Slashdot Mirror
DVD Format Changing Movie-making
rgmoore writes "The Los Angeles Times is running an interesting article on the impact of DVDs on the movie making process. They briefly mention the possibilities of end-users being able to re-edit the movie (with a veiled reference to The Phantom Edit) but focus more on the way that it's starting to influence directors and producers during the course of making the movie."
(since I am too lazy to read an article at 11:30 at night) but I remember reading that now actors are charging extra for all of the outtakes, deleted scenes, making-of footage, and commentary tracks that may or may not even be in the final DVD (and was, before this, basically all thrown away).
Of course now the "commentary" track is being ruined. Take Eye of the Beholder: Ewan McGregor[sic], Ashley Judd, Nonsensical everything, Shittiest movie Ever. And IT has a director's commentary track. Wild Things. Battlefield Earth. WTF? Are they STILL trying to snowjob you? Not like they need to after you shelled out 24 bucks for the DVD. At least if they were fucking honest on them.
Director: Now Ashley Judd starts crying here. [Puffs on cigarett] You know, I must have blacked out here 'cause I don't know what the hell I was thinking...
Instead it's like this:
Director: You can really see Denise Richards reach deep for that emotion. People say that she's just a hot piece of dumb ass but I really think she made a statement with this film...
Goddamn and Goodfellas DOESN'T have a commentary track? AND it's on a two sided DVD?
Kurosawa would never talk about his own movies. That wasn't his business. Let the scholars talk about them. What would he respond when people would as him what his favorite movie was? "The one I'm currently working on."
Says a lot (... damn, Eye of the Beholder!!! Now I'm in a really bad mood. Damn, Slashdot...)
What is music when you despise all sound?
That's ghastly! It's like having a wall of Mona Lisas and passing out sharpies to all of the museum-goers. Do you have no regard for the director and the other creative people who put time and effort into creating something? I'm not talking about dross like the Planet of the Apes here, but can you imagine changing the ending of Citizen Kane so that the [old-ass spoiler warning] sleigh read "Drink Pepsi" instead of "rosebud"? Agh!
There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
Max V.
NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
If you run a business and you provide what the customers are asking for, your sales go up and so does your profit!!
Wow - what a concept!!
To bad the movie and music industry still don't understand this.
DVD Format Changing Movie-making
Its changed the Movie Buying experiance all right.
THEN: I just went to blockbuster and grabbed a movie on VHS and bought it.
NOW: go on internet.. search sites.. Collecters Edition has X amount of footage, Directors Cut has Y amount of Footage and comments. the SuperBit version has Better footage but no Z and no Y. and of course finding a review that says EXACTLY what one has over the other is hard to find.
and obvisoly i go to the store and they dont have that version i wanted.
The More Knowledge you have the Luckier you Get- J.R. Ewing
From the article:
"New low-cost digital technology gives enthusiasts the chance to be desktop filmmakers, shooting new footage and combining it with existing movies. While DVDs are encoded to safeguard against piracy and copying, and the studios vigorously pursue civil and criminal proceedings against people they catch, more sophisticated computer users still find ways around that. With DVD-writing software, and illegal but fairly easy to find encryption decoders, not only can adventurous viewers reedit movies like "Star Wars" on their computers--removing "characters from a movie that they don't like," as Coppola suggests--but there's the possibility of creating entirely new movies from existing ones."
Couple interesting things here. In this article we are not criminals, we are sophisticated computer users.
And number two, it seems to me that there is support for this behavior by the directors of these films.
Maybe they realize that this is not a crime, it is simply our fair use right when we buy the dvd.
- Just my 2 cents.
The article went a bit too far in casting DVDs as a heroic art form. What was most irksome was it failed to mention the single biggest reason I was an early adopter of the DVD format. Yes, the directors' commentaries are fascinating. Yes, the deleted scenes, making-of documentaries, bios, trailers, and other assorted doo-dads are keen. Yes, the improved picture and sound quality are wonderful. However, even if DVDs were missing all that, I would still be buying them at a voracious rate for one simple reason -- they don't degrade.
The back end of my twenty year old VHS collection is crumbling away. In another twenty years the front half will be gone too. But in 100 years all my DVDs will play with the same quality they do today. You never really own a VHS tape. You're renting it from a decaying universe, and every 15 or 20 years you have to make the rent payment again or you lose your lease.
The DIVX goons specifically did NOT allow porn, softcore or hardcore, on their format. In the post mortum analysis that followed, I remember that this prohibition was compared to a lack of porn (I don't know if it was actively blocked or not) on the Betamax format. Most people tend to believe that blocking porn was one (of many) reasons why DIVX failed.
:-)
On the other hand, the porn industry threw their support completely behind Open DVD (just like they did for VHS), and you can see where the state of things are today...
The original.
Too many movies are chopped and edited for home release. I liked Close Encounters of the Third Kind. I loved the tearing up of the garden. The obsession of enhancing the train layout is missing. The finished hill looks nice and all, but they needed to keep in driving the wife crazy getting all that dirt into the living room. Too bad they chopped it up for home release to add the extra footage at the end.
Disney is doing this way too much. I loved the scene in Pete's Dragon with the song Candle on the Water sung at the top of the lighthouse. Don't look for it in the home tape version, it was chopped. They cut the beautiful sensitive moment. I think the song ran in the closing credits, not in the movie. Some Disney movies are even released with a new title for home release. The Unidentified flying Oddball and A Spaceman in King Arthurs Court is one example of one movie with two titles.
I am not buying these on DVD just to see if these scenes are back in the movie. When you buy a home verion of a movie, It's like a box of chocolates, you just don't know what you are gonna get.
The truth shall set you free!
You mean, by empowering end users and thus driving further sales of things they would otherwise not buy? Oh, yeah, I guess it's true. Exactly the same way the VCR "killed" Hollywood.
It disturbs me to see such a misreading of the actual trends (hmmm: Napster peaks, CD sales soars; Napster shut down, CD sales contract) slipped so quietly into an article about something else.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
Aah, the usual argument from an elite that feels the ground slipping out from under it. (Believe me, I don't despise elites... just ones that can't provide enough extra value to maintain their survival). "Demystification" is a tired rallying cry used by people defending the status quo... It boils down to, "I can't tell you why I am an expert and you are an uninformed boob, but it's just so. Now listen to me!"
Again, we see that a major concern of the Content Cartel is not preventing illegitimate copying or even maximizing profit. It's about maintaining control. It boggles my mind that in a culture that purports to embrace individuality and democracy in politics, we suffer the arrogance of people who despise that impulse in art. If art is about universal human truths, maybe actual humans should have a say.
Coppola points out the impetus behind things like CSS and the proposed CBDTPA:
'Cause as my man Cosmo said, "It's about who controls the information... what we see and think".
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
I think this is a terrible idea. The "bad content" of movies are, 99% of the time, important to the plot.
My experience is completely opposite. 99% of the language, nudity and gore is completely irrelevant to the plot. It's so blatant that I frequently think they finish up a movie, look at the result and say "Damn! That's gonna be PG! We need to spice it up a little so that it will sell. Gotta get a PG-13 rating at the least, better yet an R." That, plus I think some directors get their jollies by making pretty young actresses strip for them on-set.
However, I do think that some "objectionable" material is important to the plot, which is why I want to tag possibly-offensive material with plot relevance descriptors. For example, if you dislike nudity, chances are you do not find offensive the scenes of the naked Jews running for their lives in "Schindler's List". More precisely, you probably find them extremely offensive and horrifying, but that's not only important to the movie, it's the *main point* of the movie. The scene where Schindler has sex with one of his workers is also important to the movie (though less), but the nudity there is not.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.