PDA

View Full Version : Hollywood to pirates: Please don't steal


tjnyc
07-22-2003, 04:31 PM
An article on CNN.COM

Article Link (http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/22/piracy.ap/index.html)

Here is an interesting piece from the article


Movie studios believe they still have a few years before Internet connections become fast enough to threaten them in the same way. Studios are experimenting with new business models, including making films available legitimately online.

But studios will succeed only if they move quickly to offer legitimate alternatives that consumers want, analysts say.

"It may just be that consumers aren't quite ready yet to turn to the Internet for movies," said Fred von Lohmann, a lawyer for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "But when they are, the answer will be to offer them a compelling legitimate alternative, not telling them to behave themselves."


I'm glad to see that a more adaptable approach is being looked at instead of the Drakonian method taken by the RIAA.

Hopefully the movie studios will succeed where the RIAA has failed/is failing with pirating. Then the artists won't have to be forced to lose money due to the ineptness of there Industry's association and the opportunistic piraters.

chudofsinister
07-22-2003, 05:19 PM
I love how the studios think that peoples willingness to use the net for films depends on speed. Speed is pretty much there, its the idea of sticking their credit cards out there that has most people turned off.

arctor
07-22-2003, 05:46 PM
the US film industry pulls in, what, $12 Billion+ US a year?
could it be that the growth of their income has slacked off in the past few years because of more than just the increase in online shenanigans...
could it be the fact that they are spending more and more money on films that are really really bad?...and even more money on marketing these looser films?

if a set painter gets layed off it's not because someone downloads a movie off kazaa...it's because the union he's in wants more and more money everytime their contracts are negotiated, and there isn't enough money in the bugets of these films to pay them - because there are 30-40 'executives' who get more and more each year, and the 'stars' get more and more each year, and the insane hunger for bigger and bigger films (instead of better and better films) pushes budgets out of control...

Neil
07-22-2003, 05:59 PM
yeah, look around, our economy is goind pretty bad, our unemployement is way up.
I'm kinda tired of hearing the music and movies and software industry all blaiming this on other things.

BRUTICUS
07-22-2003, 06:06 PM
Yeah they think we're going to want to pay for it online? If I want to pay for a movie i'll go to the theatre. I only watch the movies that look visually unimpressive on the computer.

FabioMSilva
07-22-2003, 07:54 PM
i hope pirates take this seriously. Moive companies are having a real bad time because of them..

sigh...and i wanted to become a film director...one more reason for me to say them to stop or at least control the piracy alot more.

Shade01
07-22-2003, 09:29 PM
I think movie piracy is having a nil effect on the movie industry. The experience of seeing something at the theatres can't be replaced by watching a soft looking picture on computer.

They're losing the REAL money from people who sneak into multiple movies without paying ;)

Flinch
07-22-2003, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by The Solid Snake
i hope pirates take this seriously. Moive companies are having a real bad time because of them..



as long as they're able to (e.g.) pay Cameron Diaz several million $ for just doing the voice-over for shrek, i don't think they're having such a bad time.

chudofsinister
07-22-2003, 09:35 PM
"They're losing the REAL money from people who sneak into multiple movies without paying "

LOL I remember being a teenager doing that. HEHE. A little off topic but I think it is hilarious that the movie theatres themselves make little money off of the films themselves, but get their profits from concesions. Yet this is what they do the worst at, Service wise I mean. At least in my area they hire the slowest retards for this position. I would think you would want to make this your priority and move people as quickly as possible to get the $.

the_real_cabal
07-22-2003, 10:05 PM
The real problem is some very good movies have to pay the mass media movies. :thumbsdow

greetings Cabal

Goon
07-22-2003, 10:17 PM
Personally the argument that divx movies are of lower quality doesnt hold much water with me. When i'm at college I can (and do) download near dvd quality movies in less time than it would take me to go to blockbuster. Personally i dislike going to the theater, cause there are only about twenty good seats in the entire 200 seat theater, the floor is covered in drying spilled soda, and it costs 6+ bucks. So this is very convenient for me, and my conscience quite willingly ignores my theft. This is what they will have to compete with: dvd quality, rapid download, no penalty. How are they going to replace that? Maybe on a pay-by-play temporary download basis, but nevertheless, i'm not going to pay more than a buck a view, esp. when there is so much crap out there.

[edit] off topic but is the new industry obligated to mention that brad pitt is the lead voice in Sinbad? every single review makes a big deal about that, even throwing it in at extremely token times, acting like it even matters [\edit]

jeremybirn
07-22-2003, 11:10 PM
There are some countries where there's basically _no_ home video market, because piracy has run unchecked.

In terms of what studios actually earn in the US, they get less than $3 billion from television, about $4 billion a year from US theaters, and about $10 billion a year from US home video sales/rentals (if these numbers sound low to you, it's because they only count the studio's share, not the full prices paid.)

In other words, if domestic home video profits were cut in half, that would be just as bad to studio profits as if they didn't earn any money at any theaters in the US. Web-based piracy technology theatens to make that kind of loss possible within this decade if we aren't careful. Think about that kind of prospect: What would that do to your chances of getting or keeping a job in the film industry? What would that do to the quality and variety of films that got made?

-jeremy

Flinch
07-22-2003, 11:35 PM
now that i saw jeremy's posting i was remembered to some other thing which i think maybe also a reason for getting movies from the net: the world-wide release date of movies. finding nemo for example, which is in us-theatres for quite a while now, will be released in theatres here at christmas. i could get this movie earlier on dvd(rc1) than i can watch it here in the cinema!! so in most cases where people here are discussing about new movies they saw in the cinema i can skip the threads and check them back some months later. there are just a few big movies which are released the same time here than in the us, e.g. matrix2, lotr, star wars.
another reason maybe that some movies aren't released in cinema here (e.g. eqilibrium) or are released years later (e.g. cube). so even if i would like to pay some money to watch them i couldn't. and now that the laws regarding importing of rc1-dvds were changed some time ago, i'm acting illegal to BUY and import dvd's from the states or canada.
of course these are not the main reasons why people get movies from the net, but maybe you can understand that sometimes it's your only choice to download movies in order to see them.

jeremybirn
07-23-2003, 12:28 AM
I agree, there's lots and lots of reasons that people will download pirated movies. I can't think of any way studios could compete against pirated copies, if the pirated copies are free, good quality, and they are available before the movie comes out in theaters instead of waiting for home video.

I don't think the "ethics" thing will work, because people can always rationalize some reason why it's OK if they can easily get away with something. I don't think that spending tens of millions extra for simultaneous releases in more countries would eliminate piracy, and if anything doubling the number of circulating prints helps the pirates in some ways, although for some big event films it does help capitalize on global publicity sources like the internet better.

That's what makes this such an interesting issue: no easy solution in sight, but many billions of dollars (translation: a lot of our jobs) resting on good solutions being refined within the next few years.

-jeremy

ambient-whisper
07-23-2003, 12:56 AM
one good way of getting people to pay though is for things like dvds with a ton of extras.:) ( ie. FOTR extended ) add more to the experience outside of the movie.

chudofsinister
07-23-2003, 01:08 AM
I agree Add more things on DVD's and CD's make it worth the price. Same with theatres, maybe have traveling props on display at the show in the lobby or something. Make it worth the price of admission.

xynaria
07-23-2003, 01:31 AM
Originally posted by ambient-whisper
one good way of getting people to pay though is for things like dvds with a ton of extras.:) ( ie. FOTR extended ) add more to the experience outside of the movie.

I think Jeremy may have a hit on something there and something that no amount of extras in a DVD may possibly solve. In 'society' we accept certain 'ills' simply because it is too costly financially to do otherwise. Could you eradicate crime to a large extent in the major cities.... well probably not but they could significanly reduce it.. but only at the cost of a huge increase in public spending on police and security so when levels of expenditure are alloacted they do tend to be based at least in part on the financial equation of cost of prevention measured against the costs of trying to maintain what is deemed an 'acceptable level'. Similarly with drugs....could you eradicate drug abuse....well if you tried you would have to go much further afield because then you would have to cull any source of drug production, which in the main would mean eradication the plant crops in countries you had no juristiction over and in theory would then have to fund a viable alternative economic programme for those countries, and that bearing in mind that there is obviously a demand for drugs that isn't going to go away..... I know of no culture that has ever existed that hasn't had some kind of drug dependency and the world itself has at least three major legitimate drugs in nicotine alcohol and tobacco, all of which can be said to be harmful.
Yeah yeah yeah.. how is this relevant?
I may be playing devils advocate here, but at the moment, piracy is such that I don't think it is having a major impact on the way we all lead our lives and economies, in spite of what goons like the RIAA may claim, but in theory taken to a theoretical logical conclusion ..it could at the very least mean huge changes in society as we know it. Most say the internet is unpoliceable and it is one of the great things that for instance people in opressed countries can gain access to literature, ideas, images etc that are foirbidden in their counties. By the same token.. it also could be seen to effectively null and void any effective copyright legislation unless it had the ability to be globally upheld. The only way in theory that could happen is if the world had a unified global agreement. Then we come down to enforcing it. Again if we go along the lines of The RIAA and the proposals in Patriot 2 then any personal freedom is greatly reduced to the point that some one could in theory come round to your pad and go through all your belongings and files looking for illegal copies of anything. Again, it's all down to numbers.. but if it got the stage where availability of stuff through the web and/ or even 'on the street' effectively did threaten the entertainment industry per se then I doubt there would be liitle alteranative in many eyes to other than a police state as laughable as that may seem..... Now that really would be irony taken to the 'n'th degree. :)

Hookflash
07-23-2003, 04:59 AM
I don't understand why the big distribution labels will even be necessary once movies make the transition to the internet. Wouldn't it be great if artists could just distribute their own material themselves (very feasible over the internet) in a secure way, setting their own prices? It's always nice to screw the middle-man.:twisted:

jeremybirn
07-23-2003, 06:03 AM
Originally posted by ambient-whisper
one good way of getting people to pay though is for things like dvds with a ton of extras.:) ( ie. FOTR extended ) add more to the experience outside of the movie.

I agree that extras add value to the DVD, but as far as I know, they can all be pirated. Extras from the DVD are just as much fun as extra files to download when they come out.

Originally posted by Hookflash
Wouldn't it be great if artists could just distribute their own material themselves (very feasible over the internet) in a secure way, setting their own prices?

If people could all swap his files for free after they are released, how could he set his own prices?

All these ideas work great as long as piracy of larger multimedia files is rare and difficult - if it gets more common over the next few years, and cuts deeply into the domestic home video market, then's when a significant number of jobs are at stake.

-jeremy

fattdex
07-23-2003, 06:39 AM
perhaps its like people who download music from their favourite group, are actually willing and likely to go and pay for the cd anyway because they love the art and artist, but would never pay money for a britney or christina album or other such candy rubbish. maybe if there weren't so many shitty cash in "blockbuster" (i love it how they use that term in promos 6 months before the film is released) movies, people wouldnt download them instead of wanting to pay to see them- maybe there isn't anything about them that makes people think it's worth their money to pay to view the film, and at the end of the day if all they're watching is some explosions with a metal rap fusion soundtrack, maybe they're right? how many people do you think downloaded say basquait or pollock or something instead of making an effort to go and see it at the theatre? not many i'd bet!

i'm not advocating piracy or anything, but trying to think just why there is a reason for people to want to sit at home and download the films instead of making the act to venture out to the cinema, and whos fault that is?

jeremybirn
07-23-2003, 07:45 AM
I don't think piracy will replace going to the movies (you can't ask all your dates over to watch your PC), but do fear what would happen if it took a big chunk out of the home video market.

All the rationalizations we've seen for piracy (a lot of it's commercialistic cr@p anyway, worth my time but not my money, wasn't released soon enough in my country, I don't have a credit card, these people are all rich and I'm poor, etc.) only proove that many people will take advantage of a free copy if it's available of almost anything.

In terms of things people won't "bother" to download, yes, smaller more personal films that aren't a big event, people don't bother to now, because it's still a lot of time and trouble to find an illegal copy of those things. I'm worried that, over time, it'll become less of a bother and more of a convenience to download large files you're interested in watching.

I don't mean to sound fatalistic - I hope some balance can be achieved, and that artists' rights can be upheld somehow without tons more regulation and policing - but I am concerned by all the issues that need to be dealt with in order to preserve the basic business models making animation and visual effects.

-jeremy

Derlaine
07-23-2003, 07:59 AM
deleted text because i can't delete the post

Greenlief
07-23-2003, 05:18 PM
Originally posted by ambient-whisper
one good way of getting people to pay though is for things like dvds with a ton of extras.:) ( ie. FOTR extended ) add more to the experience outside of the movie.

I agree wholeheartedly. The arguments about time and quality don't hold water anymore. You can get DVD quality movies fast if you know what you are doing. Good DVD's get bought. FOTR-EE was a GOOD DVD. I don't feel screwed whatsoever, totally worth the price. But things like the Ringu DVD (30 bucks NO EXTRAS!) make me furious. Why the heck would I pay that much for something I can get for free? There should be at least some point to buying the DVD.

Neil
07-23-2003, 06:18 PM
If DVDs came with a cool poster or a collectible like limited print stills from the movie that would fit in the case, then that would be an incentive to buy the DVD.
I already buy DVDs, but i'm just saying that they could do something to try to make it more appealing.

Glasko
07-23-2003, 08:08 PM
I love how the studios think that peoples willingness to use the net for films depends on speed. Speed is pretty much there, its the idea of sticking their credit cards out there that has most people turned off.

And this is entirely true. I'm sure they'd make some money off of distributed digital movies, but those copies would just become more copies to friends and a hungry online community of movie pirates.

Redf
07-23-2003, 08:28 PM
Originally posted by jeremybirn
I agree, there's lots and lots of reasons that people will download pirated movies. I can't think of any way studios could compete against pirated copies, if the pirated copies are free, good quality, and they are available before the movie comes out in theaters instead of waiting for home video.

I don't think the "ethics" thing will work, because people can always rationalize some reason why it's OK if they can easily get away with something. I don't think that spending tens of millions extra for simultaneous releases in more countries would eliminate piracy, and if anything doubling the number of circulating prints helps the pirates in some ways, although for some big event films it does help capitalize on global publicity sources like the internet better.

That's what makes this such an interesting issue: no easy solution in sight, but many billions of dollars (translation: a lot of our jobs) resting on good solutions being refined within the next few years.

-jeremy


Very well said.:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Hookflash
07-23-2003, 09:15 PM
Originally posted by jeremybirn
If people could all swap his files for free after they are released, how could he set his own prices?


Well, people can easily swap his material illegally over the internet, whether it's his main channel of distribution or not. I just think it would be useful if artists could utilize this existing infrastructure in a secure way. For example, they could release music in an encrypted format on various p2p networks. If you want to listen, you purchase a key. Each "album" would have a corresponding key. ZBrush uses a similar protection scheme, with an interesting feature: A unique key is generated on their end for each user, depending on the user's hardware configuration. This key only works with that particular system. This would prevent me from distributing my key for others to use. Of coarse there will be cracks and whatnot, and people will still find a way to distribute illegal, decrypted copies, but you'd have to go out of your way to do so (just like any of today's protection schemes). Maybe one day we'll even see portable mp3 players that generate a unique system id. You could purchase a key based on that id, and you'd only be able to play the mp3s on that system.

Or, we could just keep listening to cds and downloading mp3s.;)

gga
07-24-2003, 12:06 AM
Originally posted by Hookflash
Well, people can easily swap his material illegally over the internet, whether it's his main channel of distribution or not. I just think it would be useful if artists could utilize this existing infrastructure in a secure way. For example, they could release music in an encrypted format on various p2p networks. If you want to listen, you purchase a key.


This is indeed the approach taken by the music industry (Apple's iTune and now Buy.com). Albeit it is too early to tell, so far it has proven successful.

In the past, every new technology has been seen as the one that would doom the industry. It happened with VHS, DVDs, and now streaming/downloading videos.
So far, each and every time, the studios have benefited from the technological change and found a way to profit from it.
Movies and Music are a weird thing in that everyone is willing to pay and watch/listen to something multiple times in different media. And that if it is affordable enough, you can easily become a collector of those items that are interesting to you. Every x years a new technology comes around that makes you completely re-start your collection, which feeds the whole cycle again.

I think we may once again end up seeing something similar.

But there could be more changes, of course.

A scheme like iTune for films could work, but only if that what is being offered is also recent movies (and decent oldies).
Even if the product was offered free somewhere else and had the same quality, brand name recognition may still be more important to your average joe (would you prefer to download, say, the new Disney film from a disney website or from some inaccesible site across the world which you would have to hunt for because it is still illegal --- it may not be worth the hassle for your average family. And those web sites across the world also need to be paid and updated somehow... where is their money going to come from to do so if they do it all for free?)

Even if swapping files could simply not be avoided, maybe the new business of studios would be offering websites where the trading of files as such would be open and legal across virtual drives. But, where a small transaction fee would be paid on every trade, in a similar way as e-bay or paypal conduct business. Each transaction by itself may not mean much but if everyone does it, it could amount to a decent business. Of course, that assumes all studios would collaborate on such a website, since that approach would fail if it is only supported by one or two big players.

Overall, I think there are certainly solutions. It may certainly be a different business model than what we are used to now and noone can say for sure which will be the true answer.

I do think that, due to the immediacy of obtaining a copy of the film, this may effect how advertisement for it may be done and it may indeed mean that if you have a dud, no amount of publicity may be able to save it anymore. And yes, there is the certain possibility that producing a $100+ million dollar movie ends up being an even riskier proposition from now on.
On the other hand, it could also mean advertisement costs can now go down since word of mouth does the rest and it could also give smaller independent productions a better chance of achieving success and theatrical distribution.

moovieboy
07-24-2003, 07:20 AM
Y'know, instead of grouching as usual about pirating, I've actually been wondering about a new dynamic that might make things a little better in our digital future, based off recent trends... so tell me what y'all think of this!

First the set up

Imagine this: It's next summer and "Spider-Man 2" comes to theatres on a worldwide release. Boom! It has a big opening weekend, everyone sees it, yada yada... Nothing new, right?

But then, they release the DVD the following weekend! Now, the DVD has no extras. Just a transfer of the movie with subtitles... AND, for those of you who went to see it in the theatre, along with your ticket stub comes a $5-off coupon for the DVD. (Of course, the DVD offer is good only for the first few weeks, so you'd have to use it soon!) And, yes, this includes buying it on Amazon.com and the like...

You could also rent the DVD at blockbuster that following week, so maybe that coupon could be used instead as $2-off a blockbuster rental of "Spider-Man 2" if you DON'T want to purchase it...

A few months later, the studio then releases the "Deluxe collector's edition DVD" which does have all the extras, including the sneak peeks at Spider-Man 3, yada yada... That sells at normal prices...

Why I like this idea...

1) The studios have their cake and eat it too... They can still make the theatrical release an event, and maximize their revenues in one gigantic shot while the hype is high... and still get their later revenue streams with the "collector" DVD, PPV, Cable, etc...

Besides, it's not uncommon anymore to see a "blockbuster film" become a "Blockbuster DVD" in only four months... Would revenues really become smaller or stay the same by crunching it into only a few weeks? Considering the fact that big films drop off up to 70% after only one week, why not keep those sales numbers high longer!

2) Parents and people who hate the cineplexes: You got people who won't step into a theatre anymore because of everything from the expense to cell phones and babies... If they can wait only one week, they can get in on the hype instead of catching up weeks/months later...

Same for all those parents with the little babies that don't take them to the theatre (like ME!) who really want to see the film, but just can't get away as often as they like... Man, if they had DVDs of big movies for purchase/rent a week after they opened, I would have seen a lot more movies this summer!

3) Pirates: While nothing will fix all the problems and allures of bootlegs, if you could buy/rent Reloaded or T3 right now for say $9.99 (since it's only a film transfer)... How many people would have nothing to do with the crappy bootlegs being passed around? All you need is one guy in your dorm/neighborhood to spend the lousy ten bucks (or six to rent) and you can all make it a blockbuster night with REAL film quality... (Sorry, I have yet to see a great looking bootleg!)

If this could work on a worldwide scale, then you also stop the nonsense of people trying to get prints/DVD from other countries because the movie isn't opening for them for months!

Yeah, I know... You've got the people that'll never be happy unless they can have a 300-disc library right now for 50-cents... For them, paying even $5 for a DVD is "an outrage!" Trust me, nothing will ever please them...

The people who'll get screwed? The film exhibitors if most people prefer to wait a week and get the DVD... Personally, I wish that there was a way to not give theatres another black eye in their revenues. I want... NEED them to stay around!

Now, I know I've totally ignored a downloading solution in this... But, let's face it: only a minority of even Americans have broadband, or the desire to pay $30-$90/month for it. If someone can just say "buy it here" for a reasonable price, I think they'd much rather order/rent the disc...

Now, if they could get the cable services' Video on Demand to ALSO have the film a week after it opens, and since that's instantaneous and could also involve using your TiVO... that might be an acceptable "download" solution...

Whew! So? Comments? :D

-Tom

rstratton
07-24-2003, 10:09 PM
i agree with a few people on this forum about the fact that i don't think people downloading movies off the internet are hurting the movie industry, at least in this country....i'm sorry alot of stuff that comes out is crap, that you don't want to go and see...like people have used the music industry bitching about music being downloaded...i'm sorry but i don't buy cds much and thats not because i download what i want its because there is so much shit that gets pumped out...i will openly admit that i download a song or two if i like it...but if its a band i like enough to download when the album comes out i will go out and buy it, its just that most music that is put out...well sucks...with movies, i have downloaded movies before but if i have downloaded it i promise you i have a dvd setting on my self of it now...so much filler is pumped out of hollywood and the music industry and i believe that if they would maybe try not to put 6 new movies out a week and cut that down and actually put out a few good ones they will start making their money back...and they need to stop spending all the money they do advertising these crappy movies and save that and advertise for the actual good ones that you go to the theater and watch and really enjoy even though you didn't see a commmerical or mcdonalds advertisement for it every 15 minutes...but hell i don't know thats just my opinion right...

Glasko
07-24-2003, 11:53 PM
Blah. They don't always know when a movie is going to be awesome or when it's going to crash. The public is unpredictable, and something YOU'RE going to like isn't going to be the same as others. There are so many movies, because there are so many people who enjoy so many different things. Now, personally I think that it's fine to download a movie before you decide to purchase it. Free renting. Why? Because Blockbuster is a damn klepto.

Now here's how it's still very different from the mp3 community. My parents download mp3s, my grandparents download classic songs all the time, police officers, EVERYBODY downloads mp3s with the exception of a small fraction of people. You download and you burn very easily.

Here's what their afraid of. Imagine you can download a movie on every home computer in matter of minutes, and it's standard now to have a DVD-burner on a computer.... the movie industry gets screwed. The reason people don't go out and buy CD's is because it's actually easier to sit down and burn one! When this happens in the movie world, they will have a major problem to deal with. As somebody said earlier, making DVD's special with many extras, fancy artwork on the front and seperate abilities is the key.

zen
07-25-2003, 03:39 PM
People to Hollywood: make better movies.
Stop making dumb sequels.
Stop making remakes of foreign films and pretending its your own idea.
Stop RAPING my wallet everytime i go to the theater, which is the #1 reason why i dont go see movies anymore.
Stop making me pay for the stupid ugly ultra family entertainment centers with pool tables i dont play, super-sized arcades i dont hang out in, and the 3 gazillion snack treats im not hungry for.
Stop making me absorb costs for the production of cheap crappy happy-meal merchandising you produce.
Stop Wasting my time at the start of the movie telling me i should look like and smell like a CK male model. Or Buy a huge SUV or pickup truck because it would make me a rugged "real man".
Stop Thrusting idiot ads down my throat trying to get me to buy as many snacks as possible, or insulting my intelligence trying to get me to believe that the cute skinney blonde girl in the add is REALLY going to eat her super-sized nachos, new york fries, coke, chicken wings, m&m's, and twizlers.
Stop trying to sell me snacks for 8$ when its 2.99$ at the dep across the street.
And if you didnt waste so much money on marketing "experts" , market psychologists (yes they exist), stupid ads, tricks, gimmicks, and just all-out WANKING me trying to extract every single penny from my pocket and then want me to praise you and the pantheon of hollywood gods...
Then maybe youd have a bit of money to hire and pay for one of the many jobless starving WRITERS who could provide you with a spark of *gasp!*....originality!. So then maybe you could stop STEALING IDEAS AND MONEY FROM EVERYONE AROUND THE WORLD and then COMPLAINING that you are victoms of theft and about your MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR NET PROFITS.
Especially when there is a population of starving, under-privileged kids in your own damn country, and when its known that a fraction of your net annual profits could ERRADICATE COMMON DISEASE AND HUNGER IN THE 3RD WORLD.

moovieboy
07-25-2003, 10:27 PM
My goodness, Zen... You're an absolute antithesis to your moniker! :D

-Tom

KolbyJukes
07-27-2003, 07:55 PM
Zen, I agree with everything you said...but some of the the things you mentioned are decisions (commercials in theatres, price/advertizing for food) of the theatre chains, not the production/distribution companies.

-Kol.

KolbyJukes
07-27-2003, 07:55 PM
sorry, double post

Chewey
07-27-2003, 08:23 PM
Originally posted by moovieboy
My goodness, Zen... You're an absolute antithesis to your moniker! :D

-Tom

No shite! And he sounds really, really cranky and bitter. :rolleyes:

Quite unzennish and Hoek...flash...ish.

:scream:

Hookflash
07-27-2003, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by Chewey
No shite! And he sounds really, really cranky and bitter. :rolleyes:

Quite unzennish.

Pot... Kettle... Black...

Chewey
07-27-2003, 08:46 PM
Armstrong wins the Tour de France again!! 5 times in a row despite efforts by locals to "steal" it away using dirty tricks.

:thumbsup:

sidious
07-28-2003, 01:03 AM
OMG

im sorry this isnt my account... and it wont let me delete

CGmonkey
07-28-2003, 01:39 AM
Zen, word up mate!

urgaffel
07-28-2003, 03:15 AM
Actually, the different release dates is probably what pisses me off the most. For example, Finding Nemo. People have been raving about that movie since may, and I won't get to see it in the swedish theaters until november at the earliest. Now, do I wait and avoid all those threads, or do I get so excited I download it? When it comes out on dvd (again 6 months later) do I buy the late late late version or the early us version? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Then there are the movies that dissapear too fast for anyone to be able to see them or doesn't have any marketing worth mentioning (Iron Giant). So what should I do? I rent a lot of movies, but there are so many more movies I will never ever see at my local videostore. And that goes for both rental and the ones you buy. The only way for me to see if that $30 dvd is worth getting off Amazon (or Yesasia, or whatever) is by downloading it and checking first. Or, if I'm lucky, go to a movie festival and see it there. (That's what I did with Volcano High, saw it at Stockholm Filmfestival. Ended up buying the special edition from Yesasia.com :))

/rant

moovieboy
07-28-2003, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by zen
People to Hollywood: make better movies.
Stop making dumb sequels.
Stop making remakes of foreign films and pretending its your own idea.
Stop RAPING my wallet everytime i go to the theater, which is the #1 reason why i dont go see movies anymore.
Stop making me pay for the stupid ugly ultra family entertainment centers with pool tables i dont play, super-sized arcades i dont hang out in, and the 3 gazillion snack treats im not hungry for.
Stop making me absorb costs for the production of cheap crappy happy-meal merchandising you produce.
Stop Wasting my time at the start of the movie telling me i should look like and smell like a CK male model. Or Buy a huge SUV or pickup truck because it would make me a rugged "real man".
Stop Thrusting idiot ads down my throat trying to get me to buy as many snacks as possible, or insulting my intelligence trying to get me to believe that the cute skinney blonde girl in the add is REALLY going to eat her super-sized nachos, new york fries, coke, chicken wings, m&m's, and twizlers.
Stop trying to sell me snacks for 8$ when its 2.99$ at the dep across the street.
And if you didnt waste so much money on marketing "experts" , market psychologists (yes they exist), stupid ads, tricks, gimmicks, and just all-out WANKING me trying to extract every single penny from my pocket and then want me to praise you and the pantheon of hollywood gods...
Then maybe youd have a bit of money to hire and pay for one of the many jobless starving WRITERS who could provide you with a spark of *gasp!*....originality!. So then maybe you could stop STEALING IDEAS AND MONEY FROM EVERYONE AROUND THE WORLD and then COMPLAINING that you are victoms of theft and about your MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR NET PROFITS.
Especially when there is a population of starving, under-privileged kids in your own damn country, and when its known that a fraction of your net annual profits could ERRADICATE COMMON DISEASE AND HUNGER IN THE 3RD WORLD.

Excuse me while I slide into my "Devil's Advocate" suit...

Hollywood to people:

Stop coming in droves to the dumb sequels. Give us one good reason why we shouldn't keep cranking them out when you give Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle over $200 million. By the time we see the receipts for the DVDs and pay per view, we'll probably hit you up for a third Angels. And enough of you will STILL come!

Stop running from the theatre every time you see subtitles. Stop conveniently ignoring every press release and web site that tells you about how this film came from Sweden/France/Japan and explain to us why only both of you even saw or heard of the original. Also, explain to us why you'll pay to see the same story this time ONLY because it stars Tom Cruise...

Stop bitching about the price of a goddamned movie ticket. On average, you drop $3 for coffee, $4 - $5 bucks for a combo meal, God knows how much each time you go clubbin' or bar hopping, and you actually celebrate when you pay "only $50" per ticket when Coldplay comes to do a show at the Forum... but $6 to $9 to see a movie once in a while merits the equivalent of an anal probe? Puh-lease...

Stop acting like the Boston Tea Party reborn, screaming "taxation without representation" just because exhibitors want to make a buck. They made huuuge mistakes trying to give audiences as many screens as possible and now most of them went bankrupt or darn close to it. They don't make the films, but they love films enough to struggle every day to show them to you ungrateful, leaving-your-trash-on-the-floor, acting-like-you're-in-your-living-room, sneaking-in-the-back-door toadies.

Stop pretending that an advertisement, even the most annoying and patronizing, will totally ruin your day. You don't even remember the commercial you saw on TV two minutes ago, so they don't carry much of an impact after all, do they? If they do, go see a therapist about how a 30 second spot has any effect on your masculinity. Ads are a necessary evil, because there's no way we're going to give the exhibitors more money... especially now that it looks like we're going to have to foot the bill for the $millions of new digital projectors...

Stop ragin' because Twizzlers are $3 at the theatre and 89 cents at the Wal-Mart. There's no gun at your head and no law that says you have to put on another 5 pounds in junk food while you're watching "Daredevil." Are you this cheap at a restaurant with your date when they charge $10 for $1.50's worth of appetizers?

Stop insulting our intelligence by suggesting that for every dollar we waste on marketing/advertising is a dollar we steal from the mouths of writers. Get your ass out here to Hollywood right now and come work as a "reader" or producer's assistant for one month. Over 98 percent of the thousands upon thousands of scripts submitted to us per week by all you "starving writers" are absolute sh*t. They're so horrible, so un-original, so incredibly not worth the paper they were printed on, we're wondering if any of you ever pick up a book anymore! Great writers write, period, rich or poor and we find some astounding ones all the time... However, among all those other marketing techniques, we "waste" money trying to figure out why only ten of you saw some of the best films written by these very original writers last year (or any year for that matter) that didn't involve comic books or hobbits...

We're stealing money from you? With what, mass hypnosis? Drugs sprinkled on your popcorn? Subliminal messages in the CK ads? And you couldn't be more wrong that we CAN'T try to do something about illegal bootlegs. Sure, the sheer weight of our 100-year old system is slow to get it together and at times, we're gonna sound more like chicken little, but if some of you would stop telling reporters it's "open season on Hollywood" or acting like it's okay to swipe our entire film library... what the hell do you guys expect, for all of us to look the other way? There's only relatively a few of us fat cats here in L.A.... most of us are as broke as you and struggling to get their next gig, if that's all right with you... Most of us make films on "deferment" meaning we don't see any real money until the film makes money... and it's bad enough dealing with monkey points and accountants and audits without teen-agers with DSL giving us more headaches...

Starving kids? What the hell did YOU ever do for them? We've given millions a year to more charities than you knew existed because everyone knows Hollywood's filled with insecure artists with bleeding hearts that can't help organizing/donating to them. What's your excuse?

[/devil's advocate]

I love role-playing! :p

-Tom

Chewey
07-28-2003, 01:12 PM
That was quite the devilish and clever retort Tom. Well done.:thumbsup:

zen
07-28-2003, 07:53 PM
Yes well done! Quite clever yes.

A very easy and predictable response.

So i and everyone else should just "bend over and take it" right? Ok i get it now.
So is this the ideology you'll be raising your kid with?

So young kids that go to the theatres can get brainwashed into the idea that they can and should eat all the junk food they can, and theyll still look nice and pretty. that its not ok to look different, that for a guy washboard abs are a must, that you need an SUV to be a complete person, and so on...
But thats ok cause nobody is making me do it, right? its fine
See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil right?
its fine that 2/3 of the US population is medically obese.
Its fine that 1/2 of US kids 12 and under are medically obese.
its fine that your country is diet obsessed, yet it consumes more food and energy than 90% of the world population.
But no one is forcing me to do it so i can just sit back, wash my hands of it and its fine, right?
And you see no correllation whatsover in there anywhere.

Anyways back to my point! Hollywood has been spiraling down for a couple years and its its own fault.
Could it be that the masses are maybe starting to get tired of its repetitiveness and general low value/high price?? NO! of course not that would be ludicrous!! Everyone knows that if the internet didnt exist Charlies Angels 8 will do fine in profits!!

Or just MAYBE....
1. Most of Hollywood's audience has more than the single-neuron credit you give them.
2. The internet has allowed alot of people to discover that the US isnt the only country on the planet and that theyre not the only ones making movies.

the internet download problem, while it may be a problem, is an overhyped, inflated problem Hollywood uses as an excuse for its diminishing [enormous] profits while in reality this is probably due to its diminishing performance. Other cities and industries are becoming more competitive and providing better material and hollywood is losing some of its market share to them.

mattregnier
07-28-2003, 10:20 PM
*ding *ding, Round 2 begin: Zen vs. Moovieboy! :D cheers!

JMulder
07-28-2003, 10:49 PM
OK, let me get this straight...

The general tone I am seeing here (from a group of artists, no less), is that it's alright to steal something if the owner is rich, if the product is crappy, or if it's overpriced. After all, "they can afford it", "it's not worth paying for" and "they're gouging us".

Theft is theft. I can't steal Bill Gates' car because he can afford it. I can't steal a Ford Escort from the used car dealership because it's a crappy car. I can't steal a Jaguar from the dealership beacuse it's overpriced. Just because downloading MP3's and films illegally is easy doesn't make it right.

I think that the film industry was reasonable in asking people to police themselves, rather than trying to force legislation down our throats like the RIAA.

Don't support illegal downloading. The copyright you save might be your own.

moovieboy
07-28-2003, 11:50 PM
Okee-dokee…

Originally posted by zen
Most of Hollywood's audience has more than the single-neuron credit you give them…
Originally posted by zen
So young kids that go to the theatres can get brainwashed into the idea that they can

You realize that in the same argument, you say the audience is both intelligent AND easily brainwashed… Well, which is it?

Originally posted by zen
But thats ok cause nobody is making me do it, right? its fine…

You’d rather our governments make us buy SUVs and CK Jeans? Look, my wife puts up with a ton of my grumbling about the fine print and other tricks commercials try to sneak by… I know just about every trick they can employ. And I agree, they sure have a lot of bullsh*t tucked up their sleeves… Regardless, it doesn’t excuse us to blindly blame them for buying that new car/shirt/computer. We still made a choice. Same goes about feeling insecure if you don’t buy it…

Originally posted by zen
its fine that 2/3 of the US population is medically obese.
Its fine that 1/2 of US kids 12 and under are medically obese.
its fine that your country is diet obsessed, yet it consumes more food and energy than 90% of the world population.

First, it is ironic to talk about growing obesity on an internet bulletin board… However, do you honestly believe Hollywood is to blame for both making kids fat and anorexic?

Americans get fat because they can. We want our food fast, cheap and convenient, calories be damned… That’s a societal problem that is much bigger than simply pointing a finger at either Hollywood or Madison Ave. and shouting, “Your fault!”

Originally posted by zen
Hollywood has been spiraling down for a couple years and its its own fault.

Some would argue it’s been spiraling for decades :D

Originally posted by zen
Could it be that the masses are maybe starting to get tired of its repetitiveness and general low value/high price??
We’re talking about the same masses that eat up the Bachelor(ette), Joe Millionaire, Dog Eat Dog, Survivor 4 while never watching “Six Feet Under,” “The Shield,” “Oz,” or “Boomtown” ??? The same ones that have a coronary because Gollum didn’t receive an Oscar while ignoring damn near every other film that was nominated? The same masses that can flip through 200+ channels and claim there’s “nothing on?”

But seriously, the masses may be getting tired and huddled about Hollywood’s same old, same old… but why aren’t they doing anything about it? They fill out surveys saying “Movies and McDonalds are bad,” then get back in line for their super-sized combo before going to see “LXG.” You tell me, which are the “real” masses???

Originally posted by zen
The internet has allowed alot of people to discover that the US isnt the only country on the planet and that theyre not the only ones making movies.

I guess I agree with that, albeit an exaggerated point. But, many “older” Americans grew up knowing about Kung Fu movies, Kirasawa, Fellini, French and Swedish “Art films” and even Monty Python long before the Internet…

Originally posted by zen
the internet download problem, while it may be a problem, is an overhyped, inflated problem Hollywood uses as an excuse for its diminishing [enormous] profits while in reality this is probably due to its diminishing performance. Other cities and industries are becoming more competitive and providing better material and hollywood is losing some of its market share to them.

Overhyped? At times… Inflated? Probably… Just an excuse? Not when they see how it’s mutated the music industry… Diminished performance? Feels like this year is no different than the many years before it… Other cities and industries providing better/more competitive material? What cities? Which industries?

Originally posted by zen
So i and everyone else should just "bend over and take it" right? Ok i get it now.

Actually, my opinion would be to stop exaggerating with all this “up the ass” imagery and, if this is truly a cause for you, spend more than both minutes thinking about it. Find out why things are this way and what ordinary people and groups could do to change it. Entertainment venues, from the Staples Center to the Getty Museum, to the food court at the Mall of America, down to your local bars, restaurants and movie theatres all mark up the price of food and drinks… Are they ALL horrible entities that are making us bend over? Should we boycott ever going out again?

Besides crying “rape” what would you suggest? Otherwise, you’re parroting an easy set of complaints without contributing anything for change…

Originally posted by zen
So is this the ideology you'll be raising your kid with?
What I will teach her (when she’s old enough) is that you should think for yourself, dig beneath the surface of both sides of an argument, accept that fact that you can be completely wrong and be open to the opposition and, finally, don’t automatically trust either the institution OR the man loudly denouncing it…

Man, I gotta pick up another hobby! :p

-Tom

CGTalk Moderation
01-15-2006, 05:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.