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

What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

aaronklein.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

#81

Post by [deleted] »

wazoox wrote: post #76
rockarage wrote: post #16

This is just sad, I get the impression from the comments and up votes that tech does not get Hollywood. Hollywood business only work because only Hollywood is willing to give Christopher Nolan 200+ million dollars to make Dark Knight, ditto with James Cameron's Avatar. When Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook or Yahoo decides to give a Christopher Nolan or James Cameron $200million+ to make a movie, things will be dif…

Christopher Nolan doesn't deserve, or need 200 millions. The fact that Hollywood celebrities receive so much money is a symptom that something isn't right.

[deleted]

Re: What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

#82

Post by hieronymusN »

nextparadigms wrote: post #66
rockarage wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and Microsoft is spending billions on Bing, if Google pulled a so called Hollywood move, by making Google search a pain to use, people will start using Bing more. We don't have that with big budget films. DRM died in the music industry, in part, because a number of popular artist, like Trent of NIN were not afraid to go direct to fans without DRM.

Oh come on. Bing is not a serious alternative to Google. Nobody likes sloppy seconds. If anything people would start switching to duckduckgo or something, which does things much more differently.

And where does DuckDuckGo get their results from? Bing.

http://help.duckduckgo.com/customer/portal/articles/216399-s...

Re: What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

#83

Post by paganel »

rockarage wrote: post #16

This is just sad, I get the impression from the comments and up votes that tech does not get Hollywood. Hollywood business only work because only Hollywood is willing to give Christopher Nolan 200+ million dollars to make Dark Knight, ditto with James Cameron's Avatar. When Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook or Yahoo decides to give a Christopher Nolan or James Cameron $200million+ to make a movie, things will be dif…

We did very fine, thank you, before Nolan's "Dark Knight" or Cameron's "Avatar" hit the screens, and I'm saying this as a movie freak. In fact, I'd say that the only difference between Melies' movies (which he did as an independent producer back in the day) and "Avatar" is only a technological one, not an artistic one.

Re: What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

#84

Post by fdkz »

o1iver wrote: post #78
wazoox wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Christopher Nolan doesn't deserve, or need 200 millions. The fact that Hollywood celebrities receive so much money is a symptom that something isn't right.

I never get arguments like this. In a perfect market every entity tries to get as much money as the market is willing to pay. There are some pretty extreme example such as this one, but in the whole that is a good thing!

But what is a perfect market? What if misleading the consumers brings in the most money? If it was possible to somehow find out and compare the environmental impact of manufacturing things we can buy, I'm sure our decisions of what to buy would be very different. Similarly, if the movie posters had the actor/millions printed on them, then the "market" would be better informed to say enough is enough. Maybe.

Re: What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

#85

Post by Keyframe »

rockarage wrote: post #25
InclinedPlane wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they would. Hollywood budgets are partly due to Hollywood accounting. If movies were set up along startup lines (where only some folks get a guaranteed salary and the vast majority of earnings by everyone comes in the form of profit sharing) then I think you'd still see very big, expensive to make movies.

Hollywood losses are partly due to Hollywood accounting. The budgets for production are real cost. In these high budget movies, there are major expenses apart from just salary. In the Dark knight, the batmobile and other machines are real vehicles, the sets are made with real materials, live effects are not cheap, permits are not free, not everything is done on a computer. This only scratch the surface of the expense…

Only a small example regarding Nolan/Batman. Bank robbery scene had more than 700kW lights running... that's almost a megawatt in electricity generators ON LOCATION (natural location, not set within a studio). Cost of running those lights and electricity alone for a few days of shooting (sans people and everything else) equals to the amount of an indie movie.

Re: What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

#86

Post by cynicalkane »

drumdance wrote: post #51
rockarage wrote: post #16

This is just sad, I get the impression from the comments and up votes that tech does not get Hollywood. Hollywood business only work because only Hollywood is willing to give Christopher Nolan 200+ million dollars to make Dark Knight, ditto with James Cameron's Avatar. When Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook or Yahoo decides to give a Christopher Nolan or James Cameron $200million+ to make a movie, things will be dif…

Blockbusters are not the only movies that get made. Let Hollywood keep Batman. In the meantime, it's not hard to imagine a new way of making and distributing Mad Men and Portlandia.

Mad Men is a big-budget TV show. Its per episode budget is north of $2 million.

Re: What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

#87

Post by technoslut »

nextparadigms wrote: post #65
rockarage wrote: post #16

This is just sad, I get the impression from the comments and up votes that tech does not get Hollywood. Hollywood business only work because only Hollywood is willing to give Christopher Nolan 200+ million dollars to make Dark Knight, ditto with James Cameron's Avatar. When Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook or Yahoo decides to give a Christopher Nolan or James Cameron $200million+ to make a movie, things will be dif…

Silicon Valley doesn't have to take on Hollywood head-on. That's almost always the wrong strategy to try to beat an incumbent. The way you beat an incumbent leader is by changing the rules of the games so it's very hard for that company to play that new game, whether it's because they lack the competency or because the have internal conflicts of interest for doing that (think of the TV networks not really wanting to…

I agree with you but doing so means that you have to acquire the talent to build the new business model. No major tech company seems to want to take that risk.

Re: What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

#88

Post by sesqu »

peterhunt wrote: post #55
alxp wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They just try to pass laws to make interoperability (format shifting) a criminal offence.

You're setting up a false argument here -- they don't do anything to restrict indie filmmakers from distributing their content.

Actually, a number of people have complained that they do. Very few indie movies are in the same theaters as Hollywood movies, though whether that's effected by the latter depends on who you ask.

Re: What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

#89

Post by technoslut »

rockarage wrote: post #16

This is just sad, I get the impression from the comments and up votes that tech does not get Hollywood. Hollywood business only work because only Hollywood is willing to give Christopher Nolan 200+ million dollars to make Dark Knight, ditto with James Cameron's Avatar. When Google, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook or Yahoo decides to give a Christopher Nolan or James Cameron $200million+ to make a movie, things will be dif…

>This is just sad, I get the impression from the comments and up votes that tech does not get Hollywood. Hollywood business only work because only Hollywood is willing to give Christopher Nolan 200+ million dollars to make Dark Knight, ditto with James Cameron's Avatar.

Your comment is somewhat ridiculous because these examples are not risks. Christopher Nolan was well known before Batman Begins in writing Memento. James Cameron wrote the script for the original Terminator and directed Aliens, T2 and the highest grossing film of all time in Titanic. Anyone would've bet on these two individuals.

Re: What if Hollywood had to use tech like we have to watch movies?

#90

Post by notatoad »

cookiecaper wrote: post #39
mishmash wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone have any ideas on how to get the IP blocks of MPAA member companies? It's been tried before. Maintaining the list is very difficult for the exact same reasons that would have made PIPA/SOPA technically inept. e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PeerGuardian

Such lists continue in wide use. Of course they are not foolproof, but it does help.

peerguardian and it's ilk don't help at all. they make uninformed people feel safer.
Post reply on HN