How popular are iTunes etc paid for movie downloads?

I came across two curious things that had me very puzzled. A home movie release was reviewed in a magazine. It gave two release dates. The download was one week before the Blu-Ray/DVD release. That was very odd in my opinion. Surely that’s just an invite to piracy etc.


Then a day later I was given a copy of the free youth targeted NME magazine. In it there was a full-page advert for a film. It was only advertising the download release. Not the cinema release or the Blu-Ray/DVD. Just the download release with zero mention of the Blu-Ray/DVD, which is presumably coming out at the same time or soon after.


Just how popular are legitimate digital movie downloads? To me it seems like such a niche market that Blu-Ray/DVD must completely dwarf. Am I wrong? Are teenagers completely over boring old physical media and will only buy downloads? Are Blu-Ray/DVDs passé?


PS I rented the digital download of Mistress America (2015). Great movie but presumably less commercial than the same director’s Frances Ha (2012) and While We’re Young (2014). Five months later it’s still not had a UK DVD release. Are the little movies now under threat of not getting a physical release?

 

Doesn't really make much difference. Either format is easily circumventable.

There's your clue - 'youth targeted'. Physical media popularity is declining, especially with younger consumers. They've long abandoned physical CDs and similarly don't want anything to do with DVDs/Blurays - that's so last century!

Yes, they are passé. I doubt there will be another physical disc format after the current UHD bluray. Digital downloads and streaming is where it's heading.

 

I haven't watched a movie on optical disc format of any kind in five or more years. Older movies I watch via streaming on Netflix, Showtime and HBO. Newer releases I watch are from iTunes downloads.

 

Not just teenagers, but almost everyone I know under 40.

 

Yes. No one gives a crap about physical media any more. The studios would rather sell you or rent you the download because the costs are less and because the chance for impulse buys is greater with downloads/streaming. Also, the number of stores that carry physical media gets closer to zero every single day.

I personally wish it had survived, because I believe physical media provides better picture and sound quality. But I think at this point, that train has left the station.

 

I actually prefer Physical media because I know it's mine. Could it be that most people don't care about physical media because they're under the impression they own the download? I think if more people learn about what's in their "Terms Of Agreement" forms they may go back to physical media.

 

No, I don't think that's it at all. Entertainment consumption has shifted from a personal collection model to a service model. Want to listen to pretty much any song in the world when you want, either at home, on vacation or in transit - there's a service for that and it's convenient. Old timers are stuck in the personal ownership mindset that just isn't relevant to younger consumers.

The same service based model is now taking over video based entertainment (though with more work to be done) with the streaming services and digital downloads. Again, the key word is convenience and discoverability.

 

The Apple "Terms of Service" on iTunes (including movie downloads and rentals) are pretty onerous. There's even a line in there that specifies that you can't use Apple products with nuclear missiles and biological weapons! No, this is not a joke:

iTUNES STORE - TERMS AND CONDITIONS »

 

I am surprised at how many iTunes movie downloads I have sprung for- I prefer the blu-ray but it was the only way to get some movies I love in HD ("Beyond the Valley of the Dolls", "A Face in the Crowd").

 

I've got a pretty large collection of iTunes movies I've purchased. If a marginal film that I like goes down to $9.99 (or even better $4.99) I'll pick it up. The movies I buy on disc tend to come from Criterion, Scream Factory, Arrow, or other specialty labels.

 

Only today for U.S. iTunes account holders, until 11:59 p.m. PT: Apple features 10-movie bundles for $10 in 10th iTunes Movies anniversary sale »

 

Very. Yes. Yes. Yes.

I think downloads are very popular for people looking for "disposable" entertainment where they just want to watch something on a spur-of-the-moment impulse. It takes a lot less time spinning through an on-line guide for Netflix or Amazon or Hulu than it would have to drive over to a Blockbuster and walk up and down aisles, looking for popular movies that they don't have because all the copies are checked out.

I think the mass market has felt for a long time that a movie is something you're only going to watch 2 or 3 times (at most) in your life, and for that reason, there's no reason to own a physical copy. I think music albums are different because many fans will routinely listen to one album 50, 60, heck, a thousand times for certain artists. Those, you really need to own. Movies and TV shows? Not so much.

There are always exceptions, and nutty fans always throw off the curve. But I think people who buy this stuff are very definitely part of a niche market.

 

My personal video library (on hard disk) consists of only the movies and TV shows which I know I will want to see again (and again). Not many titles make it there., as a much greater range of material that I have seen, I have no desire to see again.

 

Most people I know are into Netflix.

 

I would go the iTunes download route if it weren't for annoying DRM that locks you into using Apple devices to watch it.

 

"Buy"? Whadda ya mean "buy"? Watch it on some bootleg site or YouTube (which is also really just an evil bootleg site, despite Google's credo to "don't be evil")

Well, maybe not for old farts, or medium farts. For the kids, if it is not online, forget it. Ignored.

 

Actually, you can watch iTunes movies on Windows computers.

 

Right, but you can only watch them within iTunes. With a non-DRM'd copy, I'd be able to play them on my Linux laptop or any other device that is compatible with the file type.

 

I have decided I'm just going to stick to Blu-ray. It's less hassle. I can play them on any other Blu-ray player in the same region, not locked into one device.

 

Could it be that Apple is in a way trying to generate future sales of its phones and iPads by selling these movies cheap?

 

I doubt it, no one wants to watch a feature length film on a mobile screen (except maybe when traveling).

No, the way to generate future apple product sales is to remove a universal audio jack interface from their smartphones and to steer people towards purchasing expensive, recharge requiring, wireless earphones (that look like electric toothbrush heads), which can easily be lost or fall out. That's how it's done!

 

My point is that iTunes is not specific to Apple hardware. How well can you watch Hulu or Amazon on Linux?

 

Why would one choose to download a film from iTunes vs VUDU?

 

It can't be done on Linux. I'm just going to stick to buying physical media.

 

I wish our decisions mattered. But the labels decide. And they are abandoning BluRay. First they shed tv shows and catalog films, and next will be current feature films.

Even if the BluRay Disc Association (BDA) slashed all of the fees to next to nothing (making it cheap to release shows on BluRay) it is too late. Studios have tasted how easy it is to do almost nothing by selling downloads.

The moment that a studio announces that a current feature film will not be released on BluRay - and I predict that will happen in two years - hardware manufacturers will stop making BluRay players. (I am actually surprised that the next wave of gaming platforms still have BluRay/DVD drives. They won't be present in whatever gaming platforms come after that.)