What's new

First web look: RCA dvd player with ClearPlay (1 Viewer)

BrettB

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
3,019
"This arguement could be applied to either side of the debate, however. No one is forcing anyone to watch any movies,..."

Ah, the ol' "watch the film the way it was made or don't watch it at all, you narrow-minded, puritanical desecrator of art" argument.

You've changed the subject of the debate from the ClearPlay Player and it's real or perceived benefit/harm, to the murky environ of entertainment as art and all the questions therein.

"Bottom line, for me, is that you get the choice to watch or not watch a given piece: to read or not read, to view or not view--- I think you overstep what is a valid decision when you seek to alter all input to fit your definitions."

I remember actually turning my head on the Hannibal brain scene. Seemed like a valid decision at the time. Please forgive me. :)
 

Michael St. Clair

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 3, 1999
Messages
6,001
It's all part of the dumbing down of our culture, that's the problem that I have with it.

At least some directors have the clout to control how their films are edited for television, and sometimes to prevent them from being edited at all. With ClearPlay, there is no artistic control.

I personally think that the potential value of art is more important than the ability of every closed-minded consumer to 'have it his way'.

The real crybabies are the people who can't settle for the ultimate choice of not watching.
 

D. Scott MacDonald

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 10, 1999
Messages
545

I agree, but not the way you meant me to. Compare the old hitchcock films with today's film's, and you will see that today the actual films are being dumbed down for the audience. If the film uses the F word every other line, then it's edgy and biting, if somebody dies you must show the head detaching from the body in great slow-mo detail, and of course it must show boobies to make Joe six pack happy. If audiences were smarter and demanded better, Hollywood would be making more high quality films, and us consumers would have more films that we could watch without the tawdry content.
 

Julie K

Screenwriter
Joined
Dec 1, 2000
Messages
1,962

I chapter skip forward through the boring first half of Zombie in order to get to the eye-gouging scene and the shark vs zombie battle. I guess I'm just missing the director's sacred artistic vision here...

Am I really doing anything fundamentally different that what the Clearplay users are doing?
 

Marty Christion

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 3, 2001
Messages
229
I've got this player, and I really like it. Frankly, I don't enjoy watching movies with my kids that have swearing, and I like being able to watch "The Goonies" or "Back to the Future" or even "ET" with the words bleeped out.

And because of the nature of the player, it will only increase the demand for the unedited discs, so it doesn't bother me as much as buying or renting pre-edited DVD's (which I've never done).


That's what's awesome about this player. You can live according to your principles, and make the decision that brings you happiness. No one else will know or care. And it allows other people to do the same thing, without it affecting you (other than your theoretical indignation over "artistic compromise").

I think it is idealistic to lump all movies into one category as "art", make your decision, and then turn your brain off.

There is a spectrum of artistic quality in films, and a spectrum of viewing approaches to those same films. We already acknowledge a huge variation and choice in how people can experience films (screen size and delivery format, sound level and format, viewing angle, inturruptions or viewing environment, the age or maturity or background of the viewer, language of the audio or presence of subtitles, etc.).

I don't begrudge anyone their standards, but find it odd that someone could object to others having even more choice in their viewing experience.

I also assume that the ClearPlay feature can act as "training wheels" to introduce quality movies that might otherwise go unwatched, and may serve to spark in interest in one day seeing these films unedited when the viewer is older, more mature, or better able to appreciate the context or "art" of these films. This would be much better than raising a kid (or family?) so they only see lilly-pure stuff, and having them block categorize all the "other" films as worthless garbage.
 

Michael St. Clair

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 3, 1999
Messages
6,001


ClearPlay's editing criteria would certainly cover many things that happen in Hitchcock films. And the films that are made today with skin and gore for pandering purposes aren't worth watching whether edited or not. If you can't find a ton of great films in this age that don't leverage such base instincts/interests, you aren't trying hard enough.
 

Julie K

Screenwriter
Joined
Dec 1, 2000
Messages
1,962
You can only decide for yourself what is and isn't worth watching. Don't be making that decision for everyone else.

So, am I to assume you don't mind me making changes to my own copy of Zombie because it's "worthless" (only worthless to you, I assure you) or is it because no one else is profiting from it? Or is it because you don't think I've missed any artistic vision?
 

Julie K

Screenwriter
Joined
Dec 1, 2000
Messages
1,962

No, the only version of the movie available to the public is the one released by the studio. If you do value a person's right to privacy in their own home, then it should not matter how they choose to view that version.
 

Michael St. Clair

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 3, 1999
Messages
6,001


That license only includes private exhibition in their own home, not the right to create derivative works and sell access to them.

We're going in circles. I'm done here.
 

Dan Rudolph

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Messages
4,042
I'll bring up Nintendo v Galoob again as no one's mentioned it in this thread. Bottom lien is, if the original is unaffected and no copy is made in any tangible form, you haven't created a derivative work.
 

D. Scott MacDonald

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 10, 1999
Messages
545
Yeah, but technically clearplay isn't editing anything. All they are doing is categorizing the material, and then the consumer chooses if there are any categories they want to skip, so all of the editing choices are made by the consumer rather than clearplay.
 

jeff peterson

Supporting Actor
Joined
Nov 29, 1998
Messages
675
I disagree, it's the Clearplay folks who decide what words/scenes belong in which category. It's THEIR morals deciding for YOU. Not the director's ideas, not the writer's, not even your own...it's THEIRS. This, to me, is evil and dumbing down of the masses.

It's like the previous example, if a black man called his friend the n-word as a term of affection, it would be cut. Let's read about Tom Sawyer and the only scene left in the book is how Tom tricks his friends into whitewashing the fence. Oops, that would be bad, would teach con artisty and scamming and taking advantage of another. Ok, so the only thing that survives the cut is Aunt Polly serving Tom her apple pie...Ah..everything is well in Pleasantville.

I have no problem with YOU deciding what to play in your own home...but, please, don't give up your decisioning to somebody else. Don't be a lamb...
 

D. Scott MacDonald

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 10, 1999
Messages
545

I would agree with this if we were talking about the clearplay discs they were talking about, where somebody makes the edits and I'm to assume that their version is good. I'm not convinced that I'd be a lamb for experimenting with their filters, however.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,818
Messages
5,123,884
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top