Slashdot Mirror


Spirited Away Still Has a Chance

Dean Siren writes "Disney chairman Richard W. Cook says that they've budgeted to market Spirited Away in up to 1,000 North American theaters, and if the Oscars endorse it as much as Metacritic has, Disney will launch it. They'll spend the same time and money promoting Spirited Away for Academy Awards as they will Lilo & Stitch and Treasure Planet. Cook hopes that it will win not only Best Animated Film, but get nominated for Best Picture, as Beauty and the Beast got in 1991. Thanks to Jack Mathews at New York Daily News for getting Cook to explain."

281 comments

  1. "If it wasn't so boring" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also, "were it not so boring" is also acceptable.

  2. if you can't rip them off... by radoni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...market the actual thing.

    this is sure to be better then the "Atlantis" stratedgy.... no wait, how about "The Lion King"....

    i really hope to see in a theatre; i enjoyed watching it at home. the almost-naturalistic take on a love story and spirit world kept me interested enough to keep watching after i took a break halfway through.

    oh wait, there's pizza to eat. i'll take a break half way through this post....

    --
    SIGERR: laziness exceeds quota
    1. Re:if you can't rip them off... by vicious_sloth · · Score: 3, Informative

      wasnt it already in the theatres? I saw this movie in NYC on a digital screen. (English Dub) the subtitled version was also avaliable in that theater but not at a good time for me.

      Overall i thought this was an excellent movie, I Loved the sound track, and also the sound track to Miyazaki's other movie "Princess Mononoke" I cant wait for Disney to release more enlgish Dub's of his animated films, Disney does a really good job on the english dubs. "Princess Mononoke" had an excellent voice cast.

      --
      Sun is Warm, Grass is Green
    2. Re:if you can't rip them off... by guinan · · Score: 1


      _Princess Mononoke_ had an excellent voice cast?! Have you seen the original?

  3. Cynical a** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "First you win the Super Bowl, then we'll draft a quarterback."

    This is what happens to an industry that is choked by middlemen. Spirited Away is a magnificent accomplishment in filmmaking. To a**holes like this, it's nothing more than a meal ticket: a racehorse with a number.

    It's going to succeed anyway. Even Di$ney can't stop it.

    Go back to suing day care centers, cynical a**.

  4. Re:I think I speak for a lot of people when I say. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is still not available in cinema in Ottawa capital of Canada. :(

  5. excellent by tps12 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is a great victory for geeks everywhere. Disney has always done a good job of supporting "long shot" geek movies (Toy Story, anyone?). They have the market clout to make people see the beauty in things usually only appreciated by us geeks. If you think about it, The Sorcerer's Apprentice was sort of a prototypical hacker programming geek. The promotion of this film in competition for an Oscar is only going to help geeks of all walks of life. Hopefully, geeks on Slashdot will continue to support Disney so that we can get more of this!

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    1. Re:excellent by ObviousGuy · · Score: 0, Troll

      Holy cow. You know not of what you speak. Disney is the prime offender of our rights. Yes, even stealing music and movies from online P2P networks is a right, and it's being infringed by the likes of Disney, Bertelsman, Tomy, Sony, and MGM. When they buy off a senator like Hollings (D: is for Disney), they are buying their agenda.

      If you support Disney, you support slavery. Music and movies are intangible things. Do you think you should be restricted from singing in the shower?

      Get with it, dumbfuck. Disney isn't interested in anything but making a buck (or stealing a yen, in this case). Perhaps you'd support dumping chemical waste into your neighborhood's watershed?

      --
      I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    2. Re:excellent by MisterFancypants · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hah hah hah! Are you on crack, son? Disney is a BUSINESS. These decisions are based on MAKING MONEY. Disney will release Spirited Away if they think they will make a significant RETURN ON INVESTMENT from doing so. Being nice to geeks doesn't even factor into the equation.

    3. Re:excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice whoring, but a bit obvious...

    4. Re:excellent by vga_init · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      I do not support Disney. HOWEVER, are you trying to say that it is our right to infringe upon the rights of others by stealing things which do not belong to us? Somehow that doesn't make sense. Sure, I steal music, but I'm also the first to admit it's wrong; I was never one to have problems with doing something "wrong" if I could get away with it. :D

      Nobody is asking you not to sing in the shower. We are just telling what you can and cannot sing if you wish to charge people to listen to you singing in the shower. Produce all the music you want, just don't go galavanting around with ill-gotten music that wasn't produced by you.

      Yes, Disney is in it for the money, but it may be argued that if the best way to get money is by appealing to the wants of us geeks, then how is it unreasonable to postulate that Disney is pro-geek?

    5. Re:excellent by Ctrl-Z · · Score: 2


      Clearly, sir, you have been trolled. Quite well, I might add.

      This line kind of gives it away:
      "Hopefully, geeks on Slashdot will continue to support Disney so that we can get more of this!"

      Since when does Disney get any support from the geeks on Slashdot?

      --
      www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
    6. Re:excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly, sir, you have been trolled. Quite well, I might add.

      Remove not the mote from thy friend's eye and disregard the beam in thine own eye.

    7. Re:excellent by SuperFlaco · · Score: 1

      Just wait till I get Disney's DRM infrastructure put together, then we'll have some real fun.

    8. Re:excellent by G-funk · · Score: 2

      Disney can keel over and die for all I care, given they're the ones paying for the coninued erosion of our rights through mr Hollings.

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    9. Re:excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes please support Disney!

      They are a very geek friendly company who loves freedom and the constitution!

      You are so insightful thank you for that gem.

    10. Re:excellent by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      Wait, if the only problem you have is when you CHARGE for it, then what's the problem with file sharing?

    11. Re:excellent by vga_init · · Score: 1

      Because you didn't produce those files.

    12. Re:excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YHBT!!! Thank you, come again.

    13. Re:excellent by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2

      Not being the originator of something isn't enough to hang your argument on. Disney didn't originate the plots or characters in the vast majority of their movies, nor did they pay to use them. See, e.g. the just-now-being-released 'Treasure Planet,' based upon the R.L. Stevenson novel 'Treasure Island.'

      Thus, they're gallavanting around with ill-gotten stories that weren't produced by them.

      I have no problem with them doing that -- but if you're going to allow it, you'll have to find a different line of argument. There is one, but if you use it, it'll open the door to people copying music too, at least to certain extents.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    14. Re:excellent by MisterFancypants · · Score: 1
      YHBT

      Not exactly. I recognized the parent as a cheap troll before responding, but the fact that it was modded up to 3 (Insightful..not Funny) at the time I replied caused me to post a follow-up anyway.

    15. Re:excellent by dumbArtMajor · · Score: 1

      That's true, but I heard that among the animators at Disney, Miyazaki is considered a god. I'm sure they had some kind of internal PR campaign to push this movie, and the fact that it outranks "Titanic" in ticket sales in Japan helps the suits go along...

      AWESOME movie BTW, go see it in the theatre if you can or buy the DVD when it comes out. I loved it, my girlfriend loved it, and some other non-anime type people we dragged along loved it too. So much more intelligent than anything Disney has come up with themselves.

  6. OT: North American Shonen Jump debuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anybody know if it's available at newsstands, etc. or just in comic shops? Also, how about distribution in Canada?

  7. Re:Why more Japanese porno? by WaKall · · Score: 5, Informative

    First off, AC's usually don't deserve a response, but this one is just off in left field.

    Spirited Away is a _children's story_. You could let your 6-year-old watch this. So quit throwing around the 'japanese porno' catch-all description of anime. Yes, they do exist, but it's a relatively small segment of the market (in the US AND in Japan).

  8. This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 0, Troll

    ... and don't we hate them, or something?

    On top of that the movie's site is Flash only, which is retarded and lame by definition.

    1. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flash is not retarded or lame.

      It is possibly the best thing to happen to the web (as far as on the client side is concerned) in at least 5 years!

      Plus, with Flash player, you can finally get streaming video without having to deal with the ugly plugins form Microsoft, Real, and Apple. Flash is only a couple hundred KB to download and install and adds a level of character and playfullness to a lot of web sites.

      Static web sites are, ok, for news and other items. Entertainment requires motion, colors, sounds. Perhaps I'm too dumb to understand why you WOULDN'T want Flash!

      I am a graphics artist, my web site took a long time to conceptualize, design, and implement (for the graphics). I don't want to deal with the inconsistencies between the rendering of web pages done on all browsers. If you don't have the Flash Player Version 6 you will not see my web site. Sorry, not possible.

      I will NOT allow my graphics and design work to be mutilated by the multitudes of different "standards compliant" browsers out there. Say what you will, but they're all lousy in different ways.

      The Flash Plug-in lets my web site look the same to the entire world! Not because it's an open standard, but rather because it's a closed standard that behaves the same on all platforms! Quality control I will not sacrifice. (I'm sure as soon as (if) you finish reading this, you will think of at least three ways to Flame Macromedia and all the evil things they've done to you, because, otherwise, why would you have ever called Flash Lame and Retarded? That will be your response instead of a simple justification about why Flash is Lame and Retarded. By the way, no one cares about what you think of how it was written and if it is efficient enough to live up to your standards. It is so lame and retarded that it runs on almost every platform on the World! Pretty soon it'll even be in your microwave display. Then you can actionscript your dinner, or have a Flash (instead of TV) dinner)

      If you refuse to run Flash for philosophical or ideological reasons you probably won't appreciate why the world leader in Entertainment uses Flash to entertain an online audience, you shouldn't go to their sites.

    2. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This message brought to you by your friends at Macromedia(tm).

    3. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I am a graphics artist,

      Figures.

      I don't want to deal with the inconsistencies between the rendering of web pages done on all browsers

      It is the nature of the web that it *will* look different. It was designed that way, and that's the way it is. Deal with it.

      How are you going to handle CSS, where I can override your settings any way that I like? I'll bet you use little transparent images to try to "force" pages to look the same. Sigh.

      If you don't have the Flash Player Version 6 you will not see my web site. Sorry, not possible.

      It's a safe bet that I'm not missing anything! What about those people behind firewalls that don't allow executable content through? I guess they can't see it either.

      By the way, if it's done entirely in in Flash it is *not* a web site, by definition.

      The Flash Plug-in lets my web site look the same to the entire world! Not because it's an open standard, but rather because it's a closed standard that behaves the same on all platforms! Quality control I will not sacrifice

      Quality control == style sheets are too hard for me, and I can't get my head around the idea that the web was designed to allow different presentations of the same information for different situations.

      If you refuse to run Flash for philosophical or ideological reasons

      No, Flash is not a valid mechanism for web content. It is also a security hazard. I don't run any downloaded executable content. And yes, I'm aware that Flash *should* pose no threat, but I see zero evidence that the plug-in itself is secure.

      you probably won't appreciate why the world leader in Entertainment uses Flash to entertain an online audience, you shouldn't go to their sites

      I didn't say Flash itself was lame, just that web sites done *only* in Flash are, as this sort of thing will inevitably fragment the web into little incompatible islands of content. The web was invented to fix *exactly* this (if you were even *aware* of a time before the web) - and we'll end up back there again if we are not careful and don't *think* about what we do.

      you probably won't appreciate why the world leader in Entertainment uses Flash to entertain an online audience

      Because, like you, they don't actually know what they are doing.

    4. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      Indeed. It's cool to be a corporate shill, apparently. And ignorance also seems to factor highly on the trendiness scale, too.

      Most web developers sound like Lionel Hutz:

      "I'm not really a lawyer, but I watched Matlock in a bar last night. The sound was turned down, but I think I got the gist of it."

      And then they think they can just "decide", out of the blue, what is good and bad, correct and incorrect, and say patently crazy things like "I can hide HTML source" [see my journal for a laugh-a-minute exchange]

    5. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      Figures.

      I'll bet that the graphic artist makes more money than a worn out COBOL code monkey like yourself.

      It is the nature of the web that it *will* look different. It was designed that way, and that's the way it is. Deal with it.

      It is NOT the nature of the web nor was it designed that way. The WWW was intended to be a way to transfer information while maintaining the integrity of that information. Information is not plain ascii text, but also color, fonts, shapes, images and sound. Any multimedia information must retain it's integrity otherwise information is lost.

      How are you going to handle CSS, where I can override your settings any way that I like? I'll bet you use little transparent images to try to "force" pages to look the same. Sigh.

      Ever hear of the CSS1 !important rule. Geesh you are an idiot. Ever hear of scripting, generate the document from script and the style sheet from script and your overides are meaningless, you either view the document as the author intended or you view nothing. With CSSP, you get pixel perfect control of the layout, it is called position:absolute;

      No, Flash is not a valid mechanism for web content. It is also a security hazard. I don't run any downloaded executable content. And yes, I'm aware that Flash *should* pose no threat, but I see zero evidence that the plug-in itself is secure.

      By nature of it's acceptance, flash has become a standard. You haven't seen evidence that the flash plugin is secure because you haven't looked. http://www.macromedia.com/desdev/mx/flash/whitepap ers/security.pdf

      It's a hell of a lot more secure than most of the other software on your system, and that includes the Linux kernel..

      I didn't say Flash itself was lame, just that web sites done *only* in Flash are, as this sort of thing will inevitably fragment the web into little incompatible islands of content. The web was invented to fix *exactly* this (if you were even *aware* of a time before the web) - and we'll end up back there again if we are not careful and don't *think* about what we do.

      Flash exists because the W3C failed to deliver on SVG, HTML+Time and other important technologies which are needed to advance the web to take full advantage of it's potential.

      Because, like you, they don't actually know what they are doing.

      So you know more about entertainment than a multibillion dollar world leader in entertainment. Your kookery knows no bounds.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    6. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 2
      "I'm not really a lawyer, but I watched Matlock in a bar last night. The sound was turned down, but I think I got the gist of it."

      or worse, like the dpt kook who is not a webdeveloper but knows everything about how everyone else should develop.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    7. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      I'll bet that the graphic artist makes more money than a worn out COBOL code monkey like yourself

      I've never written COBOL in my life. However, I'd have more respect for a COBOL program than someone who is so l33t they write "full blown text editors in Javascript!!"

      And most graphic editors who migrated to the web were the second rate ones ie those who couldn't cut it elsewhere, so i doubt he's being paid much at all, looking at the average rates.

      It is NOT the nature of the web nor was it designed that way

      You have already proven that you do not know the first thing about the design of the web. Go to http://w3.org. Start reading. When you get some sort of clue, stop.

      The WWW was intended to be a way to transfer information while maintaining the integrity of that information

      Your assertion, which is wrong.

      Information is not plain ascii text, but also color, fonts, shapes, images and sound

      Right.

      Any multimedia information must retain it's integrity otherwise information is lost

      Yes, but you started with a spurious association, so you lose. The web was designed for document transfer, hyperlinking and universal display. Anything else must be added very slowly and very carefully. But, of course, dimwits who like Flash can't participate in that kind of process.

      By nature of it's acceptance, flash has become a standard

      Really, and where is that standard, exactly? Is it documented anywhere?

      It's a hell of a lot more secure than most of the other software on your system, and that includes the Linux kernel..

      You have demonstrated a completed lack of clue in security related matters already, in my journal. Or do you *still* think you can "hide the HTML source" from the person who downloaded it? Explain exactly how you can "encrypt" it.

      Flash exists because the W3C failed to deliver on SVG, HTML+Time and other important technologies which are needed to advance the web to take full advantage of it's potential

      Generally, I agree, but even SVG wouldn't be necessary if people didn't prefer bright, shiny, dumb things to sensible, interoperable, and intelligent things.

      So you know more about entertainment than a multibillion dollar world leader in entertainment

      I didn't say, that woogieoogiegolliwog. I said they don't understand the web, like you.

    8. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



      First off, I am not a Macromedia employee! I wish I were that way I can get discounts on the software!! (any Macromedia Personnel people out there... call me!!!)

      Yes, I am a graphics artist = I cater to end users (don't you care what their experience is? I do, it's my job to!). I'm sorry if that makes me seem like an idiot to you. It's very unfortunate.

      CSS works fine and dandy and it STILL doesn't look the same on all platforms and browsers when implemented properly. Is this acceptable to those concerned that one web browser will choose to render tables one way while another will choose another method. One will render layers one way, another in a completely different way. I can write CSS until my hands bleed and I will still not get consistency.

      I DON'T use little transparent images to make my web pages look the same... Remember I use Flash and they ALL look the same (even on a PDA (minus the lack of color on older ones)). In fact, the only reason I use any HTML at all rather than just going directly to a Flash document is because many browsers are too stupid to realize that there is a plug-in available that will play a format they don't already understand (and don't even present you an option of downloading a plug-in SHOULD you want it), then I perform redirection so the abundance of obsolete (security holes up the wazoo) web browsers still installed en-masse don't sit there and wonder if they're missing something or not, additionally, most people browsing the web (remember tons of people out there who barely know how to use their computer (they buy software that fuels the need for backend software that provides jobs to us all in one way or another) = the majority of the audience on the web, clearly not Slashdot visitors, but sorry to say, still majority of people surfing the web are the average folks, not the computer folks).

      I'm sure you wouldn't be missing anything by not visiting my website, after all, you mock me for being a Graphic Artist (how dare me!). Since a lot of my site's content is my artwork and links to interesting art projects going on worldwide it probably doesn't appeal to you. I am truly sorry if art is not important to you, it is MY LIFE so please don't discount it with childish mockery.

      I do understand Style Sheets and that the web was designed for different presentation for different situations. This is why I chose Flash, that way my site can render WELL in any medium... PC, Mac, *nix, Palm OS (just came out in a Sony product that uses Palm OS), Pocket PC, Cell phones, toasters, almost anything that can surf the web these days has a Flash Player written for it (if it doesn't yet, believe me it will, Macromedia wants 100% adoption of Flash if possible).

      Flash IS a valid mechanism for web content. In fact, with Flash you can update content and connect to your web servers to communicate without the endless page re-loads of HTML (this can be done with Built-in multi-tasking in the Flash Player while you are accomplishing other things on your browser). Flash Player allows local access of your computer system only to allow Web Conferencing in Flash Player 6 (if enabled by the user, it interfaces with your Web Cam and / or Microphone if you explicitly enable them in the Player Preferences). By design the Flash Player Browser plug-in is an interpreter. It interprets and displays a non-executable .SWF file that contains ActionScripts much like Javascripts, vector, and raster graphics (the Flash Player, I repeat the Flash Player is executable you can easily apply any local system security you want to it if you are uncomfortable about the possibility of security issues anyhow). You also have zero evidence that the plug-in itself is not secure!

      No you didn't explicitly say that Flash itself is Lame, but by implying that the idea of making a Flash only site is lame you are certainly strongly implying it! Just because you wouldn't do it doesn't mean it's lame, it means we have the CHOICE on the web to do things the way we prefer! Many web surfers, on comparable sites (in regard otherwise equal in quality of content and interest in the topics), will prefer to use the one that looks better or is more intuitive! Flash allows more possibilities to create engaging environments than other web technologies currently available. I choose to be appeal to people whenever possible to get the edge my clients demand in the product so I go with Flash, often, with rave reviews.

      Yes, I am aware of a time before the "web". It was indeed bizarre. The Internet was growing out of an emergency Military and Governmental system for communication into a more civilian method of direct and indirect communication. I remember later dialing up to BBS services (corporate and home-run) and remember the standards used there (ANSI text, Standard Terminal Interfaces by the home runs, elaborate AOLish proprietary interfaces for most of the rest). Though each was different at first, most ended up following the fold by the time the web was getting it's fame with Mosaic.

      I like lynx and STILL use it often to check Section 508 compliance for sites I often develop that must work with browsers that hardly (if at all) even keep up with current web standards. Do I use it for research, shopping, or web discussion? NO I prefer the pretty graphics and layout on my time.

      I constantly cater to clients that are using browsers so old THE BROWSERS THEMSELVES pose immense security risks to the computers they run on. I cater to clients using "Alternate" web browsers that produce tactile braille and read web sites aloud as well as increase font sizes and zoom in on graphics for users. To implement a web site that works well with these browsers graphic design is all but thrown to the wind to generate a page that will render well on a regular browser and be accurately interpreted by one of these browsers. Many of these browsers have terrible support of many web standards and are incredibly behind in the times of the technological advances for the web. And, yet, Flash 6 provides Section 508 compliance while, in many cases, older "standard" technologies can not! (Cake and eat it too?)

      I also remember the time before Flash, it was mostly visually boring. The incompatible islands of content are not really a good argument in the case of Flash. Flash has been installed on over 490 million computers to date (that sounds more like several continents of compatible content)! If that is not a standard by sheer numbers though not by W3C (which is lately pushing SVG that is really more oriented toward static graphics than animated or web based applications as Flash is?) I don't know what is!

      I DO think about what I do, which is why I think that if I stay stagnant and allow the web to remain the same so outdated browsers (that are no longer technically supported by anyone in most cases) can keep up I will never see anything exciting again on the web! It all seems to be variations of the same to me. Many Flash sites also employ this, but I am on a mission to change all of this! Stay tuned :)

      By the way you say, Disney doesn't actually know what they are doing?!?!? This is news to me! How do you figure that? Do you have something personal against the Mouse? Do you really believe that! And you are mocking me?!? Disney has been called many things for their business practices, policies, and principles, but I don't think anyone has ever accused them of not knowing what they are doing (regardless of their morals or of the intent of what they are doing, they know VERY WELL, and they do it better than any other Entertainment Company in the World)!!!

      Perhaps it is because you say "and don't we hate them?"... I wasn't aware Slashdot is officially a forum for hating Disney?!?!? Did I miss the vote on whether "we" hate Disney in these many years of reading and submitting? No thanks, please use the proper term, ENVY!

      May I also say that it is my SINCEREST HOPE that I "don't actually know" what I'm doing in the same brilliant manner as Disney "doesn't". If this is the case, I will sadly have to become the number one Graphic Artist in the World (Thanks!!!!). That would be a terrible thing for me to endure (I'll have to live the rest of my days in a lush tropical paradise "crying" myself to sleep under a lush landscape and exquisite climate). What a terrible life I'd be doomed to!

      Please *think* about what YOU do by holding such sublime hatred (envy) of organizations with power like Disney. Remember they started humbly and their innovators / entrepreneurs / visionaries / artists worked their a@#es off to get where they are today! That is the DREAM of this country for many people living here and ALL hoping to someday enter! Jealousy never gets you anywhere. Instead of hating all above you, work as hard as they did, move up the ladder by taking equal if not greater risks of falling, and get there yourself by having MUCH better ideas and drive! I'm sure the view is very different from the top. I hope you get there someday (and that others do not harbor hatred toward you just for being there)!

      Cheers!

    9. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      or worse, like the dpt kook

      Pot. Kettle. Black.

      Why is it then, woogieoogieboogie, that you are considered a kook in every newsgroup you frequent?

      Type "william platt" into Google groups, and all you see are people wishing the kook would just go away. Don't like being on the other end, do you? But your insecurities are fairly easy to pick up on from your mad rantings, and it's certainly fun to throw rocks at you, and watch you screech.

    10. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      You have probably never written a line of any stabel code in your life.

      According to Yahoo, a programmer 1 makes 45k and a web designer 1 makes 42k and a sysadmin makes 58k. You must hate being a programmer and being on the bottom of the pay scale. are you afraid of losign your job to some Indian IT firm. LOL

      HTML != WWW.

      hmm, wonder where that journal thread went off into security.

      If you do not know how to encrypt a html file, then you should not be arguing. Perhaps one day you will be enlightened and actually use IE so that you can understand the way dynamic content is rendered in that browser. Then you might finally get a clue as to why html source can be hidden.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    11. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A quick rebuttal as opposed to my (gosh) extraordinarily wordy one slighlty elsewhere on this thread.

      I am a web graphics artist because, after a lengthy and monetarily successful career in print, I want to put my $.02 into the way web content is delivered (with STYLE (better than the ones done with Style Sheets, I hope)).

      I want to help innovate break new ground in the visual design on the web as I feel I have in the print industry. Perhaps someday, it won't be unfortunately, considered by people like you to be an ending for "second rate" graphics designers. Since I believe in the power of graphic design to impact people's lives, I will do everything in my power to change perceptions like this while my heart's still pumping blood!

      Cheers!

    12. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      You must hate being a programmer and being on the bottom of the pay scale

      That's actually wrong. But since you've never *had* a real professional computing job, what the fuck would you know, anyway?

      "According to Yahoo" ... were you dropped on your head at birth, or did Pappy just beat you too hard?

    13. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      Ever hear of the CSS1 !important rule. Geesh you are an idiot

      So, as well as looking like a chimp, it appears you think like one. From the CSS2 spec, sec 6.2:

      'user "!important" rules override author "!important" rules'

      So, you are proven to be a *fucking* stupid monkey yet *again*. It's now clear that you like referring to specs you don't read.

      I'm also quite free *not* to use *any* author stylesheet when rendering the page.

      Jesus Christ, how much of a public slapping can you take, woogieoogiegolliwog? Where's that web site that you work on, boy? Is it too embarrassing to show anyone? I thought so.

    14. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by Yottabyte84 · · Score: 1

      Flash is often abused. For every good use of flash, there are 100 bad ones. And macromedia needs to keep up on ports, I'm not gonna run windows to see yur usless "web site".

    15. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by Yottabyte84 · · Score: 1

      Show me a webpage with hidden source, and I'll show you how to unhide it. Try me, I dare you.

    16. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1
      Everything to recreate it is here http://www.allmyfaqs.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Bill_Plat t

      If you understand webdevelopment, then you should easily understand why it can be done. IE does not show the source code, you can only access it via script and with a broken DOM, you cannot access it

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    17. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1
      Ohhh, you sure did slap me. Not. Try using CSS and see how far your generic elements get you when an author uses !important on a class or id. Duh. I just love it when rookies like youself read something and think you have a clue.

      yeah, right, I am just going to tell everyone where I work. You are beyond fucking retarded. My personal work is on the web and never hidden. iSpelunker is being rewritten, e-tards which highlights stupid peopel like you is also being worked on. Unlike you, I have a job and I do freelance work which means time is limited.

      Yes, the !important rule is also in the CSS2 spec, you really taught me soemthing there. NOT!!!!

      Perhaps you should take web authoring 101 and you will find out that the author can choose to not deliver the content to whomever they wish and can create conditions which force you to use their style sheet.

      I wonder why you did not reply to the part about the dynamcally generated html and dynamic assignment of styles. Must be because you are so damn clueless.

      Amazing how retards like you keep wondering why authors simply ignore Moz and Opera. it isn't the browser, we just do not like the jackasses using them.

      Have fun writing style sheets which override every style class on every website.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    18. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      If you understand webdevelopment, then you should easily understand why it can be done

      You stupid monkey. I've explained plenty of times that it *cannot*. Get it into your simian fucking skull.

      IE does not show the source code, you can only access it via script and with a broken DOM, you cannot access it

      For the last time, it doesn't matter what IE does or does not show. Jesus! You've got to send it over the network. Therefore it is not "hidden", as anyone can see it. It doesn't matter that you send it as XML+XSLT to be transformed to HTML, as anyone can simply perform that same transformation using the XML+XSLT you sent. Can you really be this stupid? Please go and learn something about TCP/IP, networks, computing, and simple logic.

    19. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1
      No it is not wrong. The salary surveys are extremely accurate. Code-monkeys like yourself always get paid less than an admin on a comparable experience level. A good admin is irreplaceable, a code-monkey will eventually lose his/her job to someone who gets paid less and less.

      You should also start being nice to your admins, you wouldn't want your files to suddenly become corrupted would you.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    20. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      No it is not wrong. The salary surveys are extremely accurate

      Then why are those figures so small? Let me guess, this is what you consider to be "well compensated"?

      You should also start being nice to your admins, you wouldn't want your files to suddenly become corrupted would you

      Admins do as they are damn well told. They exist to support me, and that is all. And as for file corruption, well, it's obvious that you are no professional now, isn't it?

    21. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      Ohhh, you sure did slap me. Not. Try using CSS and see how far your generic elements get you when an author uses !important on a class or id. Duh. I just love it when rookies like youself read something and think you have a clue

      Yes, the !important rule is also in the CSS2 spec, you really taught me soemthing there. NOT!!!!

      You *idiot*. If you had read the quote I provided, you would see that the user's "!important" setting overrides the author's. This has *changed* from CSS1. You stupid monkey. Read things before posting moronic replies.

      Anyway, looks like I win. You lose. Again.

      Perhaps you should take web authoring 101 and you will find out that the author can choose to not deliver the content to whomever they wish and can create conditions which force you to use their style sheet

      Only by being annoying pratts. Why would any *competant* person want to do this, anyway? Been using transparent gifs for layout again, chimp-boy?

      yeah, right, I am just going to tell everyone where I work

      Typical. You keep jumping up and down and whining, insisting that *I* do. Coward.

      You are beyond fucking retarded

      Again with the insults. Yet you are wrong *again*.

      My personal work is on the web and never hidden

      Except it's just not particularly good. There must be *something* to warrant all this bragging, surely?

      iSpelunker is being rewritten

      Good idea. What you had looked like it was done by a retarded chimp. Sorry, it actually was, wasn't it?

      e-tards which highlights stupid peopel like you is also being worked on. Unlike you, I have a job and I do freelance work which means time is limited

      I'm so scared. Except to put my posts on e-tards, you'll have to put your own, and if you don't know that lamers who claim it is possible to "hide" HTML source is one of the biggest running jokes of the internet, there's just no helping you.

      Tell me, do you have a compression algorithm that can compress random data as well?

    22. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1
      You claim you can use tcpdump to recreate an html file, but are still unable to produce proof. if it is so trivial, they why can't you do it?

      Go ahead and do it and if you can I will write server and client activex componants which encrypt/deencrypt the source xml and xslt files before they are transformed, then what do you have, nothing but a tcpdump of gibberish which can only be viewed using my clientside componant

      You cannot be this stupid can you.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    23. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1

      Try troll you moron.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    24. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you can also run flash on Mac OS, Palm OS, Pocket PC, Linux, Solaris, OS/2, HP-UX, or SGI IRIX (so far, list is constantly growning you'll find).

      So, no, you don't have to install Windows to see my "useless 'web site'". Besides, as previously stated, if you have no appreciation for the art I work on, you'd find it useless if it were written in any language so why bother talking trash about a site you've never seen? That's plain childish!

      Incidentally, I will comment that the Spirited Away web site I saw was definitely a part of the 100 bad ones. It used flash for the animation aspect of it only. This is something that Macromedia publicly discourages but something that companies ask their web developers to do. "Can we have an animated introduction". That is Useless, in my opinion.

      On the other hand, if you take advantage of Flash to do several important tasks while only asking your customers to download one (1) plug-in that doesn't put advertisements all over your computer. You can use flash to format fully vector documents to print (with, some extremely high quality possible may I mention) or print them as bitmaps for those printers without postscript support. This replaces the need to use a solution such as .PDF (which costs a couple of hundred dollars from Adobe).

      You can also use it to place streaming video on your site without the need for buying additional plug-ins (Apple's Quicktime is by far the cheapest way to author video commercially available but is still around $30 - $50 range, the rest are even costlier).

      You can also use it for video and audio web conferencing (with either commercial Macromedia back-end software, or you can create your own back-end software). This beats forcing people to download yet another program for video conferencing.

      Since Flash is about a 400 KB download for most people, it is a comparatively superior solution to downloading Acrobat Reader (about 8-11 megz for any platform), Quicktime (about another 8 megz download), and possibly an even greater download for a video conferencing solution. Clearly an advantage for the end-user.

      For the developer, you can get the Flash MX authoring software for about $500 ($99 if you are a student or work for an educational institution). If you wanted to go equivalent on the above software, you end up with: Adobe Acrobat 5.0 ($249 retail), Adobe GoLive 6 (we'll go with Macromedia's competition and since Flash is a Wysiwyg editor for its content we should compare it with Wysiwyg editors for HTML rather than just a plain text editors) that goes for $399, graphics editing software (because Flash does graphics too)... let's go with a cheap yet effective one (will not use GIMP in this case because I'm comparing commercial software solutions... apples to apples) Jasc Paint Shop Pro (I'd use Photoshop, but that's in a whole nother price range) that costs $82, throw in QuickTime Pro (registered) for $29.99. This is a cheap yet, I think comparable commercial package to Flash. It rings in at about $760 compared to Flash's $500! No question on commercial software Flash is the Value.

      Sure, you can do many of the same things using open source software, but many of the open source solutions are direct commercial competition to Flash. It isn't really fair to compare Flash in price to something that is not commercial software, is it?

      So, when I way the potential downloads I can force on my users to give them video, web conferencing, and high quality print (with predictable, consistent, static formatting, unlike HTML printing which is really up to the browser) that they want (they do demand it incidentally), I find using Flash doesn't make my site useless, it makes a much lesser burden for downloading on my users than anything else available with true comparable features!

      Flash is abused by unimaginative developers that are also technically undertrained in its usage. This is a trend that Macromedia is leading the way in trying to change. I am confident that this will not remain the same.

    25. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by Yottabyte84 · · Score: 1

      Only windows and Mac OS have flash 6. I have flash 5 and it works, but not on some new content. Some of the platforms you mention noly have flash 4.

    26. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is my understanding that Flash 6 will be ported to all of those in the near future. Incidentally, if you can access a computer with Flash 6 on it, check out this really nifty "Flash Only" thing on the LOTR site...
      http://www.lordoftherings.net/effects/eff ects_fram e.html

      It is SWEET! The HTML just makes sure it is centered on the page. It is a great example of the seamless streaming video you can do with the Flash 6 plug-in.

      Some content made in Flash 6 contains Flash 6 only commands (note this is not unilaterally the case). There are new commands in Flash 6 that are VASTLY superior to the earlier equivalents in many areas. Good programming in Flash 6 will detect earlier versions of Flash and use earlier equivalents. Video, for instance, is a Flash 6 thing. It CAN be done in earlier Flash players but is a memory HOG (not so in Flash 6).

      Flash 6 porting is taking longer because of the web conferencing features. In Windows and Mac OS, interfacing to the web cam and microphone devices is done pretty much one way on each respectively (of course, there are probably other ways). With *nix and the variety of PDA OS's, they are trying to work out a way to get it to work.

      That is really the only holdup on most of the OS's that don't have Flash 6 player yet. I don't think Macromedia wants to put out a Flash 6 player missing some features (particularly web conferencing... they are heavily investing in using flash for it). That's what I like about the Flash player... Flash 4 is the same on all supported platforms to the Flash Movie, Flash 5 is the same, etc. The players are complete and equivalent and that makes it very appealing to develop on!

      I DO hope Macromedia ports to *nix (at least Linux soon, which probably gets most people surfing web sites on *nix with Flash) soon. It will certainly speed adoption of Flash 6 format which, frankly is a very positive step up from 4 and 5.

    27. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      By nature of it's acceptance, flash has become a standard

      Really? And where is this "standard" published, chimp?

      You haven't seen evidence that the flash plugin is secure because you haven't looked. http://www.macromedia.com/desdev/mx/flash/whitepap ers/security.pdf

      That's a statement of intent, yes. But hardly any kind of evidence. It will continue to be banned by organizations that care about, and understand security.

      Time to get yourself some kind of education, I think.

    28. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1
      By nature of it's acceptance, flash has become a standard

      Macromedia. Cmon, please argue this, please tell me Macromedia does not create standards because they are not a bona fide standards organization... please do it, please, please, please... Aww, fuck it. The w3c is also NOT a standards organization, if you claim that flash is not a standard by nature of it's ubiquity, then neither is (X)HTML, XML, CSS or any webstandard outside of ISO HTML 4.0 and ECMAscript.

      Lookie and watch the little wannabee code monkey try and crawl it's way out of this. LOL.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    29. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      [snip mad ranting]

      No, I'm not interested in what is a standards organization or not. To be a standard of any kind, it must be published somewhere. The content of a flash "executable" that you download is not. Therefore it is not a standard.

      It is just popular amongst dimwits, like you.

      Now, where's that web site with "unreadable" source?

    30. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1
      No, I'm not interested in what is a standards organization or not. To be a standard of any kind, it must be published somewhere. The content of a flash "executable" that you download is not. Therefore it is not a standard.

      There is no rule that says that a standard has to be open or that anything has to be published. Soemthing is a standard because it is made so by a bona fide standards agency or by ubiquity.

      But since it makes you happy to think such things and I love making you look like a retard flash file format

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    31. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      But since it makes you happy to think such things and I love making you look like a retard flash file format [macromedia.com]

      Actually, this is the first time you've been right! It had to happen eventually I guess.

      They've released the format so I'm happy to be proven wrong, in this case. If non-macromedia tools and players are released, I'll be able to take it seriously.

      Pratt's list of topic he has gotten wrong so far:

      * TCP/IP
      * tcpdump
      * CSS !important priorities
      * hiding HTML
      * RSA encryption ... there are probably others. See my journal for the laugh-a-minute voyage through ignorance.

      But, I'm happy to say I was wrong about the Flash format. Unlike you, I'm man enough to admit it. If I was *you*, I'd currently be trying to weasel out of it by demanding an implementation of a Flash player.

      I wonder how long ago this happened - I guess all that lobbying by sensible people has paid off! I can't image what Macromedia's business model will be, once free tools exist ... time will tell.

      Now, where's that "hidden" web site source? Do it or forever be branded a cowardly lamer ...

    32. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1
      Actually, this is the first time you've been right! It had to happen eventually I guess.

      Before you continue, you really might try installing windows on a computer and learning a bit about IE specific features. if you wish to keep arguing about things based upon your own ignorance of the topic, don't let me stop you, I like laughing at you. But if you prefer to actually learn and increase your knowledge,

      And what besides pointing you to the tcp/ip RFC did I get wrong. What besides correctly referencing the CSS1 spec for the !important rule which overrides client styles. There is no UA which is fully CSS2 compliant which means that any implementation of CSS2 features is a broken UA unless all CSS2 features are implemented. So if your CSS1 compliant UA is not obeying the CSS1 rules for !important, then your UA is not even CSS1 compliant and is not "standards compliant." I have already proven and fully explained why the HTML source can be hidden. When you finally understand there is no "master public key" for encryption and actually get a clue about how IE renders HTML dynamically, then you will understand. Knowledge is power and until you achieve knowledge, you have no power. Perhaps you can try to obtain the knowledge by doing and using the tools of the trade.

      If you were actually an intelligent person, you would take the methods discussed and see if you can hide the HTML source from yourself. Then you would instantly know why it is possible. Most intelligent people don't argue until they know the facts, you argue based upon limited knowledge and what your believe.

      Read and learn.
      http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url= /workshop/browser/overview/overview.asp
      Embed a browser in a browser

      Set oWB= CreateObject("InternetExplorer.application")

      Are you getting a clue yet. There are many different ways that the html source can made completely and totally hidden. Once you get past your skript kiddie mentality and learn how to program in windows and how to program within the iexplorer environment, you will get a clue.

      Let me give you another example. I can embed a browsercontrol in a custome activex control in a webpage in the control and send the html file as encrypted binary data which can only be viewed and decrypted in that control. Memory dumps do not work unless you set the sourcePreservation bit because MSHTML renders what it thinks you should have written. But please, continue to argue about a topic you have no clue about. I really do not mind if you keep making an ass of yourself, it is very humourous. Continue to live in your own little ignorant and uniformed world pretending to be an IT professional.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    33. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      And what besides pointing you to the tcp/ip RFC did I get wrong

      Confusing HTTP with TCP.
      Not understanding that *all* packets can be captured.
      Not knowing that tcpdump can capture the entire contents of a packet.
      Not understanding that tcpdump is non-intrusive.

      And there's more ... the process of explaining all this to you was incredibly painful. Luckily it's all well documented in my journal.

      When you finally understand there is no "master public key" for encryption

      I did not say there was a "master public key" - but you must get a public key to the browser somehow - otherwise the browser would not be able to decrypt what you send it. Therefore I can get the key, too. Do you understand yet? Or tell me how you can magically get the public key to the browser without my seeing it as well ...

      actually get a clue about how IE renders HTML dynamically, then you will understand

      Yes, but you have to send the JavaScript, or the HTML, or whatever, to *do* that dynamic rendering. That is the source. I can capture it. Therefore there is no way to hide the source.

      Are you getting a clue yet. There are many different ways that the html source can made completely and totally hidden. Once you get past your skript kiddie mentality and learn how to program in windows and how to program within the iexplorer environment, you will get a clue

      Whatever. You have to send me the source (of whatever form) that describes the page. I can read that, as it flows across the network interface.

    34. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1
      http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1180.html
      Do you have any further retarded comments or lies to spew.
      I never said any of the things which you claimed I said. Is it that you have to resort to telling lies to try and make a point.
      I said YOU cannot do it. Literacy is obviously not your strong point. Prove you can do what you say you can.
      Again, we will go back to encryption. And please never repeat the some ass retarded comment as you said before about you having the "master key." Yes, I know you said a public key, but obviously you think a public key is a "master key" which can deencrypt any encryption. Perhaps you should put away your Cap'n Crunch secret decoder ring and get a clue.
      Or tell me how you can magically get the public key to the browser without my seeing it as well ...

      Encapsulated in a fucking com object you stupid fucking retard. Do you need me to teach you hwo to tie your shoes.

      Would you like to continue your quest in proving that you are nothing more than a pathetic poser.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    35. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1180.html

      You've posted this before. Have you read it?

      I never said any of the things which you claimed I said. Is it that you have to resort to telling lies to try and make a point

      No, it's all there. Look at your first reply to my statement that you can see the data flowing across the network interface, and then when I tried to tell you that tcpdump can be used to demonstrate this. I just did, for a quiet chuckle. Having to walk you through it all step-by-painful-step is not something I'm going to forget in a hurry.

      People like you must *hate* this permanent record thing. I'll bet the google usenet archive annoys the hell out of you. It would embarrass me, if I though employers were going to see all that mad rambling attached to me.

      Prove you can do what you say you can

      What am I supposed to prove again? Get ethereal, you can see all the HTML (or whatever) flowing across the network interface. Done.

      Encapsulated in a fucking com object you stupid fucking retard. Do you need me to teach you hwo to tie your shoes

      I already refuted this elsewhere. Security through obscurity is no good! Why don't you just admit you can only obfuscate it from people who don't really care?

      Yes, I know you said a public key, but obviously you think a public key is a "master key" which can deencrypt any encryption

      No, I didn't say that at all. Reread what I said - I said you must give me the public key *before* I can decrypt your page for viewing. And you admit that! Putting it in a component is not an effective technique for security. Please don't do that, and go around telling people their data is safe!

      Would you like to continue your quest in proving that you are nothing more than a pathetic poser

      Well, it hasn't happened yet, except in you mind, where you can decrypt cipher text without a key, or effectively "hide" the key in a component from everyone.

      It's also important to remember that your original two "hiding" schemes are failures. Encryption is better though, at least you're starting to think about it!

    36. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by woogieoogieboogie · · Score: 1
      Allrighty then Mr. Short Term memory...

      I said: "And what besides pointing you to the tcp/ip RFC did I get wrong"
      You Said: "Confusing HTTP with TCP."
      I replied: "http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1180.html"
      You replied: "You've posted this before. Have you read it?"

      And you expect people to NOT think you are dimwitted.

      No, it's all there. Look at your first reply to my statement that you can see the data flowing across the network interface, and then when I tried to tell you that tcpdump can be used to demonstrate this. I just did, for a quiet chuckle. Having to walk you through it all step-by-painful-step is not something I'm going to forget in a hurry.

      You are a fucking liar. I first mentioned tcpdump and you caught on 2 posts later after mumbling some crap about how you have mastered your ehternet interface. You probably never used tcpdump or snort until I mentioned them.

      I already refuted this elsewhere. Security through obscurity is no good! Why don't you just admit you can only obfuscate it from people who don't really care?

      Errr, retard, com objects are compiled. Oh let me guess, you are going to add in disassembling software into the regiment of tools needed to view HTML source. All security is through obfuscatory, if you do not understand that, get the hell out of the computing profession. Encryption, passwords, door locks etc... they decrease the obviousness of entry or access.

      I said you must give me the public key *before* I can decrypt your page for viewing.

      Retard, activex objects are compiled so it would kinda make sence to compile the key intot he com object

      Well, it hasn't happened yet, except in you mind, where you can decrypt cipher text without a key, or effectively "hide" the key in a component from everyone.

      It's also important to remember that your original two "hiding" schemes are failures. Encryption is better though, at least you're starting to think about it!

      Go get yourself a winbox by next Sunday. I will post a webpage next Sunday and give you 3 days to pull the HTML source. Your discussion is boring me and you obviously lack ther intellectual capacity to learn.

      --
      ... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...
    37. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you expect people to NOT think you are dimwitted

      So, you produced a link. Have you read it?

      You are a fucking liar. I first mentioned tcpdump and you caught on 2 posts later after mumbling some crap about how you have mastered your ehternet interface. You probably never used tcpdump or snort until I mentioned them

      No, I said network interface. It's a technical term. Read up on how tools like tcpdump work. Thanks.

      Errr, retard, com objects are compiled. Oh let me guess, you are going to add in disassembling software into the regiment of tools needed to view HTML source

      As I explained, for someone familiar with the activex memory layout (not me, I admit), it wouldn't be too hard.

      All security is through obfuscatory, if you do not understand that, get the hell out of the computing profession

      No, that's quite wrong. Get yourself a clue, please.

      And then get yourself "into" the computing profession!

      I will post a webpage next Sunday and give you 3 days to pull the HTML source. Your discussion is boring me and you obviously lack ther intellectual capacity to learn

      You will use this activex encryption scheme? I've already happily admitted *I* will not be able to get the source from that. I'd have to learn about activex, research the memory layout, and search for sites for info by people who do this sort of thing.

      But you must understand, there *will* be others who *can*. Do you understand?

      If it's one of your old schemes without encryption, then sure, I can get the source (be it HTML, or XML or Javascript that builds the page).

      Then we can get into the argument about whether it really counts as a web page if it only works on a Windows box ...

    38. Re:This movie is made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      Yes, I am a graphics artist = I cater to end users (don't you care what their experience is? I do, it's my job to!). I'm sorry if that makes me seem like an idiot to you. It's very unfortunate

      I don't see that Flash caters to end users at all, I'm afraid. Look at this very web site. What couldn't have been expressed with standard web technologies? Anything useful?

      Since I am a user, I have to say Flash sites display nothing but contempt towards me. They force me to view information their way, ignoring preferences I might have, force me to look at lame animations to go between pages, don't let me extract text easily, often don't interact with the browser correctly, and so on ad infinitum.

      CSS works fine and dandy and it STILL doesn't look the same on all platforms and browsers when implemented properly. Is this acceptable to those concerned that one web browser will choose to render tables one way while another will choose another method. One will render layers one way, another in a completely different way. I can write CSS until my hands bleed and I will still not get consistency

      And here is your problem. You will *not* get absolutely perfect consistency. The web wasn't designed that way. Why do you want it, anyway? Think about what it would take to enforce it - at the very least you would have to control my browser size.

      most people browsing the web (remember tons of people out there who barely know how to use their computer (they buy software that fuels the need for backend software that provides jobs to us all in one way or another) = the majority of the audience on the web

      If you don't tell the public when they are wrong, how can you expect an informed public?

      almost anything that can surf the web these days has a Flash Player written for it (if it doesn't yet, believe me it will, Macromedia wants 100% adoption of Flash if possible)

      Does FreeBSD? I'm using it right now.

      And 100% adoption is something of a nightmare scenario. Do you really want to just cede control of the content and design of the web to one corporation? Especially one that might resort to all sorts of chicanary once they start to topple. And looking at their stock price one can hope their days are numbered.

      Flash IS a valid mechanism for web content

      Sort of. HTML allows you to embed objects, but to *only* provide support for your information via proprietary viewers, and not the standard web technogies, is a little unprofessional and short sighted.

      Look the "Spirited Away" site itself. Would it really have hurt to provide a single page of HTML telling me the stuff that was on the (slow, redundant) Flash site?

      I repeat the Flash Player is executable you can easily apply any local system security you want to it

      Yes, and it's receiving instructions from some foreign source, and the format, though published, is not exactly easy to check. And as recent events have proven, it's impossible to secure "plug ins" when they themselves are full of bugs.

      You also have zero evidence that the plug-in itself is not secure!

      So, I have to wait for the first "all you base are belong to us" bug to be exploited, do I?

      Here's how it works - we allow incoming traffic through port 80 for a set of well-defined technologies. Adding *anything* else is a risk - including Javascript. You can make a case for the usefulness of Javascript, but Flash? I think I'd tell the employees to go look at movie sites at home.

      Many web surfers, on comparable sites (in regard otherwise equal in quality of content and interest in the topics), will prefer to use the one that looks better or is more intuitive!

      I've yet to see a Flash site that looks better or is more intuitive. They waste time with lame animations, and they invent a bunch of new, unfamiliar controls.

      I also remember the time before Flash, it was mostly visually boring.

      Why is that a problem, exactly? Perhaps, as another poster pointed out, you should invent some alternative to the web, get the IETF to allocate you a port for this new "multimedia" internet application, and leave the web alone.

      The incompatible islands of content are not really a good argument in the case of Flash. Flash has been installed on over 490 million computers to date (that sounds more like several continents of compatible content)!

      As long as they are all Windows machines! The plugin seems pretty flakey on Linux, and what about FreeBSD, Solaris and so on? What happens when macromedia start to collapse and start charging per page created, per view, or whatever? What happens when some other company invents some other multimedia viewing thing, and they start to try to break one another? No, I like things exactly as they are now. Open, and controlled by sensible people, in the main.

      If that is not a standard by sheer numbers though not by W3C (which is lately pushing SVG that is really more oriented toward static graphics than animated or web based applications as Flash is?) I don't know what is!

      The difference with SVG is that it will be published, and there will be many tools supporting it, not one company. I acknowledge that the Flash format itself was published (due to SVG panic and collapsing stock?), but it's not exactly XML, and therefore easily viewed and manipulated, and designed to work with other web technologies properly, is it? I haven't looked at SVG, but I truly hope that it's not just a knee-jerk reaction to Flash ...

      It all seems to be variations of the same to me.

      So? I thought you wanted it to be intuitive. Certainly, new things don't have to be unintuitive, but the risk is quite high, and I find Flash sites quite an ordeal. Which things are buttons? Which are scrollbars? They're all hidden in "clever" ways.

      By the way you say, Disney doesn't actually know what they are doing?!?!? This is news to me! How do you figure that? Do you have something personal against the Mouse? Do you really believe that! And you are mocking me?!? Disney has been called many things for their business practices, policies, and principles, but I don't think anyone has ever accused them of not knowing what they are doing (regardless of their morals or of the intent of what they are doing, they know VERY WELL, and they do it better than any other Entertainment Company in the World)!!!

      They don't know what they're doing WRT the web, if they don't just provide the information in HTML or XML as well as Flash. I don't know about their movies, the only interesting ones seem to be done by other people and just released by Disney (Toy Story, Spirited Away), which are the only ones I've seen lately. I think they are basically bereft of creativity, mining the public domain for material while trying to destroy it for future generations.

      No thanks, please use the proper term, ENVY!

      Envy over what? Being creatively backrupt? Nope.

      Please *think* about what YOU do by holding such sublime hatred (envy) of organizations with power like Disney. Remember they started humbly and their innovators / entrepreneurs / visionaries / artists worked their a@#es off to get where they are today!

      Walt Disney and crew may have. Now? I don't think so. This is, of course, why it's important that copyrights and patents are allowed to expire.

      That is the DREAM of this country for many people living here and ALL hoping to someday enter!

      It's important to remember that many people living that "dream" never got there via hard work, imagination, or drive. They'll be happy to package that dream for you, to keep you a nice docile cog in the machine, though.

      Not to say it can't be achieved, but an awful lot of CEOs don't seem to have ever actually *done* anything, except switch from job to job through the old boy's network, raping and pillaging as they go.

      Jealousy never gets you anywhere. Instead of hating all above you, work as hard as they did, move up the ladder by taking equal if not greater risks of falling, and get there yourself by having MUCH better ideas and drive! I'm sure the view is very different from the top. I hope you get there someday (and that others do not harbor hatred toward you just for being there)!

      Yes, it would be better to get there via hard work. As far as I can see, Disney is just a pack of executives and their lawyers who screw over smaller artists and their companies who actually do the producing, and lobby to change laws to take away our "fair use" rights and completely kill of the public domain - ironically where Disney gets it's "ideas".

  9. yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    step 1: advertise
    step 2: ???
    step 3: profit!

    So far they have failed at step 1, its exactly what happened to Mononoke all over again. This movie makes Country Bears laughable at best, why not advertise quality animations and get rid of these terrible terrible films. Oh well, so long as it comes out in DVD with both languages and subs I'll be happy in more than one way.

    1. Re:yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh this AC got insightful for the classic repitition of the two steps then profit routine.

      It didn't even get the two steps right.

      More like. Because critics are adding it to their best lists it makes spending payola on it worth it because of the true two step to profit formula at work here.

      1) advertise a movie that the critics love
      2) get nominated for an academy award and milk the nomination and the win if they get it to put the masses tushes into seats and ..
      3) profit in boxoffice and dvd sales

      Also keep in mind if Disney manages to starve the competition of animation awards with their 3 animated movies they win too.

      Still I don't think it will work for them but your estimation of the situation was so poor it seems as if you did not read the articles linked.

      And this got a 3? What are you moderators on, I think I'd like some too.

      This is your drug contused brain moderating...
      Moderation Totals:
      Flamebait=1, Insightful=4, Total=5.
      Any questions?

  10. So now we like them? by LordKronos · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is this the "Disney is good" week? I guess last week must have been the "evil" week, but I didn't get the memo.

    1. Re:So now we like them? by Zorikin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Microsoft started distributing free Debian installation CDs with some percentage of copies of Windows, for whatever reason, a lot of people (read: Linux fans) would associate Microsoft with goodness.

      Those of them which were in a clearer state of mind at the time would decide that /the specific action/ which Microsoft took was good.

      This story is about a specific action Disney has taken - not Disney in general.

  11. Argh! I feel faint... by jwiegley · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I'm pretty unhappy that anybody made a comparison between Spirited Away and Beauty and the Beast.

    Except for both movies being presented as animation, comparing SA to BATB is like comparing gold to crap.

    Its a comparison between true visual art and typical, run-of-the-mill disney fare. Want to see BATB again? go rent The Little Mermaid.

    And let's not even begin to compare the story lines. SA is far, far more creative, deep and moving.

    --
    I will never live for sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
    1. Re:Argh! I feel faint... by Cuthalion · · Score: 1

      So to rebutt "Beauty and the Beast won Best Film, so maybe Spirited Away could" you say "nononono, Spirited Away is way better than Beauty And The Beast!"...

      --
      Trees can't go dancing
      So do them a big favor
      Pretend dancing stinks!
    2. Re:Argh! I feel faint... by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 3, Insightful

      B&tB was a really decent story, up til the sell-out* conformist ending. Of course, the ending and overall flow was the same as the fairy tell, but the parts Disney added were supporting characters to add length- helpful servants and vile, closeminded peasants. This created a racial-discrimination subplot that concluded in an entirely unedifiying way.

      The White Gaulic Catholics are the bad guys, because they attack the hero after judging him solely by his appearance. So how is the situation resolved? He changes his appearance to look just like the bigots who had shunned him.

      What's the moral of the story kids? "If you're different than other people, try to change and blend in. Nobody likes a weirdo, and don't you want to be liked?"

      A better, more courageous ending would've had the Beast miss his deadline, and still live happily without that last-minute miracle.

      Shrek (an anti-Disney film in more blatant ways also) nicely reversed B&tB, by allowing the curse victim to decide that she was better off under the spell (superhuman strength trumps prettiness).

      *Yes, I feel the painful redundancy of using "sell-out" in reference to a Disney movie.

    3. Re:Argh! I feel faint... by PaddyM · · Score: 2

      You can diss the BATB animated film all you want, I suppose.

      But the Beauty and the Beast is the BEST musical I've ever seen. (Although, I suppose I'm only comparing it to Phantom of the Opera in Phantages and Les Miserables on Broadway).

      I think that Into The Woods has the potential to be the Best musical of all time, but no professional production has a chorus of Trees like my high school did. And I can't think that my high school did the best performance of those songs.

    4. Re:Argh! I feel faint... by Hobophile · · Score: 1
      I think that Into The Woods has the potential to be the Best musical of all time, but no professional production has a chorus of Trees like my high school did. And I can't think that my high school did the best performance of those songs.

      Damn, where did you go to high school? Where I went we had a chorus line of dancing trees too. West Forsyth, North Carolina by any chance? I was on stage crew the year we did Into the Woods.

      Here's my understanding of the reasoning behind it. Usually we did a musical production each spring (dance concert in the fall) and in musicals you have a lot more parts to fill -- all the random people who appear out of nowhere to burst into song have to be played by actors. But Into the Woods was like a straight play in the sense that it didn't have a lot of opportunities in the script for singing extras.

      So the director wrote in the dancing trees. I think the concern was if you put on a play with only 10 or so main actors, only the families and friends of those people would actually show up. By casting more people you increased the potential attendance.

      Previously I had thought this was his original (and rather absurd) idea, but it's possible he copied someone else's brainchild. I can't say I thought very much of his abilities.

      Of course, I don't think he cared much for me either, after I donned a tree costume -- essentially a black outfit, which I was already wearing because I was on crew, plus some little vine things -- on the final night and went out with the rest of the trees. I did pretty well except for exiting on the wrong side of the stage. Supposedly the director was livid about that at the time, but I talked with him a little later and he seemed cordial enough.

      Ah, high school.

  12. Re:Who cares? by ttyRazor · · Score: 1

    I do.

  13. It beats dutch manga/anime. by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 2

    I once bothered to take a look at the manga they are broadcasting over here. After torturing myself painfully for fifteen minutes while feeling something which can only be explained by a spectral force forcing two scolding-hot spiked maces into my skull through my ears and then twisting them. After some research (and recuperation) it turned out that I saw something called "Sailor Moon", dubbed in dutch, which was quite possibly the most horrible thing I ever heard. You cannot copy a line of text from japanese, to english, to dutch. It's just morally and ethically wrong.

    If anything, that event made me decide never EVER to watch manga/anime on dutch TV stations again. And never to wake up before 12:00 out of free will, either.

    1. Re:It beats dutch manga/anime. by josh+crawley · · Score: 1

      ----which can only be explained by a spectral force forcing two scolding-hot spiked maces into my skull through my ears and then twisting them-----

      When I read that, I saw:

      which can only be explained by a spectral force forcing two scolding-hot spiked MACS into my skull through my ears and then twisting them and I thought of this

    2. Re:It beats dutch manga/anime. by KH · · Score: 1

      Jouw post is eigenlijk grappig. It's beyond my comprehension why they decided to show Sailor Moon on Dutch TV. Still, it's for kids originally, and it's a pain for an adult Japanese too even in original. For that matter, German TV even showed Chibi maruko, which requires more knowledge of what life was like in Japan in the '70s. That show was actually quite fun for people from all the ages as long as you know what it is about.

      Anyhow, you could still go to a nearest video store and rent Ghost in the Shell.

      Oh by the way, you lost a point for confusing manga and anime :)

    3. Re:It beats dutch manga/anime. by G-funk · · Score: 2

      No, no, no, no, no... It's not the dutch that's killing it, Sailor Moon is simply the worst thing ever released upon the viewing public since that barbie cartoon.

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    4. Re:It beats dutch manga/anime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sailor Moon is not the best anime, but out of all the shoujo anime, it is one of the best. The story, mostly in season 2 [R], 3 [S], and 5 [Stars] is very well written. For a children's anime, the drama is very intense, and the themes presented very mature. Try to download some subtitled episodes from the finales of S and Stars..

    5. Re:It beats dutch manga/anime. by Shillo · · Score: 1

      It still beats Sailor Moon dubbed in Croatian that they're playing here. The language path, as far as I could tell, was Japanese->English->German->Croatian. If you ever read Vernor Vinge's Fire Upon the Deep, it's just as bad as long language path translations found in the book.

      Of course, Sailor Moon is bad to begin with, but this got downright ridiculous.

      --

      --
      I refuse to use .sig
    6. Re:It beats dutch manga/anime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anime = Animated Cartoon
      Manga = Comic Book

  14. This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by Qzukk · · Score: 5, Informative

    This movie was made by Studio Ghibli, and US distribution rights were bought by Disney, who so far has been doing only so-so at actually getting this stuff out. (Where is my Kiki's Delivery Service DVD? How about Nausicaa or Castle in the Sky, or any of the other good Ghibli titles they've gotten?)

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    1. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 2

      I was almost sure that Laputa was supposed to be released late this year; but I guess it's a little late for that. However, I think that Disney's started doing some advertising, so I assume it's not going to be long now.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    2. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by dpt · · Score: 1

      Ah, I see. Good point. Plastering "Disney" all over everything related to it colored my perception.

    3. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by dacarr · · Score: 2

      Not sure, but it won't be called Laputa - apparently for the same reason that perpetuates the myth of the Chevrolet Nova not doing well in South America.

      --
      This sig no verb.
    4. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 2

      Well, to be fair: when Jonathan Swift made up the name, he was perfectly well aware of its meaning; when Miyazaki used it, he didn't know that. Given that a relatively large proportion of the population here will find the name "Laputa" to be extremely offensive, I think that the name does not fairly represent the movie.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    5. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      Hm, yeah, this year has just about run out. I never seem to catch any advertising for anything other than Treasure Planet though.

      The Japanese region 2 Studio Ghibli discs are supposed to be pretty good, and even include an English dub (and dub script subtitles, usually), I just don't have the money to import everything I want to see straight from the source :p

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    6. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by wumingzi · · Score: 1

      The Japanese region 2 Studio Ghibli discs are supposed to be pretty good, and even include an English dub (and dub script subtitles, usually), I just don't have the money to import everything I want to see straight from the source

      The Japanese Region 2 discs from Ghibli are awesome, and yes, most of them do include dubs.

      Don't want to import from the source? Rent from Scarecrow Video (disclaimer: I have no connection with Scarecrow other than as a fanatic customer).

      If you live too far away from them to rent, move. There are no geek jobs to be had in Seattle, but it's still nice here. :-)

      j.

    7. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go to your favorite online auction site & get the bootleg DVDs of the Ghibli collection. The ones I've seen have been really nice conversions from laserdisk. They're cheap & have everything up until about the time of Mononoke.

      Piracy is bad, but you're never gonna see the shit on a region 1 DVD otherwise.

    8. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by Yottabyte84 · · Score: 1

      Why is "Laputa" offensive?

    9. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by nanoakron · · Score: 1

      'Laputa' means 'The whore' or 'The bitch' in Spanish.

      Sorry, IANASOS (...not a speaker of Spanish)

      -Nano

    10. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by Yottabyte84 · · Score: 1

      Thank you for that enlightenment. My guess was that it was something dirty in spanish, but I had no idea why....

    11. Re:This movie is NOT made by Disney ... by tomhudson · · Score: 2
      apparently for the same reason that perpetuates the myth of the Chevrolet Nova not doing well in South America. </quote>

      Nova == 'no va' == 'no go'.

  15. UGH! by Lysol · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Look, I'm sure the movie is cool. Has a lot of great symbolism, however I find the following (possible) bedfellows ironic:

    1. Disney. Nuff said.
    2. The oscars. like any other industry-circle-jerk awards show, gee..

    who f**king cares if it wins the oscars!!!?!??? that seems more like a curse for any artistic endeavor. i dunno, i was bummed disney released it. like i need more of my money going to a shithole company bent on f**king up copyright laws and stealing from generations before, but not acknowledging it.

    sorry but this article sux! i wish spirited away the best of luck, but i won't be seeing it...

    1. Re:UGH! by hudsonhawk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I hate disney and the oscars as much as anything, this really has the potential to legitmize anime as being more than Squaresoft fanboy fodder. Honestly, I don't think any other distributor could've brought this fantastic, fantastic movies to as many screens. Both times I saw this in the theater, it was packed with families, something I've never, ever seen at an anime screening.

      If this does well, maybe we'll finally get to see that Cowboy Bebop movie on the big screen after all.

      Scott

    2. Re:UGH! by neonsocks · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh grow up. First go see the movie. Disney is simply distributing this movie in the US. What other studio has ever taken a chance on nationally releasing Japanese anime in theaters?? Okay so the Oscars don't always represent the absolute best but they do give some limited release movies the attention they deserve. Go see Spirited Away and tell Disney with your pocketbook that you want to see high quality and high art animation, not re-hashed drivel like Treasure Planet et. al.

    3. Re:UGH! by Webphisher · · Score: 1

      If it wins at the oscars, maybe that will convince Disney that more of Miyazaki's work that they have the rights to produce over here well be worth bringing over. I marketing it looks better to say "From the people that brought you the OSCAR AWARD WINING film Spirited Away..."

      --
      I am the Pumpkin King!
    4. Re:UGH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Benjamin Franklin put it best when he said:

      "Those who would trade essential liberties for japanese cartoons deserve neither."

    5. Re:UGH! by ainsoph · · Score: 2


      Well said, thanks a bunch. Disney sucks ass, but people spending money in one direction will allow the ass suckers know what we want.

      Of course, Disney will always attempt to make White versions of what we want. But thats another thread altogether,

  16. World attacked by mutant anime by Siriaan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I'm not a big fan of the Academy Awards and disagree with much of the way it works, I think a nomination and especially a win at the Oscars for an anime film will rocket anime into even more mainstream outlets. More anime on TV, more films, more professional dubs and subs, etc. I can't think of a better way for anime to become more accepted in the west than for Spirited Away to win an Oscar.

    1. Re:World attacked by mutant anime by kableh · · Score: 2

      Since when has being accepted in the West helped anything? =)

      I saw this at a local artsy theatre. Really, really liked it. The animation was gorgeous, both as a technical work and a work of art.

      As far as it helping the West accept anime, Pokemon and the lot have done enough damage as it is...

    2. Re:World attacked by mutant anime by sakusha · · Score: 2

      You clearly don't know how the Academy works. No film will ever be nominated for Best Picture if it has no chance of actually winning the prize. No animated film has ever won Best Picture. And this "film" (and I use that term loosely) has exactly zero chance of ever winning best picture. Ergo, it has zero chance of ever being nominated for Best Picture.

    3. Re:World attacked by mutant anime by Siriaan · · Score: 1

      Where in my post did I talk about it winning Best Picture? All I said was "an Oscar", I didn't specify which one.

    4. Re:World attacked by mutant anime by Chemical · · Score: 1
      Whatever. La Vita e Bella (Life is Beautiful) won three Oscars in 1999, including Best Foriegn Film and was nominated for four others, including Best Director. Malena was nominated for two Oscars in 2001. Those were both excellent movies, but the Oscar wins/nominations didn't exactly start an Italian film craze in the US.

      An Oscar will do nothing for Anime's status in the US. It will remain a niche, but is that such a bad thing? What will mainstream do for you? Bad dubs on TV and delays due to big studios botching things up? No thanks?

    5. Re:World attacked by mutant anime by matlokheed · · Score: 1

      How much acceptance do you need? I turn on FOX on an average Saturday morning and I see enough stuff that was either anime or anime inspired that I have to make sure I'm still in the same country.

      Granted most of this stuff is horrendous anime and the more psychotic among us will complain that the dubs are terrible, but really, coming from a generation that grew up with Transformers and Thundercats, I think we're pretty accepting of anime already. Not the artsy and deep stuff that they usually get in Japan, but that's because there's nearly a zero audience for it over here.

      We've got plenty of acceptance. It's just whether we actually like what we get that's important.

      --

      "If the good lord had intended us to walk, he wouldn't have invented roller skates." -Willy Wonka

    6. Re:World attacked by mutant anime by JordoCrouse · · Score: 1

      You clearly don't know how the Academy works. No film will ever be nominated for Best Picture if it has no chance of actually winning the prize.

      Uhh, do *you* know how the Academy works? The members only vote once, you know. The nominees are just the top 5 vote getters. So if the voters generally thought it was one of the top five films of the year, it will probably end up getting nominated, but it probably still wouldn't win.

      --
      Do you have Linux and a DotPal? Click here now!
    7. Re:World attacked by mutant anime by sakusha · · Score: 2
      Uhh, do *you* know how the Academy works?
      Why actually, I do. I was a Hollywood script doctor, 5 of the scripts I worked on were nominated for Best Picture, 1 of them won. Of course, I got no credit, that's all part of the deal, you get paid the big bucks to disappear after fixing things.
      Anyway, the Academy is a large collection of people, sure there's a bunch of idiots at Disney who nominate their own films, but the vast majority are extremely conservative and vote for the same films for mostly political reasons. The point stands, SA will not be nominated for Best Picture. A foreign animated film of such limited interest will not even be a blip on the Academy members' screens.
  17. spirited away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    excellent. this is one of the more impressive
    stories i've seen for awhile .. studio ghibli
    keeps producing wonderful work, and they defintiely
    deserve the effort on their behalf.

  18. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Assistants! Get this man his dork badge right away!

    Congratulations, friend, you've just nominated yourself as dork of the day!

    DotD Committee

  19. Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by Archfeld · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I hope this is a financial loss for them and Mickey has to go back to the bread line where the stolen rat started. Has disney EVER actually created somthing from scratch or is EVERY Disney 'creation' in fact derived from someone elses work then copyrighted and 0wned forever.
    I am not old enought to speak for when Walt was around but Disney has been nothing exciting as long as I can remember.

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    1. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 2

      That would be a really great argument if the movie was made by Disney.

      --
      "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
    2. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about the Oscars, but the Emmy awards are run by NATAS. .seilf fo drol eht ot deknil eb thgim SATAN woh rednow I ...mmmH If they aren't Satan followers I don't know who is.

    3. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by Archfeld · · Score: 2

      made by or marketed by, Disney is going to eat up ANY profits and screw the actual artists by complaining that the marketing costs ate up any profit and that they are actually owed money but the artists can turn over the rights to the film in return for getting let out of a bad deal....

      --
      errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    4. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL thanks that was a good laugh :)))

    5. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by keyed · · Score: 1

      What you are saying is just wrong, wrong, WRONG!!

      I want Disney to succeed beyond their wildest dreams with Spirited Away. Disney has the licenses for most of Ghibli Studio movies. If you ever want to to see any of them released domestically in the US instead of having to import them, you had better hope that Spirited Away wins Oscars, expands to 1000+ theaters, and Disney rakes in the $$$.

      Otherwise, we'll be stuck with crap like Fox putting out My Neighbor Totoro in pan & scan, bare bones dvd.

    6. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 2
      The movie made $200 Million in Japan; it is the highest grossing film of all time in Japan, beating Titanic. Studio Ghibli doesn't care too much about how much money they make in the U.S.

      Further, Ghibli has a very restrictive contract with Disney that prevents Disney from making any changes to the movies (this is why Mononoke was released with a PG-13 rating).

      --
      "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
    7. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by Archfeld · · Score: 2

      why do they need Disney ??? Order them online and get a region mod'd player and watch what you want.
      When the PRODUCING company sees a profit to be made they will start translating them. Your way gets SOME to the market, the one that the MORONS at Disney think will work, but also ensures that they get the Mouses' (ehhh bad humor sorry) share of the profit.

      --
      errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    8. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by Archfeld · · Score: 2

      and we can see how much effort Disney put into marketing PM. Which was awesome btw...
      The lead balloon in this equation is Disney, why do they have to control distribution, especially when they won't expend very much effort ?

      --
      errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    9. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 2
      http://nausicaa.net/miyazaki/disney/
      Did Miyazaki sell his soul to Disney?

      Miyazaki stated that he didn't like the movies by Toho or Toei either (they are the Japanese movie companies which have been distributing the Ghibli films). He distinguishes between film production and film distribution. He also stated that he had agreed to the deal mainly to help Tokuma, which had backed him when he was starting out. He said he has earned enough money to last him a lifetime.

      --
      "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
    10. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2
      Has disney EVER actually created somthing from scratch?

      They have. To the best of my knowledge, excluding the music, Disney's original works, IN THE REALM OF FEATURE ANIMATION (I don't want to bother with the shorts or live action stuff) are:

      Fantasia (Toccata & Fugue in D Minor; The Nutcracker Suite; Rite of Spring; Dance of the Hours; Night on Bald Mountain; Ave Maria) -- Saludos Amigos -- The Three Caballeros -- Make Mine Music -- Melody Time (Once Upon a Wintertime; Bumble Boogie; Little Toot; Blame it on the Samba; Blue Shadows on the Trail) -- The Aristocats -- A Goofy Movie -- Fantasia 2000 (Symphony No. 5; The Pines of Rome; Rhapsody in Blue; Carnival of the Animals; The Firebird Suite) -- The Emperor's New Groove -- Lilo & Stitch -- (The Lion King, and Atlantis: The Lost Empire, are disputed)

      A number of the others were licensed (e.g. Winnie-the-Pooh, 101 Dalmatians) or were taken from public domain works which remain available to everyone (e.g. Snow White; Robin Hood)

      Disney does some good stuff. Personally I really want Eldred to win so that I can start making new Mickey Mouse cartoons. He used to be a lot more fun way back in the early days.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    11. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by Futaba-chan · · Score: 1

      No, no, no! Wrong devil. Disney is next to Dispater. Saban is next to Satan....

    12. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by Archfeld · · Score: 1

      Well cast me up in the light, I always thought Belial was next to Dispater, who was next to Asmodeus....Things get sooo confusing :)

      --
      errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    13. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by Yottabyte84 · · Score: 1

      or were taken from public domain works which remain available to everyone (e.g. Snow White; Robin Hood)

      Notice how they don't want to give back to the public domain.

    14. Re:Disney is NEXT TO SATAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The stories were public domain because they've been around so long.

      Disney's stuff will be public domain eventually (wasn't there a story recently about Steamboat Willie almost reaching the age when it becomes public domain? Then legislation was being pushed by special interests to extend the amount of time before it qualifies to be public domain from the current (somewhat over 50 years). This was probably at least in part pushed by the mouse, but our congressman's greedy pockets are wide open and listening, don't forget).

      Until then, we just wait and hope that our wonderful congress doesn't extend copyrights for another xx amount of years!

      Why would Disney EVER want to release their stuff to public domain? They're a business and want to make money (if possible, indefinitely) on their works.

  20. For those of slashdot not totally anime maniacs.. by Hott+of+the+World · · Score: 4, Informative

    ..Spirited away is written and directed by Hayao Miyazaki, which is the same person who made Nausacaa Valley of the wind, and more recently (1997) Princess Mononoke.

    It seems to be even more captivating than Princess Mononoke, yet somewhat disney oriented as it focuses on the adventures of a ten year old named chihiro who gets "spirited away" to a magical land; separated from her parents, she struggles to find a way home.(trailer)

    Whoah, that was a mouthful. But it seems to be a really good movie, if your looking for something more than Treasure Planet.

    --
    | - | - |
  21. Re:For those of slashdot not totally anime maniacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    C'mon, Ghibli ass-kisser. Even the Kureyon Shin-Chan movie was better than Sen to.

  22. I do too. by Peterus7 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That movie was really great. And plus, with disney bringing it in that'll just make it easier to access. So if it's playing at a theater near you, see it. It's a great movie. I however do wonder if the original script was changed to 'americanize' it. I hope not. But it's good to see that a big company has finally acknowledged that Anime movies could really do well in the US.

  23. Why Disney won't back it fully by infonography · · Score: 3, Funny

    I would love to see how they plan to put a Radish Spirt toy in a happy meal. They don't care about ticket sales, they care about byproducts and aftermarket trinkets.

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
    1. Re:Why Disney won't back it fully by RyoSaeba · · Score: 1

      Hehe, you weren't in Japan in july...
      That's the time around which Chihiro (original title) was released, and you could buy the DVD / tape / related stuff in any shop related more or less to anime, video, games, and such...
      So maybe Disney care about related products, but they aren't the only ones ^_-

      --
      Tsuyoikoto ha taisetsu da ne, dakedo namida mo hitsuyousa (Strength is an important thing, but tears too are necessary)
    2. Re:Why Disney won't back it fully by infonography · · Score: 1

      oh, your just teasing me, whahh. I want to be in Japan now or just have a copy of the DVD, I don't care about engrish.

      --
      Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  24. Close but no cigar by bananahammock · · Score: 0

    A fresh topic simply isn't newsworthy unless it has a baker's dozen of links. Bummer tim, you're one short.

  25. Disney losing money... by tgrotvedt · · Score: 1

    A while ago I saw a pretty insightful documentary in Australia about the making of Disney animated films, and the bussiness strategies that go along with them.

    It appears that since the Lion King, every Disney film has been either kids only, or failed to get very popular and gone to video/DVD quickly. This doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the quality of the entertainment either.

    The doco' explained that Disney don't actually make money on these any more, or at least weren't doing so in late 2000. This could put these real "long shot" and geek projects in jeopardy.

    Without sounding like a drone, I would recommend that the geek community don't just leech these movies in divx and keep them. If we like these films, we should support them by going to the cinema (just a *little* nicer than divx huh?) and/or purchasing the DVD. If we have to get the divx it should be more of a preview thing and serve a decision making process. ....that's all..... back to warezcrawler.....

    --
    What makes a man want to be a mouse? (Python's Flying Circus)
    1. Re:Disney losing money... by Brynath · · Score: 1
      I would Love to go to the Theater to see this.

      But It isn't playing in my area, in fact it isn't playing in my entire state (Alaska) I am not about to spend over 800 dollars to get to wherever the movie is playing to see it.

      The whole point of the article is that Disney isn't backing this movie, and it isn't playing in very many theaters. There are 4 theaters in my city that could play this, hell they arn't playing much more than harry potter at the moment.

      But Disney hasn't done much to market this movie, and unless it gets nominated for an Oscar, it probably won't get any play in my area.

      So it's not that people are Pirating this, they can leagally purchase an import, it is that Disney isn't doing squat with it cause they can't sell stupid pieces of plastic to kids with it.

    2. Re:Disney losing money... by Rocky · · Score: 1

      >It appears that since the Lion King, every Disney film has been either kids only, or failed to get very popular and gone to video/DVD quickly.
      >This doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the quality of the entertainment either.

      It has everything to do with the fact Katzenberg left.

      Think about it.

      --
      "I'm an old-fashioned type of guy. I worship the Sun and Moon as gods. And fear them."
  26. Re:Who cares? by neostorm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Even if you hate Animation this is something everyone should see. There are just too many good things to say about this movie, as this is something that can be considered a truly artful piece of work among the repetitive norm.

    Don't make the mistake of filing this film under the typical "Anime-blahblahblah" category.

  27. Even Disney can't bury this one. by haydon4 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Disney has been trying to bury quality anime movies for a long time because they know how good they are. Mirimax was only able to release Princess Mononoke to a limited number of theaters due to pressure from Disney.

    If word got out to the mainstream that animated movies from overseas could be both entertaining to children and thought provoking to adults, then it would force Disney to rework their entire development structure to change over and reinvent their formulated storylines and stereotyped characters.

    The problem for Disney here is that "Spirited Away" has people talking all over the world and even they can't keep this one quiet. So in the spirit of a multi-national corporation crushing its competition; if you can't beat them, buy them.
    That way they can show "Spirited Away" in a limited release, satisfy a few fans and wait for the buzz to die down. But it didn't work this time, so they will put more money into the release and hope this will still go away quietly.

    But I think Disney is in for a real shock here.

    1. Re:Even Disney can't bury this one. by CashCarSTAR · · Score: 1

      You're right. This is this years Hidden Tiger Crouching Dragon. A movie that would be otherwised ignore but is too big to ignore.

      I'm not a big fan of Disney's business practices..but..but..I'm a huge fan of art. I believe in supporting high quality art and that tends to trump these things. Only in this quality of art can we actually turn this whale of a society around into something a lot more beautiful.

      Spirited Away is a beautiful fable. A story of a girl who gives up everything to save those close to her. Then gives that up to save a stranger. It's a wonderful movie that should be seen by as many people as possible.

    2. Re:Even Disney can't bury this one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      sorry. they haven't.

      they've done an excellent job on the release of princess mononoke and spirited away. the dubs in both were excellent. they *spent* money, and lots of it.

      they decided not to go for wide releases because they couldn't work out how to market these films. crouching tiger hidden dragon was *very* marketable by comparison, the only thing which didn't make it a standard american film was the subtitles WHICH is about the only thing making spirited away look like a standard american film.

      great films suffer in america all the time. the only reason? they don't cater to "middle america".

      if you want conspiricy, try asking why every major corp, inc. its distributor, wants Bowling for Columbine to sink.

      ghibli films were a gamble for disney that probably won't pay off (they aren't allowed to cut them and have to get dubs approved by Japan). i'm just glad to see they're not giving up.

    3. Re:Even Disney can't bury this one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why every major corp, inc. its distributor, wants Bowling for Columbine to sink.

      Because it sucks and it's full of lies?

      Nah. They wouldn't care about that, if it could make a buck.

      Nevertheless, it's true. Michael Moore = Bizarro World Rush Limbaugh. Just as fat. Just as obnoxious. Just as dishonest.

    4. Re:Even Disney can't bury this one. by Watts+Martin · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's a great conspiracy theory, except that it's bullshit.

      Disney is the company that bought the rights to distribute Miyazaki's films in America. Not Mirimax acting independently. The theatrical releases have been under the Mirimax label because Miyizaki's contract with the Disney studio requires that his movies not be marketed as Disney films.

      I'm all for knocking big companies, but the fact is that big companies like to make money, and spending money on the rights to American distribution for a movie with the intent of killing it is not good business practice. Anime fans may not like the mainstream Hollywood perception that anime releases aren't "big-budget" enough, and they may not like it that Disney obviously buys into this and released both Mononoke and Spirited Away as art-house films. I don't like it, either, even though I'm not much of an anime fan. But that doesn't require a conspiracy.

      Reality check: these films got the same kind of promotional budget and release that other art-house films do. This is the normal pattern. Start small with very little advertising, and when a film starts to take off, pump more money pumped into them. Look at Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon--there was no more advertising for it in the first several months of its release than there was for Mononoke. (In my area, in fact, there was more advertising for Mononoke; Dragon didn't get TV ads, at least in that region, until its Oscar nomination.)

      And you know what? The fact that Mononoke made much less money wasn't a great argument for putting it into wide release. "It'd have made lots of money if only you'd opened it on three thousand screens simultaneously and spent ten million advedrtising it" is an argument that warms the heart of fans but not studio accountants.

      The level of commitment that Disney is showing by even considering a major theatre rollout for Spirited Away is much higher than I'd have expected. It's also inconsistent with the idea that they're interested in burying it--if they hadn't released it in the first place, nobody in America would be talking about it except anime fans. If you hope something "will still go away quietly," you don't start screaming about it louder.

    5. Re:Even Disney can't bury this one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're all fat dipshit. get over it last century.

    6. Re:Even Disney can't bury this one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are full of shit.

    7. Re:Even Disney can't bury this one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice rebuttal.

      You've been taking logic lessons from Michael Moore, haven't you?

  28. I thought it was an enjoyable movie by jmccullough · · Score: 1

    I saw Spirited away at a local independent theater and I thought it was very well good. It is written for a younger audience than Princess Mononoke, but I thought it was just as enjoyable. They did a very good job with the english dub, at least as well as with Mononoke.

  29. Budgets by EverDense · · Score: 1

    "Disney chairman Richard W. Cook says that they've budgeted to market Spirited Away in up to 1,000" irrelevant Slashdot stories.

    --
    http://jesus.everdense.com/
  30. Don't like Disney, Don't like anime, but I like... by dagg · · Score: 1
    I rarely like Disney movies, and I'm not a harried fan of anime... but I thought Spirited Away was great! I was lucky that a friend of mine recommended it... and I was lucky that it was actually being shown within a 100 mile radius. Even when the plot was occasionally below my intelligence threshold, the beautiful animation and soundtrack kept me watching and listening.

    --
    Sex for you

    --
    Sex - Find It
  31. Disney doesn't own the merchandising rights. by Mononoke · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Disney doesn't know how to promote a movie without the usual BurgerKing/McDonalds/Target/Sears tie-ins.

    Because Disney doesn't hold the merchandising rights to the Ghibli catalog, they will never promote these movies as they should be promoted. Remember: Disney gains nothing from the success of these movies, and loses nothing if they fail.

    There is also quite a bit of Not-Invented-Here attitude that is quite apparent in what little promotion there has been.

    I was lucky enough to see Spirited Away on the big screen. My girlfriend and I went to the 7:45 PM showing on a Saturday. We were the only ones in the audience. The print looked almost new, as if the theatre hadn't been bothering to run it to an empty house. Local promotion? There was only the simple one-line listing in the newspaper. There were NO posters, one-sheets, lobby cards, stand-ups, or anything in or around the theatre. No wonder I got a private showing. Even if the general public had heard of the movie, no one would know it was playing at that theatre.

    To sum up: Disney is burying this movie, just as they did with Mononoke. It may not be entirely intentional, but it is still occuring.

    --
    NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
    1. Re:Disney doesn't own the merchandising rights. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      on the other hand, they did put a lot of money into excellent dubs and dvd versions.

      I think Disney supports these films and wants to do their best by them but also needs to minimise their losses.

    2. Re:Disney doesn't own the merchandising rights. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Because Disney doesn't hold the merchandising rights to the Ghibli catalog, they will never promote these movies as they should be promoted. Remember: Disney gains nothing from the success of these movies, and loses nothing if they fail.

      What the hell are you talking about? Disney is promoting the shit out of this film, running full page ads in Variety and Hollywood reporter, along with their OWN films (Lilo & Stitch & Treasure Planet), despite the strong possibility that competition from another film will pull Academy votes away from their two movies (Lilo was a hit & TP will be a big success tomorrow).

      Last year Disney didn't even put Atlantis in the running-- no ads, no hype-- it wasn't even submitted for competition. Why? Because they didn't want to split the Monsters, Inc. vote, which they thought was the only thing that could stand a chance against Shrek.

      e were the only ones in the audience. The print looked almost new, as if the theatre hadn't been bothering to run it to an empty house. Local promotion? There was only the simple one-line listing in the newspaper. There were NO posters, one-sheets, lobby cards, stand-ups, or anything in or around the theatre.

      Are you actually complaining that the print looked great??! As far as posters go, you obviously aren't in LA, the most important city for building Oscar buzz. Here, one-sheets are plastered everywhere, there are full-sized billboards, and the movie has real exposure.

      To sum up: Disney is burying this movie, just as they did with Mononoke.

      They are NOT burying this movie. They could have easily bought and not released the film, if that's what they wanted to do. They are not only showing the movie but are heavily promoting in the trades, trying to build more world of mouth and make it a contender for the animation oscar. *IF* that happens, then they can expand to the 1000 theater version, but this is a classic "platform release" strategy-- start small, build word-of-mouth, and release wider as time goes on. It's worked for many many foreign films of which, like it or not, Spirited Away is obviously one.

      From the original article:

      Some readers suggested that Disney was burying the film because it's better than any of theirs. One said the studio simply doesn't know how to market a children's movie it isn't also merchandising.

      Sound familiar? Did you just read that and decide to be -1 Redundant or what?

      As someone eloquently said below:

      Are you on crack, son? Disney is a BUSINESS. These decisions are based on MAKING MONEY. Disney will release Spirited Away if they think they will make a significant RETURN ON INVESTMENT from doing so.

      They are NOT burying this movie. They are marketing it strongly to the people who can save the film-- not the public (who will see the ads and go "oh, it's another pokomon movie") but the American critics and Acadamy voters who can help the film build momentum.

  32. Specialization of work by ObviousGuy · · Score: 1

    Disney's main strength has never been the quality of its movies. Marketing the hell out of those movies using media blitz, "collectible videos", and all manner of plush dolls has been their main strength.

    So what do you do when your company can't afford to develop its product in-house? You contract out to the specialists. Sometimes you get beautiful results (Fantasia 2000). Sometimes you get mediocre results (Spirited Away).

    It's always a crapshoot when you contract your work out, but it's almost always cheaper. It allows you to focus on your core competencies and let's someone else focus on theirs.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
  33. A chance for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, a chance for what? You make it sound like it's a colossal failure or something. If Disney(MPAA) spent an assload to promote it and it (still) did poorly, it'd go right up there with the FINAL FANTASY movie. I think Disney are pretty smart. Little promotion, good sales on DVD, lots of geeks making them look like the underdog. Psst, please buy an aibo.

  34. why a disney movie? by mattkime · · Score: 2

    would someone explain to me why slashdot is cheering on a disney movie? (The largely fash driven website didn't explain)

    --
    Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
    1. Re:why a disney movie? by tuffy · · Score: 2
      1. Because it's a very, very good film.
      2. ...and it's not made by Disney.
      3. And, if it gets people into theater seats, perhaps it will encourage Disney to start making better animated films.
      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    2. Re:why a disney movie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4. And give them more money to fight against the right to share
      5. ???
      6. Profit!

    3. Re:why a disney movie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you know?

      You only have to boycott the movies and music industry when it's a movie you didn't want to see!

      It it's a geeky movie it's ok.

      The profits from the geeky movies go to buy cool stuff like legos, the profits from the crappy movies movies go to buy shitty laws.

      What you didn't know?

    4. Re:why a disney movie? by CaptainCarrot · · Score: 2
      It's not a Disney movie. It's from Studio Ghibli in Japan and was written and directed by Hiyao Miyazaki, who also made My Neighbor Totoro, Kiki's Delivery Service, and Princess Mononoke among others. Disney just has the distribution rights for it in the US, and they're doing a miserably poor job of it.

      Can you imagine any other studio taking this approach with a movie? "We'll schlep it around to the art houses, and if it wins an Oscar we'll actually put some effort into marketing it." What bullshit. Yeah, that happens from time to time with movies from small production companies -- I think My Big Fat Greek Wedding is an example -- but those are sleepers; no one ever plans to market them that way. Spirited Away was the top grossing movie in Japan ever, and was almost universally praised by US critics. It deserved much more intensive marketing and much wider distribution from the start, and had it gotten those things it would almost certainly have done very, very well.

      I wonder if Disney is snapping up Ghibli titles for the same reason GM bought out the trolley lines in LA back in the '30s?

      --
      And the brethren went away edified.
  35. Re:Why more Japanese porno? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly. Anime is now much more than just porno. In order to make more money, the artists are now trying to reach a larger market. It's like all of the "couples" vacations that were advertised in the 70's that are now "family" vacations. The motels and travel agents figured-out they can make more money selling to two adults and kids than just the adults. So, give anime a second chance.

  36. Re:Will Spirited Away have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ahhh, finally this bastard is getting modded down. It was funny the first few times, but maybe now he'll give it up.

  37. Best Animated Film by SHEENmaster · · Score: 1

    just like disney to make a category just to win at something

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
    1. Re:Best Animated Film by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 2

      Disney hasn't won an award in that categoy yet, and I doubt they will in the near future. Spirited Away should win this year, and if it doesn't Ice Age will, so the award will go to Ghibli or Blue Sky. Next year Finding Nemo will probably win, giving Pixar their first Oscar in this category. But the bottom line is that Ghibli, PDI, Pixar, and Blue Sky are going to win this Oscar every year for quite some time.

      --
      "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
    2. Re:Best Animated Film by MilTan · · Score: 1

      Disney Oscars:

      Best Animated Short:
      1933-39, 41, 42, 53, 68, 69
      At which point they basically stopped making short animated features anyway. In that time period, Disney by far won the plurality of Oscars conferred, and overall has won more Oscars in that category than anyone else.

      Source: http://www.wildcoast.org/dvd/oscar.html

      Best Score (only listed films that I know for a fact are Disney):
      1940, 41, 64, 89, 91, 92, 94, 95

      Source: http://www.eonline.com/Features/Awards/Oscars2002/ PastWinners/score.html

      Best Song (again, only listed films that I know are Disney):
      1940, 47, 64, 89, 91, 92, 94, 95, 99

      Source: http://www.geocities.com/tsaid3/song.html

      Not too shabby for a company that had to "make a category just to win at something"

  38. "Spirited Away" Nominations by Queer+Boy · · Score: 1
    I don't think the storyline for "Sprited Away" nearly matches that of "Princess Mononoke". I liked SA but not in the way I liked PM. SA was a rather juvenile movie, not to say it wasn't entertaining. PM touches on belief systems as well as respect for the planet. In short, SA is a nice fairy tale slash bedtime story, whereas PM is a fantastic drama.

    As for Beauty and the Beast being nominated, I thought The Little Mermaid and Lion King had better storylines.

    --
    Not since Marie-Antoinette played milkmaid has looking simple and honest been so fake and complicated.
  39. mmmm, yeah by dirvish · · Score: 1

    This story really speaks to the maturity level of the slashdot crowd.

    1. Re:mmmm, yeah by DJSpray · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You know, some of us Slashdot readers are OLD ENOUGH TO HAVE CHILDREN that would enjoy this movie... AND DO. I appreciated the info on the film for _at_least_ that reason.

      And at 35, I hope I never become too "mature" to enjoy a really good kid's film in any genre.

  40. (not) Playing in theaters near you... by dvk · · Score: 2

    I tried to see where it'd be playing around here (NYC)... entered my ZIP... the only one it came up with was some little dinky place on 12th St in Manhattan. Either it hasn't really opened yet, or the 1000 theaters mentioned in the write-up are stretched really thin.
    Not like i care much - unlike lots of people on /., if I don't like Disney, I don't like Disney. As in, won't spend my money on their profit instead of ranting and raving about how bad they are (at least while I can avoid it, being a child at heart but childless in life for the moment :)

    -DVK

    --
    "The right to figure things out for yourself is the only true freedom everyone shares. Go use it"-R.A.Heinlein
    1. Re:(not) Playing in theaters near you... by tuffy · · Score: 1

      It hasn't opened in 1000 theaters yet; it only has the potential to because that's how much Disney has budgeted for release - assuming there's an Oscar possibility. I'd pay to see it in a real theater, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

      --

      Ita erat quando hic adveni.

    2. Re:(not) Playing in theaters near you... by red_dragon · · Score: 2

      A similar situation occured here in Philadelphia. The movie was showing at only two locations, the Ritz in Centre City (another dinky little place, although known to carry a lot of good non-mainstream movies) and the AMC 24 at the Neshaminy Mall in Bensalem. I got to see it at the AMC theatre; only about 10 people were present at the time, myself included.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
    3. Re:(not) Playing in theaters near you... by TimeTrip · · Score: 1

      You shoulda checked about a month ago.. it was playing at loews on 42nd street.. stadium seating... in digital (DLP) dubbed.. and non-digital subbed. I saw digital dubbed. It was amazing!

      --

      You crazy man? You piss off supahfly!
    4. Re:(not) Playing in theaters near you... by Yottabyte84 · · Score: 1

      I saw it at a local theater that was showing harry potter and the like on other screens. I caught the final showing, there were 9 people there, including one guy in his 60s by himself.

    5. Re:(not) Playing in theaters near you... by AndyTriboletti · · Score: 1

      Damn! I really would like to see this. Checked the theater in bensalem, and they aren't playing it. Neither is the Ritz. :-(

  41. The beauty of Astroturfing. by imag0 · · Score: 1

    That, my man, was an exellent Astroturfing job. Kudos!

  42. The Old Boys' Club by jpt.d · · Score: 2

    "They'll spend the same time and money promoting Spirited Away for Academy Awards"

    Lets see, would this be called the Old Boys' club? Take only notice of movies developed (or promoted) by members of the Old Boys' club. Throw maybe one or two other movies in just for show. Congradulate the rest of the Old Boys for their work well done, hope to see you after another glorius profit making year.

    --
    What we see depends on mainly what we look for. -- John Lubbock Now search for that bug slave!
    1. Re:The Old Boys' Club by mbogosian · · Score: 2

      "They'll spend the same time and money promoting Spirited Away for Academy Awards"

      Lets see, would this be called the Old Boys' club?


      Yeah, no shit. The "Academy" awards were once supposed to be about merit. I fail to see, in that case, how one could market or promote for the Oscars. Maybe Speilberg is right.

      This is earily similar to our current domestic political situation. If I have enough money, can I lobby for an Oscar?

  43. Great Movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am fortunate enough to see the movie. Great animation and great story. But up to 1000 theatres sounds like spin. I would have gone 40 miles to have seen the movie. And Disney only seemed to put it in a handful of theatres.

    WhatMeWorry!

  44. OK, but not best by a long shot by magarity · · Score: 1

    Spirited Away was entertaining as an exercise in wierdness for the sake of wierdness. It is not by any stretch my favorite or even a film I'd recommend to non hardcore anime enthusiasts. Typical ultra-smooth, beautiful animation. But some of the characters were just bizarre... the huge-nosed woman who runs the bath house, the eating monster... The soundtrack should be 'Twilight Zone' by Rush.
    DO NOT take small children to see Spirited Away! They WILL cry, like all the small kids in the theatre when I saw it. I figure 10 - 12 would be OK, but definitely keep the 6 year olds home.

  45. yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Be sure to purchase your Spirited Away DVD courtesy of Disney Corporation. After all supporting the mega corps is ok if...well...

    You know damn well there's no excuse for that shit.

    People like are why we have the DMCA.

    Thanks a lot you dicks.

  46. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But it was so boring. Anyone who hates animation will continue to hate it after seeing this.

    Grave of the Fireflies. Still the best recommendation for anime haters.

  47. If you want to learn more about this masterpiece. by Maxime+Lefrancois · · Score: 1

    You must visit http://www.nausicaa.net

    They cover the whole movie and the places where you can watch it. You must see this movie, it's that good.

  48. Keep the fucking idiot out! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If he can't find a way around the fucking blocklist, he doesn't deserve to be on fucking slashdot!

    1. Re:Keep the fucking idiot out! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't "find a way around" the blocking lists at work, not because I can't (and I can with a ssh tunnel to my home machine), but because I'd like to keep my job. I've got two kids that are more important to me than getting to slashdot.org and the few other non-directly work-related sites I check everyday.

  49. A vote for Disney is a vote for Sonny Bono by yerricde · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Ok, now since this is the fourth Tuesday this month we like and support Disney?

    I buy from the MPAA, but I also give to EFF because I take the Lessig Challenge. But even so, I don't buy from The Walt Disney Company because the company had a hand in not only the DMCA but also the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  50. Once upon a time... by CanadaDave · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    After stumbling upon this cartoon fan site which I had never heard of, which goes by the name of "Slashdot", I clicked on the link "Bugs" on the left-hand side of the page, hoping to perhaps find some recent news about one of my all-time favourite cartoon characters, Bugs Bunny. I didn't get what I expected, instead I was re-directed to some strange site called SourceForge.net. I assumed it must have been an old link, perhaps left there by the previous nerdy webmasters who were engaged in some sort of open source project... Then when I returned to the cartoon fan site Slashdot, I began to wonder, what was this site really all about anyways? Either way, it will always have a permanent spot in my Bookmark file's "kiddy-stuff" sub-folder.

  51. Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    The only thing more amazing than the fact that these tentacle rape movies get so much attention on Slashdot is that this time, *Disney* is distributing one.

  52. Never heard of it? by Vegan+Pagan · · Score: 2

    Then Nausicaa.net should get you up to speed.

    Summary Poem:

    Through the tunnel,
    There was a town of wonder.
    It was an inconceivable place,
    Where inconceivable things happened.

    A world existed right next to the humans' world,
    A world humans could never see.

    Local gods and various lesser deities,
    Goblins and monsters.
    It was a hot springs town,
    Where old gods came to heal their illness and wounds.

    10 year-old Chihiro wanders into this world,
    Where humans shouldn't enter.

    Chihiro can only survive in this world if she accepts two conditions:
    To work for Yu-baaba, an avaricious witch
    Who rules the huge bath house at the center of the town.
    And to be deprived of her name and become a non-human.

    Chihiro lost her name, and began working under her new name, Sen.

    In the town of surprise and wonder, Chihiro comes to know
    A huge sense of helplessness... and a small amount of hope.

    However, in this difficult world, she discovers many things,
    And Chihiro becomes more lively than she ever was.

    Kamajii, the boiler keeper with his rich life experience.
    Rin, who teaches Chihiro the work at the bath house.
    Susuwatari, who carry coal.
    Bou, the son of Yu-baaba.
    The god of the river, a refugee from the human's world, who is covered with trash and sludge.
    Kaonashi, the masked man.
    Zeniiba, the twin sister of Yu-baaba.

    Unimaginable things keep happening.

    Chihiro's sleeping "power to live"
    Has gradually begun to awaken.

    And Chihiro meets Haku, a handsome but mysterious boy.

    The encounter of a boy and a girl, tied together by a promise.
    With awakening memories,
    They understand and help each other.

    Can Chihiro take her name back,
    And return to the humans' world....?

  53. haha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupid slashbots as usually all the hardline rhetoric about freedoms and essential liberties goes right out the fucking window the second a nifty cartoon comes out.

    Pathetic.

    You know i think you deserve to get pissed on with shitty laws.

    Those willing to trade essential liberty for a japanese cartoon deserve neither.

  54. Studio Ghibli Unknown? by GrimSean · · Score: 1
    Hooray! I missed Spirited Away the first time it played in my area, so hopefully it will make another pass through.

    On another note, could we perhaps link to Studio Ghibli when discussing their films in the future? It might reduce the number of "We Hate Disney" posts. It is unfortunate that Disney got the release rights to the Miyazaki/Ghibli films, but I'd rather rant about them somewhere else (for those of you who don't know who Miyazaki is check this out).

    --
    I don't need to be made to look evil. I can do that on my own. - Christopher Walken
  55. i've been waiting to see this movie by pizza_milkshake · · Score: 2

    afaik so far my closest options have been Boston and NYC. As I live ~2 hours (NW Connecticut) from either, I haven't gotten the chance. I'd support a broader release.

  56. What is it with Hayao Miyazaki and little girls? by TerryAtWork · · Score: 2

    ALL of his cartoons star them.

    I'm worried about him, personally....

    --
    It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
  57. Just Go See It by divide+overflow · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Spirited Away is a gorgeous movie. Don't judge it by the distributor (Disney)...it can stand on its own. Disney made a very smart decision to back a film that, in terms of the quality, artfulness and sophistication of its animation, simply blows away most modern animated films.

    I was a bit dubious when a friend of mine told me I had to go see it, but he wouldn't stop praising it. I'm glad I went. It is visually stunning and charmingly quirky in a way I would describe as "Alice in Wonderland, Japanese-style." Miyazaki has produced a superb piece of work.

    1. Re:Just Go See It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here I thought that Miyuki-chan in Wonderland was Alice in Wonderland Japanese-style....

    2. Re:Just Go See It by s.a.m · · Score: 2

      Before seeing it I did not hear much about the film except some mention about it on here. When I went to the theather there were a lot of kids there. Sure you saw the mom's explaining certain words situations etc, but that was fine.

      It is a great movie and like most anime's it has adults mainly as the target audience, however it is a really nice movie where even the kids can sit down an like it. My hope is that it can get released more widely so the rest of the population can see it.

      I do know however that a lot of people do not like reading subtitles. Which is a big drawback because watching the movie in it's original Japanese language is what helps this movie even more.

    3. Re:Just Go See It by Alphtoo · · Score: 1

      I would really love to see it; from what I've read it sounds like a great movie. But if Disney is making a dime off of it, I'll make damn sure it isn't MY dime. Call me old-fashoned, but I still believe that politicians should only be bought with VOTES... and Disney obviously doesn't share my belief on this.

  58. Re:Why more Japanese porno? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, whatever. The first anime, in the 1940s, was a kids show called Testuwan Atom-jin known in America as Atom Boy. Then again, you wouldn't care because you're trolling.

  59. you know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After this pathetic display of support for Disney Corporation i now support the DMCA and the CBTPA and Copyright Extenstions.

    Anyone this spineless deserves to be crushed under the heel of capitalism.

    I don't know why Stallman and Lessig even waste time with silly consumer drones like you. It's fucking all pointless.

    You are soft fat larva in your consumption cacoons posting your whiney little rants in between buckets of McFood and showings of Cowboy Bebop that you watch mesmerized by the images steamed onto the little pacifier screen via your Time Warner umbilical cord.

    You deserve to be crushed. You are not even worthy of contempt. Sure you post a lot of swell rants to your little websites but when it really comes down time to put your money where you mouth is you are just some more mindless consumers.

  60. Re:Why more Japanese porno? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must have missed the slashdot story from a few weeks ago claiming anime was a few hundred years old. Those drawings were definitely not for children.

  61. Wow... by MeatMan · · Score: 0

    ...and all these years I thought the animators who did Speed Racer had died of old age.

  62. someone please kill disolve disney by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    They need to be bought out and disolved, so art can continue. Look at all the crappy studios disney runs and ends up producing total crap. The only exception is pixar, but we all know they only distribute for pixar. All of the other studio's disney owns produce crap. Someone please disolve disney and throw away all of their stolen copyright. Yeah, it's flame bait. Fuck disney.

  63. lucky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was lucky enough to NOT see this in theatre or get the DVD.

    Yes you see i still have my dignity.

  64. What is it with people that ask this question? by pzilla · · Score: 1

    No... seriously. Watch it first, then comment.

    I did and I must say wonderful story and it's much better than Mononoke Hime.

    --

    --
    Karma is overrated, whoring is ok.
  65. Since there seems to be a lot of confusion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Spirited Away has nothing to do with Disney, other than the advertising. It's an anime film, and is therefore a lot closer to Princess Monononke (you've seen it or at least heard about it, right?) or even Ghost in the Shell (you've heard about THAT one).

    I saw it a couple of weeks ago in theatres, and I was definitely glad I did. Something like half the people here would probably not "get" it and walk from the theatre disappointed, but it was an incredible display of imagination, beautiful animation, and the most refreshing break from Hollywood crap since... well... since a long time. I enjoyed it a lot more than Princess Mononoke, as well.

    About the closest analogy I can find, without discussing the plot and characters, is "Alice in Wonderland". If you think Alice in Wonderland's stupid, or if you just don't get it, you won't like this. (and this movie, like Alice in Wonderland, can be enjoyed by kids - but it can be enjoyed by adults even more).

  66. Re:my petition by Aash · · Score: 1

    I don't know if your petition is serious, and you actually want to get a job on that show... But if you are, starting a cheesy online petition in which you state that the show sucks probably isn't your best bet.

    --

    --
    These aren't the droids you're looking for.
  67. Yeah right by Goonie · · Score: 2
    The Academy is incredibly conservative, bean-counterish, parochial, heavily marketed to, and occasionally gets desperate for credibility. Now, let's look at anime. Conservatism - that has to work against these weird-ass animated (kiddie) movies from Japan - but hey, some of them are violent and contain a bit of sex, so they're obviously going to Corrupt Our Children(TM). Bean-counterish - anime is relatively small beans compared to mainstream cinema (at least in the West). Heavily marketed to - as I've just said, there's much more money to be made in making sure Oscars go to English-language, mainstream stuff, particularly stuff that appeals to women (and anime, at this point, appeals more to Western men than women). Parochial? Say no more.

    Suffice to say I'm not expecting Oscars to be heading the way of anime directors any time soon.

    --

    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
    --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
  68. This played in one of the big theatres here by Diluted · · Score: 1

    In New Mexico...

    It played at the Century Theatres.

    I saw the first show and took my 3 year old...
    She liked it but thought some of it was a little weird... I think the little pieces of coal were the scariest thing for her...

    It was wonderful to see it on the big screen... I went out and bought it at my local Japanese animation import shop right after the movie...

    Definitely an enjoyable movie but it was out here more than a month and a half ago, so this doesn't seem the most current news...

  69. Wait a minute... THIS IS ANIME? by bujoojoo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Where are the hot anime chicks with the flaming hair-dos and swords? Huh? What about the some bad ass spaceships and mechs? What about VAMPIRES, HUH? NOT ONE FUCKING VAMPIRE!

    And to top it off, there is no obligitory $OBJECT blowing up in a slow motion 6 frame sequence...

    Anime, my ass...

    --
    This space for rent
  70. This is great by ChopSocky · · Score: 1

    I really admired SA. It possesses some of the most beautiful images I've seen in a long time on the big screen, plus a simple story that contained enough emotional layers that almost anyone could get into it. If you're not familiar with Miyazaki's work, this is probably the most accessible (and hence the reason Disney picked it up). I would certainly see it again, and though I personally don't feel it should be up for Best Picture or anything like that, it certainly deserves at least a nod from the self-congratulatory Academy. My two cents, anyway :)

    --

    "Joan of Arc, up top!" - Ghandi, Clone High
  71. yeah, where are the bionic... by zonker · · Score: 0

    ...young girl raping tentacle beasts? or the quickly flashing seizure inducing lights? quite frankly i don't like it if it doesn't end in a cheasy japanese pop song sung. and if it doesn't have a title like 'super happy fun dojo panic trouble', well, you can keep it.

  72. Re:What is it with Hayao Miyazaki and little girls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, maybe because he has a young daughter?

  73. Re:Being a M*THERFUCKER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like all those *****s! ** *** * ****!!!! LOLOLOL!!!!

    FAGGOT

    Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

  74. I will purchase the DVD instead. by Recovery1 · · Score: 1

    "Disney chairman Richard W. Cook says that they've budgeted to market Spirited Away in up to 1,000 North American theaters, and if the Oscars endorse it as much as Metacritic has, Disney will launch it"

    A thousand theaters. In that case, I'll never see it in a theater, considering every one of them in my area is Pro-big budget Hollywood movies.

    That being the case, I will try for the first time the same thing most Anime fans have been doing for some time -- ordering the DVD that has already been released in Japan and having it shipped over here so I can watch it on my region free player.(I looked at it already and it does have English captions)

    It's $100 for a DVD or a 6 1/2 hour drive to Calgary ($140 for gas and trip expenses, minus the cost of the ticket)

    And it does sound very good...

  75. Re:What is it with Hayao Miyazaki and little girls by LeoHat · · Score: 1

    You should be more worried about Disney when several of Disney's cartoon characters... DON'T EVEN WEAR PANTS!

    Donald Duck and Pooh Bear spring to mind.
    Pooh? A charecter for kids named after fecces?? What's up with that?

    PS. Refresh my memory. Where was the "Little Girl" in Princess Mononoke?

    --
    The mistakes of a clever man are equal to the mistakes of a thousand fools.
  76. Neither was A Bug's Life by yerricde · · Score: 2

    It's not a Disney movie. It's from Studio Ghibli in Japan

    Monsters, Inc. is not a Disney movie. It's from Pixar. So is that Nemo movie.

    Cents from every dollar you spend on tickets to see this movie are still going to the defense of bad copyright laws such as the DMCA and the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act and to lobbying for their sequels: the CBDTPA, the Broadcast Flag, the two Berman bills, and the Chastity Bono Act of 2018 that adds yet another 20 years to Mickey Mouse's copyright term.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  77. Flash (was Re:This movie is made by Disney ...) by tbarrie · · Score: 1
    Entertainment requires motion, colors, sounds.

    So books are incapable of being entertaining, then?

    Motiion, colours, and sounds obviously can be entertaining, but to say that entertainment requires them is just rubbish.

    I am a graphics artist,

    There's a shock.:)

    my web site took a long time to conceptualize, design, and implement (for the graphics). I don't want to deal with the inconsistencies between the rendering of web pages done on all browsers.

    Then don't design web pages. Seriously. There are all kinds of neat opportunities to do graphic design on paper or even film, and the finished product will look the same to every one who looks at it. But one of the great things about the web is that the way web pages are presented is ultimately under the control of the viewer, not the author. And if one of the great strengths of the medium bugs you, then honestly, maybe it's not the medium for you.

    Not that I'm rabidly anti-Flash; I play and enjoy Flash games. If your specific purpose is to create a graphical toy, then Flash works great. But if you have any info at all you're trying to convey (like, say, letting people know about an upcoming movie) then Flash is a bad way to go.

    So, anyway, about that movie...

    1. Re:Flash (was Re:This movie is made by Disney ...) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would flash be a bad way to let people know about an upcoming movie? It can provide a MORE interactive experience than just a video clip.

      While, of course it can also display video clips well, it also provides much of the interactivity so thoroughly touted as MPEG-4 (has for years!) by being used within Quicktime movies.

      What if you could control the experience in a more visually engaging way? Enter Flash!

      As to reasons for wanting the control to be more toward the author... I'll say this. I have nothing against USER tinkering with sites appearances. What I DO have issue with is the INCONSISTENCY (not graceful differences, no charm, nothing friendly, flat out INCONSISTENCY) between different makes and models of Browsers.

      I DO WANT the User to explore and play on a site. If they want to turn it upside down and inside out that's fantastic! But, if the web browser starts to Play with the site I take issue! No one asked it to do that! It's no fun when your browser screws up the screen for you (when do I get to do it? Maybe the fun for me would be putting it back together then?!?).

  78. Re:My Story Got Rejected!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had a fascinating story of the revamping of entire Barbie product line and it was rejected!!! This is the kind of news that /. readers demand. Keep the flow of cartoon and other pedophile related stories, this is truly news for nerds.

    You are so fucking stupid it isn't even funny.

  79. My Kids Saw It by N8F8 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was simply bown away watching a 4,5 and 6 year old glued to the screen for the entire movie. No potty breaks and no wandering minds. Hell, my oldest probably caught only 10% of the subtitles.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
  80. Re:Why more Japanese porno? by Purple+Tentacle · · Score: 1

    This movie is a must see for anime enthusiasts, Hayao Miyazaki is known for his amazing work in creating anime that can not be contended with. Spirited Away and all of Miyazaki's creations are not like the usual anime that most people are used to seeing. His works have a amazing story line, amazing visual effects , great animation and little or no fighting. His work is more like a real movie then a animation or Disney flick. I recently saw Spirited away In a dende theater in Australia and it blew me away I haven't seen any other anime of this quality before. Princess Mononoke is another example of one of his works . This movie was the biggest grossing movie of all time before Titanic was released. I personally have his dvd collection of all his works and recommend it. I don't believe I have seen any movie or anime tell a story so well as he pulls off in his creations. check out this fan page. Its got alot more info then the studio ghibli page has. http://www.nausicaa.net/

  81. Re:Moderators? by WaKall · · Score: 1

    It's flamebait because he knows it's not /.'s fault that his company filters it. Slashdot never promised to be safe enough for my company's filter or yours or anyone elses. And unless you're paying them for the service (which you probably aren't) then you don't have any right to say what they should or shouldn't put on the sight. Even if you DO pay for slashdot, it doesn't give you the right, just a little voice with which you can ask nicely.

  82. Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not part of LOTR so it's not getting my money.

  83. Disadvantage in judging? by Woogiemonger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The problem with judging Spirited Away alongside this year's stock of American films is the lack of knowledge of the symbolism/references in the anime which are foreign and unrecognized in American culture. I hope the judges do their homework, which may enable them to realize the full brilliance of the movie. Also, Spirited Away helps us familiarize ourselves a bit more with the mentality of Japanese society. While it may be as magical as Alice in Wonderland there are plenty of differences between Alice's Wonderland and Chihiro's Wonderland. I, for one, appreciated seeing a "spirit house", let alone the huge, very important bathhouse operation.

  84. Re:For those of slashdot not totally anime maniacs by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

    Ok, that's a fair claim. ;)

    --
    -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  85. Shrek by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

    Wait a minute. Shrek was not positive in it's ending at all! The Ugly guy can only have an ugly girl??

    1. Re:Shrek by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Neither of them were ugly. Didn't you get it?

      They were quite nice looking Ogres. It's all those humans that were ugly.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    2. Re:Shrek by s.a.m · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's why I loved this movie. It went against everything that Disney stands for. Most of their movies the main characters are rich, and considered by society to be beautiful. Stupid conformist crap. Shrek showed that you don't have to conform and you don't have to live up to other people's view of what beautiful is.

    3. Re:Shrek by hcduvall · · Score: 1

      Except if appearance really didn't matter- then they'd have stayed the same as they started, then it would've genuinely been irrelevant.

      Thats what really irritated me about Shrek, it had slight surface posture about being an inverted fairy tale, when its own supposed moral got crushed by its quest for a laugh.

      Why bother showing that ugly doesn't count if you go out of your way to make the villian short and petty looking as well? Even among the humans?

    4. Re:Shrek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I obviously didn't.

      What I saw was the princess physically changed to be more like someone (Shrek) that loved her instead of she being accepted for what she wanted or felt inclined to be. The princess being female and the changed character didn't sit well either. (I'm a stereotypical "white angry male" and don't give a damn about feminism, old or new, but crying out loud, writers need to grow up a bit and get out more.)

      If Ogres and Humans were actual races, heads would be rolling. That'd be like you had to appear black culturally, maybe innately, but that wasn't enough, so she had to become black and ostracized from what she favored (whiteness) to be accepted. What a load of crap. I don't care how you spin the ending, it's crap.

      I hate politically correct environments, but I can certainly believe there are numerous ways to view and perceive the ending. The ending is a modern ending but still a classic solution--you have to be like that who love you to be wanted. Hogwash. You could compound this with that, as you pointed out, they were "nice looking" Ogres, but I won't, since it's a movie so things have a need to look nice. Still, the way I see it, the acceptance of the ending as okay is PC, just as the ending itself.

      That said, it was just a movie and largely a fantasy world developed for kids. I'm commenting on it now because I had a discussion with a close friend about this as well (he took your stance); one way to view it is that the ending invoked some thought about why it was handled the way it was (comment on the writers? the times?). Artisticly (if you can call it that), the ending did a disservice to the rest of the movie; the rest of the movie was so nicely developed, it just seemed they didn't really think through the purposed climatic ending.

    5. Re:Shrek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I saw was the princess physically changed to be more like someone (Shrek) that loved her instead of she being accepted for what she wanted or felt inclined to be.

      She'd been enchanted for as long as she could remember- 50% of her time had been spent as an ogre. The end wasn't a "change", it was the end of constant changes. And the final choice was made in her heart- it's what she wanted. (Almost more to reject the castlefolk than to encourage Shrek, though).

      I didn't like the ending either, too telegraphed and too dependent on fireworks. (But at least its magic spell obeyed a preset rule, rather than deciding to change the ending on its own. Magic should be a tool or obstacle to the characters, not the DeusExMachina who makes everything OK)

      If Ogres and Humans were actual races, heads would be rolling.

      If you want to make such an analogy, she'd be a half race "mulatto", torn between the cultures of her parents. At first expecting to join the financially dominant group, she comes to find acceptance with the outcast, "underclass" side of her ancestry.

      Naturally, the fact that she's forced to choose at all isn't an optimistic lesson to impart, as it implies that culture is genetically determined. But we can say that humans and ogres just can't get along, without applying it too directly to our own species.

  86. Baloney! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A disproportionate amount of anime pr0n gets brought over and translated here in the USA. Go look in most large direct-sales video stores that carry a dedicated selection of anime. It's really pathetic.

    1. Re:Baloney! by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2

      A disproportionate amount of anime pr0n gets brought over and translated here in the USA. Go look in most large direct-sales video stores that carry a dedicated selection of anime. It's really pathetic.

      Anime porn is pathetic, but otherwise I disagree with your statement, I believe what you see is the fault of the store, not what is "brought over". What ends up on the shelves on any particular store doesn't really reflect what is released, just what happens to sell in *that* store.

      Except for a local FYE / (formerly Disc Jockey?) which has a very small anime section, locally and in several other locales I have checked around the US, the hentai that is on the shelves usually only amounts to 5% of the anime, at most. Best Buy, Suncoast, Media Play, Electronics Boutique and the "indie" shops carry about that much or less of the porn kind of anime, the exceptions may be the stores that specifically stock porn.

      A mail order catalog that I happen to get has a small tear-out section of hentai that accounts for maybe twenty pages out of 300. The tear-out section is obstensibly their attempt at serving everyone so the catalog can be kept in places where there might be children.

  87. Certain as the sun, brighter than a lamp by PaddyM · · Score: 2

    Tale as old as time
    Song as old as rhyme
    Lady and the Tramp

  88. It's a great movie by mattr · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Just to say it is a wonder film and you can take your entire family to see it over and over again. Maybe a couple parts could be a little scary for very young children but nothing like what gets by as entertainment for that age group in the U.S. these days.


    The story's focus on Disney is completely idiotic. Focus on the company that made the film, not the one that succeeded in getting it after ripping off or destroying as much Japanese anime as it could up to now.


    I don't know how the voiceovers are in English. If possible, see the Japanese version with subtitles as well some time, it is quite impressive. Of course Hayao Miyazaki's work is all fabulous. Check out Laputa!


    P.S. There is a book of Spirited Away as well, in English I believe. And in convenience stores they also sell segments of the movie as gorgeous shot-by-shot full color glossy manga books. Lots of Spirited Away (Sen to Chihiro) stuff. I believe there is a shop in New York that handles tons of Japanese anime related stuff downtown.

    Incidentally the name Sen to Chihiro refers to her name being stolen (I won't say by whom). The only character left can be read as Sen as well as Chi. Sen means a thousand.

  89. Disney as the Two Edged Sword by Sw0rdfiche · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've sen "Spirited Away" on a large screen twice now. The film is so rich that, like all good art, it gets better with more study. Beyond the story, the incidental artwork in so many of the scenes is breath taking. I am looking forward to the DVD so I can actually freeze frames and just look more closely at the landscapes, the interior sets, the tapestries, etc. My feeling is that Disney is completely outclassed by this work. They [Disney] are intellectualy bankrupt. If they can use their influence and ample cash reserves to promote something of this quality, I am all for it. My only hope is they do not lock the artist up in a Disney contract for a string of pictures that reflects their dead end concepts of "product." A clear example of this "opportunity" is the Jackie Chan deal. His Disney funded movies are TERRIBLE! They all have that lame "written by committee running a formula" feel. If they want to promote the work, fine. If they need to CONTROL FUTURE CONTENT, we could be screwed.

  90. Spirited Away Experience by jtharpla · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was lucky enough to see one of the screenings Disney did at their El Capitan theater in Hollywood in Japanese with subtitles. I remember there was a HUGE line out the theater and there was a sign when we came out saying due to popular demand, they had added another subtitled show that night. Cool, huh? I don't give Disney any credit in this except they brought good anime to America and to a wider audience.

    And I still can't get the music to the movie out of my head...Princess Mononoke and Spirited Away definitely rate on my all time favorites list.

  91. Disney need Anime by BoBaBrain · · Score: 2

    All of Disney's recent outings have been flops. If it wasn't for Pixar, they'd have sunk by now. Unfortunately for Disney, they only have the rights to a couple more movies from Pixar before that contract ends.

    Disney must be looking for another cash cow and Japan seems like the best place to start searching.

    --
    I am a Karma Library.
  92. Re:Why more Japanese porno? by MidnightBrewer · · Score: 1

    Drawings and anime are two different things. Granted, "animation" is made up of a sequence of still drawings, technical crap, blah blah blah, but you're nit-picking. The drawings you're referring to, from Japanese "pillow books," are the first record from which is derived the modern Japanese charicature style, yes. Pillow books were sex how-to books, not entertainment per se (well, that depends on whether or not you got to participate in the lessons, I suppose.) They are the forerunner of many other forms of Japanese art as well. The original designer of Astro Boy was also influenced by America's "Betty Boop" cartoons, which were also fairly risque for a cartoon. He liked the style for its technical merits (BESM, or Big Eyes, Small Mouth), not for its titillation value.

    Due to one bad review in a British newspaper of an anime that had nothing dirty about it, anime has been branded as pornographic by the English-speaking portion of western society. The original victim of this criticism was the OAV series, "Oh! My Goddess," AKA "Aa! Megami-sama" in Japan. This is an incredibly sweet, sometimes maudlin, romantic comedy about a Japanese student who dials a wrong number and ends up with a Nordic goddess as his girlfriend (short short version.)

    Pornographic material is called "hentai" in Japan, whether it be in comic book, animated, or live-action form. It is prevalent if you're looking for it, just as porn magazines and videos in the US. It represents maybe less than 10% of all anime ever created. It's just like saying all American live-action movies are pornographic, based on the Puritanical criticism of someone living in another country seeing one American movie they didn't like and branding the entire genre thereafter as smut.

    You have to wonder what kind of mind a censor has to have in order to be able to gauge what is pornographic and what isn't. "It takes one to know one," as the saying goes. What's more disgusting, the person with an open, healthy attitude about sex, or the closet pervert who cries foul and points and cover his eyes, all the while peeking between his fingers to get a better look? I seriously suspect that the loudest critics of sexual morals throughout the ages have been homely, sanctimonious men who were bitter because they weren't getting any, but were smart enough to cloak their attempts to drag everyone else down with them in the guise of searching for spiritual enlightenment, etc.

    I live in Japan. I am super-otaku (someday, I will be ota-king!) I currently enjoy the luxury of living outside of the American corporate media system. How sweet it is.

    --
    "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
  93. 15 Reivews by major media sorces. Lowest rating:B+ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Yahoo keeps track of reviews by major newspapers, mags, and film websites. Out of the 15 reviews the lowest it scored was a B+ and that only happend twice.

    http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&id=1808405164& cf =critic&intl=us

    This is my favorate movie, I saw it opeaning night in hollywood, and I hope it wins best picture but I doubt it. It probably will not even make 10 million in the US.

  94. If Spirited Away is Nominated... by E-Rock-23 · · Score: 1

    ...and better yet WINS an Academy Award, the statue should be handed directly to Hayao Miyazaki and noone else. That's his baby. To have Disney step onto the stage and take credit for this astonishing film would be a disgrace. Screw the "must be an active producer" rules. Miyazaki deserves that honor, not the rip-off artists at Disney.

    And while I'm on the subject, if an Anime motion picture can win an academy award, then it must be a legitimate art form worth a look from the "mainstream." Hopefully, that sort of wake-up call could get America out of it's "animation is for kids and can't be taken seriously" slump...

    --
    Blog Prophyts - Right On, Man
    1. Re:If Spirited Away is Nominated... by RyoSaeba · · Score: 1

      I guess the nomination should be handled to Hayao Miyasaki AND the whole crew ! After all everyone collaborated to make that movie ^_-
      And fyi in France (and probably whole Europe) too anime / manga is considered for children... whereas European 'comics' (don't know the english term, we call that 'bande dessinee'), featuring drawn chars, is considered for everyone.... hell, there are some violent / porno ones, too, and nobody objects ! Not saying it's exactly the same thing, but real close...
      Oh well...

      --
      Tsuyoikoto ha taisetsu da ne, dakedo namida mo hitsuyousa (Strength is an important thing, but tears too are necessary)
  95. seen it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was lucky enough that my local theater had it. I'd say this is the best disney dub of a ghibli film yet and doesn't have the big problem of trying to turn celebrities into voice actors like mononoke did. A great moving film that I wish I could see again. unfortunately the local bastards decided to give the bond movie a third fucking screen and take SA out. needless to say I'm still angry. hopefully it will be run again or at least come out on DVD soon.

  96. Re:For those of slashdot not totally anime maniacs by RyoSaeba · · Score: 2, Informative

    The original title is 'Sen to Chihiro no Kamikakushi', for those who care :-)
    It won a prize at some Berlin (Germany) festival, the Gold Bear
    I saw it in France around a year ago, and even if there were some long scenes imo, it's still a pretty darn good movie.
    Of course, some things are lost in the translation (for instance, why is Chihiro sometimes called 'Sen' isn't that easy to get if you don't know some japanese basics).
    You can also find some ecological references (river god), and things like that.

    I was in Japan in july, around the time it was released in DVD, and boy, it was totally crazy: any shop related more or less to video, anime, games, you-name-it had TVs with the DVDs / tape rolling ! (and i don't even mention related merchandise)

    All in all, a decent movie imo ^_^

    --
    Tsuyoikoto ha taisetsu da ne, dakedo namida mo hitsuyousa (Strength is an important thing, but tears too are necessary)
  97. Re:What is it with Hayao Miyazaki and little girls by gpvillamil · · Score: 1

    "Porco Rosso" stars a grown-up male pig.

  98. Re:For those of slashdot not totally anime maniacs by Afty0r · · Score: 1

    So we have most of Slashdot whinging about how Disney rips off old stories, and now most of Slashdot raves about a story ripped off from the Wizard of Oz.

    hmmm...

  99. Touched by this movie by jalfreize · · Score: 1

    I _resonated_ with this movie.
    Anyone who's been 10-11 and changed schools
    will understand what I'm talking about.
    Does anyone know if the house of spirits metaphor
    means something special in Japanese culture?
    Something that got lost in translation?

  100. Disney are evil scum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully, geeks on Slashdot will continue to support Disney so that we can get more of this!

    If you support Disney, you are also supporting Senator Hollings, the CBDTPA, and other attempts to ban computers to make the world safe for the media corporations' business model.

    Don't do it.

  101. Fortunately not. by MtViewGuy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think 2002 will be a much better year for Disney animated features.

    Lilo & Stitch did good business at the box office and was very well-received by critics; it appears that Treasure Planet may do this also. It appears that Disney has learned from the horrid experiences of The Emperor's New Groove, Dinosaur and Atlantis: The Lost Empire, and the upper management kept pretty much hands-off on this year's feature releases.

  102. Princess Mononoke? by tkrotchko · · Score: 2

    I bought that film based on reviews here.

    I was very disappointed with that film. It could have been trimmed down by 1/2 an hour (at least) which would have made the film paced better and eliminate the parts that just don't help the story.

    Based on the reviews here, I'm worried this film will be another Mononoke. I'm certainly not going to buy it this time.

    --
    You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
    1. Re:Princess Mononoke? by znaps · · Score: 1

      I agree with you on Princess Mononoke..I thought it was too long and cliched. Not that it was bad, I was just really dissapointed.

      Spirited Away, however, is a fantastic movie..I promise you won't be dissapointed in it. I've seen both the original version on DVD and the dubbed version in theatres. They're both excellent.

  103. No more animated best pictures by billtom · · Score: 3, Interesting


    About the idea of Spirited Away being nominated for best picture, won't happen. The new category of best animated picture was created by the MPA specifically so that animated movies wouldn't be nominated for the best picture award.

  104. Lilo & Stitch = $145 million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and that's before the DVD has been released. Not exactly a flop.

    Before this, and excluing Pixar, they have been striking out the last few years, though.

    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=lilostit ch .htm

  105. This is a great film... by UrGeek · · Score: 1

    ...I have seen it twice at the theater. I would gladly go again to see it if it was subtitled with the original Japanese soundtrack - I am curious to see if it would be as good with that magical voice of Daveigh Chase. The girl has been getting work - first "Lilo and Stitch", then this and then the "The Ring".

    More than lush fluid animation, the film has that undefinable quality that is missing in so many films....charm. I hope it gets more than the limited release it had. I hope it gets the recognition it deserves.

  106. An honest to God "Ask Slashdot" about this movie.. by FurryFeet · · Score: 2

    I'm in Mexico, and while I'm wuite fluent in English, I'd obviously love to be able to share this movie whit my wife/family/friends who are not. Is there any way I can get it on DVD with Spanish subtitles? DVD region is not a problem, and neither is price (within reason).
    Thanks for any pointers...

  107. Re:Moderators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Go to user preferences
    2. turn off anime stories
    3. Bingo, Slashdot no longer publishes stories about cartoons.
  108. Re:An honest to God "Ask Slashdot" about this movi by FurryFeet · · Score: 2

    Yeah, I wrote "wiute" instead of "quite" on a sentence regarding my English fluency. Im "wiute" aware of the irony of it all, and embarassed beside myself. Sorry about thar :S
    Still... the movie? On DVD? Spanish subtitles? Pretty please? /me kicks himself.

  109. Slashdot users! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To protest your concerns at this guy's trolling, go get an account at kuro5hin (perhaps add "from Slashdot" to your name to show where you're from), then go and moderate all of tps12's comments to 1. 1 means "I hate you.", and this will make tps12 cry. I also recommend getting account name that's quite like tps12 (eg tpsl2 or "tps12 on", etc.) and crapflooding with it. This will dishonour tps12's good standing in the kuro5hin community.

  110. Japanese morals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If "Nobody likes a weirdo" is the moral of Beauty and the Beast, will Spirited Away assume the more Japanese "The nail that sticks out gets hammered in"?

  111. Art-house release... by freeBill · · Score: 2

    ...for a children's movie?

    This was a classic movie-for-kids that Disney has been marketing well for decades. They knew fully well it should not have been released in the art houses. When I saw it there wasn't a single child in the audience.

    The dub was great. They re-synched the mouths to the English words. Could have been a breakthrough movie for Disney. They screwed it up and promoted the heck out of "Lilo and Stitch," a stinker based on "The Ugly Duckling" with five good jokes.

    I just hope "Treasure Planet" is as good as it looks, not as bad as these morons keep trying to make their movies.

    My protest: I'm going to see "Solaris" instead of "Treasure Planet" today.

    --
    Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.
  112. Spirited Away Oscar nomination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spirited away will never be nominated for best picture. No because it is not a good movie but there is now a separate category for animated features. They don't compete with live action films.

  113. Conformist Disnet endings by John+Harrison · · Score: 2
    [spoiler alert!]

    Wondering how any given movie will end? Here it is:

    1. Hero and bad guy will engage in a fight to the death. Hero is the underdog. Bad guy might "cheat" somehow.
    2. Hero wins fight fairly, possibly even saving bad guy from certain death. Hero decides to let bad guy live, because killing bad guy would "make me just as bad as him." Nevermind that this makes no sense.
    3. After havin his life spared by hero, bad guy makes one last effort to kill hero, and ends up falling to his own death. This satisfies the viewer's need for justice without getting the hero's hands dirty.

    B&tB and the Lion King both end this way. So does Spiderman, more or less. The crappy J Lo movie "Enough" did, as did a recent Tommy Lee Jones & Judd sister movie. I now go into movies expecting them to end this way.

    Contrast this with Superman 2, in which Superman, after rendering General Zod and the gang powerless, kills Zod and watches in glee as the others die. Way to go Supes! Of course if he had a nuke-proof phantom zone handy he probably would have put them in that.

    If this is my last post ever then it is because I have pissed off the Hollywood writers mafia by revealing their secret and they are coming to get me! Good-bye everyone, I'll miss ya!

    [/spoiler alert!]

    1. Re:Conformist Disnet endings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kills Zod and watches in glee as the others die. Way to go Supes!

      I had trouble paying much attention, but I saw no glee- bemused smirk, bordering on apathy. Zod's death was very much in your pattern- tried to attack after his defeat, and fell on his own. Superman didn't even bother watching the evil trio's last moments. It's like he (and the screenwriter) almost forgot they were there. (Sure, he could've taken the 5 minutes to fly them to an earthling prison, but the movie needed a conclusion pronto)

      (One could suppose that he was using his superior finesse to only inflict nonlethal blows- was dropping them into a pit of snow or such- and went round to collect them later. If one was desparate to defend Superman's adherence to his morality code.)

    2. Re:Conformist Disnet endings by John+Harrison · · Score: 2

      Zod got his hand crushed and I think he was then thrown across the room and fell into the pit. Ursula (or whatever the woman's name was) was beaten up by Lois Lane and pushed into the pit. The stupid mute character tried to fly and fell to his death.

  114. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    A programmer from a very large computer company went to a software
    conference and then returned to report to his manager, saying: "What sort
    of programmers work for other companies? They behaved badly and were
    unconcerned with appearances. Their hair was long and unkempt and their
    clothes were wrinkled and old. They crashed out hospitality suites and they
    made rude noises during my presentation."
    The manager said: "I should have never sent you to the conference.
    Those programmers live beyond the physical world. They consider life absurd,
    an accidental coincidence. They come and go without knowing limitations.
    Without a care, they live only for their programs. Why should they bother
    with social conventions?"
    "They are alive within the Tao."
    -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...