Now Introducing HBO Max Classic

[SwordOfMorning]

I wouldn’t read too much into Mulan in relation to this either. The Mulan model was a total disaster and not what they’re following here.

 

[Primal Slayer]

So as long as we agree then that this HBOMax move meant to systematically devalue an individual movie, which would have massive implications for the traditional, theatrical-model film industry that we probably can't even fully wrap our heads around yet.

Isn't it kind of weird that the only options being considered here are "$15 /mo for everything, or $30 for an individual rental?"

It just feels like a trojan horse attempt the way they're doing it. And it could backfire on them and lose them even more money in the long run.

I think streaming services have gotten out of control so id be happy having like 3 (Netflix, Hulu, Amazon) and going back to the good ol'days. I enjoy going to the theater so long term i wouldn't want to watch everything at home.

And SAG in general needs to catch up with streaming services with the way everything is.

 

[Snow Queen]

Lol the idea that talent is ‘replaceable’ is adorable. Artists are unique and individual. I’m far more interested in what filmmakers think is best than the demands of ‘consumers’.

Seriously. When it comes to people with more money than I will ever touch vs mega corporations part of a telecom empire... well I mean part of me is like "let them fight" and all but I'd rather see the work of the artist than the company at the end of the day.

That said, Nolan is wrong. HBO Max is not the worst streaming service (judged purely on that basis and not this whole mess). That honour belongs to Crave, which still streams in 720 in browsers, often has thw wrong subtitles, and only got a Playstation app this year after 5 years of promises.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Seriously. When it comes to people with more money than I will ever touch vs mega corporations part of a telecom empire... well I mean part of me is like "let them fight" and all but I'd rather see the work of the artist than the company at the end of the day.

That said, Nolan is wrong. HBO Max is not the worst streaming service (judged purely on that basis and not this whole mess). That honour belongs to Crave, which still streams in 720 in browsers, often has thw wrong subtitles, and only got a Playstation app this year after 5 years of promises.

Oh, Crave. So much content, so much hassle.

 

[Prison Mike]

What’s Crave? Haven’t heard of it.

 

[weezerspider]

Nolan calling HBO Max the worst streaming service really comes off as a Trump tweet. I understand why he's mad but it's not a good look either.

From a business and industry standpoint, it is the worst. They botched their launch and already developed a bad reputation in the industry for their working conditions way before any of this happened. This is what Nolan meant.

From a purely content standpoint, they are probably the best.

 

[Juan1193]

Explain Mulan then.



I mean...is he wrong though? I think objectively it is known that the rollout of HBOMax was/is a clusterf***. He's clearly not referring to the actual content on there. It was/is a confusing as hell launch, and it's not easily accessible to millions of people who use Roku, one of the most popular if not the most popular streaming platform. He's just pointing out the obvious there, it really punctuates why it was so wrong of them to go about it this way. It's kind of the equivalent like if you were a chef preparing to open a restaurant, you get a loan from the bank, invest all your time and energy into building the restaurant and creating the menu...it's your baby, and then all of a sudden the bank says, "actually this is no longer going to be a restaurant with tables, just a takeout spot. You don't have a say." Rough analogy, but you get the idea. It's the pulling of the rug out and unilateral move here that people are objecting to.

It just seems like there is some major incompetence happening with AT&T and WB right now.

Disney stupidly charged 30 dollars for Mulan, on top of the subscription fee. I’m not championing the death of theaters but I am championing the choice for a consumer to watch at home or in a theater. Honestly this announcement did its job, it has people talking, in a positive way about HBO Max and pressuring the other studios to do the same.

At work today my coworkers literally discussed this and talked about getting HBO Max, especially for certain movies (they’re not subscribed right now).

lol I love how Nolan, and these Hollywood elites were getting dragged all over Twitter though, it was amusing!

 

[Primal Slayer]

What’s Crave? Haven’t heard of it.

I think it's a Canadian streaming service.

 

[Juan1193]

Yeah, how have the consumers actually spoken? Besides the record breaking profit from theatrical releases last year, PVOD has been proven unsuccessful at a time where it should have made wonders and free streaming releases in major movies is yet untested. That statement reeks of cognitive bias.

it was a record breaking year for Disney, not for WB or Universal. Yeah sure the box office made billions (11B+) but did it match what a streaming service could bring in (look at Netflix which brought in 20+B last year). Plus the studios keep that money they earn with streaming services, whereas with regards to box office, they have to split it up

 

[Juan1193]

Lol the idea that talent is ‘replaceable’ is adorable. Artists are unique and individual. I’m far more interested in what filmmakers think is best than the demands of ‘consumers’.

Those entertainers and artists would be nothing without the consumer. Gone are the days of the movie star and there’s always someone younger and just as talented waiting for that spot to free up. To think they’re not replaceable is just pure ignorance.

Let’s do some math. The highest grossing year at the Box office for WB was 2018 (5.8B), HBO Max currently has about 13M active users and 38M eligible users (those who haven’t switched from HBO to HBO Max). So 13M(15subscription price)(12months)... that’s 2.34B in profit already (they keep all that money). Now using the 38M number we get 6.84B (a number already higher than WB highest grossing year!!). Not only do they keep all that money, they don’t have to worry or spend any money on licensing deals since they own everything (Netflix spent 14B last year in licensing, hence why they were in the red even with 20B in revenue).

 

[Filmfreak]

it was a record breaking year for Disney, not for WB or Universal. Yeah sure the box office made billions (11B+) but did it match what a streaming service could bring in (look at Netflix which brought in 20+B last year). Plus the studios keep that money they earn with streaming services, whereas with regards to box office, they have to split it up

So you dismiss the profit of cinematic releases because WB and Universal didn't break any records and yet you measure the success of streaming, not based on their respective platforms that have been really underwhelming so far, but on the only one that has been here for years and is available all around the globe. That comparison is futile.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Those entertainers and artists would be nothing without the consumer. Gone are the days of the movie star and there’s always someone younger and just as talented waiting for that spot to free up. To think they’re not replaceable is just pure ignorance.

Artists aren’t line cooks. No one can do the exact same thing someone else can do, it’s a hyper individualized skill set. Like, sure there are young directors out there just as talented as Nolan to use an example but he’s irreplacable because no one else can make what he can make, same with any other good filmmaker.

I’ll never understand viewing art in those terms. Yeah, it’s a business, it has to be because of how much films cost but it ain’t a damn Wendy’s.

 

[weezerspider]

Artists aren’t line cooks. No one can do the exact same thing someone else can do, it’s a hyper individualized skill set. Like, sure there are young directors out there just as talented as Nolan to use an example but he’s irreplacable because no one else can make what he can make, same with any other good filmmaker.

I’ll never understand viewing art in those terms. Yeah, it’s a business, it has to be because of how much films cost but it ain’t a damn Wendy’s.

Yep. If artists were actually replaceable, we wouldn’t still be helming every new young director “the next Kubrick” because someone would have finally replaced him by now. But no one can. Artists are people and no two people are exactly alike. The only way we get a new Spielberg film is from Steven Spielberg, no matter how hard JJ Abrams tries.


Not to mention, for the millionth time, these decisions are impacting the livelihoods of plenty of people who are not millionaires. Anyone getting on their high horse to make fun of the rich and famous while this is literally costing everyday folks their jobs is the bad guy here.

 

[Prison Mike]

it was a record breaking year for Disney, not for WB or Universal. Yeah sure the box office made billions (11B+) but did it match what a streaming service could bring in (look at Netflix which brought in 20+B last year). Plus the studios keep that money they earn with streaming services, whereas with regards to box office, they have to split it up

Also Netflix has license fees which is a huge portion of their costs. Disney won’t have that since they own everything. Disney+ could definitely surpass the studio revenues in a few years.

 

[Juan1193]

So you dismiss the profit of cinematic releases because WB and Universal didn't break any records and yet you measure the success of streaming, not based on their respective platforms that have been really underwhelming so far, but on the only one that has been here for years and is available all around the globe. That comparison is futile.

The films are still releasing in theaters, so all this is doing is giving the consumer even more choices than we had before.

And I just broke down the math for streaming vs theaters. Even with a botched launch and not being around for a year the service is making half of what WB’s highest grossing year at the box office made. It surpasses that number if we add in the eligible subscribers who haven’t converted over yet (HBO mainly).

Yep. If artists were actually replaceable, we wouldn’t still be helming every new young director “the next Kubrick” because someone would have finally replaced him by now. But no one can. Artists are people and no two people are exactly alike. The only way we get a new Spielberg film is from Steven Spielberg, no matter how hard JJ Abrams tries.


Not to mention, for the millionth time, these decisions are impacting the livelihoods of plenty of people who are not millionaires. Anyone getting on their high horse to make fun of the rich and famous while this is literally costing everyday folks their jobs is the bad guy here.

That’s more of a comparison people tend to make when a younger person comes along who is just as talented as the older person they’re replacing.

If you’re taking about movie theater owners and employees, I get the concern. But in all honestly they should have seen this coming. Just look at what happened with record stores and albums vs streaming. Theaters will still be around, just no where near the level they are now and for that I say, sorry but things evolve. Pick up a trade and a new occupation, I’ve done it before so it’s not impossible

 

[TheVileOne]

The rollout of HBO Max was a cluster****, it was bad, and it was botched. Even the trades are saying the rollout was botched and not handled well.

I think if you want to take things away from Disney+ rollout, and there are still flaws with Disney+ IMO, it was well organized and gave you an insane library. It's a very streamlined user-friendly app.

Like most of the shows from Fox Kids and Disney Afternoon I wanted to watch on there were there at launch.

 

[Primal Slayer]

WB tries to rush everything and get the $$ whereas Disney actually thinks things out. If WB put more thought into all that they have they could be making A LOT more money then they are.

 

[BatLobster]

Disney stupidly charged 30 dollars for Mulan, on top of the subscription fee. I’m not championing the death of theaters but I am championing the choice for a consumer to watch at home or in a theater. Honestly this announcement did its job, it has people talking, in a positive way about HBO Max and pressuring the other studios to do the same.

There was always a choice. The choice was, go out and see it while it's in theaters, or wait a few months. Have we really gotten this lazy and entitled? We are already drowning in endless unbelievably good content.

The death of theaters could come as a consequence of this becoming the norm. Let's just call a spade a spade. It won't be a "choice" anymore if theaters die, or it will become much less of a choice if theaters largely die out and the theatrical window becomes very short. The many of us who cherish going to the movies may not have the luxury of that choice nearly as much in the future.

Feels more like a de-evolution than evolution for me There was/is a world in which the theatrical model and streaming both were healthy. Theaters weren't doing anything to harm streaming. This is just favoring one over the other in a way that is unnecessary and potentially very damaging.

 

[weezerspider]

The films are still releasing in theaters, so all this is doing is giving the consumer even more choices than we had before.

And I just broke down the math for streaming vs theaters. Even with a botched launch and not being around for a year the service is making half of what WB’s highest grossing year at the box office made. It surpasses that number if we add in the eligible subscribers who haven’t converted over yet (HBO mainly).





That’s more of a comparison people tend to make when a younger person comes along who is just as talented as the older person they’re replacing.

If you’re taking about movie theater owners and employees, I get the concern. But in all honestly they should have seen this coming. Just look at what happened with record stores and albums vs streaming. Theaters will still be around, just no where near the level they are now and for that I say, sorry but things evolve. Pick up a trade and a new occupation, I’ve done it before so it’s not impossible

1.) They still aren’t replacing anyone. No one replaced Stanley Kubrick. No one replaced Orson Welles. No one will replace Steven Spielberg. Thinking of art that way is, in this kindest way possible, bizarre.

2.) So the people that work day to day jobs don’t get any sympathy or consideration because, and I quote you “they should have seen this coming”? Governments world wide didn’t see the virus coming, but the local theater definitely should have. Or are you admitting this isn’t actually about the virus, which only makes it a worse corporate overlord chess move? Either way, you’re lining up with the bad guys.

 

[Juan1193]

1.) They still aren’t replacing anyone. No one replaced Stanley Kubrick. No one replaced Orson Welles. No one will replace Steven Spielberg. Thinking of art that way is, in this kindest way possible, bizarre.

2.) So the people that work day to day jobs don’t get any sympathy or consideration because, and I quote you “they should have seen this coming”? Governments world wide didn’t see the virus coming, but the local theater definitely should have. Or are you admitting this isn’t actually about the virus, which only makes it a worse corporate overlord chess move? Either way, you’re lining up with the bad guys.

Then call me villain, the misunderstood always are.

Streaming is the way! Grandpas like Nolan to the back of the line...

 

[kguillou]

Even though I am pro this decision I still have to wonder...what made them so confident to go all in like this right now without seeing how WW84 does first in a few weeks. Like, I could see them making this announcement January 1st after seeing the streaming #'s come in but something must have given them a boost of confidence that this is the way to go.

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

I love going to theaters. I actually do miss it. But given the circumstances, if given a choice to stream or go to the theater, at this moment I would much rather stream

Like I previously said, I am sure WB’s decision is only temporary and this is nothing more than an experiment to see how new releases do via a streaming service and if it will have impact on gaining subscribers

If it doesn’t go as planned, then oh well. Once the pandemic is under control and theaters have re-opened then we are back to where we were. If it’s successful, then this will give consumers a choice later down the line. New releases can come out in theaters and then a month later to stream. Or while theaters continue to charge $15-$20 then maybe to watch it on a streaming service charge $5.

Time will tell how WB’s plan goes

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Even though I am pro this decision I still have to wonder...what made them so confident to go all in like this right now without seeing how WW84 does first in a few weeks. Like, I could see them making this announcement January 1st after seeing the streaming #'s come in but something must have given them a boost of confidence that this is the way to go.

Either that or desperation to get something, anything out now.

 

[flickchick85]

Even though I am pro this decision I still have to wonder...what made them so confident to go all in like this right now without seeing how WW84 does first in a few weeks. Like, I could see them making this announcement January 1st after seeing the streaming #'s come in but something must have given them a boost of confidence that this is the way to go.

Because for them, I don’t think it’s about the movies themselves anymore at all. I’m convinced they’ve basically written the whole 2021 slate off as a loss in terms of their individual investments - this is about securing HBO Max’s future. They needed a reason to get people hooked and keep them hooked, to the point where HBO Max becomes a constant presence in their everyday lives like Netflix. By the time this year-long commitment ends, they’ll have more big-budget shows ready to go to keep folks around. If they lose money on the movies, that’s almost beside the point.

 

[TheVileOne]

There was always a choice. The choice was, go out and see it while it's in theaters, or wait a few months. Have we really gotten this lazy and entitled? We are already drowning in endless unbelievably good content.

The death of theaters could come as a consequence of this becoming the norm. Let's just call a spade a spade. It won't be a "choice" anymore if theaters die, or it will become much less of a choice if theaters largely die out and the theatrical window becomes very short. The many of us who cherish going to the movies may not have the luxury of that choice nearly as much in the future.

Feels more like a de-evolution than evolution for me There was/is a world in which the theatrical model and streaming both were healthy. Theaters weren't doing anything to harm streaming. This is just favoring one over the other in a way that is unnecessary and potentially very damaging.

Based on what's been happening in the US during this pandemic, the answer is a resounding yes.