WarnerMedia Sued For Giving People Want They Wanted (The Matrix, Streaming) During An Historic Health Crisis

from the oh-no,-not-what-people-want dept

AT&T got a lot wrong (and still really can't admit it) with the company's $86 billion acquisition of Time Warner. There were endless layoffs, a steady dismantling of beloved brands (DC's Vertigo imprint, Mad Magazine), all for the company to lose pay TV subscribers in the end.

But the one thing the company did get right, with a little help from COVID, was its attacks on the dated, pointless, and often punitive Hollywood release window. Typically, this has involved a 90 day gap between the time a move appears in theaters and its streaming or DVD release (in France this window is even more ridiculous at three years). Generally, this is done to protect the "sanctity of the movie going experience," as if for thirty years the "sanctity of the movie going experience" hasn't involved sticky floors, over priced popcorn, big crowds and mass shootings.

During COVID, big streamers like AT&T and Comcast shifted a lot of their tentpole films (like Dune) directly to streaming, which technically saved human lives, but resulted in no limit of raised eyebrows and scorn among the "Loews at the mall is a sacred space you can't criticize" segment of Hollywood. You might recall that AMC Theaters was positively apoplectic when Comcast showed that release windows were a dated relic, declaring it would never again show a Comcast NBC Universal picture anywhere in the world if Comcast kept threatening the sacred release window (the threat lasted about a week).

WarnerMedia (in the process of being spun off by AT&T) has faced similar whining from the industry. This week the company was hit with a lawsuit (pdf) by Village Roadshow Films, which claims the company "rushed" the release of The Matrix Resurrections from 2022 to 2021 as part of an (gasp) effort to boost streaming's popularity. All through 2021, AT&T/Time Warner released films simultaneously in theaters and on streaming to boost HBO Max subscriptions. And people liked it.

Unsurprisingly, Village Roadshow Films did not, claiming the effort (dubbed "Project Popcorn") was a "clandestine plan to materially reduce box office and correlated ancillary revenue generated from tent pole films that Village Roadshow and others would be entitled to receive in exchange for driving subscription revenue for the new HBO Max service." HBO Max and AT&T telegraphed this intention, so it seems hard to argue this was somehow clandestine. The suit also accuses WarnerMedia of ignoring the fact that piracy would have hurt the overall profits to be made from the film, though, again, metrics proving clear financial harm appear lacking.

But just as unsurprisingly, Warner Brothers thinks Village Roadshow Films is just annoyed by reality and shifting markets:

"In a statement shared with The Verge, Warner Bros. called the lawsuit “a frivolous attempt by Village Roadshow to avoid their contractual commitment to participate in the arbitration that we commenced against them last week. We have no doubt that this case will be resolved in our favor."

Again, while it's true that AT&T attacked the sacred old release window to goose streaming subscriptions, this was something that happened during an historic plague in which indoor transmission of a deadly virus could kill or disable you. It's also almost an afterthought that in the advanced home theater and mall shooting era, this is something consumers desperately wanted. For all its downsides, COVID had a strong tendency to painfully highlight shortcomings (see: broadband, the U.S. healthcare system) and dated antiquities (like release windows or a disdain for telecommuting) that no longer served us.

While there's a shrinking sect of Hollywood folks like Spielberg who still think in-person theaters and release windows are sacred and above reproach, COVID laid bare the fact that not that many people agree with them. And while that certainly disadvantaged folks financially dependent on older models (like theater owners and studios heavily vested in release windows), the reality is what it is, and a popular change was accelerated all the same.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: covid-19, movies, pandemic, release windows, streaming
Companies: at&t, village roadshow, warnermedia


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Jojo (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 9:47am

    People are just made that Warner Bros is handing out blue and red pills.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Samuel Abram (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 9:51am

    Re: My seeing Matrix Resurrections

    I wouldn't have otherwise given the fourth Matrix movie a chance if it were not on HBO Max. I would've not seen it at all because I didn't like Matrix Reloaded or Matrix Revolutions. HBO Max meant I saw it at all.

    This is what Village Roadshow films fails to comprehend: Give me a reason to see it in the theaters, like the Alamo Drafthouse regularly does, and I will come. Otherwise, I'll stay home and watch it there.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2022 @ 2:32pm

      Re: Re: My seeing Matrix Resurrections

      Matrix Resurrections was a great big pile of steaming crap that was at least one hour too long and I'm glad didn't wind up wasting money to see it in a theatre.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Samuel Abram (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 4:09pm

        Re: Re: Re: My seeing Matrix Resurrections

        I personally thought it was better than the its two predecessors but nowhere near as good as the original.

        To each one's own.

        link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 10 Feb 2022 @ 4:35am

      Re: Re: My seeing Matrix Resurrections

      I almost went to see it at the cinema when I was visiting family in the UK. Other things came up and the amount of messing around I had to do to get tested, etc. in order to be allowed to see my family was a big enough hassle that I decided I didn't want to risk infection any further than I was already doing just to see a sequel to a great first film that let me down with the other sequels.

      Apart from that, it wasn't compelling enough to see at the cinema when I had returned back home and I'll watch it eventually, but not until it's on streaming (here in Europe they didn't seem to have the simultaneous release that it had in the US, certainly not on platforms I already pay for).

      I do know some people who chose piracy over going to the cinema because the streaming option wasn't there, so I'm not sure that Village Roadshow really want to prevent the legal option in the US if they know what's better for them. but Hollywood's history is littered with them trying to shut down lucrative markets because it doesn't give them the highest profit margin, even if they later come to make more money by accepting it.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Thad (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 9:58am

    DC's Vertigo imprint

    Stop that.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2022 @ 3:41pm

      Re:

      i couldn't even finish that first paragraph before i knew oh Thad, he comin'.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    nerdrage (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 10:19am

    one valid purpose to the theatrical release window...

    There's one valid purpose to the theatrical release window, and that's to protect an incipient new franchise like Dune, something that doesn't come along every day.

    What if AT&T putting Dune on HBO Max had undermined box office so badly that the movie didn't make enough of a profit to get a sequel, spinoff shows etc. Streaming is far less lucrative than box office and I doubt it can be used to launch theatrical franchises.

    Just look at Netflix. They've never once created a movie franchise that could do anything at the box office except the bare minimum to qualify for Oscars. But Disney has shown that, when you've got a theatrical franchise like Marvel or Star Wars, you can use that to make streaming series galore. We wouldn't have WandaVision or Loki otherwise.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 10:35am

      [Netflix has] never once created a movie franchise that could do anything at the box office except the bare minimum to qualify for Oscars.

      Has Netflix even been trying to do that? Because last time I checked, Netflix wasn’t trying to push its wholly original movies into wide theatrical releases for the purpose of making shitloads of money. Hell, its most successful franchises are already serials (e.g., Stranger Things).

      The theatrical window is outdated consumer-unfriendly bullshit. People shouldn’t have to wait six fucking months before a movie that played in theaters shows up on a streaming service. They shouldn’t even have to wait three months for it to drop on home video. The studios have the power to put their movie out on every possible format on the same day; the fact that several movies did day-and-date theatrical and streaming/VOD releases during the pandemic is proof enough of that.

      Other than the boogeyman of piracy (which anyone with any goddamn sense will tell you is bullshit), I can think of no decent reason to avoid day-and-date theatrical and streaming releases for a film like the one for The Matrix Resurrections. No one has yet offered one that can’t be dismissed as more “fuck the consumer” bullshit. Now guess how your “nobody will be able to make a theatrical franchise any more” reasoning fared!

      link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        That Anonymous Coward (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 11:14am

        Re:

        And Friday the 13th is the best movie franchise we could get out of Hollywood...

        shrug emoji

        link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 10 Feb 2022 @ 4:47am

        Re:

        "The theatrical window is outdated consumer-unfriendly bullshit."

        The theatrical window mainly exists because the major studios thought that home video would destroy the theatrical market. After they lost the Betamax lawsuit and it became clear that there was a vibrant market for pirated tapes, they eventually agreed to allow their movies on tape, first with gaps of several years, to a few months during the DVD boom. In return, they got a gigantic boost to their revenue that they have since been fighting tooth and nail to protect when people realised they'd rather wait till something come on their streaming platform than pay $20 for a disc they might not play more than once.

        It's always been artificial and based in fear, we're just seeing the dying throes as they try to pretend that being available to people who can't/won't go to the cinema is a loss of revenue. Which, during the current state of things, is often not the case.

        It seems to me that the current complaints over streaming are the same as the ones over piracy - that is, it's an easy scapegoat if things go wrong that allows the studio to escape criticism for making a bad movie or marketing it badly.

        link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2022 @ 10:51am

      Re: one valid purpose to the theatrical release window...

      There's one valid purpose to the theatrical release window, and that's to protect an incipient new franchise like Dune, something that doesn't come along every day.

      Protect it from what, being watched? How long should they wait before trying to make money on an investment?

      link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Samuel Abram (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 11:30am

        Re: Re: one valid purpose to the theatrical release window...

        Not to mention that after watching Dune (2021) on HBO Max, I saw it in the theaters twice so I could get the theatrical experience that its director said was a sine qua non to experience the movie. After seeing it in the movie theater, I understood.

        As I said upthread, give me a reason to see it in the movie theater, and then I'll buy a ticket.

        link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Samuel Abram (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 10:53am

      Re: one valid purpose to the theatrical release window...

      Of course, the Marvel comics predate the movies (and the Norse Mythology far predate the comic adaptations vis-à-vis Thor and Loki). Also, Star Wars wasn't originally theirs.

      That being said, there are also original movies that are hugely watched on Netflix, such as Bird Box and Don't Look Up. You're right about Netflix Films not being franchise-starters, as I tried searching and the only Netflix-exclusive Franchise-starter I could find was Red Notice.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2022 @ 3:44pm

        Re: Re: one valid purpose to the theatrical release window...

        No franchise-starters? Dear lord, whatever will happen to... capitalism or something. i don't know why it should matter, but i am totally freaking out right now!

        (Also, how is Dune remotely a new franchise, but never mind.)

        link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Phillip (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 10:54am

      Re: one valid purpose to the theatrical release window...

      You realize the only reason Netflix puts their movies in any theaters is to meet the bare minimum to qualify for some film awards. They don't care and don't push to release them on a national level because that's not what they're after they have their own national distribution model ... it's called Netflix

      link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Samuel Abram (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 12:29pm

        Re: Re: one valid purpose to the theatrical release window...

        I suggest you watch the documentary "Netflix vs. The World", therein it is discussed how the name "Netflix" was arrived at. They just had a list of possible names they brainstormed and the grand champion of the battle royale was "Netflix". Believe it or not, the company was almost called "Netpix".

        link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2022 @ 6:13pm

      Re: one valid purpose to the theatrical release window...

      "What if it makes the large company slightly less money" is... frankly, not the "gotcha" or the appeal to morality that you seem to think it is.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 10 Feb 2022 @ 4:40am

      Re: one valid purpose to the theatrical release window...

      "There's one valid purpose to the theatrical release window, and that's to protect an incipient new franchise like Dune, something that doesn't come along every day."

      Or, during a pandemic when your audience really doesn't want to risk their own lives to sit in the middle of a bunch of strangers who might not necessarily take the comfort of those around them serious at the best of times, stopping access to streaming is what kills it.

      "But the real solution is to look for what advantages the solution offered has."

      You've already got problems if your idea of a quality movie is whether they can wring multiple sequels and spin-offs from it.

      "We wouldn't have WandaVision or Loki otherwise."

      There's other quality series that don't depend on the provider having bought a major franchise from elsewhere. Some of them get ignored because of the franchise mentality.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 10:33am

    "metrics proving clear financial harm appear lacking"

    So another day that ends in y in copyright cartel land?
    They claim trillions in losses but never have any evidence.

    "Village Roadshow to avoid their contractual commitment to participate in the arbitration"

    Did no one explain to them that agreeing to arbitration never works out well?? I mean they have it in their contracts & abuse others but they thought they could avoid the fate?

    "effort to boost streaming's popularity"

    The full page ad that was run in Rolling Stone thanking the music industry for thinking the internet was just a fad goes here.

    "clandestine plan to materially reduce box office and correlated ancillary revenue generated from tent pole films that Village Roadshow and others would be entitled to receive in exchange for driving subscription revenue for the new HBO Max service."

    Again a day that ends in Y.
    You negotiated a contract, you could have set terms if they were so important, you did not. How does it feel to be the one who was promised things in the contract based on the net after hollywood accounting says you owe the studio $2000 for owning a piece of the film.

    We used to gather in caves for food & story sharing, those were sacred spaces but we managed to move on.
    This entire industry is a relic of what used to be & the fallout of getting everything they wanted made into law forgetting you can't force people to go to a theater if it could kill them.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Paul B, 9 Feb 2022 @ 11:58am

      Re:

      Just Demand an Audit,

      Peter Jackson got paid big bucks because he was about to demand an audit of Hollywood accounting of the Lord of the Rings.

      Somehow no movie has made a penny in over 50 years, some movies costing almost nothing and breaking big. I mean step 1 is to allocate 100% of the budget of the movie to advertising.

      Let this BS be brought into the public eye.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2022 @ 10:37am

    as if for thirty years the "sanctity of the movie going experience" hasn't involved sticky floors, over priced popcorn, big crowds and mass shootings.

    Y'know, I've been going to movies for far longer than 30 years. And in all that time, I've not seen even one mass shooting.

    The over priced popcorn dates back far longer than 30 years. And the sticky floors I've mostly seen at discount or second-run theaters. But sure.

    But the mass shootings? Is that, like, part of the floor show during Rocky Horror showings or something?

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Stephen T. Stone (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 10:42am

      the mass shootings? Is that, like, part of the floor show during Rocky Horror showings or something?

      They don’t happen often, even here in the United States, but they happen often enough⁠—and are often deadly enough⁠—that one might rethink the entire notion of going to a crowded movie theater.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That Anonymous Coward (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 11:20am

      Re:

      1 asshole tried to take down a plane with a shoebomb so we all have to have our shoes screened to get on a plane.
      There have been more than 1 mass shootings at the movies & we're not supposed to have a worry about it happening?

      Shooting happens in a school and they get turned into mini prisons for a few months. I guess people going to the movies shouldn't be banned form bags & forced through metal detectors... but we do it for 1 location of mass shootings but not others?! Humans... how the fsck are you still alive.

      Sticky floors are very common in many theaters of varying quality, usually a sign of cutting corners on staff & cleaning.

      I didn't catch covid & die, so obvious covid isn't contagious.
      Please take this map, it will lead you to the tree making oxygen to keep you alive. Make a pilgrimage & apologize.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 10 Feb 2022 @ 4:52am

      Re:

      "Y'know, I've been going to movies for far longer than 30 years. And in all that time, I've not seen even one mass shooting."

      That's the majority experience, but it's obviously more of a possibility than if you stay at home. Hell, shooting isn't necessary, there's stabbings and other forms of physical abuse that happen occasionally in countries that don't have people armed to the teeth for leisure activities.

      It's an extreme case, but the reason theatrical attendance has dropped over time has as much to do with the uncomfortable experience and high prices of going to the cinema as anything else. Sure, you might not be in great risk of being shot, but when the automated digital projector starts the film at the wrong aspect ratio and you have some idiots talking loudly on their phone during the screening, you're not necessarily going to have your experience fixed by the guy who's working the ticket desk, concessions stand (usually the same place now) and isn't being paid enough to risk physical assault by telling the idiots to shut up.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2022 @ 11:11am

    BMP

    Is it possible for both sides to lose? I'd like that...

    More classically: "A pox on both their houses"

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ryunosuke (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 11:43am

    These people also probably claimed that drive in theatres were sacred.

    at one time, there were over 4000 of them in the US... now there is about 300.

    Also vynyl records (which are kind of making a comeback), then Cassette tapes, CD's, DVD's...

    Point is... as technology evolves... so has also the businesses surrounding those technologies, lest they die off.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Bruce C., 9 Feb 2022 @ 12:55pm

    When technology evolves faster than contract lawyers can keep up, you get contract loopholes. Not that the evolution of streaming has been that difficult to keep up with. When most movie fans have huge 4k TV screens at home, they don't lose that much in the quality of the experience compared to a movie theater. Especially if you take in all the potential negatives to the movie theater experience.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That Anonymous Coward (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 2:46pm

      Re:

      Well in their defense they have managed to cripple the state of innovation in this market with fever dreams of trillions of dollars being made by film pirates... somehow....

      They've managed to dodge several asteroids that should have killed their species off, but rather than adapt they just think they can demand the next asteroid to stop.

      Something they really don't want to admit is in their efforts to screw each other over have lead to the insanity.
      Recall if you will when sampling was awesome & then the lawyers decided that if 5 notes were used from someone elses recording they were owed 95% of the profits.
      They spent more time fighting over imaginary windfalls they thought were there (without any proof there of) rather than see that this was a tip of a really big ice berg that was going to do serious damage to their ships & the best plan would have been cutting deals to make sure consumers could get the content they wanted.
      But then they don't give a shit if consumers are satisfied.
      They still think that people only go to theaters, that streaming will never compete with them if it can get awards, & we'll just take it because NetFlix is just a fad.

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Feb 2022 @ 3:21pm

    Excuses, excuses. The Matrix Regurgitations lost money because it was a shitty film nobody wanted to see, and nothing else.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Rekrul, 9 Feb 2022 @ 5:24pm

    On the one hand, I hate waiting for movies to come out on home media, but on the other hand, I do enjoy some big, Hollywood blockbusters, and I can't see streaming services generating the kind of profit that would keep funding these films.

    The Matrix - $63 million budget, $403 million profit
    The Matrix Reloaded - $150 million budget, $592 million profit
    The Matrix Revolutions - $150 million budget, $277 million profit
    The Matrix Resurrections - $190 million budget, $45 million profit

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 10 Feb 2022 @ 4:59am

      Re:

      Do those figures include all revenue, including home releases, streaming, merchandising, etc.? Or just theatrical cherry picked without additional revenue?

      Why do the films need those higher budgets if the criticisms of the films that fail is that they're too long and could tell the same story with way less effects shots in less runtime? Couldn't the same story be told at less than 2 hours with a lower budget and make a tighter film that gets better reviews and thus more paying customers?

      link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 10 Feb 2022 @ 5:07am

      Re:

      Or, to go through your list from another point of views:

      The Matrix - highly original movie with things that had never seen by mainstream Western audiences before (though yes, it did borrow a lot from Asian movies and comic book) - makes a huge amount of money and a huge cultural impact

      Matrix Reloaded - generally considered to be overlong and overstuffed with things that actually had people mocking it (the Zion rave), but still good enough for fans to return to - lots of people saw it, boosted by love for the original and the multiple videogame / other media spin offs

      Matrix Revolutions - interminably long effects sequences with a plot that chugs along at a snail's pace leading to a disappointing conclusion - seen by a lot less people because it didn't get much repeat business and a lot of people decided to wait for the video release because they got burned with Reloaded

      Matrix Resurrections - sequel that basically nobody was asking for many years after the original, which has left most people lukewarm in general - people watch at home or just otherwise aren't inspired to risk their health watch it.

      Why are you complaining that the latter is not being protected, rather than calling for more of the much lower budgeted first?

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    sumgai (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 6:34pm

    reduce box office .... revenue generated from tent pole films that Village Roadshow and others would be entitled to ....

    Say the fuck WHAT? You think you're entitled to some (all!) of the money in people's wallets??? Really?

    And since when does the world owe you a living, eh? Take my advice, free of charge: Do some research and learn what happened to the several thousand buggy whip makers that were extant in the early 1900's. Then go review the definition of adaptability.

    Asshole. In fact, make that fuckin' asshole.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    migi (profile), 9 Feb 2022 @ 7:15pm

    Scarlett Johansson vs Disney

    Am I the only one to immediately think of the Scarlett Johansson vs Disney lawsuit about Black Widow? It was about basically the same subject and they settled with Ms Johansson rather than taking it to trial.
    https://lawandcrime.com/celebrity/scarlett-johansson-sues-walt-disney-co-for-streaming-black- widow-claiming-covid-19-era-backup-plan-breached-contract/
    Regardless of the merits of streaming (in a pandemic or otherwise), the contract with Village Roadshow Films might specify or imply a period of theatre exclusivity, which would be a valid basis for the lawsuit. If the release was specified then to change the contract they would need to negotiate a change with the other party, not do whatever they want.
    Finally I'm not really aware of Warner Bros reputation, for honesty or otherwise, but should you really repeat their statement so credulously?

    link to this | view in chronology ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.