I'm not really sure why it's worth weighing in on the "Wolverine" situation, but I have nothing else really pressing in my "to discuss" column today.
For those of you who aren't movie pirates or don't follow film sites, it appears that thereabouts April 1st, a not-even-remotely April Fool's day joke happened when someone posted 20th Century Fox's X-Men Origins: Wolverine movie online. I don't know where you can find it so please don't ask. I don't care enough about the movie to even start sifting through those channels to locate it. It's out there, I guess if you're so inclined you could find it.
Whether you should or not is totally up to you. Like I said: The Cap'n doesn't care. I don't represent 20th Century Fox and have no vested interest in the film. What I find interesting is the ensuing debate going on about sites like Ain't It Zoul News refusing to accept reviews.
Fox is doing exactly what they should do: hunting down the culprit and arresting the shit out of them. They spent millions of dollars (admittedly, on a movie that people don't seem to like) on this particular film and it was leaked without their permission. Fair enough. Regardless of how I sometimes feel about 20th Century Fox and how they handle their properties, they have the right to protect their investments.
Once upon a time, The Cap'n knew several people who had access to movies before they were available (in theatres or on dvd) and yes, I saw a few of them. I won't lie. American Psycho, Insomnia, Dogma, One Hour Photo, and a number of others. Half of it occurred during the "unprotected Academy Screener" phase and the other half in the early 2000's, when "bootlegs" were chopped in half to fit on CD-R's.
I had a friend get in trouble for distributing movies online when we lived on-campus. Universal apparently didn't care for that, but he had a nice RD and the situation was resolved without litigation. The point is that I understand the "other" side as well; sharing movies obtained online wasn't something done for money but merely to share the movie with others. I can still remember a guy who had a copy of The Blair Witch Project months before it opened locally, so I can see how this is still going on.
What I am a little fuzzy about is the double standard of asking people not to send in "reviews" of a movie leaked online from sites that regularly posted pictures, script reviews, and artwork online only to have it "pulled" with similar legal threats. If the script was sold to the studio, it belongs to the studio, so unless you work for that studio and were paid to "leak" a review, it's stolen property. Please feel free to correct me if this is erroneous.
If you don't want to post reviews of the film, that's fine, but please stop posting other related images or script reviews if the issue is "copyright infringement". Personally, I think things like early looks at Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter or the Tron footage that Disney doesn't seem to be pulling are good ways to create word-of-mouth interest.
Most (if not all) of the movies I was privy to in the past were also things we saw in theatres and bought on dvd. It's the only way I know that One Hour Photo has a different beginning that's nowhere to be found on the dvd, but I don't mind having the "officially" released version. I'm not a movie pirate, nor do I have issue with either side doing what they do (studios and pirates). If you both can "get away with it", so to speak, then by all means do it.
I don't really trust Bit-Torrent and the turnaround these days is close enough that the Cap'n can wait if he doesn't see it on the big screen. I wasn't planning on watching Wolverine so it's pretty much a non-issue for me. I just find the reaction online to be strange, especially from places that pride themselves on "scoops".
No comments:
Post a Comment