Horror Movie Project #6 - Saw VI
Twisted Pictures/Lionsgate, 2009
directed by Kevin Greutert
written by Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan
Aww, the last entry of my Horror Movie Project. I'm gonna miss it, but I also look forward to going back to not posting every day, even weekends. I will continue to watch the horror movies I haven't seen, but the project has come to its conclusion.
For the last entry, I decided to watch last year's installment of the Saw franchise. (FRANCHISE SPOILER) Even though the infamous Jigsaw Killer has been dead for several movies, his grand scheme continues to unfold, engulfing FBI and the police as they try to find the apprentice who has been carrying out his plans (/SPOILER). This time, it's a higher-up at a health insurance provider who ends up stuck in John Kramer's test. Having spent his career deciding who should get coverage and who should be denied, effectively deciding who will live and who will die, he is forced to make several face to face decisions regarding who will survive the traps.
Previous entries implied that I like story over gore, so some readers might be surprised to hear how much I like the Saw movies. Sure, there's a lot of gore, but I do feel there's substance behind it. The filmmakers keep insisting that they're working toward a final payoff, where John Kramer's overall plan is finally revealed and concluded, so as long as they deliver on that promise, I think the length of the series will be worth it. That said, I liked most of the traps in this one. The barbed wire trap was pretty interesting, and the carousel trap might be my favorite from the whole series. The steam trap was bit of a fail, though. Overall, I liked this movie, and I really want to see Saw 3D, which came out on Friday and supposedly will be the last one.
Showing posts with label Horror Movie Project. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Horror Movie Project. Show all posts
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Saturday, October 30, 2010
HMP #12 - The Return Of The Living Dead
Horror Movie Project #12 - The Return Of The Living Dead
Orion Pictures Corporation, 1985
directed by Dan O'Bannon
written by Dan O'Bannon
For the second-to-last installment of my Horror Movie Project, I decided to watch The Return Of The Living Dead. Along with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, this movie is part of the reason for taking on this project. I bought it last year when Walmart had a special display of movies for Halloween, and in all that time I never watched it, which I was kinda ashamed of.
So I watched it, and I liked it. It's a semi-sequel to one of my favorite zombie movies of all time, Night Of The Living Dead (after that movie, John Russo had the rights to the Living Dead name, which is why all the later Romero movies only had Dead in the name). But it's also not really a sequel at all, referring to Night as being "that movie where the corpses started eating people." Romero's Dead series remains my favorite zombie franchise, but this was an interesting take on the zombie ideas that Romero started. As far as horror-comedies go, this was definitely one of the better ones I've seen. A lot of nice puppet work (Tarman, the wobbly zombie with stump legs, the lady on the table, etc), and the zombies being able to talk and think was fun, despite being far from zombie cannon. I guess I'd watch the rest of the movies. They can't be any worse than Survival Of The Dead, right?
Orion Pictures Corporation, 1985
directed by Dan O'Bannon
written by Dan O'Bannon
For the second-to-last installment of my Horror Movie Project, I decided to watch The Return Of The Living Dead. Along with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, this movie is part of the reason for taking on this project. I bought it last year when Walmart had a special display of movies for Halloween, and in all that time I never watched it, which I was kinda ashamed of.
So I watched it, and I liked it. It's a semi-sequel to one of my favorite zombie movies of all time, Night Of The Living Dead (after that movie, John Russo had the rights to the Living Dead name, which is why all the later Romero movies only had Dead in the name). But it's also not really a sequel at all, referring to Night as being "that movie where the corpses started eating people." Romero's Dead series remains my favorite zombie franchise, but this was an interesting take on the zombie ideas that Romero started. As far as horror-comedies go, this was definitely one of the better ones I've seen. A lot of nice puppet work (Tarman, the wobbly zombie with stump legs, the lady on the table, etc), and the zombies being able to talk and think was fun, despite being far from zombie cannon. I guess I'd watch the rest of the movies. They can't be any worse than Survival Of The Dead, right?
Friday, October 29, 2010
HMP #11 - Deadgirl
Horror Movie Project #11 - Deadgirl
Dark Sky Films, 2009
directed by Marcel Sarmiento and Gadi Harel
written by Trent Haaga
Entry number 11. Only two more to go. I know what one of them is, still have't picked the other one. Suggestions are appreciated.
Deadgirl was recommended by a friend. It wasn't bad, but it didn't do a very good job of holding my attention. Two high school students go to an abandoned mental institution (because that always works out well in horror movies) to get drunk. In the boiler room, they find a dead woman covered in plastic. Though dead, she starts to move. While one of the two boys wants nothing to do with it, the other, being a teenage male in a horror movie, decides to use the body for less than respectable purposes. Another friend joins in, then they discover that a bite from the girl will create more bodies for them to use.
Like I said, not a bad movie, just not particularly attention-holding. It made me realize that maybe I should step up the quality of the movies for the last 2. I followed my friend's suggestion on this one, but I don't think I could recommend this to anyone else.
Dark Sky Films, 2009
directed by Marcel Sarmiento and Gadi Harel
written by Trent Haaga
Entry number 11. Only two more to go. I know what one of them is, still have't picked the other one. Suggestions are appreciated.
Deadgirl was recommended by a friend. It wasn't bad, but it didn't do a very good job of holding my attention. Two high school students go to an abandoned mental institution (because that always works out well in horror movies) to get drunk. In the boiler room, they find a dead woman covered in plastic. Though dead, she starts to move. While one of the two boys wants nothing to do with it, the other, being a teenage male in a horror movie, decides to use the body for less than respectable purposes. Another friend joins in, then they discover that a bite from the girl will create more bodies for them to use.
Like I said, not a bad movie, just not particularly attention-holding. It made me realize that maybe I should step up the quality of the movies for the last 2. I followed my friend's suggestion on this one, but I don't think I could recommend this to anyone else.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
HMP #10 - Teeth
Horror Movie Project #10 - Teeth
Roadside Attractions, 2008
directed by Mitchell Lichtenstein
written by Mitchell Lichtenstein
I took a break this morning from my current obsession over steampunk fashion to watch Teeth for the tenth Horror Movie Project entry. It is...disturbing. The basic premise is a girl who discovers she has teeth in her nether regions and how that plays a part (usually a bloody one) in her interactions with men. There odd bits of humor here and there to break up the tension, but overall this is one of the more disturbing movies I've watched for this project. But that might be because I'm a dude. I'd be interested to hear the opinions of any female readers that have watched this. There's more focus on the emotional impact of the situation than on gore, which if you've been reading these entries you know I like.
Roadside Attractions, 2008
directed by Mitchell Lichtenstein
written by Mitchell Lichtenstein
I took a break this morning from my current obsession over steampunk fashion to watch Teeth for the tenth Horror Movie Project entry. It is...disturbing. The basic premise is a girl who discovers she has teeth in her nether regions and how that plays a part (usually a bloody one) in her interactions with men. There odd bits of humor here and there to break up the tension, but overall this is one of the more disturbing movies I've watched for this project. But that might be because I'm a dude. I'd be interested to hear the opinions of any female readers that have watched this. There's more focus on the emotional impact of the situation than on gore, which if you've been reading these entries you know I like.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
HMP #9 - Little Shop Of Horrors
Horror Movie Project #9 - The Little Shop Of Horrors
The Filmgroup Inc, 1960
directed by Roger Corman
written by Charles B. Griffith
For well over a decade now, one of my favorite film musicals has been Little Shop Of Horrors, starring Rick Moranis. So when I saw that the original 1960 film that inspired the musical was streamable on Netflix, I knew I had an entry of the Horror Movie Project ready and waiting. After watching ThanskKilling, a film that tried way too hard to be hilariously bad, earlier in the project, it was fun watching a movie that was genuinely hilariously bad.
It's a good movie, it's just that it's very obviously a product of 50's and 60's sci-fi/horror. The writing isn't great, but Griffith obviously tried. And the acting is just fun to watch. Plus, it started the film career of Jack Nicholson. Nicholson is often used to sell the movie in more recent packaging, but his role is minimal. He plays the character Bill Murray played in the later version. But his portrayal of a masochistic dental patient is subdued but still disturbing, and I couldn't help but think of his later role in The Shining.
Overall, a fun movie to watch. Not scary, but fun. Highly recommended.
The Filmgroup Inc, 1960
directed by Roger Corman
written by Charles B. Griffith
For well over a decade now, one of my favorite film musicals has been Little Shop Of Horrors, starring Rick Moranis. So when I saw that the original 1960 film that inspired the musical was streamable on Netflix, I knew I had an entry of the Horror Movie Project ready and waiting. After watching ThanskKilling, a film that tried way too hard to be hilariously bad, earlier in the project, it was fun watching a movie that was genuinely hilariously bad.
It's a good movie, it's just that it's very obviously a product of 50's and 60's sci-fi/horror. The writing isn't great, but Griffith obviously tried. And the acting is just fun to watch. Plus, it started the film career of Jack Nicholson. Nicholson is often used to sell the movie in more recent packaging, but his role is minimal. He plays the character Bill Murray played in the later version. But his portrayal of a masochistic dental patient is subdued but still disturbing, and I couldn't help but think of his later role in The Shining.
Overall, a fun movie to watch. Not scary, but fun. Highly recommended.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
HMP #8 - ThanksKilling
Horror Movie Project #8 - ThanksKilling
Warner Brothers (distributor), 2009
directed by Jordan Downey
written by Jordan Downey and Bradly Schulz
I watched this one after a friend jokingly recommended it, saying that he had just watched it and it was horrible. Sadly, I took his warning lightly and watched it anyway. And it was awful. They apparently had a budget of $3,5000 (according to Wikipedia). I won't fault a movie for having a small budget, being a firm believer that throwing money at a film won't magically make it better, but a better effort could have been done with that money.
I think what I hated about it most was the attempt at comedy. Movies that are so bad that they're funny is a long tradition in horror, but I hate movies that try to exploit that by intentionally being funny-bad. And the jokes aren't even that great. There were two very painful and outdated references to JonBenet Ramsey, and the first one was placed so oddly that I'm pretty sure they meant to take it out of the script and forgot. The effects were awful, too. Almost like they were an afterthought during the filming process. "Oh yeah, special effects. Whoops almost forgot them." If I weren't watching it for the Horror Movie Project, I probably would have stopped watching after the first 10 minutes.
I love independent cinema and will overlook certain flaws for the sake of supporting the underground, but movies like ThanksKilling give the underground a bad name. Just an awful, awful movie that I would not recommend to anyone.
Warner Brothers (distributor), 2009
directed by Jordan Downey
written by Jordan Downey and Bradly Schulz
I watched this one after a friend jokingly recommended it, saying that he had just watched it and it was horrible. Sadly, I took his warning lightly and watched it anyway. And it was awful. They apparently had a budget of $3,5000 (according to Wikipedia). I won't fault a movie for having a small budget, being a firm believer that throwing money at a film won't magically make it better, but a better effort could have been done with that money.
I think what I hated about it most was the attempt at comedy. Movies that are so bad that they're funny is a long tradition in horror, but I hate movies that try to exploit that by intentionally being funny-bad. And the jokes aren't even that great. There were two very painful and outdated references to JonBenet Ramsey, and the first one was placed so oddly that I'm pretty sure they meant to take it out of the script and forgot. The effects were awful, too. Almost like they were an afterthought during the filming process. "Oh yeah, special effects. Whoops almost forgot them." If I weren't watching it for the Horror Movie Project, I probably would have stopped watching after the first 10 minutes.
I love independent cinema and will overlook certain flaws for the sake of supporting the underground, but movies like ThanksKilling give the underground a bad name. Just an awful, awful movie that I would not recommend to anyone.
Monday, October 25, 2010
HMP #7 - The Strangers
Horror Movie Project #7 - The Strangers
Rogue Pictures, 2008
directed by Bryan Bertino
written by Bryan Bertino
The seventh entry. Only six more left. What films still remain? Who knows. But today's entry is The Strangers. Never saw this when it came out, despite having a little bit of interest in it. I do remember it coming out in theaters around the same time as the remake of Funny Games, which seemed to have a similar premise (the original is on my Netflix instant queue, so it might end up being one of the remaining six).
Kristen and James, a young couple, are spending the night at James' family's summer home. A less than successful marriage proposal has left a heavy feeling in the air. The night goes from bad to horrifying when a trio of masked strangers begin terrorizing the couple. Much like the original The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, the focus is more on the psychological drama of the situation, with very little attention paid to gore. In a cinematic era where torture porn dominates the horror scene, it was a nice change of pace. Suspense is scarier than blood splattered everywhere, and this movie does a great job at creating suspense. Definitely one of the better horror movies of the past decade, in my opinion.
Rogue Pictures, 2008
directed by Bryan Bertino
written by Bryan Bertino
The seventh entry. Only six more left. What films still remain? Who knows. But today's entry is The Strangers. Never saw this when it came out, despite having a little bit of interest in it. I do remember it coming out in theaters around the same time as the remake of Funny Games, which seemed to have a similar premise (the original is on my Netflix instant queue, so it might end up being one of the remaining six).
Kristen and James, a young couple, are spending the night at James' family's summer home. A less than successful marriage proposal has left a heavy feeling in the air. The night goes from bad to horrifying when a trio of masked strangers begin terrorizing the couple. Much like the original The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, the focus is more on the psychological drama of the situation, with very little attention paid to gore. In a cinematic era where torture porn dominates the horror scene, it was a nice change of pace. Suspense is scarier than blood splattered everywhere, and this movie does a great job at creating suspense. Definitely one of the better horror movies of the past decade, in my opinion.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
HMP #6 - Severance
Horror Movie Project #6 - Severance
Magnolia Pictures 2006
directed by Christopher Smith
written by Jason Moran
For this entry in my ongoing horror movie project, I chose to watch the British horror-comedy Severance. I mainly chose it because it is streaming on Netflix was relatively short, plus it's been in my Netflix instant queue for quite a while. The film is about a group of employees from the European arm of a weapons manufacturer called Palisades Defence. The group head to a company lodge in Hungary for a team-building weekend only to end up at the hands of sadistic killers with a grudge against Palisades.
Of the horror-comedies I've seen, the movie is amongst the less comedic ones, though there are a few good laughs. The focus is mainly on the horror side of things. I would recommend this to friends that like horror-comedies, but it's not on the same level as, for example, Shaun Of The Dead.
Magnolia Pictures 2006
directed by Christopher Smith
written by Jason Moran
For this entry in my ongoing horror movie project, I chose to watch the British horror-comedy Severance. I mainly chose it because it is streaming on Netflix was relatively short, plus it's been in my Netflix instant queue for quite a while. The film is about a group of employees from the European arm of a weapons manufacturer called Palisades Defence. The group head to a company lodge in Hungary for a team-building weekend only to end up at the hands of sadistic killers with a grudge against Palisades.
Of the horror-comedies I've seen, the movie is amongst the less comedic ones, though there are a few good laughs. The focus is mainly on the horror side of things. I would recommend this to friends that like horror-comedies, but it's not on the same level as, for example, Shaun Of The Dead.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
HMP #5 - Dance Of The Dead
Horror Movie Project #5 - Masters Of Horror: Dance Of The Dead
Showtime, 2005
directed by Tobe Hooper
written by Richard Christian Matheson, based on the story by Richard Matheson
Today's horror "movie" is the third episode of the first season of Showtime's horror anthology series Masters Of Horror. Featuring Robert Englund in the kind of role he's best known for, Dance Of The Dead takes place in the near future. A bioterrorism weapon called Blizz causes a deadly rain in major US cities, killing those it touches. Some survive however, in a state known as L.U.P. (Lifeless Undead Phenomenon). If pumped with blood, "loopies" (as they come to be known) will do a spastic dance, which is exploited by a bar called The Doom Room to entertain crowds of questionable youth.
It's more or less what I could have expected from Tobe Hooper given the premise. It's good, but I'm glad it was an episode of an anthology series instead of a whole movie. Not sure I could have sat through a whole feature length version. Much like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, there's very little gore, with more focus on the psychological aspects. It was alright, but to be honest I wouldn't recommend it to anyone except diehard Englund fans an a handful of friends that like this kind of stuff.
Showtime, 2005
directed by Tobe Hooper
written by Richard Christian Matheson, based on the story by Richard Matheson
Today's horror "movie" is the third episode of the first season of Showtime's horror anthology series Masters Of Horror. Featuring Robert Englund in the kind of role he's best known for, Dance Of The Dead takes place in the near future. A bioterrorism weapon called Blizz causes a deadly rain in major US cities, killing those it touches. Some survive however, in a state known as L.U.P. (Lifeless Undead Phenomenon). If pumped with blood, "loopies" (as they come to be known) will do a spastic dance, which is exploited by a bar called The Doom Room to entertain crowds of questionable youth.
It's more or less what I could have expected from Tobe Hooper given the premise. It's good, but I'm glad it was an episode of an anthology series instead of a whole movie. Not sure I could have sat through a whole feature length version. Much like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, there's very little gore, with more focus on the psychological aspects. It was alright, but to be honest I wouldn't recommend it to anyone except diehard Englund fans an a handful of friends that like this kind of stuff.
Friday, October 22, 2010
HMP #4 - Dracula
Horror Movie Project #4 - Dracula
Universal Pictures, 1931
directed by Tod Browning
written by Garrett Fort, based on the stage play of the same name by Hamilton Deane & John Balderston, adapted from the novel of the same name by Bram Stoker
Another one with Bela Lugosi, this one much more entertaining. Tod Browning's Dracula is another one of the movies that I was ashamed to have never seen. Lugosi's portrayal of the titular vampire is legendary, with a noticeable and lasting influence on all later incarnations of the character. It's a great movie, but I do think that as far as horror goes, F. W. Murnau's Nosferatu: eine Symphonie des Grauens is a much better Dracula movie. Dracula is brilliant, but it was made by a major American studio, and so the horror aspect gets kinda watered down for mainstream appeal. Murnau made Nosferatu in Germany in the 1920's, in the golden age of German cinema, so it doesn't hold back as much. And that film's Graf Orlok (due to copyright issues, all characters had different names) is a less refined, much more monstrous version of Count Dracula.
Overall, Dracula is a fine movie, but since black and white tends to put some people off and it kinda drags at times (as classics tend to do by modern standards), I can't really recommend it to anyone who isn't a fan of classic films, classic horror, or Dracula or Lugosi in general, and most of those people have probably already seen it. If you have seen it and liked it, though, I would definitely recommend Browning's next movie, the cult favorite Freaks.
Universal Pictures, 1931
directed by Tod Browning
written by Garrett Fort, based on the stage play of the same name by Hamilton Deane & John Balderston, adapted from the novel of the same name by Bram Stoker
Another one with Bela Lugosi, this one much more entertaining. Tod Browning's Dracula is another one of the movies that I was ashamed to have never seen. Lugosi's portrayal of the titular vampire is legendary, with a noticeable and lasting influence on all later incarnations of the character. It's a great movie, but I do think that as far as horror goes, F. W. Murnau's Nosferatu: eine Symphonie des Grauens is a much better Dracula movie. Dracula is brilliant, but it was made by a major American studio, and so the horror aspect gets kinda watered down for mainstream appeal. Murnau made Nosferatu in Germany in the 1920's, in the golden age of German cinema, so it doesn't hold back as much. And that film's Graf Orlok (due to copyright issues, all characters had different names) is a less refined, much more monstrous version of Count Dracula.
Overall, Dracula is a fine movie, but since black and white tends to put some people off and it kinda drags at times (as classics tend to do by modern standards), I can't really recommend it to anyone who isn't a fan of classic films, classic horror, or Dracula or Lugosi in general, and most of those people have probably already seen it. If you have seen it and liked it, though, I would definitely recommend Browning's next movie, the cult favorite Freaks.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
HMP #3 - I Spit On Your Grave
Horror Movie Project #3 - I Spit On Your Grave
Cinemagic, 1978
directed by Meir Zarchi
written by Meir Zarchi
Originally titled Day Of The Woman, I Spit On Your Grave is possibly the least-recommendable movie I have ever seen. It's not that it's bad, it's that the premise is about as far from family-friendly as you can get. Basic plot: A woman from the city rents a summer home in a remote mountain town, where some locals rape her, beat her and leave her for dead. After nursing herself back to health, she hunts them down and kills them in terrible ways.
I got this on DVD a while ago. I had read about it in some article about exploitation cinema and then randomly saw it at FYE just a few days later. Except even as I type that I realize I'm wrong, I heard about it from seeing a t-shirt with the one-sheet on HalloweentownStore.com. It was cheap, so I got it, watched about half and hour of it, then turned it off. I don't know why there are some many movies I've only watched part of and never finished, but there are a lot. Anyways, I figured this project would be a fun way to watch it all the way through.
On a side note, I think I Spit On Your Grave would be a good name for a crappy metalcore band. Or that Brokencyde "crunkcore" garbage.
Cinemagic, 1978
directed by Meir Zarchi
written by Meir Zarchi
Originally titled Day Of The Woman, I Spit On Your Grave is possibly the least-recommendable movie I have ever seen. It's not that it's bad, it's that the premise is about as far from family-friendly as you can get. Basic plot: A woman from the city rents a summer home in a remote mountain town, where some locals rape her, beat her and leave her for dead. After nursing herself back to health, she hunts them down and kills them in terrible ways.
I got this on DVD a while ago. I had read about it in some article about exploitation cinema and then randomly saw it at FYE just a few days later. Except even as I type that I realize I'm wrong, I heard about it from seeing a t-shirt with the one-sheet on HalloweentownStore.com. It was cheap, so I got it, watched about half and hour of it, then turned it off. I don't know why there are some many movies I've only watched part of and never finished, but there are a lot. Anyways, I figured this project would be a fun way to watch it all the way through.
On a side note, I think I Spit On Your Grave would be a good name for a crappy metalcore band. Or that Brokencyde "crunkcore" garbage.
HMP #2 - White Zombie
Horror Movie Project #2 - White Zombie
United Artists, 1932
directed by Victor Halperin
written by Garnett Weston
My second entry in my Horror Movie Project ended up being White Zombie, which I watched via the Internet Archive. I watched it yesterday, as per my decision to watch one every day, but I watched it so late that I didn't think I could stay awake long enough to write about it. Nor should I have, as I had to get up early for work this morning. So here's my write-up.
Quite frankly, I was a bit disappointed. I started watching this once, probably about a decade ago, and for a reason I don't remember never finished it. I found it on the IA and decided to watch it and just didn't like it that much. It's not a bad movie, I was just bored. I can appreciate the impact it has had, especially that it is considered the first real zombie movie. In the voodoo sense at least. The modern zombie didn't really show up until the 60's with Romero's Night Of The Living Dead. I think that maybe why I was disappointed is that I was expecting too much based on Bela Lugosi's reputation. Lugosi plays a voodoo master who helps a Haitian plantation owner turn the woman he loves into a zombie so she'll love him instead of her husband.
Like I said, I was bored, but it's not a bad movie and I would recommend it to any Lugosi fans or fans of classic horror.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Rob Dickins' £1 CD Plan
Starting tomorrow, October 19, I plan on watching one new horror movie (new to me, as some of the planned movies are quite old) a day until Halloween. With each new movie, I'll write a post about the movie and my reaction to it. I decided to do this partially because I drank some egg nog over the weekend and was ashamed of myself for skipping into the Christmas season and skipping Halloween. Another reason is that there are a lot of horror movies I haven't seen and I'm a bit ashamed of that. Non-related posts will also show up throughout those days.
That'll start tomorrow, though. Today I wanted to bring up this news story I found on ThePunkSite. (Fuller version of the story can be found via BBC News.) Rob Dickins, former head of the UK's branch of Warner Music has suggested a new way to combat music piracy. His suggestion? Lower prices.
What Dickins wants to do is drop the prices of CD's to £1, roughly 1.58 USD. On the surface, without much thought, it sounds like a decent idea. One of the main reasons for piracy is high prices, which make consumers unwilling to take the risk on music they haven't heard yet. At one pound, it's less of a risk. Dickins predicts a "major CD" selling 200 million copies.
The problem is that even though that's a lot of copies, it still doesn't work out to that much profit for the labels. Dickins implied suggestion around this is to supplement sales with 360 deals. For those unfamiliar with 360 deals, let me explain. Traditionally, a record deal involved a label putting up the money for recording an album and promotion of that album. After earning back their investment, the label then takes a percentage of sales of the album. In a 360 deal, the label gets a cut of all sources of income for a band, including ticket sales and non-music merchandise (t-shirts, for example). This deal kinda sucks for bands, as it greatly cuts into their earnings.
I have a problem with Dickins' plan, but I also have a problem with the criticisms. Jonathan Shalit, who according to the artcile "discovered Charlotte Church and manages N Dubz and Russell Watson," compared the suggested price to that of bottled water: "A piece of music is a valuable form of art. If you want the person to respect it and value it, its got to cost them not a huge sum of money but a significant sum of money." This reminds me of The Cure frontman Robert Smith's comments regarding Radioheads decision to make In Rainbows available for a fan-specified donation ("You can't allow other people to put a price on what you do, otherwise you don't consider what you do to have any value at all and that's nonsense").
I disagreed with Smith back then and I disagree with Shalit now. I'm a huge supporter of what Radiohead did, what Nine Inch Nails did, and what the artists on Quote Unquote Records and Death To False Hope Records. What I find most disagreeable about Shalit's statement is that it equates music to money. He's talking about a piece of music as a form of art, and that's fine. Music is a form of art. But to then say that it HAS to cost money to be worth anything pretty much contradicts that. I feel like that's not the best way to have worded it, but trying to think about his statement equating monetary value and artistic value makes me so mad that it's difficult to think straight.
Overall, I don't think album prices are the cause of the music industry's decline. It's more about album prices combined with shady business practices (360 deals, cheating artists out of royalties, etc) and the constant pushing of mediocre music as "the next big thing." I agree that major changes have to take place for big labels to remain relevant in the future of music, but I don't think this should be one of those changes.
That'll start tomorrow, though. Today I wanted to bring up this news story I found on ThePunkSite. (Fuller version of the story can be found via BBC News.) Rob Dickins, former head of the UK's branch of Warner Music has suggested a new way to combat music piracy. His suggestion? Lower prices.
What Dickins wants to do is drop the prices of CD's to £1, roughly 1.58 USD. On the surface, without much thought, it sounds like a decent idea. One of the main reasons for piracy is high prices, which make consumers unwilling to take the risk on music they haven't heard yet. At one pound, it's less of a risk. Dickins predicts a "major CD" selling 200 million copies.
The problem is that even though that's a lot of copies, it still doesn't work out to that much profit for the labels. Dickins implied suggestion around this is to supplement sales with 360 deals. For those unfamiliar with 360 deals, let me explain. Traditionally, a record deal involved a label putting up the money for recording an album and promotion of that album. After earning back their investment, the label then takes a percentage of sales of the album. In a 360 deal, the label gets a cut of all sources of income for a band, including ticket sales and non-music merchandise (t-shirts, for example). This deal kinda sucks for bands, as it greatly cuts into their earnings.
I have a problem with Dickins' plan, but I also have a problem with the criticisms. Jonathan Shalit, who according to the artcile "discovered Charlotte Church and manages N Dubz and Russell Watson," compared the suggested price to that of bottled water: "A piece of music is a valuable form of art. If you want the person to respect it and value it, its got to cost them not a huge sum of money but a significant sum of money." This reminds me of The Cure frontman Robert Smith's comments regarding Radioheads decision to make In Rainbows available for a fan-specified donation ("You can't allow other people to put a price on what you do, otherwise you don't consider what you do to have any value at all and that's nonsense").
I disagreed with Smith back then and I disagree with Shalit now. I'm a huge supporter of what Radiohead did, what Nine Inch Nails did, and what the artists on Quote Unquote Records and Death To False Hope Records. What I find most disagreeable about Shalit's statement is that it equates music to money. He's talking about a piece of music as a form of art, and that's fine. Music is a form of art. But to then say that it HAS to cost money to be worth anything pretty much contradicts that. I feel like that's not the best way to have worded it, but trying to think about his statement equating monetary value and artistic value makes me so mad that it's difficult to think straight.
Overall, I don't think album prices are the cause of the music industry's decline. It's more about album prices combined with shady business practices (360 deals, cheating artists out of royalties, etc) and the constant pushing of mediocre music as "the next big thing." I agree that major changes have to take place for big labels to remain relevant in the future of music, but I don't think this should be one of those changes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)