Knockoff Nigel gets dobbed-on by his frends.... | The Popjustice Forum

Knockoff Nigel gets dobbed-on by his frends....

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by peteyjames, Aug 17, 2008.

  1. http://www.xfm.co.uk/nigel

    XFM are really heavily advertising this - grass up your mates to the police and win a plasma-screen TV?!

    Would any of you actually do this?
    ...Because I can't really see it working - surely everyone knows that it's going to lead to their 'mates' being fined or sent to prison?
     
  2. Tribal Spaceman

    Tribal Spaceman Oh, OK.

    that's a bit sick.

    but surely people get everything off the internet these days anyway...
     
  3. That's really nasty, desperate stuff.

    It'll be interesting to see if it's an actual success or just a load of friends winding each other up for a laugh.

    With regard to the whole Knock off Nigel campaign, it is amusing to see the film industry make the same mistake as the music industry has done of pursuing the legal angle, instead of offering or pointing out that they already offer a substantially better product than knock-offs.

    When will these industries learn that most of its consumers either do not care too much about the morality of ripping off their industry or actually rationalise that it is morally good to rip off the industry - being that the public faces of these industries are portrayed as disproportionately rich and living the proverbial easy life.
     
  4. Tribal Spaceman

    Tribal Spaceman Oh, OK.

    exactly.

    but it'd help if they didn't charge an extra £8 for the bonus disc...
     
  5. that's just gross.
     
  6. I don't download or buy knock-off films because I don't have the energy. I like films, but that's why god invented Sky Movies.

    I don't often go to the cinema, but I recently went to see the new Batman film. The experience, which included a diluted coke, blurred projection and an extremely uncomfortable seat cost me about £20 in total. That means if I went to see one movie a week, it would cost £1,680 for a year - money that most of us just don't have.

    If I was as passionate about films as I was music, I'd be bankrupt. I've used the iTunes rental service a couple of times, which is pretty comparable to Sky Box Office. If there is something you really want to see, it's justifiable as a one off experience, but at £3-£4 a pop, it's also not particularly affordbale.

    There are DVD membership rental services that I think are quite cool, but you're at the mercy of a waiting list for popular films.

    The movie industry need to make films more accessible to all. Not just the super wealthy.
     
  7. Tribal Spaceman

    Tribal Spaceman Oh, OK.

    i always bring my own food anyway.

    but yes, i agree.
     
  8. Popjustice

    Popjustice Staff Member

    I completely agree. I want to have a new car every year, but at more than £20,000 for the ones I want I simply can't afford it, so I have no option but to go around stealing them.
     
  9. Oh puhlease Robinson. Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

    And there's a problem with your comparison. If you spend £20,000 on a car, you get to buy a cheap bottle of coke from the co-op and drink in the backseat. You are not charged £4 for the luxury of drinking within the car.

    And you don't have to buy a £20,000 car, you have the option of buying a £500 Ford Fiesta from the dark ages.
     
  10. Popjustice

    Popjustice Staff Member

    Well there are also cheaper nights out at the cinema than £20 - it's not the film industry's fault that cinemas charge ridiculous prices for food and drink.

    I think one of the problems at the moment is that because certain elements of background operations have been made accessible, people are questioning the value of art. "A blank CDR costs me 25p - how on earth can I be charged £9.99???" and so on. And I think it's wrong to feel justified in penalising the film industry because of decisions made by Vue, or whoever.

    Also, I think the 'everything for everyone' culture - which is great - has also obliterated the apparently old fashioned concept that if you can't afford something, you can't have it. The mantra now is "I can't afford this - but I am still entitled to own it, so I shall steal it". Is that fair? As far as I'm concerned, if you can't afford a night out, you have a night in. In the same way that if you can't afford a new car, you have an old one (as you point out).
     
  11. My friend works for a cinema and I was told that the cinema makes hardly any profit on ticket sales because it is so expensive to rent the show reels. They make all of their profit from the refreshments they sell.

    I go to the cinema at least once a week and manage to do it quite cheaply (it costs me just over £10 for two tickets). Vue cinemas offer money off vouchers, there is orange Wednesdays and of course student discount. I'm with Tribal Spaceman, I always sneak in some sweets with me, but I've heard that some cinemas are clamping down on people taking their own food into the cinema.

    Like most people I have seen pirated films and the quality is shocking, they sometimes jump and skip whilst watching them. I enjoy watching films too much to ruin the experience with crap quality knocked off films!
     
  12. The most annoying thing about the whole Knock Off Nigel/Movie Piracy is a crime malarkey is when they put them at the beginning of a DVD that I'VE BOUGHT! I appreciate what they're trying to do, but I've never illegally downloaded a film in my life, and I've bought the dvd, so why do I need to be told movie piracy is a crime? I'm being a good little citizen!

    I can see Mr PJ's point though - it used to be a case of you didn't have what you couldn't afford, but then we just don't see to live in that kind of society anymore.
     
  13. The Vue charge so much for a coke because they have no other way of making money. As popBrit said, to rent the reels costs a bomb - which pushes up ticket prices - which makes less people go to the cinema - which reduces revenue for the cinema and the film distributor - which pushes up ticket prices - which makes less people go to the cinema ...ETC

    It's a vicious cycle. But to totally vindicate the film industry for not creating a problem it now seeks to put an end to is tres naive.

    Going to the cinema in the UK should be cheaper. There's no denying that.

    I just got back from the US where a ticket to see Wall-E - without any promotion or special offer - cost me just under $6 dollars. That's £3. In Wandsworth it's £8.

    How can the film industry justify such a discrepency when the majority of films people go to see are US made and production costs can often be covered by first week box office sales in the US alone?

    Hollywood studios and Film distributors are used to making lots and lots of money. Now they are making a bit less. Boo fucking hoo. Does anyone actually think that New Line went down because of a couple of nerds downloading Lord Of The Rings on Limewire or because of their total financial mismanagement and general ineptness?
     
  14. Agreed. The same thing happens at the cinema - they make you sit through adverts lecturing you about piracy before the film you have legitimately paid to see. Isn't that called 'preaching to the choir'?

    I've got a Cineworld Unlimited card, so basically I pay £12 a month and go as often as I like - which is a LOT - so I never think of the cinema as being all that expensive, and never download films. TV shows are another matter, but I blame Virgin Media for the whole Sky fiasco denying me access to three of my favourite shows, and therefore feel no guilt whatsoever.
     
  15. Me and my cousin were actually discussing this at the cinema the other week when we went to see Dark Knight. He was saying that on one of his DVD box sets they played an anti-piracy warning before every episode. What's the point when you've just shelled out £25 for the DVDs?
     
  16. The most annoying thing about the whole Knock Off Nigel/Movie Piracy thing is the whole bloody thing.
     
  17. futurix

    futurix Guest

    My favourite experience in that regard is this DVD - it has like 5 minutes of warnings before the main menu appears. I bet it was done to support the idea of the film...
     
  18. I think this is only a small part of the reason behind art losing it's value. Particularly with regards to music. Record companies were previously able to artificially restrict supply of its product through the control of its distribution network. Vinyl, Tape & CD provide a very simple, cost efficient way for them to do this. Even though we feel we're paying for the abstract idea of the music/art itself it was the format itself that gave it excludability and therefore enabled the vendors to restrict supply and so charge what was not necessarily the true market value of the product.

    The internet changed all this. Firstly excludability became extremely difficult for the music business without great expense or reducing the value of the product to the consumers who were buying it (DRM restrictions). Secondly, and personally I believe the larger factor, it increased supply of music exponentially; it's very simple to now release your music on-line either free or via sites like cdbaby & emusic. GCSE economics will tell you if you increase supply of a product, it's price - its worth to the consumer in a free market - will reduce.

    The music industry has had a very hard time coming to terms with this reduction in the worth of its product and instead of trying to maintain its profit margins by reducing costs & embracing the new business model, it has resolutely stuck to the old business model and be damned if they piss off its core customers in the process - kidding themselves that they can still rely on a restriction of supply to keep prices high when the reality of the last 5 years continually shows this idea to be deluded.

    With relation to the film industry, the scenario is slightly different in that they can still restrict supply through the large costs involved in first producing a film. The film industry needs to concentrate highlighting the difference between watching a knock off DVD and going to the cinema. To me the cinema is a far superior experience to watching a knock off DVD, so I'll always choose that - with prices at their current level. To compare with music - the difference between an illegal mp3 and legal one is often zero.

    rant over
     
  19. Tribal Spaceman

    Tribal Spaceman Oh, OK.

    i've never downloaded a film, it's just too much hassle and you know it's gonna look crap.

    i just fail to see why tickets and refreshments should be so expensive, that's all.
    i'm quite amazed this has become such a debate.

    it is WRONG to charge £3 for a bag of sweets with a RRP of £1.50.
    that is all.
    and i think cinemas that charge over a fiver for a ticket are taking the mick.

    piracy messages on DVDs are becoming ridiculous.
    a leaflet in the box is enough, and even that is pointless.
     
  20. Cinemas overcharge quite simply because they can and know people will pay for it nevertheless though. It's like how annoyingly more expensive things are at places like train stations too where they've got no choice (random point there).

    Downloading films can be a hassle, but it can likewise be very, very easy too - especially if you're going for a film which has been released on DVD already. Downloading and watching a new release has always seemed a bit pointless to me because it is those dodgy knock-offs which are really not worth the time and energy - you may as well just

    One thing I hate about the cinema is kids, young or nearing mid-teens. I feel old saying this but I just won't go anywhere near a cinema at weekends because of 'em anymore. I'd quite happily pay a higher price for tickets for non-kids showings.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.