The big media news this week was that Amazon might buy AMC, but the problem was – no one was sure whether that meant AMC Theaters or AMC Networks. For an entire day, Wall Street and Hollywood were prognosticating on what it meant for Amazon to buy one of the biggest theater chains, and then…whoops, it might be that a reporter made a mistake on whether it was the stock ticker of AMC (theaters) or AMCX (Networks) about which they were reporting. (!!!) What’s even crazier is that both moves would make perfect sense, and that shows just how seismic are the potential changes coming to the media industry – neither case would be surprising, and we all expect deals like this to happen almost daily as the economy rearranges the business.
I’ve been predicting that Amazon or Netflix would buy one of the major chains for awhile now, and in that same linked post, I also predicted that IFC – which is part of the AMC Network – would be acquired soon, too – and that was BC. If you look back at what happened after the 1918 flu, it was a lot of consolidation, with the big studios getting bigger and the little guys disappearing. I suspect we’ll see the same as a result of this pandemic, and in addition to one or both of these AMC’s getting bought, I predict a lot more mergers and acquisitions soon.
Some of this will be bad for indies, and consumers, but when it comes to the situation in the world of theatrical, I can see some silver linings. The first reaction to any consolidation is negative, because it would mean Amazon (or some other conglomerate, but Amazon is the biggest one) would be swallowing another part of the world. But while I’m not usually an Amazon-apologist, I don’t think their taking over AMC Theaters would be half-bad, and it might even be good for both makers and consumers of film. Sounds crazy, I know, but bear with me.
First, I still think AMC Theaters are going to be bought soon by Amazon - or Netflix, Disney, Comcast or AT&T. Or some other studio. Before yesterday, most people seemed to disagree, mainly saying that none of them needs theaters to survive. But I’ve never seen this as a survival move, but more of a way for any of them to sweeten their membership and content offerings, which helps to cut down subscriber churn and give more people reason to join their services. And for Amazon, it also brings a lot of other benefits – more locations for Prime lockers, venues for live Twitch gaming, and that’s just the start.
Second, I have a hard time worrying that Amazon would be any worse of an owner than AMC’s current owners. Sure, Amazon is bigger, and is eating the world, but Dalian Wanda group isn’t exactly a mom and pop shop, nor is Silver Lake Partners. AMC was also fine cozying up with evil folks like MBS just to break into Saudi Arabia (and NATO’s Fithian saying they’d use movies as a “sword of freedom” is a laughable excuse).
Nor was AMC ever a champion of indie and arthouse films. Sure, they would play them sometimes, but they never took them very seriously. One could argue that Amazon Studios has been a bigger champion of good cinema than AMC has been, and they’ve definitely played a bigger role in getting arthouse cinema to the masses as of late. If this was Amazon buying Landmark or Alamo, I might be more worried about the impact on mid-tier films, but with AMC being the target, I don’t see any negative repercussions for the arthouse-set.
One of the biggest worries about Amazon and Netflix has been that their streaming services compete with theaters. But I don’t believe that – never have, never will. I firmly believe that in non-covid times, there’s a group of people who like going to see movies in theaters and they’ll keep going, and another group who couldn’t be enticed there with free gold, and they’ll keep streaming. And then there’s the rest of us – we love movies and know that some movies – cinema and blockbusters, mainly – need to be seen on the big screen, but a lot of other movies are just fine on the (no longer too small) home screen. I want to see the new Bond film on the big screen, and Parasite is best there too, but I want to see a lot of others at home, and fast.
But a lot of those latter two groups (the non-theater goers, and the rest of us) are left behind by the idiotic windowing practices that are mainly being kept in place by the owners of the major chains. There are a ton of movies that this group, which I’m a part of even as a cinephile, forgets by the time they come to streaming. They get lost in the crappy algorithms and queues of the streamers, and are never watched – or paid for – and that’s a lot of revenue left on the table. Or worse, an incentive to go pirate the same film. But if an Amazon or Netflix buys the major chains, we would see these windows disappear for most films, and shorten dramatically for the blockbusters and more cinematic films. This is a case where the big monopolies (Amazon and Netflix) would be better for consumers than the ones they’d replace (AMC, Regal and other major chains). And that could arguably help film culture, by making it more accessible, which might lead to more revenue for all films. I know these are big “could’s” and “might’s,” but I’d bet on them.
 Amazon (Or Netflix) could also use these theaters to build a more robust MoviePass out of Prime, by merging Stubs with Prime and IMDB. It would make it much easier for audiences to get credit for films no matter where they are watched, and to track/follow the films they want to see. If I miss something at the theater, I could watch it at home, and get credit for it, while the rights-holder gets more of my money.
AMC wasn’t doing too great pre-Covid, either. We were likely going to see a lot of consolidation/reduction of venues anyway. But if Amazon owns them, and gets valuable real-estate for delivery, local shipping, etc. they may actually keep more of them open. They would also gain a venue for other live events – most notably, gaming, which is a key part of Amazon’s future. Again, more chance of them keeping these venues open.
Yes, there are some major downsides to Amazon owning more of the world. Especially when it comes to what they know about us from the data they hoover-up. But AMC was only a better steward of that data by (our) luck of incompetence. I am a bit worried about film festivals and other sometimes renters/four-wallers getting anyone on the phone to make a deal, but again, AMC/Regal weren’t exactly easy there, either. And yes, I’d rather shop local and not have major conglomerates, but again – that wasn’t AMC anyways, and I’ll (hopefully) still have the Film Forum and other local arthouses (and I believe in their business, if they can survive this crisis). When it comes to the chains, I think there’s more upside here. Personally, I’d rather see Netflix as the owner, but that’s because I think Netflix has shown a more consistent commitment to diversity, more than anything else.
Now, what I also see happening next is Comcast, AT&T or even Verizon kicking the tires on Regal. You could see a wireless store inside the lobby soon, and waive your phone instead of a ticket, or get a Peacock/Crown-Club subscription before long (h/t to Christopher Escobar of the Plaza Theater/Atlanta Film Fest who has written about this, too). But I don’t see a future where AMC and Regal remain unless they get bought by one of these bigger conglomerates. And right now, I see more good than bad in that probable future.
Now, what happens if they buy AMCX? That's another post...
|
|
Will it be Survival of the Fittest or Collaboration for the Future? That's essentially the question producer Rebecca Green asks in her fabulous post on Dear Producer this week. She notes that everyone is working in their silos to save their way of doing things in the film world, instead of coming together to save the indie field, and she calls on the "companies and institutional organizations in the U.S. whose mission statement is to support independent film is this: Don’t just focus on your own agenda. Join forces with each other. Use your combined ingenuity, money, resources, and perseverance to ensure that independent films can continue to get made and be seen."
Kudos to KinoLorber for Releasing VOD Box Office Numbers - Score One for Transparency! Indiewire Reports on KinoLorber's very transparent release of its VOD numbers for eight titles. Pretty detailed stuff here, and while these numbers are small, these are also small, arthouse films undergoing a very fast experiment in the VOD-only world. ScreenDaily also reported updated numbers later. 
Ted Hope of Amazon Studios Tells All - Ok, not all, but he does talk about what Amazon looks for in a pitch, and gives some other great hints, in this interview with the Woodstock Film Festival's Meira Blaustein. These kinds of talks are just one way festivals can add value outside of their normal programming.
Guide to Doc-Making in the time of Corona - The Doc Society, Sundance and Field of Vision collaborated on this handy guide to the ins/outs of trying to film during the virus.
How is China Rebuilding the Movie Business? Slowly. Theaters have yet to open and are offering alternative programming. Production companies are closing and the box office is projected to be cut in half. Just a few items to note on a country (albeit very different) that's ahead of us on the curve. China Film Insider Reports.
Only 7% of Americans are Ready to Return to Theaters - according to a study reported in Screen. Interestingly, of the cinema-goers who go often (more than 6 times a year), only a third reported the communal experience as being what they miss - going against most theories about the reason for movie-going.
Endeavor Is Hiring a VP, Production Health and Safety: Probably the first of many postings for a completely new job created by the virus. Apply away, if you can figure this stuff out (which most producers are trying to do right now, anyway, right?).
ShelterShorts Launches - (H/T to the Great Sundance Institute Newsletter) ShelterShorts launched recently - read the Sundance link for background- proving three things, at least - artists will make great art, no matter the circumstances; we can probably find all the creativity we need in these extreme low-budget experiments to fill our future slates; and - a bunch of bored filmmakers can out-Quibi a Billon dollars any day (see below for more)
Quibi Founder Katzenberg Calls into the Podcast that makes fun of Quibi - well-played, Jeffrey, and same to the founders of the podcast, who call him "Shrek-Daddy." Slate reports. They are also pivoting their podcast to one that tells him what Quibi should be doing, to try to save them. Meanwhile, Jeff spoke with the NYT and blamed everything on the virus. I don't know about you, but I've been glued to my phone even more during the quarantine, actually, but it's been on more interesting stuff that cost a lot less to produce. Try again, Jeff.
|
|
The BrandFilm Awards Winners Were Announced. Last week, they announced the BrandFilm Awards, and you can see the full list of winners, honorable mentions and finalists here. Kudos to everyone who was nominated and who won. I was on the jury, and there were many good projects.
How are the Biggest Media Companies Doing? Digiday takes a look at everyone from Peacock to the NYT and how they are faring during the crisis.
|
|
Has Anyone Asked Artists What They Need? Over in Dance Magazine, Raja Feather Kelly asks a question similar to my post about asking filmmakers what they need. Raja says, "take us off your mailing lists asking for money" and ask artists what they need, and continues: "Artists are a force for change. Artists carve the path forward. Artists will design the plan for the reclamation of culture. Artists are here to transform, challenge and make meaning. Artists are here to constantly reimagine our world and show us what our world could be. Artists are here to bring people together and build communities. Artists have been here for entertainment and culture time and time again. Today, in these uncertain times, now more than ever, you can be here for artists." He also includes a script for the questions to ask.
|
|
|
Like This Newsletter? Subscribe & Past Issues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
