Has Hollywood Gone Too Far With DVD Control? - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-27-2006, 03:02 PM   #61
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Sorry I think what?



sorry that you think that the replies to the original post were motivated by liberal/conservative subtext.


[q]It is clear that there are plenty of thoughts on a broad subject. The true matter at hand is a very narrow legal issue. From response #1 it went beyond that. It need not be a conservative/liberal issue, but plenty are drawn to FYM threads for such discussions.[/q]

but those who have spoken out in defense of the studios have said the same thing over and over.


Quote:
Frankly, I was surprised by the level of objection to the organization.
who's objecting to the organization? people are objecting to a specific practice -- just as i'd object to any company that sought to add in more violence, naughty words, boobies, etc., to a film -- and not the practice of the company itself. it has been noted that blockbuster does this to a certain extent, though they simply refuse to carry objectional material, they do not change the material itself.

also, many who have voiced strongest opposition are, themselves, artists. i'm sure it hits home for them.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 03:06 PM   #62
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 04:05 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i really didn't think this was a liberal/conservative issue at all.
I don't think this has anything to do with liberals and conservatives. It's a matter of respecting what the artist has done and not butchering it to keep it from offending Person X. You can't please everyone.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 03:08 PM   #63
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,290
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
The true matter at hand is a very narrow legal issue. From response #1 it went beyond that. It need not be a conservative/liberal issue, but plenty are drawn to FYM threads for such discussions.
Oh please, you are looking for something that isn't there.

There are multiple posts on this thread by people like myself or A_Wanderer or LivLuv, for example, that made no mention of anything at all apart from copyright infringement and made no value judgment on this company.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 07-27-2006, 03:09 PM   #64
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 10:05 AM
What about when a film is redubbed for foreign distribution. Besides being edited for violence (but sometimes nudity actually added in) and altered by translation, aren't they also often stripped of "culturally sensitive material" Of coarse they are, and Hollywood makes a ton of money because of it and "artistic control" takes a backseat to profit.
So why all the fuss if some Americans would like the same option given to them?
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 03:12 PM   #65
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 10:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
What about when a film is redubbed for foreign distribution. Besides being edited for violence (but sometimes nudity actually added in) and altered by translation, aren't they also often stripped of "culturally sensitive material" Of coarse they are, and Hollywood makes a ton of money because of it and "artistic control" takes a backseat to profit.
So why all the fuss if some Americans would like the same option given to them?
How do you add nudity if wasn't ever filmed in the first place?

All of which you talk about isn't done by a third party, it's done within the umbrella of company that owns the rights.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 03:17 PM   #66
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


What if someone edited the Passion of Christ to be anti-semetic and then distributed it?
To do that would require additions to the film, not ommissions such as taking out swear words or violence.

To edit out the use of the Lord's name in vain in King Kong does nothing to alter the movie's plot.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 03:18 PM   #67
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 08:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
There are multiple posts on this thread by people like myself or A_Wanderer or LivLuv, for example, that made no mention of anything at all apart from copyright infringement and made no value judgment on this company.
Great

Why did my observation draw such a response? I'm not sure it is helpful to project my intent and then criticize the projection.

Frankly, this issue has been around for quite a while. The tenor of the discussions go well beyond technical violations of copyright law.

The issue could be resolved with the answer to this question: how much more money does a studio want from Clean Films per DVD?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 03:32 PM   #68
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 10:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


To do that would require additions to the film, not ommissions such as taking out swear words or violence.

To edit out the use of the Lord's name in vain in King Kong does nothing to alter the movie's plot.
The magic of editing is a powerful thing, you could easily do this.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 03:34 PM   #69
Refugee
 
Muggsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: I live in colombia, with a box of watercolors and butterflies in my tummy
Posts: 2,033
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


To do that would require additions to the film, not ommissions such as taking out swear words or violence.

To edit out the use of the Lord's name in vain in King Kong does nothing to alter the movie's plot.

You are deffending that company's actions because they are doing things for your convenience, although they are doing something illegal and unethical. If that company where doing movies even more violent and profane, I think your opinion would be different
__________________
Muggsy is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 03:37 PM   #70
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 10:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


The issue could be resolved with the answer to this question: how much more money does a studio want from Clean Films per DVD?
If there is truly a profitable reason, the studio will do so. There are edited versions on DVD, On Demand, and the examples listed before of many movies, done by the studio, or with permission of the studio.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 03:51 PM   #71
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader

Why did my observation draw such a response? I'm not sure it is helpful to project my intent and then criticize the projection.



why did you suggest subtext in the first place?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 04:01 PM   #72
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


To do that would require additions to the film, not ommissions such as taking out swear words or violence.

To edit out the use of the Lord's name in vain in King Kong does nothing to alter the movie's plot.


actually, i'd argue that to make "passion" not anti-Semetic, you'd have to omit things.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 04:19 PM   #73
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


Oh please, you are looking for something that isn't there.

There are multiple posts on this thread by people like myself or A_Wanderer or LivLuv, for example, that made no mention of anything at all apart from copyright infringement and made no value judgment on this company.
Thanks, I support laws that protect other peoples' property. I couldn't care less what is actually being censored from the DVDs - or even what media is being subjected to censorship. I thing it's legally wrong to do such a thing and I find that arguing in favor of it sets a dangerous precedent across the board.

Like Muggsy said, it sounds like some people's opinions are based on the actual content being altered. The way I'm looking at it is, in general, altering someone else's property and then selling it for profit is ethically and legally wrong.
__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 04:31 PM   #74
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 08:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by LivLuvAndBootlegMusic
Thanks, I support laws that protect other peoples' property. I couldn't care less what is actually being censored from the DVDs - or even what media is being subjected to censorship. I thing it's legally wrong to do such a thing and I find that arguing in favor of it sets a dangerous precedent across the board.
Is this violation of copyright law worse than things like downloading movies?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 04:33 PM   #75
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader

Is this violation of copyright law worse than things like downloading movies?
Who cares? Violating is violating, IMO. Personally, yes because they are selling the products, but technically, no it doesn't matter which one we think is "worse", they are both breaking the law.
__________________

__________________
Liesje is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com