Slashdot Mirror
Movies Online?
Crowdpleazr1 asks: "I'm starting to wonder if someday I'll consider going out to a theater to be a quaint experience. I just finished downloading the online-only movie 405, created in the spare time of two visual effects guys, and I thought it was a lot funnier than most flicks I pay money for. On top of that, I've been having a blast watching the choose-your-own-adventure movie, It's Your Movie. With Titan A.E. recently being downloaded to a movie theater, I wonder if all movies will soon become online-only affairs. Is there a business model to support this?" An interesting thought. Do you all think that digital movies may eventually bypass the traditional cineplex and be delivered straight to your home? I would pay for something like that.
What's the objective quality of movie theaters there?
Without any data to back this up (in other words, I'm talking out my posterior), it sounds like the Hong Kong studios made three mistakes. One was not maintaining tighter control over movie prints. Second was not having a VCD release ready and in the pipeline (why buy a crappy bitlegged copy when you can get the official copy for only 50% more). And the third was not beefing up the theaters to make the experience kick ass.
Besides, there are massive cultural differences between Asia and the US. Even with broadband to the home, what happened in Hong Kong is not likely to happen here.
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
Dude, you are just asking for it.
Subscriber pays for movie download, drops it on his FTP server, sez, "c0m3 g3t 1t!" on IRC. Hundreds of copies proliferate, and you "lose" a lot of money. What are you going to do?
Copy protection? Don't make me laugh. Anything you come up with will be hacked in a week. And the DMCA won't help you, either. Besides, the money you will need to spend to maintain the battalion of lawyers to license all this stuff will dwarf any revenues you may hope to earn, even if unsanctioned copying weren't an issue.
I regret to say your idea is a non-starter.
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
plays other divx movies, but this one gets no sound and a framerate of about 2x normal speed.
fwiw, ymmv.
________
1995: Microsoft - "Resistance is futile"
If VHS players and Cable didn't stop people from going to the movies, why should the Internet? It's evolution, not revolution.
Besides, I'd rather watch video on TV than my monitor any day, and a theater screen before TV.
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox
It seems we are pretty worried about the theater venue waning?
What about drive-ins?
The closest thing we have in Chicago is the Vic theater. Its an older style theater and they play three movies in a night, two bars, popcorn and pizza.
The first time I went, I saw south park, Austin Powers2 and the matrix- all in a row - friggen great time. Beer and pizza whenever you want and it was packed full of rabid fans. Like going to see Rocky Horror picture show at a state school. This is a great movie experience, and it proved that I do actually like seeing movies with other people.
I mean, its not like philosophy club, but its a damn fine time.
If you are ever in Chicago- check out the Vic, they have good Music concerts too!
-Sleen
Now, net porn industry v. video porn industry... that I'd like to, err, see! (Yes, I realize this context makes my
....
....
--Hey Doctor Jones! No time for love!
We've been through this once already. When VCRs first became popular, people thought that it would be so convenient to watch movies at home that noone would go to the movie theatres anymore.
Of course, the opposite has occurred. The film industry has boomed rather than declined. There are now 30 screen multiplexes! People go to movie theatres for the experience of watching it in a large room with lots of other people in a dark room, on a 50 foot screen and awesome sound.
TV, VCRs and DVDs haven't replaced movie theatres and net delivered movies won't either. net movies haven't even reached even one hundredth the video and sound quality of a dvd or even a broadcast tv version of the same movie. They will supplement the whole experience though. DVDs allow people to explore a movie deeper with different languages, cut scenes, background info, commentary tracks. the net will do other things to supplement the experience as well such as letting film buffs get together from all over the world to discuss the latest john woo flick.
now, a more appropriate and interesting question is, will digital movies delivered over the internet eventually replace cable tv, pay per view and blockbuster as channels of delivery into the home? i think this will definitely happen. pretty soon, there will be no more need for the video store. i've read that pay per views are a large portion of the income of cable companies. how will they respond when they are completely bypassed?
tcd004
Check out Janet RenoMargolis, the least downloaded woman on the internet!
Besides, everyone knows that the MPAA is all about controlling how when and where you see movies, and having the new movies released only in theaters (true, those of us with high speed connections *can* watch the blurry telesync version) gives them the upperhand in controling your entertainment.
---
/bin/fortune | slashdotsig.sh
Hell, this is a great idea. Kinda similar to the 'ractives' described in Stephenson's "The Diamond Age". Of course certain plotlines will work out better than others. The old "Murder on a Train" scenario seems ideal. Throw a bunch of people on a train. A NPC gets killed. Sometimes by an NPC, sometimes by a real person (to prevent Turing test detectives). Everyone tries to find the killer.
Technical challenges aside it should be fairly possible. Limited sets, data/character driven plotline. Very free form. Talk to people. Explore. Point fingers. Done. Sure it's cliched, but it would probably be one of the easiest plots to do.
Any of the old Sierra games could probably be recast in this format. No need for a human DM, just people who can stay in character and proceed towards a goal. Half the fun is getting there, and each game could be somewhat different. With the right mix of people the plot would become secondary. Could you imagine the Star Wars plot acted improv style by the cast of "Whose Line is it Anyway?"
Granted, the medium for this sort of experience doesn't quite exist. You would almost need a "stage" that could intepret your movements into 3D animation in real time. Throw in some VR goggles so you could see the action. Add a teleprompter in there to feed you some lines if you want help. Someday it will all come together, but not for a few years yet. I'm looking forward to it.
-BW
We already have movies "delivered" straight to your home: pay-per-view.
Besides, we all know that movie companies make big money charging you $8 a ticket to see something in a theatre with a huge picture and great sound. I don't think they're willing to give that up so that they can get maybe $6 for lots of people in a room to see first-run movies...they have to pay for those big-name actors, directors and all those computers to do special fx on somehow.
- Tony
// No comment
At least not until VR technology can realistically simulate a screen three stories high. I've got a DVD player and a big-screen tv, and it's good, but it's nothing at all like seeing a film at a really good theater.
Theaters annoy the hell out of me. They're crowded, people talk during the films, they show commercials before the films, they're too expensive. But the experience they deliver is like nothing you can get at home, and until that changes, I'll keep going to the theater.
This article begs the question: "Would you rather pay five to ten dollars to see a movie on an enormous screen with completely surround sound or would you rather wait for a movie to download over your 56kbps modem connection to watch on a 17 inch CRT with only a single pair of speakers?"
Such a question sounds and is pretty sardonic. There is a large physical difference between your monitor and a theater. I like made-for-internet movies, some of them are pretty damn good. They remind me in some ways of Clerks from the creative genius of Kevin Smith. No special effects, not high end post production, just a very interesting story and some important visuals. The key to Clerks is it was a good movie without a high special effects budget. Same with a few of the made-for-internet movies. Then there are movies like Phantom Menace which are specifically made to be seen in their full thousandxthousand film resolution and heard on an uber-surround sound system that lets you feel the vibrations from the pod racer engines. While I'd like TPM on video to watch it, I couldn't really experience it which it the point of making such visually impressive movies (no, I don't give a fuck about your opinion of the picture).
To my point, some people are itching for internet everything. People as such probably don't have cars and are just embarrassed to ask mommy for a ride to and fro. I don't want internet everything. If the market for low budget films outstrips that of high budget films we aren't going to see high budget films because no one will make them. Sometimes I like to see something like Phantom Menace or The Matrix. Don't be a fucking fool either and claim that equipment to make professional quality special effects are now within people's budgets. Fuck that. The real awe of special effects is not the power of the equipment used it's the time and talent behind the technology. While there are plenty of people with alot of artistic talent that could go crazy with special effects it would require alot of time. While these same people believe you ought to do things just cuz, they don't realize that things cost money. Mommy and daddy still pay their bills.
Until I have a house large enough to fit a 20' movie screen, I don't want movie theaters to go away. Home theater systems are and will continue to be very expensive and the cost of a single full system (including movies) cost way fucking more than all the movies you'll see in a lifetime unless you're a film critic or suffer a form of derrangement. If movie theaters disappeared tomorrow I'd need to spend beaucoup cash in order to watch movies with any level of visual impressiveness. Shoes for labour.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
Additionally, there are new technologies in film that supposedly increase the way it looks dramatically. Maxivision, a system that is projected at 48 frames per second as opposed to the standard 24 may be a major boon to traditional film. Not only do you maintain the richness of color and depth of film, but you get a much sharper picture (particularly of moving objects) as well. Roger Ebert has written pretty extensively about this technology -- you can find one of his articles (not credited) at http://www.cameraguild.co m/news/techno/film_v_digital.htm
Digital recording and projection will have their uses; digital is substantially cheaper than film, and is already becoming a huge boon to independant filmmakers. Movies that are essentially all digital anyway (Star Wars, any sort of big budget Sci-Fi / Action movie) will also see improvements from never having to touch celluloid.
The one other topic I'd like to touch on is the fact that so many people seem to be jumping at the idea of on demand movies from the internet as a great way to replace Blockbuster -- what happened to wanting to actually own movies? Did we learn nothing from the DIVX fiasco? Then again I'd love to have a whole archive of movies that I could watch when I wanted to... there are some obscure movies that are essentially impossible to track down without paying insanely high prices, and if the internet could get me a way to see them cheaply, I'd be all for it.
Ok, my favorite movie going experience is the Fremont outdoor cinema in Seattle. It's in the hippie neighborhood and basically it's a B-movie projected on the side of a building. The nearby residents drag their couches over and it's a totally festive event. There's contests, games, shorts and all kinds of crap before the film. It rocks.
All that's fun, but the big Ciniplex experience is cool in it's own right. I think you should be able to see the beauty in suburbia. It's a lifestyle most people actively seek out and it's beautiful in a bland sort of way. It's like McDonalds -- I don't eat there very often, but I think it's a wonderful thing. Try to envision suburbia the way an anthropologist from 200 years in the future would. It'll give you a whole new appreciation for wonderbread and old navy.
--Shoeboy
Will the 'Net replace the Theater? Not until there is a format that all the movie companies can agree upon that is available for all platforms, from Windows and Mac to appliances to Linux/*BSD. This will not happen soon since such a format would have poor playback^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcopy protection (which we all know is useless, but the movie industry does not).
Also, there are classes of films that are best viewed with others, in a theater. After all, how many people want to invite 100 hard-core Rocky Horror Picture Show fans (a.k.a. sluts by RHPS fans) to their house? Just vacuuming up the rice would take a month....
www.eFax.com are spammers
This also underpins the recent escalation in ticket prices ($10 per ticket is outrageous, when you can rent the video for half that, or wait for the TV release and see it for free, eventually).
Well, first of all, the highest I've seen for a ticket is $7, here in So Cal. But even at that, that's always seemed like an incredible bargain to me. 7/10 bucks to see a multimillion (if not hundred million) dollar production on a good screen with a great sound system? Been to a major sporting event lately? Concert? $50-$100 easy. Or heck, how about even your local light-opera? $15 at a minimum. Movies are an amazing bargain.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if tickets are cheaper than they used to be, adjusted for inflation. At the very least, they aren't much more expensive. Most of the money at theatres is made on the food. Talk to me about popcorn, now there's a rip-off.
But as for "serials", I think TV is what really killed them. It used to be that movies were one of the few entertainment places. But when TV came in, there was too much demand on people's entertainment attention to get them into a theatre once per week. Heck, I'm lucky to get to the theatre once every few months nowadays.
Bottom line, TV took over the low-end. If I want to watch a weekly serial, TV has them in spades, and I don't need to leave the house. That's why hollywood has gravitated toward the high-end, blockbuster picture, because that's what will drag people out of the house to see it on the big screen.
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
But... film color is produced in a similar fashion, using three pigmentation layers on the film. So film is similarly compromised in it's color reproduction as a CRT.
OTOH, this works, because we only have three different color-sensitive cones in the eye to see colors with: one for red, one for green, and one for blue...
This film easily matches any special effects in any 100 million dollar budget blockbuster. Yet, it was shot in 2 days, with a couple months of spare-time editing. The end result easily would have taken millions and millions of dollars 10 years ago to achieve, yet cost these 2 guys nothing but time. $0.
They had less than a few thousand in equipment, absolutely no money for a shooting budget, yet the result is nothing less than the type of scene moviegoers would have been in awe of, and studios would have had to shell out truckloads of money to achieve.
As they say on the website, we have now reached the point where film makers are limited only by their imaginations. If two guys (two very talented guys) can make a movie with special effects on par with anything seen before, anywhere. If two guys can achieve this result at home, on cheap hardware with consumer software, then we have reached the point where there are no boundries for amateur filmmakers, and it's probably safe to say that, like with the web in general, those people with the talent, and the ideas, *WILL* have an outlet to shine, regardless of whether they can be bankrolled by a big studio, much as we are beginning to see with musicians and MP3s.
________
1995: Microsoft - "Resistance is futile"
Linux's main desktop weakness, lack of video format support, comes glaring through. Hopefully someone who matters will see this soon, and create a video viewer on par with those other platforms. I just wish I was a programmer capable of doing that myself.
I love linux, but until I can get microsoft media player to work in wine, or someone writes a video player for it which can play all these video clips I run into on the net, Linux has to remain down the list for video capabilities.
I just noticed on the 405 website that they are claiming the divx format was created for the divx video disks. *chuckle* :)
________
1995: Microsoft - "Resistance is futile"
try this link then choose real media from the format menu.
should work fine in linux if you have the real player. If you haven't seen this thing yet, do it. it's ROFL funny.
________
1995: Microsoft - "Resistance is futile"
The movie theatre isn't where big movies make most of their money these days. Video's where it's at. So what's the advantage of a theatrical release?
Strangely, it seems that "credibility" is what comes with a theatrical release. Made-for-tv movies are always "made-for-tv movies", and direct to video movies are always "direct-to-video" movies. But theatrical releases, those are "real movies".
They get major ad campaigns. They get reviewed by the film critics. They're even "group culture". People will talk about current theatrical releases the same way they'll talk about recent events in the world of sports. They'll go see them on dates.
Video has already come up as a contender for movie distribution, and it sure hasn't replaced any of those things. Downloads may replace VHS (oh happy day!) but they won't replace movie theatres. Ever.
It's already happened. There are underground sites on the net where you can download DivX encoded .avi files 600MB-1.2GB in size, which on a system with good MPEG hardware decoding are comparable to DVD, and far superior to VHS, even on a large ( 36" I've seen and it looks and sounds great ) home theatre system. If you want to see how good the DivX codec really is, here is a comparison of two frames from a Dolby trailer. The site also has step by step instructions on how to backup a DVD to a DivX file on a hard disk, with all the available tools supplied.
When I say comparable to DVD, I should qualify that a bit. It is obviously inferior, in both picture and audio. But the miracle of MPEG compression is that is gives the most detail to the parts you're paying attention to. There is compression noise but only in low motion, low detail backgrounds. There are also sometimes audio synching errors.
Imagine -- using an electronic device to download real-time programming directly to your home! We may not have the technology for such a magical box anytime soon, but here's what (I think) you might expect:
1. high-quality streaming audio and video through an already-existing connection in your home!
2. multiple "channels" showing many different programs at the same time -- including movies, comedy, drama, sports, and news!
3. ABSOLUTELY FREE -- thanks to occasional "commercials" during programming!
What an exciting future we have ahead of us!
(Warning: Do not attempt to adjust the sarcasm knob on your computer!)
Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.
I believe the revolutionary technology you're describing has already been heralded by the Onion.
--
Xenu loves you!
Is there a business model to support this?
Whoever figures out a way for $7 popcorns to be delivered faster than the movie can be downloaded will be a rich rich (wo)man.
So I can't watch the "It's Your Movie" movie, since I don't run Windows or MacOS, and QuickTime is available only for those two operating systems. Guess I'll wait till it comes out on TBS.
You can view avi files that carry a divx mpeg4 stream. It does work by linking the m$ dll via the pe-loader from wine. Very beta, and a cool hack.
This is only for research purposes.
#include <your_favourite_disclaimer.h>
disclaimer: I work for AtomFilms.com , but the views express are my own and my employer isn't happy about all the time I spend on /. so I'm unlikely to run this post by them.
I don't believe that the theater will be obsolete. It's too much fun. My house doesn't have
1) a concession stand
2) rowdy kids yelling "focus"
3) sticky floors
4) complete darkness
Some of these seem like nuisances, but I think they're critical to the movie going experience. It's fun. It's not something that you can duplicate in your living room, and not something you'd want to.
That being said, there are a lot of formats that don't work well in the big theater setting. A 7 screen theater is expensive and really only hollywood features have the financing to support the theater distribution model. Online is a lower cost medium that's very friendly to short films, expirimental formats and interactive technology. But there's a limit to how interactive you can get, you can't reproduce the Rocky Horror experience in your living room, and again, you wouldn't want to.
Online movies are going to revolutionize the way content is created, marketed and viewed, but it won't kill theaters. There's always going to be a demand to GO OUTSIDE and see a film. I suspect the people saying 'I can do everything in my living room and don't need to leave the house' don't date much.
Anyway, what online films can and will do is increase the market and exposure for innovative and expirimental films, showcase new technologies, improve audience interaction and empower (I can't believe I just used that word) consumers.
--Shoeboy
I doubt it even will have a noticible influence in ticket sales the next 10 years.
-- Abigail
While you can eventually download movies over the Internet and watch them on your computer screen (or perhaps pipe them to your home entertainment system), it will never replace some of the things people have grown to expect and, in some ways, enjoy about the experience of going to a real theater.
I like going to the ticket booth, telling them I want two tickets for a movie, handing over a few bucks, walking to the concession stand for a bag of Chocolate Covered Raisins and some black licorice (or just sneaking a bunch of grub in on my own), finding a seat in the theater well before the flick starts, watching the goofy advertisements and 'Movie Facts' that are projected on to the screens in the dimly lit auditorium, listening to faint conversations from the people that are already in the theater, hearing that nice lick "shlap-shlap!" of feet sticking to the floor as they walk. Hearing the crunch of pop-corn and the jiggle of ice in drink cups. I like the sudden hush when the lights go down and the previews come up. The always fun THX introductions (which used to be better when they blew out your ear drums) and then, depending on what part of the country you're in (being from Portland, Oregon, it's a pretty quiet crowd) and what kind of movie you're watching, the crowd laughing with you at the film. And, after a really good movie, everyone clapping at a film... An inanimate object. Weird.
But the whole experience is fun. I'd rather have that than to always pay a few bucks to download a gigabyte of data over the 'net and sitting on my couch alone watching a film by myself or with a friend or two. The theater/cinema is one of those experiences that is best enjoyed with other human beings, even if you don't know 99% of the people in the building watching it with you.
---
seumas.com
Some made-for-TV movies don't suck, but they just don't bring in the same sort of money that a major movie theatre feature brings in. It's going to be awhile until you see $100 million productions made for TV. On the plus side, the miniseries is a medium that TV can offer that theatres cannot.
But beyond that, the big screen offers benefits that sitting in your house just doesn't offer. Maybe someday we'll all have 40-100 foot screens in our house, but until then I'll stick to the theatre if I want an immersive experience.
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
I have a fairly nice TV, and very nice sound. The theateres I go to have a even nicer display, and while I can't tell if the sound is nicer, I expect some people could. My living room seats about six if everyone wants a nice view of the TV. The theteres I go to seat a whole lot more. My house is pretty messy, and I'm fairly embarassed by it when I have folks over. The therteres are in pretty good shape, and it's not something I feel embarassed by when they arn't. So it is definitly nicer for me, to got out to a thetere with friends, especally if there are more then five of them.
Not that I am aginst having good AV gear at home, or being able to see nice movies at home (after all look at my TV and stereo...and DVD collection). I just think the social benifits of going to a thetere are pretty large.
Most people have good stoves, a cutting board, and a fridge, and many folks can make pretty good food. But there are still resturants, and I expect they will continue on as well.
The appeal of traditional movies isn't always just sitting and watching. For a vast majority of viewers, its a social activity. Watching commedies with a group of friends in a crowded theatre can not be recreated online. Watching horror/suspense movies in dark theatres can be slightly recreated by a home viewer by turning off the lights, closing the windows, etc., but try telling your girlfriend its the same thing and I think you'll find she either laughs at you or breaks up with you.
= =
Going to movie theatres isn't always about watching movies... its an experience that involved environmental factors as well. Until you can pack your house/dorm room/etc with 100 of your closest friends who make rude comments and laugh at unappropriate times, you can not recreate the movie going experience by downloading them online. Besides...some of us still use modems, and it would take me years to download it anyway...I'd rather spend the $8.
===============================================
If ignorance is bliss, wipe the smile off my face
Mooniacs for iOS and Android
Give me a break - you don't go to the movie theater just to watch a movie. Are you going to invite a date over to your house to watch your computer? I bet when people started renting movies for their home VCR, people feared the end of movie theaters, but they're still going strong. The big screen just can't compare.
Do you all think that digital movies may eventually bypass the traditional cineplex and be delivered straight to your home?
If Television, Cable Television, VCRs and a vidoe rental and sales industry, and Pay-per-view haven't obsoleted the ciniplex, then movies over the internet won't, either. Duh.
This "Gee whiz" fanboy approach to new technology is irritating. Do try to -think- about how the technology will fit into the scheme of things before going "Ugh! Shiny new happy thing! All will use shiny new happything! Old thing bad! Ugh!"
SoupIsGood Food
About five years ago, though, VCD (video-CD, a fairly poor technology, but cheap) absolutely destroyed the industry. You could get a VCD of a movie the day it appeard in theaters for a couple of bucks, instead of paying the 6 bucks to get into the theater.
Film production budgets plummeted to about ten percent of the previous value; because there was no profit to be made on more expensive films. Good actors and directors came to America, where this revolution hasn't happened. Yet.
thad
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
I dunno, maybe. One thing about the movies though is that it's a very social activity. Think of going to the movies with friends or a date back in high school and still today. I would like to think that an institution like that woud persist, but obviously if it's going to then there has to be some incentive for it.
Consider the economics of it. If home theatre gets good and gets cheap, then the number of people going to traditional theatres will fall. In response, ticket prices will probably have to fall in order to attract viewers, but that might or might not be enough to bring people in. In any event, it will mean decreased revenues, which in turn will mean a tighter budget for the studios. That could go two ways -- either the trend for huge expensive $100 million+ movies will slope off, or the studios will focus on them and make fewer other movies. It would all come down to whichever makes more money for them, and unfortunately, I think it's the smaller films that would take the hit there.
But those films would also have a backup plan -- the home theatres themselves. Home theatree will presumably be much cheaper than the Cineplex, once you've paid for all the equipment of course, and I'd like to think that people will have access to much greater variety of films. This could be a boon for the arthouse type stuff.
I think that would be my guess then. (I'm thinking aloud if that isn't obvious :). If the possibilities for watchign first-run high quality cinema at home come into fruition, then this change will mainly hurt smaller arthouse type movies (since most people aren't too worried about seeing them on the big screen anyway), but big budget blockbusters will be at least partly immune to any slump in the industry. Thus theatres will show more junk like Armageddon, Battlefield Earth, and Matrix ;), while the little indie ones will be pushed home.
All reckless speculation, of course, and only time will show which way things go...
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
Instead of expecting full length features, another much more viable possibility are film "shorts".
Usually within 10 minutes or so, this film format is great for the web- obviously.
There are a few sites that have come a long way to maturing the short format.
http://www.ifilm.com
http://www.pop.com
http://www.z.com
Support the starving filmakers!!!!!
-Sleen
As numerous people have already pointed out, the experience of watching a movie on even a 24" wide-screen monitor is still a poor substitute for even the worst movie screen. People do go to see movies on the big screen that are available on video (did you see the re-release of Star Wars?), because the theater experience is something far beyond the home experience.
On the other hand, I do think that within the very near future, somebody's going to figure out how to kill the trip to the local video store. TiVo and ReplayTV are the first baby step towards this, demonstrating a digital recording and playback system.
The only thing that will stand in the way of this will be the movie industry itself. But I think that despite their best efforts, a sytem will come out that lets me download movies, and the movie industry will be better off in the end.
I don't believe that they ar emaking the "Choose Your Own Adventure" books anymore. I must say, that series of books had more to do with my literacy as a kid than anything else. Much like a game, you had to try to solve the mystery or make the right command decision in order to succeed (or sometime, just get caught in bad luck). However, I would read over an over again, trying ever different path I could to find as many different endings as possible.
:)
;)
Offtopic, yes, but I felt like talking about 'em.... They are as big a part of my childhood as Legos
Maybe all kids need today to keep them off the streets are a couple of those books