>Led by Sean Parker, the Napster-Facebook-Spotify impresario portrayed by Justin Timberlake in The Social Network, the Screening Room has so far added a wide swath of industry bigwigs as stakeholders, including Martin Scorsese, J.J. Abrams, Steven Spielberg, Ron Howard, Brian Grazer, and Peter Jackson, who explained his support by saying that it will expand the audience for a movie by catering to individuals who wouldn't otherwise go see it in theaters. And though a $150 set-top box and $50 per 48-hour rental might seem preposterous, if you're splitting that amount between a handful of people, it's still cheaper than movie tickets.
>Midas-touch filmmaker James Cameron and his longtime producer Jon Landau have also come out against the Screening Room, upholding the sanctity of the theater-going experience as well as making some salient points: Best intentions aside, the service would be incredibly susceptible to piracy, and there's nothing to prevent someone from paying $50 and then piling in as many people as they can fit inside the room.
>Unsurprisingly, the National Association of Theater Owners — confusingly referred to as NATO — has also voiced its opposition to the Screening Room, saying it believes any new form of VOD and at-home viewing should come directly from exhibitors and distributors. The Art House Convergence, an alliance of smaller exhibiting interests, did the same, and the only support of any kind the Screening Room has received from inside the distributor/exhibitor nexus is from the Chinese-owned AMC chain.
http://www.vulture.com/2016/03/sean-parker-screening-room-james-cameron.html
Should we allow this to happen, /tv/ or do you think movies are best shown on the big screen for months before they are streamed to your home?
Will you buy a $150 box and spend $50 a flick?
Will this be the holy grail that pirates have been looking for? Are pirates literally fapping at the thought of playing with this new technology?
>high quality rips on day of release
Yes please.
>>67224489
Imagine it. It will be glorious.
>>67224424
I'm confused on what this is. Are they renting you a movie theater for 48 hours?? So this is only if you wanna marathon a shit load of movies (at $50 a pop)?
What I want instead is to pay some amount and be able to watch any movie of my choosing, like classics and shit
>>67224600
>Are they renting you a movie theater for 48 hours??
Damn you're fucking stupid. Let me explain it to you, retard.
You buy a $150 box. You pay $50 to have a movie sent to that box the day it comes out in theaters. You can play the movie from that box on your TV within a 48 hour period.
>>67224680
So 50 dollars for 1 movie? How is it cheaper?
Just in general, I like the idea of this. I don't think it will completely replace going out to the movies with friends because that's still a fun experience it itself and the screen is much larger, but I would probably pay for a lot more movies instead of just waiting to pirate them if I could just split the $50 between myself and like 9 other people.
>>67224767
If you're gonna be the only one watching it it's not, but if you have even four friends and you all split the cost you're gonna be paying $10 each. The more people you have, the cheaper it gets and you get 48 hours to watch it as much as you want instead of only getting to watch once.
>>67224767
You can invite people to your home and play it for them. Do you have...friends?
>>67224489
>>67224535
RIP film industry
>>67224864
you can guess 2 times
>>67224873
>giving a shit if the film industry dies
>>67224489
Now I really want this to happen.
>>67224886
>implying i do
>>67224424
The dinosaurs need to die off already. This is the meteor we've been waiting for.
>>67224836
>>67224864
so you all forget the part where you have to buy a 4k projector and 100k dollars sound system.
how is this not a glorified netflix
>>67224680
>>67224767
Were you really too fucking lazy to just read the OP?
>Essentially, the theory behind this method suggests that Screening Room will allow studios, distributors, and theaters to profit from this new method because Screening Room will cut more into piracy than it will into actual theater attendance. The mission of the service seems to be to get people who already wouldn’t go to the theater to actually still pay for their movie going experience, rather than to deter anyone from going to their local Cineplex.
top kek bring on the torrents
The only people who are gonna go for this are torrent releasers. RIP movie industry.
>>67224949
>so you all forget the part where you have to buy a 4k projector and 100k dollars sound system.
Who the fuck said you had to do that? All you need to buy is a $150 box that will hook up to your TV.
>how is this not a glorified netflix
It pretty much is a glorified netflix but you can watch movies the day they come out without having to leave the comfort of your home or pay the price of a movie ticket (assuming you have friends, which you probably don't).
>>67225072
well if im going to the cinema it is because of the extra quality. i never got the artificial waiting time as anything thats worth paying for
>>67225016
Even if the encryption isn't broken, you can at least make a really great looking and sounding camrip on Day 1.
>box literally has a built-in singles policy by charging so much for one film
>>67224949
>so you all forget the part where you have to buy a 4k projector and 100k dollars sound system.
Who said anybody has to do that?
>>67225191
It would be the best camrip. High quality camera, on a tripod, no theater audience, audio in, better than any camprip ever.
>>67225191
it has to decrypt itself before it goes into the television. or else you would need some special television too
>>67225255
the point was the guy claiming it would be as cheap as going to the cinema. not taking into account that difference
>>67224424
This is a terrible idea
>>67225016
>The mission of the service seems to be to get people who already wouldn’t go to the theater to actually still pay for their movie going experience, rather than to deter anyone from going to their local Cineplex.
I am someone who goes to the cinema to watch movies, but if I have the opportunity to torrent a movie the day it comes out I'm going to be deterred because it'll be hard to justify the cost when I can get it for free, especially for movies I'm not completely sold on.
Apparently famous directors and shit are backing it because they agree with its anti-piracy software, but, ignorant of this apparent software, I don't think it's realistic at all to expect to evade piracy when you're literally giving people the movie in their living room.
>>67224424
If love this back when I had friends.
>>67224424
>buy $150 box
>charge people $5
>profit
No way Hollywood lets this pass. Not to mention rampart piracy.
>>67225478
if it were $5/movie then everyday people would actually flock to it in droves and you'd probably see the death of many local cinemas.
it said $50/movie, dude.
>>67225478
also you forgot the all important 2nd to last step
>[things]
>????
>profit
>>67225620
he's saying he'd charge $5 per person for people to view the movie at his own venue, numbnuts.
>>67224424
Not a chance in hell
>>67225478
or just have people capture the fucking video feed and share it for everyone for free
and no, i woudnt pay 50 fucking dollars to not be completely inconvenienced by bullshit ass theater scam
>>67225724
>i'm saying i'd charge $5 per person for people to view the movie at my 1-bedroom apartment next to the train tracks, numbnuts.
FTFY. and also i gave you more credit than "in my parents' basement" so you're welcome.
also see >>67225700 and wallow in your failure to meme.
also, please stop thinking about my penis. thanks!
>>67224489
Oof, this. It'll be fucking glorious
On the plus side it'll make independent real theaters cheap as fucking dirt to operate
>>67225813
thanks but I wasn't the guy who had the bright idea in the first place. just thought I'd help you notice you didn't read what he wrote properly.
>>67225884
not the case, as just like PPV events the licensing for broadcasting won't be worth it for certain venues; ASCAP not withstanding.
You can't use residential equipment for commercial purposes without specific contract and licensing agreements. Believe me; they check for this stuff because thats how they make their nut.
>>67224767
For a family of five, plus drinks and snacks, a trip to the movies can cost 75 dollars or so. This is sheaper for some audiences.
This is going to destroy movie theaters. I don't fucking support this at all, and if you like films then you don't either. Yes torrenting is free and convenient and everybody with an IQ above 100 does it, but watching a film on your television or laptop is in no way comparable to watching it in theaters like it was intended. The cinematic experience is one of the few joys I have left in life
>>67225884
It will put every independent theater out of business. People usually only go to them to see movies they can't see anywhere else; when somebody can have access to a movie with a couple clicks of a mouse, why would they bother driving out of their way to some small business?
>Should we allow this to happe
>allow
What are you, Planned Economy commissar ?
Stop thinking you have rights to stop others to start new business. I never stopped you to go to IMAX when I watch the same movie on cable
The only bad thing about piracy was having to deal with a shitty cam rip for a month before it was released on dvd. Now we get day 1 hd quality rips. Cinemas are going to be so dead.
>>67226431
>if people can buy food at mcdonalds why would they go to cheesecake factory
literally you
I can have dinner, take shower, drink alcohol, do drugs, masturbate, have sex, sleep etc right before, in the middle of, and after the movie
I go to theatres to watch new movies on the big screen. The experience is part of it. What's the point of watching it at home? Might as well wait till it hits Netflix then
There was a time people have to go to theaters to see several month-old news reels if they want to see anything new in moving picture
Then Technology and Exonomy displaying and charging make it available at home.
This is progress. This is improvement.
>>67226729
Good. I respect your choice. Now can I have my choice?
>>67226468
You realize that the MPAA has been given almost unilateral power by the american government to stop stuff like this right?
They even have their own police and copyright police force, sanctioned by the US government to fight "piracy" and "terrorism funded by piracy", backdoors into modern operating systems and Intel CPU chips.
There is a reason why you're still paying 20$ for a movie ticket in the age of fiber.
This is great if you have a lot of friends and a nice TV. This is also good for pirates as others have stated.
>>67226642I can do all that in theaters too
>>67224424
Fuck yeah dude, me and my gf, plus 3 or 4 friends pitching in, and just like the article says, that's cheaper than theater admission. The seats in my living room are comfier, beer is free, we can smoke weed, sounds like a far superior viewing experience. Hell, I bet the picture and sound quality is better in my home theater than my shitty small town local cinemas
Fuck yes, fuck movie theaters, they deserve to die with their ridiculous ticket prices, concession prices, their backbreakingly uncomfortable seats, fuck em all, let them reap what they've sown
>>67225371
>ignorant of this apparent software, I don't think it's realistic at all to expect to evade piracy
This, pirates always find a way
inb4 some shitty jurassic park joke I wasn't desperate enough to type out
>>67225241
>implying singles don't torrent
>>67225334
>it has to decrypt itself before it goes into the television
Sounds like cake.
>>67227799
>>67227799
>>67227799
>>67225620
He meant inviting people, stupid.
>Ban singles from the movies
>Introduce an incredibly marked up service that caters to the lonely, agoraphobics, and people who generally can't or won't see it in the cinemas
It's just funny timing goy...guys!
>>67224767
For a couple with a baby or some kids going to the movies is expensive.
Babysitter for four hours at $10 an hour is $40 right there.
Movie tickets are about $30.
Food can be around $15.
So $85 to go see Batman beat up Superman.
So a $50 movie to watch in your house after you put the kids to bed on a Friday night while enjoying a nice meal of Crab legs is a lot cheaper.
Although from my understanding for a lot of couples the seeing the movie part isn't the important bit, it's the going out together that night, so it might not be as big an issue as I'm making it out to be.
>>67226367
>I don't fucking support this at all, and if you like films then you don't either.
Glad your voice doesn't matter, faggot. I can't wait for movie theaters to go out of business.
>every theater will die unless it's IMAX
>every theater will be IMAX
>prices drop because of piracy
>piracy becomes easier than ever
Thank you God for finally doing what I want.
>the sanctity of the theater-going experience
>saying it believes any new form of VOD and at-home viewing should come directly from exhibitors and distributors.
Hitler did nothing wrong
ever since the internet was born the death of theathers has been visible in the horizon, now we can almost taste it
>he doesnt want 1080p rips on day of release
FUND IT YOU FUCKING NIGGERS
Dear God:
Please let this happen. Please kill every theater. Please let pirates take full advantage of this. Please make movies a home-first option. Please make this happen now.
-anon
>>67224424
I actually like going to the cinema to watch movies so I fucking hate this idea. Piracy will become so rampant countless cinemas will shut down. If the people supporting this seriously think it's piracy proof they're fucking idiots.
>>67224767
Last time I went with my family to watch a movie (TFA), we spend $55 in tickets and almost $60 in food, so do the math.
>>67228905
>I actually like going to the cinema to watch movies so I fucking hate this idea.
Your days are numbered, buyfag. Get ready to use more gas money to get to the theater while I watch 1080p rips of the latest blockbuster you want to pay for.
>>67228988
I don't mind you piratefags. I'm pissed at Hollywood for being so fucking stupid. They're about to destroy themselves because they don't understand modern technology.
>>67229049
Why do you care if Hollywood destroys itself?
Entertainment is literally worthless anyway.
Sounds expensive but people pay the same price for UFC fights, so not shocking actually
>>67229120
UFC fights actually cost more. Like $60.
>>67225884
rent aint cheap
>music industry died because of piracy
>film industry will die because of piracy
long live vidya
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bel_Air_Circuit
>>67224424
Doesn't matter if people will pay, this shit has about a 0.01% chance of getting off the ground.
This shit would be so fucking easy to pirate.
>>67229743
>implying any of those industries are dead
Back to your containment board you manchild.
>>67229812
>This shit would be so fucking easy to pirate.
good
>>67224424
Fuck no.
Many of you will though without giving it a second thought. It is what it is
>>67224489
Each video will have a sub-audible DRM signal in the audio similar to Cinavia that will somehow identify each user, so when it leaks it's obvious who did it.
This is barely an idea. I wish i lived in California so that people would listen to my stupid ideas and give me money for them. Fuck Sean Parker.
>>67230012
and there will be no way around this, i'm sure.
>>67230120
This was inevitable. It was just a matter of who would have the best plan to carry it out.
Can't wait to pirate 1080p rips of first-run movies.
>>67224424
Will this singlehandedly kill the theater falcon industry?
>>67230012
>use VPN
>pay with prepaid debit card
Not a problem.
>>67229964
>not wanting this
>>67224489
Can't wait for the screening room.
>>67224600
No. It's $50 a movie.
>>67230227
why would they let you sign up unless they know who you are and you live somewhere they can prosecute you
No, fuck this, there is something important and special about the theater experience.
Being surrounded by strangers, all experiencing the same thing, hearing the gasp and laughs of the audience. It's important to the culture of film and the viewing experience.
>>67224424
>>67224489
>>67224535
>>67224600
>>67224680
>>67224767
>>67224785
>>67224836
>>67224864
>>67224873
>>67224873
>>67224877
>150+50
>200$
>Inviting 20 (TWENTY) people to your home, still all pay 10 bucks
>Have to have 20 people at your home
>Ask them all 10 bucks for the movie
>Still need money for food and drinks
yeah sure i love doing this, I always ask people I invite over for money
>>67224424
>catering to individuals who wouldn't otherwise go see it in theaters.
>splitting that amount between a handful of people
So you're trying to bring in the shut-in but still social crowd? Holy shit.
I'd get this if I had the money to burn though.
>>67232156
Until it becomes policy, who cares?
>>67224864
>>67224600
>>67224767
>>67224836
>>67224958
>>67224680
>>67228939
>>67228263
>Invite friends to your home
>Ask them for money
do americans really do this?
>>67232226
Nigger are you retarded? The $150 box is a one time cost. You and three or four other people will be more than enough to cover the $50 for whatever movie. Whether or not it's something you'd care to do is different, but move beyond algebra 1 if you try to use math to argue on the internet.
>>67224424
If this means high quality rips on day 1 of release, then I support it. But I would never pay for that shit. Even if it was only the price of a ticket and nothing more. I prefer the theatre seating, sound, and picture.
>>67232303
>invite 4 people to your home
>ask them for money
yeah this is gonna do friendships so much good
>>67232327
You ask them ahead of time if they'd be willing to split a movie beforehand you fucking autist, you don't just ask them over and charge admission at the door. Have you never split a bill over anything before?
>>67232226
Nigger you're legitimately dumb
>>67232327
>that weird moment when you actually encounter someone with autism in a thread
>>67232288
>friends
do normies really do this?
>>67232364
>WANNA PAY ME $10 TO COME OVER AND WATCH THE NEW CAP AMERICA MOVIE ON MY 20 INCH SCREEN ON MY LUMPY COUCH WITH 50% VOLUME BECAUSE MY NEIGHBORS MIGHT COMPLAIN?
>Nah, I'll pay $7 to get the full cinematic experience.
>>67232453
>pay me
Are you fucking stupid? It's not you who profits here, and your friends would generally understand this.
>$7
You understand that your specific matinee prices are not universal, right? Combined with the money saved on snacks, drinks, driving and parking it's not a terrible deal. You're just being autistic.
>>67232205
Good. I respect your culture. You can preserve your tradition and cultures with your people.
Now give me and our people a chance to develop our small screen culture
>as fewer people go to theaters they have to make it off the fewer popcorn sold to the die-heart loyalists
>>67232611
Worth it if it means fewer babies and small children in adult-oriented movies because parents couldn't find a babysitter tbqh.
What troubles me with this, is the possibility of movie studios sanctioning law firms to enforce anti piracy measures by sending intimidating letters to anyone they can. What might start as a neat idea could become a huge piracy problem and the studios responding with full force.
I wouldn't want to feel super paranoid every time I'm about to torrent something but it could happen.
>>67232226
$150 is a 1 time cost you stupid mexican.
>>67224424
I really hate to say I told you so but I saw this coming years ago and said so on this site.
In about 10 years once physical copies of movies are a thing of the past and everything is done online or OnDemand, and Hollywood no longer lets you buy your own copy of the movie and instead only lets you rent them for a 24 hour period for $14.99, people are really going to regret being too lazy to keep physical media around
>B-but I can just keep stealing forever.
Good luck with that once a law like SOPA gets passed which will happen sooner or later.
>>67224424
It won't be a thing. But for the sake of discussion: yeah, maybe. I am part of a organisation who would love to use something like this to gain members, and members = government sponsoring.
>>67224489
Fucking this. Just the ad revenue would more than cover your costs.
>>67232327
>being this autistic and out of touch with fellow human beings
wow
>>67234075
what ad revenue
>>67234290
Believe it or not, most people still don't use an adblocker.
>>67224873
>RIP film industry
thank god
fuck the jews
fuck hollywood
>>67224489
And that's why it won't be a thing.
>>67224873
You're seriously a moron if you think this thing will get off the ground without the backing the of the film industry.
And the film industry isn't going to back something that will make piracy a whole lot easier. As it stands now you can get shitty quality day one releases, or maybe a leaked screener now and again.
>>67234317
Yeah but still, what ad revenues? Do you mean the jews selling the product also putting ads in there, or someone making a rip and streaming it on his website? Or piratebay / other torrent sites? I'm confused.
>>67224489
So did Sean Parker do this just to help pirates because he felt guilty about becoming a corporate suit?
I wonder what they'll do to prevent people from Screen capturing. Wouldn't this just give of glorious quality movies to pirate on day one?
>>67224424
I really hope Screening Room takes off. It would force movie theaters to improve their service (no more shitty projection at pitiful brightness/volume levels with no one even supervising it), and it would hopefully get at least some of the more disruptive audience members to stay at home.
>>67224424
Can't wait to pirate better copies because at $50 a movie you can fuck off with that
>>67236127
shits already dieing.
this would mean the end entirely.
>>67236202
It's intended for groups of people, retard.
>>67236735
You're the retard if you think that it (1) this will ever get off the ground (2) if it does that it will be for "groups" at only $50, where the movie company makes $20. At that price it will be for 2 people. Movie companies aren't going to OK something that increases piracy for no extra gain on there part.
>>67236807
How fucking stupid are you? They can't control how many people you have in the room when you play the film. Do you even understand how this idea works?
>>67236899
Just wait for the Xbox doodle that's connected to MS servers 24/7.
Why, if they care so much about piracy ruining everything, would they do this? It'd just make everything so fucking easier, I mean for big spectacles I'd still go to the cinema but for shitty ass films or smaller films I'd just download on day of release. Cloverfield Lane and that London Has Fallen films being prime examples.
>>67236899
Dude MS patented software for the Kinect that did just that for this very reason. That if you rent a movie and there were more than 4 people detected you paid more money. They just never got it off the ground.
So yes they can easily control the situation.
>>67236899
http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2013/05/24/patent-suggest-kinect-could-charge-per-person-when-playing-a-movie/
>>67236997
>>67237063
>>67237082
You don't understand that idea behind Screening Room if you think they would use something like that.
>>67237138
Like I said. The ONLY way screening room gets of the ground is if the movie companies back it. When they're only getting $20 of the the $50 (IE 2 tickets) then 2 people watching for that price is all they would allow. They're not going to go with a new system that makes them less money, regardless of what Screening Room thinks. They have ZERO fucking power in this.
>>67237183
Oh and that's a big IF at that as it's not going to get off the ground anyways as the movie companies aren't going to go with a new system that is much easier to pirate same day releases at much higher quality than how it is currently.
>>67224424
>Paying $50 to rent a movie for 48hours
I would consider doing this if a BluRay was included, but even then it's not really worth it because most movies that come out are shit. I can just wait until a BR rip comes out.
Also those of you saying you would sell tickets for viewing in your home: How fucking big is your living room? That is impractical unless you have a theater room. People don't want to pack into your musty man cave. I'd rather go to the theater where I am guaranteed a high quality viewing experience instead of going to some anon's home theater and getting gangraped by furries upon arrival.
I already wait for most movies to come out because $20 on a cinema ticket is too jewy. I hope everyone involved in this loses a lot of money. But I know they won't because despite costing more this system has a tiny fraction of the overhead of a theatre.
>>67224864
no and I barely watch films from this millennium anyway.
