5 ms·
'Avatar' pulled from 2-D screens by Chinese government
- maxklein 17y agoSo? China is not a capitalist country or a free market country, and they are under no obligation to enable an American company profit for as long as it wants. Most of the money being taken in by Avatar comes from normal chinese people, and is sent straight to America. A controlled market economy is supposed to keep this outflow of cash controlled. It's a different economic model being practised in China, and this move is perfectly in line with the stated goals of the model. Nobody loses, it's just an American Multinational that does not profit as much.
- netcan 17y agoAn economist might say the people who don't get to watch the movie lose.
- maxklein 17y agoIt's available as a DVD in the stores.
- netcan 17y agoAs long as they would have chosen to go to see the movie potential utility has been lost, from a basic economics perspective. How much exactly depends on the maximum they would have paid to see it, how much it would have cost and what alternatives (eg dvd) are available
- maxklein 17y agoWhat about the grocers etc that lose because of the money that was transported overseas rather than locally?
- eru 17y agoAmerica has grocers, too.
- netcan 17y agoJust to make things more complicated, those grocery stores carry many Chinese goods.
- netcan 17y agoThis not the place to go through all of economics. I am not the person to do it either. I just wanted to point out a fallacy in your 'nobody loses' statement: You are only considering the business side of the equation. To an economist, the consumer is where the numbers get added. When a consumer chooses option A over option B, there is value in that choice. It might be savings (and the ability to use the amount saved on something else). It might be additional value (Avatar is better then Chinatar). That value is the scorecard for an economy.
- richardw 17y agoIn China the DVD will be copied, which isn't as likely with the film experience. Frankly, both countries worry about the balance of payments, which Chinese consumers consuming American movies helps. To have China focus on keeping every last dollar inside the borders is a form of protectionism, which if other countries followed would result in a general slowdown of trade. Sure this particular movie is a tiny blip, but then if so they should just play the movie until nobody wants to see it. India doesn't have a hard time making movies - Bollywood is a huge success and they export to the rest of the world. Seems like a healthy balance to me.
- ErrantX 17y ago> Nobody loses, Cinema's lose a lucrative crowd.
- nir 17y ago"Nobody loses" - you feel it's healthy that the government dictates what's playing in cinemas? The fact that it's Avatar just tells you about the odds for a film that actually has some value, eg criticism of the ruling party.
- maxklein 17y agoThat's how the chinese system works. It's a communist country with a communist party and a controlled economy: it's not a suprise if this happens. If you don't like such a system that's fine, protest the system, but don't protest a tiny part of the system. If you don't want communism, then say that, but don't say "Avatar should be allowed to make as much profit as it wants, but I don't care about the system". Do you understand the distinction here?
- eru 17y agoWhich definition of communism are you using?
- nir 17y ago>don't say "Avatar should be allowed to make as much profit as it wants, but I don't care about the system" I won't. And IIRC, I haven't.. I understand your point on China's nature, I was wondering about the "nobody loses" conclusion.
- mingdingo 17y agoLooks like it's to protect domestic Chinese films, as the 3-D version is still playing in theaters. Alternate point of view: "According to a report in the Hong Kong newspaper Apple Daily, the move was made at the urging of propaganda officials who are concerned that "Avatar" is taking too much market share from Chinese films and drawing unwanted attention to the sensitive issue of forced evictions." Apparently only 20 foreign movies are allowed to be shown in Chinese theaters every year. Regardless of the reasons, it's still a very fenced-in society.
- yummyfajitas 17y agoSomeone tell me again why we allow Chinese imports? We should seriously consider allowing only 20 kinds of Chinese-made consumer electronics into the US, and banning any model which gets popular enough to threaten non-Chinese manufacturers.
- dejb 17y ago> Someone tell me again why we allow Chinese imports? It's called freedom.
- bjelkeman-again 17y ago... and don't forget the greed. Looked at where stuff is made recently? I see a ton of stuff around me that comes directly from China. We like to buy stuff cheap from China, and we like to ignore the fact that China is not a free society. If we cared we would vote with our wallets, but we don't care. And in my opinion so don't a lot of Chinese (I didn't say all, or even most, but a lot) as long as it brings in the cash and the BMWs.
- maxklein 17y agoBut...that's what THEY are doing. Do you not become the same when you do that?
- yummyfajitas 17y ago
- c1sc0 17y agoI think these recent signs of heightened sensitivity by the Chinese censor is actually a good sign. Are they panicking because it is impossible to turn the information tide?
- netcan 17y agoI think China is getting incredibly good at operating in an imperfect rule where they do not control all information and cannot stop information completely. They control or influence enough flow to influence public opinion, commonly accepted narratives and history. I think that this makes them extremely robust. Sneak ten thousand satellite internet connections into North Korea and you will have a measurable impact. There is no equivalent for China.
- andreyf 17y agoThey control or influence enough flow to influence public opinion, commonly accepted narratives and history. American power does this without tyrannical media control just fine, it just takes a lot more resources. It's a matter of PR efficiency, more than anything.
- netcan 17y agoYou have a point, it's all a matter of degrees.
- anigbrowl 17y agoAs it's still on ~900 3-d screens, I don't really think it's a censorship issue, unless you figure political views are linked to stereo vision capability ;)
- eraad 17y agoGoogle should license the film and put it on YouTube for Chinese to watch it for free.
- Steve_Baker 17y agoAnyone who wants to see Avatar (or any western movie) in China can just plunk down the 9-10 yuan (<$1.50) for a (probably pretty decent) bootleg DVD that can be found in just about any marketplace. I'm sure this is mostly for posturing and perhaps economic reasons. I'm sure they sometimes do these things just to remind people that they're there and that they can, even if the people there aren't overly impressed or bothered by it. My inlaws in China probably watch more American movies than I do and I have netflix.
- dw0rm 17y agoHere (in Russia) we watch everything for free in HDTV quality.
- jcl 17y agoThe funny thing is that it is Americans' relative willingness to pay for movies that allows the American movie industry to create in the scale that they do. If bootlegging weren't so prevalent in China, perhaps their movie industry wouldn't need to be supported by decree, and perhaps their marketplaces wouldn't be awash in what are effectively advertisements for America.
- coliveira 17y agoOf course Avatar must look really crappy on these bootlegged DVDs. I guess many Chinese would like to spend the additional money to watch it in 3D.
- prawn 17y agoDon't want to one-up you for the sake of it, but last time I bought bootleg DVDs in China, I paid Y5.50 (about 80 US cents). The better prices will be outside of the main markets populated by foreigners - the guy I bought from was on the top floor of a market geared to only locals. Prices increase as you go out from there - foreigner markets in Beijing and Shanghai, then eventually other popular places like Vietnam, Thailand, Bali, etc.