It’s hard to miss that TV is changing – increasingly online, on-demand, and personalized. Business models, like consumers habits, are in flux, and the landscape of companies keeps evolving. Mashable recently published an intriguing list of companies that are reinventing online TV. As a response and complement to those selections, here are 5 more companies that, as we see it, take a key role in reinventing online TV.
Netflix’s popular Instant Watch streaming service has become for many a complement if not a supplement to broadcast and cable TV. With delivery via Roku, Xbox, PS3 and others, Instant Watch provides a comfortable living room experience. Now planning to expand internationally, Netflix is no longer just a DVD rental company, but an important player in online TV.
2. Comcast
Innovation by small startups might make a better story, but there’s no denying that the big players have a big influence on the future of TV. Perhaps none more so than Comcast, who with their recent acquisition of NBCU now have first access to some of the best premium content around, not to mention influence over the popular online service Hulu. With the launch of Fancast Xfinity TV, Comcast is moving at “light speed in cable TV terms” (as Videonuze put it) to provide an online TV experience that enhances - but does not replace - cable service.
What is the place of indie content in the evolving world of online TV? The question has two sides: how many people will watch indie content, and how indie creators will monetize their content so they can continue their work. With even YouTube shifting focus toward more profitable premium content, Blip.tv, the self-described “next generation television network,” provides a model for both sides of the question, extensively syndicating content to viewers around the Web and offering profits to successful creators via a 50/50 ad revenue share. It’s not the only model for how quality indie content can continue to enrich online TV, but it’s one that seems to have staying power.
As LG has identified, the next big thing in the world of HDTV is internet capabilities. LG’s NetCast Access Entertainment integrates Yahoo Widget Engine, Netflix, YouTube and Vudu content in selected HDTV models via Ethernet connectivity directly to the television. This looks like the right direction for consumers who demand a simple, seamless experience without set-up, set top boxes, and accessories.
(Of course!) Unlike typical TV, over-the-top (OTT) models where content is completely on-demand create a challenge for anyone in couch potato mood. “Channel zap” as the simple - and only - way to choose what to watch is a thing of the past. We see Jinni as the next generation TV guide, with a unique focus on the user. Based on our semantic Movie Genome, Jinni creates a one-of-a-kind model for each person’s taste, to enable selection by mood and personal preferences.
About two weeks ago, it was officially established that 2009 has been Hollywood’s highest grossing year to date (despite, or thanks to, the recession). And that was before Avatar’s expected enormous contribution. With 86% at Rotten Tomatoes and surprising Golden Globes nominations for best film and best director (all of that before the movie was even released!), its prospects look good.
With all the buzz around Avatar, which some say is once again going to change filmmaking as we know it (just like James Cameron’s groundbreaking Terminator 2), there are still other movies out there, releasing this month, waiting for their share of attention…
Hence, our challenge with this post is not to say one more word about Avatar, and convince you to choose one of the following three films as your next cinematic experience, based on their fail-proof ingredients (or are they?).
Clint Eastwood’s new movie is an unusual mix of politics, racism and sports drama. Not Gandhi, not The Blind Side - and about rugby, which is not really football. It’s achieved moderate box office success until now (Clint, maybe some 3D game scenes could have helped – next time, consult Cameron…). Still the movie gets good reviews from audiences and critics, and is nominated for 3 Golden Globes, including for Eastwood, Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon – just another ordinary day at the office for Eastwood…
If that’s not enough for you to go and see Invictus, then here are Eastwood’s top five movies as director, to remind you how powerful and rewarding his works are (and any of his collaborations with Morgan Freeman). Looking at this top five, it seems that Clint only gets better and better with the years. Maybe he’ll make his best movie, the masterpiece that will establish him as the greatest director ever, at the tender age of 119…
Critics did not take this movie seriously in 1976. Today, many consider it one of the greatest Westerns. Here the West is an ugly and brutal place, as in Sergio Leone’s films, but with a different Eastwood hero. He has a name, a sense of humor, and a heart. Next to Unforgiven, this is the most sweeping and emotionally complex of Eastwood’s Westerns.
In this Oscar-winning, atmospheric Western masterpiece, a sadistic sheriff (Gene Hackman) enforces his own brand of due process. Hired to confront him is a reformed gunslinger, who must contend with his new moral code in the face of revisiting the life he left behind.
In another Oscar-winning work, a murder mystery unites three childhood friends who have drifted apart due to a disturbing episode in their past. Powerful performances from character actors, gritty photography, an exceptionally emotional script, and a convincing working-class Boston setting make this one of Eastwood’s most penetrating works.
Once again taking home the Oscars, this is Eastwood’s first unusual mix of plots – sports with a medical drama. With all due respect to Hillary Swank’s powerful performance, it’s the two old-timers, Eastwood and Morgan Freeman, who make this film, with masterfully understated performances as a couple of men teetering on the brink of failure.
Some describe this film as Dirty Harry: The Pension Years. I think it’s terrific and it’s a shame it didn’t win deserved Oscars. In what he declared to be his last acting role, Eastwood plays a retired, racist war vet, who becomes a reluctant hero when he stands up to protect an Asian teen – and an unlikely friendship ensues.
Nine is a new musical from Chicago’s director Rob Marshall. A homage, or remake if you will, of Fellini’s classic 8 1/2. Despite not-too-flattering reviews so far, it has Oscar buzz, and 5 Golden Globes nominations, including best film. So with no decisive conclusion per its quality, let’s examine if an all-star cast will do the work of bringing in the masses. Nine includes (take a deep breath): Daniel Day-Lewis, Marion Cotillard, Penelope Cruz (all 3 nominated for Golden Globe), Nicole Kidman, Judi Dench, Kate Hudson, Sophia Loren and Fergie.
The all-star cast worked great for the third installment but couldn’t prevent the catastrophe of the fourth, which practically killed the Batman franchise until Chris Nolan’s reboot in 2005.
Troy was a hit with Pitt, Bana & co. On the other hand, even Angelina Jolie’s star power couldn’t help Alexander. Let’s face it - when a movie is THAT long and boring, no star’s gonna help…
Is Angelina Jolie a jinx? Sky Captain’s failure was even worse than Alexander’s (a shame, as unlike former failures, this movie is quite interesting). A year later, it seemed that even extras had star power in the acclaimed and successful Sin City. A sequel is scheduled to start shooting next year.
The Royal Tenenbaums would’ve probably gained much less success without it’s big names, being the small, offbeat comedy that it is. Tropic Thunder also benefited, as Stiller, who also directed and cast his comedian friends alongside more “serious” actors in surprising humorous performances.
In a few days we’ll have the opportunity to see if all-star cast works twice for the same director, in the same genre. Chicago rocked the box offices, amazed the critics and won six Oscars. Will Marshall reprise these achievements?
The most famous fictitious detective gets an intriguing new cinematic adaptation from no other than Guy Ritchie. From the trailer, it does seem to have Snatch’s energy, action, humor and fast pace. With Robert Downey Jr. as Holmes (nominated for Golden Globe), Jude Law as Watson, and Rachel McAdams as Holmes’ love interest, does this one need our help encouraging moviegoers to go and see it? In normal times no, but facing Avatar (oops, we promised not to mention it), maybe it needs a little extra push. So let’s remember why we love this type of story so much, by taking a look at some of the best puzzle solvers in cinema and television.
Despite the formulaic structure, the pleasure of watching one of the most successful mystery TV shows of all time came from Angela Lansbury’s charming portrayal of an amateur sleuth - a widowed mystery writer who stumbles across a murder in each episode, and cleverly deduces who the criminal is before anyone else can. Lansbury was nominated for an astonishing twelve Emmys for her role.
This long-running Brit series stars David Jason as scruffy police detective Jack Frost. Tracking down wrongdoers in the fictitious town of Denton, England, Frost solves cases with a healthy dose of humor and an unconventional style that puts him at odds with both criminals and his own police force.
Robbie Coltrane stars in another British TV masterpiece, a brilliant character study about a forensic psychologist with a knack for getting inside the criminal mind. Perhaps his addictions to sex, gambling, and booze put him the in the right mindset, but they also ruin his relationships with co-workers and family.
With his trademark raincoat and cigar, Columbo (Peter Falk) is one of TV’s most popular private investigators. He appears to be a quiet man who only grasps rudimentary facts. Actually he’s brilliant, always able to ask the one question no one else thought of -leading to a string of successful cases, while keeping viewers second-guessing until the final moments of the show.
Part E.R. part C.S.I., House is a medical mystery TV show that appeals with interesting characters, lively interactions, and fast-paced, twisting plotlines. Dr. House is a brilliant medical professional whose abrasive manner and bitterness often alienate his patients and co-workers. Each episode he’s faced with unusual symptoms, and must identify the patient’s illness - before it’s too late!
So are these any good? Are they better than Avatar? Comment and let us know what you think! And watch out for the Top 10 End-of-the-Decade Poll, coming soon to a blog near you…
The end of the year marks the beginning of awards season: nearly three breathless months that end in February with the Oscars – and that began last Saturday with The European Film Awards. Launched in 1988, and relaunched with a higher profile in 1997, the ceremony takes place each year in a different European country. This year it was Germany.
The big winner on Saturday night was Michael Haneke’s The White Ribbon, which won best film, best director and best screenwriter. A few weeks ago I asked why Americans get to see foreign films so late, long after their original release date if at all. I gave The White Ribbon as an example. Now I can point a finger at the European Academy, and say that if they want their ceremony to be up-to-date, relevant and influential as the awards season opener, they better nominate works that haven’t already received their share of praise long ago (like The White Ribbon with its triple win, including best film, at Cannes), or worse yet, been forgotten in the mists of time (like 2008’s Slumdog Millionaire, The Reader and even Let the Right One In). With nominations like those, this event could be the closing ceremony for the previous awards season.
True, this is the Oscars of Europe (though one could question the European essence, with nominations like Slumdog and The Reader). But the Oscars sum up a year that just ended; many nominees premiere only a few months earlier. What’s the logic of going back to these same movies, a year or even more after they opened, alongside fresh nominees like Fish Tank that premiered much later in 2009? Ask the European Film Academy…
If you’re looking for interesting European film to watch, here are some highlights (and a few to avoid) among this year’s nominees:
Among the nominees for best movie, these two are the least known and most intriguing. And as such, they haven’t yet hit U.S. theaters. Fish Tank doesn’t even have a date.
Fish Tank is a highly acclaimed realist piece from the U.K. It won the Jury Prize in Cannes, as well as major prizes in several other festivals, including Chicago. It’s a captivating, gloomy, coming-of-age story about a rebellious teen whose life turns up-side-down when her mother brings home a new boyfriend.
With 2 prizes and 4 additional nominations, A Prophet is a powerfully rough, Oz-like prison drama, chronicling the rise-to-the-top of a clever new inmate, an Arab teen sentenced to six years in a French prison. The movie won the Grand Prize of the Jury in Cannes, as well as Best Film at the London Film Festival.
Ken Loach is practically synonymous with modern realism in filmmaking. For good or bad (depends on your taste), he is one of the last truly radical political filmmakers. He’s been making movies since the late 60s, whose essence is perhaps best captured by the Jinni gene “life’s a bitch.” They are usually heartfelt, always thought-provoking, and gloomy on the verge of bleak. So it was a bit of a surprise that his latest movie, Looking for Eric (nominated for best European actor), is a rather humorous, uplifting, semi-fantastic piece of… realism (a man going through a midlife crisis makes legendary soccer player Eric Cantona his imaginary friend, after smoking several joints). Loach claimed it’s not unusual, as he has “always done films that had a little bit of comedy in them.” Sure…
The European Discovery section, which highlights first works, contains several gems. This multiple award-winning Israeli-Arab joint production is set in an urban ghetto neighborhood in Jaffa, an old city populated by Jews and Muslims, on the border of metropolitan Tel Aviv. It unfolds multiple true stories in a tense, emotional nonlinear style, carried by non-professional actors. Thus it resembles other powerful first works like Amores Perros, Tsotsi and Salaam Bombay.
This recent effort from Dogme95 founder Lars Von Trier (who is also responsible for the contemporary wave of woman-friendly porn films) garnered nominations for best director, cinematographer and actress (a prize it already won earlier in Cannes). I’m sorry to say it, but I’m glad this radical and controversial filmmaker didn’t win. (His cinematographer did, though.) Breaking The Waves was the first film of his I watched. I ended up with a severe headache and nausea, as if I’d just stepped off a stormy cruise. And that was one of his least pretentious works.
Antichrist is an extremely sexual and gory two-actor natural horror movie, set in a haunted cabin in the woods. Top critics at Rotten Tomatoes gave it 41%!
In a statement among the productions notes, Von Trier explains that this movie is a post-depression work, done “without much enthusiasm”, and that “Scenes were added for no reason. Images were composed free of logic or dramatic thinking.” And he sums up “I can offer no excuse for Antichrist.” I think he explained better than I could why it shouldn’t win awards.
(By the way, while the work itself is unorthodox, its U.S. distribution was too: it had a limited cinematic release and a VOD release at the same time.)
Since I’m on a roll with grumpy criticism, one more thing worth noting is the nominations under the People’s Choice Award. True, festival art directors, movie critics and the crowd often don’t see eye-to-eye. Still, it’s a bit strange to find Transporter 3 and even Fly Me to the Moon among the nominees. The only justification I can find for Transporter 3 is that from one brainless, mediocre-at-best installment to the next, its box office magically grows (reminding me of the equally panned yet profitable Twilight series). Fly Me to the Moon is an even greater surprise – the story of three stowaway flies on the historic Apollo 11 flight failed with both audience and critics, earning an embarrassing 17% at Rotten Tomatoes and a very modest box office. How on earth (or moon) did it get nominated? I guess they had to put up something against the sure winner Slumdog Millionaire…
Please do comment, especially if you’re European, and let us know if you’ve heard about this ceremony, and what you think of it.
(Right up to The Princess and the Frog controversy)
When last weekend’s box office results came in, movie buffs saw an interesting phenomenon: behind big blockbusters like New Moon and 2012, at #18 at the box office, appeared a new film in very limited release: Disney’s traditionally 2D animated feature The Princess and the Frog.
Perhaps you think #18 at the box office doesn’t justify a special mention. But the limited release was in only 2 theaters, and the movie grossed $393,000 per theater, making it the 3rd highest theater average ever.
We have yet to see whether this movie will become an instant Disney classic like The Lion King, Aladdin and The Little Mermaid, but these initial results point to nostalgia for good old 2D animation among cinemagoers.
This moment - which will probably have major influence on American animation in the coming years – is a good opportunity for us to examine animation’s past landmarks and achievements.
One movie, so many “firsts”: first full-length cel-animated feature in history, first animated feature produced in America, the first produced in full color and, naturally, the first of Walt Disney’s animated classics. Despite the fact that it’s over 70 years old, it is still considered a true masterpiece and was ranked among the American Film Institute 100 greatest American films of all times – the only traditionally animated film on the list.
With the revenue from this film (which is the 10th highest grossing film ever when adjusted for inflation), Walt Disney financed the studio’s headquarters in Burbank and the production of more feature-length movies. It is safe to say that without the success of this film, the world of animation, family films and general cinema as we know it would look completely different.
When this movie was first released, probably no one guessed that it would have such a major influence on the world of animation. And indeed, the movie in itself was not as great as what signified: The first movie by Hayao Miyazaki’s Studio Ghibli, a name that is now world-renowned for complex, captivating, visually beautiful animated films.
The studio is synonymous with Miyazaki’s name (although there are some others directors working in it, including Miyazaki’s son) and is considered a great influence over contemporary animation artists – Pixar animators, for example, admit wholeheartedly that Miyazaki’s films are a major inspiration.
Two important things happened with the release of this film: first, the art of combining animation and live action was incredibly improved and perfected. The interaction between animated characters and live actors looks very realistic, much better than in previous films of this kind. The second thing was the nostalgia that contributed to the Disney renaissance (more about that in a moment). The success of the film encouraged other studios to produce similar-looking titles such as Cool World, Space Jam and Looney Tunes: Back in Action, but none were as successful as Roger Rabbit.
Who Framed Roger Rabbit also remains the only film ever where Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny appear on screen together. I guess that could be considered a groundbreaking animation achievement in itself!
The 80s were not a good time for the Disney Corporation. It suffered a string of critical and financial failures, and audiences started to believe the magic of classics like Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty might be lost.
It was also a time of change in the higher management of the company that stimulated a change in the animation and film departments (intrigued readers might want to try and catch the new documentary on the subject, Waking Sleeping Beauty, which is supposed to be released April 2010.
The Little Mermaid marked the beginning of the Disney Renaissance: a combination of breathtaking animation, appealing story and great music. Disney went from one success to the next with Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King etc. The standard in great family entertainment, Disney’s characters from that era are popular and well-loved by audiences to this day.
Stop motion animation goes back a long way. The first stop motion movie was the German The Adventures of Prince Achmed in 1926. But the film that introduced this technique to the modern animation world and showed that it’s only for kids’ TV was The Nightmare Before Christmas.
With its very distinctive look and feel, this is one of the greatest stop motion films ever and gained a cult status. Each year on Christmas the movie is re-issued in 3D.
When we take a look at contemporary popular animated films such as Ice Age, Madagascar, Shrek etc, it is clear they owe it all to Toy Story and Pixar.
Pixar took animation to a whole new level when they released Toy Story, the first CGI animated feature film. Back then Disney ruled the market and CGI seemed nothing more than a passing trend. But the success of this movie enabled Pixar to continue their vision, and a couple of years later studios like DreamWorks, Blue Sky and Sony Pictures joined the celebration.
Today CGI animated films rule the market, and traditional animation has all but vanished (hopefully The Princess and the Frog will change that). None of this would have happened if Toy Story wasn’t such an endearing film, with appeal to grown-ups and children alike. The sequel was considered even better that the original, and a 3rd installment is soon be released in June 2010. The first films were re-released as a double feature earlier this year in 3D, and the 2 week run was extended due to its success.
Not all groundbreaking films were also successful upon release. Final Fantasy: The Spirit Within, for example, was a complete flop. It didn’t cover its expenses and got very mediocre reviews (44% on RottenTomatoes.com). Nonetheless, this was the first movie that attempted photorealistic rendered 3D animation, and with quite a lot of success.
Before the movie was released, people speculated that there would be no more need for human actors, as CGI characters would look just like humans and do everything a human actor can. This proved to be dead wrong, as it turned out that no CGI character can have the emotional depth and expression human actors have. However, with time CGI characters indeed get more and more like human ones, and perhaps sooner or later this obstacle will be removed too. So at least in the technical sense, this movie was important and the first in a trend that’s still unfolding.
Since 2004, director Robert Zemeckis (Back to the Future, Forrest Gump, Cast Away) has had one craze: motion capture animation. In this type of animation, the actor’s physical performance is captured digitally, then turned over to animators who change the character’s appearance. That way you can get one actor (Tom Hanks in Polar Express) to play several roles, each physically different from the other: a child, an elderly man, a fat guy… maybe someday a woman!
The Polar Express was the first movie done entirely with motion capture, although many films use that technique in specific scenes. Since then Zemeckis also made Beowulf and the recently released A Christmas Carol, and in each of them the motion capture animation became more accurate, more realistic and more appealing to the eye. Zemeckis’ vision is that some day actors won’t have to give up roles they want because of their physical appearance. With motion capture a pregnant actress could still play a beauty pageant contestant, and James Bond could be portrayed by the same actor as long as he is capable of doing the action scenes, without worrying about the declining hairline or loose muscles.
The very essence of animation and documentary films seem to collide. While documentary films try to capture reality, animation is completely based on the careful planning of each and every small, invented detail in the frame.
Yet Waltz with Bashir proved that the two genres can also be combined to haunting effect, both realistic and fantastic, that can help describe what many people cannot even imagine.
Waltz with Bashir was the first feature-length film to combine these two genres, and for that artistic innovativeness it won many important awards including the Golden Globe, the French Cesar and many more.
The Princess and the Frog is Disney’s 1st 2D animation feature since 2004, when they shut down their traditional 2D animation department in favor of focusing on the more popular 3D animation. This new feature is their attempt to find out whether this kind of animation still has enough fans.
And in order to do so Disney Studios took out some heavy weaponry: First, the main characters are black, which is a first for Disney and has stirred both interest and controversy. The directors are Ron Clements and John Musker, who brought us unforgettable classics like The Little Mermaid and Aladdin, and the music will be by Randy Newman, who composed for some of Pixar’s favorite films such as Toy Story 1 and 2, Monsters Inc. and Cars.
Personally, I hope this movie will succeed and give us back some of the old Disney magic. There is no reason why good 3D and traditional animation films cannot co-exist peacefully: In today’s world of diverse animation that appeals to all audiences, there is enough room for all the different techniques.
Always felt you deserved a special prize for your discerning taste in movies? Even if you didn’t, now you have a chance to do so. We’re excited to be launching a new bi-weekly prize drawing. Everyone who signs up for Jinni in that period (and rates at least 20 movies or TV shows) has the chance to win a Nintendo Wii! The first drawing will be on Wednesday December 23.
The end of the year marks the beginning of awards season: nearly three breathless months that end in February with the Oscars – and that began last Saturday with 
