Don't have to start with the U.S. I can name anime television series that have made many *many* times that amount in Japan. (which is about 1/20 the size of the U.S. and with a third the population) Spirited Away comes to mind: #1 movie of all time in Japan (and already licensed by Disney, of course).
Mononoke Hime could have made quite a bit more, but *cough* Disney *cough* was in charge of marketing it. Metropolis and Akira also did rather well.
Limiting the definition of success to nine figures at the U.S. box office or better is unfair, since anime starts at a huge disadvantage. If anime movies had direct access to the U.S. film market (which they don't), they would do far better than they do now.
Anime's appeal isn't quite so limited, however. There's home video, television, books and movies to consider. With all that in mind, anime is an overwhelming success compared to the average McDisney clone or sequel.
Well, closer to 15 for broadcast stuff, which has budgets of about, oh, 95% less than these films.
But I think that Disney's movies are way more better made than 99% of anime.
Sure, if frame rate and budget are the only measure, but putting chrome on a wheelbarrow doesn't make it a Cadillac.
Anime has better *stories* and better *characters* and it is *original*. Far more compelling than inflated budgets and gee-whiz. Besides, there are anime films that are just as impressive, if not more so, than even older Disney films.
Care to elucidate? In terms of pure technical skill, they are.
Yes, I like anime better.
Doesn't this answer your question? Disney animation 40-50 years ago was incredible. Disney animation now is assembly line crap.
Anime is out-Disneying Disney. There are still background images in CardCaptor Sakura that by themselves are more entertaining than "The Emperor's New Groove" or whatever it is, and certainly are more entertaining than the latest "sequel of the week."
Disney needs to hire and fund some creative people and leave them alone long enough (about 15 years for a start) to come up with something truly new and innovative, otherwise anime is going to eat their lunch.
The Lion King 1994 Production Budget: $50 million U.S. Box Office Take: $312 million
Clone.
Hercules 1997 Production Budget: $100 million U.S. Box Office Take: $99 million
Clone. Lost money. (Nine figures for an animated movie?????)
Tarzan 1999 Production Budget: $150 million U.S. Box Office Take: $171 million
Clone. (50% more than Hercules????)
The Emperor's New Groove 2001 Production Budget: $100 million U.S. Box Office Take: $89.2 million
Marginally original. Lost money
Lilo & Stitch Production Budget: $80+ million U.S. Box Office Take: Unknown
Probably a clone. Might make 20%.
The thing I *cannot* understand is how $150 million can be spent on an animated movie. (Ego?) Those numbers make absolutely no sense. It's no wonder they are losing money. They should be. Studios in Japan consistently put out better and more entertaining animation for probably 20% of that amount or less.
Of course it could be because of the declining quality of these movies, the only one I've seen is Lion King, which was a pretty good flick IMHO. I wonder if the lower TCO argument of Linux is starting to kick in a little bit. This will be interesting to see.
They are all clones and sequels. Disney doesn't do original movies any more. They are a giant, bloated corporation who's primary business is collecting and counting money. The creativity was laid off long ago.
Linux might help, but not as much as a couple of decent writers.
The corporate types are the ones that make decisions.
Like the wrong, expensive, misguided and plain stupid decisions that lead to thousands of layoffs.
Add to that the fact they haven't produced anything original since the Eisenhower Administration, and I think you've got a good case for "Corporate Type of the Year!"
Nope. Bobbs Merrill was decided by the Court based purely on interpretation of the copyright statute. The only precedent that restricts Congress in this matter are cases where the Court found a Constitutional requirement.
Well, strictly speaking, nothing "restricts" Congress in this matter. They can pass any law they want. However, they are not going to pass such a law lightly in the face of 160 years of court precedents to the contrary, regardless of what they are based on, which was and remains my point.
"The 1976 act preempted all previous copyright law in the United States. The act covered the following areas: scope and subject matter of works covered, exclusive rights, copyright term, copyright notice and copyright registration, copyright infringement, fair use and defenses and remedies to infringement. With this revision, for the first time the fair use and first sale doctrines were codified..."
Huh? The first sale doctrine is statutory. Congress can take it away with no problem.
And then the Supreme Court will reach back to precedents which begin as early as 1853, but which were resoundingly established in the 1908 Bobbs Merrill Co. v. Straus decision, and throw the law out like an 80-yard touchdown pass.
Congress already knows this, which is why First Sale was codified in 1976. All three branches are together on this one, with almost 160 years of precedents. It isn't going to happen, RIAA or not.
Tad didn't even have to pay for professional... or distribution.
The bandwidth probably wasn't donated, and they probably hired their own editor.
If they *shelled out* (I hate these terms) a couple thousand a month for marketing, editing and distribution, would that really make it so much easier to part with 18 bucks?
anything he made from shadowmarch.com is pure gravy
Yeah. There is no such thing as "pure gravy" in business.
It does make me somewhat sad, however, that this experiment didn't work out better.
After listing 112 reasons why you wouldn't buy the book. lol
What I would like to see, as a consumer, is a lot of these comics brought together under one web publication.
Which would draw instant, shrill and constant howls of "sell out!" from all of those comics' current fans. The publishers of the compilation would be called "greed-driven suits" and nobody would buy the compilation. The ads would be criticized, the content of the comics would be criticized, and the compilation itself would probably be criticized by anyone who bought it.
There would also be a story here, in all likelihood, with at least 200 comments stating how this is conclusive proof that nobody will pay for content, so why don't these companies just give it all away for free.
The average internet user isn't willing to pay a meaningful amount for content.
This is a myth. Repeating it doesn't make it more true. We've just gotten through with at least four stories on this very site about how much people are GOING to pay for content.
Is this really what the "workplace" is about? Are these mature, intelligent businesspeople or a bunch of whining crybabies?
You have now made your employer aware that you are unhappy.
Oh, oh, horrors. Whatever shall we do? Someone is unhappy! Please.
From this day on, your loyalty will always be in question.
Yes, of course. The EMPLOYEE will be questioned. The EMPLOYER of course, gets off without a single word. When prices go up, everyone has to pay them.
When promotion time comes around, your employer will remember who is loyal and who is not.
Yes. The employer will remember who is working for half-price so they can be promoted to work for 40%.
When times get tough, your employer will begin the cutbacks with you.
Well, of course they will. Employers don't have to grow up and realize that their employees become MORE VALUABLE OVER TIME BECAUSE THEIR EXPERIENCE INCREASES. They are EXPECTED TO BE SNIVELING, UNGRATEFUL MORONS.
Of course they are EXPECTED to fire a competent employee who is in high demand and will likely be working for the competition in a matter of days because they are upset over having to pay them more. Waaaaaahhhhhh!
(stomach churns)
Accepting a counteroffer is an insult to your intelligence and a blow to your personal pride; you were bought.
No. They were paid. Big difference.
Where is the money for the counteroffer coming from?
From a happy pink castle in a faraway land, where ponies and flowers dance all day under a smiling sun.
All companies have wage and salary guidelines which must be followed.
Yes. And those wage and salary guidelines were likely instituted by the PERSON WHO MADE THE JOB OFFER SINCE THEY ARE IN CHARGE OF THE COMPANY.
Is it your next raise early?
Who cares?
Your company will immediately start looking for a new person at a cheaper price.
Hope they are as well qualified. Maybe a guaranteed term would be a good add-on to the counter offer. Companies don't pay for someone they can easily replace.
The same circumstances that now cause you to consider a change will repeat themselves in the future, even if you accept a counteroffer.
The moon will orbit the Earth again this month. What's your point?
Statistics show that if you accept a counteroffer, the probability of voluntarily leaving in six months or being let go in one year is extremely high.
So what?
Once the word gets out, the relationship that you now enjoy with your co-workers will never be the same. You will lose the personal satisfaction of peer group acceptance.
Yes. So you should suffer for low pay so "Bob" in the next cubicle will like you and save you a donut. "OH NO! I'M NOT A TEAM PLAYER!!!"
What type of company do you work for if you have to threaten to resign before they will give you what you are worth?
I have a better question. What type of company do you work for if they pay you an exorbitant salary starting from day one so you don't need a raise?
Here's a hint: top... level... domain...
Whenever I see the "workplace" described this way, I am reminded of what a school must look like to a first-grader. Everything that happens in the "big people's office" is so mysterious and unknown to them. Everyone must follow the rules and not be unhappy. We must be acceptable to our peer group. "Be a team player now, let Bob borrow your stapler..."
It really is no wonder that corporate offices can't produce anything except more paperwork to justify their budgets. It's like kids asking for new crayons.
Slashdot Mirror
In other words, be a super-programmer, work three times as hard and have a big smile, BIG SMILE...
...so the management will look good.
Then everyone was laid off. Sounds great.
Don't have to start with the U.S. I can name anime television series that have made many *many* times that amount in Japan. (which is about 1/20 the size of the U.S. and with a third the population) Spirited Away comes to mind: #1 movie of all time in Japan (and already licensed by Disney, of course).
Mononoke Hime could have made quite a bit more, but *cough* Disney *cough* was in charge of marketing it. Metropolis and Akira also did rather well.
Limiting the definition of success to nine figures at the U.S. box office or better is unfair, since anime starts at a huge disadvantage. If anime movies had direct access to the U.S. film market (which they don't), they would do far better than they do now.
Anime's appeal isn't quite so limited, however. There's home video, television, books and movies to consider. With all that in mind, anime is an overwhelming success compared to the average McDisney clone or sequel.
lol Nice troll.
Akira
Nausicaa
Sprited Away
Mononoke-Hime
But thanks for playing.
fps in anime is about 10
Well, closer to 15 for broadcast stuff, which has budgets of about, oh, 95% less than these films.
But I think that Disney's movies are way more better made than 99% of anime.
Sure, if frame rate and budget are the only measure, but putting chrome on a wheelbarrow doesn't make it a Cadillac.
Anime has better *stories* and better *characters* and it is *original*. Far more compelling than inflated budgets and gee-whiz. Besides, there are anime films that are just as impressive, if not more so, than even older Disney films.
Care to elucidate? In terms of pure technical skill, they are.
Yes, I like anime better.
Doesn't this answer your question? Disney animation 40-50 years ago was incredible. Disney animation now is assembly line crap.
Anime is out-Disneying Disney. There are still background images in CardCaptor Sakura that by themselves are more entertaining than "The Emperor's New Groove" or whatever it is, and certainly are more entertaining than the latest "sequel of the week."
Disney needs to hire and fund some creative people and leave them alone long enough (about 15 years for a start) to come up with something truly new and innovative, otherwise anime is going to eat their lunch.
Disney is at least intelligent enough to see the potential.
And of course, any movie with the phrase "New Groove" in the title is crap.
Now they have moved on to the exciting possibilities of Cinderella II!
The Lion King 1994
Production Budget: $50 million
U.S. Box Office Take: $312 million
Clone.
Hercules 1997
Production Budget: $100 million
U.S. Box Office Take: $99 million
Clone. Lost money. (Nine figures for an animated movie?????)
Tarzan 1999
Production Budget: $150 million
U.S. Box Office Take: $171 million
Clone. (50% more than Hercules????)
The Emperor's New Groove 2001
Production Budget: $100 million
U.S. Box Office Take: $89.2 million
Marginally original. Lost money
Lilo & Stitch
Production Budget: $80+ million
U.S. Box Office Take: Unknown
Probably a clone. Might make 20%.
The thing I *cannot* understand is how $150 million can be spent on an animated movie. (Ego?) Those numbers make absolutely no sense. It's no wonder they are losing money. They should be. Studios in Japan consistently put out better and more entertaining animation for probably 20% of that amount or less.
Of course it could be because of the declining quality of these movies, the only one I've seen is Lion King, which was a pretty good flick IMHO. I wonder if the lower TCO argument of Linux is starting to kick in a little bit. This will be interesting to see.
They are all clones and sequels. Disney doesn't do original movies any more. They are a giant, bloated corporation who's primary business is collecting and counting money. The creativity was laid off long ago.
Linux might help, but not as much as a couple of decent writers.
Point two is that if Disney felt so threatened by Pixar, why did they sign Pixar (really John Lassiter) up to a multi-picture deal?
For the same reason they licensed all of Miyazaki-sensei's movies. It's the only way they can compete, sort of.
You've been reading this site for a while, right? You've never heard of "embrace and...?"
They didn't buy the software, and threatened to crush Pixar, until
...they looked in their rear-view mirror and saw 500 anime studios thundering over the horizon like the creatures in Nausicaa. They HID behind Pixar.
Of course, someone will still have to teach the executives (between gluttonous gorges of their catered lunch) how to spell W-R-I-T-E-R
It will be worse than Scooby Doo...
...and that is just plain bad.
The animators are the best in the world.
ROFL!!
Oh, I can't stand it. Thanks for the laugh...
Dennis Franz or Danny Devito.
The corporate types are the ones that make decisions.
Like the wrong, expensive, misguided and plain stupid decisions that lead to thousands of layoffs.
Add to that the fact they haven't produced anything original since the Eisenhower Administration, and I think you've got a good case for "Corporate Type of the Year!"
Maybe they can invest the savings in a couple of writers? Please?
Nope. Bobbs Merrill was decided by the Court based purely on interpretation of the copyright statute. The only precedent that restricts Congress in this matter are cases where the Court found a Constitutional requirement.
Well, strictly speaking, nothing "restricts" Congress in this matter. They can pass any law they want. However, they are not going to pass such a law lightly in the face of 160 years of court precedents to the contrary, regardless of what they are based on, which was and remains my point.
As far as the codification of the first sale doctrine, the Association of Research Libraries would seem to disagree with you:
"The 1976 act preempted all previous copyright law in the United States. The act covered the following areas: scope and subject matter of works covered, exclusive rights, copyright term, copyright notice and copyright registration, copyright infringement, fair use and defenses and remedies to infringement. With this revision, for the first time the fair use and first sale doctrines were codified..."
the energy released by its engines would be about 10 times greater than the entire luminosity of the sun.
Oh, please.
Two words: carried away.
Huh? The first sale doctrine is statutory. Congress can take it away with no problem.
And then the Supreme Court will reach back to precedents which begin as early as 1853, but which were resoundingly established in the 1908 Bobbs Merrill Co. v. Straus decision, and throw the law out like an 80-yard touchdown pass.
Congress already knows this, which is why First Sale was codified in 1976. All three branches are together on this one, with almost 160 years of precedents. It isn't going to happen, RIAA or not.
A nice round number.
and right after they pass it, a Federal court will set an NFL record for longest field goal with it.
"Marshal: All Rise. The Federal Court for the Western District is now in session. The Honorable Wilfred M. Impatient presiding."
"Court Reporter: Docket number 31337, RIAA vs. Guys Trying to Make a Living, Inc."
"Judge: Alright, let's hear it."
"Defense Attorney: First sale doctrine."
"Judge: Case dismissed (gavel). When's lunch again?"
"Marshal: All Rise..."
Tad didn't even have to pay for professional ... or distribution.
The bandwidth probably wasn't donated, and they probably hired their own editor.
If they *shelled out* (I hate these terms) a couple thousand a month for marketing, editing and distribution, would that really make it so much easier to part with 18 bucks?
anything he made from shadowmarch.com is pure gravy
Yeah. There is no such thing as "pure gravy" in business.
It does make me somewhat sad, however, that this experiment didn't work out better.
After listing 112 reasons why you wouldn't buy the book. lol
What I would like to see, as a consumer, is a lot of these comics brought together under one web publication.
Which would draw instant, shrill and constant howls of "sell out!" from all of those comics' current fans. The publishers of the compilation would be called "greed-driven suits" and nobody would buy the compilation. The ads would be criticized, the content of the comics would be criticized, and the compilation itself would probably be criticized by anyone who bought it.
There would also be a story here, in all likelihood, with at least 200 comments stating how this is conclusive proof that nobody will pay for content, so why don't these companies just give it all away for free.
The average internet user isn't willing to pay a meaningful amount for content.
This is a myth. Repeating it doesn't make it more true. We've just gotten through with at least four stories on this very site about how much people are GOING to pay for content.
Is this really what the "workplace" is about? Are these mature, intelligent businesspeople or a bunch of whining crybabies?
You have now made your employer aware that you are unhappy.
Oh, oh, horrors. Whatever shall we do? Someone is unhappy! Please.
From this day on, your loyalty will always be in question.
Yes, of course. The EMPLOYEE will be questioned. The EMPLOYER of course, gets off without a single word. When prices go up, everyone has to pay them.
When promotion time comes around, your employer will remember who is loyal and who is not.
Yes. The employer will remember who is working for half-price so they can be promoted to work for 40%.
When times get tough, your employer will begin the cutbacks with you.
Well, of course they will. Employers don't have to grow up and realize that their employees become MORE VALUABLE OVER TIME BECAUSE THEIR EXPERIENCE INCREASES. They are EXPECTED TO BE SNIVELING, UNGRATEFUL MORONS.
Of course they are EXPECTED to fire a competent employee who is in high demand and will likely be working for the competition in a matter of days because they are upset over having to pay them more. Waaaaaahhhhhh!
(stomach churns)
Accepting a counteroffer is an insult to your intelligence and a blow to your personal pride; you were bought.
No. They were paid. Big difference.
Where is the money for the counteroffer coming from?
From a happy pink castle in a faraway land, where ponies and flowers dance all day under a smiling sun.
All companies have wage and salary guidelines which must be followed.
Yes. And those wage and salary guidelines were likely instituted by the PERSON WHO MADE THE JOB OFFER SINCE THEY ARE IN CHARGE OF THE COMPANY.
Is it your next raise early?
Who cares?
Your company will immediately start looking for a new person at a cheaper price.
Hope they are as well qualified. Maybe a guaranteed term would be a good add-on to the counter offer. Companies don't pay for someone they can easily replace.
The same circumstances that now cause you to consider a change will repeat themselves in the future, even if you accept a counteroffer.
The moon will orbit the Earth again this month. What's your point?
Statistics show that if you accept a counteroffer, the probability of voluntarily leaving in six months or being let go in one year is extremely high.
So what?
Once the word gets out, the relationship that you now enjoy with your co-workers will never be the same. You will lose the personal satisfaction of peer group acceptance.
Yes. So you should suffer for low pay so "Bob" in the next cubicle will like you and save you a donut. "OH NO! I'M NOT A TEAM PLAYER!!!"
What type of company do you work for if you have to threaten to resign before they will give you what you are worth?
I have a better question. What type of company do you work for if they pay you an exorbitant salary starting from day one so you don't need a raise?
Here's a hint: top... level... domain...
Whenever I see the "workplace" described this way, I am reminded of what a school must look like to a first-grader. Everything that happens in the "big people's office" is so mysterious and unknown to them. Everyone must follow the rules and not be unhappy. We must be acceptable to our peer group. "Be a team player now, let Bob borrow your stapler..."
It really is no wonder that corporate offices can't produce anything except more paperwork to justify their budgets. It's like kids asking for new crayons.
Pathetic.