Reply With Quote
I agree. There won't be anymore Sicko or Slicko-type films if there aren't any financial backers willing to support such films. Just a hunch, but I think most of them would like to realize a profit on such investments.
It is free.
It's acquiring, assembling it into a entertaining package, and disseminating information that's costly and people who do so, for profit, have a right to be paid. Including Moore's financial backers in SICKO!
I agree. There won't be anymore Sicko or Slicko-type films if there aren't any financial backers willing to support such films. Just a hunch, but I think most of them would like to realize a profit on such investments.
I'm sure they will. I'm just as sure it won't be by providing financial support to any future Moore Mockumentaries.
And advertisers only buy space if you sell newspapers.
Whatever. The provision of that information isn't free.
I agree. If you are of the mindset that these movies which are made for entertainment value (Knocked Up) or information value (Sicko) that are the results of someone else's labor should be free, you are mistaken.
Dan, I highly doubt that you would mind putting in your 40 hour week and not be paid for it because someone decides that you should provide your service for free.
You can try and justify that the industry is greedy and shouldn't cost so much, but you are still breaking the law and stealing.
Look, there's still money to be made in do entaries that are shown to the public for free. Otherwise PBS wouldn't be putting out so many quality programs. Of course there are costs for making a film like Sicko. But you don't need Weinstein type clout to present it to the public.
Depending on its merit, this may be a good thing. We all know what happens to fictional movies when the goal is to make $100 Million at the box office. I would expect the same depreciation in quality for socio-political do entaries that are made to sell tickets under the guise of presenting "the truth" to the public.There won't be anymore Sicko or Slicko-type films if there aren't any financial backers willing to support such films.
I think they absolutely have a right to distribute the film for profit, even millions. But the more money there is to be made, the greater the degree of skepticism I approach it with.
And either way, this movie is not going to hurt for ticket sales, since a great majority of its audience will buy a ticket to see it as a badge of honor, like showing up with all of your like-minded buddies for a protest rally.
Now you're talking about another pet peeve of mine. Public funding of art and entertainment.
Much of what's on PBS wouldn't be broadcast if it were up to free market forces.
But, you do need money. If you want to bankroll some venture, fine; but, don't be using my money to do it and then just give it away. If my tax dollars are going to go toward some junk like Sicko!, I want there to be a profit.
Really? The fact Michael Moore was involved didn't make you skeptical?
Thankfully we've always got Fox and The CW.Much of what's on PBS wouldn't be broadcast if it were up to free market forces.
Why do you care whether someone profits or not, unless it's you?If my tax dollars are going to go toward some junk like Sicko!, I want there to be a profit.
Government funds are (supposed to be) used for the overall public benefit. That doesn't have to be monetary. It can be informational.
Of course it did.Really? The fact Michael Moore was involved didn't make you skeptical?
You can believe this sort of thing should be free. You can pe ion and write letters to your congressman or senator for change and public funding. But until it is free, you are still stealing, regardless of if you think it should be free or not. Right now, it isn't.
Amen.
It is me, I'm a taxpayer. And, if tax dollars are to be used I want there to be a zero-sum gain or profit. No losses.
Find that in the Cons ution.
At least you got that going for you.
And if it gets to the point where I feel legitimately threatened by the possibility of being found and punished for viewing it for free, I may reconsider.You can believe this sort of thing should be free. You can pe ion and write letters to your congressman or senator for change and public funding. But until it is free, you are still stealing, regardless of if you think it should be free or not. Right now, it isn't.
In a world where people drive over the speed limit, smoke pot and play in March Madness office pools, I'm not all that swayed by an appeal to my respect for the government's definition of stealing.
Find your "zero sum gain" provision in The Cons ution.Find that in the Cons ution.
What does The Cons ution have to do with any of this anyway? We're just talking philosophy.
You've got to find the cons utional authority to spend my tax dollars on PBS first.
Because you said this:
PBS ain't free.
PBS was simply an example of a network where do entaries are of a high quality, and where the public would not have to pay $8-$10 to see such a program.
I understand that it's publically funded, but it's an available option. My intent was not to debate the merits of Public TV.
If it's truly groundbreaking and significant work, I'm sure ABC or CBS wouldn't hesitate to show it during one of their news programs.
Ok, so by speeding, smoking pot and playing in a March Madness pool, who exactly are you preventing from profiting from the service/good they provided? Why not just eat your dinner at Chili's and leave without paying? If you don't get caught, no big deal right?
I'm not sure what your point is.
I'm not arguing that it's not "stealing" by definition, I'm just saying I don't care. I dislike the idea of films like Sicko! profiting millions of dollars, and I choose not to support it monetarily.
But I do want to speak intelligently on it if it comes up in conversation. So I'll download it illegally off the internet and watch it. Then I'll delete it.
That's just idiotic reasoning. Sorry, but it is.
GO SEE SICKO
best movie of the decade
Yeah, I love the way he justified his glowing praise for Cuba's healthcare system. He and his crew were allowed to check themselves into a Cuban hospital so they could see how patients are treated.
Jay Leno said something to the effect of, "Surely you realize the Cuban government was using you as a tool, right?"
Moore's response?
They had a spanish-speaking member of their crew sneak out of the hospital and re-admit herself through the emergency room. Moore says she got the same treatment as when it was known who they were.
Yeah, I'm sure the Cuban handlers had no clue about that stunt.
You want to see Cuba's true healthcare system?
Michael Moore's Wish For America.. Cuban Healthcare -- a photographic, undercover, essay
Sicko! is a Moore's kinder gentler attempt at the same bull he pulled in his other Mockumentaries.
Yoni's knee jerks and he Pavlonianly salivates as predictably as whott and Wild Cobra.
Oh well.
Nobody's losing any money if I download a movie I never would have paid to see in the first place. Sorry if I don't lose any sleep over that or your opinion of it.
Stealing the "best movie of the decade" (edit: ooops! according to "spurscenter" not "spurminator" -- yonivore) and then pimping it to others...your mother would be proud.
Sicko was ing amazing. Practically brought me to tears with all the medical bull I've had to go through with my wife here. It's time the health insurance companies went bye bye.
Nobody's losing money if I dine and dash for a meal I never would have paid for either, right?
The fact that you have the ability to download and steal it means that someone is losing money. I understand that you don't care about stealing it, you've made that clear. But that is just ridiculous reasoning.
But at least you can talk intelligently about the movie now...(even though you never would have paid to see it in the first place)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions