Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

Movies Online? 132

Posted by Cliff from the woe-to-the-cineplex dept.
Crowdpleazr1 asks: "I'm starting to wonder if someday I'll consider going out to a theater to be a quaint experience. I just finished downloading the online-only movie 405, created in the spare time of two visual effects guys, and I thought it was a lot funnier than most flicks I pay money for. On top of that, I've been having a blast watching the choose-your-own-adventure movie, It's Your Movie. With Titan A.E. recently being downloaded to a movie theater, I wonder if all movies will soon become online-only affairs. Is there a business model to support this?" An interesting thought. Do you all think that digital movies may eventually bypass the traditional cineplex and be delivered straight to your home? I would pay for something like that.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Movies Online? More

Movies Online?

Comments Filter:
  • By doing a little guesswork (changing "sm" to "lg" in the url) i got the hi-res version. By 10 PM pst, July 1, a mirror will be up at http://www.fleacircus.org/~mdue ll/405divx_lg_v2.avi [fleacircus.org]. Its a great movie and it looks even better.

    Mark Duell
  • >there is the fact that digital technology is still not up to the par that actual projected film is.

    Image quality? I've never seen a projected film that wasn't utterly full of 'projected defects'. Even the preview of Chicken Run that I went to two days before it's opening had so much it was noticable during ~20-30% of the film(*).

    The sound? Always: Too loud. Off center. Decidedly over-done(*).

    The 'social' atmosphere? You mean the autistic guy sitting in the row in front of me doing his thing every 15 minutes(**), or the woman bringing in her 6 month old?(*)

    Oh yeah, that 24 fps is just *spectacular* for all the action. I'll just hold my damn breath until this 48 fps stuff comes out within 5 miles of me.

    The west wall in my apartment is a nice flat white, 12 feet wide by 8 feet high. I'm just dreaming about the day I can project 1600x1200 HDTV/DVD onto it(***). My current HDs can hold 70 hours of DivX Mpeg4. Fuck theaters. They're dead meat.

    Cheers

    (*) I have ~20 screens within 2 miles of my house and I only see movies at the best two locations, with 'the best' sound systems, one of them built 6 months ago, and yet these are the impressions I'm left with.

    (**) Seriously. Not that we didn't get used to it pretty quickly. And I'm not suggesting he shouldn't get to see movies.

    (***) Anyone know where the status of those 'micro-machined mirror' projector displays are?

  • scratch that... host said no

    Mark Duell

  • What's the objective quality of movie theaters there?

    Without any data to back this up (in other words, I'm talking out my posterior), it sounds like the Hong Kong studios made three mistakes. One was not maintaining tighter control over movie prints. Second was not having a VCD release ready and in the pipeline (why buy a crappy bitlegged copy when you can get the official copy for only 50% more). And the third was not beefing up the theaters to make the experience kick ass.

    Besides, there are massive cultural differences between Asia and the US. Even with broadband to the home, what happened in Hong Kong is not likely to happen here.

    Schwab

  • I've been crazy about these since I was a kid. Just recently I released an audiobook version of CYOA. It's pretty cool, it is at http://www.mp3.com/StorySprawl [mp3.com] - listen to an episode, make your choice, etc. We're gradually adding more music and sound effects.

    It's based off of a website that I run called StorySprawl (http://www.storysprawl.com/ [storysprawl.com]) - where people can write CYOA books together. Pretty fun stuff once you get the good authors writing.

    Curt

  • Dude, you are just asking for it.

    Subscriber pays for movie download, drops it on his FTP server, sez, "c0m3 g3t 1t!" on IRC. Hundreds of copies proliferate, and you "lose" a lot of money. What are you going to do?

    Copy protection? Don't make me laugh. Anything you come up with will be hacked in a week. And the DMCA won't help you, either. Besides, the money you will need to spend to maintain the battalion of lawyers to license all this stuff will dwarf any revenues you may hope to earn, even if unsanctioned copying weren't an issue.

    I regret to say your idea is a non-starter.

    Schwab

  • xmps doesn't seem to work for me.

    plays other divx movies, but this one gets no sound and a framerate of about 2x normal speed.

    fwiw, ymmv.

    ________
    1995: Microsoft - "Resistance is futile"

  • Before I respond to this, I should say that I worked as a projectionist for about two and a half years.

    Now:

    Image quality? I've never seen a projected film that wasn't utterly full of 'projected defects'. Even the preview of Chicken Run that I went to two days before it's opening had so much it was noticable during ~20-30% of the film(*).

    This could be a result of a rushed print. As the film chemically dries, a white powder accumulates on the surface. If the film is rushed, it's possible that it's sensitive enough when it reaches theaters that the cleaning equipment would scratch the print. This is not a problem inherent to the technology, it's a problem with implementation by production companies rushing to meet the advertised release date. Look at ID4; that one was so rushed that some theaters didn't get prints, because they weren't made yet. The theater I worked at got it's copy shipped in cardboard boxes because they hadn't tracked down the actual film cans for it.

    The sound? Always: Too loud. Off center. Decidedly over-done(*).

    The projectionists can change this at any time. However, the sound mixers are instructed to make loud parts loud, and quiet parts quiet, which often results in inaudible conversation at a level where the loud parts are tolerable. Complain to the manager first; if (s)he gives you this explanation, (s)he actually knows what (s)he's talking about. Ask how to complain to the film company about it. Any other explanation, and (s)he's probably instructed the projectionists to turn it up. Keep complaining.

    The 'social' atmosphere? You mean the autistic guy sitting in the row in front of me doing his thing every 15 minutes(**), or the woman bringing in her 6 month old?(*)

    If someone disturbs you, tell the management. If it's a young child, point out the experiments with ``baby'' night at some theaters, and ask your theater to implement one.

    As far as other social interaction goes, there are a lot of people who spend a night a week seeing a movie with friends, and then going to a local coffee shop to talk about it. Even if it's a terrible movie, trashing it for a few hours can be an entertaining evening.

    Oh yeah, that 24 fps is just *spectacular* for all the action. I'll just hold my damn breath until this 48 fps stuff comes out within 5 miles of me.

    The west wall in my apartment is a nice flat white, 12 feet wide by 8 feet high. I'm just dreaming about the day I can project 1600x1200 HDTV/DVD onto it(***). My current HDs can hold 70 hours of DivX Mpeg4. Fuck theaters. They're dead meat.

    And the 30 frames per second DVD refresh rate is so much better than 24, right?

    The online movie business can draw people like you out fo the theater, but it won't kill the regular theaters. There's just too many of us who like to see movies with a lot of people. I have a DVD-ROM, and I enjoyed it when I still had Windows around to watch movies, but a computer screen is rarely able to accomodate, say, 8 people who all want to see a movie together. A full-wall screen can accomodate, but how many people are going to go for that? How many movie tickets can you buy for the cost of that equipment? (Yes, I know admission prices are going up. When I worked at a theater, anywhere from 65-85 percent of the ticket price went straight back to the movie company. Box office rarely covers rent in a theater; hence the concession prices. Since then, the film company's cut has risen considerably. The concession prices have reached their limits, so the box office prices have to climb to cover costs.) Harp on the film companies to take smaller cuts, and you'll see admission prices stabilize.

    - Blaine
  • If VHS players and Cable didn't stop people from going to the movies, why should the Internet? It's evolution, not revolution.

    Besides, I'd rather watch video on TV than my monitor any day, and a theater screen before TV.

    Kevin Fox

  • What about drive-ins????? (Score:4)

    by Sleen ( 73855 ) on Saturday July 01, 2000 @09:35AM (#963786)
    It seems we are pretty worried about the theater venue waning?

    What about drive-ins?

    The closest thing we have in Chicago is the Vic theater. Its an older style theater and they play three movies in a night, two bars, popcorn and pizza.

    The first time I went, I saw south park, Austin Powers2 and the matrix- all in a row - friggen great time. Beer and pizza whenever you want and it was packed full of rabid fans. Like going to see Rocky Horror picture show at a state school. This is a great movie experience, and it proved that I do actually like seeing movies with other people.

    I mean, its not like philosophy club, but its a damn fine time.

    If you are ever in Chicago- check out the Vic, they have good Music concerts too!

    -Sleen

  • Room for one more (Score:4)

    by Transition Cat ( 115549 ) on Saturday July 01, 2000 @09:37AM (#963787)
    I don't see why it has to replace anything. TV didn't kill movies. Video rentals didn't kill movies or TV. The closest analogy is the demise of the film porn industry after the rise of the video porn industry. I think it's unlikely that the movie-going experience is gonna to go anywhere no matter how good net-based movies get (even if we all have LCD projectors, etc). Hopefully, though, the addition of a viable alternative will lower video and theater prices.
    Now, net porn industry v. video porn industry... that I'd like to, err, see! (Yes, I realize this context makes my .sig a little ironic.)

    ....

  • Do you all think that digital movies may eventually bypass the traditional cineplex and be delivered straight to your home?

    We've been through this once already. When VCRs first became popular, people thought that it would be so convenient to watch movies at home that noone would go to the movie theatres anymore.

    Of course, the opposite has occurred. The film industry has boomed rather than declined. There are now 30 screen multiplexes! People go to movie theatres for the experience of watching it in a large room with lots of other people in a dark room, on a 50 foot screen and awesome sound.

    TV, VCRs and DVDs haven't replaced movie theatres and net delivered movies won't either. net movies haven't even reached even one hundredth the video and sound quality of a dvd or even a broadcast tv version of the same movie. They will supplement the whole experience though. DVDs allow people to explore a movie deeper with different languages, cut scenes, background info, commentary tracks. the net will do other things to supplement the experience as well such as letting film buffs get together from all over the world to discuss the latest john woo flick.

    now, a more appropriate and interesting question is, will digital movies delivered over the internet eventually replace cable tv, pay per view and blockbuster as channels of delivery into the home? i think this will definitely happen. pretty soon, there will be no more need for the video store. i've read that pay per views are a large portion of the income of cable companies. how will they respond when they are completely bypassed?

  • I don't think that anyone really wants to watch a feature length movie on their 17" monitor. I recently got a DVD drive for my computer, and to test it out, I watch the Matrix. It was pretty sweet in DVD, but I'd much rather watch it on my dad's 50" wide screen TV. What we really need to make a movie revolution is what we have with Napster; a way to share movies online for free. Before we can do that we need two things. First, we need more bandwidth. I'm stuck on a 56k connection, which is not really conducive to downloading mp3s, much less movies. Also, cheap DVD-R drives will make it possible to download movies, write them to disc, and watch them on you TV. Now that will really make a difference in the box office.
  • Well, on my way to work (the long 1 hour drive it is), I pass one of the few remaining drive-ins that still is in operation. It's in Garrett, Indiana. Haven't been to it myself, but my friends have, and they had a great time. It's an experience that is pretty well gone though. Pretty sad too.

  • The X Mpeg Player System could play divx. The site is located at http://www-eleves.enst-bretagne.fr/~chavarri/xmps/ [enst-bretagne.fr]

    But the site seems to be down... Anyone got a mirror?

  • Yeah... maybe they could call it something like... Home Box Office ... HBO for short..
  • This is probably a minor point in the big picture (pun intended) but a CRT simply cannot produce the full color spectrum the way film can. Think about it. Every color you see on your computer or TV screen is a combination of three primary colors, good ole RGB. There are no three colors of phosphor which together can produce every possible color in the visible spectrum. Film does not have to make this compromise.
  • I can here the screems of the Movie iNdustry version of the RIAA all the way on the east coast at your very suggestion.
  • >> Image quality?
    > This could be...

    I'm saying every film I've ever seen has had way too much scratches/dust/etc. I didn't notice it when I was younger, as the only other thing I ever saw was broadcast TV at the edge of it's range, and now DVD is just spoiling me completely.

    > When I worked at a theater, anywhere from 65-85 percent of the ticket price went
    > straight back to the movie company .. Since then, the film company's cut has risen considerably.

    Hmmm. That was an interesting tidbit. I always wondered why movies were rated according to gross revenue, but if that much actually goes back to the companies...

    > And the 30 frames per second DVD refresh rate is so much better than 24, right?

    I've recently seen enough movies on bigger TVs and 19 inch monitors from DVD such that I *really* notice the 24fps in theaters, so much so that it's almost unbearable.

    > How many movie tickets can you buy for the cost of that equipment?

    That's a fair point.

    > there are a lot of people who spend a night a week seeing a movie with friends, and then going to a local coffee shop to talk about it.

    It's also a good chance to go out for dinner. I do enjoy that. However I'd happily trade that in for inviting a half dozen friends over to kick back on the perfect leather couch, in perfect darkness and perfect silence, with all the nearly-free perfect-popcorn, perfect-Guinness, perfect-5.1-sound-system, and watch a couple movies on a 16x8 foot screen from 8-10 feet away.

    I'm definitely not claiming to predict the future demise of movie theaters. The rest of the fools on this planet are impossible to predict (seeing as I think most of them are fools). But my experiences and personal thoughts on the matter are quite clear. I'm not claiming to represent anyone's opinions or intentions on the matter other than my own.

    Enjoy your movies. (Personally I'm looking forward to X-Men next).

  • There's something to be said for seeing a really good movie in a theater filled with 150 people that you can never recreate at home. I remember seeing Jurassic park the day it came out, and watching the theater scream and writhe was worth the price of admission.

    tcd004

    Check out Janet RenoMargolis, the least downloaded woman on the internet! [lostbrain.com]

  • Hey I can't stand a mall theater, They are also distructive to the theater going experence. Why hang out with apathetic teenagers, armed gangs, and surburbinites? I go to abandoned opra houses and mosques and watch the movies for about $1-3 before they come out on video tape. At the Byrd Theater in Richmond, VA I get to mingle with a crowd of Gays, Punks, intilectuals, students, 30-70 something upppies, decendents of the signers of the constitution of the US. and watch as they watch someone plays patriotic mucic on a 100 year old theater organ to sync up with a decent low teck multimedia show. That's before they start the movie. get out and get more culture mircosoftie;)...
  • Uhh what player for linux supports Divx?
  • I know I'm in the minority and I accept this: But I've grown to intensely dislike going to the movie theater. The seating is lousy, the audience is rude and inconsiderate, the sound system is cranked up WAY too loud, the prices are getting too high, and the number of ads (not trailers) being run before a showing have become wearisome. I think of myself as a people person but the last place I want to commune with my fellow humans is at the theater. I live in Dallas, Texas, where the vast majority of our theaters are multiplexes, so this has probably affected my viewing pleasure. I still enjoy going to repertory and art house theaters. God I sound like an old cranky man -- but I'm 29 and once loved the theater experience when I was younger. I only go to the theater now if it's a very special "event" film (i.e. Phantom Menace and perhaps the upcoming X-Men), a date, or a really unique art house flick I just gotta see. Thank god for DVD -- this medium restored my love for movies. I saw Fight Club for the first time on DVD and felt that I enjoyed it more watching it as a solitary experience rather than in the theater. I've felt similarly about several movies I've watched for the first time on DVD -- I honestly don't think my like or dislike for certain movies has been colored by whether or not I saw them with a theater audience. I am willing to wait until a movie hits DVD before seeing it for the first time. As for streaming video digital films, I love watching the film shorts on sites like AtomFilms. If you have a broadband connection, it's really cool to watch these things on demand. Intimate, personal and off-beat subject matters in films like these seem to work best for this medium. But I doubt this method of film watching will replace the theatrical experience. Instead, I see it as an excellent means to showcase independent work (read: non-Hollywood shit). I see it threatening the TV networks more than the Hollywood movie studio business, and good riddance! AF

  • nope, not gonna happen (Score:3)

    by cheezus ( 95036 ) on Saturday July 01, 2000 @09:05AM (#963800) Homepage
    the movie theater is the primary data venue for many people, especially those under 21 who can't go out to the clubs (a major market group, too). Besides, not every one has the bigscreen tv and surround sound system. Imagine how much more disappointing the phantom menace would have been if you'd seen it for the first time on a 25' tv.

    Besides, everyone knows that the MPAA is all about controlling how when and where you see movies, and having the new movies released only in theaters (true, those of us with high speed connections *can* watch the blurry telesync version) gives them the upperhand in controling your entertainment.

    ---

  • Hell, this is a great idea. Kinda similar to the 'ractives' described in Stephenson's "The Diamond Age". Of course certain plotlines will work out better than others. The old "Murder on a Train" scenario seems ideal. Throw a bunch of people on a train. A NPC gets killed. Sometimes by an NPC, sometimes by a real person (to prevent Turing test detectives). Everyone tries to find the killer.

    Technical challenges aside it should be fairly possible. Limited sets, data/character driven plotline. Very free form. Talk to people. Explore. Point fingers. Done. Sure it's cliched, but it would probably be one of the easiest plots to do.

    Any of the old Sierra games could probably be recast in this format. No need for a human DM, just people who can stay in character and proceed towards a goal. Half the fun is getting there, and each game could be somewhat different. With the right mix of people the plot would become secondary. Could you imagine the Star Wars plot acted improv style by the cast of "Whose Line is it Anyway?"

    Granted, the medium for this sort of experience doesn't quite exist. You would almost need a "stage" that could intepret your movements into 3D animation in real time. Throw in some VR goggles so you could see the action. Add a teleprompter in there to feed you some lines if you want help. Someday it will all come together, but not for a few years yet. I'm looking forward to it.

    -BW
  • THAT'S SAD!

    Wasting that much bandwidth on movies that suck that bad!!!

    These aren't even has been movies, these are truely WORTHLESS movies.

    WARLOCK! LEPPRICON! WHORE!

    And after ALL THAT BS I have to use Windows Media Player and DON'T GET TO SAVE THE STRAEM! (took me 5min to get behind the rights protection scheme)

    Piracy IS a shitload better!

    Good looking site though, and nice coding job to the flash and HTML folks who put everything togather It ran pretty smooth on my MAC with netscape, even the DivX part ;)
  • I just hope the theatres don't use AOL. 20 minute delays while they try and find a dial-up!

  • I'm saying every film I've ever seen has had way too much scratches/dust/etc.

    If it's scratched, that's probably due to the projectionist. In all my time as a projectionist, I must have dealt with (quick calculation, estimate... three summers... four screens... 25 months... other projectionists...) about 500 separate prints. I've scratched a few myself (about 10 to some degree, but only 4 so that the average customer noticed), and I've seen three prints with factory scratches. This includes the time while I was training. If all the movies you see are scratched/dirty, complain. Scratches happen, but shouldn't happen often. Dirty prints can be cleaned as the film is running through the projector; there's no excuse there, unless the print is very new. However, these new, sensitive prints should be fine after two screenings. If it's dirty on a Saturday, complain.

    Note: I've seen a few movies in the ``second-run'' theaters. I've never seen one of these in good shape. I refuse to go to the cheap houses now; there's just too many avoidable errors on screen. This shouldn't happen with new prints, or old, but be ready to see it on old.

    A quick guide to scratches: they can be green or black. The colour tells you which side of the film it's on. The can be horizontal, vertical, or diagonal. Vertical scratches are usually projectionist error. The rare horizontal scratches come from the factory.

    Diagonal scratches are a result of projectionist negligence while assembling the film. I know of no other way to produce them. If you see diagonal scratches, especially when the print hasn't shown in any other theater, complain to the management. The projectionists screwed up.

  • We already have movies "delivered" straight to your home: pay-per-view.

    Besides, we all know that movie companies make big money charging you $8 a ticket to see something in a theatre with a huge picture and great sound. I don't think they're willing to give that up so that they can get maybe $6 for lots of people in a room to see first-run movies...they have to pay for those big-name actors, directors and all those computers to do special fx on somehow.

    - Tony
  • Wow.. Robert DeNiro's mole has gotta be ten feet wide!

    - Stranga Kvarko
  • At least not until VR technology can realistically simulate a screen three stories high. I've got a DVD player and a big-screen tv, and it's good, but it's nothing at all like seeing a film at a really good theater.

    Theaters annoy the hell out of me. They're crowded, people talk during the films, they show commercials before the films, they're too expensive. But the experience they deliver is like nothing you can get at home, and until that changes, I'll keep going to the theater.
  • This article begs the question: "Would you rather pay five to ten dollars to see a movie on an enormous screen with completely surround sound or would you rather wait for a movie to download over your 56kbps modem connection to watch on a 17 inch CRT with only a single pair of speakers?"
    Such a question sounds and is pretty sardonic. There is a large physical difference between your monitor and a theater. I like made-for-internet movies, some of them are pretty damn good. They remind me in some ways of Clerks from the creative genius of Kevin Smith. No special effects, not high end post production, just a very interesting story and some important visuals. The key to Clerks is it was a good movie without a high special effects budget. Same with a few of the made-for-internet movies. Then there are movies like Phantom Menace which are specifically made to be seen in their full thousandxthousand film resolution and heard on an uber-surround sound system that lets you feel the vibrations from the pod racer engines. While I'd like TPM on video to watch it, I couldn't really experience it which it the point of making such visually impressive movies (no, I don't give a fuck about your opinion of the picture).
    To my point, some people are itching for internet everything. People as such probably don't have cars and are just embarrassed to ask mommy for a ride to and fro. I don't want internet everything. If the market for low budget films outstrips that of high budget films we aren't going to see high budget films because no one will make them. Sometimes I like to see something like Phantom Menace or The Matrix. Don't be a fucking fool either and claim that equipment to make professional quality special effects are now within people's budgets. Fuck that. The real awe of special effects is not the power of the equipment used it's the time and talent behind the technology. While there are plenty of people with alot of artistic talent that could go crazy with special effects it would require alot of time. While these same people believe you ought to do things just cuz, they don't realize that things cost money. Mommy and daddy still pay their bills.
    Until I have a house large enough to fit a 20' movie screen, I don't want movie theaters to go away. Home theater systems are and will continue to be very expensive and the cost of a single full system (including movies) cost way fucking more than all the movies you'll see in a lifetime unless you're a film critic or suffer a form of derrangement. If movie theaters disappeared tomorrow I'd need to spend beaucoup cash in order to watch movies with any level of visual impressiveness. Shoes for labour.
  • the movie theater is the primary data venue for many people,

    erm... correction. not data venue, DATE venue. like boy takes girl to chick flick so he can get some sort of date. sorry. data. shit. what was i thinking?

    ---

  • That's all us geeks really need...

    Another excuse to *NOT* go out and meet women. Dad: Son, get the hell outta the house and find a damn girl.. take her to a movie.

    Geek: ba..ba..but dad, I don't hafta leave anymore!

    geesh..

  • Thanks to Rogers Digital Choice TV [rogers.com], I already get all the specialty channels I receive, plus all 45 PPV channels and 6 movie network channels, digitally -- and they look and sound amazing.

    Call me nuts, but I think the digital revolution is already here.

    --

  • The Joy of Film (Score:5)

    by skeller ( 145333 ) on Saturday July 01, 2000 @10:01AM (#963812)
    Aside from the numerous responses regarding the theater being a social experience (very true -- I tend to see about a movie a week, and always with other people), there is the fact that digital technology is still not up to the par that actual projected film is. I'll grant that it's catching up, but even the very best DVD is only trying to mimic how the real thing looks.

    Additionally, there are new technologies in film that supposedly increase the way it looks dramatically. Maxivision, a system that is projected at 48 frames per second as opposed to the standard 24 may be a major boon to traditional film. Not only do you maintain the richness of color and depth of film, but you get a much sharper picture (particularly of moving objects) as well. Roger Ebert [suntimes.com] has written pretty extensively about this technology -- you can find one of his articles (not credited) at http://www.cameraguild.co m/news/techno/film_v_digital.htm [cameraguild.com]

    Digital recording and projection will have their uses; digital is substantially cheaper than film, and is already becoming a huge boon to independant filmmakers. Movies that are essentially all digital anyway (Star Wars, any sort of big budget Sci-Fi / Action movie) will also see improvements from never having to touch celluloid.

    The one other topic I'd like to touch on is the fact that so many people seem to be jumping at the idea of on demand movies from the internet as a great way to replace Blockbuster -- what happened to wanting to actually own movies? Did we learn nothing from the DIVX fiasco? Then again I'd love to have a whole archive of movies that I could watch when I wanted to... there are some obscure movies that are essentially impossible to track down without paying insanely high prices, and if the internet could get me a way to see them cheaply, I'd be all for it.

  • I've seen the issue of digitally distributed/downloadable movies come up several times, both on Internet sites (like slashdot) and in discussions with friends, coworkers, etc. At first I thought "Gee, that WOULD be cool..", etc. but when I really sat down and thought about it, I realized that this would be just plain silly. The state of computing and home theatre equipment has advanced greatly within the past few years, but we still don't have the stuff that can equal the sound and picture quality of even the smallest theatre. You can get pretty close, but you'll have to pay through the nose. My friend, for example, has a state-of-the-art home theatre system: projection TV, fancy stereo system, and a whole bunch of other crap. He also has obscenely high credit card bills. (the speakers alone cost him $11,000 -- and that was with him building them himself; if he had bought them pre-assembled the price would have been quite a lot higher.) And even he would rather go to a theatre than watch something at his place. If I were to set up a home theatre system, it would cost me A LOT. I don't have that kind of money, and likely will never have that kind of money, at least not for a long time. I also don't have the room for one -- this dinky 1br apartment just won't cut it. Now, compare this to your typical theatre, which has an obscenely huge screen, thunderous sound, and terrific (or at least passable) acoustics. These buildings were DESIGNED for that specific purpose, after all. Many of the buildings, especially the newer ones, have been decked out with the very latest in sound and projection technology. Total cost of admission: $5.00 or $8.50, depending on if I went to the matinee or the evening show. And most importantly, I don't have to store it all! Then there's also the issue of file sizes. Even a heavily compressed movie can weigh in at several GB worth fo data. And, if you're one of those who demands absolute fidelity, you'd need extremely little, or no compression, which would bloat the file size even higher. Now I just got DSL last year, and many people I know are getting either DSL or cable. Even with cable or DSL, downloading a 650 MB ISO file takes about half a day. Menaing that even for a moderately sized movie, I'd be waiting at least a day, maybe two or three, while it percolates in. And also remember that, though more people are getting better connectivity, the majority of the populace is still stuck with 56k modems. We just don't have the bandwidth for this type of thing, and probably won't, not for quite a while. Internet downloadable movies? No thanks. I'll still be going to theatres, likely for a long time to come. There's also the social aspect. Actually physically going to a theatre has a purpose. It's FUN. It's SOCIAL. It is a group activity, but can also be done alone. One of the scariest future views of the world for me would be if EVERYTHING could be done from the comfort of your home. Sure, it may sound cool in theory, but think about it: all of us would just be sitting at home, ordering up our food, ordering up our movies, chatting online. We'd be missing out on so much of the social interaction that us human beings NEED... Yes! NEED! (There are studies to prove this.) I also like to go to theatres to see the sights. True, alot of the older buildings have been closed up, but many more have either been renovated or are still open. And old theatres are really COOL places. Here in Santa Barbara, we have a lovely old building called the Arlington Theatre. It's still in service today, and plays not only movies, but also symphonies, comedy, and other live events. The ceiling has really cool pierce holes in it, so it looks like you are watching your movie (or whatever performance is playing) while under the stars. Not being able to go to the Arlington again would truly be disappointing. Anyway, I've rambled on enough. Time to play some Diablo II!! :)
    --
  • "On the plus side, the miniseries is a medium that TV can offer that theatres cannot."

    This is only true because the major studios have gotten into a "home run" blockbuster mindset, motivated by greed (i.e., the need to satisfy investment analysts with quarterly profits). This also underpins the recent escalation in ticket prices ($10 per ticket is outrageous, when you can rent the video for half that, or wait for the TV release and see it for free, eventually).

    It wasn't always this way. Studios used to put out movie "mini-series" but they were called "serials." Ticket prices were cheap.

    In the middle of the last century, it was very common to send all the kids to the movie theater every Saturday afternoon to watch the latest episode of a "B" Western or other serial release. (And one might surmise that this helped enable couples to have much larger families years ago.)

    However, the major movie studios have lost their way in recent decades. Sony got taken for about 3-4 Billion dollars in it's foray into Hollywood. More recently, Seagrams mismanaged Universal so badly that Edgar Bronfman Jr. now has to _sell_ his entire family company to a French firm, in order to gain a consolation-prize (but very big) check for his monumental mismanagement "gaffes" (the use of a French word is quite intentional).

    I worked at Universal Studios last year as a mainframe contractor in their data center. (This was the year Universal lost $100 Million on their films, Seagrams fired the top exec, and the first he heard of it was from a journalist!) The LA Times business section had a good summary of the Seagrams/Universal story last weekend, couched in the form of a report card on Edgar Bronfman Jr. It didn't pull any punches, and I'd encourage any people interested in the corporateness of the movie business to read it (sorry, no link, I'm too lazy, but "it's out there" if you want it).

    For me, the most amazing thing in the story was that the President and COO of Universal spent a lot of time on the Universal cafe! I ate lunch there for like six months, and yes, it's a nice cafeteria with reasonable prices, but it was _not_ worth executive attention to upgrade the burgers to blue-cheese toppings or the tuna into Ahi-melts! What _were_ they smoking, upstairs?

    [Interesting aside - Seagrams consolidated the Universal data center into another in Indiana (and I extracted and gave them the statistical data to justify this move, at their request). The thought of Indiana data center technicians now reporting to France just makes me shiver. But they did deserve it - the acting IT Director at Universal wouldn't rationize his performance parameters for fear of losing lunches and golf. Now I'm long gone from there, but likely (and hopefully - the incompetant wretch), so is he.]

    And yes, I've been a projectionist too, back in high school. We had a couple of rock-solid old projectors with carbon arcs (that took watching) and the big films shown after school were like "The Great Escape" and "The Guns of Navarone." [I'm old, OK?]

    So yes, there is something about seeing a movie in a theater that's like going to the opera or seeing a good stage play, where the audience gets to participate and everyone gains a lot thereby.

    Anyway (back on topic), I think it's a Good Thing that some movies will soon be available in many formats, on the web as well as DVD in addition to the theater experience. Competition is _very_ good, as it drives down consumer prices to levels that are marginally profitable for most the efficient vendors. This is why the (bloated, inefficient) studios are fighting so hard against wide access. They don't want to see their strangle-hold on the latest big flick evaporate, so I don't blame 'em. But I think they will lose, in the long run.

    (Then again, I think it might have been Milton Friedman [economist] who said that, well "In the long run, we're all dead." But I'd hope for AOL/Time-Warner, Universal, etc. to predecease me. Their chokehold on broad-scale media is now out of date, and I'd like to see 'em all die out.)

    Right now, I think the major media conglomerates have their feet on the necks of consumers, and I for one would welcome a web-shift to change this.

    Thanks for reading,
    R

  • This will never happen for as long as humans continue to exist in the physical form which they do today.

    Today's PPV is a total joke, but the day is coming when you will be able to view all movies ever made, at any time, from anywhere. Movies can be made and delivered to almost any arbitrary quality. But none if this matters because this is NOT about technology!

    Movie theaters are a cultural and social institution. They offer things that no home theater ever could, regardless of technology. Movies (in theaters) are things that you go out to, which is very important. Also there is something very different with watching a movie with hundreds of other real people than sitting at home, even with a group of people.

    Sure there will be a place for interactive movies and home theaters, and sure these offer things that can never be found in movie theaters. But there will always be a place for real movie theaters (so long as humans continue to exist as they do today), just like there is still a place today for theater (as in plays/musicals), with real live people. Limiting oneself to just one of these forms ensure that one is is never able to experience the richness of the arts. And limiting on the basis of technology is just plain stupid.

  • Ok, my favorite movie going experience is the Fremont outdoor cinema in Seattle. It's in the hippie neighborhood and basically it's a B-movie projected on the side of a building. The nearby residents drag their couches over and it's a totally festive event. There's contests, games, shorts and all kinds of crap before the film. It rocks.
    All that's fun, but the big Ciniplex experience is cool in it's own right. I think you should be able to see the beauty in suburbia. It's a lifestyle most people actively seek out and it's beautiful in a bland sort of way. It's like McDonalds -- I don't eat there very often, but I think it's a wonderful thing. Try to envision suburbia the way an anthropologist from 200 years in the future would. It'll give you a whole new appreciation for wonderbread and old navy.
    --Shoeboy
  • There are also affects that don't work well on anything other than a large screen that engulfs your feild of vision, take the lobby scene in The Matrix with all the peices of marble flying off the pillars, everyone I have spoken to about that thought it had an oddly beautiful fractal like quality, which doesn't come out when watching on a small screen. Of course if we all had HMDs that reproduced that level of immersion then it would work, but I'm still waiting for one with a descent resolution. OTOH some of these films are very low budget and would never make it to the theatre and some are quite good check this Matrix spoof called Computer Boy -
    http://www.ifilm.com/films.taf?film_id= 115368 [ifilm.com]
  • Here's a startup that will be delivering "online only" films... http://www.creativeforces.com [creativeforces.com].
  • I don't think that anyone really wants to watch a feature length movie on their 17" monitor.

    Actually, when compared to most TVs, a 17" monitor looks a hell of a lot sharper. DVDs definitely benefit from them a whole lot. Until we all have digital HDTVs (widescreen, of course) a monitor isn't that bad an option, IMO.

  • All this seems pretty irrelivent. Given the reaction of the movie people to dvd and the lawsuits flying around, I can't see the studio executives being too keen on realeasing their latest $100 movie to people to view via the Internet.
  • Will the 'Net replace the Theater? Not until there is a format that all the movie companies can agree upon that is available for all platforms, from Windows and Mac to appliances to Linux/*BSD. This will not happen soon since such a format would have poor playback^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcopy protection (which we all know is useless, but the movie industry does not).

    Also, there are classes of films that are best viewed with others, in a theater. After all, how many people want to invite 100 hard-core Rocky Horror Picture Show fans (a.k.a. sluts by RHPS fans) to their house? Just vacuuming up the rice would take a month....

  • This also underpins the recent escalation in ticket prices ($10 per ticket is outrageous, when you can rent the video for half that, or wait for the TV release and see it for free, eventually).

    Well, first of all, the highest I've seen for a ticket is $7, here in So Cal. But even at that, that's always seemed like an incredible bargain to me. 7/10 bucks to see a multimillion (if not hundred million) dollar production on a good screen with a great sound system? Been to a major sporting event lately? Concert? $50-$100 easy. Or heck, how about even your local light-opera? $15 at a minimum. Movies are an amazing bargain.

    In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if tickets are cheaper than they used to be, adjusted for inflation. At the very least, they aren't much more expensive. Most of the money at theatres is made on the food. Talk to me about popcorn, now there's a rip-off.

    But as for "serials", I think TV is what really killed them. It used to be that movies were one of the few entertainment places. But when TV came in, there was too much demand on people's entertainment attention to get them into a theatre once per week. Heck, I'm lucky to get to the theatre once every few months nowadays.

    Bottom line, TV took over the low-end. If I want to watch a weekly serial, TV has them in spades, and I don't need to leave the house. That's why hollywood has gravitated toward the high-end, blockbuster picture, because that's what will drag people out of the house to see it on the big screen.


    --

  • A bunch of directors and producers are getting together to put movies on the internet now. They're doing it with a company called Econnect (ECNC). You'll have to pay for the movies to see them but it'll be the movies that are currently playing in the theatres. They put a news release out last week about it. It sounds like a good idea as an alternative to going to the movies.
  • So then what makes you think the internet will be different? Why should more or better movies be released on the net than on video or cable?

    Without a clear advantage in quality (or possible volume, though doubltful), my point is still valid.

    Kevin Fox

  • Re:What about drive-ins????? (Score:3)

    by w3woody ( 44457 ) on Sunday July 02, 2000 @08:45AM (#963825) Homepage
    Drive-ins are going the way of the dodo for two reasons.

    One, they're land-intensive. In the same acrage of a drive-in, you could build a mall with restaurants, shopping, video arcades and a movie theater all in one.

    Two, they're a poor source of revenue. You drive into the theater, maybe you buy food at the consession stand, then you drive away. With the modern movie theaters used to anchor a shopping district or mall, you walk in, buy your ticket, perhaps shop at some of the adjacent stores, see the movie, and walk out to grab dinner at a local restaurant. Perhaps you kill some time at the local bookstore before the movie, and drop $20 on books. But unless you walk right in without looking left or right, and walk right out directly to your car without stopping, you will probably spend more money than at a drive-in.

    On the other hand, movie theaters won't go the way of the drive-ins; in fact, they're being built as fast as developers can get plans approved in some parts of the country. That's because most shopping mall developers have figured out that having a movie theater in your mall draws traffic. And with a mall, the best thing you can do is draw traffic; that way, some of them may stay and continue to shop afterwards.
  • But... film color is produced in a similar fashion, using three pigmentation layers on the film. So film is similarly compromised in it's color reproduction as a CRT.

    OTOH, this works, because we only have three different color-sensitive cones in the eye to see colors with: one for red, one for green, and one for blue...
  • I think a more worthy question after watching this film, is whether film makers will be facing competition from the web.

    This film easily matches any special effects in any 100 million dollar budget blockbuster. Yet, it was shot in 2 days, with a couple months of spare-time editing. The end result easily would have taken millions and millions of dollars 10 years ago to achieve, yet cost these 2 guys nothing but time. $0.

    They had less than a few thousand in equipment, absolutely no money for a shooting budget, yet the result is nothing less than the type of scene moviegoers would have been in awe of, and studios would have had to shell out truckloads of money to achieve.

    As they say on the website, we have now reached the point where film makers are limited only by their imaginations. If two guys (two very talented guys) can make a movie with special effects on par with anything seen before, anywhere. If two guys can achieve this result at home, on cheap hardware with consumer software, then we have reached the point where there are no boundries for amateur filmmakers, and it's probably safe to say that, like with the web in general, those people with the talent, and the ideas, *WILL* have an outlet to shine, regardless of whether they can be bankrolled by a big studio, much as we are beginning to see with musicians and MP3s.

    ________
    1995: Microsoft - "Resistance is futile"

  • you can watch it... you just can't listen to it. :)

    Linux's main desktop weakness, lack of video format support, comes glaring through. Hopefully someone who matters will see this soon, and create a video viewer on par with those other platforms. I just wish I was a programmer capable of doing that myself.

    I love linux, but until I can get microsoft media player to work in wine, or someone writes a video player for it which can play all these video clips I run into on the net, Linux has to remain down the list for video capabilities.

    I just noticed on the 405 website that they are claiming the divx format was created for the divx video disks. *chuckle* :)

    ________
    1995: Microsoft - "Resistance is futile"

  • Update, Just found a real media version.

    try this link [ifilm.com] then choose real media from the format menu.

    should work fine in linux if you have the real player. If you haven't seen this thing yet, do it. it's ROFL funny.

    ________
    1995: Microsoft - "Resistance is futile"

  • I for one would rather go to the movie theatre to see a movie instead of downloadin it. Why would anyone give that up. I think watching movies on the net may compete with videos and tv, but not going to the theater.
  • you know, as we get more and more broadband access across the world, more and more people will put media on the net. in fact, i'm going to blatanly plug the company i work for -- www.blastro.com -- we're in the business (just getting started) of creating media specifically for the net. of course, right now it's mostly flash and/or real/asf/qt, depending.

    right now we do 28.8, 56k, 128k, 300k, and those 300k streams are pretty good looking... it's only a matter of a year or two before we can start doing megabit streams, and when that starts, we'll be able to get pretty damn close to TV quality signals.

    it's just a matter of time...

    -jmatthew3

  • Some changes that the shift to digital movies will make are going to affect the cineplexes in a positive, and lucrative way.

    Instead of haveing to get the actuall film rolls dilivered, spliced, and wrapped, theatres will be able to download high quality digital movies, and store them locally for the length of the run.

    This gets around the long download times because they can do it a day in advance.

    No more breaks in the film or the theatre employess forgetting to switch spools. (Which happened when I saw Return of the Jedi back in the 80s. There was nearly a riot)

    Of course this is where the best pirated movies will come from, your friend at the movie theatre who copies the high quality movie onto a couple of DVD-rams or something;). But with Titan AE released this way I'd say its what the production companies are going for.

  • I'm a big fan of Repertory Theater. I really don't thank that downloading movies will be an adequate subsititute for this kind of theater. I have seen the movies on the TV before but I go to see the movies on the big screen. Ben Hur on the small screen is okay. Ben Hur on the big screen == awesome. Almost any movie shown on the big screen is better.

    DVD comes comes the closest I've seen to trying to duplicate the big screen experience. Excellent picture quality and great sound. But there is still that small screen to deal with.

    Downloading is a good way to preview a movie right now. After watching it you either say "I want to go see this" or "I'm glad I didn't pay money to watch this".

    --

    I can just feel those radioactive betas & gammas crawling up on me right now.

    Police Chief - From the Real Batman - 196?
  • There are too many people that simply don't know how to make microwave popcorn correctly.


    -MunKy_v2 [dialug.org]
  • I am a huge movie fan, and part of the fun of movies for me is going out to the theatre with people, getting candy and popcorn and having fun. If it ever got to be such an impersonal experience as watching everything in your house, you can count me out. You'll find me at the drive-in ;)

  • Re:Er, it's called "television" (Score:4)

    by Webmonger ( 24302 ) on Saturday July 01, 2000 @11:07AM (#963836) Homepage
    The movie theatre isn't where big movies make most of their money these days. Video's where it's at. So what's the advantage of a theatrical release?

    Strangely, it seems that "credibility" is what comes with a theatrical release. Made-for-tv movies are always "made-for-tv movies", and direct to video movies are always "direct-to-video" movies. But theatrical releases, those are "real movies".

    They get major ad campaigns. They get reviewed by the film critics. They're even "group culture". People will talk about current theatrical releases the same way they'll talk about recent events in the world of sports. They'll go see them on dates.

    Video has already come up as a contender for movie distribution, and it sure hasn't replaced any of those things. Downloads may replace VHS (oh happy day!) but they won't replace movie theatres. Ever.
  • "I do think that within the very near future, somebody's going to figure out how to kill the trip to the local video store."

    It's already happened. There are underground sites on the net where you can download DivX encoded .avi files 600MB-1.2GB in size, which on a system with good MPEG hardware decoding are comparable to DVD, and far superior to VHS, even on a large ( 36" I've seen and it looks and sounds great ) home theatre system. If you want to see how good the DivX codec really is, here is a comparison [digital-digest.com] of two frames from a Dolby trailer. The site also has step by step instructions on how to backup a DVD to a DivX file on a hard disk, with all the available tools supplied.

    When I say comparable to DVD, I should qualify that a bit. It is obviously inferior, in both picture and audio. But the miracle of MPEG compression is that is gives the most detail to the parts you're paying attention to. There is compression noise but only in low motion, low detail backgrounds. There are also sometimes audio synching errors.

  • It just costs too much to see a movie these days.

    I saw The Perfect Storm last night with a bunch of people, it turned out to be an ok movie, lots of intense action, and the majority of us liked it.

    But the ticket price!! 7.50$ for admission? At those prices, they should be including some preperation-H to ease the burning.

    It's so expensive I don't even consider buying popcorn or soda anymore, I mean really, 4.50 for a small bag of grade F popcorn and artificial butter?

    I'll wait till I can rent it and watch it while eating the microwave stuff. At least that way you don't have to listen to the crying child some idiot always brings to the most violent loud and intense movies.

    NightHawk

    Tyranny =Gov. choosing how much power to give the People.

  • its replaced moving for me. i just bought a sony VPL-CS1 projector with svideo, rgb, and monitor inputs along with a projection the size of my wall. that with two 400 watt yamaha speakers along with a p2350 400 watt amp, who needs a theater.

  • My prediction for the future: a "wonder box" (Score:4)

    by IntelliTubbie ( 29947 ) on Saturday July 01, 2000 @12:26PM (#963840)
    Imagine -- using an electronic device to download real-time programming directly to your home! We may not have the technology for such a magical box anytime soon, but here's what (I think) you might expect:

    1. high-quality streaming audio and video through an already-existing connection in your home!

    2. multiple "channels" showing many different programs at the same time -- including movies, comedy, drama, sports, and news!

    3. ABSOLUTELY FREE -- thanks to occasional "commercials" during programming!

    What an exciting future we have ahead of us!

    (Warning: Do not attempt to adjust the sarcasm knob on your computer!)
  • The biggest profit doesn't even come from the price of admission. It's the $6 tub of popcorn, and the $3 coke. ---> Actually, it just so happens that I own a movie theatre. The "theory" behind making money with a theatre is that the price that you pay for your ticket to get in to see the show covers the fixed costs of having the theatre; film rental, property taxes, employee wages, electricity, etc. etc. The profit, i.e. the money that the theatre owner gets to keep and live on (or pay the stockholders or whatever), is the profits that are made from sales of concession items. I read an article in a trade magazine a little while ago which mentioned in passing that one particular chain worked on the basis that the concession revenue provided 110% of the profit, which meant that the actual movie was a loss leader!
  • The movie theatre isn't where big movies make most of their money these days. Video's where it's at. So what's the advantage of a theatrical release? ---> Don't kid yourself. Film companies make millions off of theatrical releases of movies. However, be that as it may, another advantage of releasing movies in theatres is PUBLICITY! Direct-to-video movies never receive the exposure and never get the hype that theatrical releases get. And even if you flog the hell out of a video on TV commercials or something, you still don't get the word-of-mouth advertising and the sheer anticipation factor that you get by releasing a movie into theatres.
  • but seriously, its a lot cooler to actually check out girls and pick em up ans stuff at the theater than at porn sites on the net
  • of watching it on the big screen, 405 was just plain bad.

  • What idiot decided this was worth the front page? Oh. That'd be Cliff would it?

    "I'm starting to wonder if someday I'll consider going out to a theater to be a quaint experience."

    You may well already pay for movies beamed to your home. WTF do you think the cable channels are? The fact that it may be distributed over the Internet will have absolutely no effect at all.

    The reason that people go to the cinema is the 30 foot tall, 60 foot wide screen and digital surround sound you moron.

    The distribution method is f*****g irrelevant.

    WTF is happening to /.?

  • This unfortunately, is down to the companies with the proprietry (sp?) codecs unwilling to support the linux platform, see: http://xanim.va.pubnix.com/xa_unsuppor ted.html [pubnix.com]

    Mr Poldipec's wonderful Xanim supports a wide variety of Codecs already, see: http://xanim.va.pubnix.com/linuxELFx86 g21.html [pubnix.com]

    (or your appropriate platform, not everyone is stuck with these fscking x86 machines).

    Instead of complaining, do as Mr Poldipec suggests, send an email to the more uncooperative companies telling them how it is in their interests to support the rapidly emerging/growing linux platform.

  • movies have become more profitable and more people are going to the cinema since vhs was released.

    until i get a 15 metre screen and all the kit to go with it in my house i will continue to pay to watch movies at cinemas.

    -tim
  • I really loved 405. I was wondering for 2 days how the heck did they manage to do those effects. Only when I read the "making of" did I finaly understood but still couldn't believe. Another funny and rather long [22 mins] internet movie is "Vendeta". Santa vs Cops. It's not as good as 405 IMHO but it's fun nonetheless. You can find it in http://www.newgrounds.com somewhere. Anyone know how to save the 'it's your movie' clips? I really don't like downloading the trailer every time I want to see [streamlined] and then not being able to save it. I was thinking of searching in the Temporary Internet folders and finding it somehow but I couldn't
  • I'm guessing you would be an american then.

    I think there is a lot to be said for movies that are produced without the multimillion dollar budget of hollywood.

    Ok some of them are shite but some are very good.

  • the Onion agrees. (Score:3)

    by Paul Crowley ( 837 ) on Monday July 03, 2000 @01:32AM (#963850) Homepage Journal
    I believe the revolutionary technology you're describing has already been heralded by the Onion [theonion.com].
    --

  • I have to agree here. One of my very fondest memories of being a little kid is when Nana would take us to the movies on Tuesdays -- the local UA theatre had a $1.00 special. (I just dated myself, I guess. :)

    One of my fondest more recent memories is of seeing Pulp Fiction on its opening weekend. Remember when Butch (Bruce Willis' character) is deciding what kind of weapon he wants to go back into the store with? I'll never forget it, because the audience cheered louder as he picked up each weapon... it really added to the fun, I think.

    As long as they keep improving movie theaters, I'll probably keep ponying up the money to go see movies in them. My favorite lately is the AMC 20 in Livonia (near Detroit) with the armrests that fold up, which makes it easier to cuddle. Anyway, I wholeheartedly agree with Seumas' point.

  • Is there a business model to support this?

    Whoever figures out a way for $7 popcorns to be delivered faster than the movie can be downloaded will be a rich rich (wo)man.
  • So I can't watch the "It's Your Movie" movie, since I don't run Windows or MacOS, and QuickTime is available only for those two operating systems. Guess I'll wait till it comes out on TBS.
  • actually, my home town opened a brand-new drivein a few years back... My sister went with her friends a few times and they'd all sit on the hood of her friend's big ol' cordoba with a portable stereo (the cordoba having only AM radio and an 8-track player, of course).

    Great fun.


    "When correctly viewed, everything is lewd
    I could tell you things about Peter Pan
  • It was named DiVX mocking the original failed technology. It's really MPEG 4 now.

    Learn all you can before you spout off about it.


    -MunKy_v2 [dialug.org]

  • Newspapers were spozed to kill off books.
    Radio was spozed to kill off newspapers.
    Movies were spozed to kill off newspapers.
    Magazines were spozed to kill off newspapers.
    Radio was spozed to kill off newspapers.
    Television was spozed to kill off radio.
    Records were spozed to kill off radio.
    CDs were spozed to kill off records.
    VHS tapes were spozed to kill off television and the movies.
    DVDs were spozed to kill off CDs and the movies and television.
    The net was spozed to kill off everything.

    The result?

    I read a newspaper, multiple magazines, watch hours of TV, listen to hours of radio, read a book every few days, listen to records and CDs and watch DVDs and lounge on the net for hours daily and manage to get in a movie every week or two.

    BLEH.

  • XMPS Mirror (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Here you go: Mirror [hu-berlin.de]

    You can view avi files that carry a divx mpeg4 stream. It does work by linking the m$ dll via the pe-loader from wine. Very beta, and a cool hack.

    This is only for research purposes.
    #include <your_favourite_disclaimer.h>

  • Depends on the format of the film... (Score:5)

    by Shoeboy ( 16224 ) on Saturday July 01, 2000 @10:36AM (#963858) Homepage
    disclaimer: I work for AtomFilms.com , but the views express are my own and my employer isn't happy about all the time I spend on /. so I'm unlikely to run this post by them.

    I don't believe that the theater will be obsolete. It's too much fun. My house doesn't have
    1) a concession stand
    2) rowdy kids yelling "focus"
    3) sticky floors
    4) complete darkness
    Some of these seem like nuisances, but I think they're critical to the movie going experience. It's fun. It's not something that you can duplicate in your living room, and not something you'd want to.

    That being said, there are a lot of formats that don't work well in the big theater setting. A 7 screen theater is expensive and really only hollywood features have the financing to support the theater distribution model. Online is a lower cost medium that's very friendly to short films, expirimental formats and interactive technology. But there's a limit to how interactive you can get, you can't reproduce the Rocky Horror experience in your living room, and again, you wouldn't want to.

    Online movies are going to revolutionize the way content is created, marketed and viewed, but it won't kill theaters. There's always going to be a demand to GO OUTSIDE and see a film. I suspect the people saying 'I can do everything in my living room and don't need to leave the house' don't date much.

    Anyway, what online films can and will do is increase the market and exposure for innovative and expirimental films, showcase new technologies, improve audience interaction and empower (I can't believe I just used that word) consumers.

    --Shoeboy
  • According to IBM, the Next Generation Internet will facilitate what we want, when and where we want it. Get the scoop at http://www.ngi.ibm.com/
  • Funny you should mention those two exact items: Choose Your Own Adventure books and Legos. I had the same to items, as much as my parents could afford, and spent nearly all my time playing with them. The only other toy that I enjoyed were those little green army men.

    I fully believe that those toys, that allowed me to be analytical as a kid (designs, solving, etc), led me to where I am today: working on computers and not having to worry about money. I'd like to believe that those toys actually made me a little smarter in the long run.

  • In a way movies are coming into your home like this. DirectTV is one example, it is digital. Now, you could sit there an order a movie on your computer, but is your family really going to gather 'round the computer? Part of the experience of a theatre is the huge screen which immerses you in the action, maybe someday when stereoscopic displays because more feasible, this would be the better way to go. Until then, Im going to the rip-off we call the movie theatre for the movies you just have to see up close.

  • Re:nope, not gonna happen (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Ha! I've got 2000" TV

    --
    Frank
  • TV hasn't killed movie theaters. VCRs haven't killed them either. And I seriously doubt that the amount of people who are willing to download a 90 minute feature film to their hard disk and watch it on a 19" monitor is going to kill movie theaters.

    I doubt it even will have a noticible influence in ticket sales the next 10 years.

    -- Abigail

  • Yes, but movie theaters generally don't kick you out halfway through the film.

    --
  • I don't go to the movies very often. Last movie I saw was Star Wars and that was over a year ago.

    While you can eventually download movies over the Internet and watch them on your computer screen (or perhaps pipe them to your home entertainment system), it will never replace some of the things people have grown to expect and, in some ways, enjoy about the experience of going to a real theater.

    I like going to the ticket booth, telling them I want two tickets for a movie, handing over a few bucks, walking to the concession stand for a bag of Chocolate Covered Raisins and some black licorice (or just sneaking a bunch of grub in on my own), finding a seat in the theater well before the flick starts, watching the goofy advertisements and 'Movie Facts' that are projected on to the screens in the dimly lit auditorium, listening to faint conversations from the people that are already in the theater, hearing that nice lick "shlap-shlap!" of feet sticking to the floor as they walk. Hearing the crunch of pop-corn and the jiggle of ice in drink cups. I like the sudden hush when the lights go down and the previews come up. The always fun THX introductions (which used to be better when they blew out your ear drums) and then, depending on what part of the country you're in (being from Portland, Oregon, it's a pretty quiet crowd) and what kind of movie you're watching, the crowd laughing with you at the film. And, after a really good movie, everyone clapping at a film... An inanimate object. Weird.

    But the whole experience is fun. I'd rather have that than to always pay a few bucks to download a gigabyte of data over the 'net and sitting on my couch alone watching a film by myself or with a friend or two. The theater/cinema is one of those experiences that is best enjoyed with other human beings, even if you don't know 99% of the people in the building watching it with you.
    ---
    seumas.com

  • Some made-for-TV movies don't suck, but they just don't bring in the same sort of money that a major movie theatre feature brings in. It's going to be awhile until you see $100 million productions made for TV. On the plus side, the miniseries is a medium that TV can offer that theatres cannot.

    But beyond that, the big screen offers benefits that sitting in your house just doesn't offer. Maybe someday we'll all have 40-100 foot screens in our house, but until then I'll stick to the theatre if I want an immersive experience.


    --

  • I have a fairly nice TV, and very nice sound. The theateres I go to have a even nicer display, and while I can't tell if the sound is nicer, I expect some people could. My living room seats about six if everyone wants a nice view of the TV. The theteres I go to seat a whole lot more. My house is pretty messy, and I'm fairly embarassed by it when I have folks over. The therteres are in pretty good shape, and it's not something I feel embarassed by when they arn't. So it is definitly nicer for me, to got out to a thetere with friends, especally if there are more then five of them.

    Not that I am aginst having good AV gear at home, or being able to see nice movies at home (after all look at my TV and stereo...and DVD collection). I just think the social benifits of going to a thetere are pretty large.

    Most people have good stoves, a cutting board, and a fridge, and many folks can make pretty good food. But there are still resturants, and I expect they will continue on as well.

  • Exactly! (Score:3)

    by b0r1s ( 170449 ) on Saturday July 01, 2000 @10:46AM (#963877) Homepage
    The appeal of traditional movies isn't always just sitting and watching. For a vast majority of viewers, its a social activity. Watching commedies with a group of friends in a crowded theatre can not be recreated online. Watching horror/suspense movies in dark theatres can be slightly recreated by a home viewer by turning off the lights, closing the windows, etc., but try telling your girlfriend its the same thing and I think you'll find she either laughs at you or breaks up with you.

    Going to movie theatres isn't always about watching movies... its an experience that involved environmental factors as well. Until you can pack your house/dorm room/etc with 100 of your closest friends who make rude comments and laugh at unappropriate times, you can not recreate the movie going experience by downloading them online. Besides...some of us still use modems, and it would take me years to download it anyway...I'd rather spend the $8.


    ================================================ =
    If ignorance is bliss, wipe the smile off my face
  • Give me a break - you don't go to the movie theater just to watch a movie. Are you going to invite a date over to your house to watch your computer? I bet when people started renting movies for their home VCR, people feared the end of movie theaters, but they're still going strong. The big screen just can't compare.
  • <em>Do you all think that digital movies may eventually bypass the traditional cineplex and be delivered straight to your home?</em>

    If Television, Cable Television, VCRs and a vidoe rental and sales industry, and Pay-per-view haven't obsoleted the ciniplex, then movies over the internet won't, either. Duh.

    This "Gee whiz" fanboy approach to new technology is irritating. Do try to -think- about how the technology will fit into the scheme of things before going "Ugh! Shiny new happy thing! All will use shiny new happything! Old thing bad! Ugh!"

    SoupIsGood Food

  • Ten years ago, Hong Kong had a thriving movie making industry. Hundreds of movies being made a year, with reasonable budgets and a strong fan base.

    About five years ago, though, VCD (video-CD, a fairly poor technology, but cheap) absolutely destroyed the industry. You could get a VCD of a movie the day it appeard in theaters for a couple of bucks, instead of paying the 6 bucks to get into the theater.

    Film production budgets plummeted to about ten percent of the previous value; because there was no profit to be made on more expensive films. Good actors and directors came to America, where this revolution hasn't happened. Yet.

    thad

  • Interesting possibility: movie theatres could become what drive-ins are today -- a nostalgic niche thing, rare or absent in most areas, a relic of the past.

    I dunno, maybe. One thing about the movies though is that it's a very social activity. Think of going to the movies with friends or a date back in high school and still today. I would like to think that an institution like that woud persist, but obviously if it's going to then there has to be some incentive for it.

    Consider the economics of it. If home theatre gets good and gets cheap, then the number of people going to traditional theatres will fall. In response, ticket prices will probably have to fall in order to attract viewers, but that might or might not be enough to bring people in. In any event, it will mean decreased revenues, which in turn will mean a tighter budget for the studios. That could go two ways -- either the trend for huge expensive $100 million+ movies will slope off, or the studios will focus on them and make fewer other movies. It would all come down to whichever makes more money for them, and unfortunately, I think it's the smaller films that would take the hit there.

    But those films would also have a backup plan -- the home theatres themselves. Home theatree will presumably be much cheaper than the Cineplex, once you've paid for all the equipment of course, and I'd like to think that people will have access to much greater variety of films. This could be a boon for the arthouse type stuff.

    I think that would be my guess then. (I'm thinking aloud if that isn't obvious :). If the possibilities for watchign first-run high quality cinema at home come into fruition, then this change will mainly hurt smaller arthouse type movies (since most people aren't too worried about seeing them on the big screen anyway), but big budget blockbusters will be at least partly immune to any slump in the industry. Thus theatres will show more junk like Armageddon, Battlefield Earth, and Matrix ;), while the little indie ones will be pushed home.

    All reckless speculation, of course, and only time will show which way things go...



  • I remember when Jurassic Park came out and my family wanted me to go see it with them. I had been suffering a head-cold (or something) for several weeks. More than a month, at least. My ears were all stuffy and clogged and everything sounded so far away. It sucked. Other than that, I felt just fine.

    Went to see Jurassic Park and as soon as the first footsteps of the giant T-Rex boomed over the THX system, my ears suddenly 'popped' and the world was completely audible again. I could hear everything! Whoo! After over a month of this, it just took one movie to fix me up. Sweeeet.

    The other thing I remember about the flick was that these kids behind us (little kids, I don't know what the hell they were doing at a movie like this) screamed several times when the dinosaurs would come out of nowhere and attack or chase. It was great. These were full-throated, scared-to-death screams of terror! It really warmed my heart.
    ---
    seumas.com

  • Instead of expecting full length features, another much more viable possibility are film "shorts".

    Usually within 10 minutes or so, this film format is great for the web- obviously.

    There are a few sites that have come a long way to maturing the short format.

    http://www.ifilm.com
    http://www.pop.com
    http://www.z.com

    Support the starving filmakers!!!!!

    -Sleen

  • It will replace going to Blockbuster, though. (Score:3)

    by IvyMike ( 178408 ) on Saturday July 01, 2000 @09:21AM (#963897)

    As numerous people have already pointed out, the experience of watching a movie on even a 24" wide-screen monitor is still a poor substitute for even the worst movie screen. People do go to see movies on the big screen that are available on video (did you see the re-release of Star Wars?), because the theater experience is something far beyond the home experience.

    On the other hand, I do think that within the very near future, somebody's going to figure out how to kill the trip to the local video store. TiVo and ReplayTV are the first baby step towards this, demonstrating a digital recording and playback system.

    The only thing that will stand in the way of this will be the movie industry itself. But I think that despite their best efforts, a sytem will come out that lets me download movies, and the movie industry will be better off in the end.

  • I don't believe that they ar emaking the "Choose Your Own Adventure" books anymore. I must say, that series of books had more to do with my literacy as a kid than anything else. Much like a game, you had to try to solve the mystery or make the right command decision in order to succeed (or sometime, just get caught in bad luck). However, I would read over an over again, trying ever different path I could to find as many different endings as possible.

    Offtopic, yes, but I felt like talking about 'em.... They are as big a part of my childhood as Legos :)

    Maybe all kids need today to keep them off the streets are a couple of those books ;)

Slashdot Top Deals

"Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling in love." -- Albert Einstein

Close