Cinematical

people who watch crappy downloaded stuff never ever go to the movies anyway. so what bloody profits are you referring to?


here, in Moscow, Russia, this crap is sold on every corner (~$3 for crappy quality disk, $5 for a very good one). does it affect moviegoers? phlease! you just can't buy a ticket on a weekend - all sold out.

Reply

Jay Sherman?

Reply

Many of the screeners they give out these days are not mass produced, but burned "one at a time" with digital watermarking etc... so they can figure out who is 'leaking' screeners.

He might have been smart enough not to sell the watermarked versions off, but greed (for money or 'respect') can usualy overcome clear thinking.

The other thing you have to look out for is the 'critics' (usualy junket quote whores) who get 10-30 copies of each DVD to give away on thier shows as promotions etc... but who usualy give away a couple then e-bay the rest.

Reply

Wired had a great article on this back in Jan '05.

The Shadow Internet
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.01/topsite.html

The companion piece in the same issue was also well done.

The BitTorrent Effect
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.01/bittorrent.html?pg=1&topic=bittorrent&topic_set=

Reply

I've actually known people who will download a movie once they've paid to see it in a theater, only to have the rest of the audience ruin the experience.

Reply

Chuck, being screeners these movies would have been of the highest quality. Generally a screener is a DVD or VHS transfer of the movie as it will be seen in theatres... sometimes even better. Case in point Jay & Silent Bob strike back... The screener contained footage removed from the theatrical release and not present on the dvd due to G.L.A.D problems.

A screener usually carries either a counter, a watermark, a scrolling copyright message or color that fades to black and white on occasion.

I actually do download the odd screener that pops up, but only after I've seen it theatrically and enjoyed it.. And if i download a screener you bet your ass I'll buy the DVD.

Good on them for catching the guy however. He was making a (small) profit on work he had no rights too. He should fry. He deserves everything he gets.

Reply

Hey chuck,
Screeners are high quality copies of the movie directly from the publisher, this isn't a camcorder rip off, this is something around DVD quality.

So he was paid about $40 / screener? Damn.

Reply

Man, you talk (write) as though he just got caught selling a kilo of coke, or raping sheep.

Ah well, 'spect to see this on my site soon! :)

Reply

Funny..... All the ads on the top of this page are for downloading unlimted free movies....Hmmmm???????

Reply

How exactly do you sign up to review movies and get screeners anyhow? Surely they just won't give it to anyone who asks...

Reply

Martha you're correct that warez groups do not profit from any of the software or media that they release. It's kindof a dick-measuring contest between the various groups more than a profit based model. It's the guys who sell the dvds on the street that are really the problem... The warez guys are adamantly anti-profit....

Reply

What's the big deal?

The interweb is facilitating piracy and such, but really, who cares? Yeah, the majors are losing out on revenues, but it's about time the business model gets a facelift. The movie-going experience has been largely the same since the beginning, with the exception of theaters selling pizza and burgers and such.

Sherman COULD be fined and imprisoned, but probably won't and shouldn't since it's not a big deal.

Reply

Damn, I didn't realize buggering sheep was a crime...

Reply

>> The interweb is facilitating piracy and such, but really, who cares? Yeah, the majors are losing out on revenues, but it's about time the business model gets a facelift.

Wow, that's really a pretty narrow-minded view. The American car industry needs an overhaul too, but that doesn't mean we should stop arresting car thiefs who steal a GM car and sell it for parts.

The fact is that most reviewers have to sign a confidentiality agreement before they can get advance copies of movies like the ones mentioned in the article. It's the same as if you were a beta tester for some soon-to-be-released software product. The studios are willing to let people review their product but in exchange the reviewer promises not to give away the content of the screener (such as important plot points and obviously the entire movie itself).

A lot of people would liken music theft with movie theft, but in this case I won't for one simple fact: you can hear music in a multitude of places including the radio, a club, etc. If you want the "pleasure" of viewing a first-run movie, you have to pay to do it -- there was no way around that until the pirate scene came along. If you are seeing a first-run movie without paying for it, there's is absolutely no doubt that you are stealing it -- there's just no argument.

And seriously, do you think this doesn't affect movie ticket sales? What percentage of the time would you avoid having to go to a theater and pay for a ticket if you had the movie already sitting on your hard drive? While there are movies you would see in the theater anyways (such as one you really want to see or get the full big-screen experience for), that percentage is going to be pretty high. Most people say they would do the right thing, but we all know that most of us are lying when we say that.

Reply

3 years seems way too much! I mean, I think e-crime isn't as serious as real life crime, despite popular belief.

Reply

Dead_roach...

Actually...the only reason I go to a theatre (where they show me fucking ads after I've already paid for a seat and charge me a million dollars for a bowl of popcorn), is to get the "big screan effect" that you mention. I'ts the movie going experience more than the content of the movie for me. I hate watching movies on my computer but sometimes I'll preview a show to be certain that it isn't a waste of my money to see it on the big screen and if it is I would have been pissed to pay for it (and feel ripped off) after the fact, thus giving my experience a shitty taste so I am less likely to watch any movie in the theatre for fear that my $20 (ticket+pop+popcorn) is going to go to a shitter of a movie.

Reply

One summer I saw about 19 movies in the theater! That was about four years ago. The problem is that there is not much compelling out there to actually go to the theater. The theater by my house got six new screens and expanded last summer and I love going there every chance I get. So far I have gone and seen X-Men 3, Nacho Libre, UltraVoliet, Inside Man, The Breakup, and V For Vendetta. What I find that gets me out to the theater more is more adult oriented films and of course action films. People really do want to go to the theater, but I think the abundance of entertainment is overwhelming and movie theaters need to compete if they want more business. More comfortable seating, better sound systems, and better concession items would work to bring in more people, it's that the theaters have kind of forgotten how to cater to movie goers, since they have not had to for many years.

Reply

Sorry for the run on sentences I was ranting. :)

Reply

Screeners are one of the pleasures of dumpsterdiving. When I was homeless in L.A., finding screeners was a joy (I had a laptop in my shopping cart which I kept charged up in AM/PM restrooms--and you thought us bums were only taking showers in there).

Thank God for screeners. The best city to find screeners in the dumpsters was Culver City. I could've sold those screeners to the guy who buys them in the U.S. Vets homeless veterans shelter parking lot in Inglewood, but I have too much respect for (and joy from) filmmakers to be that scummy. I'd rather make an honest living from aluminum mining (recycling cans).

Reply

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/author-582/

Look at his articles... hmm... could he have sold the screeners of all of these movies?

Reply