Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Touts Record Year For Hollywood
proudhawk writes "A blog posting in p2pnet today catches MPAA boss Dan Glickman at the ShoWest convention in Las Vegas crowing about Hollywood's profitable year: 'Today, we stand on a new mountaintop, and I have to say: I like the view... We had about 5 percent growth in both the domestic and worldwide box office, all-time highs on both fronts reminding us once again that good stories well told always find a place in our hearts, our lives and our local theaters.' What ever happened to the ravages of online piracy?"
What ever happened to the ravages of online piracy?
the "ravages of online piracy" excuse is for years when they knowingly put out complete garbage and don't want to own up to it.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
This doesn't contradict the "ravages of piracy" at all. Instead, the MPAA will say, "See, look! We cracked down on pirates and had a record year! CRACK DOWN HARDER!", as a justification for their future activities.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
They are saying box office revenues increased. Piracy most likely hurts DVD sales and rentals more than going to a theater. There is a big difference between a movie theater and a DIVX movie on you 17 inch LCD monitor, or if you are more crafty, a bigger TV. Its the equivalent of saying "box office revenues went up despite the rampant use of recordable media in the home". From my experience, a movie you go and spend $10 on plus refreshments, and gas (plus potentially someone else's ticket and refreshments) is not something you would download instead.
Without them, it could have been a 6 percent increase and I could buy a new ferrar... erh, I mean, yeah, right, where is the neck-breaking pirates now?
Seriously, people. The three driving emotions for people are greed, fear and greed. And the more you have, the bigger your greed gets. You have 5 percent increase (when everyone else is struggling to stay in business or have any kind of profit at all)? Doesn't mean jack, you want 6. You want 7. You want 10. And you could have 10 percent more income if it wasn't for all those who copy the content. It would be 15 if you could force people to throw away their VHS tapes. Hell, it could be 30 percent if you could force them to throw away DVDs!
It could be 50 percent if you could make those BluRays die after playing them 10 times. It could be 100 percent if you can make them so they die right after playing the movie once! It could be 200 percent when they couldn't play the movie at all... erh...
Well, if they still buy it that is.
And that's what this is about. The studios want more. They are not satisfied by having more than everyone else, they're not satisfied with having the best year of their existance, they're not satisfied with making a plus when the economy as a whole is struggling to avoid that big bad word that starts with an r and ends in cession. they want to have more than they already have. And they see some way to make more (i.e. crack down on those that copy), so they try to get rid of them. If they found a way to make you pay for every time you watch that movie, they would gladly do so.
And I'm fairly sure the next generation of players will have some sort of internet connection that enforces something like that.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
there is a HUGE difference is downloading a movie and printing copies and selling them for a profit. some people tend to download first, if they like the movie they will buy it on DVD and if its good enough go see it in the theater. Lets face it a good movie is still better on the big screen than on a PC. SO all this does IMO is give the producers incentive to stop putting out crap movies, and start making products that are worth something.
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Of course they have an increase in profits. There are actually some very high quality films coming out this year. Iron Man? The Dark Knight? Those are good reasons to go to theaters. The way I look at it, I either spend $10 on a movie ticket or I spend $20 on a DVD a year or two later - and the DVD is almost always worth it. I go to 2-6 movies a year, and they really have to earn my patronage by being a good film. And, of course, my friends have to be interested as well. I don't see how "high budget movies" are going to go the way of the dinosaur. If anything, digital distribution is going to make getting movies out *easier*. Movie theaters are sure to disappear over time, but digital distribution will probably increase the profits of movies if they do it right. Bandwidth is always cheaper than physical media.
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
You are right on this. NEVER get into a contract that says you get the "profits" unless all of the costs are defined and agreed upon in advance. If you do get into this type of contract, the product will amost certainly never be profitable, no matter how many millions it makes...
I've read Slashdot for the last 5 years, and now I start posting... Go figure
I hate parasites like you that refuse to pay for what they use.
(Same AC)
You must really hate yourself, for you don't appear to be a subscriber here on /.
Ignore this signature. By order.
How many of the 20 top grossing movies of 2007 were not adaptations, remakes, or franchise installments? How many actually involved original creative development?
For that matter, how many were over-hyped drivel titled "[adjective] Movie" or starring Will Ferrell?
Hollywood is out of ideas. Period.
The only way to find out how much media those who were studied decided to buy legally is to ask, which is of course is like asking someone if he or she smokes pot. The illicit nature of the act will cause anyone you survey to immediately deny doing such a thing in the first place and many may even appear to take a very pro-enforcement side just to shake off any suspicion.
When will they learn? It's the movies, stupid! Hollywood had an excellent year because the movies were better. They had decent blockbusters, and for quality movies we had the best year (IMHO) in over a decade. You had a ton of mainstream movies like Transformers, Spider-Man 3, Shrek 3, Pirates 3, Harry Potter, Bourne 3, etc. You had incredible smaller films like No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood, Jesse James, Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, Michael Clayton, 4 Months 3 Weeks 2 Days, etc.
The theater/DVD system isn't fundamentally broken like the modern music industry. Piracy, casual sharing, and complete dreck aren't killing the market. During years when the movies are shit, profits and revenues fall. When you have an absolutely fantastic year like 2007, profits rise. It's pretty goddamn simple.
People pay for the big screen. People pay for live shows. You can't make a digital copy of a 60ft screen and you can't make a digital copy of being in a crowd, watching a live band. The only reasons theater sales drop are: 1. Crappy films 2. Obnoxious theater goers 3. Cell phones (see number 2)
There is another study that correlates p2p network spikes with CD sales numbers. If p2p is really causing a drop in CD sales, there should be a corresponding drop in CD sales. Not only isn't there a drop, there appears to be a slight rise in CD sales following p2p spikes. While there is no doubt that p2p has trimmed off some CD sales, it doesn't appear to be anywhere close to the order of magnitude the RIAA quotes it as.
Well, I was just throwing out round figures. $25K certainly is not enough for a family of 4, but I know that for some individual folks, $25K would be plenty to live on. I am a perfect example -- single, no dependents, and no expensive tastes. I don't buy fancy clothes, I don't eat lobster or filet mignon, and when I have a car (I currently do not), it ain't no Lexus. I have survived most of my adult life on less than $25K a year, and I ain't starving. (In fact, I could stand to lose 20 or 25 pounds). And, of course, geography plays a big role -- $25K can be quite comfortable in some small Midwest towns, whereas in New York you could probably make $25K and still be sleeping on the street.
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer