jls4
Veteran
Funny, I rent them all the time! LOL But I generally rent them to understand the market on all levels. I want to know the ideas of both the big and small, those with money and those without. I generally find, as already stated, they think similarly.
I'm with Huy on this one. The average consumer doesn't see the need to upgrade - heck the average consumer doesn't even own an HDTV. I just got my first HDTV this year and I'm a filmmaker but I don't own a Blu-Ray player because I don't see the "added" value. I'll probably buy one when I want to burn my own movie into HD, but until then - for most people a movie is a movie. It's not a way of life. No one in my family owns a Blu-Ray and only 5 people own an HDTV, most just got the set in the last year or so.
Understanding what people "want" is important in sales. Technology is not the main thing that people want, it's the right technology. I'd bet Apple is thinking strongly on internet distribution of movies directly to your ipod or iphone.
Also there is a "Cloud" technology that people are working on now which you as a consumer will subscribe to, like Cable TV and the "Cloud" will hold all music and movies. And you simply download what you want to see on demand.
I actually am much more pessamistic about the future of indiependent filmmaking, especially those indies who make movies for under $100K. As the saturated market continues, more avenues for sales will dry up and indie's won't get the chance to sell their films, learn and grow. And once filmmaking gets its digital design (i.e. through the Internet, Cloud Concept, etc) then smaller films will get caught up in an environment where they have to compete directly against everyone else, instead of just a direct sale to a distributor and a cool poster to get consumers. Online companies are already bad about sorting by "Rating" or "Views" which will cause many indie films distributed on the net to find themselves at the bottom of the list. And with this technology already present and gaining momentum and with more television shows hitting the Internet, we may one day see a merger of the technologies (TV, Cable, Internet into One Technology) and I don't think it's that far off. So the one distribution channel will be the Internet Cloud and in that cloud people will fight for advertising attention which will leave sub $100K and many sub million dollar indie's in the dust.
But in the meantime, I think Hollywood needs to also recognize that honestly they have not made good movies in the last 10 years. Forget originality for a moment and just think of good acting, good production, good plot twists, good basic story. I find myself not going to the movies because I don't see these things - I just see gimmicks that Hollywood can use for the trailer and don't see much effort in creating a good movie.
Titanic was a good example, but Hollywood must not just search for new ideas like Titanic, but also take an idea and create a movie that is simply good. I mean look at Juno - it was nothing super spectacular or different - 16 year old gets pregnant - there were lots of movies like this in the 80s and 90s, but it was interesting to watch Juno's world and see good acting and plotting throughout without plot holes, and lack of motivation. I can't tell you how many movies I've seen where I could say "Why did the character do that? They wouldn't have done that. They only did that because we need a movie, but not because their situation led them to that conclusion."
Also it's interesting that in this speech nothing was brought up (although brought up in subsequent posts) about Hollywood's obsession with big budgets and throwing money at a problem. Movies need not cost $50 million, most could easily be done even with marketing for less than $30 million.
At least this is MHO
