In another timeline we have already seen Christopher Nolan’s Beginning. In all likelihood, we just spent the better part of a week discussing it, arguing about it, and trying to figure out exactly what it means. Nolan has generally spoken harshly about the film, revealing as little as possible about his premise, but in the world where he made his original release date of July 17, his secrets have already been revealed. But that is not our world. In our world, its release date continues to change. On Monday, Warner Bros. changed the release date for the third time, causing BoardDana Stevens says: “We will never be about to see Chris Nolan Beginning. “What if she’s right? Is it possible we’re stuck in a timeline where this movie follows almost be released only to be removed, like Lucy’s football? Or perhaps it will become, like the Great Pumpkin, an article of faith. We will never see it, but we can console ourselves by believing that it exists.
Warners first moved Beginning from July 17 to July 31, and then to August 12, each date presumably selected based on the probability that the film will be widely playable in theaters in North America and the rest of the world. This last change, however, is different. Rather than providing a new release date, Warners has promised only an announcement of a future date.
For a time it seemed BeginningThe release could signal a return to normality, at least when it comes to going to the movies; that the date of that return was previously only delayed by a few weeks was an encouraging, albeit strange, symbol. Now that date has been completely removed from view, possibly taking the old idea of normality. “We are not trying Beginning as a traditional worldwide date-and-day launch, and our upcoming marketing and distribution plans will reflect that, “Warner Bros. President Toby Emmerich said in a statement. The unnamed Warners informants are further clarified by suggesting to Variety that Beginning It could open in other parts of the world before making its North American debut. Even then, it might not be the usual business, with the same experts suggesting Beginning “It could move forward in select cities in the US where cases of the virus have decreased and government and public health officials consider it safe.”
Too much for normality. But even beyond the amazing nature of this potential future, the simple question remains as to whether it could work. Drink Beginning out of the equation for a moment and just consider the implications of a release strategy where a great movie doesn’t cover the world at once, but travels from one region to another. This is more or less what the National Association of Theater Owners defends for now. Speaking to Variety as a result of the Beginning NATO Chief Executive John Fithian asked Hollywood to “meet your dates and release your films because there is no guarantee that more markets will be open later this year.” Until a vaccine is widely available, there will not be 100 percent of the markets open. Because of that, movies should be released in markets where it is safe and legal to release them and that’s about 85 percent of markets in the United States and even more globally. “In other words, movies should open now where They can, and wait until later to open somewhere else.
But this “solution” avoids several problems. Fithian points out that theaters are safer than bars, but “safer than” is not the same as “safe” and there has been a lot of confusion about what it would take to secure viewers and what it would take to make them sensation safe in the cinema again. That AMC and other major chains initially announced that they would not require customers to wear masks did not inspire confidence. Nor, for that matter, is a pending lawsuit, initiated by major networks, requiring the reopening of New Jersey theaters against the will of the state governor. It’s difficult to see the attempt to overturn the mandate as more than an extension of the rush to reopen that has led to the current increase in cases in the United States. In fact, an increase in cases recently forced California to close theaters that were previously considered safe.
But even if the owners of the theaters manage to agree on a set of universally accepted security protocols and come to a better understanding of when it’s safe to go to the movies, the fact is that some countries, and even the USA. Some cities are further along the response to COVID-19 than others. And because it’s increasingly clear that both distributors and exhibitors don’t want (or can’t) financially wait until the world is 100% virus-free, a new model could emerge to launch movies and become the norm. That model, as new as it may seem, actually resembles an older model, one that was still used in smaller versions before the spread of the coronavirus.
Broad releases for major studio films have become the norm in the past 40 years alone. Like most developments in the world of blockbuster movie production, the origins of the great version go back to Jaws, who did not invent the saturation reserve strategy (opening a movie on many screens at once), but confirmed that the right movie released at the right time could be profitable on a previously unimaginable scale. Where wide pitches had been treated as cash theft for a bad reputation fee (attempts to use ubiquity and heavy advertising to make big bucks fast before word of mouth spread)Jaws demonstrated that the approach could create cultural phenomena. When the 1970s became the 1980s, tactics became standard.
But it wasn’t him only possible approach A kind of watermark for big budget genre movies, the summer of 1982 saw the debut of ET the alien, Elf, Bounty hunterand The thing. She also saw the launch of The road warriorGeorge Miller’s first sequel Mad Max. It is already a success in other parts of the world under the title Mad Max two, The road warrior He played in New York in April as part of the New Directors / New Films series, but didn’t return to the city until August 20, as part of a second launch wave that brought the film to the East Coast. By then, he had already played in most of the country a few hundred theaters at the time, collecting strong reviews and positive word of mouth along the way. The smart approach helped ensure that a potentially difficult sale, a sequel to an Australian movie that had not been a success in the United States, directed by a relatively anonymous Mel Gibson and directed by a director virtually unknown to American moviegoers, would find a audience.
That approach, one that major studios may eventually be forced to adopt, could theoretically work in 2020, but would have to take into account the many ways the world has changed since the launch of The road warriorand Beginning it does not make a reassuring test case for its possible success. Still shrouded in mystery, their secrets would last only as long as it took their first viewers to log into Twitter during the closing credits (assuming they waited that long). Once viewers, say, Montana, learn that the John David Washington character is actually a ghost, will the people in San Francisco waiting for the film’s release still want to see it? (Note: John David Washington’s character is probably not a ghost.) Of course, the ability of spoilers to influence a movie’s success has probably been overstated, especially since secrets never survive opening weekend in normal times. Piracy would be the most pressing concern. It’s easy to see the unavailability of a movie like Beginning increasing the demand for torrents in markets where it is not yet available, and seeing that those who stay away from the pandemic find that downloading it illegally is more justifiable than before. After all, life in a hot zone is quite difficult: aren’t you allowed little Copyright infringement without thinking about the legal and ethical implications and the ripple effect that such a choice has on an industry that is already struggling? There is also the question of how the press would cover regional releases. Will national publications be interested in covering movies that might not play on shorelines for weeks, even months? And with the destruction of local newspapers and alternative weeklies, are there even enough regional critics and entertainment journalists to cover a movie that will only be released in Denver? (An overly optimistic flip side to that question: What if this new launch format revitalizes the cultural pages of local newspapers?)
The only thing clear at this point is that no one knows exactly what will happen next. After the announcement that Beginning would be indefinitely delayed Texas Monthly Writer Dan Solomon shared an email from Warners in which an unidentified studio representative stated, “We are rewriting the playbook in real time” and “All factors are at stake,” including “International, National and regional “that” will allow audiences to discover the film in their own time, and we plan to play longer, during an extended game period beyond the norm, to develop a very different but successful launch strategy. ”
BeginningThe original release date was not accidental. It was the result of a calculation that took into account Christopher Nolan’s record and previous success in releasing cerebral but visceral action movies in the height of summer. The pandemic not only destroyed that plan, it overturned the entire system around it. For a moment, BeginningThe launch looked like a beacon signaling a return to business as usual, but the cinematic world in which it was slated to appear may never return. The world that takes its place will come with a whole new set of rules for how a blockbuster is released.
Keith Phipps is a writer and editor specializing in film and television. Before: Uproxx, The dissolutionand The audiovisual club.
