New era of censorship

[Havok]

The reality is that not every hunk o junk can be put on Netflix. And they can’t produce a massive DVD or BluRay release. Some are old and not enough people care to do anything about that and that’s fine. If they were once on VHS or on YouTube or whatever then fine and dandy for you guys to use eBay or online auction sites or communities to get them. But if they are nowhere to be found then they clearly were not worth saving. So why be bothered.

I don't see the logic. If they are nowhere to be found, they clearly were not worth saving?

Who made you the one who gets to decide that?

The Spirits of Jupiter (1984) is quite difficult to find, and that means it's not as good as movies more available? Lost films are lost because they weren't worth keeping around?

Pure bullshit.

Every movie, even the shitty ones (Hillside Cannibals, for instance), have every right to be available, and if any film is ever lost, that does not automatically mean it wasn't worth keeping around.

Such a view is entirely antithetical to what I'd hope fans of movies would believe.

We have to get with the times, Jiggy. It seems nobody wants to see London After Midnight because it sucks and deserves to be lost.

[Jigsaw]

The reality is that not every hunk o junk can be put on Netflix. And they can’t produce a massive DVD or BluRay release. Some are old and not enough people care to do anything about that and that’s fine. If they were once on VHS or on YouTube or whatever then fine and dandy for you guys to use eBay or online auction sites or communities to get them. But if they are nowhere to be found then they clearly were not worth saving. So why be bothered.

I don't see the logic. If they are nowhere to be found, they clearly were not worth saving?

Who made you the one who gets to decide that?

The Spirits of Jupiter (1984) is quite difficult to find, and that means it's not as good as movies more available? Lost films are lost because they weren't worth keeping around?

Pure bullshit.

Every movie, even the shitty ones (Hillside Cannibals, for instance), have every right to be available, and if any film is ever lost, that does not automatically mean it wasn't worth keeping around.

Such a view is entirely antithetical to what I'd hope fans of movies would believe.

We have to get with the times, Jiggy. It seems nobody wants to see London After Midnight because it sucks and deserves to be lost.

For sure. Who needs lost or hard-to-find films when you can have the much better-distributed Paranormal Activity series?

[zombie]

maybe throwing the more known movies under the bus is not so productive, if you really feel that all movies are worth seeing to someone.

[Jigsaw]

maybe throwing the more known movies under the bus is not so productive, if you really feel that all movies are worth seeing to someone.

I'm only throwing Paranormal Activity under the bus. It was god-awful.

That said, while it's not my type of movie, I would always want it to be preserved for future audiences.

[showa58taro]

The fans create the market. If there’s no market there weren’t enough fans.

[zombie]

The fans create the market. If there’s no market there weren’t enough fans.

or there wasn't enough exposure. how many people have seen infernal affairs? how many have seen the departed? does that mean that we should just let infernal affairs fall away?

[Reign in Blood]

Why does it matter if we lose a bunch of mediocre films?

Are you serious? I don't care if some films are complete and utter garbage piles they shouldn't be lost and as a film fan I would want to see them get some sort of recognition and be available on some format.

Natural Born Zombie Killers is a Shot on Video splatter movie from 1998 that barely anybody knows about. I found it randomly on Ebay and made a thread on the board wanting it to be seen by other Zombie genre fans.

As a Horror fan in general you wouldn't want to see any film lost, no matter the outcome of the film. We're slowly finding and releasing a decent amount of undiscovered films from the 80's like Evil In The Woods and the films of Chester Novell Turner. Is Black Devil Doll From Hell a good movie? Fuck no, but it shouldn't be forgotten.

Lean on him, Havok (and Jig)! Don't take any guff from this swine.

[Reign in Blood]

The fans create the market. If there’s no market there weren’t enough fans.

or there wasn't enough exposure. how many people have seen infernal affairs? how many have seen the departed? does that mean that we should just let infernal affairs fall away?

Way to go for the jugular, zombs.

Everybody BOO this man named Sebastard!

[showa58taro]

I don't get how I'm the bad guy, when all I'm doing is being realistic about how we value stuff in society. Exposure comes with success, especially in the modern era of social media and grass-roots engagement. Likewise, merit tends to beget merit. In many of these cases you guys are saying that your subjective enjoyment (as if we can't possibly have shit taste at times, all of us) is going to trump reality. It's just not.

Foo made the point that it is sad that these things are being lost, but aside from you wanting it to stay, what objective good are you guys envisioning here when unloved art disappears? There's no negative consequences for a reduction in Blaxploitation films, or bad horror, or any other genre. It may be that someone might find their collection a slightly smaller one, or that they can't see every film known to man, but that's not an objective good in and of itself. So what is the actual hard "harm" this proverbial censorship is causing? None. by contrast, I think the positive case is easy to make. Stuff people don't care about disappears, but that means stuff that everyone likes sticks around and becomes people's favourites. It becomes easier to identify quality and you get a perspective on what is valued about the past or the present. And it's easier to keep track of what to watch. All told, no downside.

[Jigsaw]

I don't get how I'm the bad guy, when all I'm doing is being realistic about how we value stuff in society. Exposure comes with success, especially in the modern era of social media and grass-roots engagement. Likewise, merit tends to beget merit. In many of these cases you guys are saying that your subjective enjoyment (as if we can't possibly have shit taste at times, all of us) is going to trump reality. It's just not.

Foo made the point that it is sad that these things are being lost, but aside from you wanting it to stay, what objective good are you guys envisioning here when unloved art disappears? There's no negative consequences for a reduction in Blaxploitation films, or bad horror, or any other genre. It may be that someone might find their collection a slightly smaller one, or that they can't see every film known to man, but that's not an objective good in and of itself. So what is the actual hard "harm" this proverbial censorship is causing? None. by contrast, I think the positive case is easy to make. Stuff people don't care about disappears, but that means stuff that everyone likes sticks around and becomes people's favourites. It becomes easier to identify quality and you get a perspective on what is valued about the past or the present. And it's easier to keep track of what to watch. All told, no downside.

I do care about it. No horror movie, no matter how bad even the majority of people may think it is, deserves to be lost. Not a single one.

And calling it "unloved" because it's not widely available is, again, deeply disheartening. Secret of the Blue Room (1933) is perhaps one of my favorite horror flicks of the 1930's, but it's by-and-large been forgotten by most people.

That movie should never be lost, nor should anyone encourage the loss of a movie simply because "my taste might be questionable" for liking it.

How about if obscure movies, moderately speaking, such as Secret of the Blue Room, Bikers Versus the Undead (1985), The Bloody Video Horror That Made Me Puke on My Aunt Gertrude (1989) and Soul's Ark (1999) ARE movies you both consider favorites and of good quality? Because the majority doesn't know about them or agree, flush them down the toilet and forget they exist?

That's so incredibly idiotic, in my view.

[Foo]

i don't know what to do about the stuff that is unavailable to be discovered or rediscovered. but i'm pretty sure that i can find all of the blaxploitation titles you mentioned to watch, as an example. and i intend to give it a go. (maybe after october, for the ones that aren't horror)

but wallowing and lamenting is also an option, if you wanna choose that. *shrug*

Let me know if you find Black Cream (1972) Samuel L Jackson is allegedly in it in an early role.

looks like even jay leno couldn't find it. i'm not gonna fare any better than him.

Wow, what effort!

until i mentioned making an effort, all you wanted to was have a group cry. i'm still going to try to find those flicks, and you're still going to lament.

Zombie, I feel I am pulling out something in you. Let it out, baby! Let me take you to new mental places!

[zombie]

i don't know what to do about the stuff that is unavailable to be discovered or rediscovered. but i'm pretty sure that i can find all of the blaxploitation titles you mentioned to watch, as an example. and i intend to give it a go. (maybe after october, for the ones that aren't horror)

but wallowing and lamenting is also an option, if you wanna choose that. *shrug*

Let me know if you find Black Cream (1972) Samuel L Jackson is allegedly in it in an early role.

looks like even jay leno couldn't find it. i'm not gonna fare any better than him.

Wow, what effort!

until i mentioned making an effort, all you wanted to was have a group cry. i'm still going to try to find those flicks, and you're still going to lament.

Zombie, I feel I am pulling out something in you. Let it out, baby! Let me take you to new mental places!

whatever you're pulling out, be sure to replace it? where are we going?

[Foo]

Would like to point out another common way films get "lost" is when a young star is featured in an independent film. Studios giving a star their first break often sign them to a multi-picture deal, and to keep up the illusion and image, they will buy early independent films to bury them.

[zombie]

I don't get how I'm the bad guy, when all I'm doing is being realistic about how we value stuff in society. Exposure comes with success, especially in the modern era of social media and grass-roots engagement. Likewise, merit tends to beget merit. In many of these cases you guys are saying that your subjective enjoyment (as if we can't possibly have shit taste at times, all of us) is going to trump reality. It's just not.

Foo made the point that it is sad that these things are being lost, but aside from you wanting it to stay, what objective good are you guys envisioning here when unloved art disappears? There's no negative consequences for a reduction in Blaxploitation films, or bad horror, or any other genre. It may be that someone might find their collection a slightly smaller one, or that they can't see every film known to man, but that's not an objective good in and of itself. So what is the actual hard "harm" this proverbial censorship is causing? None. by contrast, I think the positive case is easy to make. Stuff people don't care about disappears, but that means stuff that everyone likes sticks around and becomes people's favourites. It becomes easier to identify quality and you get a perspective on what is valued about the past or the present. And it's easier to keep track of what to watch. All told, no downside.

it's not censorship. no one but foo has suggested that. and you're not the bad guy. you just have a bad viewpoint.

if i can help to remind about lesser known movies, i'm gonna give it a go. and if today's maninstream or well known stuff that i like starts to become more obscure, i'm going to remind about that too. and i hope to keep finding new stuff that i had missed before, for whatever reason.

[Foo]

i don't know what to do about the stuff that is unavailable to be discovered or rediscovered. but i'm pretty sure that i can find all of the blaxploitation titles you mentioned to watch, as an example. and i intend to give it a go. (maybe after october, for the ones that aren't horror)

but wallowing and lamenting is also an option, if you wanna choose that. *shrug*

Let me know if you find Black Cream (1972) Samuel L Jackson is allegedly in it in an early role.

looks like even jay leno couldn't find it. i'm not gonna fare any better than him.

Wow, what effort!

until i mentioned making an effort, all you wanted to was have a group cry. i'm still going to try to find those flicks, and you're still going to lament.

Zombie, I feel I am pulling out something in you. Let it out, baby! Let me take you to new mental places!

whatever you're pulling out, be sure to replace it? where are we going?

I can take you to Funkytown or to Greatness. Paradise City is closed.

[zombie]

Would like to point out another common way films get "lost" is when a young star is featured in an independent film. Studios giving a star their first break often sign them to a multi-picture deal, and to keep up the illusion and image, they will buy early independent films to bury them.

if the film is suppressed in that way, there is always a chance that it could be re-released. if it is lost in the way that london after midnight and the like were lost, it's likely not to be released in it's intended form ever.

[Foo]

http://www.blumhouse.com/2017/07/06/the ... is-summer/

[zombie]

yay for discovering lost films.