This one’s more ranting about the proposed Canadian DMCA. Also, on a technical note, it looks like video hosting sites don’t ike something about the end credits, so I guess I’ll have to tweak that for further episodes.
The Canadian DMCA has just been tabled by the House of Commons, and from what I can tell (gleaned from Michael Geist’s excellent blog post) it’s a complete and total ruinous mess for the future of electronic media in Canada. Let’s, just for a second, get past the spectre of evil pirates stealing content from hard-working, impoverished studios and record companies. This bill makes it illegal for anyone to transfer music they bought off a CD and onto their own iPod. It also makes it illegal to unlock an iPhone or other locked digital devices, to the tune of a $20,000 fine. So the fact that I’ve been carting around said iPhone for the last six months is apparently more important than the fact that our representatives in Parliament consort with gangster molls or that the Alberta tar sands are an ecological disaster area. No, people downloading the latest Coldplay album is what our law enforcement services should concern themselves with.
The real irony here is that the studios are the authors of their own destruction. If these laws are actually enforceable, all that will happen is that people won’t bother to watch copyrighted material anymore. The means of production are cheaper than ever, and more and more people are watching amateur video, citizen journalism and other user generated content. The drive for self-preservation will actually accelerate the decline and fall of big media, by its own hand.
And the potential damage from this bill doesn’t just affect individuals. Companies in the business of moving and storing content, like Domain7, have already expressed concerns (check their news section for their take on the bill).
What can you do to voice your concerns about this bill? Email your member of Parliament (I just did, for the very first time), join online groups like the Fair Copyright for Canada group on Facebook, and join the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Canadian Music Creators Coalition, and other groups advocating for digital rights.
Another week of lackluster Who, this time set in 1920’s England, starring Agatha Christie…and resulting in a bit of inconsequential fluff that added up to an at best average viewing experience. The RFS crew, always ready to make lemonade out of crap, soldiered bravely on and veered so wildly off-topic that they might just have gone full circle and accidentally gone back on topic again. Digressions ahoy!
Oh, there are some bad ‘uns here. I’m glad they took 10,000 B.C. out for a solid spanking, as it’s an affront to anyone with the slightest interest in world history.
Blasphemy? Perhaps. Obviously Stanley Kubrick is a far better director than hack-for-hire Peter Hyams, and the original film’s imagery and effects are visionary (if tinged by the 60’s and not anywhere near where we actually ended up in 2001). But check out io9‘s list, inspired by the passing of Roy “Heywood Floyd” Scheider, of why 2010 is actually more enjoyable and comprehensible than 2001. Clarke has since gone on to write a bunch of crappy novels focused on the 2001 universe, so if you’re going to level criticism, be sure to spread it around to the creotr of the whole shebang.
So last night we went to see Cloverfield, the much-vaunted “Blair Witch meets Godzilla” mishmash of home video and huge effects. I’ll start with the good…the effects are top notch and the monster is pretty cool. Where the film falls apart is in dialogue, plot and character. The alleged protagonists are all self-absorbed hipster douchebags, and not nearly enough of them get eaten or otherwise butchered for my liking. I don’t think I was supposed to laugh at this film or cheer on the monster, but I did anyway. I can’t say I didn’t enjoy it, because it was cool to see Manhattan get menaced by a giant whatsit…but I wish they’d picked somewhat less retarded individuals for me to root for.
Io9, a new and snarky sci-fi site that recently emerged from the bowels of the Gawker empire, has a list of reasons why Star Trek should stay dead for a while, and I have to say I agree with every point they make. Top of their list is the series slavish devotion to continuity, but they also point out that Star Trek’s entire structure is a Cold War relic, and that new shows like Battlestar Galactica do a much better job of reflecting the present day in a sci-fi setting. I’d add Doctor Who (not surprsingly) to the list of worthy retuned series….Russel T. Davies and friends were very smart in that they lifted what worked in the old series, such as witty writing and great acting, but still managed to make Doctor Who very much a 21st century show with quick pacing, great effects and more adult approach to the material.
At first I was a little nervous at the idea of a fourth Indiana Jones film, given that there’s really no need for one and Harrison Ford is now as old as some of the mummified creatures he’s battled in the previous films. But with the return of Karen Allen as Marion, and Speilberg declaring he’ll keep the CG nonsense to a minimum, I’m actually kind of looking forward to the film, due this summer. Here’s some Vanity Fair goodness on Indy IV to stoke the fanboy flames.
Francis Ford Coppola recently emerged from a long sabbatical from the director’s chair to create “Youth Without Youth“, a film he made entirely with his own money and which, incidentally, is pretty terrible. Much better than the film itself is this article in Vanity Fair, which details how Coppola is pursuing his artistic vision with a $500 million cushion created by his vineyard, cigar business and other savvy financial moves.
Looks like the striking Hollywood writers are clueing into the fact that they don’t really need the studio system to make media. The LA Times chronicles several writers who are turning to venture capitalists rather than going back to the studio trough cap in hand, as per usual.