The W
Views: 121982980
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
28.3.10 2236
The 7 - Random - Oscar Screeners & You: What It All Means
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
(1954 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Post (9 total)
Level: 113

Posts: 1413/3504
EXP: 15470381
For next: 348228

Since: 3.1.02
From: Calgary

Since last post: 1192 days
Last activity: 880 days
#1 Posted on 29.10.03 1723.53
Reposted on: 29.10.10 1729.02
Last month, Motion Picture Association of America President Jack Valenti announced plans to no longer provide DVD "screener" copies to the various film award voters, citing piracy of these screeners as the main reason. In the past, if you were say...a member of any number of film assocations that held awards were given screener copies to watch, since there's no way you could get to the cineplex to watch ALL of the films you should be considering. But this move basically clipped small films in their tracks. Why? Films such as Lost In Translation, the Station Agent and Whale Rider (to name a few) are produced and marketed so that they would recieve a certain amount of attention from critics, and as such would recieve some attention from the awards the critics vote on. And as such, would garner more attention from filmgoers as a result of that critical attention. But if the critics cannot see these films (via screeners), how the heck would they be able to give accurate praise?

To quoth Roger Ebert: "The Valenti Decree would cripple the chance of a small independent film getting an Oscar nomination. With dozens of films opening at year end, the academy population lacks the time and energy to attend all those screenings in theaters. The DVDs pile up at home, and when the buzz turns hot on a title, they look at it."

Various film critics agreed with that sentiment, and voiced their disapproval at the move. David Poland & Ebert among others expressed their displeasure and the Los Angeles Film Critics Assocation simply decided to forego their annual awards ceremony (a precursor to the Oscars) in protest...unless the screener ban was lifted.

The MPAA & Valenti caved. The September 30th ban was lifted on October 23rd...sort of. VHS tapes will be sent to Academy members this year with the intent of stopping digital piracy by simply foregoing the digital format this year.

So, what does this all mean? Sure, the screener ban has been scrapped for this year. But in the future, filmmakers might not be so lucky. A quick browse through the results of the 75th Oscars reveals the harm a ban could do: MPAA member companies produced films that yielded all but 20 nominations.

Comments are welcomed.
Promote this thread!
The Vile1
Lap cheong
Level: 82

Posts: 358/1694
EXP: 5084950
For next: 124299

Since: 4.9.02
From: California

Since last post: 2900 days
Last activity: 2632 days
#2 Posted on 29.10.03 1742.21
Reposted on: 29.10.10 1742.25
Well I will say this. The fact that most piracy is caused by critics, academy members, and industry insiders and workers leaking things like Oscar screeners puts an interesting spin on things doesn't it? Adds a whole new angle to those "don't download movies" ads celebrities cavort around in.
Level: 132

Posts: 1530/5065
EXP: 26888767
For next: 243237

Since: 2.1.02
From: MD, USA

Since last post: 1015 days
Last activity: 982 days
#3 Posted on 29.10.03 1900.39
Reposted on: 29.10.10 1905.53

I believe the LA Critics said that the VHS screeners weren't enough for them to scrap their awards and they wouldn't reinstate them until the whole ban was rescinded.

On a tangential note, I saw Kill Bill again and for the first time, I really noticed those annoying red dots that are meant as an anti-piracy device.
Lap cheong
Level: 78

Posts: 907/1495
EXP: 4309902
For next: 72343

Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 720 days
Last activity: 644 days
#4 Posted on 29.10.03 2134.23
Reposted on: 29.10.10 2136.45
Couldn't a solution be simply that films will be distributed to critics at the filmmaker's request?
Mild Mannered Madman
Level: 73

Posts: 801/1274
EXP: 3374352
For next: 111533

Since: 1.3.02
From: Westminster, CA

Since last post: 1357 days
Last activity: 1075 days
#5 Posted on 29.10.03 2243.33
Reposted on: 29.10.10 2245.14
It's already been rescinded...
Big Bad
Level: 152

Posts: 2376/7020
EXP: 43868760
For next: 433002

Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 4 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#6 Posted on 29.10.03 2246.23
Reposted on: 29.10.10 2248.39
Perhaps the only good part about this crackdown on piracy is that maybe it'll spur the Academy into giving the critics (who see all the movies at their own screenings) a vote in the Academy Awards. It just makes sense that the most informed people get a say.
Nate The Snake
Level: 69

Posts: 795/1136
EXP: 2854263
For next: 15495

Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 4636 days
Last activity: 4105 days
#7 Posted on 29.10.03 2250.14
Reposted on: 29.10.10 2251.18 the critics get piles of free DVD screeners, let them pile up while they go see the "big" movies, don't bother watching anything smaller unless the buzz gets big on it and then bitch that they're not going to get the movies they aren't even going to watch unless someone else tells them to for free?

Color me unsympathetic. You want to make sure the little films get exposure then you get off your ass and watch 'em before you see Angelina Jolie's latest mess. People are going to go see "Bad Boys II" and that level of stuff no matter how many critics bash it, but a smaller film needs all the help it can get.

They don't care about the little guy getting Oscar time. They just want to keep getting freebies.

(edited by Nate The Snake on 29.10.03 2252)
Level: 113

Posts: 1414/3504
EXP: 15470381
For next: 348228

Since: 3.1.02
From: Calgary

Since last post: 1192 days
Last activity: 880 days
#8 Posted on 30.10.03 0038.38
Reposted on: 30.10.10 0038.40
Let me put it this way: Quentin Tarantino, Kevin Smith, Robert Rodriguez, Sam Raimi and basically every one of my favorite directors got their start through small, independent features that they had to bleed themselves dry to get funding for. These films weren't immediately seen by any and all comers because the average filmgoer would rather see a blockbuster film that Hollywood spent millions on as opposed to a small black & white feature about a convenience store or a mariachi. People went to see Reservoir Dogs, Clerks, El Mariachi & Evil Dead because of the buzz. Critics went to, say, Sundance, and saw these films and told people about 'em. And then, more critics saw them (via screeners) as a result of that buzz from the festival...and so more people go to see these films. And so, these filmmakers get more and more cred due to this success, and they go out and make movies like Kill Bill, or Spider-Man or the Spy Kids flicks. Without screeners, there's no avenue for the films to get to the critics except for festivals...which are few and far between. How can you expect future filmmakers (like myself) to have an exen keel against the huge machine of Hollywood without allowing more people access to the flicks?

Also, Academy membership is reserved for people who...y'know...make films. It makes sense to me that the outstanding filmmakers are chosen by other filmmakers. The Golden Globes are chosen by the press.

EDIT: And nobody really knows how much piracy stems from the screeners, but it's thought to be fairly low.

(edited by Freeway420 on 29.10.03 2339)
Thirty Millionth Hit
Level: 135

Posts: 1831/5282
EXP: 28635353
For next: 699728

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 121 days
Last activity: 35 days
#9 Posted on 30.10.03 0135.18
Reposted on: 30.10.10 0136.28
    Originally posted by Freeway420

    EDIT: And nobody really knows how much piracy stems from the screeners, but it's thought to be fairly low.

    (edited by Freeway420 on 29.10.03 2339) search=screeners§ion=2-3& sec_id=search& image.x=0&image.y=0

Awards screeners are movie-only DVDs or cassettes that for the last several years, as Oscar competition has heated up, have proliferated. They’re sent to members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, film critics and other awards voters in the weeks leading up to filmdom’s big contests, the Golden Globes and the Oscars.

But invariably, a number of these screeners have wound up on eBay, the online auction house, where they’ve sold at highly inflated prices. Last January, 27 bidders competed for an advance DVD screener of Punch Drunk Love, which ultimately fetched $122.

Studios are alarmed at the prospect of losing a sale once the consumer product hits stores, although their real fear is that some of these screeners might wind up in the hands of pirates with vast underground duplication and distribution networks. Indeed, last year, some bootleg copies of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets being sold in China were traced to an Academy screener.

Something to think about...
Thread ahead: Rod Roddy, dead at 66
Next thread: Malloween and a Random Tech TV Tidbit
Previous thread: Adult Swim Oops
(1954 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Related threads: Wildly Speculative Oscar Thread - Best Actors Without an Oscar Nomination - Half-Year Oscar Picks - More...
The 7 - Random - Oscar Screeners & You: What It All MeansRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

©2001-2015 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.43 seconds.