Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Cost of Good Movies

soaringtwenties.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 63 posts

Re: The Cost of Good Movies

#11

Post by harshreality »

SenAnder wrote: post #7
hyperion2010 wrote: post #4

> This is why I introduced the concept at the beginning of royalties for AI work. Ultimately AI is not an alien brain generating texts or images from its own imagination. Neural networks and large language learning models input real people’s intellectual property and output that intellectual property when prompted by someone using the program. The novelness of the output is merely how the IP is reformatted to fit the…

To expound on your point, corporations will be able to use AI - giant conglomerates such as Disney, that own enough media to train AI models on only works they own copyright on (and own enough senators to make sure those copyrights last), will happily use AI. But you, peasant, can only train it on century+ old works. Because "to promote the progress of science and useful arts", nothing post-WWII may become public dom…

For a longer form version of this argument, Cybergem's "AI vs Blood Mouse": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pIVVpoz5zk

Re: The Cost of Good Movies

#12

Post by harshreality »

bee_rider wrote: post #6

It is going to be weird in the future, when people realize how much use these companies get out of things like the $200 scan and perpetual license to somebody’s likeness, and as a result stop using them. All art will be presumably based on remixing a set of scans from between like 2020 and 2025.

Will that be significant 15 years from now? I imagine most work by then using 3d models that aren't based on any particular person, to avoid license fees. I can't imagine this strike ending with one-time payments for perpetual license to use actors' likenesses. However, even royalties based on screen time of AI-generated derivatives of their likenesses won't save their jobs in the longer term.

Re: The Cost of Good Movies

#13

Post by jack_pp »

lapcat wrote: post #8
hyperion2010 wrote: post #4

> This is why I introduced the concept at the beginning of royalties for AI work. Ultimately AI is not an alien brain generating texts or images from its own imagination. Neural networks and large language learning models input real people’s intellectual property and output that intellectual property when prompted by someone using the program. The novelness of the output is merely how the IP is reformatted to fit the…

> The crux of the argument is this paragraph. But swap out AI in that paragraph for "writers who have read the classical western canon" and suddenly you realize that no one has original ideas, and that the idea that somehow humans are uniquely capable of being the primary causes of their own thoughts and owe transitive credit (and royalties!) to the great authors of all time, or their estates, is madness. I disagree.…

Yeah, I've listened to tens of thousands of hours of music, especially Hip-Hop. Couldn't rhyme to save my life

Re: The Cost of Good Movies

#14

Post by saucymew »

After finishing reading the article, it didn't mention one anecdotal cultural trend a friend who's teaching film class at his local community college noticed.

Every semester at the beginning of class, he'd quiz his students what they've watched. In the past few years, nearly everyone has limited knowledge of current films, let alone old films. He realized young people do not have the attention/habit of watching long-form films.

Social media/TikTok videos own the top of the attention economy ladder now, not movies. This trend is not reversing anytime soon.

Re: The Cost of Good Movies

#15

Post by throwawee »

saucymew wrote: post #14

After finishing reading the article, it didn't mention one anecdotal cultural trend a friend who's teaching film class at his local community college noticed. Every semester at the beginning of class, he'd quiz his students what they've watched. In the past few years, nearly everyone has limited knowledge of current films, let alone old films. He realized young people do not have the attention/habit of watching long-…

It's kind of inevitable. I grew up hearing movies decried as brain-rotting, imagination-killing junk food preventing everyone from reading a good book like nature intended. Of course the medium would be dethroned by something even more accessible.

When there's something even more convenient people will latch on to that instead. Expect nostalgia for the good ol' days when social media used to instill community values and awareness into the youth.

Re: The Cost of Good Movies

#16

Post by zamadatix »

saucymew wrote: post #14

After finishing reading the article, it didn't mention one anecdotal cultural trend a friend who's teaching film class at his local community college noticed. Every semester at the beginning of class, he'd quiz his students what they've watched. In the past few years, nearly everyone has limited knowledge of current films, let alone old films. He realized young people do not have the attention/habit of watching long-…

I wonder if the shift has more to do with movie theater attendance absolutely tanking for COVID-19. Even in 2023 ticket sales have been significantly less than the relatively constant rate for the few decades prior. The advertised/direct fill in was of course streaming services but these lean away from the typical blockbuster film content or even full length films at all. I'm not ruling out new social media content trends as a factor in the trend change completely, or as an alternative fill in, but short form social media content doesn't really explain why the "why" for a recent shift. After all, it's not like TikTok invented quick social media content it's just a popular modern choice.

Re: The Cost of Good Movies

#17

Post by expensive_news »

saucymew wrote: post #14

After finishing reading the article, it didn't mention one anecdotal cultural trend a friend who's teaching film class at his local community college noticed. Every semester at the beginning of class, he'd quiz his students what they've watched. In the past few years, nearly everyone has limited knowledge of current films, let alone old films. He realized young people do not have the attention/habit of watching long-…

In my final semester I wrote/directed a short film with friends that I met in the university’s filmmaking club. Most of them were Freshman or Sophomore.

I was looking forward to discussing some deeper and more obscure films with them, and they did have more knowledge of, for example, Lynch’s work than most people I talk to. However, they overwhelmingly talked about the new Star Wars saga and Marvel movies.

Re: The Cost of Good Movies

#18

Post by g42gregory »

As a general rule (there are notable exceptions), I don't watch any movies made past 2019/20. Most of them seem to have some sort of a messaging embedded inside. Regardless of the nature of the messaging, I figure that they should pay me for watching it, not the other way around. I hope this would change soon. John Wick was awesome though...

Re: The Cost of Good Movies

#19

Post by AlbertCory »

It's Shameless Self-Promotion Time again!

https://albertcory50.substack.com/p/culture-at-google-part-o...

I started the Cinema Club at Google, which is still going on, AFAIK. You can download the list of the 300 or so movies which I put on.

I really don't care about MCU, Harry Potter, Hollywood studios, AI, or Rotten Tomatoes. It's pointless to rage about it. Just offer an alternative. I'd rather show a great movie that no one comes to than a garbage one that attracts big crowds. Once in a while we had a film that was both: Chinatown, Rashomon.

Our reaction to anyone was, "You can start your own movie club. We'll help you; here are all the secrets." The big secret was just to ask the boss for the money; 10 in a row said Yes.

The most common thing people said to me was, "You guys show some great movies. But I have to leave to catch the shuttle!"

Re: The Cost of Good Movies

#20

Post by crazygringo »

saucymew wrote: post #14

After finishing reading the article, it didn't mention one anecdotal cultural trend a friend who's teaching film class at his local community college noticed. Every semester at the beginning of class, he'd quiz his students what they've watched. In the past few years, nearly everyone has limited knowledge of current films, let alone old films. He realized young people do not have the attention/habit of watching long-…

Here's an alternate interpretation: they're watching television now rather than movies. Because the kind of character development and depth of storytelling that can happen in 20 or 50 or 80 hours goes far beyond what you can do in 2 or 3.

And the idea that young people can't watch long things due to a lack of attention goes directly against the evidence of the increasing habit of binge watching.

Forget about watching a mere movie for just 2 hours at a time. Try 4 or 5 hours instead, where you can cover almost half a season of a drama. You immerse yourself in the world for an entire evening, the way people used to do with novels.

Post reply on HN