Movie Conspiracy?
Posted: June 20th, 2011, 7:59 pm
If entertainment exists as a means of social conditioning and programming the masses, does this mean that all entertainment falls into this category? What about independents?
In the "good old days", men like Edison and Eastman, the founders of GE and Kodak respectively, gave the world the motion picture camera and film. One might be tempted to use the word "created", but often times these things are the products of other inventors and large corporations screw them over and make millions, or start wars, from and with their inventions. That, however, is another conspiracy thread. In any case, Edison and Eastman took their respective technologies and create The Motion Picture Patents Group.
The purpose of this group was to control the motion picture industry. Cameras were available only for rental, as is still the case today with Panavision cameras and lenses, and for an exorbitant fee. Only the rich could afford to make movies, and even then, only if the Motion Picture Patents Group approved your script. It was also the case that Kodak controlled who could and could not buy film. Basically this group insured that the only movies that would get made, were those they wanted to get made.
Along came four brothers bearing the last name Warner. One of the biggest developments under their watch was the addition of sound to film. They formed a great studio, and many others followed suit. Thus the studio system was born. Actors, writers and directors were under contract with a particular studio, and could not work for any other. If you didn't know someone, you didn't get in. People on the outside were destined to remain so.
With the advent of unions and guilds, the studio system eventually broke down to some degree, but it is still there. Now, however, the guilds also exert control. If you're not in the guild, you can't play. You can't work on a film with guild members. This caused some people to move to Texas where these rules don't apply. The problem is, they might be able to make what they want, but will they ever get it distributed? There is some measure of control at every step in the process.
Today we have cameras costing as little as $1000 that can shoot quality approaching what the big studios are using. There are cameras like the Red One, which still probably costs less than your car, which can beat the quality of the cameras used on most 35mm academy films. Someone could, with the technology today, including these cameras, low cost editing and special software and great sound equipment, now all cheap enough for many to afford, shoot and edit a film that is every bit is technically competitive with anything the majors can put out. In fact, some have. So why aren't we seeing these films? Where are they? Why aren't they make hundreds of millions at the box office?
The internet was supposed to open the doors to allow independents direct access to their market. No more gatekeepers, no more Motion Picture Patents Group, no more barriers to distribution. This did happen, I guess, but the majors quickly jumped in with sites and systems like Hulu, iTunes, Myspace and others, drowning out any independent voices with their vast libraries of mainstream content and hundreds of millions in advertising. The things is, they're not making any money! So what is the point? The point is, they don't want you to have your audience. They don't want you to have your voice. They are willing to make sacrifices, even their precious money, to make sure that the only content is their content.
They can't stop you from making it anymore. They can't stop people from watching it anymore. They can, however, make sure no one finds out about it, by being bigger, louder and very well advertised!
In the "good old days", men like Edison and Eastman, the founders of GE and Kodak respectively, gave the world the motion picture camera and film. One might be tempted to use the word "created", but often times these things are the products of other inventors and large corporations screw them over and make millions, or start wars, from and with their inventions. That, however, is another conspiracy thread. In any case, Edison and Eastman took their respective technologies and create The Motion Picture Patents Group.
The purpose of this group was to control the motion picture industry. Cameras were available only for rental, as is still the case today with Panavision cameras and lenses, and for an exorbitant fee. Only the rich could afford to make movies, and even then, only if the Motion Picture Patents Group approved your script. It was also the case that Kodak controlled who could and could not buy film. Basically this group insured that the only movies that would get made, were those they wanted to get made.
Along came four brothers bearing the last name Warner. One of the biggest developments under their watch was the addition of sound to film. They formed a great studio, and many others followed suit. Thus the studio system was born. Actors, writers and directors were under contract with a particular studio, and could not work for any other. If you didn't know someone, you didn't get in. People on the outside were destined to remain so.
With the advent of unions and guilds, the studio system eventually broke down to some degree, but it is still there. Now, however, the guilds also exert control. If you're not in the guild, you can't play. You can't work on a film with guild members. This caused some people to move to Texas where these rules don't apply. The problem is, they might be able to make what they want, but will they ever get it distributed? There is some measure of control at every step in the process.
Today we have cameras costing as little as $1000 that can shoot quality approaching what the big studios are using. There are cameras like the Red One, which still probably costs less than your car, which can beat the quality of the cameras used on most 35mm academy films. Someone could, with the technology today, including these cameras, low cost editing and special software and great sound equipment, now all cheap enough for many to afford, shoot and edit a film that is every bit is technically competitive with anything the majors can put out. In fact, some have. So why aren't we seeing these films? Where are they? Why aren't they make hundreds of millions at the box office?
The internet was supposed to open the doors to allow independents direct access to their market. No more gatekeepers, no more Motion Picture Patents Group, no more barriers to distribution. This did happen, I guess, but the majors quickly jumped in with sites and systems like Hulu, iTunes, Myspace and others, drowning out any independent voices with their vast libraries of mainstream content and hundreds of millions in advertising. The things is, they're not making any money! So what is the point? The point is, they don't want you to have your audience. They don't want you to have your voice. They are willing to make sacrifices, even their precious money, to make sure that the only content is their content.
They can't stop you from making it anymore. They can't stop people from watching it anymore. They can, however, make sure no one finds out about it, by being bigger, louder and very well advertised!