Slashdot Mirror
WB Took Pains To "Delay" Pirating of Dark Knight
Jay writes "The L.A. Times is reporting on a new studio tactic — not to prevent piracy, but to delay it, as was the case with special tactics used with Dark Knight. 'Warner Bros. executives said the extra vigilance paid off, helping to prevent camcorded copies of the reported $180-million film from reaching Internet file-sharing sites for about 38 hours. Although that doesn't sound like much progress, it was enough time to keep bootleg DVDs off the streets as the film racked up a record-breaking $158.4 million on opening weekend. The movie has now taken in more than $300 million. The success of an anti-piracy campaign is measured in the number of hours it buys before the digital dam breaks.'" You know what else helps to have a big opening weekend? Making a good movie.
"If the movie's a stinker, the word will travel at the speed of a mouse click, ruining chances of making back money." So you can't get money for a shoddy product? Cry me a river.
Here in Spain what you call piracy is LEGAL if you don't earn money with it. And so it was on your countries not so long ago. We just preserved our rights.
Why so serious??
Do they really think those 38 hours bought them anything? Do they honestly believe that their profits would have been reduced had a crappy cam recording been available 38 hours earlier? I'm sorry, but I'm just not capable of managing that level of suspension of disbelief. Seems more like a set-up for a later date in Congress where movie execs get to testify that they spent $x million to stave off the camming and all they were able to manage was 38 hours. I wonder just how dedicated they were to these "delaying tactics."
FTA: "it was enough time to keep bootleg DVDs off the streets as the film racked up a record-breaking $158.4 million on opening weekend. The movie has now taken in more than $300 million."
So, they credit those 38 hours for the record-breaking $158.4 million they made on opening weekend, but they've made another $150 million since the pirated copies have been available (according to the article). So, the pirated copies becoming available didn't seem to have much of an affect, did it?
ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
Cam quality sucks and for a movie as good as this, people are going to pay to see a quality version in theaters.
Even if it was a terrible movie, people would still pay to see it. They are wasting their time trying to delay piracy.
Does anyone really download Cam copies of movies these days? Especially for dark, special effect-filled, high motion movies like Dark Knight where most Cams are basically unwatchable.
I'd be surprised if Cam copies had *any* actual impact on movie ticket revenues; I know if I was so desperate to see a movie that I couldn't wait for the DVD release (Or DVD rip), I'd pay the £6 to watch it in the cinema in decent quality on a big screen.
You know what helps to prevent piracy?
Making a really terrible movie.
There are people out there who will track you down, smear you with honey and stake you out on top of an ant hill if you catch you distributing copies of "Alone in the Dark" or "BloodRayne". It's how the community polices itself.
They used the Disappearing Camcorder Trick© to "persuade" would be pirateurs to go elsewhere...
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
"If the movie's a stiff, and word gets out too early that it's a stiff, it's devastating to the business model," Garland said.
here come the tears...
www.purevolume.com/martyd
Wow - 300million and they are worried about a thousand people watching poor quality pirated copies. Bet it wouldn't even be 1mil less in earnings
The down side is that the cinema I went to watch this movie at let the movie slip out of focus and completely ruined the whole thing for me.
This is a double dare for the pirates to break the 38 hour record next time. What a useless tactic.
This is priceless:
"If the movie's a stiff, and word gets out too early that it's a stiff, it's devastating to the business model," Garland said."
In another words, if we can keep the movie audience quiet for several days, we will rip off enough people to cover our costs and make some extra dough.
Considering that the movie is not going to be released in Germany until late August, there isn't much of a chance to prevent bootleg copies from being available before the theatrical release. Let's see how that strategy works for them.
Those who pirate movies are going to do it anyways. I highly doubt delaying them a few hours is going to change their weekend plans.
I never understood the appeal of screeners. If I'm not interested enough to see a movie when it comes out in theaters, I'll rent it when it comes out on DVD. Watching a shaky cam with terrible audio at some awkward angle and half the screen covered in subtitles is not even worth the bandwidth needed to download it.
I'm just glad the summary had this added on: "You know what else helps have a big opening weekend? Making a good movie." I mean, seriously, the successful opening weekend probably had next-to-nothing with the "extra vigilance" and had everything to do with the fact that the movie is, top to bottom, fantastic. Make a good movie and people will pay to see it. Make good product and people will pay money for it. It's not rocket science. But, of course, they'll tout the success of the movie and the "extra vigilance" as proof that piracy hurts their other movies which don't have similar record-breaking opening weeks. Never you mind that those movies aren't half as good as The Dark Knight - their success suffered because of those filthy pirates! sigh...
have a big opening weekend? Making a good movie. ... or getting your star killed.
Also:
(from Wikipedia):
Warner Bros. created a viral marketing campaign for The Dark Knight, developing promotional websites and trailers highlighting screenshots of Heath Ledger as the Joker. After Ledger's death in January 2008, however, the studio refocused its promotional campaign.[3][4] The film was released on July 16, 2008 in Australia, on July 18, 2008 in North America, and on July 24, 2008 in the United Kingdom. Prior to its box office debut in North America, record numbers of advance tickets were sold for The Dark Knight. The film has broken multiple box office records, and achieved an overall approval rating of 95% on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes.
That's called good ol' fashioned marketing.
of new theatrical releases available for rent too at the same time the movie is in theatres?
Not everyone wants to go watch a movie with a bunch of unruly kids / idiots who can't be bothered to shut up and/or turn off their cellphones
Do people actually choose between watching a bootleg copy of a movie, and watching it in the theater in the opening weekend?
I'd expect bootleg copies to be in direct competition with dvd's, maybe hurting the value of tv rights, and perhaps even some of the last days the movie is on the big screen when you go there just to watch a movie, rather that a specific movie.
But on the opening weekend? It seems like an entirely different experience.
Sounds to me like the only thing the studios are interested in is controlling the bad information. The studios want people ignorant as to if this is a good movie or not on opening night. Then a large group of people will risk their money to see it first, and the studio rakes in the dough even with a bad movie. From this perspective, T+38 hours is a hell of a lot better than T MINUS 2 weeks.
AccountKiller
They can take any measure they like, pirated or not, I'll not waste money on a Hollywood movie, especially not when most movie experiences are polluted with:
(partial list)
# assholes talking
# assholes farting
# assholes laughing at the wrong time
# assholes gesticulating wildly
# assholes getting up during the middle of the movie and explaining loudly to the person near them why they're leaving and what do they want to eat or drink while they're blocking part of the screen
# assholes talking on their cell phones
# assholes allowing their cell phone to ring several times before touching it
# assholes not talking on their cell phones, but fondling them and waving them around so the light shines in your face and distracts you from the movie
# assholes coming in late and looking for seats
# assholes spoiling the movie by bragging about the ending because they've seen it before
# assholes who don't bathe or just arrived from their construction job and smile as they sit down next to you, as if you were happy to see them
# assholes who make out with hotties in front of you
# assholes who snack loudly
# assholes who stick their camcorder right next to you
# assholes who hold up their cellphone and aim it at the screen and move it around several times
# assholes who can't sit still and move around in their seats constantly
# assholes who start talking during slow or quiet parts of the movie because they're too stupid to take in the movie unless it's full of nonstop action so their mind starts to work again and they must fill it by talking and/or moving
# assholes who put their feet/legs over the back of your seat
# assholes who are sick and should stay home, but you hear them coughing throughout the entire movie
# assholes who bring their annoying families with them, mistaking it for a play area
# assholes who ask everyone in their row several times mundane questions and repeat themselves "what did you say? WHAT?"
# assholes who come for air conditioning only and take out their laptop or other work and shuffle papers and other objects
I'm not paying to see a movie in public, not with the assholes. I'm not paying to rent it, either. Instead, I'll wait a few months until it comes out to the public library on DVD, and check it out for free. FREE. I'll watch it in my own home without the assholes, and without wasting time and money in the process.
Fuck you MPAA, and fuck you assholes, I win.
Bleh. Anti-piracy is just like a lock. It will never stop someone determined enough to break the lock. The question, as always, is not "if", but "when".
I often wonder why movie studios don't implement some sort of new technology to thwart 'cammers'.
When you see video of say, a fence, or some object with lines close together often the video is distorted when played back, you'd think there would be some way to project an image so it's able to be seen clearly by people's eyes but not able to be recorded due to a camera limitations.
Maybe a dual projector system and seeing that it's getting more common that a modern projector is film-less, all digital, it may be easier to modify it somehow.
A shakey cam is not worth the bandwidth.
However, someone using a multi-thousand-dollar camcorder, with the framerate synced to the projector's, and the audio dubbed directly from the source... It won't be as good as a DVD rip later (or Blu-Ray/HD), but if I missed it in our local theater (which only has two screens), yes, it definitely might be worth watching.
While it won't necessarily be as professionally done, keep in mind that telesync is the same process by which actual DVDs are made from a movie reel.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
The Internet is worldwide. All audio/visual medias can be transfered via the internet.
Update your business model and do world-wide releases.
Marketspeak: you'll have more chance of ripping off people this way, especially on the opening weekend.
Most kids aren't smart enough to realize that movies are shown in the daytime, too, much cheaper, and much less crowded.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Morgan Freeman was in it. You fail.
Here in Spain
Does Spain offer asylum for refugees from the U.S. copyright regime?
"You know what else helps have a big opening weekend? Making a good movie."
Citation?
The people who put up their $150+ million to set the box-office record for the "Dark Knight" are not the same people who would be watching bad camcorder videos. The latter don't mind waiting an extra 38 hours, and certainly do mind $12/ticket.
Every download or bootleg DVD != movie ticket.
Maybe if the movie and music executives finally understand that the pirates are not potential customers, they'll focus on improving the satisfaction of actual customers, and thus earn more money. Instead, they are beating a horse that's not only already dead, but is rather decayed at this point.
While I have seen almost every type of asshole on your list, I must say that I find it hard to believe that someone would pay for a movie ticket to actually work on their laptop while in the theater.
First of all, with all their "no pirates allowed" paranoia the theaters wouldn't let someone enter with their laptop.
Second, aren't all shopping malls equipped with air conditioning? They could sit on a bench and work there, for free.
If you have indeed seen such a thing, then that person was not only an asshole, but also an idiot.
You know what else helps have a big opening weekend? Making a good movie.
I'm just going to assume that whoever wrote this didn't actually see the movie yet.
The great irony of this, is that everyone on the board thinks that the studio can just arbitrarily make a good movie button.
"well, just make a good movie", betrays a total lack of understanding for the arts.
No one really knows a canned formula for making a good movie. A studio can do everything that it thinks will make a movie, best writers, best directors, best actors, and that doesn't guarantee a good picture at all. If you had 100 guys in a room, each of which with their own ideas, how do you know which of those is going to make a movie that will gross 300 million dollars? Clearly, if it was so easy to make a hit movie, then, don't you think they would do it. And, even if they did have a formula to make hit movies, half of the people on this board would be complaining that movies are formulaic.
This is my sig.
the reason for this movie being successful is the fact that it IS good. everyone is recommending it to each other.
Read radical news here
Morgan Freeman is a fine African American citizen. Are you calling him a nigger? You racist bastard!!
I'm unwilling to pay box office prices for crappo movies - I often watch bootlegs instead.
When movies are supposed to be good, however, I'm happy to give the theatre way too much money for tickets, popcorn, etc. I love going to movies and all of my fellow "pirates" do too.
I drove 40 minutes and waited in line for over an hour to see The Dark Knight at an IMAX theatre ... and it was *AWESOME*
I was happy to pay for WALL-E too.
Keep making movies that *DON'T SUCK* and people will pay to see them ... keep making pieces of sh*t and people will download them or wait for DVD.
All of the movies that I've watched bootlegs for ... either: ... I simply wouldn't have watched it, had the bootleg not existed ... *maybe* I would pay to rent the DVD
1) the movie rocked, so I went to see it in the theatre after watching the bootleg
2) the movie sucked
^ all hypothetical, ofcourse ... i've never _actually_ seen one of these so-called 'bootlegs' ...
When you make 10,000 new cars, you have no idea whether the car will sell.
But we don't ban people from looking into the internals and telling us if the electrics are made up with chewing gum and spit.
Shareholders and underwriters have the same fixation: they MUST ONLY MAKE MONEY. As soon as an underwriter discovers they've bought a turkey, they DEMAND that government bail them out (Lloyds names, for example).
Tough shit.
Update your business model and do world-wide releases.
A simultaneous release would work in the United States, two-thirds of Canada, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand. (Ever notice that the major anglophone countries tend to come in pairs?) But other countries have other languages, and it takes time to line up quality voice actors for a dub job that isn't complete feces.
Honestly, I doubt that 38 hours are going to change much in this case. Who would cancel a planned trip to the cinema because they got a shoddy cam recording of the film?
And not many would decide to go to see the film because they couldn't get that bootleg cam recording.
Imho, either someone decides not to want to pay for it and accept the bootleg quality, or they go to the cinema.
The real piracy issues are when the film arrive on DVD, Blu-ray or (legally) streamed download, either as a screener or in retail, when the quality of the copies approach DVD quality or better.
While I have seen almost every type of asshole on your list, I must say that I find it hard to believe that someone would pay for a movie ticket to actually work on their laptop while in the theater.
Assholes are everywhere and of every kind.
First of all, with all their "no pirates allowed" paranoia the theaters wouldn't let someone enter with their laptop.
The next time you're at the movies, stand around and watch those carrying in bags. Of the people carrying bags, backpacks, gym bags, and more, how many of these are searched? My bet is, unless they stand out, zero. A lot of people carry laptops within bags and backpacks within a laptop bag, not just in a laptop bag/carrier.
Second, aren't all shopping malls equipped with air conditioning? They could sit on a bench and work there, for free.
If you have indeed seen such a thing, then that person was not only an asshole, but also an idiot.
Assholes are stupid, and they're everywhere. Just when you think you've seen them all, they surprise you with new asshole antics. By the way, does anyone have any comment on the value of their public library and checking out DVDs vs. going to movies and dealing with assholes or renting them?
Public libraries are a blessing in disguise, often overlooked.
They figure that it's a significant success to be 38 hours ahead of the pirates with a US movie release ... and then they don't allow the German audience any legal way to see the movie for another month? Whuh?
So the global hype machine has kicked in, the net's full of people saying, "Man, you GOTTA see this movie!", and when the poor old Germans turn up at the cinema desperate to hand over their cash to join the party, the studios turn them away. "We don't want your money now, come back in a month's time."
A month is a long time to wait, and it's not going to be too surprising if a bunch of twitchy germans decide that they want to watch this thing while the buzz is still there, and try to get to see it by some other route. They aren't allowed to watch in it cinemas, they aren't yet allowed to buy it on DVD.
If they're already being hit by the marketing hype, but there's NO LEGAL WAY for them to watch this movie, what's the logical result?
If a manufacturer spends millions building up demand for a product, and then refuses to sell it to some of their customers, not because of any intrinsic shortage of material, but as part of a clever marketing strategy, then that manufacturer has lost the right to complain when people start pirating it.
As a general rule, you aren't supposed to advertise a product that isn't available, and you aren't supposed to manipulate markets by deliberately creating regional shortages and banning people from cross-importing. I mean, I know the media companies probably have a special dispensation that makes them immune to the WTO rules that everyone else has to play by, but just because they can legally manipulate markets in ways that would be illegal for other businesses, it doesn't make them immune to the bad karma.
If customers think that your business is crooked, and your business refuses to supply those customers, they're less likely to feel bad about pirating your material. And once they've gotten into the piracy habit, and they've made the contacts and found the websites, and installed the software, they're going to continue doing it.
Business Rule #1: Create a product or service that people want or need.
Business Rule #2: Make it easy for them to buy it from you.
Eric Baird
Cam: recorded with a camcorder with indirect audio (using the camcorder's built in mic)
Telesync (TS): recorded with a camcorder (although TS's are often recorded with a higher quality camera) with direct audio (audio typically from a headphone jack for the hard of hearing)
Telecine (TC): A telecine machine copies the film digitally from the reels. Sound and video should be very good, but these are fairly uncommon (expensive machines)
Screener: A DVD or VHS copy sent to various places for promotional use. Many times they have timers and/or serials numbers. Quality varies, but DVD screeners should be excellent if the person ripping it isn't an idiot.
R5: Usually made with a telecine machine from an analog source. Unlike a TC the digitization is performed by the studio itself with very professional (and expensive) equipment. The purpose is to beat the pirates to the market in 3rd world-ish areas (Russia, Africa, etc).
I didn't buy a 52" HDTV to watch a DVD of some guy filming a movie in a theater. Give me a break. I also don't have the time or patience to wait 2 days to see if a torrent file is any good. I'm sure these guys lose some money to piracy but its not nearly as much as they make it out to be. Most people buying the street DVD for $5 are too cheap to and wouldn't pay the full price anyway. I'm tired of listening to multi millionaires whine about how people are stealing money from them. So skip the gold plated toilet for the new mansion and settle for the ceramic one.
Just wondering if pirated copies of The Dark Knight would look best using TDK media?
Smivs on the intertubes!
LotR really DID have lots of ending.
They could have just gone "The Bad Guy is Dead. Party for the Good Guys" but there are too many central characters to manage that.
Hell, look at the multiple endings in any movie: Hellboy? Dad Dies. One ending. Bad Guy dies. Two. Kissy kissy. Three.
Star Wars: Vader Dies. One Ending. Death Star Dies. Two. Sitting on Endor getting some wookie/ewok action: Three. Extended cut: whole universe partying. Four.
Now, there was the denouement when Frodo/Sam win. One. Gondor ending (Faramir, Aragorn and Arwen can't leave and you haven't seen the Hobbits home yet) Two. Get home. Three. The Let Down (Frodo has to leave, showing that even when you win, you have to accept that you may lose too, but you win for your friends). Four. Then Sam Gets Home. End on an up note, not sad. Five.
What could have been taken out?
I've been waiting for the flash mobs to hit a theatre with every person wearing infrared LEDs on their clothes but nobody has yet.
The first time the staff scanned the audience for camcorders they'd see a wall of light and probably crap their pants.
I am a racist bastard you insensitive clod!
"You know what else helps have a big opening weekend? Making a good movie."
Then explain Titanic?
You know what else helps have a big opening weekend? Making a good movie.
I still fail to see how opening day sales are any indication of how good a movie is, since you don't know how good it is until after you've paid to see it.
I'll have to go check but I don't think public libraries around here have DVDs, especially not blockbuster movies.
The thing about a movie is you don't have to see it right away. You can watch it whenever you want. What would a pirate care? If they are going to pirate it, they are going to pirate it.
So, they credit those 38 hours for the record-breaking $158.4 million they made on opening weekend, but they've made another $150 million since the pirated copies have been available (according to the article). So, the pirated copies becoming available didn't seem to have much of an affect, did it?
Hey, 8.4 million dollars is nothing to sneeze at!
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
If they were that serious then they could stop the 'scourge' of cammed movies at source. Equip cinemas with an IR light emitter just below the screen, pointed at the audience that spreads beams across the cinema, digital camcorders will pick these up and make the movie unwatchable. If cammers start using IR filters on the cameras, upgrade them to field-emitters (or was it wave-emitters?) that send out a signal that distorts whatever the CCD 'sees'.
If he's the Walrus then can I be a penguin please?
The suits are those guys that have to go in front of a bunch of movie theater owners and persuade them to buy the movie that you made. They are going to have relationships with these people and so are going to have a pretty good feel for what those people are interested in paying for, and what they aren't. So, say, for example, you making a movie and the central part of the plot has to do with, for whatever reason, a cantaloupe. For whatever reason, the suit happens to know that the guy who owns whatever movie chain that has 100 screens, really, really hates cantaloupe, and, he knows from having lunch that a guy who owns 50 screens just said, "hey when are they going to make a movie about bananas. I think bananas are a funny fruit."
Guess what! The suit isn't going to even try and sell the chain owner on the cantaloupe. Since he's writing you the check to make the movie, he's going to take down that barrier for himself, and come to you and say, "hey, would it really be that much worse if it were say, a banana"?
If you answer correctly, you just picked up 150 more screens for your film. If you didn't, then, you possibly don't get your movie made.
This is my sig.
Somebody has forgotten the difference between required and sufficient.
Making a good movie, for example, is required. It is not, unfortunately, sufficient — many more steps, from marketing, to, indeed, piracy prevention/reduction, are required...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
legality != morality
^This fact is nearly as important as "fire burns" and "you can't breathe water," yet it isn't anywhere near as well-known.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
If they want to accredit anti-piracy tactics to anything, accredit making a decent movie, not how long it took to get a cam out. Go on the forums, read the torrent reviews and you will see that when you make a good movie, PEOPLE ACTUALLY GO AND SEE IT.
Like let's say a new movie like "Sex and the City" is out, and you're half interested for whatever reason, then the Geek Squad probably has your PC because it's infected with a festering jungle of spyware, you don't know what a codec is much less how to download or install one, and you think a torrent is what happens when it rains really hard.
There, fixed it for you.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
And look at the number and quality of the European films! Kind of odd to see that while there are some, they do not do nearly as well at the box office - hence the fact that they are not as well enjoyed by people as those in Hollywood. Perhaps it is because of the incentives. (Bollywood seems to do pretty well though).
But other countries have other languages, and it takes time to line up quality voice actors for a dub job that isn't complete feces.
If my experience with anime has taught me anything useful, it's that dubs should be avoided at all costs, subs are better and can be made quickly.
Then again, I don't know how much of the movie-going public is literate, they might be turned off by all the "nerdy and faggy reading crap"
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
What bullshit. For a start, this guy "develops anti-piracy technology". Why the hell the journalists don't question HOW HE KNOWS THIS? Or is he just pulling it out his ass?
Especially for a "geek" movie -- say a comic book superhero, Star Trek, etc, -- the geeks WILL certainly download blurry camcorder videos. Then, if it's not crap, they'll all troop down to the cineplex to watch it on the big screen. Then, they'll buy the DVD. Then, they'll buy the Director's Cut..... The studios whine about how the "bad buzz" went around with Hulk. "If not for those meddling kids it would have been a hit". That movie was DOA. "Dark Knight" has wonderful buzz. It wouldn't matter if you could download it the day it was out, it'd still have broken records.
And they don't think that inflation could have anything to do with the records being broken?
Not taking inflation into account is akin to slowly reducing the previous records.
Online Starcraft RPG? At
Dietary fiber is like asynchronous IO-- Non-blocking!
That's exactly the kind of movie that I want to see in the theater anyway - going to see it in IMAX tonight in fact. I don't know how anyone can stand watching a movie like that from a crappy cam DIVX.
(Although, that's how I watched Deuce Bigalo 2, and the funniest part of that movie was seeing the silhouettes of people getting up to go to the bathroom.)
I'm also going to go to the theater for the Arrested Development movie when it comes out, not just because I can't wait to see it but also to do my part to encourage the further production of GOOD movies. Just bought the Series on DVD, voting with my dollars in a positive way.
If they want to stop piracy, they need to MAKE BETTER MOVIES!
We apologize for the inconvenience.
This concludes the FOX News Commentary on this article. Next up: Barack Obama, secret muslim, or just a terrorist?
+5, Truth
What I want to know is when will studios realize that 95% [unverified] of downloads are AFTER someone has shelled out $10-12 [US] for a movie. And they're actually downloading it because they LIKED the movie and it's NOT OUT on your favorite disc format.
Sigh, hurry up and do simultaneous, or at least quicker, disc releases studios. You'll make more money from it if I can buy it right after i see a film I liked.
So, the hypothesis is that delaying piracy for 2 or 3 days increases the box office take. They manage to delay piracy for about 2 days with The Dark Knight. The Dark Knight has a big opening weekend. So, they proclaim that the experiment is a success.
The problem: Correlation does not prove causation. This 'experiment' appears to have no control - no way to measure how the movie *would* have done if there *had* been piracy. No baseline to compare against.
I am in the camp that think that, basically, piracy has very little to do with how a movie does at the box office. I currently believe (though don't have a study to prove this, admittedly, so this is opinion) that most of the people who pirate movies, won't pay for them (there are some people, no doubt, who use the pirated version as a shareware/try-before-you-buy system, so it might have some impact there, but I personally don't know of many people who do that, so I'm inclined to estimate that as a low percentage). Along with that, it is my current belief that most of the people who *do* pay for movies at the movie theater, will do so if the movie is good, *even if* a pirate version is available, because the movie theater provides that big-screen, awesome sound system experience that most people can't afford to have at home.
I don't know that I'm any more right than the people who think the piracy control is so important, but my point is, I don't think they've really established a strong link between their anti-piracy measures and the box office sales. I think a better indicator is that the previous Batman Begins movie was well received by audiences, and they knew that basically the same team was doing this sequel, and wanted to see another movie with this new interpretation of Batman.
"You know what else helps have a big opening weekend? Making a good movie."
I started watching the Dark Knight via a camcording available on a popular movie site. But about 10 minutes in, I asked myself, "Is this really the way I want to have the first experience of this movie?" So I turned it off, and since then I've been waiting until the IMAX tickets are not sold out at a reasonable time.
A lot of libraries are now trying to get their hands on any movie (high quality or not) following the same pattern for purchases as they follow for which books they buy (and yes, some bestseller paperbacks and even trashy romance novels end up in libraries). So do check it out... they likely have as good a selection of DVDs as they do books if they are anything like the library I have near me.
Oh, and to keep this on-topic, I have watched bootlegged videos, and I cannot see these replacing anything but DVD sales, and only in the case of poor people, or people who are simply going to rent the DVD to rip it, so no loss of income to the studios...
I really wish that lawmakers would realize the reality that making laws to restrict freedoms only restricts the freedoms of law abiding citizens. Laws are a balance between freedom and safety from those who would harm you. Once laws are created that do not protect you from harm (Patriot Act, DMCA, marijuana laws, drinking laws, etc.) you lose freedom and gain nothing in return. Laws that protect you from being harmed by another (DUI/DWI, unauthorized drug distribution, murder, rape, assault, etc.) restrict your freedoms, but the safety of yourself and others is, IMHO, worth the cost. I just wish our law makers would check with those that the laws apply to before trading our freedoms for nothing.
Anywho, that's my 2 pence (because my 2 cents isn't worth much nowadays)
Before commenting on the Bible, please read it first
Missing Option: Jimmy Carter in blackface.
Since I was at a private screening the day before the movie was out, as for my friend is movie treater manager I was able to see the movie with nobody around but just some friends!
With my Sony Digi and SD Card of 2gigs I would had been able to record this movie like nothing.
I'd like to raise my hand up for saying all the above is a bunch of bull. :o)
It would appear that those tactics are far more effective than litigation and buying legislation.
control your supply chain and prevent recording devices in theaters. The rest isn't your business.
They're using their grammar skills there.
My local library at least checks out DVDs. As for blockbuster movies, it has 31 copies of Batman Begins.
-----------
100% pure freak
It is called the monomyth, and it was deliberately followed by George Lucas so his original Star Wars would be a success.
There are 11 types of people, those who know unary and those who don't.
Really?
I'd be curious to know how much they spent in order to keep The Dark Knight from being pirated for all of 3 days. I'm guessing that it would be hard to calculate, but would likely be a few million at least. If they did this with all of the movies released how much would it cost? They obviously think that their efforts pay off by preventing "lost sales" to pirated copies, but since we all know that 1 pirated copy doesn't equal 1 lost sale, I'd be curious to find out how much they're paying for a tiny delay in piracy.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Except Dark Knight wasn't such a great movie. It was yet another big budget summer franchise actionfest.
I would have never watched a bootleg of this film. I wanted a quality Batman experience, not some fuzzy handcam crap. Will I download the bootleg so I can watch repeatedly without paying out the ass at the theater between now and the DVD release? Maybe. But anyone who skips the theater to see a bootleg of a movie of such quality as The Dark Knight is ultimately only hurting themselves.
It should be based on tickets sold, per capita. That way a film from the 70s can be directly compared in popularity to one made today.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
First off, the pirates are getting better all the time. As access to digital prints improves, you will find "cam" versions disappearing. The pirates have access to ad revenue as well as other revenue sources to bribe folks. Also, there are just a heck of a lot of people that want to support the pirates.
Secondly, if you can't wait 38 hours to see a movie I feel sorry for you. You aren't going to be happy with a free download no matter what if you are that impatient. I expect to see you in line for the midnight opening show. The rest of the folks will take their free download (digital transform, no cam versions) and watch in the comfort, privacy and safety of their homes.
If it is possible to obtain access to the digital version of the movie and post it on the Internet for all to have, the movie theater is dead. It is possible today and will become more and more common as time goes on. The production companies cannot stop this from happening and it will destroy their revenue stream. If Freeloading Freddy can download the movie and save it to a DVD they are going to. Buy the DVD? Why? They've seen it already and have it saved if they want to watch it again.
Sorry folks, but you better figure out a "business model" that works without any revenue.
Honestly, I must be missing something... How much is does a pair of nightvision googles and an usher's hourly wage cost?? Just have the usher routinely go from theater to theater with the googles and point the handicammers out to security... geez...
~Syberz
For example, McDonalds is highly successful, but no-one confuses them with gourmet cuisine. Or confuses Microsoft with ethical and innovative product development.
Subtitles are much better
That might work for movies rated the equivalent of R, but how easily can single-digit-year-old children in a PG movie read subtitles?
You know what else helps have a big opening weekend? Making a good movie.
And how are the people who watch it in the first weekend going to know if it's good or not? Two days is hardly enough to let word-of-mouth spread, and let people decide they're going to watch it.
You probably meant "You know what else helps have a big opening weekend? Bombarding the sheeple with tons of advertising."
This idea is popular in Russia, as a lot of people want to avoid theaters. Since demand breeds supply, this created a lot of pirates who took video cameras into the theaters and recorded high-quality video and sold it on the street to this type of customer. This prompted the industry to release certain movies in DVD-quality shortly after it hits theaters, to combat this piracy and to make a few extra bucks for the movie companies. Unfortunately for them, most of these DVD-quality videos are acquired and synced to English audio (most are released with Russian dubbing) and released on the internet. They're referred to as R5s (as in, Region 5, with which Russia is associated) and are almost identical to the DVD which will be released months later. Personally, I think that's a horrible idea. The people who don't want to see it now will likely catch it in a few months when it's available for rental/purchase. Putting it on DVD at the same time as its theatrical release will not only encourage more piracy, it will likely deter a lot of additional theater revenue. ("Why spend $30 for my wife and me to see it once at the theater when Frank can burn me a copy of it for $5"?)
In some jurisdictions, a derived work is fair use and is seen for what it does, promote the product. Piracy would barely exist if the product was fairly priced. Truth is if US studios can't produce accessible, affordable content, others will. Clearly, it seems that some big corporations can't, or won't compete fairly, instead they have corrupted and perverted the copyright system.
The crazy thing is that every popular movie from 1941 seems more interesting than today's fare
http://movies.yahoo.com/browse/year/1941
This is my sig.
the metric is not how good a movie is, but rather, how effectively they can trick people into seeing a really bad movie.
Another option is to lower your movie budget to the point where different economics come into play. From the Disaster Movie FAQ:
Q: Why do these movies keep getting made? A: Even though the "Movie" series has been grossing less and less at the box office, these "films" for lack of a better term cost next to nothing to make and we won't see the end of them until one grosses less than it cost to make.
I'll watch it in my own home without the assholes, and without wasting time and money in the process.
Well, you still have *THAT* asshole to deal with, which sounds quite a bit worse than the theater assholes.
``You know what else helps have a big opening weekend? Making a good movie.''
And, who knows? Maybe people getting enthusiastic about it because they heard from their friends that it's a good movie helps, too.
I wouldn't be surprised to find that piracy drives sales in movies, too.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
You call a decent (but incomplete) argument retarded and then continue to compare the pirating of movies with not paying your gardener for mowing your lawn. A banana and a cheese grater have more in common than those two.
Rather than attempt to make sense of your inane brainfart of an analogy so that I can refute it (I would start with "(digital) product vs. (physical) service" but to go any further would require a series of big fat books), I'll defend my own point of view.
The argument you call retarded is perfectly good - when you pirate a file nobody is deprived of anything, but that is just a small fragment of an argument. As has been discussed repeatedly in this thread alone, 1 pirated file != 1 movie ticket/CD sale/insert thing here. The idea that piracy equals lost sales is the crux of the RIAA's argument and it's bullshit. They have no real data showing a link between a decrease in profit (how the media companies define profit is an argument in itself) and piracy. If you can show me any evidence that there is any significant link between piracy and lost sales (other than "Look! Piracy kinda goes up and sales kinda go down!") then please get back to me.
I'm glad we can agree that the fines and punishment for piracy are insane though. Hefty fines are only called for when someone is pirating for profit, and they should not be many times greater than the value of the legitimate items that were bootlegged and sold.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I don't think it is about the movie on opening weekend. More about the marketing. And having you star die creates more hype. Simple as ist is true.
How much is a humans live worth?
But I do not believe anyone killed Ledger for marketing reasons. They were just really lucky they focused all their marketing on the guy who happened to die. That way they already had the connection between the movie and the guy. It did sell an awful lot of tickets.
"With rare exception, once you've seen the movie you're unlikely to watch it a second time," Kocher said. "You don't have the benefit the music guys have, that piracy can help build buzz. For the movie industry, it's purely a destructive force."
So you're telling me that people know they're only going to watch the movie once, yet opt to pay $15-$20 or more for a DVD months after it's come out to see on a small(er) screen with a weak(er) sound system, instead of paying $10 to see it on a big screen with good sound and relatively comfortable seating?
Besides that, I think he's still wrong; just as bad buzz about a lousy movie can kill it, good buzz about a good film can drive people to the theater. Especially in the case of having the option to see a shoddy cam rip on a small screen or the correct colors/contrast on a big screen... and, let's face it, explosions in action movies are way better on big screens.
from TFA: "By Sunday, it could be downloaded on BitTorrent file-sharing sites or viewed on YouTube, he said"
I just want to know how people are able to upload a full 2.5 hours of movie onto YouTube, it sounds handy. They put a lot of money into those IMAX cameras when shooting the movie so that people could realise the full quality that is the YouTube experience!
Really who the heck wants to watched some getto cam version, bad color/contrast and people head moving in front of the camera inst exactly the ideal way to watch a movie.
Not that any one reads these responses, but fwiw Dark Knight was on Usenet the morning after opening.
btw, Firefox keeps telling me that "movie" and "movies" does not exist in the English UK dictionary, why is that? (I am not an native English speaker... fwiw)
I believe (though I'm willing to be corrected on this) that the UK standard is "film", and that "movie" is considered a barbaric Americanism. This is why (for example) Wikipedia uses "film" for its categories--it's an acceptable term pretty-much everywhere.
Seems a little odd to me since "film" is merely the medium and is used for static images as well--"movie" seems like a far more appropriate term for these moving images--but as an American, I'm hardly in a position to question the oddities of other people's usages. :)
(I'm just glad that my country is on the winning side in the balance of trade for "u"s.) :)
I went and saw this movie in the theater on opening night and then that night noticed it was available for download off the usenet groups. I say the more popular a movie the more likely it is to show up early.
It was going to make a bundle no matter what. People love this movie. And it looks fantastic in IMAX, something you can't experience at home.
This is someone in the anti-piracy department at Warner trying to take credit for something they didn't do. I'm sure Christopher Nolan is really happy to hear these lackeys try to ride his coattails.
Free Hans!
Telesync'd cams for Dark Knight were available on private trackers within 4 hours of the midnight screenings. At least one tracker had the East coast midnight screening up before the West coast screenings even started.
As long as there is money to be made off cams, people will keep using them. Expect to see theaters in the US start searching patrons in the name of "terrorist" threats.
What movie studios fail to realize is that so-called "pirates" who download the movie are often it's biggest fans. I won't name names, but I know some one who went to see it openning weekend, then downloaded a pirated cam recording, and is now going to see it a second time. Why? Because it was so good this person wanted to be able to watch scenes a second time at their leasiure in the comfort of their home. Movie studios often fail to see their biggest fault that helps pirates the most: The incredibly stupid and archaic distribution timelines. Why do movies debut in America before they come out in another country? If I lived overseas and was desperate to see The Dark Knight, but it came out several weeks after it did in America, I would probably download a cam version ahead of time because I'm impatient. Why do we even do exclusive distribution periods? Why do movies come out in theatres, then airplanes, pay-per-view, rentals, DVDs, and then cable? Why not have them come out for download or DVD the same time as in theatres? Some people like to watch movies in the comfort of their homes and will not go to theatres. Often times this includes older viewers who dislike loud, dark movie theatres.
What if they could do something truly revolutionary, like release another Batman film ,oooh ! Never thought of that. I wonder if it will be popular.
Damn, this is thew 21st century, hello !
Do we still want to watch a dude in tights dressed as a bird ?
Total wank, no different that Tim Burton's Batman, except less of Batman.
Right there, that's our problem, the suicidal belief that the invisible hand of the market never fails and should choose all...
You have a drug that saves almost everyone, say something like a penicillin-based antibiotic. Joe has an inferior drug that lets half of the patients die, say an earlier attempt at antibiotics like cow-urine poultices. Clearly, any sane doctor would choose your treatment over Joe's. Joe, recognizing this, lobbies Congress and the AMA, bribes doctors with perks and loose women, and runs a multi-billion dollar Madison Avenue ad campaign that associates cow urine poultices with sex and springtime.
Ten million people needed antibiotics this year to live. Joe utterly killed your product. He also killed five million people.
People like Joe are the reason I still suspect there might actually be a Hell.
He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
The problem with the theater experience is that is has been very stagnant for the last 20 years or so. Sure the sound is better with THX and the image is better (HD) but that is pretty much it. This is the main problem with both the music and movie industries. They don't know shit about technology. And they don't invest enough money into it to keep people interested. Hence why Apple is making so much money of music they have nothing to do with.
Sounds very similar to Microsoft to me. When you have a monopoly there is only so much forcing you to make a better product. The movie industry is the exact same. I have no problems with the actual content of the movies. Most movies appeal to some niche of people. There are very few movies very single person that sees it, hates (as scary as that sounds). Home media technology is amazing nowadays. A 50" Plasma and a nice sound system is worth watching a movie at home, especially on BlueRay. Watching the BBC Earth series on blueray for the first time blew my mind.
The movie industry needs to spend more time on stuff like 3D movies. Journey to the Center of the Earth and the U2 concert use this new technology as well as Final Destination 4. These experiences cannot be reproduced at home yet. These experiences cannot be pirated.
The industry is approaching the fight with piracy the wrong way. Copy protection will only ever stall the inevitable. Instead the movie industry needs to try out new approaches like the MMO gaming industry is.
ex:
1) Initial product free; pay for online play.
2) Initial product costs money; online is free.
3) Initial product and online is free; play for new/special content.
Why not sell play once DVD's at the same time the movie hits the theaters? They need to be 1 step ahead of the pirates not 2 steps behind.
First off Spain - It was never legal here to breach copyright just beacue no money was made. Major misunderstanding. Profit is INDEPENDENT of the actual infringement.
---
As far as WB, now these morons are going to think that this is the reason they broke records.
Never thinking it had anything to do with the Batman itself or even the late Mr. Ledger.
Pirates are more than willing to wait the 38 hours if it means saving $20 going to the moives. This means nothing. Those type of people will not all of a sudden go to the movies becuse they have to wait a day and a half... or even a week for that matter.
So much wasted energy.
Who would watch a cam of a movie? Maybe some... But how many of them would watch a cam of The Dark Knight?!
It is ridiculous to think that someone who is too impatient to wait the 36 hours would watch such a low quality version of the movie. More people were going for the IMAX version. I could not find a place that was not sold out of IMAX. Are we supposed to believe that the same people who bought tickets early to see the IMAX version would even consider watching a cam?
What scares me the most is that these executives do not know this.
I don't get how you can measure how good a film is based on it's opening weekend? The opening weekend only measures how good the marketing is...I would put more stock in the second and third weekends, when word-of-mouth has had time to spread.
I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
When you have at home movie/entertainment systems coupled with the high gas prices, coupled with the OUTRAGEOUS prices they charge for concessions, coupled with the price they charge you FOR the movie, coupled with the idiots who can't/won't SHUT THE H&LL up, it's no wonder more people are opt'ing out of "going" to the movies, and waiting for the movie to hit pay per view & the DVD rental/purchase to actually watch the movie at home, when they choose to. They can watch it at their leisure, make their own INEXPENSIVE concessions, watch it in their jammies if they want to. Some home entertainment systems other than the 3 story tall screens, rival what you see in the theater. The business model of getting a large percentage of the population to run out and see a movie is dying out, but the movie industry doesn't see it that way. Look, take a "typical" family of four seeing an opening run movie. Take 8 bucks as an average... that 16 bucks for the adults, say 4-5 bucks for the kids, add say 10 bucks, now you are up to almost 30 dollars just to get in the door! You know the kids are going to want something to munch on, so even if you get one of those family pack things, kick in another 10-20 bucks, split the middle, that's 15 bucks. Now you are at 45 bucks. Add in what it costs for gas, and you are on a conservative side of 50 bucks JUST TO SEE A MOVIE! Now, figuring you can watch it on pay per view usually for 9.99 and have your own popcorn soda, nachos or whatever and it's a no brainer! Stay at home and watch it.
Great! Thanks for letting me know the low quality CAM is available already for me to watch on my awesome 3" iPhone screen. I'm off to download it. Now I don't have to pay a reasonale price to see it on the big screen in high quality with surround sound and everything. Geez, it would have been horrible to sit through that. I'm saved!
Seriously though, I find it hard to believe that the anti-piracy campaign had any effect whatsoever upon those who intended to see it at the theatre, and those who intend to wait and download it. I'm sure the big opening weekend had more to do with the quality of the film, than the availability of a pirated copy.
By reading this signature, you hereby agree with the content of the above comment.
No need for a cam rip or even audio. There was some movie a few years ago where the script leaked out ahead of time and I read it. I knew then that the movie stunk and I skipped it. Some time later I actually did watch the movie and it was exactly like I remembered from reading the script.
I'm just amazed there is such a thing as a cam rip given the access that people in the distrubution chain have, plus the watermarks in the images etc. But easiest is to just get movies out of your life altogether. They were cool once the same way that Burning Man used to be cool, but now it's just all corporate schlock. Fuck the MPAA. Do even better than avoiding paying them: deny them legitimacy completely by refusing to watch their product even for free. Go see some live theater or something instead.
Who the hell thinks that piracy is a big enough issue to tackle, anyway? Batman made $442,081,677. That's 58 million shy of a billion dollars! And who would think that a cam of the movie is a good substitute for the theatre anyway?
.
among the missing in your list:
Adventures of Captain Marvel.
Serial. The first comic book superhero on screen and in live action.
Dumbo
Here Comes Mr. Jordan.
As fine and original a fantasy as we have.
High Sierra.
Bogart and Huston.
Lady Be Good.
"Facinating Rhythm," "The Last Time I Saw Paris"
Man Hunt.
Fritz Lang directs Rogue Male
Meet John Doe.
Capra and Cooper.
Pimpernel Smith.
Leslie Howard in a telling and subtle updating of one of his greatest roles.
The ispiration for Raoul Wallenberg's rescue of perhaps 15,000 Jews.
Road to Zanzibar.
Hope, Crosby and Dorothy Lamour
Sergeant York.
Gary Cooper and Howard Hawks
Sullivan's Travels.
Preston Sturges
Superman
The first in the lavishly produced Max Fleischer cartoon series.
Suspicion.
Cary Grant and Alfred Hitchcock
Topper Returns.
Should make anyone's list of the all-time great ghost comedies, expertly navigating a witty and stylish murder mystery - with one very pissed-off young woman as both victim and detective!
and there is more. more from Disney. Bugs Bunny, Bob Hope, Tom and Jerry. Abbot and Costello, The Three Stooges, W.C. Fields, The Marx Brothers, The Thin Man...
People who are going to watch a lousy cammed copy, aren't the type who are going to see the movie in the theater anyway. They obviously don't care about the large screen experience, decent video or audio quality, so it really can't be counted as an uncaptured source of movie revenue.
In some parts of europe it is legal to have Zone-1 DVDs in store. Those are often released before the movie makes it to the cinemas here.
There is a DVD store at the local theatre.
So it happens that the DVD is in the shop while that same movie is currently playing in the cinema.
Does this create less success for the movie? Never happened.
I even find it great you can buy the movie you just saw. Like buying the CD of the rock group after the concert.
Atari rules... ermm... ruled.
Hm. Think your maths is a tad wonky.... $442m + 58m = $500.
$500m != $1bn
$500m == $0.5bn
--- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
Seriously? Mine does (Willoughby LGA, Sydney NSW Australia). Hell, you can make requests for them to buy things and if they think it's any good they usually do. The nuts thing is they then ring you and tell you it's in and reserved for you, you just go pick it up!
The problem is if you're looking for something specific - if you didn't suggest it and it's popular it's probably out, and then they charge a "booking fee" of $2 so you may as well just rent it. But since they generally choose reasonably meritorious movies anyway, there's usually something decent there - I often go and look at what they've got if I want to watch something but don't have anything particular in mind. Pretty happy with it so far.
Anyway if anyone was looking for someone to thank for the fact that Chatswood library now has the complete Ghost in the Shell SAC series on DVD, I await your effusive praise ; )
Let my new 7-digit UID be a lesson to all - write down your passwords.
They must not check the same internet sites that I do.
If a movie is good, a bootleg won't hurt it. Unfortunately, most of the crap coming out of Hollywood these days isn't worth the bandwith to download it, much less the price of a movie ticket.