
Cannes Will Ban Streaming-Only Movies from Competition - prostoalex
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/05/10/going_after_netflix_cannes_bans_streaming_only_movies_from_competition_slots.html
======
1ba9115454
\- Any film that wishes to compete in Competition at Cannes will have to
commit itself to being distributed in French movie theaters. This new measure
will apply from the 2018 edition of the Festival International du Film de
Cannes onwards.

Makes sense. I guess they want potential winners to be viewable by the people
and not appear to be promoting netflix as the only option.

~~~
SomeStupidPoint
How is it better to promote a theater chain than Netflix?

~~~
jplayer01
Promoting local business and movie culture instead of a soulless American
global firm? France doesn't value capitalism and "freedom" (to destroy all
other values) as in the US.

~~~
SomeStupidPoint
It just strikes me as, well, self-defeating to have an _international_
celebration of film confined to your nation's take on it and promoting your
local businesses while ignoring major contributors to the medium.

It seems strange to say, "Well, a film must be in a cinema" when that's not
how most people watch them. (At least not the vast majority of films they
watch in any of the countries I've been in.)

It's not that they banned all soulless corporations producing faux art, they
just banned a change in watching habits to prop up an industry with poor value
proposition.

Film as a medium is a valuable part of culture; theatres aren't necessarily.

Theatres must offer something over sitting on the couch -- and in the US they
have, introducing things like bars and food services.

~~~
vacri
> _It seems strange to say, "Well, a film must be in a cinema" when that's not
> how most people watch them. (At least not the vast majority of films they
> watch in any of the countries I've been in.)_

David Sedaris goes on at length about moving to France and falling in love
with the film culture there, where movies are shown in small theatres very
cheaply. This was back in 2000, so things may have changed, but he was very
clear on the differences between the American and French theater-going
experience.

> _Film as a medium is a valuable part of culture; theatres aren 't
> necessarily._

You should probably stop calling it 'film', then. Most theatres can still show
actual films; few homes can.

~~~
tripzilch
"Film" is the UK English word for the US word "movie" (which has a red
squiggly because of my English (UK) spell-check). That's all it means.

------
kayoone
I guess it kind of makes sense because the Streaming-Only movies are not
available to the general public in cinemas and require a paid subscription.
"Normal" movies have a one-time fee too and these competitions are free
advertising for every winner, but in the case of Streaming they are
essentially free advertising for a movie subscription.

~~~
tehlike
You can always pay 9.99 or whatever the price and cancel after one month.
Still cheaper than movies.

~~~
kagamine
With the added costs of owning a PC good enough to stream and being on a paid
for network good enough to stream, which might not be available in a lot of
the French countryside where a bicycle ride or a short trip on public
transport is more affordable. The cost is far greater than 9.99. Not to
mention that French cinema sees itself as 'art' and a laptop screen can't do
the director justice.

~~~
petra
Netflix, in some countries has an option to download movies. And most PC's are
good enough for 1080p.

------
ameen
Streaming services are the future of media. If Cannes wants to be irrelevant
then so be it.

The hype surrounding Cannes was overrated anyways. France isn't even a major
market to be making that kinds of demands.

I foresee a major festival/competition for Streaming only media attended by
A-list celebrities in the future.

~~~
quadrige
>I foresee a major festival/competition for Streaming only media attended by
A-list celebrities in the future.

Sounds awful, why would you restrain a festival to only one method of
distribution? Cannes is certainly overrated but they focus on authors first
and foremost, and that's what led them to their current position.

~~~
ameen
Because the alternatives exist in plenty. There isn't a single respectable
"Streaming only" festival/competition.

Content produced for streaming services can be radically different from
traditional studio content. Rather than think of it as a restraint it would be
a celebration of the difference compared to traditional content.

The "restriction" would allow for streaming only content to be on the
forefront than be eclipsed by traditional media which still dominates the
charts.

~~~
orclev
Interesting perspective. I can't help but think of what happened with E3 and
PAX.

E3 decided that they wanted to be an industry only event and banned the
general public and all but a handful of elite media companies. In reaction
Penny-Arcade launched PAX as an E3 replacement for the general public, one
that also focused more specifically on gaming than E3 had been. PAX was almost
immediately a roaring success and E3 continued to slide into obscurity.

It will be interesting if we see a similar dynamic play out here, with say
Netflix launching a Streaming Media Festival or something.

------
uhhhhhhh
Wow, that's short sighted.

Force streaming services to release in French theaters, force customers to pay
someone else to watch the movie, and subject the streaming services to
draconian french regulations on when they can stream that movie.

So as Netflix, Amazon, and other streaming services take off, cannes will
become less and less relevant as more and more movies are funded and produced
by streaming services until cannes is that old french indy festival that was
replaced with a more modern and movie viewer friendly festival.

~~~
olavk
AFAIK the Academy Awards have a similar rule - a movie must have a cinema
release before it can be considered for nomination. (More specifically, a run
for at least seven days in a Los Angeles County theater!)

Made-for-TV movies have their own competition and awards, like the Emmy
awards.

I don't see how this will make Cannes less relevant. It doesn't make Cannes
less relevant that it doesn't award daytime soaps or commercials or whatever.
Focus on a specific niche - cinematic movies - arguably will help it stay
relevant, as long as cinemas exists.

(Whether cinemas will continue to exist is a different question. I suspect
Netflix is a much larger threat to traditional flow TV than to cinemas.)

In any case, Cannes is not "forcing" anybody to do anything. They are just
clarifying what kind of movies can be considered for the festival.

~~~
oliwarner
But your assertion there is that made-for-TV (or made-for-Netflix, or whatever
follows) movies intrinsically have less value. You're saying a movie can only
really be "cinematic" if it comes out in a cinema.

That's exactly the nonsense we're talking about here.

Distribution channel doesn't mean anything. There are strong correlations
between being able to put on a show and production values, but it's not
causative.

Define a movie by its actual qualities. Runtime, dialogue(?), even picture
format... But forget about distribution. Lots of people have cinemas in their
houses now. Where they don't have to pay £30 to be surrounded by sweaty
strangers and sit on uncomfortable and dirty seats. Plus snacks and transport.

~~~
olavk
Where do you get "less value"? They are just delimiting what kinds of movies
the will considered for their festival. The Academy Awards also have certain
restrictions on the picture format in place to prevent straight-to-video
movies from consideration.

If you don't like going to the cinema, why do you care about Cannes at all? It
is a film festival which celebrate cinema and the associated mystique and
glamour. Nobody is preventing you from watching whatever you want in your home
cinema.

~~~
oliwarner
You're saying only movies shown in a cinema can be cinematic. That's the value
you're discounting.

Again, I think you need to separate the building from the art.

~~~
olavk
Never mind the word "cinematic", the point is the festival and similar movie
awards have a certain definition for what kind of moving picture entertainment
they consider eligible for their awards. The definition includes that the
general public should be able to go to a cinema and buy a ticket to see the
movie on a big screen.

That's not saying other forms of entertainment cannot have value, just that
Cannes is about a certain form.

~~~
oliwarner
I don't disagree that that's their definition. I wish you'd stop repeating it.
It's that definition that's so stupid.

Conflating "form" with distribution as if the latter affects the first.

No, I'll give you a chance... But how do you think they review these things?
It used to be DVD screeners but (ironically, here) Cannes set up an online VOD
service for screeners. How do you assess something that _has_ to be available
via cinemas, on computer via a wonky streaming service?

This rule is simple (and classic French) protectionism of a distribution
channel that is failing to compete.

~~~
olavk
It is a film festival for cineastes - film lovers or film snobs if you will.
Its whole culture. For them there is a big difference between the big-screen
cinema experience and watching home video. It is certainly a bigger difference
than just the means of distribution.

I think it was David Lynch who said "If you haven't see my movies in a cinema,
then you haven't seen my movies".

You may not care for this difference, but why does it anger you so that others
do?

------
jchampem
As a Frenchman, it makes sense to me.

Imho, watching a movie at home or in a theater are totally different
experiences.

At home you can get interrupted by anything (phone call, email, notification),
whereas in a theater the risk of getting interrupted by something external are
lower. (I agree though, that I could airplane-mode my devices at home.)

Also, the ambience in a theater is much more different than at home,
especially for comedy and horror genre.

~~~
pvdebbe
Complete opposite for me. Theaters are full of people who react audibly at the
wrong things, chatter, phones... I loathe all that and won't see movies on
theaters on that principle.

I don't have any urges to check phone, imdb or anything like that during a
movie. I usually have a break in the middle of a movie for more tea or
bathroom.

Besides that, a mere $1500 audio setup is enough to beat theater in terms of
sound. Screen is the only thing that the theaters have going on, but I've been
satisfied with my 42".

~~~
invaliduser
I am not defending the position that banning netflix from Canne is right,
because they have several high quality shows, so it's a pity, but note that in
France the movie theaters audience is very respectful of the experience, and
there is barely any inconvenience for the viewers (no chatters, no phones, no
buzzing, it's pretty strict -- except in movies targeting children, because
well, children are children and it's hard for them not to talk sometimes)

~~~
pvdebbe
You are right. The culture matters a lot. Maybe I'd tolerate French theaters
better than I tolerate American or Finnish theaters.

------
thegayngler
That will just force Netflix, Apple, Amazon and others to start producing
their own movies.

It will have the opposite effect.

~~~
dragonwriter
You mean, I think, that it will force them to start distributing them in movie
theaters (well, French theaters, but possibly more if other awards follow
suit.) Which is possible.

Alternatively, as those platforms become more important movie distribution
venues, it will reduce the relevance of Cannes and other festivals/awards that
exclude films distributed by streaming alone (or "not in theaters", which
isn't exactly the same thing.)

~~~
wapz
I think your second point is much more on. Think about MTV movie awards. I
don't think it existed 20 years ago (just checked and it started 24 years ago
but I never heard about it that long ago) and came about because of the
unhappiness with the academy awards.

If all the award ceremonies start excluding streaming movies and the same
quality movies are being released I can assure you we will see a Netflix Movie
Awards or Streaming Movies Awards come to fruition.

~~~
smohare
Indeed, Cannes' policy will only serve to degrade its relevance.

------
5_minutes
Netflix will in a few years be completely "incontournable". Give it a few more
years and Cannes will have no other choice then to allow their movies.

------
BugsJustFindMe
Just from reading the headline, my initial thought was "But Netflix also does
DVDs, so they'll probably be fine?" But it turns out that the headline isn't a
fully accurate representation of the article's message.

> _From now on, if you want to compete at Cannes, your movie had better be
> released in French movie theaters_

That's quite a bit more specific.

------
NicoJuicy
I don't think it's a bad thing to release movies outside streaming services. I
think it's a bad thing to release in different periods in the world.

Ps. Yes, I'm protecting theatres ( also small ones) on that. Yes, I have
Netflix. No, it shouldn't last 4 months or more after being shown in theatres
to stream them, perhaps 2 months at maximum

~~~
manquer
But why should theatres be protected ? .. They are just the distribution
medium , not the art itself

~~~
NicoJuicy
Even while they cost more, they give a lot of people jobs. Not everything
needs to be as sufficient as possible. ( eg. Robots are taking over jobs in
China at a high rate, while they already were very cheap considering globally)

~~~
bentruyman
I imagine a late 1800's version of you would also require car owners to use
their horse and buggy exclusively at least once a week because it will "give a
lot of people jobs". That's some sloppy reasoning.

~~~
NicoJuicy
Buy car or buy a horse is the same and vastly different of the point I was
making. Not everything needs to go to the international companies.

I'm also not against car sharing, buy a car to share or to have is also a
bought car.

Prereleasing a movie in theatres is not that bad for everyone, giving the
exclusive streaming rights to one streaming party is much worse.

Ps. Already a lot of movie renters are out of business, but I wouldn't protect
them as I do with cinemas.

------
cies
First they ignore you, then ... bla bla bla ... then you win! — Some cool
person that might not have even said it

[http://www.snopes.com/first-they-ignore-you](http://www.snopes.com/first-
they-ignore-you)

------
timwaagh
its their competition. their rules. they get paid by the cinemas probably so
it makes sense to ban competition which is killing cinemas.

------
ceejay
I imagine the next logical step would be for Netflix to start having their own
(inclusive) movie competitions, and in the process more than likely become far
more relevant than the exclusive competitions.

------
iamben
In other news, the music industry decides not to acknowledge any songs with a
digital only release. Good luck stuffing the genie back in the bottle. [sigh]

Filing this under 'terrible ideas'.

------
koolba
They should buy a cheap French theater and show each film there.

------
AndrewKemendo
Sounds like Netflix should open their own competition up then.

------
znpy
«we like art, but only art painted with oil colours on canvas»

------
raverbashing
I wonder how hard it is to produce a "digital cinema" cut of a movie. Probably
not too expensive in the grand scheme of things

It is mostly a non-issue

~~~
nandemo
The technical ability to show the films in movie theaters isn't the issue. The
problem is that Netflix hasn't arranged for the movies to be actually shown in
French movie theaters:

> _The two movies included in Cannes’ lineup this year are slated for
> theatrical bows stateside, but according to the festival’s official
> statement, “no agreement has been reached” to get the moves into French
> cinemas_

------
anoops
And in the process kill creativity.

------
bingomad123
Looks like Multiplex lobby is pretty powerful in France.

------
bolololo12
France has strong communist influences, that's why it is how it is

~~~
Asooka
That's not Communism. Communism is when there's one single political party
that rules with total authority and owns and finances everything. A bit of
theatre protectionism does not a communism make.

~~~
bolololo12
It is the influence of communism and protectionism. Not sure which one is
worst. France is full of both and had always close ties to Russia - they
sympathies with them since 1920 (the early days of the worst disease of XXth
century - communism). Communism killed more people, and enslaved even more,
then any other disease.

