Can iTunes Resurrect Old Time TV? 214
An anonymous reader writes "With iTunes selling a couple of popular TV shows now there has been significant hesitation from other television producers to follow suit and put their content on the Web. It has also sparked activity from the actors unions who want additional compensation for what appears online. But there is also existing content that stands to be revived in this new context, older television shows from the 50's and 60's that have been squeezed out of the traditional broadcast by popular shows of more recent vintage. It was suggested to a producer who is presently digitizing 27 episodes of a 1950's show called Captain Zero to offer it up on iTunes for a buck an episode. Is this an opportunity for these old shows to strike while the iron is hot and while the owners of more contemporary content are caught like deers in a headlight? As the Captain Zero article points out purveyors of old time radio programs have enjoyed a significant revival by embracing web-based technology. Why not old time TV?"
Well (Score:5, Insightful)
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson got paid an average engineer salary to develop unix, yet only Bell Labs and now the open group make money off of every copy sold. They agreed to work for x amount a year.
Re:ipod... (Score:5, Insightful)
I assume the overhead is low and, in an era where new, expensive HD content is raising the bandwidth bar, these old 4:3 shows would be light on the pipes and relatively easy and cheap to deliver.
I for one would happily pay to see old episodes of shows like The Saint or The Prisoner without having to pay for a whole additional tier of cable TV service just so I can get channels like BBC America (and then hope they run the shows).
Listening to Podcasts like "Soap Detectives" [soapdetectives.com] has gotten me into listening to old radio shows lately and I'm amazed by how entertaining they are.
On demand, online delivery of old TV content sounds like a sure winner to me.
Bandwidth (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What I want: (Score:2, Insightful)
If you want me to be a customer, you need to offer me several things:
That's great, and good points, but if 240 million boobs in the the US don't care, and 10 million educated people like who who understand the issues with DRM do care, I think the 240 million will rule the market.
Sort of like, If WalMart wants me as a customer they need to offer X Y and Z... WalMart doesn't give a shit what I want- they have their customers....
So If you want me to be a customer, you need to offer me several things:, they will tell you to shove it up your ass, and don't watch TV, and sell it the 100s of millions of people... It sucks, but it is capitalism at its finest....
Re:Public domain, et al (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, that is so on topic that it isn't even funny- That is why the online distro is such a good idea. You aren't paying 5$ for the movie. You are paying 50 cents for the movie, and then You are paying for the freight to get it to the store, to heat the store, pay the staff, buy shopping carts, advertise, press the DVD, the DVD case, the shrink wrap and on and on etc etc etc.... With the online distro, you cut out so much of that expense....
Re:Public domain, et al (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a lot out there I'd pay good money to get on DVD, like Get Smart. Unfortunately they won't make DVDs of that series (though 1 or 2 Get Smart movies are printed and some series bootlegs exist).
I wish that just about everything was available on non-VHS media. Even some shows SciFi series from around 1999 or 2000 are being held back.
Re:Public domain, et al (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:What I want: (Score:4, Insightful)
At $1 a pop, no chance (Score:4, Insightful)
Naturally, I'd consider paying a half-dollar an episode for one of the good slightly old shows, like The Prisoner or The Six Million Dollar Man.
Re:Well (Score:3, Insightful)
Plus, in the end, actors' names do have an obvious impact on the financial success of movies (please, lets assume that a horde of geeks have responded to this and said "I don't care who's in a movie as long as it's good" or "I boycott mass-market movies" and move on). Who knows the programmers responsible for a title? Are their names on the box? Does their name recognition add any actual financial value to the producers?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What I want: (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh, and I doubt the obesity rate is higher at Wal-Mart than it is on Slashdot. Let's be honest, here.
Re:the big problem is getting the rights... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Well (Score:5, Insightful)
Tipping doesn't make service better. Go visit a restaurant in a country where tipping isn't done (i.e. most countries outside the US) and you'll see.
Tips are expected by the staff merely for showing up, so they're not a motivation for better service. Tipping is only insurance against getting deliberately bad service the next time you visit.
Re:Public domain, et al (Score:5, Insightful)
Woow. That's an impressive statement.
25+ years old: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079944/ [imdb.com]
30+ years old: http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0068646/ [imdb.com]
40+ years old: http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0059578/ [imdb.com]
50 years old http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0038650/ [imdb.com]
60+ years old http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0022100/ [imdb.com]
Saying that any of those movies are not worth 5$ bucks just shows the world what a moron you are.
Cheers,
--fred
Re:Public domain, et al (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean a bootleg OTR revival, right? (Score:3, Insightful)
why Apple doesn't care (Score:2, Insightful)
And as far as viewing the files goes, if you have a computer capable of running iTunes, you have a computer capable of playing these videos.
Re:Let me know when (Score:3, Insightful)
Boy, howdie, you said it. Huckleberry Finn, the Revised Expurgated Edition is so much better than the original. And Harriet Bowdler did such a fantastic job of cleaning up Shakespeare. I also limit my movie-viewing to trans-continental airline flights, because they boil down the movie to the good parts and I don't have to watch the "director's vision" filth.
I'm sorry I don't have more time to reminisce with you, but early tomorrow I'm heading off to Alabama and Mississippi to help clean out the government archives. There's a lot of junk from the 1950s and 1960s that makes them look bad, and it's all water under the bridge now, so hey. We're trying to project a more modern image now.
in due time, perhaps. (Score:2, Insightful)
so, if you WANT to actually see good content available at a reasonable price online.. don't push for VGA+ resolution so quickly haha. let the mainstream content start appearing, and then let the indie producers eventually start offering a VGA+ resolution option, and ultimately the mainstream content will follow suit. expecting mainstream studios to immediately offer up DVD quality downloads of their movies at a reasonable price without some VERY strict piracy safegaurds in place.. is unreasonable, imo. no way the bean-counters will do it, heh.
my $.02*
*disclaimer: i didn't proof read.. i hope this was semi-coherent.
IPTV (Score:4, Insightful)
There are many shows that are so voluminous that the only practical way to consume them is with an all-in-one jukebox with a beefy search engine behind it (think google video indexing closed captioning).
Think of these long-running shows:
The Simpsons
Married with Children
Bonanza
Gunsmoke
Doctor Who
Cheers
Imagine also being able to dig into old news shows, like every episode of 60 Minutes, 20/20, or Nightline.
Imagine being able to watch any old airing of the Tonight Show back to the earliest B&W days based on a search for a celebrity guest. For instance, you could line up all of Tom Hanks' appearances and watch his fro shrink and his hairline recede.
DVD is fine, but it is just not practical to reserve the shelfspace to own it all. And DVDs do little to help you get from "gee, I wish I could see the episode where Ricardo Montalban guested on Gunsmoke" to it actually playing on the screen. You have to go figure out the episode number online, then find the right disc, pop it in, wait through the ads, navigate through the menus, and go. The convenience at the macro level is not there, just as maintaining a large audio CD collection is a drag.
So much of our content viewing habits these days is a result of search results. That's the whole idea of web surfing. So the ideal video viewing experience, to me, is to sit down casually and just improvise search terms until you come up with interesting enough results. You won't know what you want to watch until you see what comes up. Or you have the preference engine (ala Amazon) do it for you.
Instead of using the web to index information about media, it could index the media directly and let you jump right into it.
For instance, let's say you typed in a particular line or phrase like "Do'h" and every instance where Homer says "Do'h" pops up with the timecode right in there. You might even be able to set up in/out playlists for custom highlights reels.
Really, this stuff is all doable technically. Google video is a good proof of concept. It's purely a matter of working out the DRM and the business side of things.
Re:This censorship would be an insult (Score:1, Insightful)
I want to see the racism, the bigotry and plain stupidity of the past - people need to see it and understand why it was wrong, and not just sweep it under a rug somewhere.
It needs to be brought out into the open, discussed and accepted that "yes people did act like that" and we need to see why it was wrong and how much of an asshole thing it was to do.
Granted, I think what there needs to be is a disclaimer stating the fact that the show contains bigoted material and attitudes and maybe rate it Mature. (I'd rate it lower but I doubt most children or even teens would have the opportunity to discuss the attitudes in the movies with an adult or other person with enough moral and ethical character to see how wrong it was)
I dont know if this AC's comment will reach the light of day, but hopefully a couple people will read it. That will be enough.