Zoom-in Online

In Saturday's New York Times, veteran producer Robert W. Cort makes a series of compelling arguments for films to be released in theatres and on video at the same time. As he says, "it's costly and self-defeating." It doubles advertising costs, it helps pirates, it's anti-consumer, etc.

I think there are endless reasons why the studios can increase their profits by accepting the inevitable - their business model will change someday. I've never heard one real reason why the current strategy is better - it's just sentimentality for the past and the theatre owners' desire to hold on as long as possible.

There will always be movie theatres. There are just going to be less of them. So it goes.

I loved the tribute to movie-going at this years Oscars. All these clips from movies that must be seen on big screens. Of course we were watching all these wonderful clips... on TV. If the Academy members love going to the movies so much, then why do they need all those DVDs?

Let's be honest. There is no theatrical movie business any more, and there hasn't been for a long time. Except for the biggest Hollywood movies and sleeper independent films, theatrical is a loss leader. You get reviews and publicity and generally lose money or break even if you're lucky. It's all about DVDs and the other so-called ancillaries.

Of course, the deals with the unions and guilds tend to be connected to the part of the business that loses money rather than the part of the business that mints billions.

Hmmmmm...