People like to quibble about the harm done to the motion picture industry by online piracy. They split hairs over things like whether or not each pirated view represents a lost sale or chime in with arguments that piracy is a form of promotion or a natural market reaction to outdated practices. If a lot of the arguments for piracy sound like rationalizations, it’s because they are. And when you hear rationalizations you’re hearing the voices of people who know that what they’re doing is wrong. But even if we were to take any of the pro-piracy rationalizations as serious analysis, they fall completely apart the moment we’re talking about one of the more obnoxious practices in the whole paradigm — pre-release piracy.
It’s happened a lot, but most recently, The Expendables 3 was leaked online three weeks before it was scheduled for theatrical release. There’s no other way to put it: pre-release piracy is a dick move. It says to everyone who worked on the film, most of them regular folks with regular jobs, that you’re actually eager to see the film but that your own narcissistic desire to be ahead of some imaginary curve is more important than all the investment of money and labor that made the film in the first place. More than any other form of piracy, pre-release piracy is a huge middle-finger to the grips, electrics, camera department, wardrobe, props, etc. that their jobs mean nothing compared to your need to see a mediocre-quality version of the film on a small screen before anyone else sees it in the theater where it was designed to be released. Okay that’s my opinion, but what about the impact?
A new study by researchers at The Technology Policy Institute at Carnegie Mellon University is the first to examine the effect of pre-release piracy on revenue. Their conclusions state that, on average, predicted box-office revenues can be reduced by 19% by pre-release piracy compared to post-release piracy. Theatrical release is the one window when there are no other legal means of viewing a film, and market changes caused by digital technology advances have closed that window considerably. DVDs go on sale much sooner than they used to after a theatrical release, and some films are released in theaters and through VOD channels simultaneously. Audiences for big, action films like the Expendables franchise tend to want to see these movies with friends, in theaters, and on big screens. Profitable opening weekends are a critical slice in the pie-chart of returns investors are seeking when they fund these rather expensive films.
People reading this will, no doubt, have various reactions, including at least a few sentiments directed against big, Hollywood action movies; but that is a flawed lens through which to view the problem. The Expendables 3 isn’t necessarily my kind of fare per se, but that is entirely beside the point. What matters in the macro view is whether or not the effect of piracy poisons the ground where legitimate business should otherwise thrive. When that happens, it’s detrimental to the entire, economic ecosystem in the industry. Anyone who thinks they can cherry-pick-pirate what they consider the “corporate” fare out of existence and protect whatever their idea of a “better” film might be, is sorely mistaken.
In the big-movie market, if investors are scared off major motion picture investment because pre-release piracy threatens the most critical phase of first sales, that means fewer films get made overall and that the only big films that do get made employ financial models to offset expected losses. In other words, if it can’t be in a Happy Meal, it won’t be on the screen. But the smaller movie market has similar challenges with regard to windows of opportunity to recoup investments, and that translates into the probability of making the next film. If those windows are artificially closed by piracy that preempts the real market from voting with its pocketbook, this will not result in a healthier industry by whatever measure, economic or cultural, you prefer to use.
I won’t argue the piracy issue…it’s a moral question that people really have to decide for themselves, IMHO.
But let’s talk about the film making process, whereby it is ALSO my opinion that Hollywood (particularly big budget studio fare) shoots itself in the foot…
If they were really worried about security, there would be many ways to insure that the film in question could not be leaked. The number of people who have access to the original print (now it’s on a hard drive) could be sharply curtailed if they so chose.
First off, there are the editors…usually there are many on a movie like this…and there are many because so many people have input. At every level of the studio, which these days usually means only the distribution company, there are people who can demand that the film be “tweaked”. Sometimes, this works to the film’s advantage…many times it just doesn’t matter, as a film is either good or bad…But people have to justify their jobs and inputting one’s own personal artistic preferences into the project may be a way of doing that. So re-edits (with different editors, editing houses, etc.) become part of the process.
From what I understand, most movies are pirated during this phase.
But then there is the mind-boggling complexity of the decision of the “Release Date”…One would think that a movie is either good or bad, we all know that the best marketing tool is word of mouth…so people tell their friends, who tell their friends,,,and the movie builds an audience…
But we have become so used to hearing what the weekend box office is (since when does this qualify as “news” anyway?) that a movie must “Open” in order to be successful. Hence the hair-tearing anxiety involved in picking the correct weekend to put it into theaters. One can see the evidence of this past weekend, when “Lucy” opened big in spite of almost universal bad reviews, and “Hercules” did modestly even though the critics liked it much better. Is Scarlett a bigger star than Dwayne? Is that why? Your guess is as good as mine.
But to the original point…”Expendables” was finished long ago. The ad campaigns started long ago. The road from finished film to release was quite long…and in the interim, the film has passed through many hands, including trailer houses, ad houses, different composers (if they adjusted the score)…and the longer it takes, the more likely it is that the film gets picked off…And in the case of this movie, there is already a built-in audience and a huge want-to-see (I suspect) already out there. This makes it more likely that a movie will get pirated, and I’m not sure it’s even about the money.
I don’t want to tell anyone how to run their business, but fighting human nature is typically not a good idea.
huh?
what?
exactly!
🙂
“fighting human nature.”
lol
As if being a dick is ingrained human behavior.
What a silly point of view, Overviper.
Have you ever seen a child, of any age, maybe smack a toy out of the hand of their little brother or sister or just another kid, just so they can play with it, or how about someone’s who takes time to make obnoxious pointless remarks or insults and degrate someone but no time to justify their thinking or to educate the other of their reasoning. But, this topic, piracy, is about human nature. 500 years ago it may have seemed benificial to a pirate to steal from those who’s interest seemed to controll and dominate the general public. 2000 years ago it would of been human nature, for the average man or woman to track and slay an animal for food, and use its skin and bones for clothing and tools. today the average animal is bred, fed, kept, and, well you know. The average person could not track an elephant let alone skin a deer, and many choose only to eat as vegitarians or veegans.
It is human nature to seek a beter bargin, and not always realizing the future ramifications (like shopping at Wal-mart, or having a HMO health plan). It is human nature to wana take back when there is a sence of opportunity, especially since there’s a common sence of betrayal from the corporations who invest into these projects and exploit the creators and hands involved, then turn to the public with open hands, short arms and deep pockets.
To the general public they are the rich the haves and we are the have nots. It is true an artist or one with a vision who has not the means to produce a visual or musical repesantation of the their vision is likely to seek financial support usually coming from large billion dollar corporate empires or even smaller young production company’s. when these investors find it difficult to make adequate returns on their investment, would is be corporate business nature to exploit alternate means of revenue, and if that dosent work would it not be human nature to stop investing, like closing a wound to stop the bleeding or is that all just common sence. Is it natural for corporations to resort to piracy like that of you-tube and google and their efforts to reduce copyright laws and their data collection methods.
Human nature is relevant to the context of the individual experience and perceptions and those of their ancestors before them. Genaraly, I beleive we are an acumilation of our historical background and we all have the ability to choose to change if we see a need. Is it human nature to love? but so many hate. Is it human nature to choose war? Is it human nature to be ignorant or misled? is it human nature to seek food when your hungry? and, would you steal that food if you had no money to pay for it?
In today society, I think there are many who are dependent on forms of entertainment for there daily happiness or pleasure like one needs food, as if it were in there nature to watch tv.
I myself do not like watching low quality bootleg versions of a movie or musical cd. I would rather support the productions I appreciate so they and others like them can continue to do what they do. I also recently chose to stop buying on demand or other types of downloads, I do occasionally still rent on demand for movies that I’m curious to see and Im not sure if I will enjoy or not. I would rather take a more direct path when I vote with my dollars, avoiding more middle men like cable companies and it makes so much more sence to have a physical copy, I just bought Spider-man 2 and it comes with a digital version, blue-ray and DVD. How can you beat that for $20.00. I can take the disks to a friends or family’s house and not have to consider Internet connections or battery supply and lets keep in mind technology is not perfect and things sometimes don’t work like hard drives ect..
I am an independent up n coming hip-hop artist and understand more than then the general public the work involved with making one song let alone an entire movie production. Having a digital download with my musical cd is something I plan to implement into my production giving consumers more for their money, which is what we all want.
Just ask anyone who is working how there job is going and they will tell you ther jobs all want more for less. The one way we find solutions is to comunicate and understand the equations.
Knowledge is power, ignorance is unfortunate, but perverted knowledge is a greater enemy than lack of it.