Comments on: Hollywood hates pirates, but can it use them?
Michael Moore movie "Sicko" enjoys successful debut, despite being illegally downloaded by thousands.
Michael Moore movie "Sicko" enjoys successful debut, despite being illegally downloaded by thousands.
January 4, 2010 8:25 AM PST
January 4, 2010 8:00 AM PST
January 4, 2010 7:26 AM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
A bit of a double standard, no?
If you prefer, we can go back to the 3min song and note that there are 30 3min "segments" in a 90min movies, which, at 99cents/3min, for which you should be paying $29.70 in order to satisfy your own criterion. So, the next time someone wants to charge you $15.99 for a DVD, demand to pay $29.70 to demonstrate your own lack of greed.
surprised if he had the movie "leaked" just as those in
government "leak" stories for headlines. He drums up publicity
and does not have to pay for it.
The only "Sicko" in this movie are Moore and the idiots stupid
enough to pay the money to go see it. The undereducated too
dumb to understand his propaganda and the overeducated
without the common sense to know better.
Also see a post for Sicko done some days back:
http://www.divinitymetrics.com/blog/?p=24
Cheers..
Thomas.
The trade offs for universal care is vastly increased taxation, long waiting lines for absolutely necessary care, and fewer options to who, where, and what kind of care you get. Certainly people in Sweden, the UK, and Canada all agree that people in the U.S. can get needed care far faster than they can in their countries. Funny, how nobody holds up the massively disparate mortality rates for people waiting for care and procedures in those countries compared to the U.S.
Mr. Moore is really good at putting on a show tarring and feathering the objects of his ire. But as far as workable solutions to problems, he's a pathetic loser.
His movies are just junk PROPAGANDA and not worth the money spent on them.
Is this acceptable in the richest country in the world?
How is it OK to give out corporate welfare at taxpayer expense and use taxpayer money to wage BS wars, yet it is not okay to use it to help its own people?
Canadian and UK health care, but the FACT of the matter is they
are happy and do not envy the US. I should know. I lived in
Canada for almost five years. I'd take their system over ours in a
New York minute.
What about the recent study into private-managed Medicare in
the US? For those states that have it privately managed, the
patients pay way more out of pocket and it costs the states 12
percent more than if it had been government-managed.
As one doctor in California said in a piece yesterday, "I came
from Belgium. Here you have a provider for medical, another for
dental and another for your eye doctor. So there are three
different bureaucracies you have to deal with instead of one!"
Yeah, we have it great in the US. That's why so many people
aren't covered at all, and those covered by HMOs are routinely
denied coverage. Even if the long lines in Canada were true
(which they are most certainly not) that beats the tar out of not
being allowed to stand in line at all!
Drop the blinders and look at the facts. Singer payer is more
efficient any way you slice it. Health care needs to be:
1: Non profit
2: Single-payer
3: If privately managed, then there must be ceilings on profits
and limits on denial of coverage.
I am among the countless number of people in this great nation with absolutely no health insurance and whose wages are too high to qualify for government assistance of any sort.
Increased taxation? Yes, there would be. But then again, that would be offset by the lack of health insurance premiums (which can easily be several hundred dollars a month).
Long lines? I PRAY for long lines. As it is, I can't even GET in line.
Fewer options? Get real - how can you possibly have fewer than none?
One of the many reasons they have no credibility.
So lets do what we did with code, with music, and movies, and books. I'm contacting the participatory culture foundation now.
Movies and music are too generic and too manufactured, they are designed to make the most possible money by attracting the widest possible audience (for example, the big studios are making fewer R rated, and more PG-13, horror movies) and consumers feel cheated by these expensive shallow and samey productions so they have no qualms about ripping them off.
documentary" and Fahrenheit 911 was good production. I have
not seen Sicko, let my son handle that one.
The problem is that Moore is pushing a political viewpoint as a
documentary with many key points missing in the truth. If you
want to watch his stuff as entertainment fine but I hope you are
smarter than believing the content in his work is accurate.
Sorta like reading Ann Coulter and believing she is reporting
solid work. Both are sensationalists that laugh all the way to
the bank.
political viewpoint of Colombine? He did not advocate gun control,
just asked why this happens in the U.S. To compare Moore to
Coulter is so ludicrous you lose all credibility for all your remarks. I
doubt you have seen any of his movies and base all your views of
Moore on what you hear on faux news.
If the whole thing is going to be one huge computer-generated special effect, then I may as well take the time out to download it and watch it on a computer, if I could be bothered.
I went to "Spiderman 3" at the cinema, and it was nothing but a giant special effect. That's not going to open my wallet.
However, if your final product shows a profit, how do you calculate a non-existent "loss" from people who would never have paid to see the movie in the first place (people like me, who aren't going to open their wallets at the cinema or to an ISP)?
Start producing some quality again, and we may return to watching the big screen.
I think the movie theater chains are why there is piracy of films. the game is up, and people like my self will not goto a theatre anymkore. The studios have to get those movies on to video sooner then they do. other wise this game of downloading films will get easyer and easyer to do and thats that.
Chances are, if I'm gonna (hypothetically) download something, its because I have no intentions of buying anyhow. I'd be more likely to borrow it from a friend instead.
i never said that. we weren't here. 9/11 was a fake event cooked up my Michael Moore and George H.W Bush.
watch downloaded content if its good i make sure i go watch it at the movies and i usually buy it on dvd too
if its bad i save money and don't get pissed about the crap they release to the movies and stop going for 6 months
movies i will see transformers oceans 13 harry potter
movie i last saw The Queen see the time difference
can't list the stuff i bought after watching downloaded content too many also same for tv series and then i still watch them
- Dollars and Disgust
- by Wiz Wildstar July 6, 2007 6:32 AM PDT
- Let's face it, the offerings from Hollywood ARE getting worse, and the point of a movie is (or at least was) something that you could watch and let it take you to a different time or place. In the past few decades, movies have turned into marketing for personal or political agendas, or just plain cash harvesting. I can remember when you used to watch a movie trailer and it made you want to go and see it. Now if you've seen a trailer, that's it! You have just seen the best part of the whole movie.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(38 Comments)Combine that with the fact that the theaters have become quite unpleasant, both physically and morally, and the exorbitant cost. To take a family of four at $8.50 a head, plus $5.00 sodas, $5.00 popcorns +tax, you're talking over $75.00! Our family (of 5) is over a hundred bucks a pop! I cannot recall any movie I've seen that was worth a hundred bucks to own, much less just to watch one time. So, $1500 bucks later (or 15 movies later) I have a 120" projection home theater w/all the bells and whistles, 200 watt 8.1 surround, HDTV etc.. No puny 60" plasma for $8000 or rear projection refrigerator crate taking up space. Electric screen drops from the ceiling and when you're done, it's up and out of the way and I get to reclaim all that living space.
With all the extra HDTV over-the-air channels and a basic $33/mo. satellite setup, you can totally immerse yourself in whatever you like, and if that isn't enough, there's always the thousands of DVD's at the rental store.
Fooey on the whole movie theater crap thing. I know for a fact that this scenario is playing out in more homes everyday. I live in a very modest neighborhood in a small town where the average income is under $30,000/year, and I personally know of at least 53 of these home theater systems, either projection or wide screen based, that have been installed. As soon as someone watches one of them, it isn't long before they are getting one of their own. The real price is less than the big electronic retailers want you to believe, since they make their biggest profit from overpriced, over-the-top, unrealistic systems . They've even had to close some of their outlets since Wal-Mart entered the big-screen market and cut their price gouging throats.
Piracy? Not in my opinion. It is, however, a great source for movie reviews. You don't have to download or watch a pirated move to quickly find out which ones are great and which are crap. Just look at the ones that are listed when you Google 'em. Any new release is all over the place, but within a few days, they're gone if they're crap, but the good ones are listed for months. Check back with Google in a month and see which one is still on top, Pirates of the Caribbean or Sicko. The "professional" reviewers place too much emphasis on "how" and "by whom" the movie was made, as opposed to how "good" it was. Let the pirates filter out the crap, and then you can discover what the general population REALLY thinks of a movie. Most of the time the great ones are not the reviewers choice.