TASSY P2P FORUMS

Looks reall good. When does it come out on B-Ray?

http://www.knowing-themovie.com/

Looks good.

This movie does look quite interesting.

Ive always thought that someone should make a mockumentry about Nic Cages toupee. The adventures of cages wig.

The sights that the wig must have seen, could have interviews with the current wig and all the previous wigs about how life on cages's head is, how does cage treat them. Then you could have other celebrity wigs being interviewd, about life as a wig.

Could also have comedy sketches of the wig actually being more interesting than cage himself, and the only reason he gets invited to celeb parties is because they celebs want the witty wig there not him.

Does playboy bunnies wanna bang cage or is it the wig their really interested in, their could be graphic scenes of wig sex, with cages wig banging maybe scarlet johanson.

The wig could be a bigger star than nic cage lol

LOL Flat
It does look like it might be good although I find it hard to take Nicholas Cage seriously so I'm dubious. I thought he was good in The Rock but it was downhill from there.

His all time best move - Valley Girl! Great sound track too.

Lores wrote:His all time best move - Valley Girl! Great sound track too.

Correction. Best all time is Raising Arizona. In fact I named one my SWG toons Raising Arizona.

"Do those balloons blow up in any funny shapes or sizes?"

I just watched Knowing yesterday on my computer and when it comes to nicholas cage...im with gelf. But it was the new blockbuster out and its about doom and gloom so of course Im gonna watch it.

I actually really liked it. The Directing and screenplay were good and the flow of the movie was pretty solid. There was even two or three scenes where I went, "Oh SHit!"

As I was more then half through it I was thinking that probably this movie will have some kind of stupid ending like The Day The Earth Stood Still and I was shocked it ended very well.

Its worth the $$ to see this in the theaters.

Molten Prominence wrote:I just watched Knowing yesterday on my computer and when it comes to nicholas cage...im with gelf. But it was the new blockbuster out and its about doom and gloom so of course Im gonna watch it.

I actually really liked it. The Directing and screenplay were good and the flow of the movie was pretty solid. There was even two or three scenes where I went, "Oh SHit!"

As I was more then half through it I was thinking that probably this movie will have some kind of stupid ending like The Day The Earth Stood Still and I was shocked it ended very well.

Its worth the $$ to see this in the theaters.

I'll watch it when I can see it in better quality than the current rips.

Oooh thanks Molten I'd almost given up on Nick Cage films but you've made it sound really good.
Raising Arizona was a good fun film

Raising Arizona is an awsome movie the other one leaving las vegas was a great although depressing movie. I really like red rock west as well and the Rock although a lot of his new stuff is kinda samey and as if he is on production belt rolling out generic movies, in saying that I really like the national treasure movies and con air is another classic. I will defo watch knowing, from what you guys say it sounds really good.

Anyone thought maybe they should pay to see it?

uintil they find a way to pitch it to me other than "pirating takes money away from people in hollywood who make more in an hour than i make in a lifetime" no

If it didnt cost me $40 bucks to go see a movie, then i'd go to the movies a lot more often. Possibly the studios should go after the real thieves. The cinemas.

Yeah its bullshit how much you have to pay for this entertainment. Same thing with TV and computer connection. With all the money I spend on TV each month, why the fuck is there a commericial on every channel when I flick through? I really HATE how many commercials there are nowadays. It really is a problem. If TV was free, then hey I cant complain about the commercials...But I pay crazy loot a month and its bullshit I tell you.

The theaters is really a shame because it is just so much fun to go see a real blockbuster on opening night on the big screen. But like Istik said, Why pay $40 for this experience?

When I DL on cpu and watch a movie that sucks, on some level im still happy I didnt drop $40 on it. Feeling bad about pirating movies....not in the least.

i cant watch commercial tv
your average hour long show is about 40 mins run time
1 out of every 3 mins is an ad

thankfully the bbc is still ad free, but the only thing i really watch on that is dr who

So, you have more integraty or honor in a video game then you have in rl?

if i could find a way to scam SWG for free, i'd do it

Well look at is this way. Most the movies I watch from the net, there is no way i'd bother going to the movies to see them at $40 a pop. Most of them I wouldnt even bother to hire. However, I still buy the games/movies/music I like and would want to use again, and in fact, every game I have installed currently, I own. There are plenty I wouldnt have bought if I hadnt of "Tried" them first

This is one of the points about piracy. Other than DRM, which only punishes those who buy the item, there is also the argument that most the pirates out there wouldnt have bought the item in the first place, or even that more people might buy something after they can try it or see it first. I am of course only speaking of the common household pirate that trade and swap stuff between other people (which has been going on since recordable media began). I'm not talking about those who pirate to profit from it.

This is why I fully support online content and benefits to owning a product. Such as Downloadable content, downloadable games (Steam) and online communities like the consoles have. It is a far better way to combat piracy than DRM or lawyers.

Speaking of downloadable games and movies. What I like about that, is if you lose it, you can download it again. It's also easy to make backups of your own stuff. Unlike disk, store bought stuff, where if you lose it or break it, you have to go buy it again, and it's almost impossible for the average user to make a backup. Unfortunately downloadable stuff has the drawback of not being as well supported by the developers, or not having the same features as store bought.

Justification: A reason, explanation, or excuse which provides convincing, morally acceptable support for behavior or for a belief or occurrence;

cool,i always wandered what that word meant........

Touc:

Lores wrote:Justification: A reason, explanation, or excuse which provides convincing, morally acceptable support for behavior or for a belief or occurrence;

Justifying my own reasons is not the point of the debate.

Like seeing a song on the radio, before you go buy the album, or playing a game at your friends house and deciding you want one too. Sharing items has always lead to encouraging other's to purchase the same item. This is the argument. That many people would miss out on even seeing these movies or games if it wasnt for piracy - I know there is lots of stuff I would never have seen, or owned. This on top of the fact that not everyone who pirates can afford these items in the first place. If it wasnt for the internet, they would simply borrow and copy off a friend instead or not bother at all.

Often with the game forums I participate for many of the single player games I play, its easy to tell the buyers from the pirates if you know what to look for. Many of the pirates are short term visitors, and a lot of them seem to be immature. Which suggests to me that there are a lot of kids there, who arent buying their own games, which id say is because their parents wont buy it for them. The other is that in the P2P scene, many people just get stuff because it's there, and arent really interested in it. So much of it is short term interest.

Modding communities are also helped by pirates, as they add content to the communities and in doing so, encourage other people to buy the game.

Back in the Commodore 64 days, friends would copy each other's games all the time, and that in turn encouraged more to buy the computer, and more to buy games for it. If game companies werent still making a small fortune from these games, regardless of illegal sharing, then we wouldnt have reached this point in time, where games are getting bigger budget all the time and where computer hardware is driven by the games that are made.

Microsoft was also quoted in saying once, that they would prefer people to be using their OS over a competitor's product, even if they didnt pay for it. I believe Symantec said something similar about their Norton products at one point. Simply because more people using the product makes it more popular and being more popular sells more product. This can be seen by all those barely known games out there, some of which are very good, but because they dont have a lot of publicity (popularity), they barely turn a profit, which is again what drives publishers to advertise. Word of mouth and good reviews drive popularity and which drives sales. Especially when it comes to Music and movies, or royalties from related products (toys, clothes).

An example of the above. I go to a popular forum, telling people about a movie I watched (I pirated it), and 50 people read it, half of them watch it two, and half of those watching it bought it. Because i've just pirated it, now the company sold 25 more.

There are too many companies out there blaming pirates for lack of sales, where its most likely more to the fact that they made a crappy product. Like Ewe Boll films. No one in their right mind would actually buy one.

I give up on this one not becuase Im wrong but becuase you have justified you actions and I can honestly say I really dont care.

Care: A burdened state of mind, as that arising from heavy responsibilities; worry.

I also watch a lot of stuff online, streaming it to my pc, to watch one time only.
A great example is the tv shows, heroes and battlestar galactica. The reason for this is I just dont have the patience to wait for it on tv. I pay my tv license and pay extra for sky satilite tv, both these shows I have already payed for, just I dont want to wait the extra month or so to watch it on my tv.
Also like Istik, i watch movies online for free, but most of the movies I watch are stuff I wouldnt rent nor go to the cinema to watch. Sometimes I come across a movie that I really enjoyed and was surprised at. But otherwise would have no interest in it if I had to pay and would never watch it unless it came on tv and if could be bothered to watch it.

Stuff I am interested in I will go to the cinema and watch it, or rent it as part of the i love films dvd rental account I have.

What Istik said about he watches a movie he copied or whatever and others hear his review and pay to watch it who otherwisw wouldnt have, is true. Recently I watched paul blart mall cop on the internet for free, I had never heard of it before then found out a week later it was at the cinema and a couple of friends had actually went to the cinema and watched it purely because of my recomendation, the admitted they wouldnt have bothered otherwise. So the company who made it has gained as I would never have watched it at cinema as I had never heard of it, prob never rented it so therefore never paid for it anyway.

There are certain films that just need, imho, to be seen in the cinema such as The Empire Strikes Back, 2001, Stargate (flying pyramids ftw!) the Lord of the Rings films and so on. Mamma Mia! whilst not a visual feast with space ships, pyramids or orcs, was a great deal of fun to watch in the cinema with a lot of other girls and I'm glad I went to see it there. Then there are delightful arthouse films and those that were converted from the stage to the cinema which I enjoy watching in a cosy cinema - preferably one dedicated to the genre.

As to the rest, the high price of visiting the cinema combined with the sub par story, dialogue, [lack of] characterisation and continuity make for films that are not worth the price of a bag of popcorn, in my own view. If it isn't something that I know I want to see, I'll wait for it to turn up on TV or borrow it from someone.

Speaking of TV, I can't abide adverts and will no longer watch anything broadcast with adverts during the programme or film. I couldn't imagine watching something like Seven Pounds, which was a beautiful and thoughtful story, and having it interrupted every thirty minutes by five minutes of jarring adverts for washing powder, breakfast cereal, kids toys, indigestion remedies and cars

What that doesn't outline is where I stand on the matter of piracy: with so much crap around, I don't blame anyone for wanting to download and watch a movie for free to find out if it is something they will enjoy. Personally if I really enjoy a film or TV series, I will buy it.

And that leads me onto albums and the drop in standards. Too many musicians/record companies are putting out albums with two or three good songs and five or six dreadfully dull dirges. It may be a matter of my own personal taste but I think it is simply greed in the rush to make an album and reap in the profits. I don't buy newly recorded albums anymore. I buy the tracks I like from iTunes and hope that my silent protest and my money will encourage the record companies to allow musicians (or make them - I don't know how it works) to record a whole album's worth of great songs just like it used to be.

/soapbox

This has been determined by the world courts that copyrighted material distribution is a crime.

Lores wrote:This has been determined by the world courts that copyrighted material distribution is a crime.

So you always do what someone tells you and never think for yourself? Because something is a law, does that make it right? We could all cite laws that for some reason or other had to be changed. Im not saying that this law is wrong, because it's not. It was put in place to stop piracy which is someone infact stealing from these production companies. The problem is that it costs to much to buy this product. And I'd say more then half of the time it's poor product. Also it's just to easy to get this product for free or close to free. Bad combination.

For agruments sake lets keep this about movies. The movie production companies can/need to combat piracy. This by no means is a solution but just an example to open your mind:

What if going to the cinemas, you weren't paying for the film but for the overall experience? Say to combat piracy the production company showed their new releases on their website? Maybe say 5-7 days after opening night. It would be better quality obviously then any pirate could produce and there would be really no reason for them to do so. Now why would they do something like this? Well how many hits would this website receive? How much Advertising would this generate?

Would this stop people from going to the theaters? Not if they lowered the price on tickets it wouldn't. If it cost $5 for a ticket instead of $10 and popcorn cost $3 for a large instead of $5. (why does it cost $5 for a large and $4.50 for a small) People would go see a movie in the theater for the experience that surrounds the movie they've been craving to see. Yeah they can sit home and watch it in their computer chair or on their sofa with microwave popcorn. But would they rather pay sensible prices for a big screen, surround sound deafing speakers, yummy popcorn prepared for them with a smile, and to just get out of the house with friends and loved ones?

Would you go to the movies more then you do now if it cost half as much? Even if it meant you could wait a few days and see a high quality version on your cpu? I know I would go out more to the theater...especially with my kids. The difference would be the production company would get more ad revenue.

Im not saying that this is even reasonable but its just an alternative from the top of my stupid head. With the influx of the internet into the mainstream and now a generation growning entirely up in it...a change in this matter seems inevitable in the coming years. Whether its enforcing stricter penalties against piracy or something else. I hope its something else.

So Lores, in time if there is a change that makes viewing new releases from websites legal, would that makes us who do download these movies in the present, be seen as being part of the problem or part of the solution?

Molten Prominence wrote:

Lores wrote:This has been determined by the world courts that copyrighted material distribution is a crime.

So you always do what someone tells you and never think for yourself? Because something is a law, does that make it right? We could all cite laws that for some reason or other had to be changed. Im not saying that this law is wrong, because it's not. It was put in place to stop piracy which is someone infact stealing from these production companies. The problem is that it costs to much to buy this product. And I'd say more then half of the time it's poor product. Also it's just to easy to get this product for free or close to free. Bad combination.

For agruments sake lets keep this about movies. The movie production companies can/need to combat piracy. This by no means is a solution but just an example to open your mind:

What if going to the cinemas, you weren't paying for the film but for the overall experience? Say to combat piracy the production company showed their new releases on their website? Maybe say 5-7 days after opening night. It would be better quality obviously then any pirate could produce and there would be really no reason for them to do so. Now why would they do something like this? Well how many hits would this website receive? How much Advertising would this generate?

Would this stop people from going to the theaters? Not if they lowered the price on tickets it wouldn't. If it cost $5 for a ticket instead of $10 and popcorn cost $3 for a large instead of $5. (why does it cost $5 for a large and $4.50 for a small) People would go see a movie in the theater for the experience that surrounds the movie they've been craving to see. Yeah they can sit home and watch it in their computer chair or on their sofa with microwave popcorn. But would they rather pay sensible prices for a big screen, surround sound deafing speakers, yummy popcorn prepared for them with a smile, and to just get out of the house with friends and loved ones?

Would you go to the movies more then you do now if it cost half as much? Even if it meant you could wait a few days and see a high quality version on your cpu? I know I would go out more to the theater...especially with my kids. The difference would be the production company would get more ad revenue.

Im not saying that this is even reasonable but its just an alternative from the top of my stupid head. With the influx of the internet into the mainstream and now a generation growning entirely up in it...a change in this matter seems inevitable in the coming years. Whether its enforcing stricter penalties against piracy or something else. I hope its something else.

So Lores, in time if there is a change that makes viewing new releases from websites legal, would that makes us who do download these movies in the present, be seen as being part of the problem or part of the solution?

Their is something out there similiar to what you are suggesting, its called spotify a new music website with the backing of major music labels. Basically its a giant online mp3 player, that allows the user to listen to the music whenever they want, but you cant download it or copy it on listen to it. The advertise on it so you may get an advert before your song but not all the time. Or you pay a monthly sub and get no adverts. And every time a song is played the company that own the song rights gets a small commision, so the music companies make money and the website owners make money from advertising and subscription, could work with movies.

I only go to the cinema for the experience anyway, its they way a good movie should be watched almost tradition.

The reason a large popcorn is $5 and a small $4.50, is to do with mareting as the companies want you to pay $5 and not $4.50 and they appear to give you a choice, but most will opt to pay $5.00 as it appears to be cheaper than paying $4.50 more bang for your buck. In terms of the company selling more popcorn on ratio basis and making less money, doesnt happen, as the popcorn costs next to nothing for them anyway as they buy in huge quantities, and a lot of popcorn goes to waste, so the more that buy the large, less popcorn goes to waste, so the amount the company pays for their product wether you buy small or large is the same. The company just makes more cash as all those 5o cents add up. or something like that.

Molt, Im sure your piratcy is not an act of civil disobedence.