Tag Archives: The Hobbit

July 17, 2022 · 12:40

IP of opposition

My mind has been wandering. I have been confronted with the images of oppositions. Vampires versus Lycans (Underworld), good versus evil (The Hobbit, Lord of the Rings), humans versus Aliens (Predator), and the list goes on. It seems that the worlds of Andrei Tarkovsky (Solaris) is all but forgotten. The story is still everything, but there is too much special effects. Too many fight scenes. I do not oppose them, but they seemingly take over the story and that is wrong. Or perhaps better stated, it is not good. There is a difference and I acknowledge it. But how can we evolve this? It is a question I had in my mind for a while. In Keno Diastima it was not them against us and the finale of series 3 opens doors, but I was unwilling to set a path beyond it, the open ending seems so… (perfect is the wrong word), it seemed so Terry Gilliam to consider it as such. In ‘Exhaurire vitam’, it was not opposition for an entirely different reason. And there was opposition in ‘How to assassinate a politician’ yet that was opposition of the mind. I am not against opposition, but I feel that in too many ways it is framed wrongly, or perhaps incorrectly. So, how to go about it? That is the question I have been asking myself. My education gives me that there are two forms of antagonism, the competitive and the non-competitive So we have reversible, surmountable versus irreversible, insurmountable. Two shapes of two dimensions I do not like in the first place. I know they need to exist, but they are shallow, to shallow. It remind me of the old setting I once created in my mind. Any relationship is set to the three legs of the pyramid. A physical, a mental and a spiritual one. The more they align between the two partners, the more aligned their relationship is.

The longer the legs, the more meaningful the side is. In the example the three green ones are the same, I merely connected them to another side of the pyramid. They are a good match, not a perfect one, but a good one. It does not matter which colour is which gender. In the three sides (physical, mental and spiritual) they are a good match. It could be worse, a one sided or two sided match. A one sided match it is friendship, sexual or perhaps spiritual, yet one side will always result in divorce. Two sided matches are harder, there is enough to keep them together, especially as the side they desire the most (often the largest leg of the three legs). It does not matter what side it is, but the one favoured side when both have the same side will keep them together, and that starts the long term relationship/marriage. I have never seen that expressed in any movie, or at least not a movie I have ever seen. You see this is not opposition, or antagonism, it is another way of seeing multiple sides. And it should not be the focus of anything, but it should be there and we seldom see it. There is too much antagonism. I know it makes for better cinema, but does it? Does it really? I remember Ordinary People, the debut by Robert Redford, it got 4 oscars. It seldom comes up, I reckon because there was a harsh light on psychological sides. A 1980 movie that seems to shy away from the limelight. It also reminds me of Timothy Hutton and his part in Taps (an early Tom Cruise movie). They have something in common, our assessment of values and how the people around us see those values. It is a form of inner antagonism. We versus what we believe and what we perceive. It matters because I have been playing that card in two settings whilst not really being openly aware I was.

I may have surprised myself and that is part of the equation. How to give that inner battle to the people we present to? I am honestly at a loss. I am so driven by the story so that I cannot say what the story could be. That matters, you see I am about the story and I want it to be everything it could be. This is how I see the evolution of any story. I do not start from scratch, I evolve the story (especially Kenos Diastima and Exhaurire Vitam) and I see where I can evolve the story to be more including of other sides. It is not always that easy (especially Exhaurire Vitam) but sides could be considered, or perhaps better stated should be considered, they might be rejected and that question comes for every person playing a role in it.

It reflects on both the 5G and the Augmented reality IP as well. As I stopped to reconsider the first step in both, I suddenly remembered that certain data technologies were in its infancy in those days. They still are (my assessment) and I believe that when some players stop their petty bickering we might actually get somewhere. It is no longer about their system against ours, it will be what can we unite to get the best systems in play. Some will go and research a new setting (which is not wrong) but as I see it time works against some players and in all this Amazon has the upper hand, Amazon has most elements ready in at least three of my IP stages and it includes one IP bundle. So is Amazon the best solution? I think it is, Google is messing around and only partially taking notice of their own weaknesses. It does not mean Amazon does not have any weaknesses, it merely implies they have a better handle on it and here we see some of the elements connect. It is not antagonism, it is a three sided alignment with the realisation that a bookstore surpassed a technology titan, in its physical (hardware), mental (software) and spiritual (mentality) foundations. Like Taps and Ordinary People it is not about antagonism it is about the inner struggle towards what we believe and what is perceived. If someone told me that Amazon would surpass Google and that Elon Musk Mobile would close to equal Google 10-15 years ago, I would tell them to get better drugs and please could I have some of them, but today, or basically 2021-2024 will prove these people correct and that I underestimated an online bookstore named Amazon, and many with me. A stage where Amazon surpasses Google was before the Covid era unimaginable and the Elon Musk mobile (Pi. Phone) is not far behind. By giving the people, or perceptionally offering the people what they needed they got ahead in the game. I wonder if Mint Mobile (Canada) has a similar track ahead of them. All captains of industry and the one that started furthest ahead is now in danger of being placed last. Most forgot about the people, the consumers Microsoft made that mistake some time ago and there is some concern that Google is on the same track, leaving the work to the third parties who have no concern of people. An inner struggle, an IP of opposing sides and oppositions. But here is the last question, what makes the IP and what creates the opposition? Are these part interchangeable?

In your face space

It happens, something is staring me right in the face and I lay it beside me. It happens, it happens to us all. This trip started in 1992 (I believe), at a consumer electronic show in Amsterdam (RAI) we got to see the first Mini Disc, the first thought I had that it would be a great digital system for computers, it was roughly 4% of a Bernoulli disk whilst being able to store 600% of what a Bernoulli could store. The idea was rejected by Sony, too incompatible they claimed, nowadays we know more, it would have been a great option, it would have pushed players like Apple to the limit 5 years ahead of the curve. Yesterday I was confronted with that thought as my DVD was acting up (the disc, not the player). Now consider the new players, the new way to watch TV. All whilst the telecom companies want you to use more and more bandwidth, the more they can harvest, the more dependent you get to become.

What if we take that away? Consider this Compact Flash, one card, not 26 discs, merely one card and it is not even the start, in a time and place where collections are complete book cases and we can replace it in almost all cases with one card per TV series. The fans have a perfect copy per card and there is still the option to upgrade over time, in the age where 4K will define new boundaries, the retail side also needs to adhere, a setting where we can drive innovation, not merely follow it. Battlestar Galactica, Smallville, Babylon 5, Teen Wolf, Games of Thrones, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, the Hobbit, Dexter, Midsomer Murders, the Star Wars saga and so on, one card per setting and the technology is already here to set the stage to a much larger degree to meet the customer beyond halfway, a customer that can watch their series in perfection, one card that can last a lifetime. I reckon that players will have larger settings, they have the space, open up any blue-ray or 4K player, most of it is space and adding a CF, or SD card reader (optionally both) is the easiest thing to do. Not walking back and forth to the player getting the next disc, merely one card and all seasons are there. Yes, newer series will likely go per season, but at present there are hundreds of series all well above a dozen discs, and the fans have needs, they want that card on their mobile, on the road and the card can take a lot more than any disc could, so what stopped a player like Sony? Another ‘too incompatible’ mention, or the fear of piracy? Piracy is already there, the disc allows for newer protection and even in store upgrades. Go to any store where you buy movies or TV-series, now consider a box (like GoT) and that box will be able to contain a dozen of your favourite series, now consider the space it is taking up and consider that one card could have all seasons and you keep it in your placer at all time, to be able to play it at your hearts content. So why is that solution not here now? Consider all the telecom players trying to be clever with their 5G, all whilst it is just not ready and do you really want your bandwidth to depend on your 5G router? Consider that IT Pro gave us a week ago “as they promote Kubernetes as the secret ingredient for closing the gap between 5G’s promises and 5G problems. Kubernetes does indeed have some potential to make 5G actually work well. That said, it’s not necessarily the holy grail of edge computing and telco networking that it is sometimes made out to be” (at https://www.itprotoday.com/hybrid-cloud/can-kubernetes-solve-5g-problems-partly-not-soon), there we are told “They make promises like “5G networks will one day offer peak data rates of up to 10 Gbps” and “5G’s hyper-fast speeds will revolutionise the way we live.” If you read statements like those carefully, you’ll notice that they’re predicated on theoretical future developments, not what 5G is actually delivering to the typical user today. That’s because, to date, 5G network implementations haven’t been all that impressive. They turn out to be slower than 4G in many cases, not to mention less reliable. 5G, in other words, has become “a bad joke.”” A setting I have been mentioning for close to two years and the joke gets to be worse, at present Saudi Arabia has a 5G network that is well over 700% faster than anything the US can offer, their BS marketing drive is that bad and it will get worse, as such do we want to rely on congestion, or do we want an option where we can watch what we love unhindered, optionally in a better setting than now? So whilst we take notice of “it won’t address all 5G problems, and it will take a long time–several years, most likely–before Kubernetes is a full-fledged 5G solution”, which I predicted a few times in the last two years, I made no mention of Kubernetes, I merely observed the greed driven stupidity of some and watch these ships wreck left right and center. So whilst American politicians are blaming China for their own lack of innovation, I created the setting of a 7th device that can push innovation and change. And when we consider that innovation drives creativity, I wonder what someone else can come up with tomorrow, I already set the design of a new device for IOS and Android, that is how I roll. All whilst Microsoft is pushing Forza on your mobile, I came up with two new pieces of hardware, yup, I feel decently good, especially as we see Microsoft falter again and again and now it get to pull the wool over the eyes of Apple and Sony too (life can be satisfying). Did I figure out everything? No, I did not, but if I had done so I would make life for 1,000 researchers at Microsoft impossible and that is not fair either, oh wait, I really do not care about that, sorry!

All this in a day, so what is stoping these moguls of achieving true innovation? #JustAsking

FACT on piracy?

There is a newscast that got to me in the middle of the night (at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25575298).

Now, let me start that I am not in favour of digital piracy in any way. I have had a fortunate live, so for the most, I could go to the cinema and enjoy the big screen. At times I got to buy a DVD/Blu-ray, so I could enjoy the quality of the movie at home.

What gets to me is this quote “A spokesperson for the Federation Against Copyright Theft (Fact) said that piracy puts jobs in the entertainment industry at risk and prevented future investment in entertainment.”

This spokesperson needs to take a hard look at himself/herself in the mirror in regards to the ‘BS’ (as I personally see it) that is proclaimed by said spokesperson! Why?

The 25 most profitable movies represented in the US alone $5.2 billion dollars. At the top is Iron Man 3 which did $400 million in the US, but did an awesome $1.2 billion worldwide. So, there is no future danger to investments, there is a truckload of money to be made there and greed is trump. An additional interesting fact is that the second Hobbit movie is on that top 25 too. It made over 200 million in one week, so lighten up FACT!

Perhaps FACT needs to take a new look at the message they are proclaiming. What angers me is that this is pretty much the same BS Sony ‘voiced’ gave when all that music was shared in the early 90’s (when the US had similar poverty numbers) on how much damage they had.

These people do not realise that a large portion of the US and the EEC is in such a recession that the people cannot afford the luxury of going to the cinema (or buying a DVD for that matter). In the US the poverty line now hits 1 for every 7 Americans, so it is time for FACT to wake up! In the UK things are slightly better, but only 1.1% better, making it 1 in 7 as well. So, perhaps FACT would like to take that into consideration before blaming dangers to piracy?

Who downloads movies?

Well, the main group here in my view remains the student population (who can hardly make ends meet as school fees go up and up). In addition I must state that this does not OK the transgression, but consider that these people have little options to see anything. Prices go up, yet students end up with less and less. The second group is the poverty group, who likely have no internet, but rely on a friendly neighbour to burn them a DVD. I am not saying that this is good, legal or acceptable! I am just saying that perhaps setting the right dimension might help ‘comprehension’ for those who cannot afford any of it anyway.

the second quote that the BBC gave “Piracy threatens the livelihoods of over 1.5 million people whose jobs rely on the continued success of films, TV programmes and other forms of entertainment that are created in the UK.” reads a little better, but I fear that this is slightly disjointed. We dealt with films, but we did not deal with TV programs. There we see that the big ‘winner’ is Game of Thrones (HBO) the quote that another site gave me “It also seems that those involved in Game of Thrones are not too worried by the levels of piracy around their show.”

This does not make it OK, but consider that these series can only be watched with a subscription and that in the UK and the US 1 in 7 is below the poverty line. The financial situation in many European countries is not that much better, then perhaps those involved should realise that they, for the most are not doing that bad. Forbes showed an additional side to the HBO dilemma (at http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/05/10/international-audiences-have-few-choices-to-legally-watch-hbos-game-of-thrones/). Consider that the three pirated TV series that truly jump out are all HBO series. Can FACT explain how these poverty driven families can shell out $50 a month for cable? And, even those making minimum wage (which is only marginally better than poverty) can often not afford any of the choices FACT would deem acceptable.

So, and your truly (meaning me!), did I ever watch an illegal movie version? (I never downloaded it!) Yes, I did once. It was Star Wars Episode One and I only watched it because the Movie was launched 4 months later in the Dutch cinema then in the US (an unacceptable time-lag for such a movie). I still watched it in the cinema, I bought the DVD and later the Blu-Ray and so they got more than their money’s worth!

So, is there a real issue?

Depends on how you look at it. From my point of view, the bulk of those downloading the movies and/or TV series cannot afford them in any way, which means that there would never have been a sale to begin with. Those who are above that mark are a decreasing population. As TV series and movies are offered via iTunes, consoles and other digital media for just a few dollars, getting the series (or movie) in that way would be preferable to many viewers, especially as those versions tend to be of better quality. The growth in sales as claimed by some (an increase of 40% in digital sales), means that the tide is shifting. The biggest group that remains has no way of buying it ever under the economic pressures they face.

Yes, you might have a case against these people, but consider how movies claim to make so many billions. Do they really want to go on a hunt for those who live below poverty? Has it truly come to this?

How about we use all that effort to get these people a ‘decent’ income?

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Tagged as digital piracy, entertainment, FACT, Federation Against Copyright Theft, HBO, movies, poverty, poverty line, revenue, Sony, The Hobbit, UK

December 30, 2013 · 07:04

Greed and the movies

As I contemplated the year 2013, several thoughts came to mind. I have spoken about it in several blogs, however, in most cases it was mostly about the banks when I looked at greed. Is that however a limitation?

From my point of view greed has drenched itself into so many parts of our lives that we must wonder if there is any way to avoid getting tainted by it in some form. The thought that hit me was how we are now seeing greed into the cycles of cinematography. This is the one field where greed was least likely to take hold, or so I thought!

Let me illuminate it with two examples.

The first one is the Hunger Games trilogy. Now, in all honesty I had not read the books, so when the Hunger games trailer hit me, I was seeing it with the air of ‘Yea, whatever!‘ I admit a stance I would regret. When the movie was on TV, I ended up being blown away. This as a movie buff should be regarded as somewhat of a loss. Most movie buffs will agree with me that a good movie has to be seen on the big screen. So, seeing it on TV, without ever seeing it on the big screen felt a little diminished. So, when Catching Fire came out, I had to see it on the big screen. I regarded that act as an error of sizeable proportions. The movie was a disappointment to me!

Do not get me wrong, there was nothing wrong with it, but the stars (like Donald Sutherland) seemed to be playing below their expected stardom quality. None of it was their fault. The script was lacking in my view. The movie was not bad, but it was all about ‘the set-up’.

What set-up? You might ask.

Well, as I see it, Catching fire is the introduction towards Mockingjay. After Hunger Games, Catching fire is cleaning the palette and in that final movie it will truly come to blows. This is what I expect. Is that true? I do not know, but what does worry me is that Mockingjay is presently going to be a two part title, which means that the Hunger Game franchise is getting stretched for the better part of a year so that the money people (producers and such) can cash in as much as they can. Again, I state that I never read the books, which might be cause for a valid disagreement by you the reader.

That view does not apply to the Hobbit. You see I have been a Tolkien fan since before I was able to parachute out of a plane (driving cars is so trivial and I was too young for that too). I even have an original 7 book hardcover edition of the Lord of the Rings. So, when that was presented to me in three movies it made perfect sense to me. Unlike some of the die-hard fans, I am pretty happy with the result. The only thing I did miss there was the taking of the Shire in the last movie. For me that made perfect sense. It was the moment that Merry and Pippin realised what those around them had gone through, when they saw the devastation to their own home. But apart from that, I have truly enjoyed that movie. The issue I have is with the Hobbit! Like the Hunger Games, I avoided the first movie in the cinema (which I slightly regret) and I still have not seen the second one. You see, when you stretch a 300-page book (I also have a 261 page edition with a smaller font), into 3 movies, each stretching well over 2 hours, it is time to ask a few questions. If it was in two parts, like Mockingjay seems to be it would have made a little more sense to me, but no, there will be a third movie! Is this greed gone wild?

Now, if the story warrants it and the movies are released within 18-12 weeks, then it might not be a big thing, but having to wait a year between parts is stretching my tolerance for the ‘branding’ too thin for comfort. If the movie is really good, would it matter? Well, there is the kicker of course. Yet, the question becomes whether we should have to wait for a year to get to see a complete story. I am not talking about a story that is part of a whole in several movies like the Millennium story (the girl with the Dragon Tattoo). No, this is specific towards the Hobbit and Mockingjay. Consider that the movie ‘Dances with wolves’ would have been presented in two parts (the 4 hour edition), would it still have been such a success? This is directly linked to the 2 movies I mentioned. Why are we accepting this annual approach to a movie that should be open into almost one timeslot? An example of that is the movie Novecento (1900), which was released in the mid 70’s. The interesting part is that this movie was also in 2 parts as the movie was 5 1/2 hours, but what you might not know is that they opened BOTH parts in the same week. So either you saw two movies in one go (which is not realistic in many minds) or you watched them in two parts either a day or a week apart. That would be fine with me, so why this greed driven stretch?

Well, there is a valid partial defence. The movie we see released nowadays have so many special effects that it take a while to get it all ready for the audience, but in the end, delaying part 1 by a month or two, so that we can enjoy a complete result within a month or two feels preferable to me than being forced to wait a year.

I will actually make a prediction. I reckon that this approach will be the main reason why illegal downloads of movies is likely to increase dramatically over the next year. It seems to me that this current milking approach will cost the movie makers and not just because times had been hard on some.

The revenue numbers are currently not in support of my view. At present 2013 is another lucrative year for the movies, but I am talking about 2014. Will it remain this way? Movie will always be downloaded by some and the illegal movie selling will continue. The question becomes how people will react to the multi-part movies? The only partial evidence I would offer is in the numbers as seen with Breaking Dawn (Twilight Saga). In this set we see New Moon, Eclipse and Breaking Dawn part 2 all around $300 million, whilst Breaking Dawn part 1 is slightly more than 6% lower. Is this enough to be regarded as evidence? The multi-part movies are still too new to be allowed any level of certainty (or reliability). I reckon that 2014 will give us a little more certainty in that regard.

In all honesty, if you had to wait a year to see the complete story, would you go to the cinema to see part one?