3 ms·

I'll go along with bad_user's example of Avatar. From Wiki: "Avatar was officially budgeted at $237 million.[3] Other estimates put the cost between $280 milli

I'll go along with bad_user's example of Avatar. From Wiki: "Avatar was officially budgeted at $237 million.[3] Other estimates put the cost between $280 million and $310 million for production and at $150 million for promotion." So, I'd have to agree. At those costs, I don't think any amount of creativity or motivation could get that creator over the hump if all they had to look forward to was a bunch of people torrenting their creation. I view the choice as simple. If you don't want to pay, in some regard, then don't watch the movie. Everyone has a choice. And nowadays the choice is easy... wait a few months and pay a $1 from Redbox if that's all its worth. Or get it through Netflix. At least the team gets SOMETHING for it.

chopsueyar 16y ago
If you don't want to pay, you don't have to pay. Ever snuck into an extra movie in the theatre when you were a kid, or had a friend who worked at the theatre get you in to a free show? In your Avator example, had their been a group of motivated people willing to pursue the creative goal of James Cameron's vision in spite of monetary compensation, $237 million would not be required. Some sort of 501c3 action movie production company.
- jamesgeck0 16y ago
  There have been no instances of altruistic people creating a movie valued at over two hundred million dollars, nor would piracy be justified if such an instance existed.
- ffumarola 16y ago
  I actually haven't snuck into an extra movie. But, to be fair, I have downloaded movies and music. I just grew up and don't find the need to do that anymore. With services like Pandora and Slacker Radio, and a ton of pay per song models, I don't need to steal music anymore. With Netflix and Redbox, it is worth a few bucks to keep the artists creating so that I can keep enjoying their work. People who justify piracy either A) Haven't grown up, B) Don't work for a living so they don't understand how important it is to get paid for their work, or C) Are selfish and feel the world owes them something. Maybe a mixture of the above.

chopsueyar 16y ago

If you don't want to pay, you don't have to pay. Ever snuck into an extra movie in the theatre when you were a kid, or had a friend who worked at the theatre get you in to a free show? In your Avator example, had their been a group of motivated people willing to pursue the creative goal of James Cameron's vision in spite of monetary compensation, $237 million would not be required. Some sort of 501c3 action movie production company.

jamesgeck0 16y ago
There have been no instances of altruistic people creating a movie valued at over two hundred million dollars, nor would piracy be justified if such an instance existed.
ffumarola 16y ago
I actually haven't snuck into an extra movie. But, to be fair, I have downloaded movies and music. I just grew up and don't find the need to do that anymore. With services like Pandora and Slacker Radio, and a ton of pay per song models, I don't need to steal music anymore. With Netflix and Redbox, it is worth a few bucks to keep the artists creating so that I can keep enjoying their work. People who justify piracy either A) Haven't grown up, B) Don't work for a living so they don't understand how important it is to get paid for their work, or C) Are selfish and feel the world owes them something. Maybe a mixture of the above.