Sorta like an anti-Robin Hood?
[quote=“Noir_Fiction”]
I think that if you’re a filmmaker and someone wants to see your movie, then it really shouldn’t matter how they see it, just that they did. But as much as I hate to say it, movies are a business and illegally downloading is siphoning off money that would benefit the industry. But the movies that are frequently downloaded are usually the bigger movies that come out, the movies that tend to make more money anyway. I also find that a lot of people I know, who download movies tend to download movies that they’re not sure will be worth spending their money on, which goes back to the fact that movies are so mass produced and cookie cutter. It’s really a give and take. Most people would be more apt to spend the money if they were surer that the movies were worth the cost of admission.
[/quote]
ok but eventually, the big films are also the ones that eventually will make the theaters anyway… smaller films suffer from this. and you end up in a world where Pirate of the carabbean plays in 4 theaters of the same multiplex while smaller films don’t get a release at all. by the end of the day, it all comes up to what nublob said yesterday:
[quote=“nublob”]
by illegally downloading films you are depriving the film industry of much needed revenue revenue which can then be used to finance new movies good movies more experimental fims like Inglourious Basterds… with less revenue they are forced to resort films which are likely to make money but have little substance like Paul Blart Mall Cop…
[/quote]
I rarely download but sometimes I do. When I like the movie I will buy it anyway, if it sucks I won’ t.
There are so many hollywoodmovies that don’ t deliver and just are made out of the motivation of making money that I really don’ t care if their movies are downloaded.
Make good movies and people will buy the dvd anyway for their collection.
I have dl’ed one movie, The Wrestler, and that’s cos it was on a limited release, but as soon as it comes out on DVD, I’m buying, so, I figure it really didn’t hurt anything. I wanted to go see it while I was in NYC, but none of my friends wanted to spend 2 hrs in the theater when we were in NYC for only a day. Instead, we spent two hours at the Nintendo store, which was bollocks, cos I couldn’t afford anything I wanted.
I download or watch online mostly all movies but there’s ones that I need to see in the movie theater.
Movies I watch in movie theater: QT flicks, Mark Wahlberg movies, really cool upcoming action films.
[quote=“Eastern Beauty”]
I download or watch online mostly all movies but there’s ones that I need to see in the movie theater.
Movies I watch in movie theater: QT flicks, Mark Wahlberg movies, really cool upcoming action films.
[/quote]
it’s bad for the industry, it’s bad for the audience… most kids aren’t used to spend a dime on music or cinema anymore… by the end of the day “really cool action films” will be the only kind of films we’ll get to see in cinemas… that’s not a happy perspective…
[quote=“tonyanthony”]
it’s bad for the industry, it’s bad for the audience… most kids aren’t used to spend a dime on music or cinema anymore… by the end of the day “really cool action films” will be the only kind of films we’ll get to see in cinemas… that’s not a happy perspective…
[/quote]
That sux balls, but it’s true.
I download constantly. I very rarely go see movies in theaters simply because I’m not gonna pay $11.50 (if I’m only paying for myself it gets worse than $30 on a date night) for an hour and half of mild entertainment. If the movie’s good I’ll by it on DVD.
Quality is usually up to DVD standards or close and my monitor has much sharper quality than a film projected in a theater. Maybe when all films are projected in digital clarity I’ll pony up but right now I’d rather watch a DVD quality film in the comfort of my own home for free rather than sit through a film full of defects in a theater crowded with moronic strangers.
My point is I’d be willing to pay to see movies in the theater if somebody would make it worth the asking price.
[quote=“Dex”]
I download constantly. I very rarely go see movies in theaters simply because I’m not gonna pay $11.50 (if I’m only paying for myself it gets worse than $30 on a date night) for an hour and half of mild entertainment. If the movie’s good I’ll by it on DVD.
Quality is usually up to DVD standards or close and my monitor has much sharper quality than a film projected in a theater. Maybe when all films are projected in digital clarity I’ll pony up but right now I’d rather watch a DVD quality film in the comfort of my own home for free rather than sit through a film full of defects in a theater crowded with moronic strangers.
My point is I’d be willing to pay to see movies in the theater if somebody would make it worth the asking price.
[/quote]
Exactly. What people fail to realize is that bootlegging has been around forever. People have been bootlegging movies for at least 50 years. Sure the internet has exacerbated the issue, but it’s always been around. Only people weren’t as flippant about going to the movies as they are now. They could more often then not, enjoy the movies they went to. Now it’s like a 70/30 percent chance that the movie you go and see is a pile of shit. Why not watch it for free? At least that’s the mindset quite a few people I know have.
[quote=“Noir_Fiction”]
Exactly. What people fail to realize is that bootlegging has been around forever. People have been bootlegging movies for at least 50 years. Sure the internet has exacerbated the issue, but it’s always been around.
[/quote]
there is absolutly no comparison… bootlegging may has been around forever but when i was in high school you had to go to chinatown to buy videotapes or VCDs bootlegs (that were shot on a video camera, in a movie theater – that was not DVD quality). now internet has changed everything, everybody has access to it, it’s easy, the quality is good… this is a huge change… the best example is music. the music industry is dying, music stores are closing. that didn’t happen 15 yrs ago with the bootleg audio tapes…
Yeah, but as internet piracy grew so did the number of movie theaters per state and the number of screens per theater. They’re losing money for the same reason as everyone else. They spent more than they should have.
What exactly is the music industry a perfect example of? How to throw away money and expect consumers to pick up the bill? The music industry spends more money on a three and a half minute video that only airs on premium cable channels than most blockbuster films do in a month of filming.
Movies and music are making less money nowadays for the simple fact that they’re spending way too much. The movie/music industry isn’t dying. There’s just a smaller gap between money spent and money earned.
If anything the internet has just proven to be a form of healthy competition that forces the various industries into giving us something worth paying for.
[quote=“Dex”]
What exactly is the music industry a perfect example of? How to throw away money and expect consumers to pick up the bill? The music industry spends more money on a three and a half minute video that only airs on premium cable channels than most blockbuster films do in a month of filming.
[/quote]
to me music is a good example because a lot of small labels or music producers went belly up because of piracy… the majors suffered but they are still there. 50cts and pussycat dolls and other MTV products are still around but what about the others, smaller, better, personal artists? i’m not sure a guy like tom waits could have a good start in this business anymore, like he did 30 yrs ago.
[quote=“Dex”]
If anything the internet has just proven to be a form of healthy competition that forces the various industries into giving us something worth paying for.
[/quote]
unfortunately, i don’t think it’s true. as far as studios are concerned “something worth paying for” right now is 3D… or imax!! and not better films… for the past two years investment funds lost too much money. private investors are now more reluctant than ever to invest in films. as a result, some companies that were financing 10/12 movies a year are now producing just 4 or 5, at the most. and if they do, they don’t invest on risky/personal films. they’d rather invest on pirates of the carribean 4 than anything else.
It hurts the people that made the movie. If we all downloaded illegaly no one would make movies. Quentin would be out of his job and forced to live on the steets. Do we want that to happen?
[quote=“VikingWithNoName”]
It hurts the people that made the movie. If we all downloaded illegaly no one would make movies. Quentin would be out of his job and forced to live on the steets. Do we want that to happen?
[/quote]
Yes, because then I would let him live in my house. He would even have his own room.
[quote=“Crazy Kenneth”]
Yes, because then I would let him live in my house. He would even have his own room.
[/quote]
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
[quote=“Crazy Kenneth”]
Yes, because then I would let him live in my house. He would even have his own room.
[/quote]
I’d wanna sleep in the same room as him, so we can have a chat and maybe watch Shogun Assassin before sleepy time.
You people are crazy 
[quote=“Ify”]
I’d wanna sleep in the same room as him, so we can have a chat and maybe watch Shogun Assassin before sleepy time.
[/quote]
And then you could smell his hair while you spooned him.
[quote=“plunderbunnie”]
And then you could smell his hair while you spooned him.
[/quote]
You know me too well, Plunderbunnie.
[quote=“tonyanthony”]
to me music is a good example because a lot of small labels or music producers went belly up because of piracy… the majors suffered but they are still there. 50cts and pussycat dolls and other MTV products are still around but what about the others, smaller, better, personal artists? i’m not sure a guy like tom waits could have a good start in this business anymore, like he did 30 yrs ago.
unfortunately, i don’t think it’s true. as far as studios are concerned “something worth paying for” right now is 3D… or imax!! and not better films… for the past two years investment funds lost too much money. private investors are now more reluctant than ever to invest in films. as a result, some companies that were financing 10/12 movies a year are now producing just 4 or 5, at the most. and if they do, they don’t invest on risky/personal films. they’d rather invest on pirates of the carribean 4 than anything else.
[/quote]
The music industry makes the bulk of it’s money through touring/selling merchandise and ring tone sales not by reaching the top of the sales charts. Singer/song writers, the smaller, better, more personal artists are HUGE right now. That kind of stuff has never been mainstream you’ve just gotta look for the stuff. Same goes for movies. The big blockbuster tentpole movies have always dominated the theaters and that’s not gonna change.
The same goes for smaller independent films. They’re as strong now as they ever were mainly due to the fact that they can get so much more exposure on the internet than they ever have or will get anywhere else.