As Sundance wrapped with more films seeking homes than landing deals, and EFM looms as the first major sales test of the year, the question is no longer who has the best film, but who is best aligned with today’s market. 2026 will reward scale, discipline, and precision, and punish nostalgia for a business that no longer exists.
Hollywood continues to frame the post-lockdown box office slump as a temporary dislocation, thus a function of strikes, scheduling gaps, or audiences that need to be “retrained” to return to theaters. That explanation is convenient. It is also incomplete. What the industry is confronting is not just an economic contraction, but a cultural rejection. Moviegoing has become more expensive, more politicized, less comfortable, and overall, less rewarding.
For most of the past decade, the streaming business was defined by a single, deceptively simple premise: more content equals more subscribers. Platforms raced to outspend one another, greenlighting volume at unprecedented levels, compressing windows, and treating exclusivity as an absolute virtue. That era is over. By 2025, the streaming industry reached a quieter but more consequential conclusion: content alone does not create value—access does.
Let’s be blunt: TIFF 50’s low deal count and headline grabs tell the same story: the old model of acquisition excess no longer exists. But that doesn’t mean distribution is dead; it means it’s being refined. The more brutal, quieter truth is this: many films failed to get deals, not because they weren’t good, but because the margins, windows, and risk calculus no longer justify speculative purchasing.
Well into its second week, TIFF 2025 is shaping up less as a buying frenzy and more as a barometer for where the independent business is heading. Deal volume remains lean, but the festival has already produced a $15 million bidding war for a Midnight Madness horror and a seven-figure North American deal for Gus Van Sant’s “Dead Man’s Wire.”
As TIFF celebrates its 50th anniversary, the festival spotlights what might be its most resilient genre amid a fractured marketplace: horror. With shrinking screen counts, compressed Pay-1/Pay-2 deals, and younger ticket buyers pulling away from theaters en masse, horror remains a rare safe-haven—cheap to produce, reliably engaging, and buoyed by fervent word-of-mouth among young theater-goers.
Toronto’s 50th anniversary edition arrives with independent distributors weighing risk against opportunity. Theatrical remains a tightrope, Pay-1 and Pay-2 license fees are under pressure, and negotiations are slower across the calendar. Yet a sturdier acquisitions slate, a pair of well-capitalized newcomers, and a crop of commercially minded titles suggest TIFF could regain some of its old deal energy.
While most independent distributors faltered after the lockdowns started a cycle of theatrical collapse, Neon doubled down on theatrical releases, carefully timed VOD windows, and an expanding slate of in-house productions. But behind the critical acclaim lies a high-stakes business model facing mounting financial pressure.
The 2025 Cannes Market delivered more questions than answers, as industry players navigated, stalled US deals, shrinking Pay-1 licensing windows, and a growing rift between premium and mid-budget titles. High production and distribution costs are driving greater selectivity among studios and streamers, leaving many films without buyers in the North American market.
Despite record attendance and renewed energy on the Croisette, the Cannes 2025 Film Market is operating under the familiar strains of soaring acquisition costs, and a struggle to reconcile rising budgets with narrowing margins. For buyers and sellers alike, the market is less about glitz and more about financial clarity, pricing discipline, and navigating global distribution headwinds.
The slowdown in packaging during the first half of the year, has led to a stronger-than-usual Cannes lineup. The market is flush with well-developed packages and finished films with genuine theatrical potential. With more robust slates from top sales agencies and buyers reportedly ready to move on high-promise titles, Cannes 2025 could outperform recent years.
The dominance of social video platforms and the plateau of streaming growth signal a new phase in entertainment. Content alone is no longer a moat, as production becomes riskier and audiences more complicated to retain—especially as many content creators and executives prioritize agenda-driven programming over compelling storytelling.
With subscriber growth slowing and content costs ballooning, studios and streamers alike are revisiting syndication, not as a relic of broadcast television but as a renewed source of value in an increasingly saturated market. Lending out original titles is quickly becoming a practical tool for monetization.
As streaming platforms continue to dominate the conversation, traditional broadcast networks are proving their staying power by strategically aligning with digital platforms. New data confirms that network television still commands a substantial audience, with streaming partnerships extending its reach and influence.
Streaming services are reevaluating their financial playbooks, balancing the high costs of direct-to-consumer services with the steady returns of third-party licensing deals. With studios weighing the financial viability of streaming-first strategies against the profitability of licensing, the industry is at an inflection point where content ownership alone may not be enough to drive sustainable growth.
The U.S. streaming market is saturated, with 96% of households subscribed to services, prompting a shift from acquisition to retention strategies. Ad-supported models are gaining traction as affordability overshadows uninterrupted viewing. Live sports and telecom partnerships are key growth areas, while brand ecosystems are vital for subscriber retention in this maturing landscape.
Copyright © 2014-2025 FilmTake