"There won't be a film industry by 2020" - discuss

Nick Hiltgen · May 22nd, 2008, 06:35 AM

I don't know,

yes we will have to move away from oil as a fuel source but isn't oil also used in the development of plastics? I mean we may be able to get off "oil" as a fuel source but I think our dependence on oil is larger then simply transportation. I think hydrogen and natural gas is really more of a stop gas measure as most Natural gas deposits come from oil wells right? So the motivation for oil companies to develop that resource is already there. I love the idea of hydrogen power but I don't think that the current way of obtaining it is going to continue to work. I think there will need to be a new way. I think ethanol is part way there but it lack a delivery structure because it's so corrosive. I like the brazilian way of doing things by switching the entire transportation over to ethanol (but sugar cane is far more efficient then corn syrup which is what we mass produce here in the US for our ethanol).

Personal for me reclaimed biodeisel is the best method but I hope that not everyone jumps on that band wagon because the demand will easily out way the supply.

As far as entertainment, one of the big reasons the great depression was a "golden age" of movies was because of the lack of technology at the time, people went to the movies because they were the first places to have air conditioning, it was a social experience and there was a lack of entertainment options outside of it. (at least compared to today)

I'm under 30 and watch a fair amount of TV. I think a lot of young people still watch TV but like the above poster said is they watch it differently. This means that manufacturers have to market differently, (which is where we get hour long karaoke shows designed to sell records of manufactured artists) you have to live the product experience more, engrain it more. How many commercials for mentos have you seen since the "viral video" of mentos and diet coke has come out, how have the sales of mentos been effected?

Many people will continue to be effected by this change of the way of doing things, but just like with the oil "crisis" we have to innovate or perish.
But to be honest the moving picture industry -the storytelling industry- will never go away, if it does then there really isn't a society worth living in.

Ryan Postel · May 22nd, 2008, 10:32 AM

Numbers are deceptive for the "Golden Age of Hollywood" (aka the same years as the Great Depression) vs the present, but its known as being the time when more movies were produced than any other time in history. Roughly 7500 features were produced during the period of about 15 years (1930-45). thats around 500 films per year. Today, about 400-600 feature films are produced per year, but only about 170-200 are major studio theatrical releases.

The deceptive part of the numbers is that TV was not a major media force in the 1930s-40s and who can really count the total number of television productions per year today? And viewers under 34 are still a major audience.

Change is always possible, and jobs can be drastically cut, but films and entertainment will always exist.

Marco Wagner · May 24th, 2008, 11:06 AM

Many of the energy companies own or are owned by communication companies and subsequently have interest in what we watch. Take GE for example they own film studios, news stations, and a group of other genre stations.

Jack Kelly · May 24th, 2008, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marco Wagner

Many of the energy companies own or are owned by communication companies...

Really? I'm not aware of any communications-related business activities from companies like BP, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Shell, Centrica, Saudi Aramco, Petrobras, LUKoil etc etc. I could be wrong.

Except, of course, for Exxon's campaign of disinformation about climate change. ;-)

Marco Wagner · May 24th, 2008, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Kelly

Really? I'm not aware of any communications-related business activities from companies like BP, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Shell, Centrica, Saudi Aramco, Petrobras, LUKoil etc etc. I could be wrong.

Except, of course, for Exxon's campaign of disinformation about climate change. ;-)

Yeah great campaign isn't it!!! omg what crooks

one example From MediaTank:
Oil Companies. Almost all mainstream media companies profit from the advertising dollars of oil corporations which have a vested interest in both Iraq and Afghanistan. TimeWarner Chairman and CEO previously held both those positions at ChevronTexaco. Current Chevron board members include Carla Hills and General Electric director and former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn

another is ConocoPhillips which is in part owned by Mitsui & Co., Ltd which in turns owns a few media outlets.

Jack Kelly · May 25th, 2008, 05:28 AM

Ah, interesting - thanks for the info!

Régine Weinberg · May 27th, 2008, 04:07 AM

Hi boys
the fuel cell, electric cars all is ready only the big Texaco and Shel will not switch to install an infrastructure, pumps, since ten years.

Plastics, a lot can be made from green material not all but a lot.

go there
http://www.rytterfalk.com/2008/03/07...-for-download/
the Sigma DP1 in raw can out put decent www movie and a bit Lightzone polishing voila. Red comes up with Scarlet, a 3k cam for a base price 3 K.
dollies and ll this stuff can be build cheapo.

Why not serious NEWS low budget via web cast, weather too an total fresh new approach can show up face it,
lets start today I like to jump on tis wagon, who joins me ?????

Even shows we can produce live from small clubs. Start to entertain them in another format, the Laptop format attached to a beamer

David Kennett · June 9th, 2008, 03:17 PM

I tend to cringe when I hear the term FILMMAKER, especially when many are no even using film. It's like calling a WRITER a PAPERMAKER. I like MOVIEMAKER or maybe MOTION PICTURE PRODUCER better. Alright guys!

Jack Kelly · June 10th, 2008, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Kennett

I tend to cringe when I hear the term FILMMAKER, especially when many are no even using film.

Language evolves. I think we need to learn to live with it.

If you really want to sink your teeth into poor use of language then look at Adobe's DNG file format: Digital Negative. Eh? What's negative about the file?!? Or the phrase "Digital Intermediate" when the movie will never be printed to film and maybe even originated on a digital format. Or "podcast" (a concatenation of "iPod" and "broadcast") when you don't need an iPod to listen and they're not broadcast.

As I said, language evolves. The lexicon isn't static, it gently grows with every passing year. The only rule is that language must communicate meaning; and most people know what "filmmaker" means.

Ryan Postel · June 10th, 2008, 08:43 AM

Filmmaker is better than being called a ... 'filmer', or better yet, a 'movie-er '(?).

Dave Blackhurst · June 10th, 2008, 04:24 PM

Or a "vidiot"...

What one really is is a historian/archivist/storyteller - a most honorable profession, with grand new and evolving tools and methods!! But those terms just aren't hip enough for the digital age!

Andrew Hoag · June 15th, 2008, 11:01 AM

All this talk makes me think,
this could make a pretty awesome movie.
It could be really cliche and called "2020" and be about the oil prices drilling <no pun intended> the broadcast and film industry into nothing.

But hey, just verbal diarrhea over here.

;)

May 22nd, 2008, 06:35 AM	#16
Nick Hiltgen Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Atlanta GA Posts: 1,427	I don't know, yes we will have to move away from oil as a fuel source but isn't oil also used in the development of plastics? I mean we may be able to get off "oil" as a fuel source but I think our dependence on oil is larger then simply transportation. I think hydrogen and natural gas is really more of a stop gas measure as most Natural gas deposits come from oil wells right? So the motivation for oil companies to develop that resource is already there. I love the idea of hydrogen power but I don't think that the current way of obtaining it is going to continue to work. I think there will need to be a new way. I think ethanol is part way there but it lack a delivery structure because it's so corrosive. I like the brazilian way of doing things by switching the entire transportation over to ethanol (but sugar cane is far more efficient then corn syrup which is what we mass produce here in the US for our ethanol). Personal for me reclaimed biodeisel is the best method but I hope that not everyone jumps on that band wagon because the demand will easily out way the supply. As far as entertainment, one of the big reasons the great depression was a "golden age" of movies was because of the lack of technology at the time, people went to the movies because they were the first places to have air conditioning, it was a social experience and there was a lack of entertainment options outside of it. (at least compared to today) I'm under 30 and watch a fair amount of TV. I think a lot of young people still watch TV but like the above poster said is they watch it differently. This means that manufacturers have to market differently, (which is where we get hour long karaoke shows designed to sell records of manufactured artists) you have to live the product experience more, engrain it more. How many commercials for mentos have you seen since the "viral video" of mentos and diet coke has come out, how have the sales of mentos been effected? Many people will continue to be effected by this change of the way of doing things, but just like with the oil "crisis" we have to innovate or perish. But to be honest the moving picture industry -the storytelling industry- will never go away, if it does then there really isn't a society worth living in. __________________ I have a dream that one day canon will release a 35mm ef to xl adapter and I'll have iris control and a 35mm dof of all my ef lenses, and it will be awesome...

May 24th, 2008, 11:06 AM	#18
Marco Wagner Trustee Join Date: May 2005 Location: Saint Cloud, Florida Posts: 1,043	Either way they got ya... Many of the energy companies own or are owned by communication companies and subsequently have interest in what we watch. Take GE for example they own film studios, news stations, and a group of other genre stations. __________________ www.facebook.com/projectspecto

May 25th, 2008, 05:28 AM	#21
Jack Kelly Major Player Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: London, UK Posts: 243	Ah, interesting - thanks for the info! __________________ Jack Kelly's filmmaking website AfterCarbon.org

May 27th, 2008, 04:07 AM	#22
Régine Weinberg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Bordeaux, going to Bangkok, 2011 Posts: 232	Start now Hi boys the fuel cell, electric cars all is ready only the big Texaco and Shel will not switch to install an infrastructure, pumps, since ten years. Plastics, a lot can be made from green material not all but a lot. go there http://www.rytterfalk.com/2008/03/07...-for-download/ the Sigma DP1 in raw can out put decent www movie and a bit Lightzone polishing voila. Red comes up with Scarlet, a 3k cam for a base price 3 K. dollies and ll this stuff can be build cheapo. Why not serious NEWS low budget via web cast, weather too an total fresh new approach can show up face it, lets start today I like to jump on tis wagon, who joins me ????? Even shows we can produce live from small clubs. Start to entertain them in another format, the Laptop format attached to a beamer

June 9th, 2008, 03:17 PM	#23
David Kennett Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Ridgeville, Ohio Posts: 407	I tend to cringe when I hear the term FILMMAKER, especially when many are no even using film. It's like calling a WRITER a PAPERMAKER. I like MOVIEMAKER or maybe MOTION PICTURE PRODUCER better. Alright guys! __________________ Dave

May 22nd, 2008, 10:32 AM	#17
Ryan Postel Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 93	Numbers are deceptive for the "Golden Age of Hollywood" (aka the same years as the Great Depression) vs the present, but its known as being the time when more movies were produced than any other time in history. Roughly 7500 features were produced during the period of about 15 years (1930-45). thats around 500 films per year. Today, about 400-600 feature films are produced per year, but only about 170-200 are major studio theatrical releases. The deceptive part of the numbers is that TV was not a major media force in the 1930s-40s and who can really count the total number of television productions per year today? And viewers under 34 are still a major audience. Change is always possible, and jobs can be drastically cut, but films and entertainment will always exist.

June 10th, 2008, 08:43 AM	#25
Ryan Postel Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 93	Filmmaker is better than being called a ... 'filmer', or better yet, a 'movie-er '(?).

June 10th, 2008, 04:24 PM	#26
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	Or a "vidiot"... What one really is is a historian/archivist/storyteller - a most honorable profession, with grand new and evolving tools and methods!! But those terms just aren't hip enough for the digital age!

June 15th, 2008, 11:01 AM	#27
Andrew Hoag Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Gaithersburg, MD Posts: 51	All this talk makes me think, this could make a pretty awesome movie. It could be really cliche and called "2020" and be about the oil prices drilling <no pun intended> the broadcast and film industry into nothing. But hey, just verbal diarrhea over here. ;)