Slashdot Mirror
Besieged Movie Industry Suffers Record Takings
nagora writes "The BBC is reporting that the movie industry, in yet another illustration of just how much damage the Internet is doing to the long-suffering members of the MPAA, has just endured a record breaking $1Billion dollar takings for the single month of June. Clearly there is a desperate need to tighten up copyright laws in the face of this huge mountain of cash that is literally being metaphorically syphoned into the studios' pockets. How will they survive? "
Here's some infomration to put that figure into perspective:
The box office tally for June 2004 is 37% higher than the same period in 2001.
From the Sunday Herald (link at end of article):
Controversial film-maker Michael Moore has welcomed the appearance on the internet of pirated copies of his anti-Bush documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 and claimed he is happy for anybody to download it free of charge. The activist, author and director told the Sunday Herald that, as long as pirated copies of his film were not being sold, he had no problem with it being downloaded.
"I don't agree with the copyright laws and I don't have a problem with people downloading the movie and sharing it with people as long as they're not trying to make a profit off my labour. I would oppose that," he said.
Sunday Herald
90% Professional Slacker
It's deliberate double-speak to emphasize the sarcasm in the rest of the article. I like it.
Mathematics is not a crime.
Most theatres do... although only if you leave well before the end.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Considering the price of movie tickets has doubled in the last 6 years. They aren't selling more tickets, they're extorting money from those willing to pay.
Where did you get your numbers from? Here's what I was able to dig up:
Average ticket price 2003: $6.03
Average ticket price 1997: $4.59
source
Number of admissions (billions):
2003: 1.57
2002: 1.63
2001: 1.49
2000: 1.42
1999: 1.47
1998: 1.48
1997: 1.39
source
It seems the price has not doubled and ticket sales are generally rising.
Many theaters do refund your ticket if you leave before the end of the show. I know for a fact United Artists/Regal does.
The rise in revenue is due solely to increased ticket prices, not because more people are seeing movies. In fact, movie attendance has dropped in three of the last five years. The fact is, there will always be a market for movies, as few non-slashdotters consider watching a bootlegged movie on your computer to be a "good date", but tickets will instead become even more expensive.
And if you want a proper movie review/rating, your first stop ought to be here.
He's Danish.
HAND.
Better re-read your industry group history. The MPAA (and it's politically-very-well-connected) head, Jack Valenti) was heavily involved in the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act and the DMCA, to name a few of their more egregious crimes against the nation. So, no, while they have avoided most of the RIAA's PR gaffes they are by no means blameless or any less dangerous than their sister organization.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Just a little nitpick, US $4 is the *minimum* daily wage in Mexico, I know we have really low wages over here, but the average is certanly higher than the minimum
And yeah, only big retail stores sell CDs now. All the small shops (if they still exist) sell pirated CDs (!)but on the bright side, most of the "catalog" CDs are US$7-10 and only the newest are sold at US $15-20.
But then again, these are CD "pirates" (as in organized crime) we are talking about; the computers/homes ratio here is way too low and it takes ages to download songs at a decent bitrate by dial-up. The vast majority of pirated music is acquired by buying pirated CDs on the street, rather than downloading it. If the Mexican Recording Industry is being destroyed, it is not because of those damn downloaders
"Experts are predicting...?"
My God, you have to be joking. You are, right? Because who are these "experts?"
There are plenty of original ideas, unfortunately many either don't make it to screen or fly under the radar. But still, great and original movies continue to be made and even make it to theaters. This year brought us Eternal Sunshine, Napoleon Dynamite, Big Fish... And many more, and it's still only July.
"sequals, prequals, adaptations, book-to-films, comic-to-films, even old saturday morning cartoon-to-films to keep supply levels up."
Some of the greatest movies have been sequels-- Godfather 2, anyone? And books-to-film, how could you honestly complain about that? Some of the greatest films ever made are from books. That's such an obvious point I can't believe I'm saying it.
Anyway, look back at a list of movies made since the 20's and 30's. They were making sequels from day one. They were adapting books and comic books from day one. Television and movies have always fed off each other. And from the first frame of the first movie ever shot, most of it has been mediocre at best. The current state is NOTHING NEW. ALL art forms are mostly formulaic crap with some amazing products that rise to the top. We remember the gems from the past and mercifully let the pap disappear. You think there were only a handful of artists in the Renaissance? There were hundreds of thousands, but only a few stood the test of time. Thousands upon thousands of books were written in the 1900's, but only a hundred or so stand as "classics". And even in the most-lauded periods of filmmaking-- say, the 1970'
s-- most of the movies were drivel.
So go tell your made-up "experts" to go screw. You have absolutely no idea what you're saying.
I hate responding to AC's...but here ya go asshole:
A story in Newsweek, which was was actually linked on Slashdot.
It is 16 DVD's per year that the average American home purchases. But I covered myself by stating '~15'.
I don't mind the spelling/grammar Nazis on Slashdot, but the 'please provide a link to prove every facet of your statement' people are freaking annoying.
What I should have said was..."look it up your damn self".
But, I provided links...so karma me up!
No reason to lie.
The robots never got around the laws they were programmed with. In one story they are working in a fairly high risk environment, where humans are exposed to radiation, slightly risky to humans, but will destroy a robot brain.
Warning, spoiler for the story follows.
The robots are modifed so the "will not allow a human to come to harm". One of the robots kills a human by dropping a weight on him, it lets it go, knowing it can catch it safely, so it isn't enandering the human. Then when it is falling, it doesn't have to catch it, becuase it misssing that part of the law. Calvin has to figuire out which one of the identical robots is the killer.
There are also some occastions where the robots have to harm someone to avoid greater harm, but they aren't getting around the three laws, but trying to follow them as best they can. The laws are their programming (if they are programmed that way, as the story demonstrates humans can make robots that aren't), and sometimes they act in ways the programmers didn't expect, but they never 'get around' them, the programmers just don't realise the consequences.
Like the effort to help a robot decide which human is more worth saving if they have to choose, which tells them to ingore things like appearance and results in a robot concluding that robots are more worth saving becuase they posses better qualities than humans. It's pretty much right in a way too, in Asimov's world the robots really are better and more noble than the humans, adn pretty much save the human race.