I can't wait for Cedarford to check in on this one.

Remember that Coppola case? Nothing changed.

This is exactly how the major labels operate in the music industry.

Which is why I want to see them go DOWN.

There was a time when the Democrat Party would have actually been the side to speak up on behalf of the individuals who were screwed over by the big corporations in this instance. Judging by your post on this topic; you do indeed have some liboeral values residing deep inside of you, Ace. Good for you.

Good for Jackson, but I think Congress should stay out of it. Federal involvement (in the form of the post-Enron Sarbanes-Oxley Act) has been a disaster. In the long run, the feds can only make the crappy products Hollywood puts out even crappier.

It's up to people like Jackson to enforce their contracts in court. Just because most of them are afraid to burn their bridges doesn't mean that bureaucrats should be enlisted to do their dirty work for them.

Somewhat OT: can someone explain (or point me to a source that explains) what the Hollywood distribution system is all about. As far as I can tell, "distribution" means something like "financing" or "paying for advertising," when to my ears, it sounds like it ought to be putting film reels on trucks and delivering them around.

I have a feeling that "distribution" is a code word for some arcane governmentally-defined function within the movie-making process, and is probably to blame for generally lousy quality. Just a hunch.

Zombie Dogs:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160903,00.html

No mention if the Umbrella Corp. is involved

Ace, dunno if you saw this Slate piece on movie profits from a few weeks back, but it's probably up your alley.

I admit to only being a casual fan of this debate, but I've always been a loving fan. Little fascinates me more than convoluted Hollywood accounting.

Hell with the accounting-- how we can have an industry that spends as much (or MORE) on advertising a film than the money spent making the film boggles my mind.

Oh, and I love how Hollywood hated the DVD until they figured out they could scarf profits and hide losses on their back ends in the after-market.

BTW, on a side note, I went to a War of the Worlds screening yesterday (damn the embargoes, review on my site), and for the first time in my life I was exposed to the search rules Hollywood has implemented at pre-screenings. Everything electronic in the bag.

I can understand video cameras obviously, and I can *barely* understand cel phone cameras, but Blackberries? WTF? Is Hollywood concerned that I'm going to pirate a movie *script*?

I know the folks in NYC and L.A. have had to suffer this bullshit for a while now, but I just think it's ridiculous, and insulting. I haven't seen a pirated DVD in the last five years that *wasn't* copied from a master print, obviously leaked from a theater, or just as likely, smuggled from the studio itself.

Anyway, it was enough to piss me off to the point that *I* wanted to pirate War of the Worlds last night, just outta spite.

Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

Hollywood is in alot of trouble right now. They're in their worst slump in decades, can't come up with fresh ideas, and face stiff competition from new technologies like DVD and TiVO.
ROTS did horrible on repeat business because who's going to pay another $10+ dollars to see it, when in 3-6 months they can own it for $20?
Their radical politics doesn't help either.

And with TiVo you can watch shows on your schedule, skipping commercials. You can even (with some hacking) distribute said programs on your home network. The DirectTivo (joint venture between Tivo and DirectTv) even allows you to record 2 shows at once AND watch a previously recorded show at the same time, as it has 2 tuners built in. Try doing that with a VCR.

Iblis--

I disagree, but only on evidence, not your conclusions.

Hollywood's "slump" is mostly artificial-- remember, last spring The Passion of the Christ jacked up the average. Also, once you factor in the overseas market-- more important than ever-- Hollywood is no worse shape than before.

The biggest problem, long-term, for Hollywood is that, when faced with competitors like DVDs and online downloading, etc., they have to find a way to keep the theater experience relevant and profitable. Unfortunately, they "business" of Hollywood has been much more focused on the profitable part, and ignoring the relevant.

Theaters suck. Stadium seating is great, but the projector quality is terrible, the lighting is awful, film is out of frame, sound systems are too loud or out out of sync. Concessions taste terrible, cost too much, and are served too slow. Ticket prices are too high, making it cheaper for two people to *buy* a movie than "rent" it in the theater. Children and (loud) teenagers are allowed into R-rated films, ruining the experience for people who actually want to, you know, watch the movie.

Personally, I'd like to see more "bundling" of the experience. Make the theater experience first rate AND cheaper-- use it as a loss leader for the eventual home release. Pool home market profits with theaters-- the more tickets they sell, the more money they make on the DVD release.

Anyway, bottom line: I love going to the theater in principle, but the execution leaves a lot to be desired. The solution is *not* to abandon the theater, but to recognize and emphasize the unique advantages the theater brings versus the at-home experience (big screen, big sound, communal experience-- nothing beats opening night), and minimize the disadvantages (high prices, abysmal presentation, poor experience).

As for piracy, well. . . that's for another day.

Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

The shift in movie-going demographics, combined with improved home-viewing technology, is driving people away from theaters.

Since the mid-1970s, the amount of discretionary income of children and teenagers has skyrocketed. Teenagers simply have much more money to spend, and when they spend it, they spend it on (a) entertainment, and (b) clothing. (The shift to two-income homes and an increased divorce rate is probably behind it, at least in part.)

As a result, teenagers comprise the largest entertainment market. Movies are made to appeal to them far more than they ever have. Even when an adult movie is playing in a theater, there are always at least 2-3 others directed toward the teen set.

This makes movie-going a dreadful experience for adults.

This in turn effectively increases the demand for home-entertainment. This demand is what is driving the demand for larger, wide-screen televisions. Digital technology makes it possible.

As the technology improves and prices drop, theaters will continue toward becoming more of a niche market (suitable only for teens and die-hard movie-goers), and home exhibition will become even more of a dominant outlet for adults.

Plus (and I really hate to even say this), the first bomb that goes off in one will probably spell the end of theaters as we know them.

Spongeworthy -

The fear of both Democrats and Republicans to go after the "players" behind the miasma of business fraud and tax cheating in Hollywood speaks to the power of the "players".

Once a group loses the power to control major facets of America and the justice system, then they can be prosecuted. It happened to the Italian Mob - for decades they were untouchable due to power and money reaching the right politicians. They used their common ethnicity and loyalty to one another vs. non-Italians to avoid penetration. But once they weakened, the feeding frenzy was on.

The Hollywood and mass media "players" are still pretty untouchable. Indeed, they took over much of the Italian mob's money laundering, casino take, and pornography businesses once RICO shattered the Italians.

Democrats know going after the Hollywood mob and their friends could cost them half the DNC donations made. Republicans know going after them might mean an end to their dream of transferring the wallet contents of the richest ethnic group in America to Republicans.

Republicans and loyal Democrats once dared go after them in cleaning out the Communists, but paid a steep price for doing so. But that was another era, and the fate of America rested on going after the Communists, most of who were members of one ethnic group, so it was imperative to do so.

The rather unique Hollywood and mass media accounting practices that aim to reward "insiders" while cheating "outsiders" not tied by ethnicity or protected by union membership stem from practices and book-keeping tricks learned in Czarist Russia to shield their wealth from the Czar's hands. Before Hollywood, this rather unique accounting system was used in NYC businesses, where it was associated with cons, cheats, frauds and described as a means of accounting and ethics specifically tied to one ethnic group.

which ethnic group would that be?

Let me Guess, No No wait let me
Ahem...

JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOS

Thank you.

Thing is, I knew he would Blame the Jews. How did I know that? Why didn't I think he would blame the Navajos or the Polacks? Am I as guilty of stereotyping as he is?

Do we get upset with C-ford because he's wrong or because he's a master of the obvious or because he's so "focused"?

And if I am so superior, why can't I find any factual problems with his post?

*sigh*

I live in SoCal. I'm half-Jewish on my mom's side - the side that counts. Does this mean I should be expecting a cut of that $100mm?

"The Jew is using the black as muscle against you. And you are left there helpless. Well, what are you going to do about it, whitey? Just sit there?"

- Blues Brothers

I live in SoCal. I'm half-Jewish on my mom's side - the side that counts. Does this mean I should be expecting a cut of that $100mm?

Typical.

I'm really getting a mad crush on this lauraw person.

Damn, girl. That shit is funny.

(blush)

Glad I could make one of you guys laugh for a change.

PJ just HAD to know he was jumping into a swamp full of disgusting ooze and rapacious predators

but, he's just the man to drain the swamp and bite those alligators in the arse.
not a man to be trifled with.

the thread is dead, I know, but -

sponge, here's a problem with Cedarford's post. Jews aren't actually the richest group in America - they're behind (subcontinental, obviously) Indians and Russians.

(Yes, lots of those Russians are also Jews. Not so much with the Indians, though).