Thread For Terrible Movie News

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
Posts: 8093
Joined: August 2009
LelekPL wrote:
February 5th, 2019, 12:56 pm
Why is this terrible news. It's not like this film requires the audience to see it on the big screen. This just means we'll get to see the movie faster.
It's terrible news for the filmmakers involved. Most directors want their works to be seen on the big screen, not on someone's telephone.

Posts: 7243
Joined: August 2012
Artemis wrote:
February 5th, 2019, 12:58 pm
LelekPL wrote:
February 5th, 2019, 12:56 pm
Why is this terrible news. It's not like this film requires the audience to see it on the big screen. This just means we'll get to see the movie faster.
It's terrible news for the filmmakers involved. Most directors want their works to be seen on the big screen, not on someone's telephone.
Financially it’s really not. It’s possibly the best decision they could’ve made. The film got backlash due to its portrayal and potential glorification of Bundy, and somewhat lukewarm-to-positive reviews, so it’s really difficult to gauge how much they could’ve earned from a theatrical release. But it’s gained momentum on social media (some of which is super unfortunate - i mentioned it above, but some of it’s already causing genuine discussion) and with releases of shows like “you” people most likely WILL watch this on netflix. They should use that attention to their gain and drop the film as soon as they can.

I mean yeah, in a perfect world all films would be seen in cinemas, but this may actually have a better chance shown via a streaming service.

Posts: 8093
Joined: August 2009
Ruth wrote:
February 5th, 2019, 1:09 pm
Artemis wrote:
February 5th, 2019, 12:58 pm
LelekPL wrote:
February 5th, 2019, 12:56 pm
Why is this terrible news. It's not like this film requires the audience to see it on the big screen. This just means we'll get to see the movie faster.
It's terrible news for the filmmakers involved. Most directors want their works to be seen on the big screen, not on someone's telephone.
Financially it’s really not. It’s possibly the best decision they could’ve made. The film got backlash due to its portrayal and potential glorification of Bundy, and somewhat lukewarm-to-positive reviews, so it’s really difficult to gauge how much they could’ve earned from a theatrical release. But it’s gained momentum on social media (some of which is super unfortunate - i mentioned it above, but some of it’s already causing genuine discussion) and with releases of shows like “you” people most likely WILL watch this on netflix. They should use that attention to their gain and drop the film as soon as they can.

I mean yeah, in a perfect world all films would be seen in cinemas, but this may actually have a better chance shown via a streaming service.
I think these are really good points.

I know most filmmakers would love it if their work gets a theatrical release, so skipping that and going straight to VOD has got to be embarrassing to some extent.

But yeah, financially it makes more sense. I assume they got their money back and then some through this deal.

Posts: 19671
Joined: June 2011
Location: The Ashes of Gotham
Joe Berlinger made both the Ted Bundy Documentary and Film, so I can imagine he already has a good working relationship with Netflix. The articles did mention that the movie would get a limited cinema release to qualify for awards next year, so I don't know why people are complaining. I can't imagine it being like Roma were people are saying "This was made for being at the cinema". If it's Zac Efron who makes this movie work and nothing else, then I'm glad it went to Netflix.

Posts: 8093
Joined: August 2009


Image

Posts: 8093
Joined: August 2009


I actually have this book because Karina Longworth recommended it a while ago and I saw it in a bookstore when I went out the next day.

This...does not look good.

Posts: 18676
Joined: June 2010
Location: The White City
why is all this dubbed hilariously poorly


-Vader

Post Reply