We have all seen those adverts in the UK cinemas right? The DVD piracy. ‘Cinema – It’s the Experience That Counts’. Well no. As piracy gets more prevalent and the quality of these discs become better, rather than turn away from piracy I think we should embrace it.

Why?

Think about it. All this lost revenue is for a reason.

Maybe when studios and Cinema owners start losing money hand over foot it may force these people into realising that the only experience we seem to get at the moment is people munching pop corn, talking, throwing food and generally annoying the f**k out of me.

Not to mention the crap seats, sound system cracked all the way up to 2, the 30 mins of adverts (which you need before a 3 hour + film like King Kong), over priced confectionary and drinks and even the general smell of the place.

Maybe if people turn away from the cinema, cinema owners will be encouraged to get up off their arses and do something about it.

I love film. I always have. That’s why I make movies. But cinema is killing film.

I have an issue paying almost £6 to see films that universally are crap, even worse when we normally get those 3 months after its US release. For me and my partner it’s £12 per trip. With drinks and food that’s almost £20 per visit.

Now compare that to buying a pirate copy. I can get the DVD for £5, sit at home with my LCD TV, surround sound system where I can actually HEAR the film, have a comfortable, warm room to watch it in, no adverts and no idiot talking all the way through it behind me.

Until cinema owners and studios start to make cinema worthwhile I for one will only go to the cinema when it’s worth it.

Which these days isn’t very often…

Phil, although much of your agrument is sound, I can't go along with advocating DVD piracy as the alternative. You are right, the theater is becoming less appealing every day. Overpriced food and drinks, endless commercials, distracting inconsiderate patrons around you...the experience is not as rewarding as they believe it is. What makes the situation worse is that I have two young children, which means -- for my wife and I to go to the movies, we have to add another $20 in babysitting cost to the already high prices of tickets, snacks, etc. Needless to say, we have stopped going to the movies unless the movie is one that we feel MUST be seen on the big screen. This now happens maybe 2 or 3 times a year.

I don't agree that priacy is the alternative, though. Have patience. Just wait. The movie you want to see will be out (legally) on DVD soon enough. Just rent it, or buy it. New releases come out every week!

Problem is a 6 month wait to see the film by which time you know everything about it. The new Section 8 thing where they are releasing DVD, Cable and Cinema at the same time is an alternative but that will be US only no doubt!

One cinematic experience that's definitely worth seeing is Imax films, though. I agree on the regular cinemas. 99% of the time I'd just as soon watch the movie at home. But if it's good, and it's on Imax, woohoo. :)

edit: In case anyone doesn't know, Imax theaters use 70mm film instead of 35mm. The screens are like, 8 stories high. :D

Indie, many this post should be moved to the Premiere forums...?

I agree that the theatre experience blows monkey chunks and I hate it. The last time I went to the theatre was a few years ago to see Freddy vs Jason (Yes, I love this kind of dreck). The movie was good, but the theatre experience was horrible! The theatre was filled to capacity (opening night - my mistake for going on this night, but I really wanted to see it), tons of teenagers all talking on cell phones, funky rings sounding off all through the movie, one group of people geing so roudy, the lights came during the film, cops came in to escort kids out, I missed what happened in that timeframe. The popcorn fights. The MST3K crowd in the front row.

I HATE the theater. I have a netflix subscription and I enjoy watching what I rent.

I don't condone piracy at all, as the pirated movie might be YOUR movie.
It could be Indietalk's movie.
It could be Johnny Wu's movie.
It could be Sonnyboo's movie.
It could be ...

Indie, many this post should be moved to the Premiere forums...?

I agree that the theatre experience blows monkey chunks and I hate it. The last time I went to the theatre was a few years ago to see Freddy vs Jason (Yes, I love this kind of dreck).

I don't condone piracy at all, as the pirated movie might be YOUR movie.
It could be Indietalk's movie.
It could be Johnny Wu's movie.
It could be Sonnyboo's movie.
It could be ...

hey Freddy V Jason was great. I have had one good cinema expereince in teh last 5 years and that was a late night Dawn Of The Dead remake showing. The crowd were into it, chearing, screaming and all that in a cool way. That was worth my money. (I should add that the cinema premiere of my own film was pretty amazing also).

I agree that piracy is bad. But sometimes it's the ONLY way to see a movie. And I mean that some movies you can NEVER get hold of. Remember the 80's in teh UK? Video Nasty era. I watched more horror film pirate DVD's that rented ones. It was the only way I could see Texas Chainsaw and the like.

Did I buy them on pristine DVD when they came out ? YES! I had copies of Land Of The Dead, Devils Rejects and many others before they screened in the UK. Did I o out and watch them in the cinema? Yes. Did I rent them? Yep. Did I buy the DVD? Yep.

But did I enjoy watching the pirate copy for the first time in my house on my 32" LCD with surround sound with no idiots throwing pop corn, or broken seat springs or over priced beverages or all teh other crap I have to endure at the cinema. Hell yeah. And I'd do it again in a heart beat!

The only good theatre experience I've EVER HAD was in 1983 at a showing of Return of the Jedi.

During the final fight scene between Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader, the entire theatre (including myself) stood up, screamed and yelled "KILL HIM!" at the top of our voices, cheering and carrying on with more emotion than I have ever mustered before. Vader's hand came off thanks to a quick move by Luke and the theatre exploded in screaming. I fell to my seat, trying to catch my breath.

Now THAT'S a theatre experience.

I won't mention the times I've seen Rocky Horror at midnight showings, as that's another story. :D

Ha! I've done the Rocky Horror thing also! Great fun! I looked dreadful in stockings though!

Ha! I've done the Rocky Horror thing also! Great fun! I looked dreadful in stockings though!<shudder> Please, no more visuals!!! :D

Ha!!!!!!

I really can't believe that a filmmaker is condoning pirating of films!
I mean it's like a dirty cop. And to even boast about it and say that "it's the ONLY way to see a movie" is absolutely the worst cop-out I've ever heard.

Let's not forget what this thread is about: "case FOR Pirate DVD's..."

You pirate DVD's or support the pirating because you don't like to go to the theater? I think that's crap... I find it hard to believe that you rent, buy, and go to the theater to see EVERY movie you have a pirated copy of.

This is a simple case of patience. You have none.
It's like a librian burning books. A priest sexually assaulting a kid. An officer selling drugs. A filmmaker pirating films.


Ummm yes, officer. How much can I get a kilo for?


Absolutely disgusting!

It's like a librian burning books. A priest sexually assaulting a kid. An officer selling drugs. A filmmaker pirating films.You forgot a dirty ref miscalling plays against the Steelers in Sunday's playoff game against the Colts. :D Sorry for the off-topic remark, but I just had to get it off my chest.

In my humble opinion, CootDog has a point. I don't think you can be a filmmaker and condone the piracy of it simultaneously. Think of it this way: If Kevin Smith made Clerks 2 available for free download from his website before the theatrical release saying "Pirate this!", do you think he'd ever work for a major studio again?

I don't think you can be a filmmaker and condone the piracy of it simultaneously.Wait a minute... I remember a VH1 interview with Metallica years ago when they created the entire MP3 flap where they were quoted as saying they pirated everyone else's music on analog cassettes as they were raking in the cash and getting famous.

Aw, never mind... :crazy:

I'm sorry, but I have a great experience every time I go to the theater. Because I realise the value of the theater and no matter how many idiot comic geniuses (you know the guys who make utterly hilarious - sarcasm is applied thickly to last word - remarks), chatty kids, heavy breathers, cell phone talkers, amorous teens, or other types of theater baddies that sit behind me, I still manage to enjoy the movie (if the movie is enjoyable) because I tone them out. I go to the theater at least once a week and most weeks two or three times.

I don't care if a trip to the theater in the future starts resembling the events of "Hostel" (second half torture stuff, not first half sex stuff...that actually would be kind of cool) I could never see myself thinking piracy is a good thing.

Poke

I really can't believe that a filmmaker is condoning pirating of films!
I mean it's like a dirty cop. And to even boast about it and say that "it's the ONLY way to see a movie" is absolutely the worst cop-out I've ever heard.

Let's not forget what this thread is about: "case FOR Pirate DVD's..."

You pirate DVD's or support the pirating because you don't like to go to the theater? I think that's crap... I find it hard to believe that you rent, buy, and go to the theater to see EVERY movie you have a pirated copy of.

This is a simple case of patience. You have none.
It's like a librian burning books. A priest sexually assaulting a kid. An officer selling drugs. A filmmaker pirating films.


Ummm yes, officer. How much can I get a kilo for?


Absolutely disgusting!

I think we could find a more Indie Talk like manner of expressing our opposing view.

Poke

I've three thoughts about this thread:

1) Bottom line is that a pirated disc cuts the revenue connection between the buyer and the creative team. None of the money paid goes back to the people who did the work of creating the performances the buyer is enjoying. That's something you can either live with or not; in essence a moral decision.

2) Supporting pirarcy isn't going to force Hollywood execs to rethink; if you look at Hollywood history when money gets tight they get more conservative, indies always flourish under a Hollywood that is feeling financially secure.

3) I've been going to the cinema since 1969 and have never had a bad experience, but I've always been able to tell from a trailer whether a film sucked or not.

Guys,

All is was saying is that poor cinemas, overpiced entry and the death of the experience is killing cinema and driving people to piracy.

My point is that I would rather watch a pirate copy than sit in a shitty cinema. To say that it's like burning books is bulls**t. Next you;ll acuse me of wanting to door rude things to young children.

Perspective. I dont give a shite if I'm a filmmaker or not. I am a consumer and the same rules apply. If i'm not happy with something I make it known.

And as I stated often (and ALWAYS when i like the film) I'll get the pirate copy then BUY the DVD when it comes out if I like the movie. That way the film makers still get my money and I get to watch the film on release in a way I enjoy. Ie NOT getting popcorn thrown at me or annoying idiots next to me talking.

If I dont and the studios loose money then SCREW EM! THEY SHOULD MAKE BETTER MOVIES!

Question...

So you guys have NEVER burnt a CD from someone or got a copy of a DVD? Come on guys... no one is perfect and I'm sure I can speak for everyone here when I guess that you all have done at least one of these?

If anyone finds a pirated version of Macbeth 3000, go ahead and take it, guilt-free. Frankly, considering the release date trouble we've had, it'd be more than resonable. (to pre-emptively answer questions: soon... maybe March)
I've always figured that in the end it evens out- so some people get it for free? Maybe it's because they can't afford it, or maybe they are just cheap bastards? It doesn't matter, since it's only a small percentage.
Now, in the case of filmmakers pirating movies, I believe that's excusable (Especially in indie-film). Think of it as research, learning, appreciation of art.... how many filmmakers have sent me free DVDs just so I can enjoy thier work? And isnt that what it's all about?

Then again, if you believe in the class system, the fortune 500, and all that other razz-mutaz, then piracy might be an issue- but I think it boils down to personal belief. I don't need to be paid 5 million to work on a film, but if there are some that do (and will fight for the small percentage of thier possible profit through hunting pirates), then whatever- just don't come after me and we're square. Is it too much to ask that in a DVD collection of about 100 discs, 5 of them can't be pirated (and 4 of them just weren't available in North America due to censorship bans, or silly rights issues)??

Call me crazy, but in the most self-centered, ego-driven industry (where they'll spend through the roof for things they could've done for free anyway with a little work), the amount of complaints about piracy is ridiculous. If anything, I'm just happy people watch my stuff!! And most of the money lost comes out of the executives/studios pockets, and frankly, I'd love to see them crash and burn (along with any and all conservative governments). But once again, it depends on the principles of the person. In my case, go ahead and pirate, ye mateys, if ye dare.

EDIT: Wanted to point out I'm from the extreme guerilla filmmaker perspective. I'm talking working part time to save up $300 to rent a boom mic for a day, just to shoot a 5min short... and you know what- if you can really manage resources, you only really need a good idea to make a film. But being in the poorhouse makes a person either of two things: a liberal and a philosipher, or, a crump and a lout.

Case in point about the film makers involved. THEY HARDLY ever get to see money. Why? Well studios and studio execs are the reason.

The studio execs made Forrest Gump (cost around $50 million, made around $300 million) NOT turn a profit so everyone (and there was a lot) of the people of deferred agreements didnt get any cash.

You feel sorry for these bottom feeders? The studio execs that are all queing up to buy and fund your movies? Give me a break.

I don't need to be paid 5 million to work on a filmCongratulations, your film budget just became 5 million dollars lighter. :D

Congratulations, your film budget just became 5 million dollars lighter. :D

Ha! Ouch!

All is was saying is that poor cinemas, overpiced entry and the death of the experience is killing cinema and driving people to piracy.

Over priced?

£6 isn't a lot of money. These days I pay half that for a cup of coffee, which I drink in about ten minutes and then forget about. I've never in my life gone home after two Chai Tea Lattes and said to my wife "Honey, you should have seen the grande latte I just had, man it was the best frothy drink I've ever had in my entire life, there was this great bit about half way through when the milk got really foamy and then ..etc." But as this board proves almost everyday some of us are still talking enthusiastically about films we saw in the cinema twenty-five years ago. Watching a film in a cinema is a potentially life changing experince that lives with us forever. Man, I can still remember going to see 101 Dalamtions in a cinema when I seven years old, I've vivid memories of seeing One Flew Over the Cuckoos nest in 1984 in a cinema in Croydon, I still remember seeing Beverley Hills Cop in a cinema in Manor House, ( I was the only white guy in the place and the whole cinema was full of grass smoke; I had to go back again the next day becuase people were laughing so much that we couldn't hear all the lines). I also remember seeing the Exocist in a cinema in Paris, the cinema was packed and when one guy walked out because it was too frightening the audience heckled him. Or what about when I got to see the premiere of "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrrels" at the Edinburgh Film Festival and everyone gave it a standing ovation at the end.

Man, some of the best experinces of my life have been in cinemas. I'd pay twice what I'm paying now, because for me cinema is the reason I make films, there is no other experience quite like it and unless you're going to pack my room with dope smoking Rastifarians and witty Parisians and get me a TV twenty feet wide, seeing films at home isn't ever going to come close.

I remember the time when i was browsing the Strawberry fields car boot sale in Bridlington and bought the Full Monty on dvd for £2. I thought i had a bargin, but then i watched it...

The picture looked as if someone had used a camcorder on a tripod and filmed it all direct from the cinema screen! I could even hear people crunching popcorn throughout the film.

So the following week i took it back to Bridlington and pay this rogue trader a visit. As expected i recieved no refund and got a load of "F" words shouted at me, but i still got the number plate of his car written down and passed it all onto Trading Standards with the dvd.

The piracy is the black market and the sharks responsible for this do not care about the film industry as every penny goes into their back pocket, giving the Filmmaker absolutely nothing for all his/her hard work.

As for the cinema, yes i know the snacks there are expensive thats why i always bring a mars bar and a bottle of mineral water, with no complaints from anyone.

I agree some of my best expereinces (ask me one day about the horny girlfriend and Liv Tyler washing a car in One Night At mccools!!!) but it isnt £6. With two people, drinks, food its upwards of £20!

20 years ago, 10 even people respected the art, the atmos, the feel. Now they dont. And that has killed the expereince for me. Prices go up, quality and service go down.

As I said Dawn Of The Dead was amazing, people chearing. Wild Things in LA with a crowd screaming for nudity. That was superb. Now you get some chav spitting and providing an x rated commentry for some kids film when i take my newphews. F**k that.

I'd rather sit at home. Or start my own private members cinema...

NO KIDS
NO IDIOTS/CHAVS
NO POPCORN/SWEATS
NO TALKING OR BREATHING LOUD
SOUND CRANKED UP FULL
AND BEER & CIGS!

Thats my idea of a good cinema!

Hollywood studios keep churning out the movies they do because people go watch them. Its that simple. The re-hashed formula movies do well enough to make a profit, so that's what will continue to get made. Hypothetically, if overall theater attendance just dropped (across the board -- ALL movies) by 50%, then the studios would likely not see this as a sign that they need to create a different style of movie -- they would just refocus their efforts on turning out the guaranteed hits (ie: crap) and eliminate the more experimental types of films as being too risky. I see piracy ultimately having this effect. If it does anything, it will just reduce the chances a studio will take on a non-formulaic movie.

Changing the movie indistry requires TWO things to occur simulatneously -- 1) STOP going to the movies you want Hollywood to stop making, and 2) START going to the movies you want to support.

Incidentally, these steps will actually need to be followed by the majority of the largest demographic segment of regular movie attendees in order for it to actually have an affect. I don't have any statistics in front of me, but I would venture a guess that the group is probably in the 15 - 25 age range. So, how do you convince all the teens and young adults that they should support movies like Brokeback Mountain instead of King Kong?

The piracy is the black market and the sharks responsible for this do not care about the film industry as every penny goes into their back pocket, giving the Filmmaker absolutely nothing for all his/her hard work.

As for the cinema, yes i know the snacks there are expensive thats why i always bring a mars bar and a bottle of mineral water, with no complaints from anyone.

I agree with the balck market but is it any different to a DVD costing £20 when in actuality it costs less that 50p to produce? DVD's have such a stupid mark up that the film maker NEVER sees. See my Forrest Gump example. And this isn't alone.

Why for the most part are deferred agreements Bullshit. because it's very hard to make a good deal these days. Most people never get paid. And the industry isnt that different. If a studio can make Forrest Gump loose money so they dont pay out but they make the money... how is that fair?

You liek giving money to studio execs who only care about a bottom line they move to suit their needs?

As for bringing my own... I got told off for eating food I hadn't bought at the cinema last week.

Hmm, let's see what's playing in my local theatre:

Cheaper by the Dozen 2. Formulaic rehash. I'll skip this one.
King Kong. 3+ hour monkey business. I saw the 1930's version. Skipped.
Narnia. I saw the cartoon when I was 5. Skipped.
Fun With Dick And Jane. Yet another remake. It has to be bad because I hate the actors. Skipped.
Munich. The 1972 massacre is something I'd like to FORGET. Skipped.

Oh well. There's nothing I want to see. I guess I won't go.

This is my protest to Hollywood. I don't see anything that intrests me. There's no independent films in the list, either.

Hmm, let's see what's playing in my local theatre:

Cheaper by the Dozen 2. Formulaic rehash. I'll skip this one.
King Kong. 3+ hour monkey business. I saw the 1930's version. Skipped.
Narnia. I saw the cartoon when I was 5. Skipped.
Fun With Dick And Jane. Yet another remake. It has to be bad because I hate the actors. Skipped.
Munich. The 1972 massacre is something I'd like to FORGET. Skipped.

Oh well. There's nothing I want to see. I guess I won't go.

This is my protest to Hollywood. I don't see anything that intrests me. There's no independent films in the list, either.

God your privileged. We get Narnia on two screens and Kong on two leaving 2 screens for whatever is left!

Maybe the problem is the cinema.

If you have a bad experience then go to a different one.

After many years of searching for a theater I have finally found a theater that has great ambience, respectful workers, and free refills of beverages and popcorn. The sound is pretty good and the patrons aren't too bad. Perhaps it's the actual cinema.

Hmm, let's see what's playing in my local theatre:

Cheaper by the Dozen 2. Formulaic rehash. I'll skip this one.
King Kong. 3+ hour monkey business. I saw the 1930's version. Skipped.
Narnia. I saw the cartoon when I was 5. Skipped.
Fun With Dick And Jane. Yet another remake. It has to be bad because I hate the actors. Skipped.
Munich. The 1972 massacre is something I'd like to FORGET. Skipped.

Oh well. There's nothing I want to see. I guess I won't go.

This is my protest to Hollywood. I don't see anything that intrests me. There's no independent films in the list, either.

I totally agree, thats why I dont go to the cinema much. Even the local art house is a multi use facility and its only once every month or two they program a film, half of which are special interest and I have no interest in watching. Make films that I want to see and I will gladly pay my way into a theater. I remember times in the past I would go once a week, not now.

God your privileged. We get Narnia on two screens and Kong on two leaving 2 screens for whatever is left!So, are they still screening Bewitched where you are? :D

Wow, reading this thread has opened up mye eyes a bit as to how many people don't go to the movies. I can't fathom anyone not wanting to see King Kong or Narnia. But then again, I realise that I have always been attracted to spectacle films whether good or bad.

As I said before, I go to the theater at least once a week, so the movie industry has gotten plenty of money from me over the years, yet I do not deal in pirated DVDs. Clive's right, it's a moral issue with me. And I don't care if the second unit carpenter doesn't see a fraction of my money, in the end I don't feel it matters who gets the money from the product, all that matters is that stealing is against the law and wrong.

Poke

Wow, reading this thread has opened up mye eyes a bit as to how many people don't go to the movies. I can't fathom anyone not wanting to see King Kong or Narnia. But then again, I realise that I have always been attracted to spectacle films whether good or bad.

As I said before, I go to the theater at least once a week, so the movie industry has gotten plenty of money from me over the years, yet I do not deal in pirated DVDs. Clive's right, it's a moral issue with me. And I don't care if the second unit carpenter doesn't see a fraction of my money, in the end I don't feel it matters who gets the money from the product, all that matters is that stealing is against the law and wrong.

Poke

I did see Kong and I might see Narnia before its done. Tristan & Isolde sounds like it might be decent too, as well as New World (but I dont like Farell), and maybe one or three others in the next three months that at least intrigue me.

No I have no interest in buying bootleg DVD's. zero. I carefully decide what movies I want to own and I buy them. Furthermore if I see a movie that has just come out and I want to see it I go to the cinema (in LA I had nice AMC's and such but here its not as deluxe but thats ok, its still fun).

As you said Poke, I put my money where my mouth is and do realize now that I am supporting the filmmakers and their crews by doing so. And if a 2nd unit carpenter worked on deferrment and the producers didnt negotiate well enough with the distributor that that guy will make some money back, well that isnt my fault.

Wow, reading this thread has opened up mye eyes a bit as to how many people don't go to the movies. Isn't that SCARY? We're filmmakers and we don't go to the movies... :D

Things I'm thankful for: Home video and HBO. Without them, I don't think I'd have any interest in movies.

all that matters is that stealing is against the law and wrong.

When I hear a statement like this I have an anarchist knee jerk reaction to want to break the law. In all fairness to pokemaster he did say that for him this was a morale issue and I respect that. However I would like to see a artists, filmmakers, writers, etc have a greater discussion about the copyright laws that increasingly favor large cooperations and not the interest of the consumer. I am even less familiar with UK copyright law than with US but I imagine the laws are similar. And while I must be clear that in most cases I do not condone media piracy a little healthy civil disobedience can be a good thing, if the laws are wrong.

Isn't that SCARY? We're filmmakers and we don't go to the movies...

This raises a far more interesting question. For reasons that have been stated the cinematic experience can not be recreated outside of the cinema and filmmakers, those who have the greatest reason to have that experience, are electing not to. As a casual consumer I can see turning to alternative forms of film viewing, but the serious filmmaker must have an understanding of the chosen medium. An understanding that can not be derived from casual consumption. And yet.... any ideas why a filmmaker as a consumer would not make the investment.

And may I suggest skipping the soda and popcorn. Movies are no more than three hours folks you wont starve... ;). Also there is the matinée. Less folks, cheaper tickets. I call that win-win.

Okay quick straw poll... and please answer YES or NO.

1. Have you ever copied a tape, LP. CD or MP3 that you didn't purchase?

2. Have you ever recorded a film or TV show to keep of Satalite, Cable or TV?

Again how is this giving the film maker his money

3. Have you ever watched DVD in a group of 4 or 5?

Yes? then you may have broken the law also.

Side Note : In the UK it is actually illegal to keep something you recorded off TV for over I think 48 hours.

If the answer YES then please tell me HOW this differes from buying a pirate DVD. Are musicians (who get a better cut of profits from CD's than film makers EVER do from DVD's) exempt from your moral highground?

1. Have you ever copied a tape, LP. CD or MP3 that you didn't purchase?

You got me there Phil, I'm a hypocrite. The only thing I would say though is that two wrongs don't make a right. To be honest I think that I really need to change my behaviour around music, something I've been considering for a while now for exactly this reason.

2. Have you ever recorded a film or TV show to keep of Satalite, Cable or TV?

Yes of course I have, but the distribution company got paid by the TV company for the rights to show that film, and I paid my Sky subscription, so in reality money has changed hands.

3. Have you ever watched DVD in a group of 4 or 5?

There isn't anything that prevents me from showing the DVD to many people as I like, providing I don't do that in a public venue or for commercial reasons. Again, I've paid for the DVD and have certain rights as a result of that purchase.

However I would like to see a artists, filmmakers, writers, etc have a greater discussion about the copyright laws that increasingly favor large cooperations and not the interest of the consumer. I am even less familiar with UK copyright law than with US but I imagine the laws are similar.

Copyright laws are pretty international now, which is the reason that as a UK screenwriter the best way to establish the copyright of my script is to send it to the US Library of Congress. However, I agree that the actual concept of copyright is one that probably needs larger debate.

I'm still unsure about where I stand on the copyright issues, because I have split feelings about it. On the one hand I want to make a living by creating IP (Intellectual Property) in this case films/screenplays. To do this I need to know that I can turn my ideas into property and that the only people who have access to that property have to come to some kind of financial arrangement with me (In other words, if I make a film I want to be able to sell it). The copyright laws are the institiution that allow me to do that and without their protection I would never be able to send a new screeplay out to a production company because they could just steal it. In many repsects the copyright laws do a better job of protecting me against the large studios than the other way round, because they really, really don't want to get into litigation over a script.

On the other hand, as an artist I see the whole concept of IP as nonsense. There is part of me that would be quite happy to see "No Place" pirated all around the world, if it meant that people were enjoying it. If there was enough money coming in for me to live on comfortably I'd make films for nothing and give them away via P2P.

I think this is where the fulcrum of this argument lies: If you want to make a living from film making then you have to support copyright, because to not support is to say that all film should be free. If all films are going to be free, how do we pay the people who make them. Well in the UK the Arts Council provides grants of up to $70,000 for film makers to make films, but in my experience that then becomes censorship by committee. Personally I'd rather take my chances in the market than have a government quango decide whether I can put a film into production or not.

With that said, I think there is a larger debate to be had over whether conventional distribution via the industry is the route forward for indie film making. Any distribution method that gave the producer of film direct access to the people buying the films would have to be a good thing.

The problem with the current distribution system is that it favours the distributor over the film maker. The distributors go for easy to sell products, hence the proliferation of teen flicks (slasher horror, urbna junkie tales) and blockbusters. Anyone looking of something different is left with the art house cinema chains and it's a well documented fact that the costs of an art house cinema run can often wipe out the DVD profits of an indie film, turning a popular indie film into a fianacial loss.

Clive,

I guess my point is that whilst my original statement was bold I wanted to get peoples opinions on it. When people attack directly, taking teh moral high ground when they in fact are as guilty it annoys me. There are far too many hypocrites in this world and when people attack me for an opinion then go hone and watch the movie they downloaded or copies to their PSP or listern to tracks they never purchased on their Ipod but still lecture me on how evil I am for suggesting that people are driven to this...

Well needless to say this double standard annoys me. I never suggested piracy was right (and backed it up by saying that I also tend to buy the DVD's on release for the films i like) but like many things in this world is was an evil that people are driven to for reasons out of their control.

Wow, lots being said here. Figured I should add my 2 cents to the discussion:

Perhaps I am wrong, but it is my understanding that if I copy a dvd for personal use only and do not profit from it or publicly distribute it, I am breaking no law. The same thing goes for taping from TV (that's why DVR is so big here). And I can invite as many people as I want to see a movie privately as long as I don't profit from it.

It muddies the water, Phil to suggest that taping from TV in your home to watch later has anything to do with piracy. The airwaves are free to the public (if you are like me and have abjurred cable/satellite, etc.) so I cut no one's profit by recording at home. And when I did have satellite, I paid upwards of $80 a month for the priviledge, so I can do whatever I want with the content that was beamed to my home- as long as I don't profit from it.

Because I have a young daughter, I haven't spent much time at the cinema in the last seven years. I have wanted to many times, but because I respect the movie-going experience so much, I would not subject fellow patrons to a small child in the theater. Now that she is older, we can take her to some of the things that interest us (ie. Narnia, which really was quite lovely). I saw Kong with my husband on a 'date night'. We choose our cinema films often for spectacle- it we know it will suffer a lot on the small screen, we go to the movies. We often do the matinee and skip the snack bar completely- it is just an enourmous rip off. As stated somewhere above on the thread, it's not like you'll starve in a two hour film.

That said, I am such a regular Blockbuster patron that they know me by name. Late fees have been abolished there folks, in case you didn't know. You get a 1 week grace period from the due date (meaning a 1 week rental is actually 2 weeks), if you keep it after that, you can still get it back within 30 days and be charged a $1.25 restocking charge. (I should point out the penalty for the over due stuff is that they do charge your credit card for the movie purchase if you are more than a week late- they credit it back ASAP if you get it back in 30 days.) I know, they are a giant corp. too, but I live in a tiny burg in northern Ohio and my choices are between two chain stores. Also, they often have great deals on pre-viewed dvds that come with a 30 day money back guarantee- AND they have an exchange/trade-in policy too for credit on purchasing other films. What's not to like?

I do not and would not pirate dvd's or cd's. Sure, the system of studio filmmaking is as corrupt as any corporate entity (just look at R.R. Rebel Without A Crew and his discussion of union editors), but that doesn't make it O.K. to steal product from a vendor.

As to the 'personal nature' of some of the exchanges on this board... Phil, I have to believe you are trying to get a big, visceral reaction out of people. It's the only reason I can fathom that you post in provocative language. There's an old addage from my public speaking days, "If you don't get the audience reaction you expected, it's not the audience, it's the way you delivered the message." You have every right to vent your frustration with the "system", and others have every right to disagree.

OK, perhaps I gave more like $0.50 than 2- sorry for the long post. :)

Wow, lots being said here. Figured I should add my 2 cents to the discussion:

As to the 'personal nature' of some of the exchanges on this board... Phil, I have to believe you are trying to get a big, visceral reaction out of people. It's the only reason I can fathom that you post in provocative language. There's an old addage from my public speaking days, "If you don't get the audience reaction you expected, it's not the audience, it's the way you delivered the message." You have every right to vent your frustration with the "system", and others have every right to disagree.

OK, perhaps I gave more like $0.50 than 2- sorry for the long post. :)

Far from it. I just wanted to float an idea why pirate DVD was taking off so much. Why people are willing to break the law. It's happening and there must be a reason beyond people being tight.

What baffles me is that people can't seperate an discussion from personal opinion. That's what baffles me. Whilst i agree in part I am evil, I feel I'm being called the sporn of satan by (and yes here comes the generilastion) people who themslves preach double standards.

Most pople here have copied CD's but then take moral high ground on DVD like there is a difference. When there isn't (not to mention DVD to PSP which is still a breach of (c))

As for me I have been a cinema patron for years and used to watch upwards to 75 films a year on the big screen. I used tos tay up and watch the Oscars live and I used to enjoy the cinema over everything else. But I've been driven out and forced away. I didn't choose this it happened.

So to see recent films i, on ocasion, will buy a pirate. if I like the film I'll buy it on DVD. Maybe even rent it too.

But don't tell me I'm taking food off peoples tables. I have two releatives that work in film (one construction one FX). They gat paid more in one day than I make in a week. They are doing fine and happy. These tecnicicans, the real skilled people behind the scenes, make their money as do most others. When I watch a pirate copy of War of The Worlds I know in my heart of hearts that buying this copy will not make poor Timmy the Admin guy out of a job. As poor timmy the admin guy makes trebble what I do.

Does it make it right? No. DO I feel bad denying share holders of multi national corporations an extar 0.003 cents on their next dividend? No.

Will piracy kill cinema. No. Do Pirates always fund child porn or terrorism? No. Do we believe everything we hear in the media... well evidently yes.

As for TV and copying. (I speak from a UK pov). It is never acceptable from a legal POV to copy a DVD or CD for personnal use. It is also not permisable under (c) laws to screen to an audiance (which I believe is over 5) and it wasnt (although I'm unsure how this stands now) legal to copy or record from TV and keep that on tape/disk for longer than 24 hours. Up to a few years ago it was considered a breach of law to copy a cd that you own even if you keep that yourself.

As for TV and copying. (I speak from a UK pov). It is never acceptable from a legal POV to copy a DVD or CD for personnal use. It is also not permisable under (c) laws to screen to an audiance (which I believe is over 5) and it wasnt (although I'm unsure how this stands now) legal to copy or record from TV and keep that on tape/disk for longer than 24 hours. Up to a few years ago it was considered a breach of law to copy a cd that you own even if you keep that yourself.
Dude...that sucks.
Here in the states
1) Noone really gives a rat's ass if you show more than 5 people a dvd as long as it's on your own propery (and don't charge them to see it). Seriously, even if it is a rule, nobody cares.
2) We can record anything we see on TV or radio for pretty much unlimited personal use (so long as we don't resell it). You could record a season of a show off tv, edit out the commercials, and burn the season to dvd. So long as you are subscribed to the channel that airs the show, no one can touch you.
3) We can make unlimited "back-ups" of anything we have rights to, CDs or DVDs. I know people who've taken their CD collections, burnt copies of them all, and kept 1 copy at their house and 1 copy in their car. Doesn't matter because they paid for the song 'rights' for personal use when they bought the CD. Same applies with ripping your CD collection to your mp3 player.

You forget up until 5 or 6 years ago the UK still banned filsm liek Texas Chainsaw, Driller Killer and other quote 'video nasties'. Now I agree than Cannibal Ferox and Zombie 4 should be banned but for reasons of wuality and taste not gore. Even Oscar winner The Exorcist was banned for over 20 years (on home video at least).

But again ask any film fan (horror at least) in the UK and they owned or watched pirate copies of these films.

Perhaps I am wrong, but it is my understanding that if I copy a dvd for personal use only and do not profit from it or publicly distribute it, I am breaking no law.

<RANT>
Thanks to a new law called the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA), this act is now illegal here in the USA. The DMCA is an addon to existing copyright law that states unauthorized 'copying, for personal or commercial use, without profit; or personal backup of protected digital content' is illegal.

That's right. The DMCA disallows you to backup your own legally purchased protected digital content. It's sad. I can't make a backup of something I legally purchased to protect the master copy from damage (Yes, I have kids who love to get into my stuff and DESTROY IT).

The DMCA is the brainchild of the RIAA and MPAA to protect it from piracy.

The big problem I see here is that DVD, for all it's current uselessness now that a large chunk of us have HDTV sets, made standard definition video perfect. I think the industry killed itself with making DVD available: Sell and distribute perfect digital copies of its films and hope no one copies them. SILLY! If they didn't want high quality digital copies of its films to be made available for free on the web by pirates, they shouldn't have released the DVD format to them in the first place.

I think the industry that's trying to protect itself is the exact same industry that's killing itself.

Next, home HD content will be coming soon. Nice. I'd like to see either a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD format that truly is protected, perhaps by using a MASSIVE encryption key, like a 1024 or 2048-bit cypher that would take years of brute-force attacks by a supercomputer to crack. Then the **AA would have the right to whine that everyone is pirating their content. They just need to put in some effort to stop it from happening before they start suing children and dead people.
</RANT>

Sorry for the long rant, but I think big business (Disney, et. al; **AA) who want copyright reform are the same people that's going to DESTROY copyright altogether.

David Bowie said something to the effect of 'in a few years, copyright will not exist as we know it today. It needs to be thrown out the window and we need to start all over again.'

I agree with this comment. Should we take a step back and evaluate how copyright has evolved into over the last 100 years? The founding fathers created copyright to last 14 YEARS. Now, thanks to Disney, it's 100 years. And when that 100 years is over and Mickey Mouse goes into the public domain, Disney will make sure that copyright law gets extended to 150 years. Anything for the almighty buck.

That sickens me. The industry that's trying so hard to protect itself from going downhill is the same industry that's doing it to themselves.

Well said. Thats why this Section 8 deal with simaltanious release is the next big thing. Okay so it may cost more but it will enable people like me to watch films at home when they are first released at a reasonable price how I want to watch them WHEN I want to watch them.

Lets hope the idea flies!

Interesting thread. I will agree that the movie going experience has declined in quality over the last two decades. The "world is my living room" and not a theatre where other people have paid to watch a film without distractions is the biggest reason. I don't go to see movies on opening weekend. Too many teens chatting and taking cellphone calls. Being a freelance cinematographer, I have big blocks of free time, so I go to weekday matinees in LA (I know many folks around the US and other countries don't have that option plus day jobs) and avoid rowdy crowds. My advice is complain long and hard to theatre owners.

Crappy Movies: Yes, there are plenty of them. Do your research and avoid them. As I get older I realize that movies are cyclical, in that plots seemed to be recycled every 20 years or so and repackaged with the latest hot star. (Two Cases in point: "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" 1956, remade in 1978 and the had the plot borrowed for 1998 Rodriguez's "The Faculty". The hot rod movies of the late 50s & 60s, now "The Fast and the Furious") I don't go and see as many movies as I used to simply because I've seen them before. I tend to see more indie movies.

Pirating: I just don't support it. I have never downloaded a film, bought a pirate DVD or even music. Yes, many studio execs and stars are lining their pockets, but I believe in the trickle down theory, in that if studios are losing money on big movies then they'll be less money for smaller movies. Most of the studios have indie arms like Sony Classics or Fox Searchlight, etc.... and they are affected by loss of revenues. Also, as I get older, I just don't need to see a movie as soon as it's available.

My two cents.

Scott

1. Have you ever copied a tape, LP. CD or MP3 that you didn't purchase?

I have never willingly copied a CD or downloaded an mp3 that I did not purchase (save for legal free downloads from Download.com or other sites for indie artists like Soundclick or My Space which allow the artists to make available thier songs under a creative commons license). I have had copied CDs given to me, and you can consider this hypocritical if you like. Like clive, I have felt the pangs of guilt about copied music that I have kept in the past.

My problem with this idea of supporting or allowing piarcy for the sake of a better product or better venue to view said product is that it is against the law - like MikeyD said we need better laws, but right now this is what we got and I am guilty of breaking these laws by possessing copied music - thus I should accept it if I was to be thrown in jail or made to pay a fine for soing so.

By the way, I don't consider copying your own CDs that you've legally purchased to be against the law. I am unfamiliar with the legislation that mrde50 brought up, I need to research that more before I can further elaborate this point.

2. Have you ever recorded a film or TV show to keep of Satalite, Cable or TV?

Yes, but as clive explained money is paid for the distribution and I pay my cable bill. In the US it is not against the law in any way.

3. Have you ever watched DVD in a group of 4 or 5?

Yes, but agian, not against the law. As long as I don't take money at the door, I am not breaking any laws.

Poke

As I said before opinions are like arseholes. Everyone has one. Mines bigger than most! Ha!

A tad bit off-topic, but it has to do with piracy...
Is it just me, or are music rights way over priced. Like on Napster, they charge $.99 per song. They equate stealing music to stealing cars and purses (the US RIAA does anyway). Yet, when you steal cars, purses, etc. they aren't there anymore. Digital media is an unlimited resource, infinite in quantity. It's rediculous.

Yep 99 c to download it.... $250 per second or more to add it in a film. Hmmmmmm.....

Ok, I use this argument a lot when discussing music rights:
When I was 16, I only listened to a few bands and mainly classical. My best friend Bill burnt me a mix CD of downloaded tunes, amung which was a band called "Matthew Good Band" (song: Apparitions).
I now own every single albumn by Mr. Good, and have seen over 13 shows since discovering this artist.
Same thing with Zepplin, the Stones, The Killers, Third Eye Blind, Concrete Blonde, etc. (minus the concerts because half those bands are partially dead or don't tour in Canada)

So in essence, the "0.99" cents the music industry lost per song I downloaded was recouped in albumn and concert sales. Also, the artists get a new fan.

I've only downloaded a few films, and most of the time it had to do with concent being censored in north american markets (Battle Royale for example). Others were released a year before north american markets in Europe and Asia.

But here's my question- how are downloads considered profits? In essence, p2p software is just file sharing from one computer to another... kind of like making a copy of a DVD for yourself and lending it to a friend for free... so where's the harm? Is this about "potential monies lost"??

I bring this up because it ties in with Lilith's comment: "If you don't get the audience reaction you expected, it's not the audience, it's the way you delivered the message.".

Since there is no major outlet for downloading feature films, how can an industry complain about potential losses when they do not even use that medium as of yet?

It's like me saying that too much wood is being burned for campfires and it's enviromentally harmful, but not providing an alternate solution except to sue every camper who makes a fire!!!

Either way, I firmly believe it is up to the industry to provide more incentive to go to cinemas and buy DVDs- whether it be bonus features exclusive to certain mediums, or whatnot.

When Serjus mentioned: "Digital media is an unlimited resource, infinite in quantity. It's rediculous.", it made quite a bit of sense- in essence, no one is ACTUALLY losing money. The industry is just claiming the people who downloaded these movies are stealing because they did not pay for a ticket... Am I wrong or am I wrong?
(prove me wrong)

Another point I just though of:

What about used music/movie shops that sell DVDs for profit at reduced costs?

Isn't that selling a film for profit?

And if that's legal, then wouldn't it be legal for someone to buy a film, burn a copy, re-sell it, that buyer burns a copy and resells it, etc, etc, etc?

Technically it would be.. so hows about them beans?

Another point I just though of:

What about used music/movie shops that sell DVDs for profit at reduced costs?

Isn't that selling a film for profit?

And if that's legal, then wouldn't it be legal for someone to buy a film, burn a copy, re-sell it, that buyer burns a copy and resells it, etc, etc, etc?

Technically it would be.. so hows about them beans?

No, you're creating a sellable entity from a source of which you do not own the rights to. In the case of used CD sales, once the seller sells the CD or DVD, they no longer have that to sell and so they must buy another if they want to sell more, which in the end puts money back into the pocket of the original purchaser of the DVD so they might buy another to take its place, further continuing the cycle, and supporting the industry. Further, those who may not have the cash to buy new DVD's to discover artists may buy used and then eventually start attending those artist's concerts or buying their merchandise or even new CD's or DVD's once they've discovered them.

See there is another issue here that sometimes drives people to piracy.

The issue here is also my cinema chain which hasn't shown films I want to see. Transporter 2, Unleashed, History Of Violence, Saw 2... they all missed my cinema. Instead I get Herbie on 3 screens.

No I am unable to pay to see these movies when they come out due to where I live and the cinema. So is it then morally right to buy a pirate DVD IF I intend on rerenting or buying it when it comes out proper.

Technically I can't pay to see it so what do I do?

I've been thinking about this for a few days and the truth is that I really don't care if everyday punters pirate the occassional DVD. I don't see it as something worth worrying too much about. Home taping hasn't killed the music industry, and although P2P is hurting them, I don't see many execs living on the streets.

However, what I do have a problem is with an indie film maker doing it. It basically comes down to this, as a film maker I expect the distributor to pay me to distribute my film and would sue his/her ass if they distributed it without paying me. I don't think it's playing the game to then screw the distributors by publically condoning pirating. It's like selling computer games to Woolworths and then suggesting that everyone shoplifts them.

As to your local cinema, I suggest writing to them about their booking policy. If they get twenty or thirty letters from people all complaining about the lack of choice they will rethink their programming. I have to drive forty minutes to get to my nearest multiplex, maybe you should look for a better cinema. You live in Sussex, I don't believe for second there isn't a choice of cinemas. I've got maybe six ten screen mulitplexes withing forty minutes drive and they all programme differently. Plus three great arthouse venues. I live in the North East where we've only just got inside toilets and electricity, so I know that you southerners must have it better.

The other way of looking at it is if there is a gap in the market in your area for a cinema that programmes better films, maybe you should consider going into the cinema business. A few of us have talked about setting up indie cinemas over the years, the margins are tough, but it beats complaining.

Cinema's are quite expensive and very low profit. My dad considered putting a 10 screen in our hometown. Would have cost several million to construct and making it all back takes several years. Not an ideal business venture for someone looking for great money.

However, what I do have a problem is with an indie film maker doing it. It basically comes down to this, as a film maker I expect the distributor to pay me to distribute my film and would sue his/her ass if they distributed it without paying me. I don't think it's playing the game to then screw the distributors by publically condoning pirating. It's like selling computer games to Woolworths and then suggesting that everyone shoplifts them.

What I should have said before is that I would NEVER pirate an Indie film makers DVD out of repect. My morals may be dubious but everything i have said applies to hollywiood and mainstream only.

That's kinda of a double standard but again I dont mind Hollywood studio types loosing money (and lets not forget they are the main loosers of mainstream piracy WHATEVER anyone says or thinks. How do I know this - well technician wages on films have never been higher in the UK, so high that they are pricing themselves out of the market but thats a different arguement) but knwoing that I'm taking money out of Clive's pocket.

That I wouldn't do because I know how that effects us/you/them.

If you have problems with the current structure, you can start a petition and present it to the appropriate gov't agencies. If you instead turn to crime to try to prove a point, expect to get caught...especially if you're saying your a criminal in a publically accessible forum.

I don't believe in the way the economy works, so I'm going to go rob a bank. This is a much more obvious example of an action being illegal. Yes, the example is extreme, but I'll prove my point by breaking the law. Speaking morally, the two crimes are the same. Morality doesn't know extremes, it's black and white.

Stealing a DVD is the same as stealing a car...their manufacturing costs scale accordingly. In digital, it's not materials that cost money, but hosting, content and bandwidth. How much hardware is dedicated to iTunes Music store to handle the 1 billion song downloads they've had so far? Between that and the cost for the content, apple is probably just above breaking even on ITMS.

Above and beyond that, the big studios have to promote their content (designers making posters and tv spots, air time and wall space for all of that costs money) and pay their bills as well. The content doesn't just magically appear out the 'net, it is made by large armies of people with families that need to get fed and bills that need to be paid.

As I wrap up production on my feature, I have come to respect every completed film no matter how crappy I think it is. Getting to the finish line is a massive undertaking, much larger than I had ever though about before. I am currently doing it with volunteer cast/crew, but they all have day jobs, if this was their day job, they would expect to get paid...I would have to get the movie to make a profit to be able to do that. As Indies, we have the luxury of claiming moral issues with the established cinema industry and claiming that the content should be free and that piracy isn't that big of a deal.

So did metallica, until their families started depending on the income from their music.

Bottom line, piracy is illegal, if you don't think it should be, get enough people to complain about it to the government. These are the people responsible for amending the laws to suit the needs of ALL the parties involved on both sides of the equation.

If you have problems with the current structure, you can start a petition and present it to the appropriate gov't agencies. If you instead turn to crime to try to prove a point, expect to get caught...especially if you're saying your a criminal in a publically accessible forum.

<::content removed by moderator::> Goverements dont care.

Stealing a DVD is the same as stealing a car...their manufacturing costs scale accordingly. In digital, it's not materials that cost money, but hosting, content and bandwidth. How much hardware is dedicated to iTunes Music store to handle the 1 billion song downloads they've had so far? Between that and the cost for the content, apple is probably just above breaking even on ITMS..

Not in law. Look at the different scales of punishment. TOTALLY different.

Above and beyond that, the big studios have to promote their content (designers making posters and tv spots, air time and wall space for all of that costs money) and pay their bills as well. The content doesn't just magically appear out the 'net, it is made by large armies of people with families that need to get fed and bills that need to be paid.

They are all paid. Trust me. As I have stated before up and down the line on major studio films they pay is better than what I earn in a week for a day. That goes across teh board. Simple. The only people who loose out is shareholders and studio execs. This bullshite that piracy funds terrorism, that it will kill the film indutry etc is just that. Believe what you want but piracy has been going on for years and will continue to.

<Post edited by moderator>

EVERYONE PLEASE... Does anyone else here think this thread is getting a bit out of hand? It started as a moral question (That's how I took it) to outright attacks on neighboring countries, governments and their people.

Yes, we all agree that there are laws that prohibit illegal copying of copyrighted material with and without profit. Whether it is moral or not is up the the individual.

Personally, my Karma is excellent.

Thanks to a new law called the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA), this act is now illegal here in the USA. The DMCA is an addon to existing copyright law that states unauthorized 'copying, for personal or commercial use, without profit; or personal backup of protected digital content' is illegal.

Actually, what is illegal is using a device to break the copyright encryption. And since DVDs (and soon CDs) have copy protection, there is no way to legally copy them for fair use. So that puts us in a weird place, because we have the right under fair use to make the copies, but if we break the copy protection, we are breaking the law.

Here's a good article about it. (http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-3513_7-5128652.html)

I'm back on forth on this issue. I guess I don't really mind unless it's happening on a mass level or being sold for profit.

Now compare that to buying a pirate copy. I can get the DVD for £5, sit at home with my LCD TV, surround sound system where I can actually HEAR the film, have a comfortable, warm room to watch it in, no adverts and no idiot talking all the way through it behind me.

What I don't get is, if you're going to BUY a pirated DVD, why not and just wait to get a legal disc when it is released? You're spending money anyway, plus, your arguements seem to support more along the lines of - stay at home and watch DVDs, screw the crappy cinemas - vs. - long live pirated DVDs- I guess I don't get how pirated DVDs plays into the comfort of watching DVDs at home. And if you're paying for it, someone's getting your money.

What I don't get is, if you're going to BUY a pirated DVD, why not and just wait to get a legal disc when it is released? You're spending money anyway, plus, your arguements seem to support more along the lines of - stay at home and watch DVDs, screw the crappy cinemas - vs. - long live pirated DVDs- I guess I don't get how pirated DVDs plays into the comfort of watching DVDs at home. And if you're paying for it, someone's getting your money.

Because I work with a community of film makers and for the most part hate having to wait 6 months to discuss a film they have seen because my crap cinema is showing Harry Potter in 5 out of 6 screens. So I buy a pirate if I have to. Watch it. Bin it (I've still spent less than at the cinema), then buy the DVD when It comes out. I still support the industry.

Cinematic directors mostly want their audience to see their films in the cinema- mostly. Soderbergh is experiementing with simultaneous release. I like his willingness to experiment - although I can't say I liked "Schizopolis". For many people without access to a good "art house" theatre, the movie going has been eroded by a ridiculous amount of commercials, sterile "mall like"environments.. the architecture is crap, the food is crap, and most of the films are crap. Why bother? Because I love the wide screen! I hate watching films intended for the large screen on my laptop or television. My dream is to see Michael Mann's "Heat" on 70mm at IMAX.

I love the cinema. Well loved.

And that's my point. I go to the cinema but due to various factors - poor sound, annoying people, lack of choice... I can't enjoy the cinema.

Soderbergh releaises that Cinema and more relevant release scedules are out moded ways to watching films. He knows that due to cinemas being over crowded and poorly run that it's dirivng people to piracy as the alternative.

It's this ground breaking thinking that will drive the industry forward. And probably aid in eliminating the NEED for piracy!

Hey what happened to that other thread?

The one about censorship? It was (In the biggest irony to date) censored!!! The mods have taken it down for 'review'.

A debate about censorship being censored. Kinda funny no?

The one about censorship? It was (In the biggest irony to date) censored!!! The mods have taken it down for 'review'.

A debate about censorship being censored. Kinda funny no?

Your thread was about moderator actions, not censorship in general. We have a rule that you please PM a moderator or admin when you have a dispute, and not start a thread. I received a few PMs and will respond to them. Thanks

In fairness it related to both...

Okay, I'll have a look in a minute.

This thread is about DVDs, so let's get back on topic. As far as the censorsip, I am answering some PMs, and looking into all the situations. If the rule needs to be tweaked it can be, but don't blame the mods, they are just enforcing the rule as it is written. I am going to look at everything. Suggestions can be PMed to me. Okay, back to thread.

Fair play!

Now back to the thread. If you copy a DVD you are a crook.

LOL Film... Short, sweet and to the point. :)

Because I work with a community of film makers and for the most part hate having to wait 6 months to discuss a film they have seen because my crap cinema is showing Harry Potter in 5 out of 6 screens.

Well where are they seeing these movies? You're not confined to one cinema. I don't know the layout of the UK at all, so you may live in the middle of nowhere, but I drive 21 miles (34 km), about 40 minutes, across town just to independent movies.

but I drive 21 miles (34 km), about 40 minutes, across town just to independent movies.At least you have a theatre that shows indie films. Every theatre in my county is owned (in this case, Pwned) by some huge, faceless corporation. I've never seen an indie film in any of these theatres. Not once.

They refused to show The Aristocrats. When I called them and asked why they wouldn't show it, I got the standard "that's a corporate decision" answer. :cry:

At least you have a theatre that shows indie films. Every theatre in my county is owned (in this case, Pwned) by some huge, faceless corporation. I've never seen an indie film in any of these theatres. Not once.

Yeah, I guess I'm lucky to have independent theaters near me.

Well where are they seeing these movies? You're not confined to one cinema. I don't know the layout of the UK at all, so you may live in the middle of nowhere, but I drive 21 miles (34 km), about 40 minutes, across town just to independent movies.

Nearest other cinema to be is around an hour in a town called Brighton. And it's not much better.

We have one cimena in Brighton that shows Indie films but again thats hard to get to.

I guess I'm the only person on this thread/board who ahs ever watched or bought a pirate DVD. Sorry for being so immoral!

As for breaking laws (and I know this is kinda off topic in a way) but how willing are you, as a film maker, to break laws to get the shot? I guess I'm just trying to see where the moral line does lie.

For me, if I have to, I will bend a few laws. Filming without permits, road law violations... as long as no one person or proerty gets hurt. My thoughts are always that sometimes it's easier to go round laws that to get permission to not breakthem.

For me, if I have to, I will bend a few laws. Filming without permits, road law violations... as long as no one person or proerty gets hurt. My thoughts are always that sometimes it's easier to go round laws that to get permission to not breakthem.Well, here's a good example that relates to the original topic:

Copying DVDs is illegal: I won't do it.

Filming without a permit is illegal: I don't agree with this at all. If I walked outside with a 35MM still camera and I took a picture of a tree on the side of the road, is that illegal? Hell no. What if I were "filming" it with a motion camera? Possibly yes.

After extensive research and talking to the county's film commission, here are the steps required to get a film permit:


Submit your completed script to the county for approval.

This is a red flag right here. As long as my script isn't pr0n, what do you care? Just recently, a million-dollar pr0n production was filmed in downtown St. Petersburg. This news his CNN.


You must have $1 Million in insurance.

I understand and agree to this, but for a one man shop like me, there should be some sort of Indie permit or exception.


The county will consider the application and has every right to deny it if it is not economically feasible to the county.

Oh, you mean if I don't bring a large crew that'll spend tons of money into the county, you'll probably tell me to go away?

Now you know why so many people break these laws. I don't want to break any laws, but I'm very disturbed over all these indie-unfriendly rules the industry has -- and it's all about money.

Whew! Guess I am lucky here. My city and county have no permit rules for film. I called the Mayor's Office and police before my first short and was told to 'go for it' even though we'd be on the sidewalks of very small downtown Port Clinton.

The state of Ohio's rules are that if you are in public, you can film. However, many municipalities have passed ordinances that require permits.

Funny I watche dthe making of Swingers (I think) and they talked about how they kept getting chased by Vegas PD because they were filming without permits.

See we dont have permit issues in the UK but we do have stupid idiots that call the police everytime they see a toy gun (despite may I add the three cameras, lights, and make up team) which resulted in a pant browning expereince of having a armed response unit point HK MP5's at us.

This isn;t a dig at any one but an observation : It's funny though how we choose to ignore laws and regulations that we feel are incorrect but then admonish others for breaking other laws we agree with.

What a strange and very human concept morality is... (human in terms of it being highly flawed!!!)

We've had the SWAT team called on us for a stunt, not to mention the dozens of Police and security officers harassing us.

Even making a film for class, it's nigh impossible to get insurance unless you have a budget. For no-budget filmmakers, where locations can really add the only production values, it hurts to be kicked out for filming a hand-held one-shotter.

I think the problem we're having with censorship is that after all the challenges to just get a production off the ground, in the can, and through post, a bad rating can squash a film's release.

On the other hand, it always depends on the content, the people rating the content, the laws and policies of the country, and current events (the twin tower removal in Spiderman was a rather picky subject).

I wouldn't change the way they rate films, but I would like to see penalties removed from unrated films in regards to the scope of thier potential release. Disclaimers should solve everything, and put the choice in the hands of the audience, where it really should be.

Disclaimers should solve everything, and put the choice in the hands of the audience, where it really should be."I'd like to thank the Academy..."

Honestly, I couldn't agree with you MORE. But, of course, this solution is so simple it'll never work: No one would make money off it. :D

We have a cool thing in teh UK now - as well as rating teh film we get advice warnings on the posters. "Conatins strong scenes of Violence." and the like. An 18 rated film. May have strong violence. No Shit!

Naturally I rent all of these!!! It's like last year I picked up a pack of Nuts from a local shop. It actaully said on the back "this product may contain nuts". Tow things worry me about that.

1. Who is thick enough to but nuts then be shocked to find that their content is er nutty?
2. MAY contain nuts. What the fuck else does it contain?

My point? Rather than censor we now get spoon fed. I guess you really can win!

See we dont have permit issues in the UK but we do have stupid idiots that call the police everytime they see a toy gun (despite may I add the three cameras, lights, and make up team) which resulted in a pant browning expereince of having a armed response unit point HK MP5's at us.

Eeks! I make sure to let the local police know if I am filming, especially if I will have guns on set (props...incapable of firing, which makes them legal according to local ordinance). They just ask that I call again when I'm finished.

We have 4 interconnected cities in my area to choose from all of which have no filming laws. This makes filming considerably easier. Generally, you should be able to film anywhere from private property that you have permission from the owner to film in/from. A couple of local phone calls are free/cheap and generally get you in much better graces with the local authorities/governing bodies. Relationships are everything in this business and those are important ones to have.

My orchestra teacher in High School had a wonderful take on life. Know the janitors on a first name basis...they are the ones who can get you anywhere in the building and anything you need once you are there. Identify the folks who are the actual "make it happen" folks in your city and take them out for coffee and talk about your film projects...they're too busy, bring coffee to them ;) I'm reasonably certain you're not above bribery to make filmmaking easier for yourself.

Back on the topic (sorry):

You should actually check into the cost of opening your own theater. I always tell my kids not to complain about problems they are not willing to put forth effort to solve (they don't always listen to this sage advice). Business loans/like minded financial backing is generally easy to come by, especially if you come with a sound business plan that fills a need in your area. Even being able to open a 1-3 screen establishment would benefit your community directly and success would force the big chain to rethink their programming as they lose customers to you.

It's like last year I picked up a pack of Nuts from a local shop. It actaully said on the back "this product may contain nuts".
:rofl:

We have a cool thing in teh UK now - as well as rating teh film we get advice warnings on the posters. "Conatins strong scenes of Violence." and the like. An 18 rated film. May have strong violence. No Shit!

Naturally I rent all of these!!! It's like last year I picked up a pack of Nuts from a local shop. It actaully said on the back "this product may contain nuts". Tow things worry me about that.

1. Who is thick enough to but nuts then be shocked to find that their content is er nutty?
2. MAY contain nuts. What the fuck else does it contain?

My point? Rather than censor we now get spoon fed. I guess you really can win!

As bad as toothpicks with instructions! :hmm:

Indeed!

We did let the police know when we had the Armed unit called. Thats what made it even funnier! Well after I shit my pants!

You should actually check into the cost of opening your own theater. I always tell my kids not to complain about problems they are not willing to put forth effort to solve (they don't always listen to this sage advice). Business loans/like minded financial backing is generally easy to come by, especially if you come with a sound business plan that fills a need in your area. Even being able to open a 1-3 screen establishment would benefit your community directly and success would force the big chain to rethink their programming as they lose customers to you.

In honesty I did. But the profit margins are so small that it didnt seem worth it. It's a hard business to make work. Also in teh twon I live we have two cinemas so another may be over kill.

There's no easy solution to all this, I know.

Funny i complained to my cinema about the state of the seats, the smell and the loud, annoying customers. They send a letter back saying a refit is planned and as an appology... have 4 free tickets!

Oh the irony!