Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Fairly lame "60 Minutes" piece on movie piracy last night

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » Fairly lame "60 Minutes" piece on movie piracy last night (Page 3)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Fairly lame "60 Minutes" piece on movie piracy last night

Aaron Garman
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: Toledo, OH USA
Registered: Mar 2003

posted 11-06-2009 11:13 PM

Must have missed that day of film class. [sleep]

AJG

| IP: Logged

Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 11-06-2009 11:59 PM

In my opinion, the biggest weakness of the MPAA ratings system is that it treats Paranormal Activity and Erin Brockovich the same as Bruno and Borat. This one area does more to undermine the ratings system than anything else. Unless parents are watching movies like Borat or Bruno, they have a false idea of what an R rated movie is.

I also think the standards used to apply the ratings are out of date with modern society. They still put too much emphasis on the "F" word and there is no parallel to what kids have access to on cable.

As for piracy, I'm sick of hearing it used as justification to try and close the DVD release window. If they really want to make a dent in piracy, they need to put more emphasis in teaching kids that downloading content is illegal and basically the same as stealing. With today's teenagers having grown up in a post Napster world, they see downloading as totally normal and don't see anything wrong with it.

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 11-07-2009 12:58 AM

Justin -- right on the money.

As much as we would like to think the "honor role" system is a goal all should strive after, the reality is, expecting people to do the right thing based solely on their inner sense of right and wrong is totally unrealistic. If that honor role concept would really work, even only 50% of the time, there might be a chance that kids wouldn't download and copy copyrighted material. But there is no chance this will work. How do I know this? Have you ever walked into the locker room of a police station? There are locks on all the lockers....in a POLICE STATION. Human nature says we will try to get away with stuff unless there are consequences. Stealing from via the internet is seen as without even the most remote spectre of capture or punishment.

Downloading music or movies from the internet will never be seen as "evil" because there is about zero to negative zero chance that there will be any consequences to the theft. You might as well think a kid who sees a $100 blowing in the wind in an open field won't pick it up and pocket it. He knows the chances are zilch that anyone knows he found the bill in the first place, and he doesn't see anyone being hurt by his theft and there are no consequences to his action.

There is no way internet piracy can be stopped unless there can be a way to easily and accurately identify the people who do it and there is punishment assigned to the action. In terms of recondition the minds of today's youth -- sorry to say, this generation is just lost when it comes to getting them to think watching or listening or sharing music or movies is a crime like shoplifting. They just don't and won't. And btw, bragging every chance the film companies get that it cost them 30 million dollars to make a move and they grossed 85 million in the first weekend isn't the way to teach youngsters that they are hurting people when they engage in piracy activities.

It will take at least another generation. maybe two to instill the concept that there are serious consequences for piracy and that there is a good chance that you will get caught. But that kind of detection and prosecution of individuals is nowhere near a reality and maybe never will be. What keeps most people from committing crimes is the severtiy of the punishment and the high possibility that the crime will be detected and punishment will be meeted out.

The way it is today, you are just expecting that people are going to always be on their best behavior in the privacy and security of their own homes. That's a pretty big piece of wishful thinking to swallow. Unless the major studios change the way they have set up the current distribution model with the relationship of theatrical release and ancillary video window, they best be resigned to give up that 6 billion every year.

| IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 11-07-2009 07:41 AM

quote: Mark Ogden
That's why IFC and other distributors ignore the MPAA's "thumb" completely. Why bother with them at all?

The public sure doesn't seem to bother with ratings much anymore. I was shocked to see 8 and 10 year olds in "Saw 6" last week. Any parent who would take their kid to see something like that...

| IP: Logged

Martin McCaffery
Film God

Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-07-2009 08:56 AM

It is important to keep in mind in this discussion that the self-described purpose of the ratings is to be an advisory to parents. The MPAA is contradicting themselves every time they get on one of their enforcement campaigns.

I the ratings fail to to meet their purpose. At best they are just a crutch for parents who don't want their kids to see a movie. Oh, it's rated blah blah blah so you can't go. Of course, since there are no actual standards, how can the adults know anything about a rating? Though I do love reading the little descriptions in the box they now have, always good for a chuckle. Really, it should be the parents job to know about the movie before approving or disapproving it for their children.

The MPAA likes to claim it is a success because so many people know about it, but name recognition and effectiveness or usefulness are not the same thing.

Indie distribs certainly don't release a lot of movies parents would even think about for their kids. Certainly if the movie has subtitles there is no reason in the world to pay to get it rated. When they do get things rated, they end up with totally mysterious results like The Fall, which would be a great movie for anyone 12 and over, getting an R rating.

The MPAA ratings - totally useless for 40 years!

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 11-07-2009 11:30 AM

quote: Tim Reed
The public sure doesn't seem to bother with ratings much anymore. I was shocked to see 8 and 10 year olds in "Saw 6" last week. Any parent who would take their kid to see something like that...

Those were the same bad parents that took their kids on airplanes when they were infants. [Razz]

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 11-07-2009 12:39 PM

quote: Frank Angel
Have you ever walked into the locker room of a police station? There are locks on all the lockers....in a POLICE STATION.

The honor system doesn't really apply for a police station. Even if every police officer is an absolutely honorable person... criminals seem to come in an out of the station on a pretty regular basis.

| IP: Logged

Chad Souder
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 962
From: Waterloo, IA, USA
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 11-16-2009 11:32 AM

I think it's pretty obvious the MPAA isn't perfect, but that doesn't mean they're unnecessary. The rating system is meant to be a very broad generalization. The more important stuff is the specific content warnings the MPAA also provides - "strong graphic violence" and the like. Without the ratings system, people wouldn't even have a rough idea of what content a movie may include. We must have something, however general, to give our consumers an idea of the product.

quote: Aaron Garman
I'm also for a system that doesn't influence the art itself, but rather aids in helping a parent choose what films their kids may be ready for.

Therein lies the catch-22. If a parent is going to choose based on rating, then the studio is going to slide their content in that rating's favor to gain that parent's dollar. If a movie doesn't have a rating, the parent won't know if it is suitable for their kids.

I don't think the MPAA has anyone "under their thumb." Their boards are made up of real people representing a cross-section of the country. They show the movie to the people they've assembled and recommendations are made. It is an attempt at a fair, impartial system to rate movies, but with people being hired to make up these boards, you're going to have some differences.

| IP: Logged

Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

Posts: 7595
From: Hollywood, CA USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 11-16-2009 12:10 PM

"This Film Is Not Yet Rated" is an excellent documentary film made in 2006 that is an expose' of the MPAA.

| IP: Logged

Ron Curran
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 504
From: Springwood NSW Australia
Registered: Feb 2006

posted 11-17-2009 12:58 AM

No ratings system is perfect. You may be able to improve the US system faster than we could improve the Australian one. Ours is government run and carries legal (financial) penalties.

Here, a cinema must display the correct rating on all posters and advertising including consumer advice.

A correct rating tag must be spliced to trailers.

The strange anomalies include the following;

A standee does not have to have a rating (apparently, everyone will see a poster but no one will notice a standee).

If we are showing something like Sense and Sensibility (rated G) which will not attract anyone under the age of 21, we can't sgow a trailer for Up (rated PG).

Yet, we can show a trailer for some pretty nasty stuff when we are screening one of the M-rated comic book films that won't bring in anyone over 16.

Because of a different protocol, we can book space on tv to show trailers that we can't show on our screen. Or we can show those trailers on a giant screen tv in the foyer.

Also, there is little opportunity to screen trailers for MA15+ or R features. So you can not give audiences an impression of the contents of such films. This can be a problem for the very, very sensitive who will think that Beautiful Kate (great film) sounds like a "nice" film but can't read any ads to warn them to get their tut-tuts ready.

But … back on topic, piracy will not stop until people are made aware that there will be no decent entertainment in the future if no one can make a living from it.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11-17-2009 01:56 AM

quote:
The MPAA likes to claim it is a success because so many people know about it,

There've been multitudes of surveys where the majority of people say the ratings are useful.

No, it's not perfect. Nothing would be.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.