Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: MPAA employs only retarded people

This is topic MPAA employs only retarded people - And Jack Valenti is a Fool in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003970

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-22-2005, 06:35 PM:

This thread really has no single point of reference. I just thought it would be nice to have a single place where people could discuss what a moron Jack Valenti is and how Nazi-esque the MPAA has become. Even though Jack and the MPAA have supposedly parted ways, neither does anything to make the world a better place. It has been a proven fact that the MPAA only employs retarded people, and this can be seen in their actions. I hear that an applicant's IQ must not be over 34 to be considered.

So why do you hate the MPAA? Here are two of my reasons:

-The MPAA is super-paranoid about the copying of movies. Waaaaaay more paranoid than they need to be. We can all laugh at Jack Valenti's truly moronic speech a few years ago at ShoWest where he said how much the industry grew that year and how it had made more profit than ever before and then started blasting piracy for destroying the movie industry. Can anybody take anything the MPAA says seriously after that? Of course not, as that would be silly to buy into their hypocritical propoganda. Anyone who buys into the MPAA's piracy rantings obviously needs some lessons in common sense. Is piracy a problem? Sure. Is it wrecking the industry? Hell no! DVDs are pretty cheap, nearly the cost of an actual movie ticket. I would rather buy or rent a DVD than watch a crappy version shot in a theater with a camcorder. People who watch a camcordered movie they download on the internet probably would not have gone to see the movie anyway if it weren't available to them. They download only because it's convenient, not because they want to save cash. Since the MPAA consists only of retarded people (remember, this is FACT) they wrongly assume that for every person that watches a pirated copy of a movie, they would have sold a ticket to the real movie that they otherwise didn't. That is completely wrong. The real losses on any given movie at the box office due to piracy? I'd say less than $1,000. And while the movie execs could use that extra $1,000 to buy a few lines of cocaine and maybe a Hollywood hooker, do they really need that extra $1,000? A better question is do they really DESERVE that extra $1,000? They already get paid insanely high salaries. What good will MORE money do them? With the crappy movies being put out these days, I wouldn't blame people if they were afraid to spend money at the theater to see movies, even though I don't think that's why most people pirate. It's simply all about GREED.

-Another reason why the MPAA sucks is because on the next generation of high definition movie players, they do not want the consumer to be able to send HD signals over component cables. If you use that method to hook your player to your TV, you'll get 480p max. For HD, they want you to use the super-strict digital connection so they can keep their hands tightly gripped on your nads. They think that if component HDTV is allowed, somehow piracy will suddenly be super rampant on the internet. I'm not quite sure I follow that one. That is probably because I am not a moron like ALL MPAA employees (and their families).

There are many other reasons, but talking about the MPAA and Jack Valenti is like talking about the retarded kids at the local day care. So I'll end it for now.

Why do you hate the MPAA? Any pro-MPAA comments can only be made by stupid people.

Bottom line: The MPAA does not fight for you or for decency or anything else except for greed.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-22-2005, 08:03 PM:

I don't know any employees of the MPAA personally, so I can't say they're all morons. On the other hand, it is a fact they think 99.9% of the American general public is made up of morons. This is coming from the same ilk of people who blow a headgasket in their brain over Janet Jackson's nipple (which no one could see in normal NTSC resolution). Yet they seem to have no problem with 4,658,595,474 dick hardening commercials during that same Super Bowl broadcast. 3,785,637,866 of those spots were of Bob the Enzite guy.

What kind of idiot is going to populate their home movie library with DVDs made from camcorder tapes? Normally I'm not given to cruel behavior, but I would laugh and ridicule the hell out of anyone who wasted their time and money on camcordered DVDs. People who watch those things, even if they view them free by streaming them off the 'net, are not going to be movie theater customers anyway.

The thing that pisses me off the most about the MPAA's moral hand-wringing on this is the hypocrisy behind it. The real problem in piracy is those damned DVD screener discs film distributors hand out to movie critics and friends. That's what China uses as their source material, not camcorder crap. But do any of those rich people want to get tough with China? Hell no. China is helping them make a shit load more money. Those rich guys are working with the communists in the far east to sell our asses out for a fast buck.

And that's obviously the business model behind all of this. Make better movies? To hell with that! Let's spoon feed the public more sequels and formulaic shit and lay out business forecasts that expect everyone to buy more and more of it.

My music buying habits dropped way off over the past few years and over the past couple years my DVD buying has dropped off as well. "The Incredibles" is the first DVD I've bought in four months. My movie library has filled up with most of the old, archive films I wanted. Now what else is there?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-23-2005, 12:00 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
I can't say they're all morons.

I can. And do! But it is good to hear other perspectives as well.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-23-2005, 03:36 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
What kind of idiot is going to populate their home movie library with DVDs made from camcorder tapes?

Only the kind of idiot who would never be likely to buy legit copies anyway (so Valenti et al have nothing to gain by stopping him from getting hold of the camcordered versions), but I get the impression that people are increasingly ripping and burning rental discs or those owned by friends and relatives.

Perhaps a more effective answer than just coming up with newer encryption systems (which some spotty teenager in the Czech Republic will produce cracking software for sooner or later) is to offer some 'value added' features to the legit copies, like Criterion do for example. Throwing in a book about the film or a copy of the screenplay in with the DVD, and selling the whole thing in a glossy-looking package is something consumers could never get just by copying the disc itself.

Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 03-23-2005, 08:21 AM:

Joe thus spoke: "Bottom line: The MPAA does not fight for you or for decency or anything else except for greed."

I agree, but I feel they are far from morons, in fact, they absolutely brilliant. The MPAA is a small 'rich boy's club' and Jack Valenti is a smart, well-spoken (and well funded) front man. After all, Valenti wrote most of JFK's famous speeches, and still has buddies in Congress. Anyway, Jack has been proven wrong before; does anyone remember him stating about how blind bidding films was the 'right way, the American way' or how home VCR's would be the absolute death of the movie industry?

While Joe makes a good case about the MPAA's paranoid stance on copying (I agree totally that people who watch a camcordered movie would not have gone to see the movie anyway) I feel this is NOT the major issue we in the exibition industry should be fighting for.

I feel the major issue is how the studios undercut the theaters with huge releases which leave many theaters scraping for a few dollars each, releasing a feature on DVD in as little as two months; generally poor product that is over hyped, etc. I feel the issue is not that MPAA is so strong; it's that NATO is so ineffective.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-23-2005, 09:55 AM:

But DVD releases happen so soon in an effort to thwart piracy. You can't win!

Obviously by calling the MPAA morons I am just trying to personally insult them directly and childishly. It works and it feels good!

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 03-23-2005, 09:57 AM:

One side of me agrees with Joe and the other side is in full agreement.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 03-23-2005, 02:17 PM:

At Showest I went to the piracy seminar put on by the MPAA and NATO. While a lot of it was the same BS propoganda some of it was fairly interesting. The MPAA's main concern over piracy is no the US market-though it is still an area of concern-but rather international markets. Places like China where 95% of the market share for DVD's belongs to pirates.

During the course of the presentation the audience was shown a clip from Kill Bill Volume 2 that was claimed to have been camcordered. I have to wonder about that, because the quality was very good. However, during the course of presenting the clip it was shown multiple times in different langauges. The pirates were using stolen DTS discs to quickly 'translate' their pirated movie into multiple languages. The syncing was very well done. If nothing else there is now a reasonable explanation for DTS not providing images of the discs on the web and encrypting the discs.

Posted by Jared Foley (Member # 3004) on 03-23-2005, 05:37 PM:

My theatre ran the MPAA piracy trailers when I first started working. It seems odd that they're telling a room full of people, who just purchased tickets, to not download movies. Seems like that should be a TV spot if anything at all.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 03-23-2005, 10:04 PM:

quote: Dustin Mitchell
The pirates were using stolen DTS discs to quickly 'translate' their pirated movie into multiple languages. The syncing was very well done. If nothing else there is now a reasonable explanation for DTS not providing images of the discs on the web and encrypting the discs.

It also shows that piracy is well organized and has a worldwide reach. They will use whatever means to get the picture and sound, with all segments of the industry vulnerable. [Frown]

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 03-24-2005, 02:37 AM:

Wanted: 35mm telecine projector in good condition. Please email me.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-24-2005, 03:16 AM:

Actually it surprises me a bit that the sale of TK gear is not more tightly controlled. I know of at least one instance in which a regional TV studio gave a Rank Mk. II away to a private individual when they upgraded. OK, it wasn't in fully working order, but it isn't difficult to get parts for those things. If the people who made TKs and hi-def scanners adopted the Panavision model and only rented the hardware to customers (i.e. refused to sell it outright), that would at least enable the industry to keep tabs on who is using this equipment.

Of course it may be that illegally TKed prints aren't a significant problem when it comes to organised piracy (and, being release prints, the high contrast will mean that the resulting transfers won't look as good as a proper job), in which case this sort of regulation wouldn't be worth it. But it has struck me as odd that there appears to be little or no attempt to keep tabs on who owns and uses TK gear.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 03-24-2005, 03:54 AM:

Yeah! Let's get the film police to control who owns what! JFC!

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-24-2005, 04:03 AM:

Actually aren't projectionists responsible for much of the piracy that goes on?

Posted by Matthew Nock (Member # 1575) on 03-24-2005, 05:29 AM:

Joe,

Of course its us projectionists that do all the pirating! Thats why you can download or purchase your favourite movie from your local sunday market, before you even receive your print of it!!! I mean, we are all SOOOOO good that we can pirate a print, before we even receive it!

Posted by Jared Foley (Member # 3004) on 03-24-2005, 01:05 PM:

In theory it would be easiest for one of us to get really "good" quality camcorder copies when we preview. By "good" I mean: no talking patrons, perfect location on a tripod, etc. You know there has to be a few people doing this.

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-24-2005, 01:05 PM:

Valenti said something years ago, about it being illegal for a private individual to own 35mm motion picture film at all.

So much for those titles I made... I guess he owns them.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-24-2005, 06:07 PM:

The the MPAA says that any individual who owns 35mm fim prints is breaking the law?

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-24-2005, 07:58 PM:

Well, Valenti did. At some point.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 03-24-2005, 08:34 PM:

Valenti said a lot of shit while speaking from his asshole...

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 03-25-2005, 12:01 AM:

Anyone have a picture of that?

Posted by John Lasher (Member # 968) on 03-26-2005, 01:28 PM:

How's this?

Now I'm a pirate too. Arrgh!