Behind Amazon’s Sudden Change in Its Film Strategy

"Even the parking lot in Culver City is a problem. Those who do not arrive early are often stuck parking at the nearby Trader Joe’s." Oh, the horror!!

"late night" and "brittany runs a marathon" are "regression to the mean" films: okay, worth watching on television (for free), but not worth seeing in a theater. the problem, i think, is how green lighters at amazon choose scripts and projects to pursue. the audience for a tv movie (for free), seen at home, is different from the audience that would pay to see a film in theaters. to put it simply, more quality, more imagination is needed. if amazon is serious about producing films for theater audiences, its team needs to "up their game". quality is out there--they need to look harder. maybe hire some programmers for the telluride and sundance film festivals.

I rarely go to movies, but thanks to a long distance plane trip, I got to see "Late Night". I thoroughly enjoyed it. Whether it made millions or not, it was delightful to watch. Thank God Amazon is making something besides super hero movies which are a total bore.

"Late Night" failed despite its excellent premise, because of the lack of a strong male star. It was not a rom-com, it was the story of two women's careers. Men deemed it a "women's movie" so no go. Despite the fact that Emma Thompson was great. Mindy Kaling wrote some brilliant dialogue, but ultimately played herself. It was really a movie about two women. So of no appeal to men.

Scaling down the release plan for a film because the poor performance of another film, whose subject matter is totally different, smacks of certain people trying to protect their own job security over the welfare of the film, the people who made it and the long-term viability of Amazon as a film-production-financing entity. Of course, we shouldn’t feel to bad for Amazon: like any studio, they can depreciate losses on the costs of producing and acquiring films that underperform on their taxes — IF Amazon actually paid any taxes, which they don’t.

The problem here is that Late Night was actually not a very good movie, as anyone who sat through it can tell you. So the challenge could well be the product itself rather than the strategy.

I am just a basic member of Amazon Prime Video from France. I had a bad feeling when I read that the new head of Amazon Studios came from Disney. The feeling is now even stronger now. They have flooded the french catalog with french-dubbed movies and shows, no possibility to watch them in their original version with subtitles, unlike their competitors in France, Netflix, Canal Plus or OCS(where we have most of the HBO catalog), and with movies/shows that are listed, but not available(no date announced for months and nothing moves). Most of the new original Amazon shows are uninteresting and reflect in my opinion poor choices from management. The ones that are interesting were available before the new manager's tenure. Of course, at least in France, fees are low and subsidized by the Prime program. However, I would rather pay a higher fee and get more interesting, adult-oriented programs, rather than zombies, horror, super-heroes, teenage oriented, etc. I would also eliminate the french-dubbed-only policy. I realize that all these categories are needed to satisfy the largest audience possible, but Amazon's standards in movies/shows are now well below expectations and I am afraid it could hurt their image overall..

There are very few geniuses in the film business. Success is one film at a time. It's also a closed off business very few are allowed in.... And it's also very self congratulatory. So bad taste... staleness... formulas... the usual suspects abound.

Starting in 2020, she added, those movies — as many as 30 a year — will come from three categories: young adult films, including a lesbian romance from the director Jennifer Kent; dark-themed thrillers from Blumhouse Productions, the company behind “Paranormal Activity” and “Get Out”; and films Ms. Salke once described as “sexy date-night movies,” now called provocative dramas, from collaborators like Nicole Kidman and her Blossom Films production house. None of the above descriptions of categories are of any real interest to me. These companies need to get out of New York and Los Angeles sometimes, there is a whole 'nother country out there.

Well there aren’t a lot of things I want to watch on Prime. And then when I do I find only the first season of a series is free. Season 2 and 3 cost me on abritBox and Then The later seasons cost me even more on aAcorn. Vera is an example. I find it insulting and I no longer play their game. Maybe stay I Prefer Netflix. I pay my monthly fee and I know what I select is free. And theMindyKaliningrad movie wasn’t bad. It just wasn’t good. There’s a difference.

Why don’t Netflix, Amazon and Hulu just build their own movie theaters to exclusively show their productions there. They have the money to do it. Problem solved.

Mindy Kaling. Never found her amusing and sick of her being shoved down our throats. Enough already.

Prime is now,with a 100 million members who are in the Amazon family whether it, TV ,movies,video or streaming it's the last mile to get into your home. Directors,Producers ,writers,actors that's who your working and there goal, just like WF it's all in the margins hit products create more Prime members.

Oh, a rip off of Jules Verne's "80 Days Around the World". And they are spending what, billions of dollars to produce hardly anything worth a part of that.

There is a tremendous amount of mediocre-to-bad movie directing and script writing going around these days. Maybe all the talent has been poached by the current golden-age of tv? Even recent British comedies I’ve seen feel hollow and Hollywoody.

Every time the prices get bid-up to record levels at Sundance, the films they bought for those towering sums seem to fail theatrically. This is because to make their purchase price money back, they need to go with a big opening weekend blitz, when in fact, most thoughtful indies need a slow, “platform” roll-out that builds word-of-mouth over several weeks (like “Big Sick.”) Also, historically, there is typically only *one* major breakout hit to come out of Sundance *per year* so to swoop into Park City and cut checks for $14, $14, and $13 respectively, means that inherently, (based on historical comps, look it up) they have just thrown away at least $27, right out of the gate, even before prints-and-advertising. It’s just a silly signaling move to spend like that in a single year from the same festival, and would have been a much better idea to buy 41 individual smaller indies for $1 million each. Then they could have kept the indie film biz alive and maybe found a few singles and doubles among them, rather than swinging for the fences to look like a tastemaker first time at bat with “Late Night” an indie “Devil Wears Prada” but with lesser stars and zero name recognition without a hit memoir by the same name. Instead of “The Aeronauts” somebody should make a sci-fi adventure about “The Micronauts,” which had a comic from a partnership between toy manufacturer Mego and Marvel.

I saw this film at the Telluride Film Festival. It was very disappointing. The screenwriters didn't seem to know which of the leads was their main character. The "science" was absolute hokum. No one I talked to liked it, with the exception that the special effects were nicely done. Overall, though, two thumbs down.

When in doubt, lower your expectations.

i was looking forward to The Aeronauts on a big screen... i love that kind of retro looking, big idea movie... i'll likely watch on prime anyway, but that is a disappointment... a 17 inch monitor on the computer cannot compare to an IMAX screen.

I just watched "The Aeronauts" trailer. Exciting, suspenseful and "based on a true story." I'm excited to see it -- with regrets the film won't be shown in the U.S. on IMAX. Still, here's to a good run for this one. Appears to be a wondrous story.

I LOVED LATE NIGHT!!

Enjoyed "Late Night", and who doesn't love Mrs. Maisel. My whole purpose of subscribing to Amazon is so I can avoid the theaters and I can take advantage of "cc", replay, restart, etc. It's the best of all worlds, so please Amazon, don't try to be a "theater only" for your new releases. Keep to your original plan and let your subscribers enjoy your creative productions.

I watched Late Night on a flight and loved it.

I was eager to see "Late Night" and sorely disappointed. Emma Thompson's character was unbelievably crude, rude and brash. She may have been based on bosses Kaling worked for when she was coming up in the industry, but this boss had no vulnerability to root for. Sometimes subtle touch gets the point across better than a sledgehammer.

"Premium content"? It's great that people who know nothing about movies or storytelling are running the show, in the creeping managerialization of America ('“The mission is to align the movie side to the same values of trying to get premium content to the global consumer,” she said. '). Maybe that explains why Ms. Salke spent $13 million on a bland Mindy Kalin vehicle? OTOH, Amazon's movie executives have previously acknowledged that their real objective is to get people to the site to buy shoes and toaster ovens. So which "vision" is it?

I guess it's just too bad for those of us who don't have 60" home screens.

Lol. Releasing this bomb-to-be on IMAX and exclusive screens? Pish. Anyone with half a brain could have told the marketing geniuses at Amazon that THEIR head was in the clouds, along with the balloons. Face facts: Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones aren't great box office draws, especially in a story about ballooning. It's not just the general audience's lack of any discernible interest in either one of them, or any feigned romance, there's also the vertigo and acrophobia to contend with.

Late Night was the worst movie I saw all summer. Completely forgettable, even while I was watching it. Amazon gets props for Mrs. Maisel though.

I didn't know Late Night was IN theaters, and, frankly, I rarely go to movies unless accompanying one of my kids to an action/superhero movie. In fact, my wife and I went to see Downton Abbey and that was the first movie I remember us going out to see alone since "Titanic"! But I did see it on Amazon Prime and thought it was a cute and enjoyable movie, a rom-com without much "rom" :) I generally enjoy pretty much anything with Emma Thompson, though. Considering Amazon has picked up "The Expanse" I'm counting the weeks till it's released!

I barely had a chance to see Late Night at the theater—it was in theaters up here for less than two weeks. I loved it. My husband and I would go to movies a couple times a week if there was anything on offer besides kids' films, superheroes, and horror. Very sad to see original content adults can enjoy go straight to streaming.

I payed one of my infrequent visits to the movies recently. They tried hard to pamper me, with stadium seating and reclining chairs, but the quality of the picture was disappointing. I'm used to watching movies on my 28 inch iMac. I know it is puny by home screen standards, but it is bright and colorful and very sharp. The movie was dark and soft focus by comparison. Projecting images on a screen is a technology that is passing. I don't know what will be required to make movie screens digital, but they better get moving if they want me to come back.

I enjoyed the movie, "Late Night," in a theater with my friend, and again on a Delta flight from south Asia. Can't think of anything wrong with it and, no I do not know Mindy Kaling (wish I did).

"With the change in plan for “The Aeronauts,” Amazon was behaving more like its streaming rival Netflix, which has favored delivering movies to its subscribers quickly, rather than giving the films long theatrical runs." Face it, with folks having 60 inch television sets in their homes there is less and less reason to deal with the problem of traveling to a movie theater, paying God-knows-what for admission and popcorn, having to hear some superhero movie's soundtrack blasting through the walls from the next theater, the inconsiderate clowns in the audience playing with their phones and the rest of it. I am 61 years old and grew up going to theaters and drive-ins to see movies and I treasure those times, but these days that whole scene has no appeal whatsoever. I would rather watch movies at home.

“Late Night,” a comedy written by Mindy Kaling and starring Ms. Kaling as a neophyte TV writer and Emma Thompson in the role of an imperious talk show host. It is mediocre and often downright flat and plodding. Any exec at Amazon who saw it before its release should have known that and scaled the release downward. It is the same old story -- there is no one in the movie business to call a dud a dud for fear of losing one's job in the movie-making business. So they push it out the door and watch it flail.

They didn't pay for first class airline tickets? Oh, those poor mistreated movie types. Too bad though about not being able to see The Aeronauts at an iMax theater. My wife and I live in Minneapolis, but have a cabin by Siren Wisconsin. We pretty much just go to the movies in Siren, where first run movies are $5.50 before 6 PM. We can go to a movie, get popcorn and something to drink, and only spend about $17. It would cost almost that much just for the popcorn and drink at our local AMC in Minneapolis. So in town we pretty much watch movies on our flat screen TV.

As someone else pointed out, those of us with vary large screens at home can approximate the positives of theater experience pretty well without dealing with the negatives. I used to go to the theater dozens of times a year. These days, I go maybe 2 or 3. Some of that is I am much busier than I used to be and some of it is that my home experience is pretty good and it is way easier to see something at home in the couple hours before bed when the mood strikes than to find a babysitter spur of the moment on a school night. And when my wife and I do go out, we would rather be able to talk to each other than sit quietly in a dark room.

No third season for Patriot shows that the heads of Amazon's video productions do not know what their doing.

Don't bring a knife to a gunfight, and don't produce a teleplay for presentation on a movie screen. If Amazon management thought otherwise, they are truly amatuers who have no place in the movie business.

Some films simply must be experienced in theaters, for the quality of picture and sound, as well as the social experience of being with other fans. Star Wars and Interstellar come to mind as life-changing experiences. However, Amazon produces such mediocre garbage that I can’t imagine going to any of their releases in a theater, even with my AMC subscription. I might give The Aeronauts a try, but most of their films and shows are entirely forgettable if not downright poor.

Another commenter pointed out that there is one theater in the county and lots of snow. I think a film with balloons would be better seen in a movie theater, but the closest theater is a long drive. I have to really want to see a movie to go to another town. One of the reasons not as many people see films in theaters is because there are no more theaters except in bigger towns and cities.

As a film buff, I thoroughly enjoyed the opportunity to see Netflix films like Roma and The Ballad of Buster Scruggs on the big screen, and also streaming at home (saw Roma 3 times, 2X at our local Cinerama, and on my TV). Both films were so much better in the theater, even in their limited runs. But I'm afraid that outside of progressive, artsy towns like Seattle, in vast swaths of America where multiplexes rule the world, that movie fans will not get the chance to see these gorgeous creations the way they were meant to be experienced. I implore the streaming companies to serve both sets of customers. You've got my dollars!

"Late Night" was a streaming flick, not a theater experience. I am stunned Amazon paid that much money for a rather bland movie with an improbable fairy tale ending. Is the author of this piece a film fan or bean counter? No mention that Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones acted together. Redmayne won his Oscar for a film, remember? That film. I would love to read articles about film written by people who know film, not just numbers and trends. One can wish.

I am a film fanatic with a relatively small TV, so I make a distinction between what I consider streamers and big-screen productions. Aeronauts definitely calls for a big screen, and I'll be very disappointed if I can't see it in a theater.

Despite their marketing budget, I never heard anything of Late Night until I saw Mindy Kaling on the Late Show, and the banner for it on Prime Video. As far as The Aeronauts goes, and Tom Harper's comments, I have a 75" TV and I am sure if I were to watch the movie on it I would get every bit as much of a thrill as I would from IMAX, well almost.

I’m a big Mindy Kaling fan, but I think it’s obvious: no matter how good her movie was, she’s viewed as a TV star, not a movie star. That was likely a subconscious deciding factor when many people opted to wait to see her film when it came out on Prime. For Amazon to chuck their whole go-forward strategy on the basis of that one film’s theatrical performance is a sign of questionable management.

I would love to see this movie on the IMAX screen - I go to the theatre all the time to have the full experience - a true escape with no distractions - my personal therapy. Streaming is wonderful to keep you company while cooking or are home-bound. There is a place for both!

I have Amazon Prime. I am not going to pay for a theater ticket if the film will show up later for free. Plus popcorn and soda are affordable. And I can use the bathroom without missing anything. We have one movie theater in the county. It snows here. Streaming is it for many of us who have a long drive to attend. I liked Late Night. But not enough to pay for it.