Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood. • Hacker News Board

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#241

Post by JamesLeonis » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:49 AM UTC

DocSavage wrote: post #157

"Some of the best ideas may initially look like they're serving the movie and TV industries." Somehow, I think it'll be difficult for your startups to partner with or serve movie and TV industries if they've been funded under a "Kill Hollywood" RFS :-) Although leadership in Hollywood may be cruel and tech-stupid from our standpoint, they have a tremendous amount of talent at their disposal. Seems like a production s…

If we take a cue from Apple with iTunes, you could set up a service that does cater to the industry while stealthily eating up market share. Once you become too profitable and control too much of the market, you turn that on Hollywood and start dictating your own terms. The music industry was entirely unprepared when Jobs started twisting its arms to get the terms his way.

I agree though that eventually Hollywood will need to be replaced if the situation is to improve substantially.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#242

Post by rjurney » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:51 AM UTC

One area I would encourage startups to get involved with is hollywood analytics: predicting the revenue of films based on their properties. Ryan Cavanaugh has revolutionized film funding, and there is a real opportunity for analytics startups to compete in this area.

http://www.esquire.com/features/best-and-brightest-2009/ryan...

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#243

Post by eru » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:51 AM UTC

pearle wrote: post #236

eru wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are probably looking at the wrong games. Most people who aren't already into games, won't buy the 60 USD games. Casual games will catch them. Think Solitaire or Tetris, which lots of people have sunk more than 100 hours over the years into. Or even evil Farmville.

No, I was responding to the comment that $50 games provide 100+ hours of entertainment. I was just claiming that this is not necessarily true.

Oh, OK. Indeed some games play much faster than that.

To become very specific: Portal is a fine game. And much shorter.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#244

Post by eru » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:52 AM UTC

marshray wrote: post #206

eru wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are probably looking at the wrong games. Most people who aren't already into games, won't buy the 60 USD games. Casual games will catch them. Think Solitaire or Tetris, which lots of people have sunk more than 100 hours over the years into. Or even evil Farmville.

I think in a sense you've identified the issue too. For every dedicated player who will pay $60 and be disappointed when he beats the game in 50 hours, there are 99 or 999 who want a game that they don't have to invest as much in. Players like me want to play on our own terms and come and go as they please. I used to play a lot of WoW but shutting down all my VMs and rebooting out of Linux to do so is now a big disin…

I guess Nintendo serves these demographics pretty well. (Not that there's no space for a competitor.)

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#245

Post by StavrosK » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:52 AM UTC

sambeau wrote: post #214

Here's my suggestion: Trailer Pitch This is a simple design for a site and business where filmakers can crowdsource investment. It uses a simple mechanism to sell tickets and shares in advance based on the popularity of premade movie trailers. It uses a mechanism based on ideas tried by Pinboard, Kickstarter, YouTube, Vimeo, Betfair and Louis CK. One: filmakers make compelling trailers for films they would like to be…

Who's going to return the money if it runs out before finishing the work?

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#246

Post by hythloday » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:54 AM UTC

wtvanhest wrote: post #198

eru wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look back a hundred years (or so). Even if you shot the people who invented colour film or sound in films, somebody else would have developed those.

I cannot think of a good counter argument to that. This could be a totally different way of thinking about investing than the way I previously thought. Assuming the investor can figure out what the next big thing is, their only goal is to find the team with the highest likelihood of success.

The idea is often called "Steam-engine time", e.g. http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/6089/the-art-of-fic...

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#247

Post by EwanG » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:55 AM UTC

My idea is to build a strong AI system. Point it at your TV and Movie directory/directories. Let it scan through to evaluate what you watch. Then let it start "pitching" ideas for your evaluation. You now have the basis for a personal Pandora of AI created shows (primarily animated initially, although with CGI advancements you could "rig" humanoid video actors to almost a live effect). You can even share your results with others, and perhaps particularly popular ones could be "picked up" by a YouTube or Netflix for wide distribution (though do you pay me or my AI for it).

I fully expect that by the 20 year goal that you will see this happening. I suspect someone willing to work with an engine such as Blender and build XML files to control it externally could have a rudimentary version in 2-3 years. I will be happy to discuss further if someone is seriously interested.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#248

Post by alexsb92 » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:56 AM UTC

jim-greer wrote: post #209

potatolicious wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think video games are a full substitute for TV or movies. They are completely different experiences - one is purely passive, and the other is active and participatory. There are lots of game fans that would claim that this distinction is what makes games superior , but for a lot of people I think that's what turns them off . The passivity is a virtue in many places.

I'm really not optimistic on getting people to stop watching TV or movies. Maybe there's some way of producing and financing them that's smarter but I wouldn't bet on changing behavior that drastically. People have been consuming stories about other people forever, and they're going to keep doing that.

But you don't really have to stop watching TV or movies. You just have to move the production of such content away from the big media corps.

It reminds me of one of freddiew's Behind the Scenes video, in which him and Jon Favreau were talking how it's so nice when someone provides the toys/funds, but at the end of the day it's the actual artists who call the shot. Why not apply the same kind of contracts movie studios make with directors and actors (base amount, and maybe some % of revenue), in reverse, so the artistic driving force between the project negotiates the same amount of deals with the financier. It would be like a VC deal, where some people/companies would have preferential treatment at getting the money back and all that.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#249

Post by Macsenour » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 1:58 AM UTC

alanfalcon wrote: post #216

potatolicious wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think video games are a full substitute for TV or movies. They are completely different experiences - one is purely passive, and the other is active and participatory. There are lots of game fans that would claim that this distinction is what makes games superior , but for a lot of people I think that's what turns them off . The passivity is a virtue in many places.

It also gets boring to watch my wife play her 20th hour of Assasin's Creed Revelations. Video games aren't good entertainment for those not holding the controller.

As a 30 year game industry vet I have to say I agree with you... but... maybe games that depend less on the controller will capture BOTH of your attentions.

I'll give you an example. At a board game company, I do those too, I proposed a card game where playing the cards moved the story along, and each section of the story formed pages in a comic book format. At the end of the game you could take pictures o the "pages" and put them for others to enjoy. Then mix the cards up gain, and since the play order would be different, a slightly different story resulted. I say slightly because if it was a murder mystery a replay wouldn't make it a story about horses.

I think that games are ready for the next evolution and that will continue the killing of movies and TV.

Re: Request for Startups: Kill Hollywood.

#250

Post by EwanG » Sat, Jan 21, 2012, 2:00 AM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #245

sambeau wrote: post #214

Here's my suggestion: Trailer Pitch This is a simple design for a site and business where filmakers can crowdsource investment. It uses a simple mechanism to sell tickets and shares in advance based on the popularity of premade movie trailers. It uses a mechanism based on ideas tried by Pinboard, Kickstarter, YouTube, Vimeo, Betfair and Louis CK. One: filmakers make compelling trailers for films they would like to be…

Who's going to return the money if it runs out before finishing the work?

Could setup insurance for such things. If there are enough of these being made, then the percentage that get far enough to be funded but not far enough to finish becomes something an actuary can calculate, and risk can be assigned as well as the cost everyone has to "pay to play". Whether that can be done for a sufficiently small number is a matter of how fast you grow this market, and what things you can put in place to minimize the risk.