George Lucas To Quit Movie Business 520
CaroKann writes, "Variety is reporting that George Lucas is getting out of the movie business. Mr. Lucas laments that today's big-budget franchise films are too expensive and too risky. He believes American audiences are deserting their movie going habits permanently. Instead of making major films, Lucasfilm will instead focus on television. Lucas states that for the price of one $200 million feature movie, 'I can make 50-60 two hour movies' that are 'pay-per-view and downloadable.' Notably, he does not plan on distributing movies online, calling online distribution a 'rathole.'"
Alas, (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Alas, (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Alas, (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Alas, (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Alas, (Score:5, Funny)
Never tell me the odds!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080684/quotes [imdb.com]
Re:Alas, (Score:5, Insightful)
"I think the secret to the future is quantity," Lucas said
In other words, he's not going to make more movies, he's just going to make loads and loads and loads of terrible TV spin-off series.
Oh my.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Unfortunately the guy who made the Clone Wars shorts so good, Genndy Tartakovsky, is working for Henson Productions on the sequel to the Dark Crystal. And they are going with CGI instead of traditional/CGI hybrid like the original shorts.
They are working on the new CGI series...in the Phillippines. Not necessarily known as a great hotbed of animation talent.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Anyway, I don't have any interest in anything else that George Lucas would do. If he wants me
Re:Alas, (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You must love the duck (Score:4, Insightful)
Bad kung fu movies have more character conflict that Darth Maul and Mr. Master Jedi.
That was what was great about the real #1 to #3 and what was so lacking from the new #1 to #3.
Re:You must love the duck (Score:4, Interesting)
It pretty much ruined the whole scene for me. Oooooh arbitrary plot device thrown in to create dramatic showdown.
Re:You must love the duck (Score:4, Informative)
*blink* ... *blink*
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *gasp* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *gasp* HAHAHAHAHA
Value? That movie was unending crap from the first frame to the last. The story was the worst gibberish I've seen outside of a Troma picture (and they are trying to be stupid). All it had was special effects and over-choriographed sword fights. Those do not make a good movie. What those make is eye-candy. Distraction from the fact that there is nothing below the surface.
The fact of the matter is that Lucas got lucky with Star Wars (the first one). The rest of movies introduced every newer plot holes that invalidated the first film. And the prequals? Garbage.
Let's take a look at the Lucas track record, shall we?
- THX-1138 - Not a great movie. Good ideas. No budget. Kinda boring. But worth seeing.
- American Graffiti - His best movie. Based on his life in Fresno, CA.
- Star Wars - His most popular movie. Good for its day. Has not aged well, however. (Not a good idea to go ten years between viewings. You start to notice the weak points.)
- The 'Star Wars' Holiday Special - A portant of things to come. The horror! The horror!
- Empire Strikes Back - Some argue that it's the best of the originals. I disagree due to the contradictions with Star Wars that were introduced. Technically it's better than Star Wars.
- Raiders Of The Lost Ark - My favorite of his, and the best movie he made with Spielberg.
- Return of The Jedi - Could have been great. Took the easy (and incestiously revolting) way out of the love triangle he setup in Empire. Loses major points for Vader being such a Nancy.
- Temple of Doom - Well, he only wrote the story, so he only gets half the demerits for this steaming pile of garbage.
- Ewok (anything) - Why does Lucas hate us?
- Willow - Jesus, Mary and Joseph. I can't tell who should be more ashamed by this turd, Lucas for writing it or Ron Howard for directing it.
- Last Crusade - Not really his movie, but it could have been great. Instead it's just okay.
- Episode 1 - The man has lost his mind. Hundreds of millions of dollars for what amounts to a bedtime story he told to his kids. A bucket of vomit splashed across all that was Star Wars.
- Episode 2 - For a brief moment there was hope of a good story in there. But just for a moment. It was pissed away on lame dialog, over-done special effects and the worst love story ever written.
- Episode 3 - This movie did have one positive thing going for it: after it was done the pain was over. The patient was dead and we can all go home and have punch and pie and try to forget about it.
You'll note that I left out Howard The Duck and everything else that he was only the producer or executive producer on. all he did with those is write the checks to get them made.Praise the gods. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A friend and I were discussing George Lucas' skill (or, more accurately, lack thereof) at writing dialogue and thought the same thing. Lucas has a knack for coming up with good stories, but lousy dialogue; his best movies have been where somebody like Lawrence Kasdan wrote a script from his story. Whedon's probably the best dialogue writer I can think of off the top of my head, and he appears to be a huge Star Wars nerd (eg. regarding ho
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Praise the gods. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anything he offers up has gotta be better than wrestling.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Praise the gods. (Score:4, Insightful)
"calling online distribution a 'rathole'" (Score:3, Informative)
Wouldn't that make all of us rats then? Is that a bad thing?
Re:"calling online distribution a 'rathole'" (Score:4, Funny)
May I be the first to say... (Score:2)
Wait, he's going to keep making stuff? Aw, crap.
Too expensive and Too risky? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Too expensive and Too risky? (Score:5, Insightful)
What he needed to do was recoup some of that cost into other things. When you make a "blockbuster" you trash almost all the sets with in a few weeks of shooting... sets that are more detailed and cost more than most of our houses! Compare SW:TPM to SG-1 where they use simple sets, and reuse, reuse, reuse to cut costs. They made more fully decorated sets for SW:TPM than an entire season of SG-1. Then let's get started on the digital models! Again, the cost nearly as much to create as the "meatspace" models, but they aren't being REUSED in anything else! Movies are full of huge non-recurring set costs that nobody thinks about. Lucas could do 3-4 seasons of a TV show with just the leftovers/reused props/efffects from his movies.. and we'd probably like the story better too.
The cost of making films (Score:2)
Me thinks you were part of the problem, Georgie...how much did the last three of your films cost? Yeah.
It's hard to tell this early, after all he's only released them once so far. Maybe after the 3D versions you'll be able to get a good estimate of how much they cost to make overall.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What I want to know is.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What I want to know is.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Lower proffits.
*rimshot*
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What I want to know is.. (Score:5, Funny)
An actor that likes to jump around on the furniture?
The drugs and hookers of course. (Score:2)
And if your very lucky you can make a down payment on the next rehab...
Re:What I want to know is.. (Score:5, Informative)
attack of clones 120 million
revenge of the sith 113 million
king kong 207 million
alexander 155 million
final fantasy 137 million
pirates of the carribean 143 million
pearl harbour 132 million
its not like he's spending more than anyone else, especially considering the intense special effects.
Re:What I want to know is.. (Score:5, Informative)
Explosions are really, really expensive. A film crew is the size of a mid-sized company. Sit through the credits some time, and see the names of the script girl and the second second assistant director and the backup plasterer. Each camera takes several people (camera operator, loader, focus puller, and sometimes more), and for an explosion you're going to have to catch it from several angles because otherwise all that work ends up as only a fraction of a second of screen time. They call cost money, not just in salary but in insurance, craft service, studio rental, the rental of the camera equipment they're holding, etc.
And every single one of them is sitting around while the explosives rigger is making 200% certain that none of them get hurt when the explosion goes off. And another 200% certain that the explosion is going to do the right thing the first time, because otherwise you'll have to start from scratch.
It's literally tens of thousands of dollars to make even something simple blow up. If you want something big to blow up, it'll cost you a few hundred thousand. Add a few dozen explosions into the movie, and suddenly you're talking about real money.
If they're on location, they have to have bathrooms, and hauling a porta-john into the desert isn't cheap, either. It's not any one thing that makes it pricey. It's eight million little things.
Plus the eight million little things that go into the digital effects (light matching, wire frame artists, shading artists, data center ops, plus a studio to put them all in, usually close to the studio which means the high-rent district).
Why bother? If you don't do all of that, your movie comes off looking cheap. Scrimp on the continuity girl, and the lack of continuity becomes glaring to the audience. It works for indie movies, which the audience expects to look cheap, but your summer blockbuster is going to look corny, and audiences won't enjoy it if it looks corny.
Lucas figures that the small screen is cheaper. The low resolution means that makeup that used to take two hours now takes only half an hour. Sets are built to a far lower level of detail; even where the audience can see the difference [e.g. Firefly vs. Serenity] you have lower expectations. (It used to be that you could save money shooting with three cameras rather than one, which means you can do in one take what used to take three, but these days quality dramas are usually shot movie-style with just one camera.)
It can all be done cheaper than it is. As in any organization a lot of money goes to waste between the cracks. Better organization means less wasted time and unnecessary equipment, but it's like at your office: you have a spare printer or ethernet cable sitting around not doing anything. It cost money to buy, but if you need it you'll be glad you have it, especially if the lack of it drives the entire company to a standstill. When those resources are people, though, it gets pricey fast.
Re:What I want to know is.. (Score:5, Informative)
Still, Lucas is right that TV is cheaper to produce than movies. It is astonishing that even an expensive show like Lost runs only $3-5 million per episode, even though it's 1/2 to 1/3 the length of a full movie. Some of the difference is set-up costs, but even the pilot, where they had to put out all of the one-time costs, cost a measley $10 million, and that was full of fancy effects and explosions.
Most Lost episodes are only that expensive because they involve location shooting in Hawaii, which is expensive, and it's done to keep the location secret, which makes it more expensive. They do most of the back-story and interiors in LA, and they end up flying people back and forth. It's amazing that they can do that. But they make up for it with clever management: they're shooting several episodes in parallel, and they don't fly people back and forth to Hawaii every single week.
It takes less than two weeks to shoot primary photography on an episode of Lost, compared to 30 to as much as 60 days for a movie. It's not really that there are fewer takes, although there sometimes are, but it takes so much less time to get each take ready. Standing around a set waiting for the light guys to remove every single damn shadow is incredibly tedious. (People rarely wear hats on TV because it's hard to light your face properly. They even forbid certain hair styles in TV shows; a movie director expects more flexibility.) And God forbid you should have to do it outside, where the lights look completely different at 2 PM as at 6 PM, even with the supplemental light. Audiences notice that in movies when they don't on TV.
The effects are cheaper on TV. The resolution is higher on HDTV than on NTSC, but it's still lower than full movie resolution. The actual pixel content may not be much higher, but the color reproduction on film is better, and it would take many pixels to compensate for that. The better the final picture, the more time it takes to make it look realistic: you have to have an artist shade every single pixel, or it ends up looking like the Babylon 5 effects. (Miniatures are easier, but not as flexible.)
What effects they do shoot on Lost would look cheesy on a movie screen. Audiences wouldn't pay $10 a seat for them. They expect more from a movie. Even where they do have good effects, you're often seeing less than you think you are. A movie is expected to be a big-budget affair, and producers say "yes" to a movie when they'd say "work around it" to the same request for a TV show.
That'll save Lucas a lot of money, and arguably we'll get better work. The man DOES know how to tell a good story, when he doesn't let the effects take up his whole life. Sometimes less is more, and the work-arounds make for better drama.
I felt... (Score:5, Funny)
I think that this could be a good general trend (Score:5, Interesting)
Tuesday on "Those Hairy Hobbits" (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You want a telenovela (Score:2)
I sense a confusion in the Force... (Score:5, Funny)
'I can make 50-60 two hour movies' that are 'pay-per-view and downloadable.'
But...
Notably, he does not plan on distributing movies online, calling online distribution a 'rathole.'"
I haven't been more confused since, well, about five minutes into Episode 1.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I sense a confusion in the Force... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
While I would not consider downloading a movie on the internet right now (too much hassle, too low quality), I have no problem downloading movies on my cable box as the system is very well developed, efficent, and goes straight to my television.
Star Wars has run out (Score:2)
50 TV series! Bring back Firefly! He can spend his money there...and be a silent backer...ok, maybe not.
Re:Star Wars has run out (Score:4, Insightful)
We're all tired of the prequels.
Really? My understanding from my Star Wars loving friends was that the prequels could have been fantastic. Going into the fray they were all enthusiastic about the films. But, IMHO, it appears that it was the films themselves that killed their love for SW, not the concept of a prequel.
Who knows, maybe Lucas' number was up... maybe him time was over. Maybe the older core of SW fans just couldn't relate. There is a thousand things that could have gone wrong. I don't think he was brought down for doing a sequel, I think he was brought down by doing bad films.
But again, I'm not a Star Wars fan. Doubtlessly some will offset what I've said. But also consider that artists sometimes lose their focus on what once made them great artists too.
GL is welcome to forge forward... (Score:3, Insightful)
George dug his own grave here, now he's lamenting he has to lie in it. I just hope he realizes it's not too late. There's always room for movies like "Walk the Line" and "Signs". Neither had awesome special effects, but they were still a joy to watch.
Re:GL is welcome to forge forward... (Score:4, Insightful)
In version 2.0 of this story.... (Score:2)
Does retirement mean... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now the humans fire first.
Still (Score:5, Funny)
He's right about online distribution (Score:2, Interesting)
Until all the DRM gets solidified (and legal downloadable larger-studio content won't happen without DRM, regardless of what anyone says) and the bandwidth to pull down large files reachs a larger share of the American populace I wouldn't waste my time either.
Re: (Score:2)
Until all the DRM gets solidified (and legal downloadable larger-studio content won't happen without DRM, regardless of what anyone says) and the bandwidth to pull down large files reachs a larger share of the American populace I wouldn't waste my time either.
DRM is a pipe dream that will never happen. I happen to agreen with Bruce Schneier's views on DRM: [schneier.com]
The reason we're seeing this -- and this is going to be the norm for DRM systems -- is that DRM is fundamentally an impossible problem. Making it wo
The rathole statement... (Score:5, Informative)
He is saying, "We do not want to rush into this and have the method we chose to enter the online realm explode on us." Online movie distribution is in its infancy. We have already seen the Wal-Mart/iTunes debacle. He is simply making a methaphorical statement to describe that they are being cautious, but he does not openly say, "Online distribution is a stupid."
So, this one again proves that you must always RTFA.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A fine rat hole it is... (Score:2)
Don't worry Mr. Lucas, the guys here at BitTorrent got you covered!
Re: (Score:2)
And you wonder why content creators like Lucas call on-line distribution of movies a "rat hole". This is exactly why they want and need DRM technologies.
Somewhat hypocritical (Score:2)
Late breaking news from planet Zort (Score:2)
Yes, the movie marketplace is glutted with a lot of pseudo-scifi action films. The spectacular success of the first Star Wars trilogy was a large part of that happening.
It's interesting to hear him say this, and it will be interesting to see if he really means it. However, since I think George's point of view hasn't touched down on earth in a few decades, I dont think what he has to say really has much bearing on reality.
Let me be the first to say... (Score:2)
Good Riddance (Score:2)
Anyone else noticing TV Movies lately? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is in comparison to movies, where it seems like everything is a sequel nowadays, or some book->movie or TV->movie or game->movie port.
Err, I meant TV > Movies (Score:2)
Agree (Score:2)
As crazy and unbelievable as it can get, "24" is still more fun than most action/thrillers to hit theaters these days.
As for gritty crime drama, "The Shield" pwns all.
Stuff like Family Guy and Adult Swim and similar shows are orders of magnitude funnier than most "comedy" films.
And then there's Battlestar and the Stargates, although Darren Aronofsky's "The Fountain" is heading to theaters soon.
There's a whole website for Lucas Bashing (Score:2, Informative)
Yep, http://www.hanshootsfirst.org/ [hanshootsfirst.org]
story line (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, if the special effect overshadows the story line, you've lost. The first three Star Wars were great, not because of the special effects (which were good at the time) but because of the people. Not computer generated crowds, but real people; Not a fake looking Jar-Jar, but a real actor pulling strings or whatever.
Peter Jackson did a great job with LotR. There were lots of special effects, to be sure, but most weren't relly all that spectacular. It just that they came in second to the actual story line and acting. Gollum was believable because of Andy Serkis; Jar-Jar just looked fake, as did many other CG characters in Star Wars.
How many movies? (Score:2)
Are those the originals or does that number include the special editions, extreme special editions, and hyper extreme special editions? [ducks]
He's probably right (Score:5, Insightful)
However, it's pretty clear that Hollywood is getting into a self-destructive cycle. Bigger movies, worse scripts, and ever-dropping returns due to too many OTHER forms of entertainment competing for your dollar. Yes, the SW Prequels and the Matrices and LOTR all made money... but in the past 7 years, how many summer mega-movies have bombed terribly? It's a much higher number, and most of them titles we don't even remember a couple years later.
What he's advocating IS the rational move. And if he can get a few more high-profile directors to join him, he could make a real difference in the industry. (again)
And it'd be terribly ironic (and Campbellian) that the man who basically invented the summer blockbuster would be the same man to end its death throws.
Are you forgetting Jaws? (Score:5, Insightful)
Those of us who lived through those times might remember when directors were critisized for spending too much money on their films as that was seen as a sign that too much emphasis was being placed on sets, stars, and other things besides the story. I remember Steven Spielberg being interviewed on Dick Cavett. When asked about the budget for his upcoming movie (ET: The Extraterrestrial), he was reluctant to talk about it because he feared some complaints and he gave the humorous example of using a multi-colored bedspread and being critisized for production values that were too high.
What George Lucas did give us was the dreaded sequel. Give him credit for that, but don't rob Steven Spielberg of credit for the summer blockbuster. Jaws had people waiting in lines around the block and dwarfed even "The Godfather". It was an impressive accomplishment.
Quantity (i.e. not quality) (Score:2)
Now, it's possible to make good films on a low budget, but I doubt that it's possible to crank them out _quickly._ I have the idea he is not talking about 50-60 "American Graffittis" or 50-60 "Easy Riders" or 50-60 "CSA: Confederate State of Americas" or 50-60 "Wordplays" or even 50-60 "Kukla, Fran and Ollies."
Somehow I think it will be more like 50-60 "C
Mockery episode 1 (Score:2)
Well, a lot of people have posted some good mockery of Lucas now. But, even though there's enough and it's gotten old, I'm going to come along some time later and post MORE mockery, mockery that's increasingly silly and boring and actually undermines your memories of the original, quite good, mockery.
And, uh, that was it.
Seriously, though, I think his remarks only go to show what was obvious anyway -- like much of Hollywood, he doesn't understand that people are more willing to pay for _good_ movies than f
A Mixed Blessing (Score:2)
Hooray!
> Instead of making major films, Lucasfilm will instead focus on television.
Crap!
Don't cheer... (Score:2)
Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy! (Score:2)
Translation: "Online distribution. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy."
Sweet! (Score:2)
Who is "forcing" him to spend so much money? (Score:5, Insightful)
American Graffiti? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Or alternatively... (Score:2)
Lucas has way too much money and not enough ideas. The format, be it TV or Features, won't change that.
Coming soon... (Score:2)
Yoda : "Statue inside what this is?"
Yoda : "On cliff stuck Jedi plane Hmmmmm..."
Apologies Jedi Masters... Native language mine Yoda speak not is.
TV movies (Score:2)
Yeah, yeah, don't let that light sabre hit you on the ass on your way out...
Seriously, though, I'd love to see more (at one time, at least) gifted directors do this. I've been thinking lately that a lot of series/miniseries on TV I enjoy a lot more than the relatively limited "two hour experience". In a miniseries, they have the luxury of time to develop the characters, etc. Some examples: HBO Deadwood, the A&E "Hornblower" adaptations, hell, the TV series Lost is excellent, which is basically a seria
Did anyone RTFA? (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems like a lot of people are busy trying to yell at Lucas for going too heavy on the effects and not writing a good enough story. Let's say this is true, that the story writing was actually bad in the prequels (cant prove it to me though), and that the problem with it was NOT that the actors were shooting most scenes in front of a green screen and having a difficult time reacting (imagine if Dagobah had been all CG instead of an elaborate set in a London soundstage, how silly would Mark Hamill have looked then?)
What Lucas said about ratholes is linked to his not knowing how to get paid for online distribution. It's a simple enough question if you're a filmmaker, or a musician. "How does the money get from the consumer to me?" He uses a big word...monetization. He's asking how does a producer get paid. Gotta get paid, yo. Until somone can answer that question he feels it's a rathole.
And yeah, he's looking at the industry's current state and considering how much money and quality the Sopranos, Galactica, Lost, Firefly, Desperate Housewives, and looking back he's looking at Clerks, Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction. He's realizing that low budget good stories with high quality actors are the way to go. He's realizing that people will be patient with a good story.
Just because he called your bitorrent addcition a rathole doesnt mean he's wrong. I'm sure he's so sorry he hurt your feelings.
Thank god (Score:3, Funny)
Get with the times (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Expensive. Not just the ticket cost, but the cost of food is unbearable now.
2) Less on story, more on special effects. Don't get me wrong, I really love special effects. But, there are a ton of movies with nothing BUT special effects, the plot is just trash.
3) Cell phones in movies really drive me nuts.
4) People who won't STFU in movies are worse. I can't tell you the last time I went to a movie and DIDN'T have some jack off yelling, laughing with his friends, standing up, etc. The movie theaters don't do jack about it these days also.
5) I am not amused about going to a movie, and hainvg to sit through 2 coke commericals, 4 car commericals, 2 fandago commericals, 1 about the snack bar, 1 about not using your cell, 2 commericals about the internet being evil and then, we finally get to the previews. The previews are my favorite part of the movie experience. Now, I am so annoyed by this point I can't even enjoy them.
6) Movie studios are tossing out good movies, and replacing it with quick easy to make movies that can line their pockets with quick green cash.
7) The bathrooms are like the bathrooms in Grand Central station. You don't wanna use them.
Looking at all the above, I can very well see why people want to download movies (legal or illegal). Personally, I would rather wait till I can buy the DVD, or download it from iTunes or what not. I have a very extensive DVD collection of well over 500 DVDs. In the past 5 years, I think I have seen 8 movies in the theater vs the few hundred DVDs I have purchased.
Hollywood now reminds me of what the postoffice was crying about when E-Mail first started to become popular. Then will learn to adapt, or be crushed and put out of business along the way.
Ok, so now that that is out of the way. On to George Lucas quiting the movie business. Good, its time. I enjoyed the last Star Wars, he should leave now while he made a good movie. If he tries to stay around, things will go down hill very fast. Steven Spielberg is a good example of this, that bastard should have quit a long time ago. His movies now are trash.
Article Summary (Score:5, Funny)
And in summary... "Screw you guys, I'm going home"
Re:Ho Hum (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, except he should have quit before Howard the Duck [imdb.com].
Re:Ho Hum (Score:5, Funny)
Search your feelings. You know it to be true.
Re:Ho Hum (Score:5, Funny)
I see you looking the the Episode I-VI: Special Edition Anamorphic DVD Edition in the limited edition Jar Jar binks shaped titanium collectors box on Amazon. Take out your Return of the Jedi credit card and buy it!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Lucas must be someone special as he's done both!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ho Hum (Score:5, Informative)
More like until he figures it out. Either way, he apparently realizes the distributors (iTunes and whatnot) are making all the money, and not the producers. I'd have to agree with him that at this time online sales of movies aren't making anyone rich (besides iTunes).
Re:Ho Hum (Score:4, Informative)
Motivation: As with all new products, Apple wanted iTMS to become popular and accepted. For any new technology to successfuly enter a market or create a new market, price and perceived quality are usually the most important factors. A cheaper better mouse trap with a pinch of good marketing will usually do well. Therefore Apple has an incentive to keep price as low as they can go.
Means: It is CHEAP to distribute digitally. Therefore Apple CAN sell for cheaper than the legacy content distribution moguls.
Note as evidence for at least the movies and TV episodes the recent Walmart vs. Apple articles [bloggingstocks.com], the articles usually contain some analysis that shows Apple undercutting Walmart's prices even though Walmart is selling new release DVDs at a loss! Trust me when I say that if anyone sells for less than Walmart (even if the products are not exactly the same), their profit margin is minimal. Then for music, even though this is not the greatest source, it's just one article of many that tell about the pennies made per song purchase on iTMS [businessweek.com].
Re:Rats will do anything to survive (Score:4, Funny)
Oh yeah, and I also hope Mr. Lucas focus on soaps or reality shows and leave SciFi as it is.
I for one (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And by 'potential market-plan' he means 'Robust D . R . M'