Technology news and opinions: Nintendo, Google Glass and Netflix

Apart from writing for Yahoo on TV shows and film franchises, I also write for them about technology issues, news and opinions. Here are links to some of my recent articles on subjects that range from time shifted TV viewing to Google Glass:

The repercussions of increased time-shifted TV viewing

As a recent convert to time-shifted TV viewing and recording technology, I have found that that my viewing habits have drastically changed. But what will be the repercussions?

 

 

Why I hope Nintendo never quits making consoles

With Nintendo currently making loses year after year and ignoring calls to go into mobile game development, the future of the company looks uncertain. However, I hope that Nintendo will find a way out of the hole they are in and get back on top in gaming.

 

Interviewing Ralph Fiennes with Google Glass is a success

After having my first experience with Google Glass this week I am convinced that everyone will be wearing this gadget within the next few years. On Monday night, I interviewed the stars of a new film on the red carpet in London, all videoed on Glass.

 

 

Netflix needs more films, not three tier pricing structure

Netflix might be moving towards a three tier pricing plan, offering a cheaper option to those with no desire for HD or dual streaming capabilities. The cheaper pricing plan will not get me back on Netflix as my main concern is the selection of films.

 

Should Google Glass be banned from cinemas?

As a major film fanatic, and someone who would resist watching pirated material even if you paid me, I would hate to think that more people will be making poor quality copies of films from wearing their Google Glass specs in cinemas.

June Movie Reviews and Round up

In June, I watched a meagre 11 films and there are two reasons for this. 1 was Arrested Development series 4 and the other was Breaking Bad series 4 (and the first half of series 5). Those wonderful folk at Netflix gave me a second free trial this month and I used it to full advantage. The last time they gave me a free trial I watched the first three series of Breaking Bad and this time I've used it to get right up to date.

Although I haven't written much about Breaking Bad, it has pretty much become my favourite show on TV. Series 4 exceeded my wildest expectations. It was perfection and to be honest, I thought perhaps it would have been best for everyone involved to leave it with the bombshell that was dropped at the end. Where the hell could series 5 possibly go to better what had already come before?

Series 5 did then seem to lull a bit but on the plus side is also fulfilling the promise of everything the show and particularly Walt has been leading towards all this time and the first half concluded with another beautiful bombshell. I cannot wait to see how this show ends!

On the other hand Arrested Development was a bit convoluted and too clever-clever for its own good. There was still some of the old charm but nowhere near enough of Gob and Tobias for my liking. I hope if they continue, it picks up again.

The movies I watched in June are as follows. Click the links to check out my reviews:

The Master
This is the End
Come As You Are (Hasta La Vista)
Summer in February
Man of Steel
To the Wonder
Star Trek Into Darkness
Desert Runners
Monsters University
The Internship
Magic Mike

I also re-watched Les Miserables at the Open Air Cinema at Hedsor House which was a really cool experience.

The always entertaining David Jackson came back to I Love That Film to write a couple of excellent pieces: Fight Club and the Doors of Perception and Second-Hand Stories, Second-Hand Opinions

Other highlights of the month were getting the Starburst Magazine Cover Story: The Wolverine Preview. I actually wrote two pieces for this issue of Starburst so that was really cool to see them in print.

My first year at Filmoria passed and I wrote a piece to celebrate. I also got my first clip joint article published on The Guardian website on the Best Battle Speeches in the Movies.

Here at I Love That Film, the huge milestone of 200,000 page views was reached (finally after over two years)!

I also had some more articles for Yahoo Movies published and a very kind Message from the Side By Side Producer about my review of the documentary at Filmoria.

None of the films I watched this month could compete with the majesty of Breaking Bad but I liked This is the End and Star Trek into Darkness quite a lot. However if I could recommend only one, it would be the documentary Desert Runners. Please check out my review to find out why.

I also didn't really get into The Master I'm afraid. What were your best and worst of the month?

Developing Technologies in TV and Film: HD, Streaming, On Demand, Pay Per View, Digital Recorders

The TV and film industries are rapidly changing especially with regards to new and developing technologies. In previous posts, I looked at satellite and cable television, the move from analogue to digital technologies in both film and television and interactive and internet television. Finally in this post I will look at other developing technologies such as HD, streaming, On Demand, pay-per,view and digital recorders.

With picture quality becoming more important to modern audiences, High Definition formats and channels are increasing. High Definition (HD) means that the resolution of the picture is much higher than standard definition. This means that there are more pixels used to make up the picture on screen and therefore the picture quality is better and clearer with less visible pixels to the viewer. There is HD recording equipment such as cameras, HD televisions, HD projection in cinemas and even HDMI cables that ensure the best picture quality comes from a Blu-ray player to the television. HD technology is becoming increasingly cheap and is now becoming the standard experience for the viewer. For filmmakers, the iPhone and iPhone 4S will even let people record HD footage on their phones, allowing people to make high quality films on relatively cheap technology.

Developing technologies are mostly about offering viewers more ways to watch and greater choice with how and when they watch TV and film. Streaming means people can watch programmes and films as they are being downloaded to their computer and Lovefilm and Netflix offer this method of viewing to their subscribers. Content is delivered immediately and depending on internet connection speeds, people can watch what they want as soon as they wish to. Sometimes the viewer may have to wait for the programme to buffer and this can affect the viewing experience negatively, particularly if it needs to buffer in the middle of watching.

Similarly On Demand television and film is available over the internet and allows the consumer almost complete control over what they watch and when they watch it. More and more channels are offering On Demand services such as iPlayer, 4OD and Demand 5, meaning that consumers are not restricted in the way they once were to watching TV when it is originally broadcast. This is very useful to people who require more flexibility due to their hectic lifestyles.

The other option for those with busy lives that cannot watch TV shows when they are scheduled and broadcast on traditional channels is to record programmes with a digital recorder. Whereas viewers used to be able to record television on tape (that degraded over time and with heavy use), they can now digitally record shows either on to PVR which stores the information on a large internal hard disk or a DVD recorder which allows the programme to be stored on a digital versatile disc. Many PVR’s allow consumers to store a programme in HD in order to watch it at a later time but the hard disc will eventually fill up and programmes will need to be erased in order to make room for new ones. A DVD recorder on the other hand may not be able to record in HD but it means that programmes can be archived endlessly and also shared with other people is desired.

Pay-per-view is also becoming increasingly common for viewers offering even more choice but also adding more cost to their viewing. If consumers do not want to subscribe to a Sky Sports or Movies package but still want to watch specific movies or sports games, they now often have the option of paying a one off fee for the privilege. This can be costly but is similar to renting a film from a video shop. It also means they can get access to live events as they happen such as football matches and even music concerts.

Technology is developing very rapidly and is constantly changing the TV and film industries. The impact of the internet means that though there is more illegal piracy and downloading, there is also much greater choice for the consumer than there has ever been before. Though consumers are occasionally forced into upgrading technology (analogue to digital TV), the benefits of new technologies are great. The means of production are becoming cheaper and so more people can get involved with producing films and TV but there are still challenges to getting content noticed. Though everyone appears to benefit from new emerging technologies, there is always a concern that the rich benefit much more than those less wealthy. People with more disposable income to spend on entertainment have greater access to new technologies and therefore more choice than others.

Check out the rest of the posts in this series:

Satellite and cable TV
Move from analogue to digital technologies 
Interactive and internet television

Funding and Ownership of the TV Industry

For my recent article on the ownership and funding of the film industry, please click here.

The television industry is made up of many different companies, some publicly owned and some privately owned. The BBC is privately owned and is funded by a license fee that is paid be every household that has a television. ‘The BBC used its income from the licence fee to pay for its TV, radio and online services, plus other costs’. This means it is guaranteed an income every year no matter the quality of the products it produces. It also means that it is not allowed to make any money from product placement like other TV channels can, as it says in its editorial guidelines, ‘the BBC must not commission, produce or co-produce output for its license fee funded services which contains product placement’. There have recently been concerns over how the money raised by the license fee is being spent with many people raising the issue of how much BBC stars’ salaries are. The BBC has come under pressure to reveal the salaries of their highest paid stars but have not done this, citing the right to privacy of the stars. Some have called for the license fee to be scrapped so the BBC will not be funded by the public and then it will only be funded by its profits. These ‘profits at BBC Worldwide, their commercial arm, rose by 10.3% to £160.2 million’ in 2010 so there is clearly a strong argument for this.

 The funding of the BBC through the license fee has many critics with people arguing it is just another tax people are forced to pay and anti-competitive. Historically the BBC had a monopoly over the television and radio industries in Britain, meaning it had absolutely no competition and dominated the industries, but this was broken with the ‘arrival, first of independent television in 1955, then commercial radio in 1973’. Further calls for the license fee to be scrapped were renewed with the introduction of cable and satellite TV and particularly the increasing popularity of Sky in the 1990s.

However the funding of the BBC through the license fee also has many supporters. Some argue ‘the BBC produces a lot of output that the commercial sector wouldn't even consider. It is vital to the cultural health of the nation’. The argument that the BBC has an obligation to provide a public service and therefore to educate as well as entertain means that it does not have to fight for ratings by bidding for the most popular American shows and can afford to cater for niche audiences as well as the mainstream.

On the other hand ‘Channel 4 is a publicly-owned, commercially-funded public service broadcaster’. This means that they do not make money from the license fee and instead are funded from advertising and sponsorship. They are also allowed to gain income from product placement which is where ‘is where a company pays a TV channel or a programme-maker/production company to include its products or brands in a programme’. Channel 4 is a business not made for profit and can buy and sell programmes as it sees fit in order to be a successful enterprise. It was set up (with aid from the government) to be an alternative to the BBC and to feature more cultural and ethnic diversity. All its profits go back into the business and it is a rare example of a publicly owned business that does not sell shares in the business.

Other television companies such as British Sky Broadcasting are funded through subscription and pay-per-view means. BSkyB is also a publicly owned company so it has shareholders that own shares in the company and can be consulted in the decision making process and also share in the profits and losses of the company. Sky operates a range of services and subscriptions and these services start from above £20 per month. These services are increasingly multimedia so people can have Sky TV, Broadband and Mobile apps. Their Sky Box Office and internet TV services bring in further income by allowing viewers to watch certain programmes for an extra pay per view fee. For example a recent Rolling Stones concert could be watched live by paying a one off charge and now Premier League football matches are being offered on a pay per view basis whereas before only those who subscribed to Sky Sports could watch them.

Many have accused BSkyB of being too dominant in the TV market and having a monopoly that means there is less chance of competition being able to thrive. It has even been investigated by the Competition Commission for this reason but the commission found that there is little that can be done in the face of BSkyB’s market power. Competition has increased in the form of subscriber streaming services for film and television shows such Netflix and LoveFilm but these do not have the same market share as Sky.

Ownership and funding in the TV and film industries is complex and includes many different means of making income from the licence fee to shareholders to ploughing existing profits back into the business. Concerns over the dominance of a limited number of companies are justified with huge multimedia, multinational conglomerates controlling much of the market and making it hard for other companies to emerge and compete. This is a major issue for the media because TV, film, print and radio play such a huge part of many people’s lives and it is undesirable for so much of it to be controlled by so few.

Bibliography

http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/whoweare/licencefee/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/page/guidance-product-placement

http://www.atthegrapevine.com/politics/funding-the-bbc

http://www.transdiffusion.org/tv/aspidistra/funding_the_bbc

http://www.channel4.com/info/corporate/about

http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/faq/name/productplacement/id/501310053

http://www.sky.com/mysky/latestnews/article/my-sky-updates/2012-12/watch-the-rolling-stones-live-on-sky/

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/sky-make-premier-league-matches-available-on-payperview-8475243.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/02/bskyb-power-rivals-competition-commission

A Universal Celebration: Lovefilm Just Got Lovelier

Good readers you may have read my rant a while back about the Lovefilm rental service VS Universal Studios dispute that has been ongoing since 2009.  If you haven't, go read it here!


Back in March I was basically having a right good bloody moan about it and was sick and tired of the poor communication that was happening between Lovefilm and their customers... myself included.  So I wrote:

'Since 2009 there has been a dispute between Lovefilm and Universal Pictures.  Lovefilm can't rent out any post-2009 Universal Pictures films.  This means just this month I cannot put Safe House, Wanderlust, Contraband or The Greatest Movie Ever Sold on my rental list.  I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!'
 
I really was mad.  Like shaven headed crystal meth dealing teacher Walt White mad!  Mad enough to phone Lovefilm.  Mad enough to repeatedly email Universal.  Mad enough to bombard Lovefilm's Facebook with whingy comments.  Mad enough to give Netflix a go.  I had my 1 month free trial and got through the first three series of Breaking Bad and then quit.  The selection is not great and I couldn't figure out how to make myself a list.  I've currently got around 120 titles waiting to be sent to me or watched via streaming so it's important for me to be able to add films to lists.  Netflix didn't cut it!

Anyway nothing I did worked.  I got no response from the companies involved but a lot of comments on the blog post.  Lots of people telling me to try Blockbuster, Amazon, Netflix etc.  But I LOVE Lovefilm and I wanted to stick with them and so I did.  Here's some of the interesting comments I received:

Anonymous said:  'I've just defected to Blockbuster because of the 'Universal Issue' - found a voucher for a month's trial for a quid. Their service is still not as good as Lovefilm's I'm afraid - the one time I used their 'top ticket' service (a service which guarantees you a title from your list no matter what) they throttled back despatch of my regular titles, so in effect, I'm getting nothing extra, just the guarantee of the title I want. It should be noted that new titles such as 'The Thing' and 'Contagion' aren't initially available as top titles..! In short, I've taken a holiday from Lovefilm but will return after 3 months'

RTB said: 'If Lovefilm don't, can't or won't carry new films from Universal, then they shouldnt be advertising with the strapline "We have everthing"... The only way these people will be made to understand how angry their customers are is if their customers vote with their wallets and take their business elsewhere. Blockbusters here I come!'

Sephen raised the issue of piracy and said: 'Given that LoveFilm and the other studios can play nicely, the fuss over movie piracy is a little undermined by a major studio being unable to settle on a deal with the UK's main (I'm assuming) movie rental service.

I don't pirate movies, but I don't think I'd have a hard time making peace with a decision to pirate Universal movies.'

Janetyjanet added: 'I used to be vocally and vehemently against online pirating of films and still am - but, if it's a Universal film I'm unable to get via LoveFilm, then I've started making an exception.

I don't feel great about doing it - but both parties have spectacularly failed to resolve the issue in over FOUR years so sod 'em...' 

It was great to see these people stumble across my post and give this kind of feedback.  I hope that some of them bothered the hell out of Universal and Lovefilm about the dispute and that in some small way, we played a part in what brings me to put fingers to keyboard today.

The other day I noticed, Lovefilm had added the title Repo Men to the Lovefilm Instant streaming service. I'm not desperate to see the film but I thought I'll add that to my list.  So I did and then the studio that released it caught my eye.  Universal!  I facebooked Lovefilm immediately to see if they would comment on this development but as usual... no reply!

So I did some digging and what did I find?


The Telegraph reports: 'Lovefilm has signed an exclusive streaming deal with Universal Pictures allowing its members early access to movies before they come out on general release.... Jim Buckle, managing director... said: "Lovefilm is proud to offer its members access to the highest quality content across multiple platforms from another of the world's most respected studios...." Additional Universal Pictures titles which are available to watch instantly in the UK include: It's Complicated, Nanny McPhee Returns, Leap Year, Green Zone, The Wolfman, Robin Hood, Scott Pilgrim vs The World, The American, Paul, Fast And Furious 5, Bridesmaids, Johnny English Reborn', Snow White and the Huntsman, Bourne Legacy, Dr Seuss The Lorax and Safe House'

 
















 

The Financial Times reports: 'Lovefilm... has struck a multi-year deal allowing it to show Universal Pictures’ content, marking the end of a two-and-a-half-year dispute between the two companies.
It gives Lovefilm exclusive rights to films such as Kick-Ass, Battleship and Bridesmaids for online streaming, granting subscribers’ access to Universal’s films. It also allows Lovefilm to rent out Universal movies on DVD – over a which disagreement first erupted in 2009.'

So Lovefilm users, this appears to be the beginning of the end!  It's been a long hard fight and it's hard to say if we were being listened to at all but least, finally we can see the signs of progress.  Now all that's left to do is to decide what to watch next?

 
Green Zone, Robin Hood and The Adjustment Bureau are all headed onto my list right now!  Hope they were worth the wait!

Any Lovefilm customers want to share their Universal film wishlist they've been waiting for?  How do the rest of you feel?  Will this have knock-on effects?  Are other rental services going to suffer now that Lovefilm have this 'exclusive streaming deal'?  You tell me!

Hooray for Lovefilm, hooray for Universal but most of all, hooray for all us film lovers!  Victory is ours!