Wow, that's disturbing to see those movies called "classics." Not that I don't actually enjoy all 3 of them, but I'd only consider T2 as a classic...and the other's as just shut-off-the-brain-and-enjoy flicks (despite Total Recall being based off a Philip K. Dick story, it becomes hokey rather fast).
Unfortunately, I much prefer the extended version of T2 that isn't available on iTunes. And I much prefer my movies in 5.1 digital surround, which also isn't available on iTunes either.
I'm really at a loss to see any value in buying movies from iTunes. Lower quality video, lower quality audio, no bonus features, no subtitles, no alternate audio languages. No ability to burn it to a become a regular DVD video. Especially using these 3 movies as an example; they are all readily available at local retailers like Walmart or Target for less than the $9.99 they'll cost on iTunes. Inferior product for a higher price, what a wonderful concept!
When you're a youngster like Sunil, or have forgotten much of your life do to drug use (like Sunil ), anything more than a year old seems like a classic.
I think that is part of the reason that I like the show. Since it is funded by the government Top Gear is much more brutal and honest then any add supported show can be in the U.S.
...((Terminator2, TotalRecall, Stargate. Some classic SciFi.))...Wow, that's disturbing to see those movies called "classics." Not that I don't actually enjoy all 3 of them, but I'd only consider T2 as a classic...and the other's as just shut-off-the-brain-and-enjoy flicks (despite Total Recall being based off a Philip K. Dick story, it becomes hokey rather fast).
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
When you're a youngster like Sunil, or have forgotten much of your life do to drug use (like Sunil ), anything more than a year old seems like a classic.
Heh. I'm speechless. Too much life experience to remember it all, Mel...
When do we get Alien and Alien2? Tell me those ain't classic SciFi.
Of course, not *quite* Alien3, the pretty yucky Alien4 and the writeoff that his Alien vs Predator.
Throw me a frickin' bone here, people.....!!1!1!!!
There was certainly an issue of scifi wanting to pay less than MGM wanted to charge - and neither backing down. (The ratings have been pretty good.) And that's the way capitalism works
Agreed - there are so many countries with their own sets of distributors, and the number of companies makes it very difficult. I was responding to bigdaddyp, who said other countries had more complicated setups internally. Anyway - we have 20million (not sure why I need to multiply that by 30!?) and it sure is a less appealing place to invest Apple's time.
And as I said - Apple haven't even setup iPhoto album printing here (though a couple of enterprising printers have some options) and that is a far easier task.
30 was just an approximate number to represent all of the people outside of the US where there are iTunes stores, and about the number of different itunes stores.
I do tend to take most things very seriously, I absolutely meant no offence to you and have much enjoyed reading your rants over the years, in particular you humour. But commercial tv in this country just gives me the sh@ts no end.
People seem to watch whatever is thrown at them with little regard to quality.
The latest and greatest out of the US doesn't seem to equate with qulaity in the least.
Our commercial stations here are so hooked into what ever is cheap to produce or what ever the contracts they sign make them show, bahh humbug, maybe it is just me, television for me is about information not mind numbing nothingness, but hey, each to their own, and again sorry for any insult you may have taken, it was not intended.
end rant
It's very expensive to produce shows with good production values, to name just one aspect of a show. When the local market is small, the money isn't there. As to the quality of the shows from an entertainment perspective other that the production values, it's hard to say. US shows seem to be very popular around the world. There must be a reason.
It's very expensive to produce shows with good production values, to name just one aspect of a show. When the local market is small, the money isn't there. As to the quality of the shows from an entertainment perspective other that the production values, it's hard to say.
US shows seem to be very popular around the world. There must be a reason.
In this country there is legislation that dictates how much locally produced content has to be aired each week, (can't quite remeber the numbers at a the moment). So the local FTA networks, there are only 3, spend as little as possible on local content, in almost all cases it is reality tv or game shows.
The networks then spend the rest of the programming budgets on supposed news and current affairs (mostly just irritainment as someone earlier nicely quoted).
Most the rest of the programing money goes on American content.
If an FTA chaneel wants to buy say Lost, they negotiate deals that give them the rights to that one particualr show but also ties them into buying dozens of other BAD shows that that must also air or they do not get the rights the next time they are negotiated.
I am sure there is a reason, and certainly they are the best of the bunch that our networks purchase, but these shows make no differences to people lives, they do not educate or inform, they simply numb away the time for a mostly listless population who could not be bothered to look for anything else.
Generalisation, sure, but also fairly accurate in much of the world I believe.
Lowest commen demonitaor stuff, glossed up with fancy editing and camera shots with the aim of nothing in particular.
In this country there is legislation that dictates how much locally produced content has to be aired each week, (can't quite remeber the numbers at a the moment). So the local FTA networks, there are only 3, spend as little as possible on local content, in almost all cases it is reality tv or game shows.
The networks then spend the rest of the programming budgets on supposed news and current affairs (mostly just irritainment as someone earlier nicely quoted).
Most the rest of the programing money goes on American content.
If an FTA chaneel wants to buy say Lost, they negotiate deals that give them the rights to that one particualr show but also ties them into buying dozens of other BAD shows that that must also air or they do not get the rights the next time they are negotiated.
I am sure there is a reason, and certainly they are the best of the bunch that our networks purchase, but these shows make no differences to people lives, they do not educate or inform, they simply numb away the time for a mostly listless population who could not be bothered to look for anything else.
Generalisation, sure, but also fairly accurate in much of the world I believe.
Lowest commen demonitaor stuff, glossed up with fancy editing and camera shots with the aim of nothing in particular.
My my I do go on don't I.
Some people have the wrong idea about entertainment.
They believe that it should inform, and teach.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Entertainment, by the very word that is used to label it, is just that, something to occupy your time with interesting and enjoyable folly. It certainly doesn't have to be useful in any other way. It's a filler.
The fact that so many countries feel as though they must legislate a certain amount of locally produced programming shows that the local programming isn't entertaining the local population. The reason why is only important to those who produce such things (and the frustrated governments, the "protectors" of the local culture).
Mindless shows do serve a purpose. They take people's minds off their daily drudgery, or boredom, on the job, and in their social life.
The fact that locally produced shows are what they are is because those producers have given up trying to compete with what is imported. Again, it's all a matter of money. This goes back decades. The situation that exists now is just the long term result of failed local competition from long ago. They gave up, and don't seriously try any longer.
The question, as we see it in France, the supposed bastion of European culture (and as far as they are concerned, of the entire world), that local people aren't impressed enough with their own culture to make works based upon it profitable, or even watchable. Ergo, few in France want to watch French programming, so Canal is paid for by the government, for the most part, and the French won't allow anyone to buy it who isn't French. If Canal disappeared, as it would without that government requirement, there would be almost no French programming, and the French people would be happier for it.
Some people have the wrong idea about entertainment.
They believe that it should inform, and teach.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Entertainment, by the very word that is used to label it, is just that, something to occupy your time with interesting and enjoyable folly. It certainly doesn't have to be useful in any other way. It's a filler.
The fact that so many countries feel as though they must legislate a certain amount of locally produced programming shows that the local programming isn't entertaining the local population. The reason why is only important to those who produce such things (and the frustrated governments, the "protectors" of the local culture).
Mindless shows do serve a purpose. They take people's minds off their daily drudgery, or boredom, on the job, and in their social life.
The fact that locally produced shows are what they are is because those producers have given up trying to compete with what is imported. Again, it's all a matter of money. This goes back decades. The situation that exists now is just the long term result of failed local competition from long ago. They gave up, and don't seriously try any longer.
The question, as we see it in France, the supposed bastion of European culture (and as far as they are concerned, of the entire world), that local people aren't impressed enough with their own culture to make works based upon it profitable, or even watchable. Ergo, few in France want to watch French programming, so Canal is paid for by the government, for the most part, and the French won't allow anyone to buy it who isn't French. If Canal disappeared, as it would without that government requirement, there would be almost no French programming, and the French people would be happier for it.
Well put mel and I do understand that which you say, althught you put far better than I, I just find it a shame that most, so called "Entertainement" , in this country anyway is so unworthy of the title.
I would also state that entertainement is far, or at least can be, far more than that, it can be entertaining to be informed and learning can be entertaining.
Wishful thinking I know, but I do not see why said entertainment has to be of the lowest form available, ie - big brother, biggest loser and all the other, lets say below par, programs that hit our screens.
I believe people watch itsimply because it is all that is offered buy money hungry newtorks more interested in advertising that in their audiences. And yes I understand they need to make money also.
Most of the recent shows made locally in Australia are made by independent groups/companies and shown on Pay TV because the FTA networks are simply scared of change.
On a side note, do you currently reside in France or the US, if you are in France, don't drink the beer!
...Mindless shows do serve a purpose. They take people's minds off their daily drudgery, or boredom, on the job, and in their social life...
Heh. Sad truth, but need it be so sad? People work hard and have problems and shite, and sitting down to a bit of BattlestarGalactica, or Lost, so be it. But I understand the frustration, especially recently with expanded cableTV (Foxtel) in Australia, sampling things like TryaBanks Show, Maury, the infamous JerrySpringer(still going on and on and on), ProjectRunway( I'm the greatest designer, OMFG, bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch), and I swear if I saw Dr. Phil on the street....... I don't know if I could contain my irritation. 8) BUT, different strokes for different folks, and DifferentStrokes wasn't too bad a TV show if I remember. Oh, Bikerdude, and I saw Humphrey the Bear LIVE in person at a Melbourne Manningham Council "Carols by Candlelight in the Park"... Usually the Children's TV shows are quite fun because they have a cute 18+ legal girl to host different segments and stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
The fact that locally produced shows are what they are is because those producers have given up trying to compete with what is imported. Again, it's all a matter of money. This goes back decades. The situation that exists now is just the long term result of failed local competition from long ago. They gave up, and don't seriously try any longer.
In so far as where there are similar languages and culture spoken, "local content" is yeah, tough. Australia is triple-f*kced because there's US, UK, and globalEnglish shows. Leaving a small niche to meet the "local content" quota... With, Home&Away, Neighbours, TodayTonight, BigBrotherAustralia -- mmm.. Kryptonite to Bikerdude. Which, BTW, WTF is up with Smallville? It just drags on and on and somehow all the characters seem to magically forget all the crazy sh1t that went on the previous episode and go on like it didn't happen, and each episode is yet another new crazy wacky zany adventure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
The question, as we see it in France, the supposed bastion of European culture (and as far as they are concerned, of the entire world), that local people aren't impressed enough with their own culture to make works based upon it profitable, or even watchable. Ergo, few in France want to watch French programming, so Canal is paid for by the government, for the most part, and the French won't allow anyone to buy it who isn't French. If Canal disappeared, as it would without that government requirement, there would be almost no French programming, and the French people would be happier for it.
Without Jean Reno or less so nowadays (Jean Reno is cooler), Gerard Depardeeeuuu, French TV and film media would be fuXX0red.,,, I think...... But that'as all I know about Canal+ and French media. Jean Reno. He is da man...!!11.
More food to feast your hungry forum-rant desires on. Munch away!!!
Heard something today where 9's Eddie Mcwanker is considering dumping Humphry,
Aggred about some of the young lasses, although my kids do like Humphry and Playschool.
Smallville, MY WIFE LOVES IT, I find it funny as f^^% for the reasons you mention, also like the way they give Lex such continuing, beautiful beatings without any consequences, other than he is evil of course.
And please forgive my rants on local tv, guess I have been going on and on and on now.
No more rants from me on this subject, unless, unless, unless .....awwww ... everytime I try to get out, they just pull me back in....
Heh. Australia in-joke, in case other forum viewers are wondering.
*sniff* I'm going to miss Australia.
But, I guess I need to find a new City to live in to add to my list.
Come and try Sydney mate, beautiful women, beautiful beaches, wonderful trafic jams, public transport that gets you where you need to be ( a day late), just make sure you have lots and lots of money, unless you like the simple life, as I do, and do not require food, clothes , any kind of life that costs anything.
Come and try Sydney mate, beautiful women, beautiful beaches, wonderful trafic jams, public transport that gets you where you need to be ( a day late), just make sure you have lots and lots of money, unless you like the simple life, as I do, and do not require food, clothes , any kind of life that costs anything.
LOL. It's already on my list. 2 years. How do you think I ended up with 2 maxxed out credit cards, no money, burnt out of work, can't remember who or what or when I partied/ hooked up with, and had to come running back to mummy and daddy 2 years ago....???
Well put mel and I do understand that which you say, althught you put far better than I, I just find it a shame that most, so called "Entertainement" , in this country anyway is so unworthy of the title.
I would also state that entertainement is far, or at least can be, far more than that, it can be entertaining to be informed and learning can be entertaining.
Wishful thinking I know, but I do not see why said entertainment has to be of the lowest form available, ie - big brother, biggest loser and all the other, lets say below par, programs that hit our screens.
I believe people watch itsimply because it is all that is offered buy money hungry newtorks more interested in advertising that in their audiences. And yes I understand they need to make money also.
Most of the recent shows made locally in Australia are made by independent groups/companies and shown on Pay TV because the FTA networks are simply scared of change.
On a side note, do you currently reside in France or the US, if you are in France, don't drink the beer!
I'm a US citizen.
Entertainment CAN be useful for learning, etc. But it is difficult to produce such a thing AND make it entertaining at the same time.
The problem is a truly sad one. Pop culture has slid a long way since WWII. It used to be that movies, broadway plays, and books were of a higher class than they are now.
But, one would be hard pressed to find such things making money today. What we would see in mainstream venues, is now produced as "art". Sad, isn't it?
People no longer have the attention span to learn enough about something difficult, unless it's a video game, and even there, as a report that just came out shows, as one gets older, starting in the mid 20's one begins to lose interest in complex video games as well. This is why "casual" gaming is now the biggest category of games.
It's also why classical music, and even jazz, has almost disappeared from the recording scene.
An example of a movie that was a big hit, but which would never see the light of day today, was "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf?". A great film, but too talky. There are others like that.
Broadway today is the provence of such crap as "Cats", and other big, expensive musicals, which are produced for the tourist trade, rather than for the more intellectual New Yorker, who has diminished in number in the past two or three decades.
It's also why classical music, and even jazz, has almost disappeared from the recording scene.
Aren't those genres partly responsible for that? At least for classical, I've seen several people point out that the average tempo of classical performances has slowed down alot from a century ago.
Aren't those genres partly responsible for that? At least for classical, I've seen several people point out that the average tempo of classical performances has slowed down alot from a century ago.
Not really. Tempo is generally up to the conductor for large scale works, or to the performer, if they are featured. In the past, while we had Toscanini, we also had Klemperer.
It's the effort required to understand what these works mean, and to listen for it during the performance (and live performances are doing just fine) on the recording.
As much as I like rock, I have to admit that it displaced other forms of music faster, and more thoroughly, than any other pop music in the past had ever done.
The same thing is true for films.
Values have changed as well; distrust, lack of respect for what has come before, etc.
I don't think it matters who is picking the tempo, but given that the average is going down and that the audience is stable at best, I can't help but think that those that pick the tempo end up doing so to the detriment for a wider interest in order to satisfy a small segment of their audience.
Comments
Wow, that's disturbing to see those movies called "classics." Not that I don't actually enjoy all 3 of them, but I'd only consider T2 as a classic...and the other's as just shut-off-the-brain-and-enjoy flicks (despite Total Recall being based off a Philip K. Dick story, it becomes hokey rather fast).
Unfortunately, I much prefer the extended version of T2 that isn't available on iTunes. And I much prefer my movies in 5.1 digital surround, which also isn't available on iTunes either.
I'm really at a loss to see any value in buying movies from iTunes. Lower quality video, lower quality audio, no bonus features, no subtitles, no alternate audio languages. No ability to burn it to a become a regular DVD video. Especially using these 3 movies as an example; they are all readily available at local retailers like Walmart or Target for less than the $9.99 they'll cost on iTunes. Inferior product for a higher price, what a wonderful concept!
When you're a youngster like Sunil, or have forgotten much of your life do to drug use (like Sunil
I think that is part of the reason that I like the show. Since it is funded by the government Top Gear is much more brutal and honest then any add supported show can be in the U.S.
It's not funded by the government.
...((Terminator2, TotalRecall, Stargate. Some classic SciFi.))...Wow, that's disturbing to see those movies called "classics." Not that I don't actually enjoy all 3 of them, but I'd only consider T2 as a classic...and the other's as just shut-off-the-brain-and-enjoy flicks (despite Total Recall being based off a Philip K. Dick story, it becomes hokey rather fast).
When you're a youngster like Sunil, or have forgotten much of your life do to drug use (like Sunil
Heh. I'm speechless. Too much life experience to remember it all, Mel...
When do we get Alien and Alien2? Tell me those ain't classic SciFi.
Of course, not *quite* Alien3, the pretty yucky Alien4 and the writeoff that his Alien vs Predator.
There was certainly an issue of scifi wanting to pay less than MGM wanted to charge - and neither backing down. (The ratings have been pretty good.) And that's the way capitalism works
Agreed - there are so many countries with their own sets of distributors, and the number of companies makes it very difficult. I was responding to bigdaddyp, who said other countries had more complicated setups internally. Anyway - we have 20million (not sure why I need to multiply that by 30!?) and it sure is a less appealing place to invest Apple's time.
And as I said - Apple haven't even setup iPhoto album printing here (though a couple of enterprising printers have some options) and that is a far easier task.
30 was just an approximate number to represent all of the people outside of the US where there are iTunes stores, and about the number of different itunes stores.
Sorry Sunil
I do tend to take most things very seriously, I absolutely meant no offence to you and have much enjoyed reading your rants over the years, in particular you humour. But commercial tv in this country just gives me the sh@ts no end.
People seem to watch whatever is thrown at them with little regard to quality.
The latest and greatest out of the US doesn't seem to equate with qulaity in the least.
Our commercial stations here are so hooked into what ever is cheap to produce or what ever the contracts they sign make them show, bahh humbug, maybe it is just me, television for me is about information not mind numbing nothingness, but hey, each to their own, and again sorry for any insult you may have taken, it was not intended.
end rant
It's very expensive to produce shows with good production values, to name just one aspect of a show. When the local market is small, the money isn't there. As to the quality of the shows from an entertainment perspective other that the production values, it's hard to say. US shows seem to be very popular around the world. There must be a reason.
never mind, found it
I quite like Resurrection
Scott
It's very expensive to produce shows with good production values, to name just one aspect of a show. When the local market is small, the money isn't there. As to the quality of the shows from an entertainment perspective other that the production values, it's hard to say.
US shows seem to be very popular around the world. There must be a reason.
In this country there is legislation that dictates how much locally produced content has to be aired each week, (can't quite remeber the numbers at a the moment). So the local FTA networks, there are only 3, spend as little as possible on local content, in almost all cases it is reality tv or game shows.
The networks then spend the rest of the programming budgets on supposed news and current affairs (mostly just irritainment as someone earlier nicely quoted).
Most the rest of the programing money goes on American content.
If an FTA chaneel wants to buy say Lost, they negotiate deals that give them the rights to that one particualr show but also ties them into buying dozens of other BAD shows that that must also air or they do not get the rights the next time they are negotiated.
I am sure there is a reason, and certainly they are the best of the bunch that our networks purchase, but these shows make no differences to people lives, they do not educate or inform, they simply numb away the time for a mostly listless population who could not be bothered to look for anything else.
Generalisation, sure, but also fairly accurate in much of the world I believe.
Lowest commen demonitaor stuff, glossed up with fancy editing and camera shots with the aim of nothing in particular.
My my I do go on don't I.
In this country there is legislation that dictates how much locally produced content has to be aired each week, (can't quite remeber the numbers at a the moment). So the local FTA networks, there are only 3, spend as little as possible on local content, in almost all cases it is reality tv or game shows.
The networks then spend the rest of the programming budgets on supposed news and current affairs (mostly just irritainment as someone earlier nicely quoted).
Most the rest of the programing money goes on American content.
If an FTA chaneel wants to buy say Lost, they negotiate deals that give them the rights to that one particualr show but also ties them into buying dozens of other BAD shows that that must also air or they do not get the rights the next time they are negotiated.
I am sure there is a reason, and certainly they are the best of the bunch that our networks purchase, but these shows make no differences to people lives, they do not educate or inform, they simply numb away the time for a mostly listless population who could not be bothered to look for anything else.
Generalisation, sure, but also fairly accurate in much of the world I believe.
Lowest commen demonitaor stuff, glossed up with fancy editing and camera shots with the aim of nothing in particular.
My my I do go on don't I.
Some people have the wrong idea about entertainment.
They believe that it should inform, and teach.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Entertainment, by the very word that is used to label it, is just that, something to occupy your time with interesting and enjoyable folly. It certainly doesn't have to be useful in any other way. It's a filler.
The fact that so many countries feel as though they must legislate a certain amount of locally produced programming shows that the local programming isn't entertaining the local population. The reason why is only important to those who produce such things (and the frustrated governments, the "protectors" of the local culture).
Mindless shows do serve a purpose. They take people's minds off their daily drudgery, or boredom, on the job, and in their social life.
The fact that locally produced shows are what they are is because those producers have given up trying to compete with what is imported. Again, it's all a matter of money. This goes back decades. The situation that exists now is just the long term result of failed local competition from long ago. They gave up, and don't seriously try any longer.
The question, as we see it in France, the supposed bastion of European culture (and as far as they are concerned, of the entire world), that local people aren't impressed enough with their own culture to make works based upon it profitable, or even watchable. Ergo, few in France want to watch French programming, so Canal is paid for by the government, for the most part, and the French won't allow anyone to buy it who isn't French. If Canal disappeared, as it would without that government requirement, there would be almost no French programming, and the French people would be happier for it.
Some people have the wrong idea about entertainment.
They believe that it should inform, and teach.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Entertainment, by the very word that is used to label it, is just that, something to occupy your time with interesting and enjoyable folly. It certainly doesn't have to be useful in any other way. It's a filler.
The fact that so many countries feel as though they must legislate a certain amount of locally produced programming shows that the local programming isn't entertaining the local population. The reason why is only important to those who produce such things (and the frustrated governments, the "protectors" of the local culture).
Mindless shows do serve a purpose. They take people's minds off their daily drudgery, or boredom, on the job, and in their social life.
The fact that locally produced shows are what they are is because those producers have given up trying to compete with what is imported. Again, it's all a matter of money. This goes back decades. The situation that exists now is just the long term result of failed local competition from long ago. They gave up, and don't seriously try any longer.
The question, as we see it in France, the supposed bastion of European culture (and as far as they are concerned, of the entire world), that local people aren't impressed enough with their own culture to make works based upon it profitable, or even watchable. Ergo, few in France want to watch French programming, so Canal is paid for by the government, for the most part, and the French won't allow anyone to buy it who isn't French. If Canal disappeared, as it would without that government requirement, there would be almost no French programming, and the French people would be happier for it.
Well put mel and I do understand that which you say, althught you put far better than I, I just find it a shame that most, so called "Entertainement" , in this country anyway is so unworthy of the title.
I would also state that entertainement is far, or at least can be, far more than that, it can be entertaining to be informed and learning can be entertaining.
Wishful thinking I know, but I do not see why said entertainment has to be of the lowest form available, ie - big brother, biggest loser and all the other, lets say below par, programs that hit our screens.
I believe people watch itsimply because it is all that is offered buy money hungry newtorks more interested in advertising that in their audiences. And yes I understand they need to make money also.
Most of the recent shows made locally in Australia are made by independent groups/companies and shown on Pay TV because the FTA networks are simply scared of change.
On a side note, do you currently reside in France or the US, if you are in France, don't drink the beer!
...Mindless shows do serve a purpose. They take people's minds off their daily drudgery, or boredom, on the job, and in their social life...
Heh. Sad truth, but need it be so sad? People work hard and have problems and shite, and sitting down to a bit of BattlestarGalactica, or Lost, so be it. But I understand the frustration, especially recently with expanded cableTV (Foxtel) in Australia, sampling things like TryaBanks Show, Maury, the infamous JerrySpringer(still going on and on and on), ProjectRunway( I'm the greatest designer, OMFG, bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch), and I swear if I saw Dr. Phil on the street....... I don't know if I could contain my irritation. 8) BUT, different strokes for different folks, and DifferentStrokes wasn't too bad a TV show if I remember. Oh, Bikerdude, and I saw Humphrey the Bear LIVE in person at a Melbourne Manningham Council "Carols by Candlelight in the Park"... Usually the Children's TV shows are quite fun because they have a cute 18+ legal girl to host different segments and stuff.
The fact that locally produced shows are what they are is because those producers have given up trying to compete with what is imported. Again, it's all a matter of money. This goes back decades. The situation that exists now is just the long term result of failed local competition from long ago. They gave up, and don't seriously try any longer.
In so far as where there are similar languages and culture spoken, "local content" is yeah, tough. Australia is triple-f*kced because there's US, UK, and globalEnglish shows. Leaving a small niche to meet the "local content" quota... With, Home&Away, Neighbours, TodayTonight, BigBrotherAustralia -- mmm.. Kryptonite to Bikerdude. Which, BTW, WTF is up with Smallville? It just drags on and on and somehow all the characters seem to magically forget all the crazy sh1t that went on the previous episode and go on like it didn't happen, and each episode is yet another new crazy wacky zany adventure.
The question, as we see it in France, the supposed bastion of European culture (and as far as they are concerned, of the entire world), that local people aren't impressed enough with their own culture to make works based upon it profitable, or even watchable. Ergo, few in France want to watch French programming, so Canal is paid for by the government, for the most part, and the French won't allow anyone to buy it who isn't French. If Canal disappeared, as it would without that government requirement, there would be almost no French programming, and the French people would be happier for it.
Without Jean Reno or less so nowadays (Jean Reno is cooler), Gerard Depardeeeuuu, French TV and film media would be fuXX0red.,,, I think...... But that'as all I know about Canal+ and French media. Jean Reno. He is da man...!!11.
More food to feast your hungry forum-rant desires on. Munch away!!!
On a side note, do you currently reside in France or the US, if you are in France, don't drink the beer!
He's in NYC. We just need to warn him not to drink Fosters...!
Aggred about some of the young lasses, although my kids do like Humphry and Playschool.
Smallville, MY WIFE LOVES IT, I find it funny as f^^% for the reasons you mention, also like the way they give Lex such continuing, beautiful beatings without any consequences, other than he is evil of course.
And please forgive my rants on local tv, guess I have been going on and on and on now.
No more rants from me on this subject, unless, unless, unless .....awwww ... everytime I try to get out, they just pull me back in....
...Eddie Mcwanker....
Heh. Australia in-joke, in case other forum viewers are wondering.
But, I guess I need to find a new City to live in to add to my list.
...Lex....other than he is evil of course....
A conflicted, Shakespearean character, almost. Ooops, now I've really done it, comparing Smallville to Shakespeare...
Heh. Australia in-joke, in case other forum viewers are wondering.
But, I guess I need to find a new City to live in to add to my list.
Come and try Sydney mate, beautiful women, beautiful beaches, wonderful trafic jams, public transport that gets you where you need to be ( a day late), just make sure you have lots and lots of money, unless you like the simple life, as I do, and do not require food, clothes , any kind of life that costs anything.
Come and try Sydney mate, beautiful women, beautiful beaches, wonderful trafic jams, public transport that gets you where you need to be ( a day late), just make sure you have lots and lots of money, unless you like the simple life, as I do, and do not require food, clothes , any kind of life that costs anything.
LOL. It's already on my list. 2 years. How do you think I ended up with 2 maxxed out credit cards, no money, burnt out of work, can't remember who or what or when I partied/ hooked up with, and had to come running back to mummy and daddy 2 years ago....???
Well put mel and I do understand that which you say, althught you put far better than I, I just find it a shame that most, so called "Entertainement" , in this country anyway is so unworthy of the title.
I would also state that entertainement is far, or at least can be, far more than that, it can be entertaining to be informed and learning can be entertaining.
Wishful thinking I know, but I do not see why said entertainment has to be of the lowest form available, ie - big brother, biggest loser and all the other, lets say below par, programs that hit our screens.
I believe people watch itsimply because it is all that is offered buy money hungry newtorks more interested in advertising that in their audiences. And yes I understand they need to make money also.
Most of the recent shows made locally in Australia are made by independent groups/companies and shown on Pay TV because the FTA networks are simply scared of change.
On a side note, do you currently reside in France or the US, if you are in France, don't drink the beer!
I'm a US citizen.
Entertainment CAN be useful for learning, etc. But it is difficult to produce such a thing AND make it entertaining at the same time.
The problem is a truly sad one. Pop culture has slid a long way since WWII. It used to be that movies, broadway plays, and books were of a higher class than they are now.
But, one would be hard pressed to find such things making money today. What we would see in mainstream venues, is now produced as "art". Sad, isn't it?
People no longer have the attention span to learn enough about something difficult, unless it's a video game, and even there, as a report that just came out shows, as one gets older, starting in the mid 20's one begins to lose interest in complex video games as well. This is why "casual" gaming is now the biggest category of games.
It's also why classical music, and even jazz, has almost disappeared from the recording scene.
An example of a movie that was a big hit, but which would never see the light of day today, was "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf?". A great film, but too talky. There are others like that.
Broadway today is the provence of such crap as "Cats", and other big, expensive musicals, which are produced for the tourist trade, rather than for the more intellectual New Yorker, who has diminished in number in the past two or three decades.
I could go into a lot about that!
It's also why classical music, and even jazz, has almost disappeared from the recording scene.
Aren't those genres partly responsible for that? At least for classical, I've seen several people point out that the average tempo of classical performances has slowed down alot from a century ago.
Aren't those genres partly responsible for that? At least for classical, I've seen several people point out that the average tempo of classical performances has slowed down alot from a century ago.
Not really. Tempo is generally up to the conductor for large scale works, or to the performer, if they are featured. In the past, while we had Toscanini, we also had Klemperer.
It's the effort required to understand what these works mean, and to listen for it during the performance (and live performances are doing just fine) on the recording.
As much as I like rock, I have to admit that it displaced other forms of music faster, and more thoroughly, than any other pop music in the past had ever done.
The same thing is true for films.
Values have changed as well; distrust, lack of respect for what has come before, etc.