Earlier today I mentioned this brand new place called Hoopla which was the 1st legal place to stream movies, and apparently someone thought, hey, I can do better than this.

Paramount Pictures today has released more than 100 movies to their verified YouTube page to watch for free. More than 100 full length movies... On YouTibe. Of course there arent any blockbusters or anything like that, but a free movie is a free movie so its time to take advantage and hopefully others will see what they did here and use the idea themselves.

Do you think this is a good idea? A movie company releasing their movies on YouTube for free?

This is, I believe mostly a publicity stunt. By watching a few free movies from Paramount, for example, people will probably tend to see more movies from them.

However, I say this is a great publicity stunt. Considering all the streaming problems with Netflix, putting them on Youtube is way better. Unless they found a way to circumvent ad blockers, then everyone is a winner. I hope more get the same idea.

janus : A place like Paramount doesn't really need publicity that much since they are already one of the 3 largest movie companies in the world.

I didn't get a chance to see what movies they had but I will when I get a break from life.

That's pretty neat. Of course, I'm sure the movies are their bottom tier movies, but hey.. I mean, I guess that's cool? I use Hulu Plus and Netflix so I probably won't actually take advantage of this, but it's neat to know that it is there for those who actually may take advantage of it.

zanderlex : Not so much, With all the recent flops at the box office (I am not pointing at anyone in particular) and all the alternatives available, they still have to remain relevant if they are to live.

janus : Flops? Just in the last year they had Mission Impossible, Interstellar, and Selma plus a few other big movies.

Indeed, 2015 seem to be a better year at the box office according to http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/?view2=ytdcompare&view=releasedate&p=.htm. However it may just be because tickets are, on average, more expensive. Because if you look at the number of tickets sold, http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/?view2=domestic&view=releasedate&p=.htm, it still has not peaked back at the 2004 record.

I like to see more free movies out there. I would really like to see more "TV" on the internet anyway since it can handle it and most folks would rather be able to do whatever, whenever. Plus, it breaks out of the mold of paying for extra on tv to just to watch 1 hour of video.

However, free movies/shows would greatly increase the chances of getting Subscriptions. I know I'll be more likely to pay, if I was allowed to watch even 25-50 free movies of decent movies with a promise of 1000+ awesome ones if I subscribed.

WandererExiled : What? How does that have anything to do with YouTube?

zanderlex :

Sorry, I thought we were talking about Free Movies in general not just via Youtube. Nonetheless...

YouTube has the new subscription services where you get more content if you pay. Plus, YouTube has had the "Rent-a-Movie" for a while. A few studio/streaming companies (like Lifetime) post a few "Freebies" with links to their actual site for subscription. Granted most of these freebies are bonus footage and/or shows. I personally think that these companies can reach more of an Audience via internet than TV.

Not to mention that YouTube itself would be effected for the better or worse if more studios left the TV subscriptions and transferred online. This would help YouTube, if these companies strike deals. Or hurt YouTube if new and old companies decided to create their own --especially through Apps.

WandererExiled : Well, movies aren't eligible to be part of the subscription service on YouTube, or even show ads, the company gets 0 money for the movies they put on YouTube, which is why they don't put up recent movies.

zanderlex :

Ah, a bit of a misunderstanding on my part. I thought they did by the articles I was reading on it but I personally am not ready to test it so I have no personal knowledge of it. Thanks for clarifying it for me!

There should be a better deal on those though. Partial profit based on views like other viewers but at a great percentage would be a big boost to that market. Plus it might bring in more revenue if they posted movie right after they leave the theater lists.

WandererExiled : That's what DVD's and TV are for, of they wanted money, they wouldn't have put the movies on YouTube. A DVD gets them like $15 per person while YouTube gets them nothing

zanderlex :

Looks like one part of my argument was already taken care of by Google Play Movies & TV (forgot about that feature v.v, my bad).

My view is that I see a potential revenue for both Google and Studios if they started adding more (not everything, just more) to the "free" side of things. YouTube is pretty huge and the most popular of video streaming companies. The Studios make a good amount of money off of Box Office revenue but after that they need to keep it going either through home movie sales, TV sales, or merchandise. Seeing that Youtube is already a large pool of potential consumers who may or may not have seen these movies on TV or in theaters, a company would greatly increase chances of snagging those who fall into the "may not" crowd. Thus, improving profit (even if YouTube gives them nothing).

As far DVDs and BluRays, they have been declining gradually in sales since 2013 (though not by enough to stop production), since folks can buy the digital copies (with all the extras) via sites like Flixter (partnered with UltraViolet) sometimes right after theatrical production is over. Even the studios themselves have been making a point to switch over to those services by adding codes to unlock the digital copies of DVDs and BluRays if bought.

Though TV is a bit trickier (it would still be the largest way to advertise), but there's still that good sized group of people who don't have TV. Either because they don't want to pay $80+ to watch the 3-5 channels they really care about or they can't afford that amount.  Some companies are starting to sell non-TV subscriptions for roughly between $10-15 a month, but this still brings 2 keys issues (1) "is there anything on this particular sub that I'd really want to watch?" (2)  getting their services out there while proving the first.

Granted a few give out free trials but the getting out there is still an issue. This could easily be solved by putting samples of movies/shows on YouTube. As I said in a former post, I personally, and I'm sure others as well, would be more willing to pay for services if the "Freebies" were decent or amazing.

In conclusion, the Companies may not get anything from YouTube (as you point out), but by using YouTube, they tap into a group that they may not be able to reach out to anywhere else. It would be a mutual benefit because YouTube would get more revenue from the views or contracts, while the Companies would be able to redirect these viewers to their own pay-for services and/or merchandise.

I think this is a great idea, publicity stunt or not.
It seems that Netflix, Hulu, and the like remove a lot of their older movies, so its nice that the companies are putting them up somewhere so we can still watch them. :3

How did I not see this before? Nice would look into it. I love free movies. I watch sites like afdah and movie2k, they have great movies.

I seen Candyman and Hellraiser sometime ago on Youtube, so they're putting up some classic movies (I can't remember though if it was from the film producers themselves).

It's a wonderful idea! Hopefully more companies follow suit.

This is great... I think it's awesome that they are doing this. It gives me way more options to watch things now.