Tag: movies

‘Inside Out 2’ arrives in theaters and could hit a 100-day run. Here’s why that’s increasingly rare

Post By Business , , , , , , , ,

In Disney and Pixar’s “Inside Out 2,” Joy, Sadness, Anger, Fear and Disgust meet new emotions.

Disney | Pixar

Disney is looking to bring a little joy to theaters with its upcoming release of Pixar’s “Inside Out 2.”

Current expectations see the animated sequel easily topping $85 million during its domestic opening this weekend, which would make it the highest debut of any film released in the United States and Canada in 2024. Some are even forecasting the film could secure more than $100 million in ticket sales, a feat not seen since July 2023 when Warner Bros.’ “Barbie” waltzed into cinemas.

Already “Inside Out 2” has tallied $13 million from Thursday night preview showings in North America. For comparison, 2019’s “Toy Story 4” generated $12 million on its Thursday previews and snared $120.9 million for its opening weekend.

Any opening figure north of $50 million would be a boon for Pixar, which has struggled to regain its foothold at the box office in the wake of the pandemic. However, Disney seems confident in “Inside Out 2,” as the film is expected to have a 100-day theatrical run, a nearly unheard-of stint nowadays for animated features and non-blockbuster action flicks.

While most consumers are agnostic about theatrical release windows — the period of weeks or months that a film is shown exclusively in theaters before it hits streaming or other on-demand options — for cinema operators and box office analysts, a commitment to more than three months of exclusivity on the big screen is a big deal.

Before the pandemic, industry standard was what’s known as the 90-day theatrical window (though the average was actually closer to about 75 days in reality, according to market research firm The Numbers).

Only a rare few films would extend beyond that date — usually massive franchise films or blockbuster hits. After that time frame, a film could move into the home video space, which included digital downloads, DVD and Blu-Ray discs and availability on streaming sites. Films would still play in theaters after that date, but would then compete with home-market sales.

When the pandemic hit, and theaters were forced to close, studios had to decide if they were going to hold off on releasing their films until cinemas reopened or place them on streaming or video-on-demand during the interim.

Disney was one of the companies that opted to make a number of its animated offerings available in the at-home market during that time.

As theaters began to reopen, studios renegotiated the amount of time that films were required to remain on the big screen before they could go to the home market. After all, new Covid variants and a not-yet widely available vaccine had led many moviegoers to stay home. The result has been a widely variable time frame of exclusivity, as each studio negotiated its own deal with the major cinema chains.

For example, Universal and Focus Features inked a deal in which movies had to play in cinemas for at least three weekends, or 17 days, before those films could transition to the premium video on-demand platforms.

“Ninety-day windows were always going to be unsustainable,” said Jeff Kaufman, senior vice president of film and marketing at Malco Theaters. “The pandemic sort of accelerated that.”

The shifting theatrical windows has left studios and cinemas with a complex equation.

A shorter window

Studios had been pushing to slim down the window prior to the pandemic in order to cut down on marketing expenses, explained Daniel Loria, senior vice president of content strategy and editorial director at the Box Office Company.

Studios were paying a significant amount to market films for their theatrical release and then months later had to drum up buzz again for a film’s transition to the home market. With shorter windows, studios don’t need to spend as much to refamiliarize audiences with a film as it’s likely still fresh in their minds from its debut.

“My impression of films going to [premium video on-demand] early is usually a decision to not double dip on the marketing spend,” Loria said.

Last year, the average run of a widely released film was 39 days, according to The Numbers. So far in 2024, the average run is 29 days. Of course, as bigger blockbuster titles roll out in the summer months, that figure is expected to grow.

Average theatrical window by major Hollywood studio in 2023

  • Focus Features — 28 days
  • Lionsgate — 30 days
  • Universal — 30.8 days
  • Warner Bros. — 30.9 days
  • Paramount — 42.5 days
  • Sony — 47.75 days
  • 20th Century Fox — 60 days
  • Searchlight — 60 days
  • Disney — 62 days

Source: The Numbers

There are cases where studios have extended their runs well beyond the typical theatrical window. In 2022, for example, Paramount and Skydance’s “Top Gun: Maverick” played for more than 200 days in cinemas before heading to the home market.

And, these figures only refer to when a film becomes available in the home market for rent. Typically, the wait before films are available as part of subscription streaming services, often considered “free” by those subscribers, is much longer.

The Numbers reported the average time span between theatrical release and streaming subscription launch was 108 days in 2023.

Early on there were experiments with day-and-date releases, meaning films would hit cinemas and streaming at the same time. But that faded as studios realized these simultaneous releases cannibalized sales and led to increased piracy rates.

There’s also the consideration that many actors and directors have contract stipulations that award them a percentage of theatrical gains. In 2021, actress Scarlet Johannson sued Disney for releasing the 2020 Marvel film “Black Widow” on streaming and in theaters at the same time. She claimed that her agreement with the company guaranteed an exclusive theatrical release for her solo film, and her salary was based, in large part, on the box office performance. Johannson and Disney later settled for an undisclosed monetary sum.

Still, Universal has dabbled with the day-and-date model for horror movie fare around Halloween, opting most recently to release “Five Nights at Freddy’s” in theaters and on streamer Peacock at the same time. While the film had a stellar opening weekend, topping $80 million at the domestic box office, ticket sales shrunk more than 76% in the second weekend, reaching just $19 million.

Of course, shorter exclusivity and lower ticket sales can be bad for theater chains, which are still struggling to rebound operations after Covid. But some argue that getting the window wrong can be bad for the movie, too.

“A sufficient window is important not only to exhibitors, but also to our studio partners, as it’s necessary to deliver the full promotional and financial benefits of a film’s theatrical release, which continue to meaningfully enhance a film’s lifetime value across all distribution channels, including streaming,” said Sean Gamble, president and CEO of Cinemark.

Disney’s dilemma

It’s a lesson that Disney learned in the wake of the pandemic.

Both Walt Disney Animation and Pixar struggled to regain a foothold at the box office after pandemic restrictions lessened and audiences returned to theaters. Much of this was due to the fact that Disney opted to debut a handful of animated features directly on streaming service Disney+ during theatrical closures and even once cinemas had reopened.

The company sought to pad the company’s fledgling streaming service with content, stretching its creative teams thin and sending theatrical movies straight to digital.

That dynamic trained parents to seek out new Disney titles on streaming, not in theaters, even when Disney opted to return its films to the big screen.

As a result of that and other challenges, no Disney animated feature from Pixar or Walt Disney Animation has generated more than $480 million at the global box office since 2019. For comparison, just before the pandemic, “Coco” generated $796 million globally, while “Incredibles 2″ tallied $1.24 billion globally, and “Toy Story 4” snared $1.07 billion globally.

Box office experts are looking to “Inside Out 2” as a barometer for the health of Pixar and its future. If the film can capture attention from audiences and perform well over its opening weekend and beyond, the animation studios will regain goodwill from audiences and the industry.

Recent Pixar domestic opening weekend results

  • “Elemental” (2023) — $29.6 million
  • “Lightyear” (2022) — $50.5 million
  • “Turning Red” (2022) — streaming release
  • “Luca” (2021) — streaming release
  • “Soul” (2020) — streaming release
  • “Onward” (2020)* — $39.1 million
  • “Toy Story 4” (2019) — $120.9 million
  • “The Incredibles 2” (2018) — $182.6 million

* “Onward” was released just as Covid cases spiked in the U.S. and theaters began closing.

Source: The Numbers

A 100-day window for “Inside Out 2” may be the key.

Disney is one of the only studios that doesn’t have a traditional premium video on-demand window, according to Sebastian Gomez, a research and data analyst at The Numbers. Meaning, that once that theatrical window is up it will go to Disney+ where subscribers can watch it for free, rather than an intermediate rental option.

By delaying its at-home release, Disney is signaling to audiences that its latest Pixar release is a “must see” on the big screen.

The first “Inside Out” film, which hit theaters in 2015, generated $90.4 million during its opening weekend and tallied more than $850 million at the global box office.

Disclosure: Comcast is the parent company of NBCUniversal and CNBC.

Source link

#arrives #theaters #hit #100day #run #Heres #increasingly #rare

Shaking seats and piped-in fog: How 4DX is carving out a niche moviegoing market

Post By Business , , , , , , , ,

Chris Hemsworth stars as the villainous Dementus in Warner Bros.’ “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga.”

Warner Bros. Discovery

In George Miller’s new Mad Max film “Furiosa,” a red paint flare explodes and casts the theater screen in a saturated crimson cloud.

Feet away, among the rows of gyroscopic 4DX chairs, plumes of fog roll in, catching the red hue from the screen as if the flare somehow transcended the fourth wall and infiltrated the cinema. The fog parts, Chris Hemsworth as Dementus comes into focus and grins at the audience.

This is the 4DX viewing experience. It’s one of many multi-sensory moments programmed for “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga,” which opened in theaters Friday, in order to immerse audiences in Miller’s latest visit to the vast Wasteland. And it amounts to a key value proposition at a time when cinemas are desperate to lure back moviegoers, particularly those in the younger demographics.

“We make movies different,” said Duncan Macdonald, head of worldwide marketing and theatre development for CJ 4DPlex Americas. “We are so different out there, with our motion capabilities and our environmental effects.”

In the wake of the pandemic, audiences grew used to shorter theatrical windows and having access to more content at home. At the same time, pandemic-related shutdowns and production stalls from two Hollywood strikes greatly limited the amount of content hitting theaters. As a result, consumers fell out of the habit of going to cinemas.

Moviegoers who have returned are seeking premium experiences — higher-quality picture and sound — and are willing to pay more for those tickets. 4DX is one option in the premium large format market alongside the likes of IMAX and Dolby Cinema. CJ 4DPlex also owns the ScreenX format.

“Premium movie theatre experiences are key to the health of the industry and with fewer films in the marketplace on average than in past years, the importance and essential nature of a company like 4DX comes into sharp focus,” said Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst at Comscore.

4DX utilizes motion seats, practical effects and sensory elements to immerse viewers in a movie. For Warner Bros.’ “Wonka,” the company piped in the smell of chocolate during screenings.

CJ 4DPlex Americas CEO Don Savant says the experience is “complementary” to routine moviegoing experiences, noting that 4DX cinemas attract younger consumers, predominantly in the 10-to-30 age range, who are seeking more experiential viewing.

4DX is a 4D film presentation system developed by CJ 4DPlex, a subsidiary of South Korean cinema chain CJ CGV. It allows films to be augmented with various practical effects, including motion-seats, wind, strobe lights, simulated-snow, and scents.

CJ 4DPlex

For consumers, the 4DX experience costs an average of $8 more than traditional ticket prices, meaning a ticket can range from $20 to $30 each. But the extra cost doesn’t seem to be detering audiences.

Last year, 4DX’s domestic locations tallied $53.4 million in ticket sales.

“Notably, the higher price for premium movie tickets is not a barrier to their success but rather seen as representing a solid value proposition for fans in pursuit of the best possible big screen experience,” Dergarabedian said. “This is good news for theater owners who, facing fewer wide release films in the marketplace, can boost revenues on a per-ticket basis while giving their patrons a great experience that will have them returning to the multiplex more often.” 

And, for major blockbuster titles, 4DX is proving to be even more popular. Ticket sales for Disney’s “Avatar: The Way of Water” topped $83.6 million from 4DX screens, or about 3.6% of the film’s total box office haul. It is currently the highest-grossing film for the screen format, Savant said.

“We want to give customers an easy excuse to leave their homes and visit a local Regal theater,” said CEO Eduardo Acuna of Regal Cinemas. “Premium formats like 4DX offer a movie-watching experience that cannot be replicated by any home theater setup. Each premium format serves a different purpose for storytelling, and each increases the enjoyment of watching a movie in a different and immersive way.”

Acuna noted that 4DX auditoriums are “a strong box office performer” for Regal.

Regal is the largest operator of 4DX screens domestically, with 50 of the 62 locations found in the U.S. and Canada. Globally, there are nearly 750 4DX screens with numerous theatrical partners. The highest volume is in Asia and Europe.

Savant said 4DX is adding around 25 to 30 screens per year worldwide, but is looking to push that figure up to 50 to 60 screens a year. The company is seeking to have around 1,200 4DX locations in the next five years. On average, each theater has around 140 seats.

Moviegoers who venture away from their couches and into a 4DX theater to see Warner Bros.’ “Furiosa” will feel from their seat the rev of motorcycles racing through the desert, smell gunpowder in the air during epic gun battles and even get hit with a soft spray of water as it’s flicked in the face of a character on the screen.

Last year, 4DX programmed more than 100 films for the souped-up viewing experience. Around 40 to 45 of those were major Hollywood titles, Savant said. Others included concert content, musical singalongs, anniversary titles and local language films.

Typically, the 4DX programmers, who are based in Seoul, have two to three weeks to craft the motion and special effects, although Savant said they can turn around a film in a week if the need arises. 4DX can program three titles at a time.

Both Macdonald and Savant referred to 4DX’s programmers as “artists,” describing the process — from the subwoofers in the seats to the fog machines — as different brushstrokes in a work of art.

“Every film is different,” said Macdonald. “So we look at the nuances of the different films that we have and how those are programmed.”

In some cases filmmakers will get involved, offering suggestions for when certain effects should be used and how subtle or bombastic they should feel or look.

“It’s the most dynamic way to see [a film],” Savant said.

Don’t miss these exclusives from CNBC PRO

Source link

#Shaking #seats #pipedin #fog #4DX #carving #niche #moviegoing #market

New Discoveries & Innovative Cinema at the 2024 Cannes Film Festival | FirstShowing.net

Post By Entertainment , , , , , , , , , ,

New Discoveries & Innovative Cinema at the 2024 Cannes Film Festival

by Alex Billington
May 15, 2024

Another year, another Cannes Film Festival. The 77th Festival International du Film de Cannes has begun this week in the South of France in the lovely beach city of Cannes on the Mediterranean coast. We’re back again, along with thousands (and thousands) of film critics, journalists, cinephiles, industry members, filmmakers, students, and more. Cannes remains the BIGGEST film festival in the world, not only with the most prestigious line-up and the most attendees. It’s always an exciting time, just to be here in the midst of it all. In the weeks leading up to Cannes, it’s particularity challenging to gauge whether everyone is actually excited about coming back, or if there’s some other controversy or snag that will disrupt the festival… With its pandemic years now in the rear-view, Cannes is powering forward with another full-on, fireworks-filled two week celebration of the power of cinema. Artistic director Thierry Frémaux also stated during the announcement of the official selection that due to the strikes in Hollywood last year, there are not as many American films, but there are plenty of other new discoveries and surprises ready to shine on the big screen.

Every year when I return to Cannes (or Venice or Sundance) I always wonder, is it still possible to innovate anymore in cinema? With limitations on production, budgetary problems, changes in the industry, many major crises around the world, can cinema still remain relevant and reinvent what visual art can be? Yes, of course! Cannes is the place to be in May every year because they still have the power to program and screen some of the best films that really are innovative & exhilarating. Of course, they’re showing George Miller’s Furiosa and Francis Ford Coppola’s Megalopolis, two new creations made by Cannes veterans already well known as masterminds of cinema. Yet here they are, returning again decades later to the Croisette, still challenging cinema as we know it with movies that are visually stunning and hard to pull off. It’s important to be in Cannes because it’s the right place to be to get a first look at all this fresh new cinema. Maybe that small film from India might be the most innovative creation? Maybe some other film from no one expected to matter will blow us all away? Better to be here now and find out before any of the marketing kicks in, to go in with an open mind and hope Cannes has brought some truly great filmmakers from around the world.

There’s an interesting quote in a very dour Cannes postmortem article published by Roger Ebert in 2010. He ends his wrap-up saying: “I’ve been to 35 festivals in Cannes. I’ll tell you the truth. I doubt if there will even be a Cannes Film Festival in another 35 years. If there is, it will have little to do with the kinds of films and audiences we grew up treasuring. More and more, I’m feeling it’s goodbye to all that.” Well, first things first, it’s 14 years later and Cannes is still going strong. However, he does bring up a good point – is Cannes moving in a good direction, are they still playing these kind of films that “we grew up treasuring”? Or have they drifted off course? Everyone seems to have a different answer. One thing is for sure – there’s absolutely way too much French control over Cannes these days, with the country’s films dominating the line-up but also everything else about how the festival runs (e.g. no Netflix films because of archaic, oppressive laws about films playing in cinemas in France). However, I do believe that Cannes does still make its mark by having first dibs on incredible movies and giving them a chance to reach audiences by showing them to the huge number of attendees these two weeks. I do hope they don’t drift too far off course in the next decade…

In terms of my most anticipated films at Cannes 2024, aside from Furiosa and Megalopolis, there’s a handful of others I cannot wait to watch. I have high hopes for the two big horror films in the competition line-up: David Cronenberg’s The Shrouds (teaser trailer here) and Coralie Fargeat’s The Substance. I’m always looking forward to animation in Cannes, including Claude Barras’s Sauvages, Yôko Kuno & Nobuhiro Yamashita’s Ghost Cat Anzu (teaser trailer here), Michel Hazanavicius’ The Most Precious of Cargoes, and Gints Zilbalodis’ Flow. As a big fan of her 2017 film I Am Not a Witch, I’m excited to watch Rungano Nyoni’s On Becoming a Guinea Fowl. I’ve also got a really good feeling about all of these films playing at the festival this year: Jacques Audiard’s Emilia Perez, Zhangke Jia’s Caught by the Tides, Ali Abbasi’s The Apprentice, Mohammad Rasoulof’s The Seed of the Sacred Fig, Payal Kapadia’s All We Imagine as Light (teaser trailer here), Sean Baker’s Anora, and Paolo Sorrentino’s Parthenope (which was already picked up by A24). The rest we’ll have to wait and see and find out if they’re any good (or not).

I invite you to please follow along as I make my way from screening to screening at #Cannes2024, watching films from all kinds of different countries, catching up with friends and colleagues. And please make sure to follow updates, read reviews, and keep an eye on all of the film critics / journalists in Cannes this year. One thing I love about this festival is that it brings us all together! We fly in to be here at the same time. There’s different voices, different takes, different kinds of coverage, different reviews, always more to read, always more to consider. As strange as it is to say this out loud, I do love arguing about films here! Sometimes it’s fun to have a healthy debate, sometimes it’s fun to disagree about a new film, sometime it’s interesting to think about what someone else saw in a film, and how their interpretation is different (or similar). Festivals should always be about this kind of intriguing discussion, encouraging a vivacious discourse, where any/all voices can participate in the conversation about cinema. Thankfully the Cannes Film Festival is a beautiful place where conversations happen on every street, in bars, in restaurants, in apartments, and yes even in queues for the next screening. I’m ready to start watching, dedicating myself fully to two full weeks of films.

You can follow all of my Cannes 2024 coverage and reviews right here and on my Letterboxd with ratings and thoughts posted daily. I’m also still on Twitter @firstshowing. The festival begins on May 14th and runs until May 25th, and I’ll be watching as much as I can while the films are still playing on the screens in town.

Share

Find more posts: Cannes 24, Editorial, Indies



Source link

#Discoveries #Innovative #Cinema #Cannes #Film #Festival #FirstShowingnet

Universal banks on ‘Migration’ to expand its animation lead over Disney

Post By Business , , , , , , , ,

Universal and Illuminations latest animated film centers on a family of ducks who decides to leave the safety of a New England pond for an adventurous trip to Jamaica. However, their well-laid plans quickly go awry when they get lost and wind up in New York City.

Universal

Disney dropped the animation crown. Universal has picked it up.

And, with “Migration” opening Friday, the studio is looking to strengthen its grip.

“Migration,” a comic tale about a family of New England ducks that leave their pond for Jamaica, but end up in New York City, is expected to tally $25 million during its domestic debut. Universal has more conservative expectations, forecasting between $10 million and $15 million in ticket sales for the film’s opening.

While that pales in comparison to the $100 million-plus debuts of Illumination/Universal’s “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” and the latest “Minions” film, it’s comparable to the studio and DreamWorks Animation’s “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,” which ran in theaters for several months, securing nearly $500 million globally.

“‘Migration,’ with solid word-of-mouth and strong reviews, will have to be judged more on its long-term results than the opening weekend splash,” said Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst at Comscore.

Disney’s most recent animated film “Wish” failed to connect with audiences. After generating $31.6 million domestically over the five-day Thanksgiving holiday, the film has grossed a total of $55.2 million in the U.S. and Canada. Globally, the film has reached $127.1 million. The film had a budget of $200 million, not including marketing costs.

For comparison, “Trolls Band Together,” which was released the week before Thanksgiving, secured $30 million for its three-day debut and nearly $180 million worldwide. The film had a budget of $95 million, not including marketing costs.

Representatives from Disney did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

How Disney lost the crown

Ariana DeBose stars as Asha in Disney’s new animated film “Wish.”

Disney

Disney established its animated feature empire in the early 20th century with 1937’s “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” and continued to dominate, more or less, into the 1980s and 1990s with “The Little Mermaid” and “Beauty and the Beast.”

Later, it acquired Pixar, which together with Walt Disney Animation, generated billions in box-office receipts for the company.

“The world of feature animation has been dominated for decades by Disney and for good reason,” said Dergarabedian. “They set the gold standard.”

Then came the Covid pandemic. While theaters closed, Disney sought to pad its fledgling streaming service Disney+ with content, stretching its creative teams thin, and sending theatrical movies during the pandemic straight to digital.

The decision trained parents to seek out new Disney titles on streaming, not theaters, even when Disney opted to return its films to the big screen. Compounding Disney’s woes was a general sense from audiences that the company’s content had grown overly existential and too concerned with social issues beyond the reach of children.

As a result, no Disney animated feature from Pixar or Walt Disney Animation has generated more than $480 million at the global box office since 2019.

“I think what’s changed is that Disney doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt,” said Josh Brown, CEO at Ritholtz Wealth Management and a CNBC contributor. “And people will not go to a movie just because it’s the latest Disney movie in the way that previous generations did.”

Universal appeal

Meanwhile, Universal’s two animation arms — Illumination and DreamWorks — have thrived.

Illumination’s “Minions: The Rise of Gru,” which opened in 2022, tallied $942 million worldwide, DreamWorks’ “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” capped at $485 million after its holiday 2022 opening, and Illumination’s “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” soared to more than $1.3 billion in 2023.

Even the Magic Kingdom was impressed with the box office of “Super Mario.” Disney CEO Bob Iger praised the rival studio back in May during the company’s fiscal second-quarter earnings call.

But as moviegoers have returned to cinemas in the wake of the pandemic, more are gravitating toward Universal’s fare.

“Simply put, Illumination Animation’s only agenda is entertainment,” said Jeff Bock, senior box-office analyst at Exhibitor Relations. “Their animated films are sweet and simple and family audiences appreciate that. Disney sometimes attempts to pack too much into their animated features, and lately have been losing sight of the simplicity of the genre.”

Not to mention, Universal has been revisiting tried and true fan-favorite stories and characters. In fact, Illumination hasn’t released a nonfranchise film since 2016, and only three of the last 10 DreamWorks features have been original stories.

For comparison, of the last eight films released by a Disney animation studio, seven have been original films with just 2022’s “Lightyear,” a “Toy Story” spinoff, tied to an existing franchise. Previously, Disney has thrived bringing new animated material to audiences, but in the post-pandemic world, it has struggled.

It is the exact opposite strategy of Disney’s live-action theatrical releases, which have relied heavily on established franchises. Think “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny,” “The Little Mermaid,” Marvel franchise films and “Haunted Mansion.”

Iger has said that Disney will continue to make sequels, without apology, but admitted that the company needs to be more selective in which franchises it revisits.

“I think there has to be a reason to make them, you have to have a good story,” Iger said during The New York Times’ DealBook Summit in late November.

“Minions: The Rise of Gru” is the sequel to the 2015 film, “Minions,” and spin-off/prequel to the main “Despicable Me” film series.

Universal

In animation, returning to popular characters and worlds is an easy way to capture the attention of parents and kids.

“Because they have seen these characters and related stories before, they have high confidence that they will be high quality, entertaining and ‘brand safe’ for their kids,” said Peter Csathy, founder and chair of advisory firm Creative Media. “And they may even anticipate franchise animated films as much as their kids.”

In developing consistent franchise content like Minions and Trolls, Universal is now able to introduce a new film like “Migration” with a sense of clout. Parents who see that the film is from the same studio that brought other fan favorites to the big screen are then more likely to come out to see it.

It’s what Pixar was able to do so well for nearly three decades.

“With ‘Minions,’ ‘Secret Life of Pets’ and ‘Sing,’ I think Illumination is a brand people are aware of by now,” said Bock. “And that awareness will boost ‘Migration’s’ flight pattern, likely extending its box-office run. That’s key. The long play.”

So far, “Migration” has generally favorable reviews from critics. If audiences respond well, and spread the word, the film could see a solid run, adding to the prestige of Universal’s animation brand.

“The kids animation market opportunity will never grow old, so those playing at the top of the game – as is Illumination – hold the promise and possibility of becoming the next go-to brand for quality animation after Pixar,” said Csathy.

Next year, Disney and Pixar are set to release “Inside Out 2” in June, while Universal and Illumination’s “Despicable Me 4” is scheduled to hit theaters weeks later in July.

Disclosure: NBCUniversal is the parent company of Universal Pictures and CNBC.

Source link

#Universal #banks #Migration #expand #animation #lead #Disney

IFFK 2023: Cinephiles explain what brings them to the annual festival of cinema every year

Post By Entertainment , , , , , , , , , , , ,

It is that time of the year when Thiruvananthapuram gets set for its annual tryst with the best of world and Indian cinema. As the 28th edition of the International Film Festival of Kerala begins on December 8 (Friday), MetroPlus catches up with cinephiles who talk about their IFFK experience.

For many residents in the city, age no bar, this is the time of the year to romance the screen. Long queues outside theatres, heated debates over hot tea and eats, headline-making panel discussions and fashionistas turning heads with their signature style are familiar vignettes of the IFFK.

So, for city residents Praveen Mohan and Murali Krishnan, the buzz around the IFFK was not an unfamiliar one. While Praveen has been a regular since 2011, Murali has been a delegate for the last five years.

Praveen Mohan
| Photo Credit:
Special Arrangement

Praveen, 35, vividly remembers his first look at IFFK. “It was exciting, especially watching foreign language films in the same theatre where I used to watch mainstream films. Since the theatres are spread across the city it was like entering a different world. A group of us friends, all of us aspiring filmmakers, gathered every year to enjoy and discuss cinema,” says Praveen.

It is true that the IIFK has shaped the viewing culture of several generations of film buffs in Kerala. UK Mrunal, who did his masters in filmmaking from the University of Reading, UK, has been watching films from his school days. “Since, my father, TK Rajeev Kumar (film director), has been closely involved with different editions of the IFFK, it is difficult to say when I began frequenting the screenings,” he says.

Filmmaker UK Mrunal 

Filmmaker UK Mrunal 
| Photo Credit:
UK Mrunal

In 2017, he helped his father direct the signature film of the fete and also participated as a delegate for the first time. Mrunal has been an avid viewer since then. He says the movies he watched has certainly shaped his decision to become a filmmaker. He recalls with a laugh how he created a furore when he got into a discussion with Shyam Benegal about new stipulations of the Censor Board during a panel discussion held on the sidelines of the festival.

Ahaana Krishna

Ahaana Krishna
| Photo Credit:
NM PRADEEP

Another city resident who found her way to cinema via IFFK is actor Ahaana Krishna. Although she was a regular at all the editions when she was in the city, once she left for Chennai to pursue her graduation, it became difficult to be a part of IFFK.

Keen cinephiles come from all across Kerala as delegates of IFFK. James Thakara, founder and frontman of the band, Thakara, has been attending the IFFK since 2011. “I was staying in Kochi with students of Cochin Media School in Kochi and heard about the festival from them. I travelled all the way to Thiruvananthapuram on my bicycle. Later, I used to come on my Activa. This time it’s on my Royal Enfield Himalayan,” says James.

James Thakara

James Thakara
| Photo Credit:
SPECIAL ARRANGEMENT

What brings them to the festival every year?

Learning experience

James says that each edition has helped him learn and unlearn various aspects of cinema. “The films have shaped my world view as I make it a point to watch as many as possible from all countries. That’s how you learn about their culture, history, politics etc.”

Murali, a photographer, writer and short-filmmaker, calls the festival a learning experience as one understands filmmaking, subjects to be chosen and the pulse of the audience.

Murali Krishnan

Murali Krishnan
| Photo Credit:
Special Arrangement

For Mrunal, what is special about the IFFK is that it screens the best movies from Asia, Africa and South America in addition to films that make an impression at high-brand festivals such as the ones at Cannes and Toronto. “The spectrum of films that IFFK screens is not seen at at any other festival,” he maintains.

Murali points out that the general perception about film festivals is that it includes only slow movies, called in jest as award padam (award-winning movie). “I remember, however, watching the Argentinian movie Back to Maracana at IFFK 2019. What fun it was! You don’t expect to see a light-hearted movie at a film festival.”

For actors Devaki Rajendran and Anumol, the IFFK was their ticket to world cinema. Both of them had their debut films screened at the IFFK.

Devaki Rajendran 

Devaki Rajendran 
| Photo Credit:
SPECIAL ARRANGEMENT

“As a student in Mumbai, I had heard a great deal about the IFFK. It was in 2017, however, when my movie, Sleeplessly Yours, was screened that I participated in the festival. It was an unforgettable experience. Since then, I have been a regular at all the editions. It is an opportunity to watch world cinema and interact with people who seem to breathe cinema.”

Actor Anumol

Actor Anumol
| Photo Credit:
Special arrangement

Engineer-turned-actor Anumol became an IFFK fan in 2012 when her film Akam was chosen for the fete. “Five of my movies were chosen in succession in the following years. It was an eyeopener for me – the films, the delegates, rubbing shoulders with filmmakers, who were household names, the endless cinema discussions…”

She recalls that her mother, Kala Manoharan, a fan of mainstream cinema, was awestruck when she watched French movie Amour. “She said loudly ‘so films can be made this way too’. It was about an elderly couple’s love for each other as they negotiate ailments and ill health! That is what IFFK does – open your eyes to different kinds of naratives, themes, approaches and filmmaking.”

This year too, her film Ennennum is part of the Malayalam Cinema Today category.

The festivals have been special for Praveen. “Sleeplessly Yours in which I worked as an associate director was screened at the IFFK in 2018. This time, I am an assistant director in Shalini Ushadevi’s Ennennum. I had watched her first film, Akam, at my first IFFK.”

Memorable experience

Each delegate usually has a fond IFFK memory to cherish. Ahaana, for instance, remembers watching Parasite on the big screen during an edition of the IFFK. “It was a mind-blowing experience. If I am a delegate, I watch at least 15 to 20 movies with my friends. The movies provide a great learning curve to understand culture, politics and society.”

While the increase in the number of delegates speaks of the festival’s popularity, both Praveen and Murali feel not all the delegates turn up to watch the films. “Some are there to grab everyone’s attention and there are quite a few who come only to have fun at the cultural programmes in the evening,” says Praveen.

Murali adds, “In 2019 I watched 38 films! There might be others like me who watch that many movies. But some of them skip screenings seeing the crowd not knowing that half the delegates have no plans to watch the movies.” Murali hopes for a better website this time. “It often crashes when the registration opens due to heavy traffic. I hope it has been revamped this time.”

Meanwhile, the magic begins as the curtain goes up on the first screening in the morning at theatres across the city.

Source link

#IFFK #Cinephiles #explain #brings #annual #festival #cinema #year

Paramount’s Shari Redstone is open for business, but business may not be open for her

Post By Business , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Shari Redstone, president of National Amusements and controlling shareholder of Paramount Global, walks to a morning session at the Allen & Company Sun Valley Conference in Sun Valley, Idaho, July 12, 2023.

David A. Grogan | CNBC

Shari Redstone may have missed her window.

Paramount Global‘s controlling shareholder is open to a merger or selling the company at the right price, according to people familiar with her thinking. And she has been open to it for several years, said the people, who asked not to speak publicly because the discussions have been private.

Spokespeople for Redstone and Paramount Global declined to comment.

The problem has been finding the right deal for shareholders. Market conditions have made a transformative transaction difficult at best and highly unlikely at worst.

“The market is crying out for reshaping media company portfolios and consolidation,” said Jon Miller, chief executive at Integrated Media and a senior advisor at venture firm Advancit Capital, which Redstone co-founded. “But the deck is stacked against large-scale transactions now because of both immediate concerns in terms of ad sales, subscription video numbers and the cost of debt. No one wants to transact at the current market valuations that these companies are given.”

Paramount Global is an archetype for the media industry’s consolidation conundrum. The company consists of Paramount Pictures, the CBS broadcast network, 28 owned-and-operated local CBS stations, the streaming service Paramount+, free advertising-supported Pluto TV, “Star Trek,” “SpongeBob SquarePants,” MTV, Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, BET and Showtime. It also owns the physical Paramount studio lot in Los Angeles, California.

From a sum-of-the-parts perspective, the company holds a strong hand. Many of Paramount Global’s assets would fit nicely within larger media companies.

“Paramount has a tremendous amount of assets in its content library and they own some pretty powerful sports rights in the form of the NFL contract, Champions League soccer and March Madness,” Guggenheim analyst Michael Morris told CNBC last week.

“But, they are still losing money on their streaming service,” Morris said. “They need to pull these things together, right-size the content, super charge that topline through pricing and penetration, and then we can see investors get excited about this idea again.”

Declining revenue from the acceleration of pay-TV cord-cutting, continued streaming losses and rising interest rates have put Redstone in a bind. The company’s market capitalization has slumped to $7.7 billion, nearly the company’s lowest valuation since Redstone merged CBS and Viacom in 2019. At the time, that transaction gave the combined company a market valuation of about $30 billion.

It’s unclear whether staying the course will help turn investor sentiment. Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, one of Paramount Global’s biggest shareholders, told CNBC in April that streaming “is not really a very good business.” He also noted that shareholders in entertainment companies “really haven’t done that great over time.”

Paramount Global’s direct-to-consumer businesses lost $424 million in the second quarter and $511 million in the first quarter. The company reports third-quarter earnings Nov. 2.

CEO Bob Bakish said 2023 will be the peak loss year for streaming. Paramount Global cut its dividend to 5 cents per share from 24 cents per share to “further enhance our ability to deliver long-term value for our shareholders as we move toward streaming profitability,” Bakish said in May.

Wells Fargo analyst Steven Cahall suggested earlier this year that Bakish should shut down the company’s streaming business entirely, despite the fact that Paramount+ has accumulated more than 60 million subscribers.

“We believe Paramount Global is worth a lot more either as a content arms dealer or as a break-up for sale story,” Cahall wrote in a note to clients in May. “Great content, misguided strategy.”

Big Tech lifeline

Bob Bakish, CEO of Paramount, speaks with CNBC’s David Faber on Sept. 6, 2023.

CNBC

Executives at Paramount Global continue to hold out hope that a large technology company, such as Apple, Amazon or Alphabet, will view the collection of assets as a way to bolster their content aspirations, according to people familiar with the matter.

Paramount+’s 61 million subscribers could help supersize an existing streaming service such as Apple TV+ or Amazon’s Prime Video, or give Alphabet’s YouTube a bigger foothold into subscription streaming beyond the National Football League’s Sunday Ticket and YouTube TV.

While Federal Trade Commission Chairman Lina Khan has been particularly focused on limiting the power of Big Tech companies, Apple, Amazon and Alphabet may actually be better buyers than legacy media companies from a regulatory standpoint. They don’t own a broadcast TV network, unlike Comcast (NBC), Fox or Disney (ABC). It’s highly unlikely U.S. regulators would allow one company to own two broadcast networks. Divesting CBS is possible, but it’s so intertwined with Paramount+ that separating the network from the streaming service would be messy.

“We believe Paramount Global is too small to win the streaming wars, but it is bite-size enough to be acquired by a larger streaming competitor for its deep library of film and TV content, as well as its sports rights and news assets,” Laura Martin, an analyst at Needham & Co., wrote in an Oct. 9 research note to clients.

Acquiring Paramount Global would be a relative drop in the bucket for a Big Tech company. Paramount Global’s market value was below $8 billion as of Friday. It also has about $16 billion in long-term debt.

Still, even with huge balance sheets and trillion-dollar valuations, there’s no evidence technology companies want to own declining legacy media assets such as cable and broadcast networks. Netflix has built its business specifically on the premise that these assets will ultimately die. Paramount’s lot and studio may be appealing for content creation and library programming, but that would leave Redstone holding a less desirable basket of legacy media assets.

Breakup difficulties

It’s possible Redstone could break up the company and sell off legacy media assets to a private equity firm that could milk them for cash. But Paramount Global’s diminished market valuation, relative to its debt, likely makes a leveraged buyout less appealing for a potential private equity firm.

Moreover, rising interest rates have generally slowed down take-private deals in all industries, as the cost of paying debt interest has soared. Globally, buyout fund deal volume in the first half of 2023 is down 58% from the same period a year ago, according to a Bain & Co. study.

If a full sale to Big Tech and a partial sale to private equity won’t happen, another option for Redstone is to merge or sell to another legacy media company. Warner Bros. Discovery could merge with Paramount Global, though putting together Warner Bros. and Paramount Pictures may hold up deal approval with U.S. regulators.

Beyond regulatory issues, recent history suggests big media mergers haven’t worked well for shareholders. Tens of billions of dollars in shareholder value have been lost in recent media mergers, including WarnerMedia and Discovery, Disney and the majority of Fox, Comcast/NBCUniversal and Sky, Viacom and CBS, and Scripps and Discovery.

Merger partners such as Warner Bros. Discovery also may prefer to sell or merge with a different company, such as Comcast’s NBCUniversal, if regulators allow a big media combination.

Redstone has recently dabbled around the edges, shedding some assets, such as book publisher Simon & Schuster, and engaging in talks to sell a majority stake in cable network BET.

But Paramount Global shelved the idea of selling a stake in BET in August after deciding sale offers were too low to outweigh the value of keeping the network in its cable network portfolio. With the total company’s market valuation below $8 billion, it’s difficult to convince buyers to pay big prices for parts. A change in broader investment sentiment that pushes the company’s valuation higher may help Redstone and other Paramount Global executives get more comfortable with divesting assets.

Selling National Amusements

If Redstone can’t find a deal to her liking, she could also sell National Amusements, the holding company founded by her father, Sumner Redstone, that owns the bulk of the company’s voting shares. National Amusements owns 77.3% of Paramount Global’s Class A (voting) common stock and 5.2% of the Class B common stock, constituting about 10% of the overall equity of the company.

Redstone took a $125 million strategic investment from merchant bank BDT & MSD Partners earlier this year to pay down debt, reiterating her belief in Paramount Global’s inherent value.

“Paramount has the best assets in the media industry, with an incredible content library and IP spanning all genres and demographics, as well as the No. 1 broadcast network, the leading free ad-supported streaming television service and the fastest-growing pay streaming platform in the U.S.,” Redstone said in a statement in May. “NAI has conviction in Paramount’s strategy and execution, and we remain committed to supporting Paramount as it takes the necessary steps to build on its success and capitalize on the strategic opportunities in our industry.”

Selling National Amusements wouldn’t alter Paramount Global’s long-term future. But it is a way out for Redstone if she can’t find a deal beneficial to shareholders.

Paramount Global isn’t actively working with an investment bank on a sale, according to people familiar with the matter. The company is content to wait for a shift in market conditions or regulatory officials before getting more aggressive on a transformational deal, said the people.

Still, Redstone’s predicament aptly sums up legacy media’s current problems. The industry is counting on a turn in market sentiment, while executives privately grumble that in the near term there’s little they can do about it.

WATCH: Mad Money host Jim Cramer weighs in on Paramount Global

Lightning Round: Paramount Global might drop another two to three points lower, says Jim Cramer

Disclosure: Comcast’s NBCUniversal is the parent company of CNBC.

Source link

#Paramounts #Shari #Redstone #open #business #business #open

Anant Nag reminisces his 50-year journey in cinema

Post By Entertainment , , , , ,

When he entered the world of film, Anant Nag was lanky and handsome. Whether he played the mean, selfish son of a landlord in Shyam Benegal’s Ankur, the conniving brother in Kalyug, or the romantic pilot in Puttanna Kanagal’s Bayalu Daari, he portrayed every role with  élan and intensity. He could evoke sympathy as a lovelorn youngster as well as hatred for his negative roles. He was capable of tickling our funny bone with his comedy turns in films such as the Ganeshana Maduve series.

Though he was a newcomer, the audience saw him sharing the screen space with legendary actors of his time like the late actor Kalpana and Julie Lakshmi. If his commercial films ran houseful across Karnataka, he also worked in parallel cinema in Kannada (Minchina Ota, Accident, Nodi Swamy Naavu Iradu Heega) and Hindi (Nishant).

He was part of the iconic television series, Malgudi Days, directed by his late brother Shankar. The two brothers were the main propagators of Kannada theatre in Bengaluru in the ‘70s and ‘80s. They even founded the amateur theatre group — Sanket. Despite his success in cinema, Anant always made time for theatre.

With Shabana Azmi and Amol Palekar in a Kannada Film Kanneshwara Rama
| Photo Credit:
Special Arrangement

From his debut in PV Nanjaraja Urs’ Kannada film Sankalpa to KGF Chapter 1, Anant has been there and done that. He has worked with legends and budding directors.

This year, he celebrates 50 years in the film industry. Even today, he is a busy man. The actor is being felicitated by fans and organisations for the remarkable milestone.

Amidst this hectic schedule, Anant, speaks to The Hindu over a call about cinema and what it means to him starting at the very beginning.

One way ticket

“I grew up in two ashrams — one in Uttara Karnataka and then in Dakshina Karnataka. I led a sheltered life and was adept at the life in the ashrams. Academically, I was in the top five ranks always.” Things changed drastically for Anant when the family moved to Mumbai. “School was in English medium. I could not cope and felt lost. Suddenly, I was at the bottom of the class. I chose arts, I was unsuccessful, tried literature, failed there too.” Anant tried to join the Army, but was rejected as he was underweight. “I lost interest in academics, and was thinking of going back to the ashram.”

That was when someone suggested acting. “Those days, failures were told by teachers and family to become actors. It was considered a profession for those who could do nothing else. I got a break in theatre and felt destiny had ushered me on stage.”

Though terrified initially, Anant says, he dived into the world of rehearsals and characters. “I started discovering myself. I regained my lost confidence. Theatre helped me find myself and in five years I had acted in 50 plays.” Anant started his stage journey with Konkani theatre. “I enjoyed acting because though my personal life was miserable, I could be anyone on stage. Gradually, film offers started pouring in.”

Cinema, Anant says, is like going on a road with a one-way ticket. “Once you get into this field, cinema consumes you. There is no way you can return. It is like riding a tiger all the time. Try getting off its back, and you can be attacked.”

In a still from the Kannada film Hamsa Geethe with Rekha Rao

In a still from the Kannada film Hamsa Geethe with Rekha Rao
| Photo Credit:
Special Arrangement

Second wind

About him sustaining in the industry for 50 years, the actor says, “It was not my efforts alone, but the love the audience gave me. They made my films a success. Equal credit goes to the directors, producers, and most importantly, the writers. They wrote specific roles for me and I am grateful to each one of them.”

After a while, Anant started getting bored with his roles. “By the time I was 40, I was questioning myself — what was I doing? Why was I repeating the success formula over and over again? Once again, I was in a dilemma, I did not want to repeat myself on screen. Art cinema, which offered me scope for experimentation, had limited reach those days. Even the remuneration was nominal. Ultimately, cinema is meant for entertainment. People come to watch your film, not to get patronised, but to get entertained.”

“Success and failure is not in anyone’s hand. A film you think nothing about, may become a blockbuster and one that you pinned all your hopes on, may go unnoticed. Also, when you are an actor, sometimes you are left with no choice, but to do the role you are offered as that is what people wish to see you as. It is also a question of money for the producer. So, in the end the numbers do count.”

That is when Anant started exploring comedy. His Ganeshana Maduve series with Vinaya Prasad is still remembered for the laughs they provide. “I also did a lot of dark comedy in films such as Udbhava, Yaarigu Helbedi where I explored negative characters with shades of humour.”

Anant Nag in a still Godi Banna Saadarana Maikattu

Anant Nag in a still Godi Banna Saadarana Maikattu
| Photo Credit:
Special Arrangement

Anant then took a break to venture into politics. After a short stint, he decided to return to films. “I was now in my 50s. As someone who ragged my seniors who still played the lead with significantly younger heroines, I was terrified of being bullied by my juniors. I decided I would not do lead roles and started to explore strong character roles. This attitude comes only from theatre, where you give your best even for a two-minute role on stage. Sometimes supporting roles are written better than leads.”

Despite this switch, the films that he was a part of went on to become major hits including Mungaru Male, Godi Banna Sadharana Maikattu, Kavaludaari and KGF Chapter 1. Because he remains a sought-after actor in his 70s, he is often compared to Amitabh Bachchan. This comparison, the actor says, is unfair on Amitabh Bachchan. “He is a legend and has done more work than me. He puts in the same passion for a three-hour film or a 15-second advertisement, which I am incapable of. He is a terrific brand and is from the Hindi film industry, which has a larger reach. However, comparing me to him is the people’s verdict, and I humbly accept this honour.”

Source link

#Anant #Nag #reminisces #50year #journey #cinema

Christopher Nolan breaks down the best ways to watch a movie, ahead of ‘Oppenheimer’ release

Post By Entertainment , , , , , , , ,

It’s no secret that Christopher Nolan made “ Oppenheimer ” to be seen on the big screen. But not all big screens are created equal.

That’s part of the reason why Universal Pictures has made “Oppenheimer” tickets available early for over a thousand “premium large format” (or PLF) screens, with options including IMAX 70mm, 70mm, IMAX digital, 35mm, Dolby Cinema and more.

Knowing that even those words can get overwhelming and technical, Nolan went a step further: In an interview with The Associated Press, he offered a guide to his favorite formats, explaining why it matters and even where he likes to sit so that audiences don’t feel like they need a film school degree (or one in theoretical physics) before settling on a theater.

“You rarely get the chance to really talk to moviegoers directly about why you love a particular format and why if they can find an IMAX screen to see the film on that’s great,” Nolan said. “We put a lot of effort into shooting the film in a way that we can get it out on these large format screens. It really is just a great way of giving people an experience that they can’t possibly get in the home.”

In a film about about J. Robert Oppenheimer, the theoretical physicist who oversaw the development of first atomic bomb during World War II, this will be especially pivotal in viewing the Trinity Test, the first detonation of a nuclear weapon. Nolan and his effects teams recreated the blast, with all its blinding brilliance.

“We knew that this had to be the showstopper,” Nolan said. “We’re able to do things with picture now that before we were really only able to do with sound in terms of an oversize impact for the audience—an almost physical sense of response to the film.”

“Oppenheimer,” starring Cillian Murphy, opens in theaters on July 21.

THE BIG PICTURE

“Oppenheimer” was shot using some of the highest resolution film cameras that exist. Like “ Dunkirk ” and “ Tenet,” “Oppenheimer” was filmed entirely on large format film stock, meaning a combination of IMAX 65mm and Panavision 65mm (think David Lean/”Lawrence of Arabia”), that’s then projected in 70mm.

“The sharpness and the clarity and the depth of the image is unparalleled,” Nolan said. “The headline, for me, is by shooting on IMAX 70mm film, you’re really letting the screen disappear. You’re getting a feeling of 3D without the glasses. You’ve got a huge screen and you’re filling the peripheral vision of the audience. You’re immersing them in the world of the film.”

Nolan has been shooting with IMAX cameras since “The Dark Knight.” Audiences would regularly gasp at seeing its first shot projected in IMAX 70mm. Though it’s “just a helicopter shot” of some buildings in Chicago, it helps explain the ineffable power of the format.

On a technical level, the IMAX film resolution is almost 10 times more than a 35mm projector and each frame has some 18,000 pixels of resolution versus a home HD screen that has 1,920 pixels.

Director Christopher Nolan, center, and Cillian Murphy, right, on the set of ‘Oppenheimer’
| Photo Credit:
Melinda Sue Gordon

WHY IS IT SHOT ON 65MM AND PROJECTED IN 70MM?

The 5mm difference goes back to when that extra space on the film had to be reserved for the soundtrack. With digital sound, that’s unnecessary and it is “purely a visual enhancement,” Nolan explained.

DO THE DIFFERENT FORMATS IMPACT HOW THE FILM IS SHOT?

“We have to plan very carefully because by shooting an IMAX film, you capture a lot of information,” he said. “Your movie is going to translate very well to all the formats because you’re getting the ultimate amount of visual information. But there are different shapes to the screen — what we call aspect ratios. What you have to plan is how you then frame your imagery so that it can be presented in different theaters with equal success.”

Starting with “The Dark Knight,” they developed a system that they call “center punching the action” so that nothing is lost.

Cinematographer Hoyte van Hoytema is also always aware of the “frame lines for the different theaters” when looking through the camera.

On the biggest presentations, IMAX 1.43:1 (the massive square screen) the screen essentially disappears for the audience. For other formats like 35mm, the top and the bottom get cropped.

But, Nolan said, “from a creative point of view, what we’ve found over the years is that there’s no compromise to composition.”

WHY NOT MAKE AN ENTIRE MOVIE IN IMAX?

The IMAX cameras are just too loud for dialogue heavy scenes, but Nolan is optimistic about the new cameras being developed.

WHAT’S THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BLACK AND WHITE SEQUENCES?

Some of “Oppenheimer” is presented in black and white for a very specific story reason.

“I knew that I had two timelines that we were running in the film,” Nolan said. “One is in color, and that’s Oppenheimer’s subjective experience. That’s the bulk of the film. Then the other is a black and white timeline. It’s a more objective view of his story from a different character’s point of view.”

Nolan’s desire for the black and white portions to be of equal image quality to the rest of the film led to the development of the first ever black and white IMAX film stock, which Kodak made and Fotokem developed.

“We shot a lot of our hair and makeup tests using black and white. And then we would go to the IMAX film projector at CityWalk and project it there,” he said. “I’ve just never seen anything like it. To see such a massive black and white film image? It’s just a wonderful thing.”

Christopher Nolan, right, and Emma Thomas accept the “NATO Spirit of the Industry Award” at the Big Screen Achievement Awards during CinemaCon

Christopher Nolan, right, and Emma Thomas accept the “NATO Spirit of the Industry Award” at the Big Screen Achievement Awards during CinemaCon
| Photo Credit:
Chris Pizzello

NOLAN’S FAVORITE THEATRICAL FORMATS

For Nolan, the “best possible experience” to view “Oppenheimer” in theaters is the IMAX 70mm film presentations. These are also among the rarest, currently set for 25 locations in North America including the AMC Universal CityWalk in Los Angeles, the AMC Lincoln Square in New York, the Cinemark Dallas, the Regal King of Prussia near Philadelphia and the AutoNation IMAX in Fort Lauderdale.

The prints span over 11 miles of film stock, weigh some 600 pounds and run through film projectors horizontally.

There will also be over one hundred 70mm prints (“a fabulous presentation,” Nolan said) sent to theaters around the world, with over 77 (and more to come) on sale in North America at major chains and many independent locations like the Music Box in Chicago and the AFI Silver in Washington D.C.

“The two formats are sort of different and I love them both,” he said.

The sequences projected in IMAX 70mm really “come to life” on those screens, and vice versa for the 70mm sequences on those specific projectors. In IMAX theaters, for example, things shot with IMAX film cameras will expand vertically to fill the entire screen.

Cillian Murphy as J. Robert Oppenheimer in a scene from the film ‘Oppenheimer,’ written and directed by Christopher Nolan

Cillian Murphy as J. Robert Oppenheimer in a scene from the film ‘Oppenheimer,’ written and directed by Christopher Nolan
| Photo Credit:
UNIVERSAL PICTURES

IMAX DIGITAL, LASER AND EXHIBITOR PLF OPTIONS

The vast majority of moviegoers in North America will have easier access to digital presentations. These include IMAX digital, which can sometimes mean a laser projected image and other times involves a retro formatted screen, and what’s called “exhibitor PLF,” meaning large format screen and projection systems developed by individual theater chains (like Regal RPX, Cinemark XD and Cineplex UltraAVX). When in doubt, look for an “X” in the name.

But don’t dismay: It’ll still look great, according to Nolan, whose team has worked for six months to digitize the original film for other formats to ensure the best experience on every screen.

“This is the exciting thing about shooting an IMAX film: When you scan it for the digital format, you’re working with the absolute best possible image that you could acquire, and that translates wonderfully to the new projector formats like the laser projectors,” he said.

Nolan said the “IMAX impact” over the last 20 to 30 years has resulted in more theaters paying more attention to presentation, from projection to sound, which has been “great for filmmakers.”

WHERE ARE THE BEST SEATS?

Well, that comes down to personal preference but here’s where Nolan likes to sit.

“When I’m in a theater that’s Cinemascope ratio, I like to be right near the front, middle of the third row,” he said. “When I’m in a stadium, IMAX 1.43:1, then I actually like to be a little behind the center line right up at the middle. So, a little further back.”

Source link

#Christopher #Nolan #breaks #ways #watch #movie #ahead #Oppenheimer #release

Let us now praise single moms | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,



CNN
 — 

Roughly 24 million, or one-third of all American children under age 18, are living with an unmarried parent, according to a 2018 Pew Research Center analysis of US Census Bureau data. And 81% of those single parent homes are headed by a mom.

This has been a growing trend since the late 1960s. The number of kids being raised by mostly single moms has more than doubled between 1968 and 2017.

Yet despite growing up in the middle of this trend, in the 1970s and ’80s, when divorce was increasingly common and “Kramer vs. Kramer” felt like the documentary of our childhood, and despite being part of a generation of latchkey kids who came home from school while parents were still at work, I was, I confess, embarrassed to be raised by a single mom when I was growing up.

For the majority of my 12 years of Catholic school, I was the only student who lived with one parent. And for that reason, I was also, demonstratively, the poorest kid in my school. We lived off one paycheck, or paychecks when my mom held multiple jobs at once. The modest child support went to school tuition.

Like most kids, I didn’t want to be different. I wanted to be “normal.” “Why can’t we just be normal?” I’d often lament to my mom.

I was embarrassed by our car, which broke down; embarrassed that we didn’t seem to go anywhere for vacation; that I didn’t have brand-name clothes (thank God for school uniforms that greatly leveled the playing field); or video games; or cable TV; or anything else that my classmates had. I was embarrassed that my dad, who lived in a neighboring state, never came to any school events.

And I was teased for it. “Why don’t you get a new car?” “Your gym shoes are fake Nikes.” “Do you even have a dad?” I was often angry. I got into a lot of fights. When the principal’s office called home because I got into it with another kid, it was always my mom who had to come in.

Of course, my mother, like all parents, only added to that embarrassment. She was, and still is, artistically inclined and health-conscious. We went to museums and art stores instead of amusement parks and toy stores. I went to a summer camp run by cloistered monks … in heavy brown robes. My mom performed in community theater and sometimes roped me into bit parts. We went to clown school … together. At Christmas, I often got books and clothes. And my mom shopped for groceries at health food stores, which was much more unusual back then and involved a lot of bulk foods, homegrown sprouts and warm, freshly ground peanut butter. I had an all-carob Easter one year. I was embarrassed by my un-tradable school lunches and embarrassed at meals when friends spent the night.

Sitting under a framed movie poster of Richard Attenborough’s “Gandhi,” my friend would stare at an unappetizing breakfast bowl of “natural” cereal I poured for him out of a bulk food bag. His breath would blow a few rice puffs out of the bowl and across the table. “We can drizzle honey on it!” I’d say, as if that would solve everything. And then he’d go home to eat his Honeycomb or Count Chocula or whatever.

“Why can’t we just be normal?”

There has been a lot of research over the decades that has shown children of single parents report more family distress and conflict and live at a lower socioeconomic status compared to those growing up in two-parent households. Two-parent families usually have more income and are generally able to provide more emotional resources to children, and that’s also a reflection of how little the United States in general does to support working mothers with parental paid leave and access to more health services and quality education.

And of course, it’s difficult to compare single parenting outcomes to hypothetical alternatives. For many, a single mom can create a much safer or more stable environment than living with an abusive parent and spouse. Just growing up in an unhappy marriage has an effect on children.

A 2017 study, however, looked at the long-term effects of single parenthood on kids and found that it had nearly no impact on their general life satisfaction. The authors also found no evidence “supporting the widely held notion from popular science that boys are more affected than girls by the absence of their fathers.” What mattered most in terms of thriving, they concluded, was the quality and strength of the relationship between children and parents.

A separate 10-year study on single parenting that collected data from 40,000 households in the UK came to a similar conclusion last year. “There is no evidence of a negative impact of living in a single parent household on children’s wellbeing, with regard to self-reported life satisfaction, quality of peer relationships, or positivity about family life,” the report states. “Children who are living or have lived in single parent families score as highly, or higher, against each measure of wellbeing than those who have always lived in two parent families”

Speaking for myself, I’d go further and say there were benefits to being raised by a single mother, that it was foundational to becoming the adult I am now.

Being raised by a single parent required an Emersonian amount of self-reliance. I got myself to school in the morning, figured out how to apply to college, paid my way through that education and embarked on a career with no shortcuts or introductions. Our poverty made me class-conscious even as I earned my way into the middle class myself. My role model for what women are and should be was smart, strong, independent and deserving of all respect.

Even my childhood embarrassment was character-building, giving me a deeper sense of self-worth that is dependent neither on material things nor the opinion of those I don’t admire.

I’m not embarrassed now. Being raised by a single mother means the opposite to me today: I have a pride in her for enduring so much (including the indignity of a son perpetually embarrassed by our situation).

But even as a kid, I thought of her as a role model of resilience and resourcefulness. She imparted integrity, a love of the arts and a sense of occasion for the things I loved, like “Star Wars” and Orioles baseball. Before the age of 10, I was exposed to classical music, classic film, anti-nuclear activism, boxing (as participant) and yoga (long before it was a thing people did at gyms). And her exuberant creativity meant she was also a lot of fun growing up. We once invented a board game about the holidays of the world’s religions. On weekend mornings, we went to a park near a music conservancy to hear musicians practice while we ate our granola breakfast.

Join the conversation on CNN Parenting’s Facebook page

  • See the latest news and share your comments with CNN Parenting on Facebook.

    • Nothing about the financial and logistical stress of our years together kept her from raising a responsible, decent, curious, creative and accomplished son with very high life satisfaction. She gets more credit for that than any other individual, except maybe me. I’m not embarrassed, I’m grateful.

    Let us now praise single mothers. All of them. The “weird” ones. The struggling ones. The driven ones who choose to parent alone. The widowed, who didn’t. The brave ones who divorced for the well-being of their kids and/or themselves. They are all raising about 19 million children right now, and they need all the support they can get.

    This story was original published in October 2019. It has been updated.

    Source link

    #praise #single #moms #CNN

    The rash of remakes of south Indian movies by the Bombay industry

    Post By Entertainment , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    For more than a year, the Hindi film industry is unspooling a popular concept of computer science on the screen: garbage in, garbage out. Bachchhan Paandey, Jersey, Cuttputli, Hit, Vikram Vedha, Mili, Drishyam-2, Cirkus, Selfiee, Shehzada, Bholaa, Gumraah, and Kisi Ka Bhai Kisi Ki Jaan — there has been a glut of remakes of South Indian masala. A few of these such as Drishyam-2, Jersey, and Vikram Vedha have been fermented organically but the rest raised a stink at the box office and were trashed in review columns.

    The art of remake is neither new nor confined to the Bombay film industry alone. But gone are the days when Mehboob Khan updated his film, Aurat (1940), to make Mother India (1957), a masterpiece rooted in Nehruvian socialism. Or when film director Tapi Chanakya successfully relocated the entertaining Ramudu Bheemudu as Ram Aur Shyam (1967) or for that matter, Farhan Akhtar reimagined Chandra Barot’s Don (1978), co-written by his father Javed Akhtar, into a sleek tribute in the new millennium.

    Not on par

    In the last few years, there has not been a single remake that is at par or better than the original. There is no Amar Prem (1972) that made one discover its Bengali original Nishi Padma or an Akhree Raasta (1986), which made us compare Amitabh Bachchan’s performance with that of Kamal Haasan in the Tamil original, Oru Kaidhiyin Diary.

    Over the years, even the best in the business has featured in remakes that played a part in either changing the course or resurrecting their careers. Much before Ram Aur Shyam, when Dilip Kumar was advised to come out of the tragic hero image, he chose to do Azaad (1955), a remake of the M.G. Ramachandran-starrer Malaikkallan, which fetched him a Filmfare Award for Best Actor. Years later, in Shakti (1982), he essayed the role of an honest police officer in conflict with his antagonistic son, played by Sivaji Ganesan, in Thangappathakkam, when the Tamil hit was imbued with a fresh soul and verve by Salim Javed. The writer duo knew the craft of reinventing the original as they did in their first major success, Hathi Mere Saathi (1971), an adaptation of Deiva Chayal. Interestingly, the film’s success prompted producer Sandow M.M.A Chinnappa Thevar to remake it in Tamil as Nella Neram, with M.G. Ramachandran playing Rajesh Khanna’s part.

    Jeetendra survived a slump in his career by acting in a series of remakes of Tamil and Telugu films, particularly with N.T. Rama Rao. Likewise, Mithun Chakraborty found a lifeline when T.L.V. Prasad rehashed Amaithi Padai as Jallad and Rajendrudu Gajendrudu as Jodidaar. Meanwhile, Anil Kapoor won respect by doing remakes of superlative films from the South such as Eeshwar (1989), a remake of Kamal Haasan’s Swathi Muthyam.

    After legendary actor-director-producer L.V. Prasad set the trend by turning Missamma into Miss Mary (1955) and Edhir Paradhatu into Sharada (1957), K. Bhim Singh, K. Viswanath, Bapu, and T. Rama Rao frequently transcended barriers of language and culture to remake their South Indian films into Hindi. Later, Priyadarshan showed immense skill and a bit of creativity in Hera Pheri ( Ramji Rao Speaking) and seamlessly transported the soul of a South Indian potboiler into a Bollywood body with Bhool Bhulaiyaa ( Manichitrathazhu) as a shining example, but of late, remaking films from the South has become a formula for those who believe a star can sell trash and that a writer becomes redundant in the remake business.

    Flashy treatment

    Even the translation of concept films such as Sairat and Driving Licence as Dhadak and Selfiee, respectively are marred by flashy treatment, emasculating the essence of the original. Both came from the stable of Karan Johar. So, when recent reports suggested that Dharma Productions is planning to redo Pariyerum Perumal, one wonders whether Johar would make a mess of yet another good film from the south.

    The casual approach that is being put in making remakes can be gauged from the fact that director Farhad Samji first wanted to make Ajith’s Veeram as Bachchhan Paandey, but then made Jigarthanda as Bachchhan Paandey with Akshay Kumar and remade Veeram as Kisi Ka Bhai Kisi Ki Jaan after Salman showed interest in it.

    Lack of flair

    Remaking a film doesn’t necessarily mean a lack of originality in a particular industry but in the present scenario, it does suggest the Hindi film industry’s lack of investment in screenwriting and inability to gauge the taste of the audience. The writers lack the flair that Gulzar showed in turning Uttam Kumar’s Bhranti Bilas into Sanjeev Kumar’s Angoor. In Rohit Shetty’s Cirkus, only those portions worked which were directly lifted from the original. It seems Kisi Ka Bhai Kisi Ki Jaan has been green-lit just because director Farhad Samji told Salman Khan and his advisers that the protagonist in the original runs away from making a matrimonial commitment.

    Salman is not new to remakes. Be it Tere Naam ( Sethu) or Wanted ( Pokiri), in fact, when there was a lull in his career, it was revived by a remake. But those were the days when the term, ‘pan Indian’ hadn’t gathered weight and the southern stars didn’t shine on the northern horizon. One feels sorry for the likes of Kamal Haasan and Uttam Kumar who were often replaced in the remakes just because producers felt they could not sell enough tickets up north.

    Remakes like Sooryavansham had always been the driving force of television channels dedicated to cinema but during the pandemic, the consumption of South Indian films on OTT and YouTube increased manifold because of time and cheap internet rates. For instance, the Hindi dub of Veeram was already watched more than two crore times on YouTube before Kisi Ka Bhai Kisi Ki Jaan arrived this Eid. After COVID, when buying a cinema ticket has become a luxury, audiences expect a little more than fantasy from filmmakers.

    They are not only aware of the source material but have also accepted the lead actors as their heroes. Prabhas, Allu Arjun, and Yash are household names now in the north and the audience prefers to watch the Hindi dub of Baahubali, RRR, Pushpa, KGF, and Kantara rather than wait for their remake. Technically refined, they touch the raw religious and caste nerve of the masses in the garb of entertainment.

    A regressive shift

    Industry sources say that the recent spurt in remakes of South Indian films is because audiences have rejected the Hollywood tilt of Hindi film content and want something rooted and polyphonic which the films from the South are providing. Many young Bollywood filmmakers, who handle Hindi films with an English mind and prefer to remake a European or Korean film, find this shift regressive and chaotic, and are taking time to adapt. Also, with the OTT space taking care of the dark, realistic themes, the big screen is increasingly meant for larger-than-life experiences which the single-note treatment of Hindi films has stopped delivering in recent years.

    Industry insiders also say that it is not necessarily the film but the budget of remakes that is failing. When the original made in ₹25 crore to ₹30 crore is remade with a budget of ₹100 crore, the creative imagination doesn’t swell in the same proportion as the fee of the star, who in most cases, has a major say these days. For instance, a non-vegetarian Bholaa is no match for Kaithi in the present environment. The writer watched the film at an IMAX theatre with great expectations only to find how director Devgn failed actor Ajay in the din that the background score created.

    It is time, the producers employ the rules of remake where reimagining the original is more important than a shot-to-shot copy and try to lace it with something original that we don’t have.

    It is time the Hindi film industry gets picky when shopping for a remake, and that if it has to make garbage, why not churn out its own?

    Source link

    #rash #remakes #south #Indian #movies #Bombay #industry