CosmicBills

Again, you have no idea what you're talking about. The studios are NOT middle men. Studios produce the product. Studios distribute the product. They are not middle men. You cannot get your movie exhibited without a studio being attached in some way unless you plan on exhibiting it yourself on the net. You won't get a release in a theater. You won't get any exhibition on TV or VOD without a studio. If studios disappeared tomorrow, there would not be a sudden renaissance of feature films. To think otherwise is insane. Do you realize how expensive it is to make a movie? Even a cheap one? Even Clerks cost over 40k to make and without Miramax Kevin Smith would never have seen a dime of that back.

I don't blame you ... and I'm not trying to defend the studio's blindly here. They bear a share of the blame for being too slow to adjust to the threat they're facing from the internet (not just piracy). Nor do I support SOPA as it's currently constructed. But the fact remains that piracy is NOT a harmless crime. It has ramifications far beyond taking a few pennies from the studio's coffers. It impacts the consumer as much as it impacts the artists.

You're not only wrong, you're missing the point. The reason piracy is thriving is because the studios (TV and Movies) have no idea how to monetize the internet. They were too slow to realize the power of the web and stumbled out of the block. They are attempting to course correct right now and as always happens, they're over-correcting. SOPA is a bad bill. It's not going to pass in it's form, but that doesn't mean piracy isn't a problem for the entertainment industry -- not just the studios. Right now, feature films (and TV) make a huge sum of their money from international markets. Countries like Germany and China account for a huge portion of a studio films' profit. Only certain genres translate internationally -- big, SFX driven tent pole movies. American comedies don't translate well, neither do dramas. So you've seen Hollywood shift from these types of movies to the Transformers/Avatars of the world. If they can combine these franchises with a mega star like Johnny Depp (who has made for BILLIONS of dollars for Disney alone), all the better. Stars aren't dummies. They know what they're worth in movies like this, so they have a high price tag. VFX are also expensive. Then there's marketing. If a movie has a budget of 150 million, they're going to spend AT LEAST another 150 million marketing that movie. That's 300 million right there. Once you take out people's back ends, those films need to make close to 700 MILLION just to turn a PROFIT. So if you don't have a script with huge VFX or a mega star attached in a genre that translates internationally, it's going to be impossible to find financing for your picture. Studios won't take the risk to spend hundreds of millions in production, distribution and marketing on a movie unless the risk is low. This thinking, right or wrong, has KILLED the medium sized movie (40-60 million dollar movies). In today's world, films like Casablanca, Double Indemnity, American Beauty, Shawshank Redemption would never get made. Hollywood takes ALL the risk. Which makes your Kodak example silly. They're not claiming they don't take risks when they make a movie. Studios used to make 100 movies a year. They'd have medium to large budgets and hope for 5 of those movies to be hits to cover whatever loses they took on the other films. Today, that number has been cut in half. Studios make less movies, putting more eggs into less baskets. This has a ripple effect throughout the industry. With less movies being made there's less work for above and below the line people. With less movies being made, there's less creativity. With less movies being made, the consumers are given fewer choices. You want more creativity and more choices? You need TALENT to do that. Piracy cuts into a studio's profits and the first thing a studio does to correct that is take opportunity away from their talent (actors, writers, directors) and giving those opportunities to the established stars who they know can make a dent on the international market. Piracy is stealing. It's that simple. It's no different than walking into a store and taking a candy bar off the shelf and not paying for it. It may seem inconsequential, but it's a product that cost money to make.

It's not the same argument. The BetaMax vs VHS argument (which predates my involvement in this industry by a couple of decades) had to more to do with the fact the studios originally thought so little of the home video market they gave artists "too large of a cut" of the profits. Then, when that market exploded, the studios realized they were missing out on millions of dollars and tried to change the game. There wasn't an issue of piracy or theft, people were being paid for their product, it's just the studios screwed up their own deal. This lead to several WGA strikes until the issue was finally resolved. You clearly have no idea how exhibition works in the entertainment industry. There are not "thousands" of independent movies being made and exhibited a year. That's just false. The amount of movies produced each year has dropped across the board in the past 10 years -- studio movies AND indies. There are even less avenues for indie films to find distribution and exhibition because exhibitors aren't going to tie up their screens with Blue Valentine when the DVD is on the street before the movie is even delivered. It has very little to do with the studios cramming it down your throat. It's about RISK. Pirates 4, Dark Knight, Transformers 3 -- they have far less risk for the studio than The Descendants or the Artist. And, since they're big spectacle movies, there's less of a chance of piracy hurting their bottom line (like the Avatar example you used earlier) because these movies are built to be seen on the big screen. But smaller movies that are devoid of a brand or big VFX? Those are riskier because you don't "need" to see those on the big screen. They work on smaller screens. Piracy LIMITS the consumer choice. The loss of profits force the studios to limit the amount of movies they make per year and move that money from riskier, unknown films to more stable, big budget movies. Movies cost millions of dollars to make -- even small ones. They cost double that to market. You're beyond wrong. You have no idea what is really at stake when it comes to this stuff.

Piracy DOES hurt artists. If Avatar loses 21 million sales that does more than just impact Fox. But it's only used as an example because it's a movie everyone has heard of. Look at the trend in Hollywood over the past decade -- less movies are made per year, which limits consumer choices at the box office. People on this very board have complained to no end about why Hollywood only makes sequels, remakes, reboots etc ... there's such a thing as cause and effect and piracy is a tremendous threat to the entertainment industry and everyone it employs. Despite that, movies aren't going away -- with or without piracy. There is something about seeing a movie as it was meant to be seen (on a big screen) in a crowded theater that is magical. Comedies are funnier with more people. Scary movies are scarier -- it taps into something innate. It's why people went to the theater in ancient Greece. People will always go to movies. What piracy does is ensure that the movies we'll have to choose from are Transformers 34, Avatar 12, and Spider-man rebooted 1234.

Crazy kids and their new fangled computer contraptions.

Your dishes need more salt.

Move to Cali.

Only one of the remaining QBs left was NOT a first round draft pick. Two of them were #1 overall. The only one who wasn't taken with a team's first pick is a first ballot hall of famer and possibly the best QB ever to play the game.

Anyone who thinks Eli isn't an elite QB doesn't understand the game or doesn't watch him play. Look at his track record. He won the super bowl MVP by besting Brady during the greatest season a QB has ever had (Brady that is), now he comes out and beats Rodgers on the road after he had maybe the second best season a QB has had. Eli is crazy clutch AND a top 5 QB in the game today.

Sadly the face got stuck like that when I got slapped in the back when I was 10. That and I lost a bet and am forced to endure that picture for quite a bit longer. That said ... So, Jim IN Anchorage, is that really a geographic location or the name of the "woman" you picked up at Chilkoot Charlies?

We can't count you out if you were never counted in to begin with. SICK BURN!

You'd fit in perfectly at OBD.

Which is why I wasn't calling you insane

Sure, but if you're given a chance to pick any 5 players in the NFL to start your team with and you don't take a single QB, you're insane. Even in the hypothetical.

1986 called and wants its mentality back.

Plenty. Apparently finding UFO's on the bottom of the ocean makes sense since apparently aliens have built huge underground bases with massive vents that require ... venting. According to numerous reports popping up all over the world, strange sounds from the Earth have been heard. Some say the Earth is groaning. Others say it's UFO bases. You decide. Part 1 (listen starting at the 1:52 mark) This one too

They do. But the peeps in the tinfoil hats are immune to their mind melting rays -- thus, able to tell the world about it. Duh.

"It is HAARP, they heard it all over the world. Look it up, it is a weapen from the US , it is sending soundwaves for weathermanupulation and (as far as I know now) it can be used to confuse people and for mindcontroling people! Haarpstations are in three places on earth now!!" (anonymous YouTube poster in reference to these strange sounds). The end is near.

I'm no scientist or nothin', but I think it probably has to do with this: Scary sounds coming from the sky! (Part 1 of 5) Scary sounds coming from the sky! (Part 2 of ... well, now they say it's 2 but before it was 5. Bastards)

Your name has "poo" in it.

There's also Shawshank, Misery, Dolores Clairborne, The Shining, The Dead Zone ... the list goes on. King's stuff translates to the screen so well (and so often -- more than any other author) because he's a tremendously visual writer unlike some novelists. He writes a movie for the mind with his books in my opinion. He's brilliant. Sure, sometimes the director gets in the way, but by and large, his work has produced some fantastic pieces of cinema and television over the years.

If you're Chan Gailey then, do you start CJ next season? Or do you start Freddie?

As critical as I am about this franchise -- firing Chan right now is not the answer. I actually like the guy as a fan (he cracks me up), and I think he's got a good offensive mind on his shoulders. I think he gets lost in games occasionally, is too loyal to poor players and coaches (but that's excusable since he doesn't make personnel decisions in the end), but overall he's good enough for this team right now. This team isn't going to win in '12 without a serious overhaul in talent during Free Agency and the draft. But a third year with Chan and the scheme gives them a better shot of winning with less talent than they would have if they turned it over again. Let Chan ride this out until Ralph kicks it. It's the best chance the Bills have to luck their way into a playoff season in the next few years.

The problem is CJ was picked 9th. Economically, he HAS to see the field even though he is, by a long shot, a far worse RB than Freddie. Freddie is over 30 now, coming off a pretty significant injury for a RB. That will be all the excuses Nix and his cronies need to insert CJ into the starting lineup in 2012. Fred will see his role reduced. If CJ was picked in the second round, or was a street FA, he'd be a change of pace back with big play capability. And he'd thrive in that role. This is why it was foolish to take CJ where he was taken -- even worse when you factor in the talent the Bills already had on the roster and the amount of first round picks expended on RBs over the past decade and change. RBs are a dime a dozen in the NFL. It's why smart teams rarely draft a RB in the first round anymore unless they're the missing piece to a super bowl run. But now the Bills are committed to CJ. They have to play him. A lot. And they will.