Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » "FilthyFlicks" vs. "Clean-Flicks" (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: "FilthyFlicks" vs. "Clean-Flicks"
John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 09-25-2002 12:50 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The battle of good vs. evil begins --- choose your side:
http://tv.yahoo.com/news/sal/20020920/103256058200.html
http://www.salon.com/ent/wire/2002/09/21/lawsuit/print.html
http://digitalmass.boston.com/news/globe_tech/upgrade/2002/0819.html
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0828/p09s02-cojh.html

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 09-25-2002 01:57 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I've read about this, but haven't seen anything to indicate how they are actually doing the editing. I assume that they are not physically splicing the videotapes.

As much as I don't really like what Cleanflicks is doing, I don't believe that it should be illegal. It sounds like they are making an attempt to make clear that their versions of the films are altered and that they aren't illegally pirating anything (since everly "clean" copy requires the purchase of a legitimate copy). It sounds like they are doing the equivalent of selling a book with pages removed, which is perfectly legal in the US.

 |  IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 09-25-2002 06:46 PM      Profile for Adam Martin   Author's Homepage   Email Adam Martin       Edit/Delete Post 
A guy named "Rod Cumming" who makes movies "involving his trademark blend of gymnasts, Ping-Pong paddles and kiwi fruit."

The Onion couldn't come up with a better story!

Regarding the missing pages in a book, at least you can tell that it's not there since the pages are numbered. In a movie, I doubt they're replacing the footage with "Scene Missing" cards.

 |  IP: Logged

David Favel
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 764
From: Ashburton, New Zealand
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 09-25-2002 10:19 PM      Profile for David Favel   Email David Favel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
These guys are doing what T.V. stations & airlines have been doing for years.

Perhaps it is because permission has not been given?

Personally the idea of living in Johnny Dangerously's life fargin sargs. The iceholes. The fargin cork sargers.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 09-25-2002 10:34 PM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
No physical cutting of course with videotape, just selective copying. They're laying their edited version down onto an orginal tape, presumably after bulk erasing it. So the buyer is buying a legitimately licensed tape, just altered without the rights holders' permission. If I were the judge I would hold that it is a violation of copyright law. I don't think the fact that it's layed down on what used to be a licensed tape cassette obviates the fact that they ARE making a copy without permission.

But a bit of software to play a DVD on a computer in a selective order I would think would be in compliance.

One TV report had the guy demonstrating it and concluding with a remark to the effect that he hadn't changed the story so why are the filmmakers upset. Um...like some two-bit weasel in a video store ought to pass judgement on what is or is not important to the story. One imagines Schindler's List with the holocaust edited out!

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 09-26-2002 04:46 AM      Profile for Dave Williams   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Williams   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The problem comes down to intellectual property rights. Can someone purchase a single copy of a movie, edit it any way he/she sees fit, and resell that movie with only the term "edited" added to it?

Does it change the story? Does it change the directors vision? Answer, yes. When editing without permission, you create a new product, not authorized by the copyright holder. This is not the same movie, it is now a totally different movie.

If the movie is too harsh for you to watch in its original form, then why the hell would you want to watch it edited? You wont see what all the fuss is about because you wont be watching the same movie.

I have seen a demonstration between the original and the clean version. It is horrifying. Saving Private Ryan becomes 20 minutes shorter, and has no blood, or direct acts of violence. Hey, this is a war movie.

Would you believe that they also edited "The Princess Diaries"? Yep, not sure for what, but they did.

It is unfortunate, but this editing craze is religeously driven, and backed heavily by mormon interest. I am appauled because as a mormon, I feel that my fellow man is trying to tell me what to do. This is not the mission of this particular church, but so many people in it, think that they must save the world from themselves.

Our original founder, Joe Smith, had stated publicly that our value system was driven by the desire to aquire all things of beauty and culture. How fortunate that we no longer live to that standard, but instead try to create our own version of what everyone else has.

Either live in the world, or shut up and sit down.

Dave

Dave


 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 09-26-2002 05:50 AM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
So if Clean Flicks is actually copying a new version _over_ an existing, licensed videotape, then I can definitely agree that they are violating copyright law. I'm surprised that they thought that they could ever get away with that.

I'm amazed to hear that there are "edited" versions of SPR. For those who don't want to see violence: DON'T WATCH WAR MOVIES!


 |  IP: Logged

Steve Kraus
Film God

Posts: 4094
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Registered: May 2000


 - posted 09-26-2002 11:29 AM      Profile for Steve Kraus     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Scott, the right has always been against realistic depictions of war. Apparently they don't want to dissuade people from it. Look at the protests over "The Day After" tv movie, and, IIRC, "Testament." They didn't dispute the technical details of what would happen after a nuclear war; they were angry that anyone could suggest that a nuclear war could even happen at all. I've heard mentions amidst the talk of a war against Iraq that they regret allowing news footage of the 'highway of death' from the Gulf War to be shown--and that was what most people, me included, consider to be a just cause. But death and destruction have a way of turning people off to war so that was a mistake they will avoid in the future by tighter management (read: censorship) of war news by controlling access to the fronts.

 |  IP: Logged

Thomas Procyk
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1842
From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 09-26-2002 12:46 PM      Profile for Thomas Procyk   Email Thomas Procyk   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If people are offended by bad words, sex, or violence in movies, then don't watch that movie. We shouldn't have to butcher works of art so that they can "appeal" to these oh-so-sensitive ideallistic hermits. Some people feel that the world needs to bend to their standards. They wanted ratings reasons, they got them. So now are they going to use those ratings reasons to decide what should be CUT from the film??

"I really wanted to see Steven Spielberg's masterpiece, 'Saving Private Ryan' but I didn't really much care for all those people being killed in the battlefield..." -- Shut the H-E-double-hockey-sticks up!!!

=TMP=


 |  IP: Logged

Michael Gonzalez
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 790
From: Grand Island , NE USA
Registered: Sep 2000


 - posted 09-26-2002 03:44 PM      Profile for Michael Gonzalez   Email Michael Gonzalez   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I am no expert but I am pretty sure that this "news story" going to turn out to be a Hoax.

 |  IP: Logged

Robert E. Allen
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1078
From: Checotah, Oklahoma
Registered: Jul 2002


 - posted 09-26-2002 03:45 PM      Profile for Robert E. Allen   Email Robert E. Allen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It's a mistake, Steve, to paint everyone on "the right" with the same paintbrush. I have no problem with special effects (such as bloody war scenes). However, in my 57 years in and around the movie business I have never seen a sex scene or heard a vulgar word that, in my opinion, has added anything to a film. And I certainly wouldn't call any of that "art work" Thomas. I believe it's a sad commentary on our industry that it has degenerated to the use of gutter language (for shock effect) and sexual intercourse portrayals (apparently to foster an appetite for pornography). It seems today's writers grew up in an amoral atmosphere and are not aware that not everyone in the world behaves in that manner and apparently don't know either that you really CAN write a good story without including profanity and sex. BTW, I agree that no film should be edited without the copyrite owner's permission. And just to set the record straight I have nothing against sex (I'm the father of nine children). It's the exploitation of it to which I object.

Bob
The Old Showman

 |  IP: Logged

Dwayne Caldwell
Master Film Handler

Posts: 323
From: Rockwall, TX, USA
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 09-26-2002 04:18 PM      Profile for Dwayne Caldwell   Email Dwayne Caldwell   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
It seems today's writers grew up in an amoral atmosphere and are not aware that not everyone in the world behaves in that manner and apparently don't know either that you really CAN write a good story without including profanity and sex.

Have you ever read Catcher in the Rye, Bob? That's littered with graphic language and it was published in 1951. Or how about Chaucer's Canterbury Tales which was written in the late fourteenth century? Better yet, look at some of the implyed sexual situations in ancient Greek mythology. Today's writers grew up in an amoral atmosphere? Give me a break.


 |  IP: Logged

Robert E. Allen
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1078
From: Checotah, Oklahoma
Registered: Jul 2002


 - posted 09-26-2002 06:28 PM      Profile for Robert E. Allen   Email Robert E. Allen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yes, that garbage has been around forever, but never to the degree it is today. Today's writers seem to be enjoying some sort of new found "freedom" and are trying to see how far they can push the envelope by being as offensive as possible.

So, are you saying they CAN'T make a good movie without using vulgar language and sexual exploitation? And what useful literary purpose do you feel those serve?

Bob
The Old Showman

 |  IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99


 - posted 09-26-2002 08:51 PM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
How about when stuff like that is used for realism? If a war movie was made, you can't really make it realistic without graphically violent scenes. Also, soldiers DO cuss. It would be unrealistic to change the way they speak for the movie. So as far as making a movie as realistic as possible, it DOES enhance the storytelling. I would laugh at a movie like Private Ryan if the worst word in there was "dagnabbit". Nobody could even begin to take the movie seriously if it were without the cuss words and the violence.

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 09-26-2002 09:08 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Compare "The Longest Day" and "Saving Private Ryan". Very different movies in the level of raw language and graphic bloodshed. Both films were excellent in telling the story of D-Day. I'm glad we have both to enjoy and learn from.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.