So even just getting people to buy their product from them is a step forward.

Not if they're losing money off it.

It's a small ethical victory, sure, but the problem of piracy from the studio's POV is that it costs them money. So if they're also losing money in this new setup, it's an entirely pointless venture. I think it's safe to assume that they're at least breaking even.

[eta: When I order DVD stock for my office, the cost per disc is about $0.60. Granted, that's in much smaller quantities (usually only 1,000 at a time) than someone like Warner home video is going to be buying, but there is a substantial difference in cost between DVD and CD blank media.]

It's a small ethical victory, sure, but the problem of piracy from the studio's POV is that it costs them money. So if they're also losing money in this new setup, it's an entirely pointless venture. I think it's safe to assume that they're at least breaking even.

I'm not saying it's an ethical victory. I'm saying it's like the difference between iTunes and what Napster was. People used to steal it for free, but when it became cheaply available legally there was a market for it. People still trade songs without paying, but there is a fairly large market as it turns out that likes the convenience *and* legality.

To establish that market I can see them using a business model that is not profit driven over the short term. Like say, the predatory pricing of Borders where it moves in next to an established independent store, and undercuts them on price because it gets discounts from publishers, and then after it drives the indie out, can raise its prices back up.

Of course, I don't know if that's what they're doing, but establishing themselves in the Chinese market is such a huge venture with such a massive potential upside that it seems like it would be worth taking a short term loss. In any event, they have to price their product close to the pirated versions to get a foothold. I'm guessing that's a bigger factor than profit at this point.

I'm saying it's like the difference between iTunes and what Napster was. People used to steal it for free, but when it became cheaply available legally there was a market for it.

They're not trying to combat illegal free movie downloads, they're trying to compete with the pirated DVDs currently available in every store. It's the difference between paying $10 for a CD in a store and paying $5 for the same CD in a slightly shadier store right next to it.

Like say, the predatory pricing of Borders where it moves in next to an established independent store, and undercuts them on price because it gets discounts from publishers, and then after it drives the indie out, can raise its prices back up.

Warner isn' t undercutting anyone -- they're charging twice the street price of a pirated DVD in hopes that people will pay a premium for the legal version. I'm not saying it won't work (a guarantee that the movie on the outside of the box is the same as the movie inside may very well be worth paying extra for), but I doubt very much that they're losing money over it.

M

Now that's a hell of a movie.

I just saw Ice Age 2. It was just as mediocre as I was expecting. Again, Skrat's quest for the acorn was the best thing about it.

Does Skrat ever get to eat his acorn? Or is he perpetually denied its acorny sustenance, like Tantalus or the Trix Rabbit?

I'm not even sure he wants to eat it; he just wants to have it. But he's definitely a Tantalus figure. In this one, he even dies and goes to a heaven full of acorns...only to be resuscitated before he can grasp the Giant Holy Acorn of Acorns.

They've got a big plasma monitor at the grocery store (in the cereal aisle; Kellogg's tie-in) that shows several Skrat scenes from Ice Age 2 (or, as it's translated here, The Epoch of the Icyness 2 ) over and over, so it's good to know there's no reason for me to part with money to see the movie.

Bought the 3-disc MR. ARKADIN, and watched the third, comprehensive version - basically the one where some film scholars attempted to take the myriad versions of the film and put the various bits together in a way that, to the best of their ability to tell, was the way Welles wanted it.

It's still a mess, but at least it's a comprehensible mess now. Lots of nifty bits, but there are too many moments where the characters actions or inactions just provoke loud choruses of WTF? I have to agree with a number of critics who say that Welles gives probably the weakest performance in the film - he has some lovely moments, but he's often way too hammy, and the makeup is hella distracting (worst beard I've seen since Jeremiah Crichton).

If it's Netflixable, I'd say queuing the third disc is worthwhile. I'm glad I bought it, but I'm not sure I'd recommend it as a purchase to anyone but committed collector. I am curious to hear the commentary on the first version, and I'm also interested in the episodes of "The Adeventures of Harry Lime" radio show that they've included.