BLOCKBUSTERS AND COPYRIGHT

Blockbuster: Avatar grossed $2.8 billion

Marco Cucco (2009) discusses blockbusters in great detail and as a big fan of ridiculous special effects and action, I was happy to read his stuff. Everything Cucco (2009) covered in relation to blockbusters was to be expected – big budgets, big effects, big audience, etc. That being said he did divulge some useful information on the origin and history of the “genre”. Like that the word “Blockbuster” had a military origin and that “Jaws” (1975) was the first movie to open on a large number of screens on opening weekend (Cucco, M 2009).

Cucco (2009) then pretty much gave a break down on how to market a blockbuster to the public. I found it interesting the number of movies that fail to turn a profit compared to those that do. Being a self-proclaimed ‘movie buff’, I enjoyed reading about the tactics that marketers use (and succeed) to get me in the theatres. Cucco (2009) mentions something that has always annoyed me. Blockbusters never get any credit. They are absent at the Oscars while the worst movie of year takes home the statue (case in point – ‘The Hurt Locker’). Movie critics tear them to pieces and give horrible movies 5 stars. I created a movie review blog for another subject for just this reason. I haven’t added to it for a while but feel free to check it out - http://thereelreview1.blogspot.com.au/

 

While reading Steve Collin’s paper on Copyright and Fair Use, It reminded me of James Watt’s patent of his steam engine design. Watt’s invented the first real steam engine and slapped a patent on it that restricted any one replicating or building on his original design. This patent gave him a monopoly on the industry but also set the industrial revolution back some years. Ironically, not only did Watt use the patent system as a legal cudgel with which to smash competition, but his own efforts at developing a superior steam engine were hindered by the very same patent system he used to keep competitors at bay. It is only after their patents expired that Watt really started to manufacture steam engines (Boldrin, M, Levine, D.K. 2007).

Collins (2008) describes fair use as a safety valve on copyright law to prevent oppressive monopolies (like the one Watt had on the steam engine) and I believe it is very necessary for true creativity to flourish. Brilliant ideas are born every day but we can’t rely on that same person to build on and evolve that idea. I believe copyrights hinder creative progress but at the same the absence of copyrights could take away a person’s desire to create. I guess it’s a necessary evil. What do you think??

Thanks for reading.

Cucco, M (2009), ‘The promise is great: the blockbuster and the Hollywood economy’, Media, Culture & Society, 31/2: 215 – 230

Collins, S (2008), ‘Recovering fair use’, M/C Media Culture 11 (6)

Boldrin, M., and Levine, D.K. (2007). Introduction. In Against Intellectual Monopoly (pp. 1-15). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press [URL: http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/anew01.pdf]

Image sourced from: Wikipedia