: The Most Pirated Film of 2011

2011-12-29, 08:53 PM
Fast Five — the fifth film in Universal’s Fast & Furious franchise — was the most pirated movie this year according to TorrentFreak, having been downloaded 9.26 million times.

The numbers are way down from last years Avatar, is this a good sign or is it the quality of movies this year causing the down turn in downloads?

John Koenig
2011-12-29, 10:41 PM
Coop, I'd say thanks to the MKV format, quality could hardly get any better... Peers may be put down by increasing file sizes (to meet 720p HD) and despite what is reported in the news, services like Netflix end up satisfying a good chunk of us.

2011-12-29, 11:37 PM
MKV format
Just a correction. MKV is only the container like AVI, ASF, MOV, VOB etc. The video format is usually AVC aka H.264 or MPEG-4. The codec has been finalized for many years.

I suspect like you the decline is due to people finding other options like Zip or Netflix. They are always reporting that video on demand is taking over the internet.

2011-12-30, 03:26 AM
Coop, I'd say thanks to the MKV format, quality could hardly get any better... Peers may be put down by increasing file sizes (to meet 720p HD) and despite what is reported in the news, services like Netflix end up satisfying a good chunk of us.
I think what Coop meant is the quality of the product (good movie, bad movie), not the quality of the technology used to encode and distribute it on the internet.

Personally, I have found very few movies that interest me in the last 5 or 6 years.

2011-12-30, 08:14 AM
It is considered a bad year for movies in general and total box office is down as well so it's more likely due to poor quality product than anything else. There are some good movies out there but not many big blockbusters like Avatar. The studios will blame pirating for bad box office sales, of course. The fault is their own for creating a stagnating industry. I doubt Netflix is having much influence on new movie sales. PPV and VOD probably are but I don't recall seeing figures for those.

2011-12-30, 08:37 AM
^Not sure about that?(Movies at theater) What there charging to see a movie is way to much. Add your ticket, and your munchies and your looking at $20+ for one ticket!! Can't comment on the other stuff in this thread.

2011-12-30, 09:25 AM
Hollywood released a record 28 sequels in 2011 (Fast Five included in that list). Also interesting to note:

So far the top seven pictures at the domestic box office have been sequels, an alignment that appears unmatched in movie history. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/29/movies/sequels-ruled-hollywood-in-2011.html)

As the books close on 2011, the year turns out to have been a remarkable exercise in cinematic repetition. In terms of ticket sales the most popular seven films to date have been “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2”; “Transformers: Dark of the Moon”; “Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn — Part 1”; “The Hangover Part II”; “Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides”; “Fast Five”; and “Cars 2.”

The strong opening for “Mission: Impossible — Ghost Protocol” suggests that it may well join a list that also includes “Rise of the Planet of the Apes,” from yet another film series, in the ninth position. If “Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows” or “Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked” gain traction, the year’s entire Top 10 may turn out to have been sequels...

In addition to profits they strive for the kind of inventiveness that was commonplace back in the early 1990s. In 1993, for instance, all 10 of the top performers, including “Jurassic Park,” “Mrs. Doubtfire” and “The Fugitive,” were freshly conceived films, whether based on an original script, like “Sleepless in Seattle,” or adapted from another medium, like “The Firm.”

2011-12-30, 10:12 AM
In addition to sequels, there were a huge number of remakes way too early - Dragon Tattoo, Let Me In, etc. Almost all originality has been lost.

John Koenig
2011-12-30, 10:33 AM
I agree with you guys. 2011 was not a good year for movie lovers (hence the satisfaction that comes from visiting Netflix with its old flicks).

Last spring, I was so egerly awaiting the arrival of ANOTHER EARTH which leaves you totally hanging and APOLLO 18 which is just a cheap and shaky cam-on-my-shoulder thingie.

Titles sure looked good this year, but boy was contents ever disappointing.

2011-12-30, 10:36 AM
I don't mind the foreign remakes done so early. It's the domestic remakes that baffle me. Do we really need a new Spiderman already?? Footloose wasn't that old, nor was it good enough to warrant a remake.

2011-12-30, 10:42 AM
I tried netflix for about 10 mins, maybe if you live in an area coated with cable and have download speeds in the upper megabillions or whatever, out in the country with a max download of 1.5mb the picture quality was atrocious. If I wanted to download a decent 720p movie it takes about 5 hours. I am lucky if I can get youtube without going and brewing a coffee while it downloads.

2011-12-30, 12:40 PM
I don't think I visited a theatre once this year, yet I watched more movies this year than any other year in my life.

Aside from reguarly watching Netflix content, the last two movies I paid to watch were Margin Call (two nights ago) and X-Men First Class (just before Christmas). Both were rentals on the Zune service, and the picture quality was outstanding (1080p). I didn't have to conform to the schedule of a theatre, I didn't pay too much for popcorn and drinks, and I could pause the movie if anyone needs to go to the bathroom.

I sympathise with anyone who lives in a remote location and doesn't have access to a high quality internet connection, but I don't think things are necessarily getting worse for you. Its not like remote locations ever had equivalent access to media. They don't have many (any?) theatres, or nearly as many video rental stores. Going forward, it is easier to run some fibre lines to your location than to bring all of the "media distribution" businesses that would have been required to give you the kind of access to content that "big city folk" enjoyed.