Open Forum Friday: Does Piracy Actually Hurt a Film Financially?
So, first things first… a DVD-quality workprint of X-Men Origins: Wolverine was leaked to file-sharing sites earlier this week, making it perhaps the highest profile movie ever to be leaked online ahead of its release date — nearly a month before, no less. This has sent shockwaves throughout the industry, with Fox scrambling to find out how such a thing could have slipped out, and a lot of people from the press and the blogosphere arguing about whether or not it is appropriate to run news stories about the leak, much less download it and review it.
Clearly a lot of people have varying opinions about the ethics of downloading pirated movies. Some people justify it by saying that as long as they still pay to see the movie in theatres, it’s okay. Others say they have a right to preview something before they pay for the full deal. In this particular case, a lot of people say it’s wrong because it’s an unfinished product and not ready for public consumption; on the flipside, some say that viewing a workprint version offers interesting insight into the post-production process of a major Hollywood blockbuster.
What I’m most curious about is whether or not people think this will have an impact on the box office numbers for Wolverine. Will enough people download it, and will those people opt not to go because they’ve already seen it, or will it actually add to the publicity and help build strong word of mouth (assuming the movie is decent)? Remember, torrents of the French DVD release of Taken were available online way before the movie hit North American theatres, and it is now closing in on being the highest-grossing movie of 2009 thus far. What do you think? Is it wrong to download a leaked movie? Do movie fans have an obligation to take a hard line and avoid even talking about it? Is piracy truly killing the entertainment industry, or is the financial threat greatly exaggerated? Give us your thoughts here on Open Forum Friday.
Comments (54)
Thing is, the only people that are going to go out of their way scowering the internet for an unfinished version of a comic-book movie are uber-fans who will, no doubt, see the film on the big screen once it is released.
So no, it will not affect ticket sales for this film. Other films would not be so lucky.
That being said, I’m not sure how anyone can make a serious argument that is ethical to watch pirated movies.
I hate hollywood. I hate overpriced, pretentious asshat actors and their soap-box liberal lunacy, I hate Angelina Jolie and all her adopted children, I hate shitty CGI, Geroge Lucas can suck it, I’m sick of nazi-pedophile protaginists and American Military antagonists… sigh…
Look, NOBODY wants to pay $10 for a movie that will probably suck but pirating movies is stealing, plain and simple. The hundreds of workers and investors (and even actors) that create these movies do it to make a profit, it is a service. Not paying for that service is stealing.
Have I ever done it? No comment.
Posted by Shut-Up Ed on April 3rd, 2009I download movies all the time. But only movies that are out of print or just really hard to find. As for downloading films that are about to hit theaters, i only do so if i know its not getting a wide release, therefore not coming near me. But even then, i would most likely wait for the dvd anyway because the quality is never that good unless you get a good screener copy. As for the financial aspect i think a lot of these big movies are leaked by the studio in an act to gain more publicity. I don’t know if it would hurt them financially, with a movie like Wolverine for instance, you have the geek audience and the casual movie goers who are gonna fork over the dollars to see this thing. And now that it leaked onto the internet, in an incomplete form, i think that it would at least drive most of the people who downloaded it to see it anyway. I think the only thing that really hurts a film these days is word of mouth on the internet.
Posted by cronenfly on April 3rd, 2009I was listening to an old filmjunk podcast were you guys first talked about the Fox lawsuit over watchmen. Interestingly enough, you talked about how watchmen fans were threatening to pirate the wolverine film in retaliation – is this just a coincidence or did someone hold a huge grudge? Either way Fox must be fuming.
Posted by dom_g on April 3rd, 2009There are indeed theories that it could be related to the whole Watchmen situation, but this was clearly an inside job not just the work of a random angry fanboy.
Posted by Sean on April 3rd, 2009I’m not a big fan of pirated movies, i think sometimes it can hurt the movie overall. I actually watched a bootleg version of Taken, but only cause I really wanted to see it and didn’t think it would make it to theaters near me. So for me, that movie didn’t get my $10 and probably should have. Others I watched illegally were some oscar contenders that didn’t come to my town, like the Wrestler. In that case, I just simply couldn’t wait for DVD. Which doesn’t excuse the fact that it is breaking copyright laws. I will make up as best I can by purchasing the DVD when it comes out. Since it was a great movie. I will however not see a movie like Wolverine in a shitty unfinished version on my computer. That is one I need to see in theaters. I don’t think this movie will be hurt much by piracy anyways.
Posted by Dane on April 3rd, 2009I downloaded The Wrestler because I thought it wouldnt get released where I live, but when it did, I went to see it in the cinema.
Posted by Hannes on April 3rd, 2009If a film is actually good enough then I’ll gladly pay the money to see it.
I’ve watched American Pie and a few other really bad old movies on those sketchy streaming sites, but only because I didn’t want to waste a slot on my DVD rental service. They weren’t movies I really had any interest in seeing, I just wanted to be able to rate them on the Flixster compatibility test. And I’ve bought DVDs of a few Broadway shows online, but nothing that is currently playing, just older shows that I didn’t get to go see and probably won’t ever have the chance to see live.
I used to host a monthly movie night, and once a friend brought over a bootleg of American Gangster. Despite everyone wanting to watch that, I refused, and the friend that brought it then forgot the disc when he left, so I threw it out. I don’t like paying $10 for crappy movies either, that’s why I go to the $4 Tuesday matinees, or I skip it altogether.
A friend who downloads all of her movies because she things theatre seats are uncomfortable told me she didn’t like the Dark Knight. It was only after ten minutes of conversation that I realized the version she watched was missing the last half hour, and she didn’t even realize it. Another reason to see it legally.
Posted by Ashley on April 3rd, 2009“A friend who downloads all of her movies because she things theatre seats are uncomfortable told me she didn’t like the Dark Knight. It was only after ten minutes of conversation that I realized the version she watched was missing the last half hour, and she didn’t even realize it.”
You’d think she would have enjoyed it even more with the last half hour missing.
Posted by Wintle on April 4th, 2009I download movies.
But mostly stuff I can´t see over here in germany in an undubbed form, rare movies without any DVD-release, or movies I don´t know if they are worth my hard earned money.
I wouldn´t have bought and discovered hidden gems like “Session 9″, “Joshua” or “The Woodsman” (just to name a few I bought last mnth) if I hadn´t downloaded and watched them before. So – from my point of view – the industry gains a lot just because I download movies illegally. But of course I´m no normal downloader, but a hardcore movie geek.
And – I´ve also downloaded “Wolverine”. Not to watch it, but to add it to the DVD I will buy in the future as a comparsion piece. And I will probably watch it AFTER I watched Wolvie in the theatre.
Posted by theDia on April 4th, 2009Seriously, regular movie pirates who download this are not going to pay to go see it anyway, and would wait for the dvd screener to hit the net rather than pay money to watch the movie. People who go looking for it after the news stories are most likely fanboys who will pay to see the movie 5 times at the cinema anyway. The only others who would have it are those who want to brag that they have it, or just brag that they have a pre-release version of any movie, and it is that unfinished that they would probably go see it at the movies anyway or at least wait for the dvd.
Posted by Jax on April 4th, 2009I really don’t think it will hurt 20th Century Fox financially.
Making people pay for shitty movies is stealing too…in a way.
Today’s poll question on the MSN homepage is “Would you watch an illegally downloaded movie?”
So you know “something” is going to be done to it in the near future.
Posted by Tomas on April 4th, 2009I have to say that I really want to see the workprint because I’m very interested in the process and like to see the differences in the theatrical release.
Posted by swarez on April 4th, 2009“You’d think she would have enjoyed it even more with the last half hour missing.”
I should have clarified, the main reason she claimed not to like it is because she said it “just ended,” and failed to come to smooth conclusion. She probably still wouldn’t have liked the actual ending since it’s left pretty open for the next installment of the franchise. I guess for her it was a no-win situation.
Posted by Ashley on April 4th, 2009The Wrestler opens in May… I have seen it already. I can’t wait to take people to the theater and see it with them.
Posted by Henrik on April 4th, 2009I’m just happy my fellow film fans here on FilmJunk seem to be reasonable with their illegal downloading and understand piracy of any entertainment will ultimately effect the product with less filmmakers, bands, etc. making the stuff we love.
Shut Up Ed is the man.
“Seriously, regular movie pirates who download this are not going to pay to go see it anyway, and would wait for the dvd screener to hit the net rather than pay money to watch the movie”
That is true, I have two cheatass movie loving friends that buy, download illegally because their cheapness is part of their DNA. One is a streetsmart hustler who gets the local bootlegger in his Chicago neighborhood to knock on his door! Talk about Netflix, that’s Gangsterflix. Basically, every trailer we watch during a sporting event is followed by, “Fuck, that shit is tight! I can’t wait to get that from my boy!”
The other one is a politically connected businessman who actually “has a guy” that burns copies of the screeners sent to one of Chicago’s major newspapers, or, it could be a burn of the screener that goes to this screening room downtown were all the critics go? Anyway, they are both cheap in everything they do and wear it as a pathetic badge of honor.
Needless to say, I see a lot of films alone.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 4th, 2009Whether its movie or music files, I’m sure everybody here is guilty for “stealing”, so let’s cut the ethical crap.
I’d watch an “illegally downloaded” movie, just to see if its worth adding to my collection. I have no problem buying a movie or music cd if I know its good.
Buying or paying for stuff blindly is taking a chance. Now in our economic downturn, I’m sure there will be more illegality going on when it comes to movies and music.
Posted by Tomas on April 4th, 2009“Buying or paying for stuff blindly is taking a chance.”
Stop using personal logic to justify your sins. You buy stuff on faith everyday. There is no guarantees in life. That sandwich you buy off the menu is going to taste exactly how you like. The shirt you buy is going to not lose a button on its third washing.
And don’t give me,”well I can send the sandwich back, or take the shirt in for returns.” We all have gotten free movie passes if the film breaks or is oversold.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 4th, 2009Rus,….sin? I hope that isn’t a transference of guilt. LOL
Posted by Tomas on April 4th, 2009I think its bullshit. I dont understand the point of watching an unfinished product and then complain how bad the movie is (which Ive seen a lot of people do). Not saying Wolverine is a good movie but at least watch it as it was intended before judging it.
As for illegal downloading, its more bullshit. If you need to sample a movie before going to the theatre then watch the trailers, previews and read the reviews, THATS WHY THEY ARE THERE. Especially with the internet there are so many sites offering information about movies that you dont have to make any blind purchases. Stop with the excuses already. You illegaly download movies because its convienient and free.
Posted by Niklas on April 4th, 2009MY SINS!!!!!
Get off your rhetoric-horse please. Since when is stealing a sin? Especially when it’s just a sample, like this Wolverine thing that leaked, an advertisement of the final product. “If you liked this, just wait till you see the rest of it!” Like an advanced trailer.
Posted by Henrik on April 4th, 2009Stealing has been a sin for 2000 years last time I checked and has been pretty much frowned upon since the dawn of man.
Posted by swarez on April 4th, 2009An unfinished product is a sad excuse for an advertisement and won’t do the film any favors. People will see it in the cinema regardless because right now the majority of people downloading it are anonymous nerds that think they get some “cool points” from other anonymous nerds on internet chat boards.
I will however probably download the workprint after I see the film. It will be interesting to see.
I thought it was only a sin if you were religious though. It’s the rhetoric that’s fucking annoying, not the sentiment.
“An unfinished product is a sad excuse for an advertisement and won’t do the film any favors.”
Obviously I was joking before, but I think it holds up. I don’t get your reasoning behind this, to me it seems just as likely that someone will see it and think they can’t wait to see it in full, as the opposite outcome.
Posted by Henrik on April 4th, 2009sin, crime, amoral, bad karma, whatever you want to call it…if you have a problem figuring out what you are doing use the simple test:
Can I freely tell anyone about it without feeling bad/embarrassed?
Can I tell my mom?
Do a hide my actions?
Is it hurting anyone?
Do that test and see what you find.
Its all part of the same attitude that has poisoned society. Everyone wants everything for free and live by their own personal morality. The illegal download that robs the artist of any compensation, is the same, as trading work for goods you know are hot, is the same, as the real estate appraiser cooking the appraisal to get a higher commission for the real estate agent that kicks back some cash their way, is the same, as the banker rolling thousands of bad loans into high risk derivatives at higher thresholds then the bank standards allow because stockholders look the other way for consistent returns, is the same, as wall street ponzi schemes that promise astronomical returns that defy every other market trend but see no regulation demands from customers due to their greed. Its all the same.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 4th, 2009Why has this turned into a ridiculous moral/sin discussion?
Just ask yourself that if you made something with intention of selling it and someone swoops in and puts it out there for free, would you be upset? would you think it was wrong? if you say yes you obviously think its morally wrong to illegaly download movies. The end.
Posted by Niklas on April 5th, 2009Which is funny with movies, because I personally would never make a movie with the intentions of selling it.
Posted by Henrik on April 5th, 2009You people that take advantage of digital media are so full of shit. You never download any music or movies you hate, right. You download the media you love and divorce yourself from that fact that you are killing the thing you love. And when you do it for independent filmmakers and musicians, or small market studio pictures, you are killing them before they even get any footing. All of these artists struggle every day to make a living so they can pursue a career making music or films you love. That is what I’m trying to do, and it sounds like what Jay Cheel is trying to do. When people take advantage of the digital age to get something for free that some ten years ago they would have had to pay for – that KILLS the artists chance to make a living doing the very thing you WANT them to do.
You do it because you can and it is soooooo easy. It’s not like with VHS were you have to find someone with a copy, make a dub, deal with loss of quality…you do this in your underwear while eating fruit loops.
At least burn copies of films you get through Netflix so at least the artist get something.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 5th, 2009Dude, I wanted to see The Wrestler.
I feel bad that you’re not living your dream. I’m sure digital downloads is the reason.
Posted by Henrik on April 5th, 2009put your money where mouth is smartass and post a receipt for a Wreastler DVD purchase now that you’ve seen it and liked it. no? why don’t you send in $5 bucks to Protozoa Pictures and say how much you liked it and here’s a thank you and a contribution to their next indy picture. here I’ll give you the address:
Protozoa Pictures
104 N 7th St., Brooklyn, NY 11211-3020, United States
(718)388-5280, (718)388-5424 fax, http://www.protozoa.com
no? didn’t like it enough? what lameass excuse do you have now?
Posted by rus in chicago on April 5th, 2009Rus, you’re arguing with an atheist who does not live in the United States and who also believes art and commerce should never mix. I feel I should also point out that The Wrestler is not actually out on DVD yet.
I think the problem here is that no matter how much you argue that it’s wrong, human nature dictates that a lot of people will still try and get something for free if they can. It doesn’t help that most people think Hollywood makes way too much money already.
I’m just not sure what the real world repercussions of these leaks are. Did the leaked screener of The Wrestler actually help word of mouth and will it translate to more sales when it does come out on DVD? I think it’s definitely possible.
Posted by Sean on April 5th, 2009Drop the crazed rhetoric, please.
The kids growing up with the internet see downloading as a given, as opposed to those of us who can remember a time before its existence. Whether anyone views such acts as stealing or immoral or what have you is as irrelevant as when calligraphers railed against the arrival of the printing press.
I’m not saying this as someone championing this new paradigm, but as someone who has realized that curtailing this alleged theft is less important than seeing how the landscape will evolve over the next few decades, and if you’re in an affected industry, learning to get with the program or risk fading away. The rise of VHS and the multiplex had similar, if smaller, effects. Art, including movies, will still be created, distributed and make money even if the studios fall, though it will no doubt be done in a completely different way than we know it.
I follow comic news at least as much as movie news, and viewing the shift in various forms of comics due in part to the internet may inform what could happen with movies. Comic forms once thought of as impenetrable institutions are faltering, and independent voices who wouldn’t have received distributed are making a decent living. While this kind of change will no doubt claim some victims, for those savvy enough this could be a chance denied to them up to now. And what’s wrong with that?
Posted by Wintle on April 5th, 2009rus in chicago, maybe I should change my nick to Henrik in Copenhagen to make things more obvious. The Wrestler has yet to reach theatres here. For somebody who frequents websites like this one, it can be tough to not see the films that people rave about. And when I decided to finally bite the sour apple and download it, it still had not gotten a date for distribution here, that’s why I decided I might as well see it now, rather than wait anymore. As it turns out it opens in May, around 1 year after being raved about in Venice, I am going to go see it, and as a direct result of having seen it and loving it, will bring 5 people.
I feel like you are arguing based on a personal need to succeed, and using thieves as a scapegoat for your own personal struggles. People struggled before the internet as well. As for Jay Cheel, I doubt that the internet has hurt his chances to make films. If anything, it has given him a way bigger audience than would have been possible, had it not existed. In the case of struggling unknown artists, I have a feeling that leaked screeners aren’t as big a deal as with blockbusters that have marketing budgets that boggle the mind.
Posted by Henrik on April 5th, 2009But I’m probably in the minority on this issue, I will admit. I have never understood why artists and entertainers became millionaires personally.
Posted by Henrik on April 5th, 2009Finally, if I was going to send cash, I would not send it to the production company. I hate most movies, who knows what piece of shit that cash would go to.
Posted by Henrik on April 5th, 2009good points, esp. those bring up the change in comics and other feilds.
Darren Aronofsky is the owner of Protozoa Pictures, so your money hopefully will go to getting that shitty mustache of his removed.
“As for Jay Cheel, I doubt that the internet has hurt his chances to make films” — we are starting to associate downloading with the internet in general and that is bad form. The internet and prosumer digital video is going to make Jay’s movie great and widely known. File sharing is going to keep him from making a decent amount of money off that movie so he will be forced to work for Greg in his bookstore – AND HE CAN”T READ!!!
Posted by rus in chicago on April 5th, 2009“we are starting to associate downloading with the internet in general and that is bad form.”
Sometimes you gotta take the good with the bad though. When you’re talking about struggling artists, I would hope most of them aren’t too worried about making money. There are plenty of ways to make money, I would not recommend artistry if you want to do that. I wonder if somebody will ever be rejected by “Sorry, your work will probably just be downloaded illegally and we won’t make money off of it”. And I don’t mean disrespect, but do you honestly think if Jay tried to sell his movie, he would be able to make a decent amount of money off of it? As big a fan as I am of the site and all, I doubt I would pay for it. And outside of me personally, it’s a 30minute home-made horrormovie on a shoestring budget, I doubt anyone has been able to make a decent amount of money off of such a movie, even before the internet.
I honestly like Aronofskys moustache. Do they only release Aronofsky films? More specifically, Aronofsky films with Mickey Rourke in them? If so, I think I might send them some money.
Posted by Henrik on April 5th, 2009This must be a European, U.S. thing…O.k. I’m a cobbler and make really good shoes, but I can’t make shoes full time due to some weird system were half my shoes get used by the public without me getting paid, and since I’m only selling x amount of shoes I’ve got to work at another job as a blacksmith. This really sucks, because as a cobbler everyone wants me to make more shoes because I’m really good at them, but I’m so tired and frustrated at having to be a blacksmith I can’t concentrate on making shoes and the potential I have to make even better shoes is not being realized.
I’m not talking about Jay’s half hour film, but the feature length one he only tells Platinum FilmJunk members about.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 5th, 2009In some cases, digitally reproducible content (like comics, e-books, etc.) is given away for free, while the money is made from advertising, donations and/or selling non-reproducible items, like clothing and print collections, to loyal fans. If I knew how that could transfer over to something like film I’d probably be rich, but I imagine there must be ways, and if not maybe all film content in the future will be strictly amateur.
And Henrik, I seem to recall that you’re not into horror, so you may not know that the genre is ridiculously easy to sell to fans despite budgetary limitations. I own quite a few homemade horror movies made on a shoestring budget that can’t compare to Jay’s movie. If Jay made a horror feature it would get snapped up in a heartbeat. When the dust settles, horror and porno will be the last ones standing, believe me.
Posted by Wintle on April 5th, 2009right, and to that point, the artist Christo sells the sketches and models he makes for his fabric wrap projects to fund the art.
Henrik, most see film making as a craft and not an art. So in that mode of thinking, whatever you do to make a living (your craft) imagine if 10, 20, 30 percent of that income is gone do to a glitch. How would you feel?
Posted by rus in chicago on April 5th, 2009I know your comments were directed at Henrik, rus, but I can’t sleep and I’m already invested, so I hope you don’t mind if I take a crack at them.
For both your previous comments I would have to say that I would feel bent out of shape about the situation at first, then I would find a way to work around the problem, growing so used to it that eventually I wouldn’t even notice it anymore. Or, alternately, I would find other work.
Something like that did happen to me. The studio I worked for wouldn’t replace their outdated computers and so they’d crash at least three times a day, wiping out anywhere from a few minutes to hours of work. Since I was paid by how much I accomplished, it bit into my wages. I worked around it until I found a better job.
In yet another job, we were told that each location budgeted a certain amount for theft, due both to customers and employees. Lesson being, when faced with an obstacle outside of your control it seems to me that your two best solutions are to acknowledge it and work around it, or, even better, find some way for it to work for you. Whining doesn’t seem to help any.
Posted by Wintle on April 5th, 2009Believe me I’m not whining, I’m debating. If it sounds like whining its due to frustration of people not acknowledging the points I bring up. The digital age and the internet age are very young and in a way like the wild west. The issues we are talking about here are the same as access to porn, the breakdown of triangulated investigative reporting due to internet based journalism, social networking in business versus direct contact, etc. None of these issues have been solved, or norms established, and many people here seem to have this idea that “downloading is here, deal with it.” I don’t see it that way. If you remember during the early days of napster everyone was all for it, then after people discussed it you saw the shift to were most people didn’t expect all their music for free and wanted to support the artist they love. We are doing the same thing here by discussing it.
I’m not totally one sided on this issue and see the future of television, particularly comedies, being developed online for free, ad supported, before leaping to broadcast networks. We are also seeing the push for intense 3D from Cameron and Spielberg as a way to keep the movie going experience alive as something that couldn’t possibly be pirated or enjoyed outside the theatre.
Its all good, we’ll figure it out.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 5th, 2009Some reading material that may be relevant to the discussion:
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-03/ff_free
Posted by Sean on April 6th, 2009Sean, that is a really good article, thank you for sharing it. I agree with the premise and it could possibility work if there was a true internet based distribution system that had the third party revenue stream to support the filmmakers and allow the users to have the films for free. I even believe this is why Microsoft and Goggle are getting so involved with Hollywood.
The biggest difference between what we are discussing and the examples given in the article is repetition and scale. Items like razors and sandwichs are different then films in that those items identically manufactured objects and a film is basically a realized idea. A film is not a track home built over and over it’s a singular home design for a specific piece of land. This is especially important to our discussion because film goers want movies for free because they are so sick of getting films that seem formulaic. Each film starts with a blank screen and blinking cursor.
Furthermore, unlike a single pop song created by a band, an individual film at the quality expected by general film audiences has far more real world production costs. The time to develop a script, refine it, develop resources, produce and finish is in years not weeks or months.
The only way the article’s business model works for film outside the major media companies is if there are actual production companies backed by the same distribution system that develops talent and greenlights stories they feel are viable at the endpoint – the internet user.
Actually, now that I think about it, if a worldwide internet distribution platform existed with a third party revenue stream based on the concept of time and respect, i.e., “page views” and “scoring” that is all the true independent filmmaker needs and wants. This is because it would be a true real world system to allow the work to earn the revenue it deserves from the public’s acceptance. This system is far more fair than the current system of Film Festivals and Who You Know distribution deals.
Posted by rus in chicago on April 6th, 2009I wish there was a system in place where I could simply pay a monthly fee or something and it would give me access to download movies.
Like a porn site but with regular movies.
Posted by Niklas on April 6th, 2009My comment about whining wasn’t directed specifically at you, rus. It was meant as a rebuke to those people and organizations who are content to ignore the need to get proactive and seek other options.
Posted by Wintle on April 6th, 2009“most see film making as a craft and not an art.”
Really? It’s like I always suspected, this world is a cesspool of idiots and morons! For me, I see it as art. The financial side of it doesn’t interest me. I want to see movies in the theater, because it is the best experience, and where they were meant to be shown. The fact that it costs money annoys me. I wish I had complete power, I would fund the movies I wanted to see, and release them for free to the public. Imagine how many good movies can be made for the budget of Iron Man? That’d be a world worth living in.
I will quote Renny Harlin again: “In Europe, film making is perceived as an art form with marginal business possibilities, and in the US, film making is a business with marginal artistic possibilities.”
Wintle, I am aware that horror is a genre that does have alot of cheap shit, and that the worse it is, sometimes the better it is, but are the people really making a decent amount of money? I guess maybe they are.
Posted by Henrik on April 6th, 2009Henrik, its called show business, not show art or show public endeavor. I don’t know what your deal is, every form of commerce has its art side; those examples that make something more of the basic function of the task. In architecture, book binding, hair cutting, all of them have some empowered individuals that put in the blood, sweat and tears to make a artform out of their product and advance it with their ideas. And you know why they can? because there is a economic framework in their business that allows them to do that exploration. With your way of thinking the last century of film making should be heavily influenced by major films from areas of the world that have a government supported film making process. Yet, it appears that the majority of the films that people hold up as ground breaking and inspired come out of the very system I describe. The idiot and moron is you fine sir, it is you!
Posted by rus in chicago on April 6th, 2009“Yet, it appears that the majority of the films that people hold up as ground breaking and inspired come out of the very system I describe.”
I can only say that I do not care at all what the masses think of things. I don’t care about business. I care about what touches me.
I think Triumph of the Will is groundbreaking and inspired. Same with Jüd Suss. Alot of people do as well. What does that tell you? We should condone the system? Obviously not.
Posted by Henrik on April 6th, 2009And, FYI, it’s only called show business in america. And england I guess, since they have the word as well.
Posted by Henrik on April 6th, 2009O.k. you convinced me and I think we should practice what we preach. I’ll only watch films made in a capitalist system and not touch your precious government funded artform system films that should replace my capitalist pig films. Likewise, you agree to support the change you seek by only watching the great government supported arthouse fare you hold so dear.
Agree, great! Good luck, its been great talking to you. Shit, I got to get busy I have A LOT of really cool films to support this summer! How about you, excited?
Posted by rus in chicago on April 6th, 2009I have already expressed my willingness to watch movies made by horrible systems, ie. Triumph of the Will, mate.
What’s with this asshole, I’ve-now-got-a-smoking-gun-to-use-to-kill-the-argument attitude?
Posted by Henrik on April 6th, 2009Rus, your a dick. You dont consider any of the greater systems in play. Why do people pirate films? Its not purely a matter of money, there are people who flat out dont care about the suposed “benefits”.
For example, have you seen that new fast food commercial where they ask people if they will pay double at the fancy table? That is the movie industry in its current form. Except you MUST pay double for the fancy table.
Piracy is a problem because the industry does not look to cater to that market. And why would they, this is the way the movie bizz worked in the past, so it should never change right?
The truth is the industry needs to examine why people pirate, and create a system that captures that market. There are some channels that are now allowing veiwers to watch their programs for free over the interent, and beleive me they are making money from this.
Does this hurt the already in palce buisness of Theatres and DVDs? perhaps, but it comes down to a decision, a decision to diversify to more markets, or continue to neglect other groups.
It seems that the only real delay in accepting the potential benefits of a new market is a fear of change.
Posted by Kyro on April 10th, 2009I download movies (and music) illegally because i simply cannot bring myself to pay for something which i know damn well i can get for free at the touch of a button.
I know it’s theft, i make no excuse, it’s wrong… I simply can’t justify spending money on things that are available for free.
Posted by Mr Darkbloom on April 22nd, 2009Online DVD rental sites are gaining popularity rapidly. However, once can easily be confused with so many of those DVD rental sites out there as each has their own terms and pricing. It is wise to compare the top DVD rental sites before signing up with any.
For more information visit: http://online-dvd-rental-reviews.co.uk/
Posted by BobbyT on May 26th, 2009Who cares?
If the companies want to secure their profits, they should make their product not so easily distributable. They’re the ones that have to get creative. Piracy IS going to exist whether you think it’s moral, immoral, or whatever. People that pirate movies don’t care what you think, or how you “feel”. No one cares how you feel.
The truth is, the companies are going to have to do something extra with their movies/music to make it not so easy to be pirated. I have no answers for them, like I said, either get creative, or get your product stolen.
Complaining and whining to the government and international agencies is not the answer, nor is it productive, or even WORKING for that matter. Pirating is not even an art anymore it’s become so easy. Hell, with a quick google search you can just about find any album/movie you want at the convenience of enjoying it in your home free of charge.
So companies, if you don’t want to be jipped like you jip the populace, then you’re going to have to up your ante.
Posted by Brutal_Aeons on June 23rd, 2009Leave a Reply