Don’t Mess with Fox’s Wolverine: Me-ow! | The Devil's Avocado

9 comments - Join the argument!

Don’t Mess with Fox’s Wolverine: Me-ow!

A follow-up to Josh’s review of the leaked Wolverine.

The Rupert!

The Rupert!

Just thought I’d see what you all think about this. A columnist for Fox News, Roger Friedman, was fired yesterday for writing about his experience watching the leaked version of Wolverine recently - you can read about it here in the LA Times and here in Variety, among many others. His review was positive, but saying things like watching it online is “so much easier than going out in the rain” is probably what did him in. Especially since he works for Fox, which owns and distributes the fucking movie! Did he really not expect retribution from the Rupert??

Anyway - piracy is something I haven’t taken a very hard stance on (I believe this is more Josh’s territory). I believe that artists should have ownership of their work and they should be able to make a living on it. A very good living, if possible. But I also believe that we are living in a very different time with a very different set of rules. We are in a deep recession and we have machines in our pockets that can immediately gratify us with just about any information we desire. Distribution companies MUST keep up with technology and evolve. They have to completely reconfigure who they are and how they go about it in order to be a part of an awesome new future.

Cry baby litigations and reactionary retributions are not the solution. They are stunting.

CommentsDon’t Mess with Fox’s Wolverine: Me-ow!

Joshua Schilling

April 7th, 2009 at 7:56 pm

The problem is that no business model exists where studios or filmmakers can make any money if their projects are constantly leaked onto the interwebs. It isn't like music where you can just go on tour and make your money the old fashion way.

April 7th, 2009 at 8:46 pm

Right. And I don't have an answer. But as it stands now - I'm not the person who has to come up with one.

At the moment, movies leakages aren't nearly the problem music leakages are - since music is so short and less dense in comparison. What a perfect time to try things out. There's some interesting stuff going on in the indie world where studios are releasing their movies in theaters, on DirecTV, and on DVD all at once. Not sure how well it's worked out, but it's interesting.

If studios want to make their money in theaters, theaters have to be better than they are now. Personally, I love going to the movies - it sort of is like a cheap concert.

Joshua Schilling

April 7th, 2009 at 9:09 pm

The main difference between music and movies is that a business model now exists where there is none for the studios. Music companies are engaging in more "360" deals where, they take a percentage of all of the artists income–concerts, iTunes, commercials, etc. This can make up for their loss in CD sales to a degree.

Without "concerts", the film business is in real danger of losing their revenue stream unless they can create franchises that can be merchandised, like Iron Man, or Wolverine. It makes it nearly impossible for independent films that don't lend themselves to action figures or cereal boxes to turn a profit.

Simultaneous release hasn't really worked yet. It isn't widely accepted by filmmakers either. Another theory for cutting out distribution costs is the use of satellite transmitted digital projectors, and eliminating the need for prints. This is comparable to building a nuclear power plant, where the up-front costs are astronomical, but the long-term costs diminish greatly.

So, while movie leakages aren't nearly the problem that music leakages are, yet, the music industry is better equipped to deal with the problem as it grows. We can only assume that it will grow.

Marty_Schilling

April 8th, 2009 at 3:01 am

It's a sad reality, and I don't like the idea of record companies taking a share of a band's touring cash. I like going to the movies, but I completely agree with Rob that theaters need to change. How does a movie leak anyway? The only business model I could see working would be cheaper home theaters and a watch it now option through itunes or netflix. A theater needs two things, better projection, and less assholes. I don't think that will happen, so I don't know either, but it is an important thing to figure out because whoever does stands to make a lot of money.

Perhaps cutting the supply would help. No more huge national releases. Then again that didn't work for Gran Torino. It will take time for theaters to close to fit the shrinking demand but movies will survive.

Mat M

April 8th, 2009 at 3:44 pm

Sadly, there will always be assholes at the movies.

April 8th, 2009 at 7:34 pm

Yup.

April 8th, 2009 at 7:39 pm

I think part of the solution is treating every movie differently and every theater differently. I think there is still room for cheap seat theaters - they can be great. They promise nothing and make you pay nearly that. You walk in with a flask, order a soft drink, mix and have yourself a merry old time (while still not being an asshole).

I think there's room for something more formal and grand for theaters - a higher price, but a truly great experience. I think there is a market for that.

The problem lies with the middle ground multi-plexes which range drastically in quality (of service, of picture, sound, seating, concessions, bathrooms, etc.) but all make you pay the same and almost all treat you like you're an asshole for even showing up. Some of these places are good - but they are few.

Marty S.

April 9th, 2009 at 12:01 am

I kind of wish for the Studio system to return. I feel like that's the way movies should go. Contract actors and directors, would help out to keep costs down. The budgets sky rocketing is from advertising, and salaries.

April 9th, 2009 at 4:40 pm

That's funny. There is something nostalgically appealing about the old studio system. But I think there's not necessarily one answer for every movie. There can be something like the old studio system - but there needs to be freedom. There are obvious restrictions to the old studio system. Unfair restrictions, in a way, to both talent who want to work with others and audiences who want to see talent work with others. Of course, there are still some long-term contracts out there to certain studios (5-picture deals and so on) and then just loyalty (like Tarantino to the Weinsteins).

Leave a Reply