Slashdot Log In
MGM First To Post Full-Length Features To YouTube
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Mon Nov 10, 2008 07:44 AM
from the users-finally-dictating-consumption? dept.
from the users-finally-dictating-consumption? dept.
Lithal13 writes to tell us that MGM studios will soon be the first major movie studio to post a complete feature-length film on YouTube. Some credit commercial video site Hulu.com for the mended relationship between YouTube parent Google and Hollywood. "YouTube has developed systems that help keep pirated clips off the site and is developing video players that present clearer images than the site's standard player. When it comes to financial terms, Google has proven much more flexible than in the past, according to three studio sources. [...] The only obstacles to Google and YouTube getting more studios to post full-length movies is Google's insistence on a particular ad format, say the sources. They declined to say which ad unit Google prefers. The other hurdle is that some studios are skeptical that users will accept all the ads that need to accompany a feature film in order to make it profitable."
Related Stories
Submission: MGM first to post full-length features to YouTube by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
What about limits? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What about limits? (Score:5, Informative)
What about people from other countries (other than the US) that have even less than Comcast limits?
I confidently predict that it won't be available for us, so that part is a non-issue.
However a lot of ISPs here in the UK are bitching and moaning about the BBC's iPlayer (online TV catchup service), which they reckon has significantly increased their bandwidth usage. Of course they would like the BBC to pay them as well as the end user paying for their broadband (less enlightened debate over net neutrality in this country, but the same old issues). I can only see increased capping/tiering on broadband if this sort of service becomes more common.
Parent
Re:What about limits? (Score:4, Insightful)
it's sort of sad to see how the situation with ISP's is going.
A few years back there were thousands of them all keen to stab each other in the back and undercut each other.
Caps kept dropping and quality was going up fast.
Now we're down to a handful of providers who tend to play nice with each other. Caps are dropping, prices are rising, and it's harder than ever for anyone without a few hundred million spare change to get peering.
Parent
Re:What about limits? (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps watching videos online is not as cheap as everyone originally believed. Perhaps buying mass-produced DVDs truly is a cheaper method of distribution?
As for years ago: We had telephone lines which allowed us to pick whatever dialup ISP we wanted. That's why there were thousands. That's no longer an option with broadband, due to government-dictated monopolies that control the neighborhood. (I get to choose either Comcast or Verizon; not much of a choice.) As a result most of the videos I watch are low-definition 0.5 Mbit/s streams that are just-barely watchable, in order to limit my monthly bill.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
>>>(I get to choose either Comcast or Verizon; not much of a choice
To clarify - Comcast has a government-dictated monopoly over cable. Verizon has a government-dictated monopoly over phones. Both of these monopolies offer internet over their lines as a "side business" to their main business.
I also have Netscape Dialup. It only costs $7 a month, and they don't have any caps, but the 50 kbit/s line can only handle 16 gigabytes per month, maximum.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know. Do you have a weblink to an article, so I can read more about it?
Not up here... (Score:4, Informative)
Except in Canada, where Bell has to play nice and share their copper with the other kids. In my city, there's no less than 18 DSL providers I can pick and choose from:
http://canadianisp.ca/ [canadianisp.ca]
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So why don't these companies start using P2P technology. Keep network trafic within the networks.
There is some new music listening (legal) software that I have seen recently supported by adds and stuff and I looked into the technology behind it. Apparently it caches some of the users files on their computer and shares them with other users listening to the same songs. Exactly the same type of technology as torrents.
So basically if your neighbor has recently watched the same movie as you are watching now. Th
Re: (Score:2)
So why don't these companies start using P2P technology.
Because they don't want you to have a copy of the movie or tv show stored on your computer, that you might later figure-out how to copy into a different folder & keep. With direct streaming from nbc.com or bbc.uk, nothing gets stored except a few seconds worth of buffered data.
What about quality? (Score:3, Informative)
I don't see it as a given [eventechnologies.com] that "quality := large amounts of bandwith".
Re:What about limits? (Score:5, Interesting)
Given the ridiculously low bitrates YouTube employs, I can guarantee it will not be a problem for 99.999% of users.
Even HD downloads (720p, from services like Apple's iTS) tend to weigh in at around 4-6Gb at the moment (2-3Gb per hour), which would give you around 50 full-length HD movies a month if you have a Comcastic Internet connection. DVD-quality, done at H.264, tends to go for around half a gig per hour, or around one gig per movie, which gives you 250 full-length ED movies, 500 hours of video, per month, or around 16 hours of video PER DAY.
And realistically, the limits aren't going to go down either.
The golden age of IPTV, where you subscribe to the TV stations you want individually, is quite possible with the existing infrastructure and Internet services. What we need are standardized STBs to hook up to the TVs, and TV stations willing to offer subscriptions.
Parent
Re:What about limits? (Score:4, Interesting)
Even at YouTube quality, my wife's 2-4 hours a day would add up to well over 30 GB per month. She watched Thai lakorn (soap operas) and Thai music videos. Since none of the large satellite providers offer Thai channels, YouTube was the only available option to listen to broadcasts in her native language.
I see bandwidth caps preventing greater usage of such services for things like watching full length movies. Where a few years ago we had a computer that accessed the internet, now we have multiple computers, an Ipod Touch, PS3, Wii, and Xbox 360 all using Internet resources and media and all requiring updates. The bandwidth caps are being implemented at a time when more and more home devices are using the Internet, and adding to the speed that you will hit your capacity.
Parent
Re:What about limits? (Score:5, Informative)
You're not going to use it at "full usage" though. You need to look at the applications you'll be using and how they use bandwidth. The reason you need 3Mbps for something approaching DVD-quality video isn't because it's a constant 3Mbps stream, but because when there's a lot of action, the stream will need to "burst" up to rates that high.
Like I said, the current standard is around .5Gb per hour for DVD quality video, and around 2-3Gb for HD (720p) - that's based on what services like Apple's iTS and Netflix are doing. At those speeds, you're talking about 120 hours of DVD quality video (four hours a day), though only about 20 hours of HD quality video. But HD isn't really an option on 3Mbps except for buffered downloads, so the chances of you actually wanting to watch 20 hours of HD a month on your current connection is fairly small.
I'm not saying I agree with the 60Gb cap, I don't and I find the caps a completely wrong solution to the problem. But I don't think it will impact you in any way in terms of your use of DSL for watching movies from legitimate download/streaming services.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Even at YouTube quality, my wife's 2-4 hours a day would add up to well over 30 GB per month.
Does she rewatch any of them? If so, you can copy Flash* files out of the /tmp/ folder and watch with VLC.
Re: (Score:2)
These problems will continue to plague us as long as we allow them to. There is a simple and relatively inexpensive solution, which is to build a mesh network and just make an end-run around the ISPs. The internet was meant to be peer-to-peer and today we have the technology to make that happen! If you want to change the world, get or make a mesh networking AP (I bought an AMD geode development board off eBay for $30) and built some high gain antennae to go with it.
Just what nobody needed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Just what nobody needed (Score:5, Informative)
Youporn.com [youporn.com] has done something right, then. Seeking to the 75% mark of a video (before any buffering) jumps to and loads quite quickly and easily. ;-)
Parent
Re:Just what nobody needed (Score:4, Insightful)
If I were writing a video player for a porn site I would have it buffer the last X% of the film before buffering the start. Isn't that the part the viewers care about?
(I was going to make a joke about it being the climax of the film but actually, when you think about it, makes sense to program it that way so it's a serious comment)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
When will they allow regular users to upload movies longer than 10 minutes? I have a few rugby games I want to share with friends. If you encode it right, it's passable for my needs.
Instead I have to do a system of hacks to make a playlist, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Picture quality (Score:2)
MGM studios will soon be the first major movie studio to post a complete feature-length film on YouTube
And the picture quality is still better than the DVD release (for God's sake, don't waste money on The Outer Limits. They should be ashamed.)
Just like movie theater abuse? (Score:5, Insightful)
Do they mean equivalent to the enforced advertising already present in a regular movie theater?
-- one Coke short filmvertisement
-- one long length car commercial
-- 4 movie trailers
-- a long format Coke advertisement
-- a hip clothing advertisement
-- a charitable organization fund drive appeal
-- 4 more movie trailers
If MGM attempts to recreate the movie theater captive audience advertising innundation effect, this will fail miserably.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that's why, on the rare occasion I go to a theatre I pick my seat. Then go get popcorn and stuff. By the time I get back to my seat, most of the commercials are over.
And the fact that they have so many commercials is one of the biggest reasons that I hardly ever go to a theatre anymore. (way to go guys...)
Re: (Score:2)
I loved the previews in the 80s and early 90s. They were for movies. They were entertaining to watch, since they were for the same genre as the feature film, and they gave you a couple extra minutes to find your seat or grab a box of popcorn.
Now adays you can see those on the internet, and the movie theaters show more coke and car commercials.
Re: (Score:2)
They're welcome to the previews if they want to watch. I'd rather do something else for 20 minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
Arriving at a movie on time just to sit down and be inundated with ads after paying 10/ticket + 5+/pop + 5+/popcorn, makes me tremble with anger. One of many reasons that I don't go to theaters much anymore.
Re:Just like movie theater abuse? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Huh? (Score:5, Insightful)
"The other hurdle is that some studios are skeptical that users will accept all the ads that need to accompany a feature film in order to make it profitable."
You mean, aside from the 10 minutes of previews and actual commercial ads that precede theater films, or the 15 minutes of ads, unskippable warnings, and "DON'T BE A DVD PIRATE! PIRATING IS STEALING" infomercials that precede the feature on every goddamn dvd?
No, I don't believe I'll be surprised at whatever Hollywood deems "necessary" to make something profitable. I mean, according to Hollywood accountants Spider Man, Forrest Gump, and Lord of the Rings all failed to make a profit, right? Of course we can trust them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget the $10 or more that we *paid* to actually see the movie.
Speaking of youtube (Score:3, Funny)
Anyone else having problems going to it right now? I'm getting 500 errors
Re:Speaking of youtube (Score:5, Funny)
Anyone else having problems going to it right now? I'm getting 500 errors
Wow, that's a lot of errors. I probably would have given up after 9 or 10 myself.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Oh great.. (Score:2)
How can they NOT profit? (Score:2)
How can they NOT "step 3" profit? (Score:2)
"For the minimal ammount of effort required on the studio's part, if even one person clicks on an ad..."
Spam works on a similar model and we all can see how well that works. "If only the other guy would..."
"...the studio has turned a profit for their endevor. The movie is already (if it's one that anyone wants to see) paid off by ticket sales and DVD sales."
However you're forgetting the slash "new and improved" business "I don't want you to make any money" model. Everything will be available via a broadband
Residuals (Score:2)
For the minimal ammount of effort required on the studio's part, if even one person clicks on an ad, the studio has turned a profit for their endevor.
At least twenty percent of this goes to residuals [wikipedia.org]. Some goes to the lawyers who negotiated conditions for online reruns. And some goes to parties that I'm not ready to look up right now.
The important part here is not "full length movie" (Score:2)
it is "by a major studio"
There are tons of full length movies already on there, youtube just wants to skip the middleman:)
Uncut and Commercial Free (Score:2, Redundant)
Uncut and Utopia Free. (Score:3, Insightful)
"I can already download movies uncut and commercial free from the Pirate Bay and other torrent sites."
Which is all the more reason to keep it locked in the vault. Yes I'll spare you the lecture but threatening people with their worst nightmares isn't going to get you all what you want.
"So, unless this service gives me full screen movies, uncut and commercial free, despite my not living in the US, chances are I'll not be using it."
Baby steps oh desperate one. They still have to get one working in the US firs
Re: (Score:2)
There's a certain irony to your sig.
And for the mods: yes, this is relevant to the discussion.
This could work... (Score:3, Interesting)
If they post the right movies.
Aren't MGM (and the movies in question) owned by Sony now?
Ad time (Score:2)
studios are skeptical that users will accept all the ads that need to accompany a feature film in order to make it profitable.
It depends on how many ads they run. I watch Hulu a bit to catch shows I've missed or not seen in years. They generally have one 15-second commercial every 10 minutes or so. It is far less than broadcast television.
If they are going to have breaks anyway, I wish they were a bit longer. It would give me time to get a snack.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
of course, many movies have paid product placements -- ads -- already. Isn't that the slashdot business model? Make a movie, paid for via product placement, and give it away for free?
Re: (Score:2)
Some users, yes.
For the rest of us, it's:
Re: (Score:2)
>>>can't anything be pure anymore!?
The DVD or Bluray versions doesn't have any annoying ads during the movie. And, when you get something for nothing (like free movies on youtube) it has to be paid somehow. Better the advertisers pay it then me. Otherwise I simply won't bother. I'll go read a book instead (~20 hours of entertainment for just 5 bucks).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm OK with the way Hulu [hulu.com] handles their ads in TV shows. They have about the same number of commercials-per-episode that a Network station would air. HOWEVER each commercial break consists of only 1 ad which is between 15-30 seconds.
I'm willing to put up with their ad system without a problem. Sure it breaks the flow but most TV shows end their scenes assuming that a network will air a commercial in between.
As for films, I use my NetFlix account for them. As weak as Netflix's OnDemand movie listing is, H
Re:U.S. only? (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps you should talk to whoever owns your country's distribution rights to MGM works and convince them to participate in this instead of ignoring international copyright treaties and treating it like the mean ol' 'mericans won't share their toys with you just because you talk funny.
Parent