Star Wars and George Lucas's Overreach

Recently, George Lucas has made news in the tech world by announcing changes to some of the dialogue in the original Star Wars movies to make the plot and background more complete. The reaction, at least among those who watched the original movies when they were released in the theaters, is that he is needlessly meddling with the movies they love and remember so well just to satisfy his own desires, and it's time that he opened it up (Will Gompertz, BBC News) to the fans to modify and redistribute.
I agree with most of the arguments presented in that post. Basically, the idea is that the artist doesn't have sole control over what happens to a piece of art, and that part of what makes art great is how other people view, use, and build upon it. The artist can't possibly think of every way the piece of art can be used, so it's not right for the artist to simply exclude all unofficial uses; in fact, that is stealing art from the viewers, much more than "piracy" is stealing from the artist. And finally, George Lucas, by essentially writing previous versions of the movies out of official existence, is destroying pieces of art that were valuable in their own right, even if he doesn't think so.
I'd like to add to this that I think there are basically three groups of people with regard to Star Wars fandom: there are those who will regard George Lucas's word as the gospel, those who will regard only the original movies as the gospel, and those who will create their own plot and dialogue patches to satisfy themselves and their friends. So what George Lucas should do is try to continue to sell the revised movies, because those in the first group will come anyway. Leave the movie to the second and third groups, because they will probably not be significant sources of direct revenue, yet they have the right to watch the movies as they see fit. Maybe there will be competition among the official George Lucas revisions, the original unaltered movies, and the fan-made alterations, but that's something that George Lucas will have to deal with, just like any other firm does in a free competitive market.
What do you think? Let me know in the comments below!

FOLLOW-UP: The Film Industry's Next Avatar

This comes from this article (writer Enigmax, Torrent Freak) on filmmaker Enzo Tedeschi's plan to distribute his new movie The Tunnel for free through torrent sites. (Yes, I know the site is called "Torrent Freak", but the article is mostly quotes from Tedeschi himself apart from the introduction about the evils of Hollywood's modus operandi.) People get to buy individual frames of the movie for $1 each — $25 gives one second of the movie (because this movie has a frame rate of 25 FPS), so $1500 gets a full minute of the movie. Along with this, one randomly selected investor gets a 1% cut of the profits (as a sort of investment lottery). Follow the jump for my take.

Some Sanity from the Mainstream Media on Movie Piracy

This comes from a recent article (Mike Ryan, Yahoo! Movies) about how piracy is affecting box office sales of Iron Man 2.
For once, the author (who is probably not a copyright law/tech law junkie; I am not exasperated with this particular author but with mainstream reporters on the subject in general) recognizes that the impact of piracy on box office sales is tiny. The only reason why it is making news is because Paramount has released the film in other countries before releasing it in the US and Canada, so people here will have an even bigger reason to watch a foreign pirated version (as, unlike other movies, this movie would not have been seen by them). The author also recognizes that with the movie Avatar, people had a reason to go into the theaters as the pirated copies were of the 2D version (as current home recording equipment isn't sophisticated enough to allow copying 3D movies without losing the 3-dimensionality of the film) while the theaters were showing the film in 3D. Even the producers of Iron Man 2 admit that they could have made more money at the box office by making the movie 3D (with respect to people not pirating 3D films), and they don't rail on end about how piracy is killing box office sales (because they probably know that it isn't).
At last, I see some sanity in mainstream observers of the movie industry.

What Will Stop the MPAA?

This is really unfortunate (Kathie Dickerson, Coshocton Tribune).
This is the kind of overzealous copyright enforcement I am worried will become a common occurrence in the future; it's why I don't support copyrights in general.
To summarize, the MPAA (movie making industry lobby) has shut down an entire town's wifi because of a single illegally downloaded movie.
I don't support such illegal downloads. I also don't support the myriad restrictions on movie files, but I don't support illegally downloading a movie for free if a fee is charged. People will pay a fee if they feel like the product is worth it. Those that don't but still acquire the movie are stealing; it is in fact the same as eating an apple that isn't yours (though that's where the idea-property analogy ends).
Yet, why should an entire town have to suffer for a single isolated online theft? Should a national grocery store chain (by analogy with the MPAA's nationwide presence) close down one of its stores just because the store owner realizes that a single item has been taken (say, a candy next to the check-out counter) without being paid for? That would be ruinous for the townspeople.
Please, if you find yourself in a situation like this, ask the MPAA, RIAA, or whatever to stop.
This story has also been reported on BoingBoing and Slashdot; you can read more there.

Movie Review: The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas

This is the first in the series of reviews I will post on this blog in the title form "[Category] Review: [Title...]".
Last night my cousins and I decided to watch a movie, so that's the one we picked.
[alert type="synopsis"]
It's about a German boy who's dad is a Nazi SS Guard who has been restationed such that he and his family live near the Jewish death camp that he must lead. The boy loves exploring on his own and soon finds the camp, meeting a Jewish boy in the camp across the fence in the process and becoming friends with the Jewish boy.
[/alert]
[alert]
(I may use tongue-in-cheek HTML syntax a lot. However, they will be in square brackets as the text editor interprets tongue-in-cheek HTML as real HTML, so the syntax won't show up when published - only blanks will.)
[/alert]
[alert type="spoiler"]
The boy, on the day he and his family must move away, digs a hole under the fence to get into the camp to play with the Jewish boy in disguise of a boy in the camp. However, all of the Jews in the labor camp are rounded up, and while the family tries to find their missing son, the boy and his Jewish friend are sentenced to death by gassing and are gassed (too late for the family to save him).
[/alert]
I actually learned of the ending from one of the cousins who stayed up to watch it. I didn't have the guts to continue when the boy started digging under the fence.
The film makers did an excellent job with the movie, what with all of the great dialogue, shots, and background music. The music was oddly playful and ominous simultaneously and that's what made it so freaky.
Granted, I can easily be scared by a movie scene, but this was really disturbing from start to finish. All Holocaust movies are, and though I haven't seen a particularly graphic one yet, this is still a chilling movie.
My cousin who suggested it said it's a kid's Holocaust movie.
(1) That's not possible simply because of what the Holocaust was.
(2) It may technically be true if only in relation to other more graphic Holocaust movies.
He also suggested that this was the best way to introduce them to the subject. I beg to differ. I would suggest, as it is done today, a light discussion of it at school and then a serious follow-up at home or at school later. This is the best way to clear up the many doubts that form in the younger child's mind.
Sure, it's rated PG because it has no sex, violence, or profanity, but it is an extremely weighty subject that needs to be dealt with carefully.
I think it's a great movie, but it should be re-rated to PG-13 (at least), because it's definitely not kid-friendly if only because of the underlying subject matter itself.