vdc530

With Scorsese going to the oscars again as a big contender I decided to look up some of the movies he made that I have yet to see, on Amazon. Both last night and today

Turns out "Bringing out the Dead" has jumped from $8.99 a copy to 20+ bucks overnight. Many sellers had it for under $10 bucks but now their all sold out. Both on Amazon and Ebay, the minimum price is $19.99 now. Other e-tailers don't seem to have it either most saying out-of-stock or back-ordered

Holy Crapola, I was going to purchase this last night but figured I'd wait. Now it's gone up 2X and some change!

2/13/12 Update: Since this thread has been created the price has jumped from $20 to $30!!! This is looking to be a big deal OOP title.

http://www.amazon.com/Bringing-Out-D...9128148&sr=8-2

crazychris88

thanks. I put my unopened copy up for 12.99 + $2.00 S+H

gp1086

Never checked this one out. May have to give it a watch.

I see some new and used versions for < $10 on ebay.

vdc530

From what I've heard over the years it's pretty damn good. Not only is it Scorsese but it's also the writer from Taxi Driver and Raging bull + the cinematographer from Casino, Aviator, Shutter Island and Hugo.

g

They had a ton of these at Big Lots a year or so ago.

vdc530

LOL they probably did, but I think those days are over. More power to you if you find em

Alan Smithee

Fucking Paramount. Why don't they just license all their movies out to someone else who might actually want to sell them? I had to get one of their movies through illegal means since the DVD was out of print and going for ridiculous amounts.

smurr05

Excellent film by the way!

dex14

Theres plenty of used prices for below 5 bucks. Who would even bother buying this new?

wz42

Iirc Paramount and Disney were the last two backers of the old Circuit City Divx format before it folded in favour of the open DVD standard.

I'd be willing to bet that Paramount's wet dream is that nobody will ever be able to buy their movies again - only rent them via ala cart or Netflix type subscription.

Alan Smithee

Yeah- the movie I obtained in a manner not mentionable here was "The Big Bus"- I would have gladly paid retail price for the DVD if it were still out, but when I checked Amazon new copies were about $50 and used around $30 which is ridiculous for a used disc. They DO still have this movie on Amazon and Vudu however- for $9.99 I could "buy" it and watch it only on my TV (with less-than-DVD quality), and if I end up replacing this TV with one that doesn't have those services on it then I guess I'll be out of luck. (So I guess it was really wrong of me to get this movie in the way I did since I could have still paid for it, but 'buying' an online copy isn't an acceptable option.) There's a few out-of-print Paramount titles on Netflix, I don't know how much money studios make from those but I keep reading complaints from studios that their stuff gets "devalued" when it's on there.

wz42

I could be wrong but I thought getting a movie through "other means" was legal *if* you owned the movie. I'm taking a "none of my business" agnostic view on "other means" for this convo but if I understand "other means" right that may be a loophole.

How much is the proper value for one of their titles according to the studios?

Sonic

I own a copy. Great movie. Been awhile I have not seen it. Might play it this weekend.

Silverscreenvid

Yes it was wrong of you. You stole it. And it didn't matter whether you could have paid for it or not. You stole it.

Paramount spent $32 million making that movie. They paid Martin Scorsese and Nicolas Cage and every single person on that set. They own the movie. They can decide how or if they're willing to sell it to you. The can sell it as a DVD or a BluRay or a VHS tape or on some version of downloadble media or just sit on it for as long as they want to try to build its value back. The next time you spend $32 million on something you can decide how to sell it too.

Some people apparently think that they have a right to determine what's a fair price for a movie (and that may be only a dollar or so), and if the studio won't sell it to them for that price (or won't offer them an "acceptable option" for buying it), they have a right to steal it. By that theory, I'm justified in breaking into the electronics store and taking that big screen that they wouldn't deal with me on the price last week. I doubt if you spent even $32 making something, you'd feel very happy if someone decided they would just take it if you didn't sell it to them for the price they wanted.

There's plenty of movies I felt were priced too high and I didn't buy them. There's others I would have bought but never got around to and they're now out of print. I would never justify taking one.

Legally, you're a thief. Morally, you're a thief. As a practical matter, you will probably get a way with it just because of the logistics involved. But that doesn't change the nature of what you've done.

And don't say it's a victimless crime or that studios have plenty of money. I work for a company that sells educational materials in an online downloadable form. We have to deal with people trying to bootleg our merchandise as well. If they steal and distribute enough copies, my company will be out of business and I'll be out of a job.

My Other Self

Who pissed in your Cheerios, Silverscreeen?

Xiroteus

Not quite, it would be closer to going into a store while open and making a magical copy of that same television while leaving the original there. Right or wrong? Most likely on the wrong side, however it is still much closer to that.

wz42

But what if someone legally bought the Amazon Unbox version and acquired a second copy via "other means" since he preferred the second format? Even burning them both to the same disc - would that still be stealing in your books?

By that logic whomever owns the Mona Lisa would be within their rights to set it on fire *if* they thought they could make more in one shot by selling the live burning of it as a PPV event instead of a small amount from the entry fee for each person paying to enter the musuem to see it.

Legally that may be right but morally it'd be criminal in my books.

There we agree - I've passed on many titles I felt were over priced. Some I paid the price if I wanted it badly enough. However I made sure to counter that by making sure I paid vastly little for other casual purchases titles from that studio. Other "meh" titles, because the studio reamed me so much on a title I wanted, I simply passed on buying them all together.

Until this thread I didn't realize Paramount had abandoned the DVD/BR standard for most (all?) of their catalog.

Since I support the open nature of physical media that means it'll have to be a rare exception for me to buy *anything* from Paramount again.

Xiroteus

One issue that will never make sense are those who take issue with someone owning a movie or series that was NEVER released on any format. A company cannot lose money on something they have never sold. Plus millions of people have recorded programs from television.

Silverscreenvid

A movie that hasn't been sold (yet) may be sold some day in some format. Every bootleg copy that gets distributed diminishes the eventual market for that movie.

Shout Factory is legally selling some movies and TV series they've licensed that a lot of people thought would never be released. Their sales have been hurt by bootleggers and those who felt they had a right to buy bootlegs because the movies and TV shows had "NEVER" been released.

You think that just because someone taking a copy doesn't remove the original from circulation makes it "right"? I work for a company that sells educational texts and training materials. I get paid to research and write those texts. Every time someone gets their hands on a bootleg (and it happens), we still "own" the original and can sell more copies of it. Except the person that has the bootleg got the value of it (the value of my and the other authors' months of research and work) by paying nothing and that's one less person in an admittedly small universe of people interested in this subject matter who won't be buying. If that happens enough times, we're out of business, I'm out of a job, and people who were buying our materials legally will no longer have access to a valuable resource.

But nobody gets hurt by a few bootlegs, do they?

Xiroteus

I shall use an example of a show like Journeyman and Perfect Strangers season three to eight. They do not current exist in any official format, been waiting for Perfect Strangers for years, and many people would say if they cannot bother to sell it they will find it from somewhere most likely some horrible tv edits that are twenty plus years old and would LOVE to have a official dvd release if they would ever bother to sell it.

And a lot of those people may have had those horrible bootlegs and were thrilled once they found out an official release was being made and went out and bought them.

Different then stealing the original, not right, when you get down to it no one has a right to take anything in any manner that has an official release, out of print or not, the fact is some just do not care, make it right? not really.

A lot of these people would never purchase a copy anyway, make it right? No. However the biggest issue is someone uploading that copy for others to take that would have purchased it thus causing a possible lost sale. There is also the fact that many people and companies like to have control over their own content. Of course this will effect smaller companies long before it would effect larger ones.

Sometimes yes and other times not that much, really depends on several factors. This discussion is about damages, not about it being right as it is clearly not okay to take something that does not belong to you, digital or not.

wz42

Your sense of entitlement and arrogance is remarkable. You really only see it from those who think they're so special because they create content.

I ran into that sense of entitlement and arrogance at a campus radio station from independent artists when I was on the board.

The artist/content owner is god and the members of the audience are peons...simply a marionette to have it's strings pulled.

I see you ignored my point that, by your logic, the owner of the Mona Lisa should be able to set it on fire in a PPV event simply because they own it.

I'll assume that's because you think that but you know to admit it would make your position so repulsive to everyone else.


That's the second time you mentioned that. You must be very special.

However frankly we don't care...everybody is losing their job or being placed in financial distress with pay cuts, downsizing, off shoring, cutting of benefits or the '08 financial collapse for their 401k over the last ~20 years or so.

Frankly instead of being pissed off that one person dares to enjoy the content you were part of creating without you controlling every facet of how they enjoy it I'd be more concerned that a blogger will start doing your job online for pennies on the dollar with Google Adwords.

Or that your research position will be off shored to India.

vdc530

Black Snake Moan Blu-ray....OOP Paramount release....Price skyrockets 3 fold and some change in 3 days time.....Whoa...just Whoa

Kurt D

We should probably can the poorly employed rhetoric and dismissive attitude.

There's no mention that he "wants to control every facet" of how people enjoy content. To escalate the argument by twisting someone's words weakens your position.

Silverscreen just doesn't want people to steal his work, and he's arguing that stealing is a universal wrong, regardless of circumstance.

Now I must go and steal a loaf of bread for my starving baby.

wz42

If I misread his words I will be happy to issue a retraction however my understanding of this statement:

sounds to me like he wants to control every facet - up to and including only offering a VHS release...or none at all.

Kurt D

It's true they have the right to distribute it in whatever format they want, but after you buy it, you can enjoy it any way you want, baby!