13 January 2014

Just Noticed Something

I was reading about how a talk show's copy of a screener DVD had been leaked to the torrents.

Every once and a while such films have a caption, "This viewing copy is provided for awards consideration only and is not for sale or public presentation" or similar disclaimer.

What I just noticed is the people voting on the awards are not expected to actually support their own art form by paying for a ticket, running the snack bar gauntlet and planting their ass in a theater seat.

And if they're not going to pay for it when their livelihood is at stake, how can they expect us to?


I'm talking about Oscar screeners not copies given to critics.  The distinction was crystal clear in my mind when I posted, but obviously I didn't bother to actually SAY it was about Oscar screeners.



  1. No different than book reviewers getting ARCs so that there will be reviews available for the public when the book hits shelves.

  2. Review copies for critics are loss leaders to generate buzz to promote sales. Oscar screeners are... self congratulatory?

    Because you intimidate me so I can't really reply well. ;)

    I just think the entire process of the Oscars is strange.


You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: Sign your work. Try this link for an explanation: https://mcthag.blogspot.com/2023/04/lots-of-new-readers.html

Anonymous comments must pass a higher bar than others. Repeat offenders must pass an even higher bar.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.