'Greyhound' viewer numbers equal summer box office smash, report says

Posted:
in General Discussion edited July 2020
Apple's multimillion dollar investment in Tom Hanks vehicle "Greyhound" appears to have paid off, as opening Apple TV+ viewer numbers rivaled those of a traditional summer box office hit.

Greyhound
Tom Hanks in "Greyhound."


Citing sources familiar with the matter, Deadline reports "Greyhound" was the largest opening weekend release in Apple TV+ history, including bows for original series.

While exact numbers were not revealed, insiders claim initial viewership was in the same league as big-budget summer theatrical debuts. "Greyhound" was originally destined for the screen before the coronavirus pandemic put a kink in Sony's plans for the film. Apple acquired streaming rights to the property in May as part of a deal estimated to be worth some $70 million.

More importantly for Apple, and perhaps as designed, the blockbuster generated interest in the fledgling Apple TV+. According to sources, 30% of viewers who watched "Greyhound" were new to the subscription service.

"Greyhound's" release reportedly eclipsed other popular Apple TV+ shows including previous record holder "Defending Jacob," a limited run series starring Chris Evans.

Hanks in interviews leading up to last Friday's release voiced disappointment in the fate of his World War II saga, characterizing the shift to streaming as "an absolute heartbreak." He struck a more optimistic tone in later press junkets, saying Apple "saved the day" by offering the film through its "benevolent streaming service."

"We are going to be able to fill up the screens in the living rooms and the bean-bag chairs of the world all in one fall shot, so we feel as though we were rescued at sea by a convoy with a big Apple logo with a bite taken out of it," Hanks said in an interview with NBC's Today.

"Greyhound" tells the story of a Navy captain tasked with protecting a convoy from a pack of German U-boats during his first command in the Battle of the Atlantic.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 27
    tylersdadtylersdad Posts: 302member
    This is really an apples and oranges comparison. Apple TV is what, $5 per month? While a ticket to the movies is at least $10. 
  • Reply 2 of 27
    This is inevitable. Post-pandemic, the sooner studios realize that streaming is a viable channel, equal to brick-and-mortar venues, the sooner they will profit. Just to cite one local example, I watch a lot of shows/movies, but even before COVID-19 my theatre attendance had dropped from 1-2× a fortnight to once per year, simply because being around people sucks.
    StrangeDaysJapheyevolutwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 27
    BeatsBeats Posts: 2,531member
    tylersdad said:
    This is really an apples and oranges comparison. Apple TV is what, $5 per month? While a ticket to the movies is at least $10. 

    I thought Apple TV+ was an empty theater and no one was watching?

    There's always an excuse man.....
    StrangeDaysXedmatrix077lolliverRayz2016jbdragon
  • Reply 4 of 27
    iOS_Guy80iOS_Guy80 Posts: 530member
    Bring on James Bond “No Time To Die” this November.
    StrangeDaysMisterKituraharawatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 27
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 11,584member
    tylersdad said:
    This is really an apples and oranges comparison. Apple TV is what, $5 per month? While a ticket to the movies is at least $10. 
    Opening weekend numbers are opening weekend numbers. Yes it’s a good deal for us, but so what? The point remains, it was very popular. 
    lolliverBeatsuraharajbdragonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 27
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 11,584member
    This is inevitable. Post-pandemic, the sooner studios realize that streaming is a viable channel, equal to brick-and-mortar venues, the sooner they will profit. Just to cite one local example, I watch a lot of shows/movies, but even before COVID-19 my theatre attendance had dropped from 1-2× a fortnight to once per year, simply because being around people sucks.
    Agreed - our problem with the theater has never been about sound or screens getting better at home, or cost of soda. It’s that more people are jackasses at the theater, on their phones, etc. 
    djames4242lolliverflyingdpurahararazorpitjony0jbdragonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 27
    jdb8167jdb8167 Posts: 621member
    I watched it this weekend. It was pretty good. Not a blockbuster though (in my opinion). I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have paid to see it in a theater but I would have seen it on streaming at some point anyway so this was a good deal for me and I’m happy to help bump up the numbers for Mr. Hanks. Before watching, I didn’t realize he also wrote the screenplay.
    williamhMacQcurahararazorpitwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 27
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,291member
    Ah, so much about the earlier report that the out-of-sync audio irked the audience.
    lolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 27
    Hanks is so salty about the whole thing, lol — I love how he says the right words, just filled with snark
    blurpbleepbloopwatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 27
    FatmanFatman Posts: 513member
    Good news for Apple - I’m actually quite surprised at the news. It will take time (and money) but at some point Apple will have another large services revenue stream. Sounds like there will continue to be bidding wars for content for a while ... a great time to be a content creator.
    Beatswatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 27
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,760member
    Hanks is so salty about the whole thing, lol — I love how he says the right words, just filled with snark
    Which would make sense if Apple had produced it and clipped his creative wings but they just bought it at the last minute from Sony.
    I hear this kind of vapid anti-authoritarian ranting at Apple from teenage Android owners. Maybe he’s honing a new character get younger parts.
    Beatswatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 27
    MisterKitMisterKit Posts: 440member
    Seventy Million was a high price for Apple to provide one blockbuster movie. I don’t see how Apple or any streaming service can shell out that kind of money for a $5/month subscription. Apple did not charge ‘admission’ to watch ‘Greyhound.’ I don’t see where it’s any better for Apple to have two hundred million views rather than 20 views other than publicity and hype.
  • Reply 13 of 27
    BeatsBeats Posts: 2,531member
    MisterKit said:
    Seventy Million was a high price for Apple to provide one blockbuster movie. I don’t see how Apple or any streaming service can shell out that kind of money for a $5/month subscription. Apple did not charge ‘admission’ to watch ‘Greyhound.’ I don’t see where it’s any better for Apple to have two hundred million views rather than 20 views other than publicity and hype.

    Long term vision.
    razorpitwatto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 27
    Congratulations Apple!

    I see this as a great win for the service and Hanks. Getting 30 percent of non-Apple TV plus members to join the service to watch this movie is a pretty huge deal. There is also enough content on the service now to have someone new get hooked on a few shows before the second seasons in the fall in spring.

    Hopefully Apple can provide more previews like Foundation to show they have more flagship content besides The Morning Show. 

    Tom Hank's improves his standing in Hollywood as a leading man, getting people to subscribe to a service for a movie he produced. 


    watto_cobramtlion2020
  • Reply 15 of 27
    iOS_Guy80 said:
    Bring on James Bond “No Time To Die” this November.
    I was hoping for Tenet in July!
    razorpitjbdragonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 27
    MisterKit said:
    Seventy Million was a high price for Apple to provide one blockbuster movie. I don’t see how Apple or any streaming service can shell out that kind of money for a $5/month subscription. Apple did not charge ‘admission’ to watch ‘Greyhound.’ I don’t see where it’s any better for Apple to have two hundred million views rather than 20 views other than publicity and hype.

    When I heard that the budget for 6 Underground was close to $200M, I was wondering how Netflix could afford it and how it planned to make money off the investment. Then I realised that their subscription numbers were so high that they could easily afford to fund a movie like that regularly.

    Apple will get to that stage. Like @Beats said, it is a long term vision. 
    Beatswatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 27
    mike1mike1 Posts: 2,754member
    tylersdad said:
    This is really an apples and oranges comparison. Apple TV is what, $5 per month? While a ticket to the movies is at least $10. 

    $10 per person, plus snacks. I think there's still a short free trial period with ATV+ too. So, people could sign up and essentially watch for free. That's not necessarily a bad thing, because some % of those will stick and become paying subscribers.
    razorpitjbdragonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 27
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,796member
    This is inevitable. Post-pandemic, the sooner studios realize that streaming is a viable channel, equal to brick-and-mortar venues, the sooner they will profit. Just to cite one local example, I watch a lot of shows/movies, but even before COVID-19 my theatre attendance had dropped from 1-2× a fortnight to once per year, simply because being around people sucks.
    Agreed - our problem with the theater has never been about sound or screens getting better at home, or cost of soda. It’s that more people are jackasses at the theater, on their phones, etc. 
    That and you can pause the movie to get more popcorn or go to the bathroom.
    iOS_Guy80 said:
    Bring on James Bond “No Time To Die” this November.
    I was hoping for Tenet in July!
    If Apple did just one of these big movies per month I’d consider renewing. As the service stands now there is no chance of that happening for our family.

    Beats
  • Reply 19 of 27
    bbhbbh Posts: 118member
    MisterKit said:
    Seventy Million was a high price for Apple to provide one blockbuster movie. I don’t see how Apple or any streaming service can shell out that kind of money for a $5/month subscription. Apple did not charge ‘admission’ to watch ‘Greyhound.’ I don’t see where it’s any better for Apple to have two hundred million views rather than 20 views other than publicity and hype.
     Well, I guess it's a good thing you are not in charge of anything at Apple. 
    mike1watto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 27
    The movie was awesome but would have played better in my mind on a big screen. I had no problems with the audio synch. Also just watched Hamilton on Disney. So glad I bought a Sonos Sub for my system since we'll be watching more of these blockbusters at home! Now I need to get a bigger screen with all this 'movie' money I'm not spending ;)
    Beatswatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.