[commanderkai]

Scape Scape:

If I had a house and in the house I had stuff. Now, if that house had a door and I went to work and LEFT THE FUCKING DOOR OPEN then what would you say if I got ripped off when I came home? You would say I deserved to be robbed because I had taken no due diligence.

You'd be an idiot, no doubt, but that doesn't give you the right to rob them. Just because you left the front door unlocked does not mean people can just take your shit. Lax security aside. Stealing is stealing. What the fuck is complicated about that? Whoever stole the disk should be imprisoned.

If they falsify the leak, then there's no crime. But if this was actually stolen, there was one.

I'm seriously amazed at this. So basically if you leave anything on your front porch, I can steal it? The lightbulb of your porch light, the little wind chime? Christ.

[Scape]

You clearly do not have any grasp at very simple concepts when it comes to law and order and how it relates to pervasiveness.
Have you ever jay walked?
Is it a crime?
Why are you not dead or arrested?

I understand you have a need to close the barn gate after the cows have left in the interests of principals but this happens every day and unless you want a society strait out of Orwells 1984 there will be liberty and free will. You can buy napster, take pirate bay to court and think DRM is useful but a great many rebel at that construct and have never accepted it as legitimate.

You might as well try to charge for campfire songs when it wasn't the song but the experience that has value. That is the lesson the record industry failed to learn and one the movie industry seems to be following. If the lesson out of all of this is stealing is bad m'kay your numb to the reality that it's a two way street.

[bootlegga]

Scape Scape:

If there were subscriptions to theaters just like there was to sporting events where the option of all you can eat is on the table and it is not obscenely priced then the movie industry stands a chance of not treading the same path as the record industry. The have got to motivate and innovate so that watching at home is NOTHING compared to the theater. Be that 3D or moving seats the visuals and sounds of home theater are impressive but IMAX blows it all away and the industry needs to tap on that vein because movies are going to end up online one way or another.

The reason everything at the concession costs so much in movie theatres is because the movie studio gets most of the box office. The next time you see that Spiderman made $100 million over the weekend, you can expect that Sony got 90% of that figure. The leftover box office is usually enough to heat/cool the auditorium and pay for the projectionist. Concession sales are what keeps the theatre running, if at all.

The industry is innovating. Look at the new 3D movies coming out, or IMAX movies. Digital Cinema also provides better picture and sound than you can get at home. One tool I'd love to see here is assigned seating. In movie theatres across Asia, the seats have numbers, just like arenas, and the seat price is based on that.

Actually, one method that is being looked at in Hollywood right now to stem piracy (of which 75% comes from the industry istelf and not guys with camcorders) is to simultaneously release movies in theatres, pay-per-view and maybe even DVD format.

[Tricks]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Tricks Tricks:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Well I saw the online version and except for filling in some of the CGI and editing out the wires for the stunts it looked like a done deal, and seeing is it's going to be released this month I'd be guessinfg what was seen on line and what appears this month will be pretty much the same. Isaw it as live streaming from the site I use, so I didn't have to download, which is a pain.

That's basically what I thought still needed to be done. Terrible.

I thought it was an interesting insight into how they make these movies. It didn't detract from the actual story....wait a sec, what was the story?

If these were random names not associated with marvel or these comics, it might actually be a decent movie. But because it had Wolvie, Sabretooth, Deadpool etc. associated with it, I would expect them to keep some of their story in the movie, but they didn't.

[DerbyX]

Wouldn't releasing them simultaneously hurt the bottom line? As I understand it they release movies for rent some 3-5 months after theatre release (at least for the good movies) under the theory that its approximately the time when people would start to rent a movie they had already scene yet long enough that people will want to go to the theatre because waiting for the rental movie is too long. Same theory for released for purchase. Get people to see it then many months later they rent or buy the movie to watch again.

I've certainly rented and bought movies that I had seen already in the theatre.

[bootlegga]

RUEZ RUEZ:

Eisensapper Eisensapper:

The movie is shit, we cant re-create it into a steak.

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.ap.org/fox-news-columnist-out-after-wolverine-review-ap

$1:

the movie "exceeds expectations at every turn."

I guess someones shit is someone elses steak.

A Fox News reporter said he liked a Fox product? Will wonders never cease!

Next, you'll tell me that Steve Jobs likes iPods! Or that Bill Gates thinks MS Windows is the best OS out there!

[bootlegga]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Wouldn't releasing them simultaneously hurt the bottom line? As I understand it they release movies for rent some 3-5 months after theatre release (at least for the good movies) under the theory that its approximately the time when people would start to rent a movie they had already scene yet long enough that people will want to go to the theatre because waiting for the rental movie is too long. Same theory for released for purchase. Get people to see it then many months later they rent or buy the movie to watch again.

I've certainly rented and bought movies that I had seen already in the theatre.

No, the reason they wait 3-5 months to release it on DVD is because movie theatres have threatened not to carry product if its released sooner on DVD. A few years back, Fox Europe was planning on releasing movies to DVD 90 days after release. When movie theatre owners in Germany got a whiff of that, they promptly told Fox they would not carry Fox product if it followed through with it (the rationale is that many people would wait the 90 days to watch it at home instead of in a theatre). Fox backed down, but they are again pushing for something like that. It's one of the reasons for 3D coming back, digital cinema, etc, to provide an experience that can't be had at home.

Yeah, it might hurt the bottom line, because DVD sales these days are almost as big as the theatrical release. Comingsoon.net shows what movies make in their first week of DVD release if you're interested in checking it out. But now that the studios don't own a part of the movie theatre industry any more, they don't have to care whether or not they take a hit.

One advantage to massive distribution is some people wouldn't have to delay watching it (like parents with small children), as they could buy it right away, watch it on pay per view, so it might impact long term sales, but short term, it could bea bonanza. Movie viewing (in theatres anyways) drops dramatically after 35 years of age, mostly because of work, family etc., and this is one way to reach all audiences, instead of just the younger crowd. While a lot of people buy DVDs, they are designed to hit the over 35 demographic, who can't/won't see movies in theatres.