Does Anyone Actually Think You'll Pay $30 to See Just Go With It?

When it was revealed last week that Warner Bros., Universal, Twentieth Century Fox and Sony were teaming up with DirecTV for a new on-demand service that would give potential moviegoers the option to watch recently released films from the comfort of their IKEA couches, you didn't have to be a media reporter to assume that certain people would be upset. Namely: Theater owners and filmmakers, both of whom feel Home Premiere could ruin their respective careers. Which it could, if it weren't so expensive.

The nuts and bolts: Expected to launch later this month on DirecTV (with a rollout to other cable providers like Comcast to follow), Home Premiere will offer subscribers the opportunity to see recent films a mere 60 days after initial release, instead of the traditional 90 days in place between theatrical premieres and DVD/Blu-ray releases currently.

For studios, the idea behind this is simple: In this front-loaded society, most films have reached their box office potential two months after release. Thus, Home Premiere would allow distributors to squeeze blood from the proverbial stone before shuffling their wares off to a crumbling DVD/Blu-ray market and cheaper on-demand services.

All you have to do is spend $30 to see something like Just Go With It. And therein lies the rub.

When the structure of Home Premiere was leaked to the press during CinemaCon last week -- announcing a possibly knee-capping on-demand platform during a meeting of the National Association of Theater Owners was probably a bad idea -- it was met with "surprise and strong disappointment" from theater owners. Said the group in a statement to the New York Times: "[We] repeatedly, publicly and privately, raised concerns and questions about the wisdom [of early on-demand movies]. [...] These studios have made their decision in what they no doubt perceive to be their best interests. Theater owners will do the same."

Thus far, protecting those "best interests" has meant harsh words and a marketing stonewall: Cinemark will no longer carry trailers or posters for films of the four studios until the theater chain is notified if said films will be a part of Home Premiere; Regal Entertainment plans on cutting the trailer volume of the four studios by half. Said Cinemark CEO Alan Stock to THR: "We are not here to market movies for DirecTV and VOD. We are demanding they tell us upfront what movies those are. Our goal is to promote and advertise movies for their theatrical run."

Stock also has friends on the filmmaking front. Todd Phillips told attendees at CinemaCon that he was against the on-demand model, because he wasn't making films for television; similarly, James Cameron reportedly plans to lead a charge of filmmakers against Home Premiere sometime in the next week. This kinda means war!

And that, of course, brings us back to the rub: Home Premiere will cost $30, which makes all the teeth-gnashing about its existence somewhat unnecessary -- if only because it feels doomed to failure.

Think about this for a moment: Even for the fantastical family of four that didn't go see the latest Twentieth Century Fox film in the theater because of expensive ticket prices -- the family that studios are, in all likelihood, trying to court with this service -- the idea of paying that much money to watch a two-month old movie seems a bit unlikely. Yes, in theory, spending $30 to watch a recent release at home saves money -- no gas used, no over-priced popcorn and soda consumed -- but the sticker shock of clicking "OK" on the remote to accept a $30 charge feels like too much to bear to simply watch a movie. Especially when other movies available on-demand cost around $5, and DVD/Blu-ray purchases of recent releases cost barely $20. Would anyone who waited to see Just Go With It really spend $30 to watch it on-demand via Home Premiere, when they could wait another 30 days, pay less, and own it for a lifetime?

This is to say nothing of the filmgoing experience, which is a major part of what audiences are paying for in the first place. You might hate going to the theater and spending $12 to deal with noisy kids, chattering old people and rude concession workers, but that's what makes it fun! The din of reality is what makes going to the movies a social experience -- and it even makes the movies better. After all, trying watching the latest comedy without an audience, or Avatar without 3-D glasses; many movies aren't the same without the community. Home Premiere simply cannot change that.

And yet, the fear and pressure theater owners and filmmakers are feeling right now is understandable. Though a seemingly obvious misstep, Home Premiere is the first move toward a full-time on-demand future. How quickly can Hollywood figure out how do to this the right way (i.e.; with a lower initial cost or more incentive to the consumer)? Considering how long it takes certain film projects to get off the ground, don't hold your breath waiting to find out.