26/11/2012 - TrustNordisk, Curzon Artificial Eye, Versus Production, Utopia: the future of cinemas deciphered by professionals invited by Europa Cinemas

Potential conflicts or complementarity? The debate on the essential role of cinemas for European films held last Friday during the Europa Cinemas conference rapidly turned to the emergence of Video on Demand (VoD). Here are some choice extracts from a debate that was sometimes tense and in which both the traditional and the modern attempted to guess what the future holds.

Laurent Cantet (director): "Cinemas are the place for which I make my films and the venue for an irreplaceable collective experience. It’s the big screen that I think of when I place my camera. In Europe, we are lucky and American colleagues envy our cinema network. But perhaps I'm a dinosaur from a generation that can’t imagine a film on a mobile phone.”

Rikke Ennis (TrustNordisk): "The power of cinemas is indisputable for an international sales agent, but it’s up to the distributors to decide what is better for a film. A war between windows is not in the interest of films, and we need better communication and to optimise different releases. The challenge is that platforms like Netflix and iTunes have considerable financial means and that they are starting to compete with traditional distributors. I think that VoD will become essential for some films, but that a theatrical release will remain decisive for most. VoD will perhaps be a solution for "small films" that struggle on an international level. It will be case by case. But for the moment, prices are not adequate: DVD is dwindling, but VoD is not replacing it."

Ross Fitzsimons (Curzon Artificial Eye): "The place of cinemas in the value chain remains vital for communication. But there are very different audiences, in terms of composition, location, culture, and we have to find new ways to draw people to cinemas. For example, non-film screenings in cinemas is a trend on the rise. As for VoD, now all is done on demand and the idea of media chronology is discriminatory. It’s the reality and we should face it: The world has changed and we need to engage in realpolitik."

Jacques-Henri Bronckart (Versus Production): "We should not forget that cinema is greatly funded by television, for whom a film is valued according to its exhibition in cinemas. For the moment, VoD is not a consequential source of revenues on which to base film funding, and it mostly benefits films that did well in cinemas. As for the other films, even if the distributors like them, they come up against exhibitors’ cautiousness because of excess supply, and VoD is not cost effective for this kind of works. We are starting to lose the diversity of European cinema and the renewal of its talents. Exhibitors are also sometimes too passive: Viewers won’t come on their own. Beyond event films, one has to seek out the public. With social media and the Web, there are tools to do so."

Claude Forest (Université Paris III): "I see VoD more in terms of its complementarity to cinemas, but it took a while to find its economic model and it’s not very satisfactory, with free catch-up TV also competing against it."

Nico Simon (exhibitor – Utopia) : "VoD could work in certain territories, but not everywhere. Opening up Pandora’s box is very dangerous because those who open it are people who have no weight in the profession. Funding is still based on the date of a theatrical release. Beware of breaking our toys without a new funding model."

(Translated from French)