If you love movies, this week there were many reasons to be happy. Looking outside borders, A place in silence Part II was a smash hit in North America, where theaters were filled, the same with Cruella, from Disney.
And then there was the confirmation and scheduling of the Cannes Film Festival. Not only because of the return after a year suspended from the most important festival in the world, but because there are more films than in previous editions (65 will be screened in July, against 54 in May 2020) and because all this means betting on watching movies in cinema.
In fact, there is not a single Netflix production on the official Cannes selection grid. Surely to Thierry Frémaux would have loved to have a Cannes winner like Jane Campion (The Power of the Dog), but this year’s Cannes should be seen as a step in the right direction.
The cast of “The French Dispatch”. The Wes Anderson film waited a year to make it to Cannes. Disney Photo
A step towards the consolidation of watching cinema in the cinema.
All this indicates that the public chooses to see cinema in the cinema. That it is not a battle between the projection rooms and the streaming. And if it is, it does not mean that the second prevailed over the first.
Surprise and a half
The proceeds from A place in silence Part II, the horror thriller with Emily Blunt and Cillian Murphy (Peaky blinders), surprised locals and strangers. That $ 58.5 million, with the United States holiday on Monday, hadn’t gotten a movie in theaters since the pandemic. And the US $ 26.4 million Cruella they also attract attention, but for another reason.
“Cruella” premiered in theaters in the US and streamed around the world. What if I did it only in theaters first, was it a better deal? Photo DIsney
Disney appealed to a hybrid when deciding to release the prequel to 101 Dalmatians, with Emma Stone and Emma Thompson. He released it in theaters wherever they were open, but also put it on demand for those who were subscribers to Disney +, but, and there is always a but, with an additional cost.
That, depending on the country in which you are sitting in your chair, it could cost you 30 dollars or about 7, more or less to the change of blue, as it happens in Argentina, where to see Cruella now it costs 1,050 extra pesos. In the middle of July you will not need to pay for anything other than the subscription.
Was Disney right to launch it in streaming?
If the answer is sought from the economic side, of the business, there is not a correct answer either. Cruella in normal times, it would have exceeded $ 100 million. As it is on demand, and the number of subscribers who paid the additional price is not disclosed, we do not know if the total figure is close to that.
Emma Stone, behind the wheel in “Cruella.” Disney Photo
The truth is that Disney, by putting it on its own streaming platform, loses nothing, but wins everything.
How is this? Because it does not share the income from the box office of the cinemas, which is usually 50% for the owners of the cinemas, and the other 50% for the distributors or “owners”, in the case of Disney, of the film. So everything that is collected by streaming is net profit.
I’m not going to give them in advance, but back in April 2020, in What’s coming: online releases instead of in theaters and in July, in Do I go to the cinema, or do I wait 17 days and see it at home? anticipated that Universal’s business with Trolls 2: World Tour it was premiering in streaming and skipping theaters.
Barb, in “Trolls 2: World Tour”. The coronavirus canceled its movie premiere, but it was a streaming smash. Photo UIP
Hence, the profit, dollar over dollar, has been higher with Trolls 2 (more than US $ 100 million of collection, but since it did not have its own streaming platform, it kept 80%. And 80% is 80 million for Universal) than with the original released in 2016 (US $ 153 million in theaters: 50 % is 76.5 million for Universal).
It will be seen how this continues. For now, of course, Argentines will see it on TV, until we see movies at the movies.
To be continue.