$29.99 to download a movie early

[X400]

if it were movies currently in cinemas i may be interested (but id rather just go to the cinema)

i think they feel this might combat piracy?

[SpaceDog]

I'm sure this will appeal to some people who wouldn't otherwise go to the cinema, but not me. I wouldn't be very pleased with this if I were running a movie theater.

[AKORIS]

not a chance of me doing this..............

[sfmarine]

Physical copies...please.

[McCrutchy]

Does no one remember good old cable Pay-Per-View? Those times when a bunch of guys would get together and one of them would order the $40-$50 boxing match WWF/WWE/WCW "event" and they'd all chip in? With the rising costs of going to the movies--nobody's pointed out fuel costs, either--and the rise of larger HDTV sets that make the average American question: "Why go out to the movies at all?" in the first place, I could see this becoming a big thorn in the theater industry's side. As much as I love going to a movie theater over watching at home, I don't think the majority of people need much of an incentive to start down the "Theatrical Rental" road...

[supersix4]

Originally Posted by fatediesel

I would do this if you got a Blu-ray version of the movie when it was released, but not just to watch it once. It could make some sense though for families or groups of people, because it'd be much cheaper and convenient than driving to theaters, spending $50 or more on tickets, and another $30 on food, and then having to deal with inconsiderate people in the theaters. I guarantee the studios are going to get a lot of opposition and threats of boycotts from theater chains over this.

Yeah last date I went on to a movie popcorn, tickets, drinks, exc. well over 50 bucks and thats two people and not even Imax or 3d.

+ if I could get it in hd even with just standard audio I'd do it for some movies, like an Iron Man, Spider-Man exc. but just to see some random film probably not

I'm psyched if this actually happens though, because it would be nice to have the choice, even if someone doesn't take advantage of it.

[ts0323]

I might be for this if:

1. It were 1080p Blu-ray quality (not likely)
2. You get to keep the movie

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

Does no one remember good old cable Pay-Per-View?

Remember it?--I've got Comcast greedily nagging at me three times a month to upgrade my plan to a luxury $75/mo. service so I can "enjoy" it at an extra $4 per movie, just to get my own local digital stations...

We didn't lose PPV, we just saw it become the main prize in the cable-vs.-satellite wars, as if Blu-ray and Netflix never existed.

[hedliniv]

I got the Spaghetti with a Chance of Meatballs as a free download from Sony when I bought my TV. It actually was broadcast in 1080p and it was phenomenal! It is actually the reason that finally pushed me over the edge to order my blu-ray player!

If they released these movies at the same time as the theater and priced it competitively (come on it should be much less without the middleman!) then I may bite every once and awhile. Now if they "sold you" the rights to view it at any time and any place (kind of like what Disney not has it movies online) Then I could see this being VERY successful!!!

[kernel_thai]

Its not a bad idea just crappy implementation. I dont have the big family issue to contend with but if I like a movie I wanna see it more than once and not 5 months from now. If they offered a quality download and say a 5 viewing site license, I would go for it. It would fill the gap till the Blu came out and replaced it.

Id never pay $20 to $30 for one viewing. The movie I need to see again that bad hasnt been made.

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

Does no one remember good old cable Pay-Per-View? Those times when a bunch of guys would get together and one of them would order the $40-$50 boxing match WWF/WWE/WCW "event" and they'd all chip in? With the rising costs of going to the movies--nobody's pointed out fuel costs, either--and the rise of larger HDTV sets that make the average American question: "Why go out to the movies at all?" in the first place, I could see this becoming a big thorn in the theater industry's side. As much as I love going to a movie theater over watching at home, I don't think the majority of people need much of an incentive to start down the "Theatrical Rental" road...

The reason that worked most people had a friend with a big screen tv and everyone went there. Now everyone has one so why travel.

[Trogdor2010]

When impatience and pride come to play, the fact that you can just watch something from an internet connection for a monthly fee or even free instead, hell even rent blu rays and dvds for a small fee, then you watch a movie that is likely scooped up by pirators, only you pay $30 or $40 just to watch a movie you likely see that you seen many times on a much smaller screen that you watch by yourself with no one around (much worsening the deal).

I'm going to sound bias, PASS this "entertainment" fiasco. Only benefit over the theater (if you get caught frequently) is that you can get snacks for dirt cheap (unless you bought that popcorn from the amusement park).

[Minimejer05]

Not sure about this one. I love the experience at the theater. And with a price of 30 a movie.. its still cheaper for a ticket and soda/popcorn.

Only movies I like on demand are the IFC and indy films that go on demand and at theaters for 10 bucks. Its about the price of a ticket and it saves me the 25 min drive to the arthouse theater.

[fdm]

If I want to see a movie that bad (and pay that much), I would just go to the theater when it first comes out. Otherwise, I can wait. Pass for me.

[henson1855]

I live in Las Vegas , where two of the Best Buys here and one in Chicago are currently doing a complete remodel to be the first three stores in the company that virtually diccontinue selling blu rays,dvds and cds with the exception of a very select few new releases,they have eliminated thousands of titles.the company is going to start pushing the downloading of music and movies through Best Buy,I think it's a big mistake,and personally I hope the people here speak up like I have and do everytime I go in the store because these 3 stores are going to be testruns to see how many more will be overhauled,and if things go well,all stores will be overhauled like the 3 model stores.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by fatediesel

I don't really know why it would. They would have plenty of copy protections in place so you couldn't record the movie so it really shouldn't be any different than going to the theater.

Just like dvds and blu rays copy protection.

[masoud90]

Why are the studios continually trying to take away from the exclusivity of the theatres?

[wallendo]

A lot of posters on this thread seem to feel this is a threat to blu-ray and have launched a counter-attack.

My take is that:
1) People who watch movies in theatres will continue to do so.
2) People who wait for BD's will continue to do so
3) Big fans of individual movies will continue to go to the theatre and then buy the BD.

There are people to whom such a service would be potentially useful.
1) People who have mobility or transportation issues.
2) People in isolated areas who do not live near any theatres.
3) People in larger areas that do not have access to "art houses".
4) Families with young children (babysitting can get expensive).
5) Die hard fans (Avatards etc) who just can't wait to see their favorite movie for the 10th time.
Obviously, these people could wait for the BD/DVD to be released, or the film to arrive on regular PPV, but why should they have to. If they want to spend $30 to see the movie early, it doesn't hurt any of us.

Whether it works are not depends on its implementation. The studios will need to wait long enough to keep theatre owners happy, while releasing films early enough to justify the high price.

In addition, keep in mind, that something similar is already being done with hotel pay-for-view, where movies are available long before they are released on BD/DVD or satellite/cable PPV. This is just an extension of that product.

[ArmyOfDarknessAW]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

Just like dvds and blu rays copy protection.

Well to be fair Blu ray's encyption may be broken but it is still way to exspensive thats why almost nobody does it compared to DVD. If the file sizes are big enough that they cannot use a DVD to record a copy of it then i don't see it being done till blank Blu rays get much cheaper.

[Sith]

I don't pay $20 or more for anything that doesn't have uncompressed audio period!!!

[Germtop]

Originally Posted by SDon1969

I wouldn't do this. I noticed that On Demand had that new movie Monsters ready to go before theaters, and it was $10.99...I didn't even do that!

I watched it. I hate going to the theaters (overpriced food, obnoxious people chatting and texting on their phones, etc.) so I thought this was actually a pretty good deal since movie tickets are $9 PER PERSON.

The downside is that the quality was pretty bad. It looked Netflix-streaming quality.