Disney's live-action "Mulan"

[DarkKnight88]

$50? For something that’ll be released with no premium fee in 3 months? There’s just no upside other than to claim, “I saw it first!!” Either give me the theatrical experience or I’ll gladly wait.

I’m sure these titles will be hot on the piracy circuit with clear copies available.

 

[weezerspider]

It's not. I keep seeing "when you factor in my wife, my mother, my father, my daughter, my son, my son's friend, my sons friends friend, my dog, and popcorn, it adds up". That's a lame reason.

I mean aren’t the majority of people watching Mulan families? How many single adults are going to watch Mulan?

 

[MadVillainy]

Also, a thought...what if Mulan sucks? What if part of the reason they're doing this is because they know that it would've eventually dropped off at the theater and not made that much money anyway?

I'll be really surprised if they do this with Black Widow because that was probably gonna make a billion

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

I also think an important thing to remember that some might be forgetting is that they are charging people this when you still aren't getting the real movie going experience unless your one of those lucky rich people who just so happens to have a home theater system there house somewhere. Paying $30 bucks or more at the theater isn't such bad thing IMO, because at least your watching a movie on the bigscreen with surround sound and everything, but just to watch it at home it just doesn't seem worth it to me.

And then on top of that, what about unforeseen circumstances. You pay for the movie, then in the middle of it you have to leave the house for an emergency or something. 30 bucks down the drain for a movie you couldn’t even totally enjoy.

If this was like a rental available for a week, then fine, but 30 bucks for a single viewing is a little steep.

 

[MadVillainy]

And then on top of that, what about unforeseen circumstances. You pay for the movie, then in the middle of it you have to leave the house for an emergency or something. 30 bucks down the drain for a movie you couldn’t even totally enjoy.

If this was like a rental available for a week, then fine, but 30 bucks for a single viewing is a little steep.

What if your internet goes out too or if your internet sucks? Or maybe the movie sucks. Imagine paying $30 for a movie that sucks

 

[DarkKnight88]

Also, a thought...what if Mulan sucks.What if part of the reason they're doing this is because they know that it would've eventually dropped off at the tehater and not made that much money anyway?

I'll be really surprised if they do this with Black Widow because that was probably gonna make a billion

I was thinking that.

So far the straight to streaming titles that haven’t been delayed to 2021, mostly has to do with lesser quality family films. If they thought this would make a billion, they would’ve delayed it a year like other films.

It’s not “special” anymore. Just lost amongst the hundreds of other streaming titles forgotten after a week.

 

[Drizzle]

I figured Mulan would be the guinea pig for this. It's an interesting move, but this also inevitably means that it will be released on physical media a few months later for the same price or cheaper.

 

[MadVillainy]

I mean I get why some people like Marvolo wouldn't care, because as long as they are able see the movie they're good, but for me to pay $30 bucks or more for a single film I better be getting the full experience and I just know I can't get that at home.

For sure, I agree and get that theaters don't matter and/or are inconvinient to some. But making blanking statements about how $30 is cheap or that this is the way all theaters need to be is silly to me.

Again the users I see calling for stuff like that were either being spoiled or they have had gripes about theaters for years and are just using these circumstances to get their points off

 

[MadVillainy]

I figured Mulan would be the guinea pig for this. It's an interesting move, but this also inevitably means that it will be released on physical media a few months later for the same price or cheaper.

Oh yeah that's a good point too. Why pay $30 for a movie, having a family or not, instead of just waiting 3 months for it to be $6 for a rental? It's not like kids aren't easy to distract

 

[KaijuDude1992]

Can you guys imagine living in world where a heavily delayed New Mutants somehow makes it into theaters, but Black Widow doesn't? I just can't fathom that and that's why I don't believe Disney would do it, especially when they are pretty much flushing a potential billion dollar film down the drain.

 

[Gothamsknight]

I mean aren’t the majority of people watching Mulan families? How many single adults are going to watch Mulan?

That's the only thing I can somewhat understand, but still. It's a one time price, I mean, you don't even own it after the $30

 

[MadVillainy]

You know, Google is going to launch a product, a successor to the Chromecast and in a leaked video it did feature watching Black Widow on Disney+. Peep at 2:06.

It could've just been a rendering especially since they used Black Widow's poster from TWS, but I thought that was curious

 

[MadVillainy]

That's the only thing I can somewhat understand, but still. It's a one time price, I mean, you don't even own it after the $30

Well if you have a family, you pay $30 for a one time watch at the theaters. Depending on the size.

A big differentiator I'm wondering is...did anyone else's parents take you to the movie theater just to shut you up? LIke you were running around the house and they knew the movies would keep you relatively quiet? Can't do that at home or at least it's harder

 

[Primal Slayer]

And then on top of that, what about unforeseen circumstances. You pay for the movie, then in the middle of it you have to leave the house for an emergency or something. 30 bucks down the drain for a movie you couldn’t even totally enjoy.

If this was like a rental available for a week, then fine, but 30 bucks for a single viewing is a little steep.

How is that any different then what if an unforseen circumstance happens to you in a movie theater? I agree $30 for a 24hr rental is insane but come on...things happen in everyday life...everyday regarldess of theater or at home lol.

 

[Primal Slayer]

Why in the world was this not New Mutants?

Doesnt New Mutants have it in its contract that it has to have a theatratical release first?

 

[MadVillainy]

I see a few people on here and on Twitter more focusing on the fact that it's $30 for a Mulan remake.
Idk I wouldn't even pay $30 for The Batman, Black Panther 2, or the next Avengers. ANd for sure I wouldn't pay $50. I don't care if I'm richie rich. Paying $30-$50 to watch a movie once that i don't know if I'll like it.

That's dumb

 

[MadVillainy]

How is that any different then what if an unforseen circumstance happens to you in a movie theater? I agree $30 for a 24hr rental is insane but come on...things happen in everyday life...everyday regarldess of theater or at home lol.

There are way more factors of things that can happen at home vs a movie theater though. And in a movie theater, you can get your money back or a rain check very easily

 

[MadVillainy]

Doesnt New Mutants have it in its contract that it has to have a theatratical release first?

That's what they claim but it's not like Disney can't flex their way or litigate their way out of a contract. And I'm sure a lot of these movies that are going to VOD first have that same thing in their contract. WHy would it only be New Mutants.

I think it's like someone said, something in the contracts or whatever don't allow to Disney+ first. It'll go to HBO Max first and Disney doesn't wanna give in to the competition

 

[Kev4000]

I see a few people on here and on Twitter more focusing on the fact that it's $30 for a Mulan remake.
Idk I wouldn't even pay $30 for The Batman, Black Panther 2, or the next Avengers. ANd for sure I wouldn't pay $50. I don't care if I'm richie rich. Paying $30-$50 to watch a movie once that i don't know if I'll like it.

That's dumb

I can understand the price. Hang out with 2 friends and then you have normal price like cinema. For families with two kids is it even better.

 

[Shinobi Shaw]

How is that any different then what if an unforseen circumstance happens to you in a movie theater? I agree $30 for a 24hr rental is insane but come on...things happen in everyday life...everyday regarldess of theater or at home lol.

But unforeseen circumstances at a theater are rare compared to at home. And then you also don’t have to worry about your wifi acting wonky or your streaming service crashing at a theater.

 

[MadVillainy]

I can understand the price. Hang out with 2 friends and then you have normal price like cinema. For families with two kids is it even better.

That's why I said "I".
"I" wouldn't pay $50 for my friends to watch a movie. Even if they pitch in. Why would I do that? We all will be tempted to check our phones and talk through it.
ANd then "I" don't have a family so that means nothing to me

For my individual life I wouldn't pay that to watch a movie once and not own it. And I know there are a lot of others who feel the same

 

[The Guard]

Well if you have a family, you pay $30 for a one time watch at the theaters. Depending on the size.

What magical wonderland is this?

 

[samsnee]

How many times are you gonna watch a movie in 24 hours?

And everyone keeps mentioning concessions like you have to buy them at the theater

If you have young kids, at least 3.

We only had it for 48 hours but I can quote Trolls World Tour by heart after that weekend

 

[Marvolo]

OK but that's you. You didn't say "cheap for me" you said "cheap. " Most people don't have those circumstances to watch a movie in theaters

On another note: are you in America? Because nowhere in America have I heard of paying $20 for an average movie ticket

Most Americans have those circumstances. Whether they factor it in or not they are at risk of being assaulted or infected. Concession costs are ridiculously high at all major theater chains. For example my AMC charges $5 for a small soda or Dasani. All Americans have to pay some form of transportation cost unless they walk or bike.

Im in america. My theater is a dolby cinema. Its $12 for a matinee + a $3 surcharge for the Dolby screens + tax. A night movie is $15 + $3 + tax. Last showtime of the night has another $2 surcharge. I could use one of the older non dolby screens and lose the surcharge, but those screens aren't worth the cost and effort. They aren't awful but my TV at home has 4k dolby vision and a sound system that will accommodate most films I watch. So why bother with a 2k non dolby screen at the theater? For the size? Its just not worth it.

 

[MadVillainy]

What magical wonderland is this?

$30, $30+ You know what I meant. If you have a family paying $30 or more isn't that unheard of for a night at the theater