Ghostbusters: Afterlife (July 2020)

[FireGilbert]

I’ll be watching for the cinematography in rural Alberta alone. It looks amazing in the trailer.

I’m not sold on the whole Stranger things/Super 8/IT chapter 1 vibe, which has been done to death lately, but it still looks way way way better than the 2016 version.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Hmm. Didn’t even think of the local places. I think that’s the crossfield school in the shot with Paul Rudd on the ground and the brick building with brownish trim behind him. If true I once escaped Miss McGuigan’s math class by jumping out that window once. Good times.

[mac_82]

Filming Locations Map:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/vi...0834999998&z=9

https://twitter.com/user/status/1204253289249935360

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Yup. Good old WG Murdoch.

[rubecube]

This made me laugh.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1204169076681003008

[Rando]

Ghostbusters: Afterlife - Moved from July 10, 2020 to March 5, 2021

Damn you Covid19

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Rando

Damn you Covid19

This is the true crime.

[direwolf]

Bummer.

[Sliver]

Aww, lame. I was hoping they'd release it on streaming platforms for a fee. Guess the pirates would have ruined that for the people willing to pay, though.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

I’ll be watching for the cinematography in rural Alberta alone. It looks amazing in the trailer.

I’m not sold on the whole Stranger things/Super 8/IT chapter 1 vibe, which has been done to death lately, but it still looks way way way better than the 2016 version.

Stranger Things, Super 8, It, etc... were all basically copying Ghostbusters somewhat in their vibe. I'm actually excited to see if they can bring back that vibe from the original Ghostbusters to this effectively. That was really what made the originals so great.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Aww, lame. I was hoping they'd release it on streaming platforms for a fee. Guess the pirates would have ruined that for the people willing to pay, though.

Zero chance of that happening. They want the whole family to pay admission and buy snacks. Charging a single fee of $10 for a room full of people to watch would have cut their revenue by hundreds of millions.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by blankall

Zero chance of that happening. They want the whole family to pay admission and buy snacks. Charging a single fee of $10 for a room full of people to watch would have cut their revenue by hundreds of millions.

Well, not zero chance. Universal is doing it with some movies already. And $10 would be too low, of course.

We'll see how things progress. Without any doubt, they're going to be watching the take on movies like The Hunt to see what streaming looks like compared to their expectations had it been in theaters. We'll see how full theaters are in a few months, six months and 12 months. If things are back to normal in a year, then great. If not, I wouldn't be so sure more movies won't end up going straight to streaming services.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by blankall

Zero chance of that happening. They want the whole family to pay admission and buy snacks. Charging a single fee of $10 for a room full of people to watch would have cut their revenue by hundreds of millions.

Do movie studios get a cut of snacks? I thought they just took all the door revenue.

I think a movie was recently released while still in theatres, and it was $20 USD for 48 hours. So if they price it like a movie for 2-4 people I think they would still take in the same per person, roughly.

I'm sure they'll find some technology that gives them permission to spy on you in your living room to make sure not to many people watch, sand you sign away all your privacy for the privilege.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Well, not zero chance. Universal is doing it with some movies already. And $10 would be too low, of course.

We'll see how things progress. Without any doubt, they're going to be watching the take on movies like The Hunt to see what streaming looks like compared to their expectations had it been in theaters. We'll see how full theaters are in a few months, six months and 12 months. If things are back to normal in a year, then great. If not, I wouldn't be so sure more movies won't end up going straight to streaming services.

A lot of these movies either movies that had already hit the theatres or lower budget dramas. Doubt any high budget action movies go straight to video.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Do movie studios get a cut of snacks? I thought they just took all the door revenue.

I think a movie was recently released while still in theatres, and it was $20 USD for 48 hours. So if they price it like a movie for 2-4 people I think they would still take in the same per person, roughly.

I'm sure they'll find some technology that gives them permission to spy on you in your living room to make sure not to many people watch, sand you sign away all your privacy for the privilege.

They don't get a cut of the snacks, but it's all part of the business model. Theatres build in the profits they make from snacks into the ability to build giant theatres to watch the movies on.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by blankall

They don't get a cut of the snacks, but it's all part of the business model. Theatres build in the profits they make from snacks into the ability to build giant theatres to watch the movies on.

But studios don't care about theatres in this case. If they can make up the revenue in direct sales, snacks won't matter at all.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by blankall

A lot of these movies either movies that had already hit the theatres or lower budget dramas. Doubt any high budget action movies go straight to video.

Yes, well obviously not in normal circumstances. If eight or 12 months from now theaters are still closed, you can bet they're going to find another way to recoup some of their investment. Streaming will be their best option. They may even have to explore that option if theaters do open, but attendance remains suppressed.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

But studios don't care about theatres in this case. If they can make up the revenue in direct sales, snacks won't matter at all.

Studios would much rather prefer to have hundreds of billions in box office then go to the at home routes. The movies already make a lot of money off of at home watching (On Demand and Blu Ray), after the regular course in the theatres, then the movies go to streaming services. If possible, the studios will get their movies into the theatres.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by blankall

Studios would much rather prefer to have hundreds of billions in box office then go to the at home routes. The movies already make a lot of money off of at home watching (On Demand and Blu Ray), after the regular course in the theatres, then the movies go to streaming services. If possible, the studios will get their movies into the theatres.

Everyone knows everything you just said.

I feel like I'm having a conversation with somebody completely oblivious to COVID-19 and that all movie theatres all over the world are closed indefinitely.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by blankall

Studios would much rather prefer to have hundreds of billions in box office then go to the at home routes. The movies already make a lot of money off of at home watching (On Demand and Blu Ray), after the regular course in the theatres, then the movies go to streaming services. If possible, the studios will get their movies into the theatres.

Hundreds of billions?


Anyway, the point is they don't get theatre revenues from snacks, so they only have to look at ticket sales, and find a price that compensates them for home viewing similar to theatres. With everyone staying home looking for content, it may work out OK for them. It's obviously a newish idea, but they have been toying with it for a few years now. If they can make their money, why do they care what screen it comes out on? Particularity at a point in history when those screens aren't available.