Slashdot Mirror

Why don't the fuckin commie pirates just plunder some where else, like to hell from where they came!!

Unfortunately, the US Congress keeps passing legislation that enables these fuckin commie pirates to continue to plunder out culture and destroy anyone who threatens their outdated business model.

From comment on Deadline Hollywood Daily above:

4) Waiting - Waiting is a common game in Hollywood. When you see someone doing something you don't like, you usually wait until they are fairly pregnant, because that's where the money is. Had Fox stepped in the second they saw this occur, the movie probably just wouldn't have gotten made by WB, and Fox would be sitting on a property they hadn't developed in decades. BUT... by waiting until WB finished production, now there's money! Now Fox can see some cash because WB is so pregnant that they have to do something to release the movie. It is possible that WB can make an equitable claim of laches (sitting around trying to maximize the damages), but that's in equity, not in law; and that's strictly up to the court.

Its true. WB had the same problem with the Dukes of Hazzard movie, and simply had to pay a bunch of money to make the problem go away. I doubt Fox actually wants to stop the movie, nobody makes any money then. They'll just be bought off if they win.

Here's a good writeup on the issue: http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/urgent-warners-watchmen-in-legal-peril/

There is a more detailed account - including a useful chronology - over at Deadline Hollywood Daily if you are so inclined.

Assuming that version of events is correct, then it looks like Fox may still have a legitimate claim on distribution rights for Watchmen. If so, then this lawsuit is probably more likely a way for them to get a cut of the action rather than to stop the whole thing outright.

I mean, after all, Toshiba paid 150 million bucks to studios for "Promotion Consideration" in August of 2007 -- 50 million bucks to Paramount and 100 to Dreamworks. So, why not do the same, and pay some (proportionally big amount) of money to buy competitor's supporter? The winners are movie studios anyways, be it Paramount/Dreamworks (who won't have to be HD-DVD only now) or Warner...

Funny how HD-DVD was "dying the slow death" in August, but thanks in part to transfusion it lived up to, well, 2008 :)

In a conference call with analysts today, CEO Jeff Bewkes said Time Warner plans companywide cost cuts and specifically mentioned that its New Line Cinema movie studio is ripe for expense reductions. News reports said Bewkes stated that changes in the film industry leave less purpose for New Line. I reported last month that sources told me New Line co-founders Bob Shaye's and Michael Lynne's contracts wouldn't be renewed by Bewkes and that the studio would either be folded into Warner Bros or sold altogether to someone like Terry Semel. My latest info is that when Bewkes met with the New Line pair to deliver the bad news, the twosome pushed back and told Bewkes they would put together a plan for reorganization that would save the company a lot of money in exchange for a contract extension that leaves them as co-heads of the studio. But Bewkes isn't interested in that scenario.

Deadline Hollywood Daily is stating that the strike is not over and that while there is a tensive agreement worked out they are only now starting to draft it in writing and agree to the wording, so the strike is not over until everything is completely hashed out in writing and signed by both sides. They are also stating that Eisner is the only one saying this, and further speculated that he may be saying this to pump Disney stock.

Guys... Eisner proclaiming the strike over is just part of a PR effort to attempt to pressure writers to vote for the strike proposals by creating the wide expectation that the strike is over, that it's a done deal. That way, if the writers turn the proposal down, people feel let down.

The strike is NOT over.

If you watch the video where Eisner insists the strike to be over, he says quietly at the end that he is really just passing on a rumor. He also points out that the writers have to vote on the offer. He says the writers would be "insane" not to take it, but he also previously had stated that the entire strike was "insanity" so he's not the most unbiased person on this.

The strike is not over until the full WGA membership votes on the proposal. They may do so, but they may not. The terms of the contract proposal have not even been seen by the writers, so there's no way to know right now what's going to happen.

If you don't believe me, may I recommend this post by Joss Wheden, or this one, or this one.

W

Guys... Eisner proclaiming the strike over is just part of a PR effort to attempt to pressure writers to vote for the strike proposals by creating the wide expectation that the strike is over, that it's a done deal. That way, if the writers turn the proposal down, people feel let down.

The strike is NOT over.

If you watch the video where Eisner insists the strike to be over, he says quietly at the end that he is really just passing on a rumor. He also points out that the writers have to vote on the offer. He says the writers would be "insane" not to take it, but he also previously had stated that the entire strike was "insanity" so he's not the most unbiased person on this.

The strike is not over until the full WGA membership votes on the proposal. They may do so, but they may not. The terms of the contract proposal have not even been seen by the writers, so there's no way to know right now what's going to happen.

If you don't believe me, may I recommend this post by Joss Wheden, or this one, or this one.

W

Although it would appear that the strike is likely on it's way to being over, it's not quite over yet.

Here's the WGA's timetable for the next few days which may result in the actual end of the strike.

Although it would appear that the strike is likely on it's way to being over, it's not quite over yet.

Here's the WGA's timetable for the next few days which may result in the actual end of the strike.

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/wga-timetable-for-next-few-days/

The union still needs to vote on the contract, after some meetings.

Seems to me no one has mentioned something which to me says a lot:

"For a long time, Hollywood was lopsided in favor of Blu-ray: 7 of the 8 major movie studios (Disney, Fox, Warner, Paramount, Sony, Lionsgate and MGM) supported Blu-ray, and 5 of them (Disney, Fox, Sony, Lionsgate and MGM) release their movies exclusively in the Blu-ray format. Only Universal was exclusively HD-DVD. Now that is rapidly changing what with HD DVD exclusive converts Paramout and DreamWorks Animation, and Warner Bros now for Blu-ray." (this from http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/boost-for-blu-ray-warner-bros-will-release-high-def-titles-exclusively-in-that-format/)

So in summary, we have:

HD-DVD Exclusive:

Paramount/Dreamworks

Bluray Exclusive:

Disney
Fox
Sony
Lionsgate
MGM
Warner Bros

Not mentioned in the article above, I believe Universal Studios is actually HD DVD exclusive, but rumours seem to indicate that they aren't that way by contract, so they COULD jump ship. Further, New Line Cinema is owned by Warner Bros, so it would stand to reason that they will end up Bluray exclusive.

At this point, it LOOKS like a pretty lopsided situation to me. Add in that while supposedly HD-DVD players (and PCs with HD-DVD in them) have outsold bluray players, (again supposedly) bluray titles themselves seem to have outsold HD-DVD, especially in non US markets.

I have been reading about this since the news broke yesterday on places like http://engadgethd.com/ and http://avsforum.com/ and it really sounds like even the HD-DVD diehards (for the most part) are conceding victory to bluray.

-Verxion

Nikki Finke reports that between the two of them, Paramount and Dreamworks were paid $150M to make the HD-DVD deal.

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/desperation- move-cash-grab-or-intensified-blu-rayhd-dvd-format -war/

Ms. Finke is irritating and self-righteous, but as far as industry new goes, her "sources" are rarely (never) wrong.

I didn't smell it but read about it in the LA Weekly.

Microsoft is warmongering its ways thru the digital media download market, by keeping the war going, the consumer confuse and wary of jumping in the HDM bandwagon.

"We believe there's room for both formats", yeah, the consumer is thrilled to buy two players to be able to watch any movie...

_Deadline Hollywood Daily_ is reporting that HD-DVD promoters paid Paramount and Dreamworks $150M to switch. At least $150M: that's just a couple of immediate deals. $150M is enough for those studios to produce at least one or two movies, either of which could return $300-500M even before being released... on HD-DVD.

Previously Blu-Ray sales had been about 2:1 in favor of Blu-Ray, though the whole year (66% to 34%, to be exact). Sony Blu-Ray players in the last few months have actually been outselling Toshiba standalone players, and that's not counting the PS3 numbers.

Target had announced they were only offering a dedicated Blu-Ray player in store, and Blockbuster was only going to offer Blu-Ray in store.

Now, with Paramount and Dreamworks the equation has changed. Blu-Ray still has really significant exclusives in Fox, Disney, and Sony (Star Wars/Pixar/Spider Man!). But, it will take much longer for Blu-Ray to win, if it can eventually. This means there is actually a war, as opposed to HD-DVD claiming tehre was a war and slowly fading away which is what was happening previous to this announcement.

The rumor is that Microsoft paid Paramount $50M, and Dreamworks $100M, to make this switch (until now they had been neutral). Why would Microsoft do this? Pretty simple, if consumers are confused about which format to buy they are more likley just to download HD content from the only provider currently sellign HD content online. That provider is Microsoft...

Bad news basically for consumers interested in HD content, as this will really kill sales for both formats through the year. Consumers want one choice.

I don't think this was the best time for Paramount to jump ship on the Blu-ray line. While they _may_ have looked at the numbers involved, units sold, etc., all of that data was over the last year or so. What they didn't really consider was that a lot of non-videophile (aka., people who would buy a specific HD-DVD / Blu-ray player) purchasers were going to start purchasing PS3s...

With Sony's recent price drop, the sales of their console have increased. As far as consoles go, this isn't a tremendous jump -- they're still trailing behind Microsoft and Nintendo as far as sales. As far as HD-Movie players go, however, this is quite a jump. According to 'figures' and sources., they are seeing up to a 135% increase in sales after their price drop. That's a lot of Blu-ray players on the market that weren't there a short time ago.

Personally, I'm pissed! I purchased a PS3 during the price drop and I'm ok with what Sony has to offer for the console and with what movies are presently out (though, admittedly, I'd like more on both fronts), but you'll notice I said 'ok', I didn't say I was a raving Sony fanboy. I think there could be more selection of movies and games -- and it saddens me that I will now not be able to own a 1080p copy of Transformers to watch on my 51" HDTV because some pockets were apparently lined.

I understand that I'm not the norm in the market -- a lot of people don't have HDTVs, and a lot of people that do don't have big-screened HDTVs, but even with that, I think that it's a big step backwards for Paramount to alienate my class of shopper.

Then again, I'm sure everyone who was alienated by the Betamax -> VHS move was saying the same thing then ...