| |
| Author |
Message |
|
| jeremy |
 Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 12:53 am |
 |
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6794
Location: Derby, England and Hamilton, New Zealand (yes they are about 12,000 miles apart)
|
| I'm pretty sure that paying to see a film at the cinema does not give that person the right to subsequently stream it, download it to a hard drive or burn a copy. |
Last edited by jeremy on Fri Jan 11, 2008 2:35 am; edited 1 time in total
_________________
I am angry, I am ill, and I'm as ugly as sin.
My irritability keeps me alive and kicking.
I know the meaning of life, it doesn't help me a bit.
I know beauty and I know a good thing when I see it. |
|
| Back to top |
   
|
| Marc |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:01 am |
|
|
Joined: 19 May 2004
Posts: 8424
|
| people don't seem to understand that downloading music and film for free is killing the very thing they're enjoying. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Nancy |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:16 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 4607
Location: Norman, OK
|
Marc wrote: people don't seem to understand that downloading music and film for free is killing the very thing they're enjoying.
Some of them probably don't understand, others just don't care. I'd much rather buy something and make it possible for the maker to produce another than drive them out of business. |
_________________
"All in all, it's just another feather in the fan."
Isaacism, 2009 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Nancy |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:18 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 4607
Location: Norman, OK
|
jeremy wrote: I'm pretty sure that paying to see a film at the cinema does not give athat person the right to subsequently strwam it, download it to a hard drive or burn a copy.
I've known people who thought that if they made a slight alteration when reproducing someone else's work, that made it theirs. No, it doesn't. |
_________________
"All in all, it's just another feather in the fan."
Isaacism, 2009 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| mo_flixx |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:27 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 30 May 2004
Posts: 12533
|
Nancy wrote: jeremy wrote: I'm pretty sure that paying to see a film at the cinema does not give athat person the right to subsequently strwam it, download it to a hard drive or burn a copy.
I've known people who thought that if they made a slight alteration when reproducing someone else's work, that made it theirs. No, it doesn't.
except in the cut-throat garment business... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| gromit |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:35 am |
|
|
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 9010
Location: Shanghai
|
Marc wrote: people don't seem to understand that downloading music and film for free is killing the very thing they're enjoying.
The old corporate system of producing music was pretty crappy for both the average artist and consumer. I think a lot of the ferment in the music industry is pretty interesting. One benefit is that live music and concerts are again a money-making venture, not just a means of pimping a product. So more bands are on the road and live music is thriving.
The film industry is more high stakes, but I don't see fewer films getting made, or profits going down. DVD, cable, and the int'l market has opened up a lot of alternative revenue sources for films.
A big problem is that the music and film industry primarily cater to the taste and disposable income of 15-30 year olds, who are exactly the ones who have the time and tech savvy to d/l films.
I don't see the attraction of watching a film on a computer monitor, but I saw a kid on the subway the other day watching some action-epic (I think it was an LOTR) on a handheld device with a 3" x 3" screen. |
_________________
Killing your enemies, if it's done badly, increases their number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| mo_flixx |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 1:40 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 30 May 2004
Posts: 12533
|
gromit wrote: ...
don't see the attraction of watching a film on a computer monitor, but I saw a kid on the subway the other day watching some action-epic (I think it was an LOTR) on a handheld device with a 3" x 3" screen.
I agree and question how good this is for one's eyesight. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| inlareviewer |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:29 am |
|
|
Joined: 05 Jul 2004
Posts: 1949
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Son of Relayed Deaction Dept.:
lshap wrote: Saw The Diving Bell & the Butterfly, and while it's inarguably a fine film it's nowhere near the level of other big name Oscar bait from this year. Why critics are wetting themselves over this small and personal story is a mystery. The Sea Inside with Javier Bardem covered the same ground a couple of years ago.
Now, that's fascinating. While both are certainly similar in being based on the true-life situations of men imprisoned in their bodies, and both draw upon imagination and memories to achieve kinesis, it's hard, for me, to imagine two more intrinsically disparate films in tone, content, intent and effect. For all the elegiac artfulness of Amenábar's approach, it was primarily Bardem's stunningly internalized performance as Sampedro that elevated The Sea Inside above right-to-die-soaperatics for me, its poetry often approaching polemic, the ponderous emotionalism flirting with implosion. Fortunately, Bardem had those lighthouse eyes and that smoky voice. Whereas, the mercurial brilliance with which Amalric inhabits Bauby and his predicament, and with even more limited physical presence in the present, was but one ingredient -- the focal one, to be sure -- in the multi-layered sorbet that Schnabel made of The Diving Bell and The Butterfly. It felt to me as though it were evolving on the screen, virtually as it unspooled, even from cut to cut at times. Was engrossed from first fuzzed-out POV shot, through that long, near-hour of textural invention and cinematographic ingenuity -- Kaminski is a lock on my Blanche list -- that Schnabel deployed to keep us inside its first-person perspective without dropping the immediacy ball during the expository reels, through its final shot. If it recalled any other film for me, t'was that li'l Christy Brown biopic that won Daniel Day-Lewisohn his Racso, albeit crossed with every angle and simile that Cocteau didn't live to try -- La Belle et My Left Eye, perhaps. Was totally unprepared for its delicacy and the prismatic and often hilarious ways in which it managed to be life-affirmative without schmaltz or loss of gravitas. Left the cineplex profoundly moved and deeply bouyant, at once. And, being based on a teeny-tiny memoir (for reasons that become obvious), its other great joy for me was how much genuine pleasure its auteur clearly felt in finding cinematic ways and means to meet the challenges of source material that, even in a year of hard-to-imagine-it-filmed source material, is very unlikely movie fodder. Admittedly, am rather partial to small and personal films, and of late, depictions of the parent-child relationship can reduce me to amoeba status (found the scenes with Von Sydow heartrending). Of course, as ever, it's all so subjective -- in this case, literally.
Edited because the Edit Function just took me over |
Last edited by inlareviewer on Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:06 am; edited 24 times in total
_________________
"And take extra care with strangers/Even flowers have their dangers/And though scary is exciting/Nice is different than good." --Stephen Sondheim |
|
| Back to top |
|
| inlareviewer |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:29 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 05 Jul 2004
Posts: 1949
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:59 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
| Damn you, inlareviewer! I thought I was all set to nominate things for the Blanche and now you've made it imperative for me to see The Diving Bell and the Butterfly before I make Decision 2008. Damn you! Well, darn you, anyway. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| shannon |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:18 am |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 1628
Location: NC
|
jeremy wrote: I'm pretty sure that paying to see a film at the cinema does not give that person the right to subsequently stream it, download it to a hard drive or burn a copy.
I didn't say that I have the right, just that I'm not a complete asshole. Plus, let's pretend a person's only rental option is Blockbuster (in my case, true story). I would say downloading as opposed to paying Blockbuster is the moral high ground there.
And Marc, I wouldn't worry too much. I don't think we'll be attending the music and film industries' funerals any time soon.
Gromit: Time and tech savy? You click, you wait three hours. That's all there is to it. Those dvds you buy on the street, how do you think they're made? And watching a film on 19-inch computer monitor should be preferable to watching a film on a 19-inch television. TVs have nowhere near the resolution that your pc monitor has. And it's not like it's hard to make a dvd... |
Last edited by shannon on Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:35 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:19 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
In today's Answer Man column, Ebert addresses the question of whether or not Juno's characters are too hip for their own good. Whether or not you agree with Ebert--I'm talking Marc and company here--I have highlighted the phrase with which I think Ebert decimates the argument about her parents at least.
Q: On the strength of your naming Juno the best film of the year, I just took it in at my local googleplex, and I was a tad disappointed, even though I largely agree with your review. I was distracted to the point of annoyance at the implausibly hipper-than-thou sentences zipping out of the lips of the movie's characters. Juno is hip. Juno's friends are hip. Juno's parents are hip. Even Rainn Wilson's character, the guy behind the counter at the store, is hip. Only Jason Bateman's and Jennifer Garner's characters seem to be spared this indignity, probably to make some obscure point about the evils of yuppiehood.
A wise reviewer once wrote: "I have a problem with movies where everybody talks as if they were reading out of an old novel about a bunch of would-be colorful characters. They usually end up sounding silly." Well, of course that reviewer was you, and the movie was Raising Arizona. So can you explain why the affected English bothered you in one but not the other?
C. Morris, Noblesville, Ind.
A. Your local "googleplex"? We discourage that kind of hip coinage around here. Isn't "movie theater" good enough? Although you have caught me in a contradiction, I would argue that the dialogue in Juno mostly works because Ellen Page sells the tone so convincingly. She wins us over. Think of Diablo Cody's words in the mouths of Page's contemporaries, and you cringe. Yes, her parents talk that way: Where do you think she learned it? As for the drugstore clerk and Juno's best girlfriend, it's as if she affects the linguistic weather when she enters a room.
And here is Felix Vasquez of the Bronx, N.Y.: "This movie has divided audiences around the Internet. Some love its cute and intelligent way of addressing teen pregnancy, while others hate the pop culture quip-dialogue and put Diablo Cody through the wringer for it. Yet they never seem to complain when Tarantino or Kevin Smith use the exact same sense of dialogue." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Ghulam |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:38 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 4742
Location: Upstate NY
|
"Yet they never seem to complain when Tarantino or Kevin Smith use the exact same sense of dialogue."
I did. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:43 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Ghulam wrote: "Yet they never seem to complain when Tarantino or Kevin Smith use the exact same sense of dialogue."
I did.
I complain about every single aspect of every single Kevin Smith movie. The possibly too-hip dialogue is the least of it. Tarantino and Diablo Cody? No problem whatsoever except (Grindhouse, anyone?) when the movies are lousy. Juno is a wonderful movie in (IMO) every single way. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Trish |
| Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:55 am |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 2438
Location: Massachusetts
|
I'm so behind in my movie watching this year 
and from what I've seen not much has floored me honestly - I usually look forward to oscar time - the award shows, all the special websites tracking the contenders - I usually make sure I'm not working on any of the award nights (Globes, Sags, Oscars etc) - I didn't even bother this year and funny enough most aren't even going to air due the writers strike
not to say there haven't been a few excellent performances (Loved Pisent and Christie in Away From Her, in particular and Philip Seymour Hoffman in well, everything this year) and of course many "good' performances also
I the only flick I might be tempted to buy though is Black Book
unlike most here I liked a lot of the War-themed flicks: Charlie Wilson's War, Lions For Lambs, In The Valley of Elah which surprised me
Two prominant documentaries, however, Sicko and No End In Sight were fabulous and MUST SEES
I think my Blanche picks this year will be very incomplete |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
