The Reel Blog

*Simultaneous or near-simultaneous release on DVD or PPV

Share This

Jeffrey Katzenberg continued his 3d evangelism at Cinema Expo in Amsterdam this week. Katzenberg is so high on the technology that he vowed all DreamWorks releases will be in 3d from 2009 onward.

Katzenberg, a regular attendee at the European exhibition confab, said Monday that he regards the opportunities offered by 3-D digital as "unmissable" for exhibitors. But he noted that to take advantage of 3-D digital, operators will have to adopt 2-D digital technology first and faster overseas.

"There's a chance to change the economics of (exhibition) for the first time in 17 years," Katzenberg told a packed audience during a Paramount Pictures International-hosted discussion alongside NATO boss John Fithian and Steve Knibbs, COO of U.K. exhibition outfit Vue Entertainment.

The enthusiastic DreamWorks chief, who earlier thrilled the audience by bringing Jerry Seinfeld to the stage to buzz about his "Bee Movie," said that with all the big-name filmmakers backing 3-D technology, his studio will be using it to make all its movies from 2009.

"We're taking on the additional costs, which are estimated to be $15 million a film, for us to author our films this way from 2009," he said. "These opportunities come once in a lifetime."

Katzenberg also pointed to the fact that 3-D movies are pirate-proof as handycam recordings simply don't work.

Share This

Canada's anti-camcording bill became law Friday, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

On Friday, MPAA chief Dan Glickman applauded the bill's passage.

"By adopting this legislation, the Canadian government has taken a significant step toward reducing the proliferation of camcords generated in Canadian cinemas," Glickman said. "It demonstrates that the Canadian government understands that all it takes is one good camcord to trigger the mass production and distribution of illegal bootlegs in street markets around the world.

Before passage of the law, Canadian theaters could do little more than eject camcorders fron theaters as it was necessary to prove intent to distribute for personal gain to press criminal charges.

Share This

Share This

The pre-release pirating of Sicko has already had one effect on the film's reception in theaters - it's opening a week early.

Variety reports the documentary will bow a week earlier than planned in New York, followed by sneak previews at 43 theaters in more than 30 markets Saturday. The film will then expand to an undetermined number of screens on its original release date of June 29. No word on whether or not you'll be able to watch it on your new iPhone, set to be released the same day.

Share This

Entertainment Weekly posts a provocative dissection of the movie rating system from its June 22 edition online.

Writer Mark Harris, prompted by the extreme and sexualized violence of Hostel II receiving an R rating, puts his finger firmly on some of the weaknesses of the rating system as it now exists:

The hypocrisies of the ratings system are familiar: Indies have it harder than studio films, naked men are naughtier than naked women, and almost any sex is worse than almost all violence. But the problem runs deeper. The MPAA has never decided whether its job is guidance or rule making. As a result, four ratings - G, PG, PG-13, and R - are merely advisory: The raters tell parents what's in a movie and let them decide whether to take their kids. But the fifth rating - NC-17 - carries the force of law: It's the only stage at which raters decide their judgment should overrule yours. It's a sharp distinction, and Hostel II's R rating proves that they're manifestly incompetent to make it.

NATO has repeatedly called for the proper rating of films - particularly films that merit an NC-17. At ShoWest in March, NATO president John Fithian stated

Speaking of the NC-17 rating, we call again for efforts to revitalize that important category through the release of significant movies under the NC-17 rating. Contrary to often-repeated myths, most theatre companies will play NC-17 movies that are appropriate for their markets, and most newspapers will run advertisements for the pictures. NC-17 movies on average make $3.9 million, while unrated films on average make $1.8 million. Serious filmmakers need to take NC-17 seriously. Everyone in the industry should resist any temptation to treat NC-17 as a negative judgment, rather than an integral part of the rating system that contemplates entertainment for both children and adults.

This approach is simple, but it is not easy. NATO General Counsel Kendrick Macdowell's column in Boxoffice magazine's May issue makes the point:

We do not pretend that simply saying "NC-17 is not a negative" can suddenly alter entrenched public perceptions. But we know that better educating the public begins with more precise communication. We also know that the vast majority of exhibitors will play NC-17 movies, if otherwise appropriate in content to their communities, and that virtually no exhibitor has a categorical policy against playing NC-17 movies. The same holds true for the vast majority of newspapers and their policies about ads for NC-17 movies.

We further do not pretend that there is no consequence whatever from an NC-17 rating. Yes, there is a consequence. Per above, patrons under 18 need not apply. But if I might paraphrase a Supreme Court ruling on the limitations of government regulation of free expression, we rue the day that all entertainment is reduced to the level of what is suitable for children.

Share This

June is Ratings Awareness Month, so it might be of interest to find out just how aware parents are of media ratings regarding sex and violence.

The Kaiser Family Foundation, demonstrating excellent timing, has released a report detailing the findings of its survey Parents, Children & Media: A Kaiser Family Foundation Survey.

They report that "Sixty-five percent of parents say they "closely" monitor their children's media use, while just 18% say they "should do more." This may help to explain why since 1998 the proportion of parents who say they are "very" concerned that their own children are exposed to inappropriate content - while still high - has dropped, from 67% to 51% for sexual content, from 62% to 46% for violence, and from 59% to 41% for adult language."

Some of the key findings:

Media Ratings

• Parents' use of the TV and video game ratings has stayed virtually the same since 1998 at about 50%, while use of music advisories has gone up (from 41% to 52%), and use of movie ratings has declined (from 86% to 77%).
• Among parents who have used any of the media ratings, the proportion who say they find them "very" useful has increased over the years, from 43% to 58% for video game ratings, 45% to 56% for music advisories, and 42% to 49% for the TV ratings.
• Many parents still don't understand what the TV ratings mean. Among parents who have children ages 2-6, only three in 10 can name any of the ratings used for children's shows, including TV-G, or G, which means "general audience." Only 11% know that the rating FV indicates violence (it stands for "fantasy violence"), while 9% think it means "family viewing." And only 11% know that the rating EI means educational or informational programming. Among parents with any child ages 2-18, 61% know that TV-14 means the show may be inappropriate for children under age 14 and just over half (54%) know that TV-MA means for mature audiences.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share This

The Hollywood Reporter reports that Michael Moore is backtracking somewhat from his support of bootlegging. You may recall he supported the idea of stealing movies for private use at Cannes and if you don't,  YouTube will remember it for you:

He has a slightly different perspective now:

"Every filmmaker intends for his film to b