our daily lives.

We want quality movies, some horror movie renting a high school for the entire film is not what we call quality for instance. Lets face it, baby boomers aren't much of movie goers anymore, and our generation that are movie goers right now, want to see more science fiction! Where is the next matrix!
GREED, pure unmitigated greed. Frankly I wish people would do a grass roots boycott for just a weekend of movies. The cost of going to the movies far exceeds their entertainment value. Now this. I hope it fails big time and costs Time Warner and the Studios; they will only learn when their bottom line is hit. In any case cable companies are becoming irrelevant and hemorrhaging subscribers as this article indicates: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/posttech/2010/11/for_the_second_quarter_in.html
0 Votes
+ -
This may work...
huntm856 5th Nov 2010
...for the few big event-type movies, where people will be willing to organize viewing parties, but it's not going to be at all appealing for low- to mid-budget productions. I predict fail.

Also, the industry has made a big deal out of pirating being an issue. It would be far easier to make a much better recording of films from the comfort of one's home. I never bought the pirate videotapers thing anyway; I guess I was right, because there's no way they'd do this if they felt like it was really an issue.
Solves a problem for me. My wife is home bound. IT would be great to experience date night again viewing a movied recently released and anticipated.
0 Votes
+ -
Never work
Dr_Zinj 5th Nov 2010
The MPAA would forbid anyone inviting friends over to watch with them. The want to see a first run movie at home, they have to buy the eqyipment and pay for the movies separately. Otherwise the poor movie industry won't make their billions.
$50!!! Jesus tap dancing Christ NO!

There might be 1 or 2 movies a year I'd pay $15 at home to see during release. Right now I go to a regular movie about once a year and a local drive in movie theater (for the novelty) about 3 times a year. Otherwise, I can cool my heels for 6 months until Netflix gets it.
0 Votes
+ -
$50 is still too much
laman 5th Nov 2010
For the same money, I can sit more comfortable in a cinema watching on a much better screen than the 42" TV at home.
And they wonder why they have such a problem with pirates. But then again, this is Time Warner we're talking about.....
$50.00, no way. I'll wait for Blu-ray. The price difference will buy a lot of popcorn and drinks. And I find movies are always more enjoyable at home.

I rarely go to a theater. Way to expensive. While the size of the image is nice the theaters in this area have sound that sucks.
At home the screen may be slightly smaller but at proper seating distance the image can come close to the theater image and is excellent quality. At home the sound can envelop the body with tactile messages that help create the "you are there" experience that is lacking in theaters. Plus if there is some jerk disturbing the show you can evict them.

So for me I'll stick with Blu-ray until the price becomes more reasonable, like $5.00.
*laughs uncontrollably*
$50 a movie? No way in hell! No movie is so "Must See" that I can't wait until it comes out on disk or is available on Netflix. I wonder how long it will be until they cut the price or end the service.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix