This movie seems to be very insignificant.
Otherwise the owners of the rights would sell a legal DVD copy of it.
But this would become a commercial flop, and that's why they don't.
It seems that market analysis has shown,
that there is hardly anybody interested in buying this movie on DVD.
Wow, that comment is incredibly stupid. Because there isn't a DVD available, something is not significant? LOL.
http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=12180629
So it is.
Otherwise the owners of the rights would like to make business.
Good point. The original poster is either making a satirical joke or is unwittingly living out the ethos of the society depicted in Brave New World which is a piquant irony.
shareThe mistake you make is to casually assume that people would purchase something that is significant.
Whilst I agree that a DVD release may not be commercially viable (though that is arguable considering how cheap DVD production and distribution is), that doesn't mean the show is not significant. Personally, I still remember it pretty well 32 years later and would love to watch it again. If nothing else, it is a fairly faithful reproduction of the book and if you're arguing that that's insignificant, you are unequivocally wrong.
I would like to put it this way:
May be there are a few intellectuals interested in this story and in this movie.
But if something is interesting only for a few intelligent persons,
then it is really insignificant for commerce and for human life generally.
In other words:
In our world,
something must have a big impact in business or media in order to be important.
Business and media are the parameters by which modern human life is to be measured.
By that measure, you are probably correct about the movie. However, the story itself has had a huge influence and you can see its influence through a whole lot of modern science fiction and other genres.
share
O.k., it "has had".
But now, in the present, it isn't important any more,
and nearly nobody wants to see it.
Well, this is among my prized possessions because it is a very significant movie to me and also because it is very hard to find a good copy of. Brave New World is among my favorite books and this movie is a very close rendition to the book. I remember watching this 2-part made-for-tv movie when it first aired in 1980 in the USA and it made a distinct profound impression on me then (I was 22 years old.) Afterwards, I remember reading that there was an uproar over the airing of this movie by advertisers in that time slot and some viewers over the disturbing subject matter covered in the movie. Funny, in all that time since then I have NEVER seen a repeated airing of this movie on television, nor has it ever been released on video. Strange, considering that television has been known to repeatedly air any sort of dreck that passes for entertainment.. Coincidence? Have you ever considered that perhaps the subject matter was so provocative that the movie was deemed "unacceptable" for wide-spread release and suppressed for that reason?
shareIf this movie really were provocative and disturbing to a great number of people,
it would sell very well and therefore one could make business producing a DVD.
For instance movies like "The Day After" or "Clockwork Orange"
are really provocative and disturbing,
and that's why producing and selling a DVD makes money.
But this one is not provoking or disturbing in any way to the vast majority of people,
besides of a handful of intellectuals.
I think that most people consider it rather boring,
and that's why nobody is interested in producing and selling a DVD.
Okay I'm only 2 minutes in and I know I'm going to love this film, and I can also tell you that you're full of *beep* How is something insignificant because only intellectuals would understand it or like it.. That makes no sense..
Think of all the things unappreciated in their time, to be realised as greatness later; across all spectrum's of art..
For example, Eraserhead, they told Lynch his film wouldn't sell if he didn't change it to make it more acceptable and understanding to the masses, but he refused, unwilling to drag his art through the mud for money; and because of this his film was not widely popular, it wasn't appreciated until later, once it had drummed up a cult following and now it's one of the highest regarded films of all time. It took me ages to find a DVD copy because for vast amounts of time it was 'out of print', but this is the direction he went and every Lynch fan around is glad as hell. And that was someone who NEEDED money, not selling out.
Now consider that this film was made by a HUXLEY; why would a Huxley care if his film made 20$ or 20BIL$? Money has no meaning to the world elite, they own all the banks and most of the governments, they can print money as they like. Or whether it was popular or not, everyone hates them anyway.. This film was an inside joke, a 'movie for the guys', so to speak. They've been planning this 'brave new world' scenario for hundreds of years..
"Money has no meaning to the world elite."
This is definitely not true.
As far as I can see, they try to make money whenever and wherever they can.
And they would do so with this movie too, if there were any chance of being profitable.
But with hidden significance only,
that might perhaps come forth after many many years, if at all,
a dvd production would be just a waste of money.
Again I have to say:
Such cloudy "hidden values" are really unimportant in modern real life.
"This film was an inside joke, a 'movie for the guys'."
If so, they certainly wouldn't have broadcasted it in television.
Really, this movie was a flop.
You are so.. so naive..
shareTell me - do you always judge value by the currency at hand? So sad!
"Vademecum..."
In order to judge the value of a movie,
the question is not by which criteria I am judging it,
but by which criteria the vast majority of people is judging it.
And again:
A movie with only some cloudy "hidden values"
to be appreciated by some cranky intellectuals
doesn't have any importance to modern real life.
Sad!
"Vademecum..."
Just finished watching, and I can tell you I'll be preserving a hard copy. If you actually watched this and found it insignificant your powers of observation and ability to think critically must be very underdeveloped..
shareFrom a financial perspective, you are right, this movie is 'insignificant'. But if you judge what is good or not good by how much money it can make you, I feel very sad for you (for a half a second then of course I won't think of you again, as my image of you slides back into the morass of people who don't 'grok it').
:)
Life is a journey not a destination. Fear nothing.
My argument is not primarily a financial one, but a demoscopic one.
If only a few cranky intellectuals are appreciating this movie
and the vast majority of people don't give a dime for it,
it really doesn't have any significance in the modern world.
So-called "hidden values" do have zero importance in real life.
Wake up !
"My argument is not primarily a financial one, but a demoscopic one."
Did you mean "demographic"? Because "demoscopic" makes very little sense in the context of your clearly expressed measure-all-significance-by-monetary-value attitude.
In other words, you know we see through you with the greatest of ease, so you desperately offered a simple and blatant denial thinly *disguised* as an (actually meaningless) argument.
Yes, you are right,
I wanted to say "demographic".
By the way,
I do not "measure-all-significance-by-monetary-value",
but the monetary value of a movie
gives us a good indicator about the importance
that the movie has in the minds of people in the world.
By this kind of rating,
you must admit that Brave New World (1980)
has nearly no importance for modern thinking.
I disagree, in that as time goes on more people are becoming politically aware.
There are now huge numbers of people around the world that are interested in what is known as 'The New World Order'. This story is tied into that in a big way, and is significant in regard to that. People are aware of it more and more even if they never actually read the book or go searching out a TV movie based on it.
I would also say that despite there not being a straight-up Hollywood version out there, the constant stream of things that trace their roots to this story continue. Thus making it significant in more than one respect.
This is the problem - How YOU have chosen to define significance.
Whether or not the 1980 TV version is commercially viable for release now, does not deem the story wholly insignificant. Unless you are going to pretend that whether there is mass appeal is the ONLY factor to take into account, which you seem to do.
The context of your post suggests that it could only be significant should there be a potential blockbuster movie to be had out of it, and I am glad that this is NOT what defines significance in the world.
It's easy to pick one angle and say because it is not significant in that respect, makes it insignificant in every respect.
Fine have it your way and have things decided for you by the movie industry whilst us "intellectuals" will think for ourselves.
I have seen many things that go barely noticed let alone be a world famous novel, and I may decide that it is important whilst the 'significant' stuff in the world is being lapped up by tweens or whatever - this week.
Anyway this version is on Youtube and gets viewers every day I don't doubt.
Indeed,
the New World Order question is important in the modern world,
but only among intellectuals, rarely among other people.
And indeed,
this movie is dealing with the New World Order question,
but although this question is much discussed nowadays by certain people,
such discussion is not extended to that movie,
thus leaving it perfectly alone.
Essentially, what I want to say:
Although the theme this movie is dealing about
may be rather important among certain segments of the modern population,
the movie itself is fully disregarded among those same people
and among all others as well,
und thus it is and remains a really insignificant movie.
There's a variety of reasons a movie can go out of print. Often it has to do with legal issues pertaining to rights. You've yet to demonstrate that this movie was a dud when it was released. The fact that it was nominated for two Emmys would in fact be evidence against that assumption.
shareIndeed, it was a rather important movie when it was released.
But it is a really insignificant movie NOW.
Where's your evidence that appreciation of this movie has declined since it was broadcast?
shareNowadays, in the present movie world,
this movie is completely out of talk.
What means that its present appreciation is zero.
It was exactly 11 persons at all
that discussed this movie here on the IMDb message boards
in all 2014.
Compare this to a movie like "Casablanca" of 1942,
where this figure goes into the hundreds still now in 2014 !!!
That's my evidence.
Casablanca is one of the most famous movies ever made.
shareYes, it is,
and Brave New World is not,
at least in the present movie world.
So, your main argument isn't that Brave New World is a "very insignificant movie," but that it's not as significant as Casablanca?
shareOh yes, it is very insignificant
compared to so many other movies
whose audience is a hundred times greater.
Like what?
shareIMDb gives to you the necessary information
to list them up altogether,
and they are thousands.
To me this task is not necessary,
because the result is evident.
So you have no evidence of your claim.
shareOh yes, I have,
but the evidence is so much evident,
that it is not worthwhile to list it up.
If you doubt - do it yourself !
Thanks for confirming that you have no evidence for your claim (for whatever reason). There's no purpose in continuing this conversation further.
shareAnd I still insist in my claim,
that there are thousands of movies
whose audience here and now on IMDb
is a hundred times greater.
[deleted]
Look at this:
http://www.imdb.com/genre/?ref_=nv_ch_gr_3
Take any of those movies (before 2016)
and look at the number of rating persons
(beneath the yellow star)
and compare it to the respective number at BNW 1980,
which is 563.
A common, but very stupid, mistake is to confuse commercial success with significance. Please don't fell offended as we have been programmed to equate the two. There have been several novels exploring this programming. Aldous Huxley wrote one of the better ones called ... errr ... what was it? ..... oh yeah... Brave New World.
It is actually very rare for the two to appear in the same item as they are often mutually exclusive, this film is such a case. For a film to be a commercially success it must have a lot of investment but investors will only put up money when they know there will be a good return. At the time of BNWs filming the consumer interest was in action films and glamour, categories into which BNW hardly fits. So little investment = minimal promotion = insignificant showing = no great commercial success. Additionally when a film attacks a dominant ideology, in this case - consumerism, the beneficiaries of consumerism, i.e. governments & business, feel even less inclined to support it. So there is why this film is both 'significant' and 'a commercial flop'.
And it is why this story, in all its forms, will remain significant until we get over consumerism. Indeed more significant now than when written/filmed.
Your argument says that the latest boy band is more significant than Mozart. a modern pulp fiction novel is more significant than one of Dickens' novels etc. Can that be correct? btw Brave New World was a bestseller at the time of writing and still sells well over seventy years later.
According to the most common definition,
the importance of a movie is to be measured by the amount of people interested in it.
And in this sense, BNW is really unimportant, insignificant.
Business is just an indicator.
Business reacts automatically, as soon as people are interested in a movie.
But in this case people are not interested,
therefore business doesn't react, and the movie remains a commercial flop.
And it is not true that "governments & business feel even less inclined to support it".
Otherwise they would not recommend the book to be lectured at scool.
I'm somewhat more interested in your philosophy on what you believe is significant vs. insignificant.
Let me ask you this: given that there have only been 2 film adaptations of Huxley's book BNW, does this film have any significance in terms of being a close adaptation of a highly significant novel?
-The idea being (as there are large masses of people still interested in Huxley's book) that a film adaptation of a significant work must in itself have some significance ("some" in this case meaning greater than an objective value of 0 or "none").
Oh, and would you please give me your definition of 3 terms: 1)significance (importance), 2)relevance, and 3)fame.
The definitions I'm most familiar with in regard to these 3 terms are:
1)significance-the quality of being worthy of attention, the quality of being important, the quality of having notable worth/influence
-from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary
2)relevance-being closely connected or appropriate to a present matter
3)fame-the condition of being known or talked about by many people, especially on account of notable achievements
I didn't read the novel
and I don't know anything about its significance or importance or impact factor.
I am just judging the film for itself
and hence I see that it is very insignificant.
I agree with your definitions, besides one thing:
In my opinion,
"the quality of being worthy of attention"
does not make part of the definition of the term "significance".
May be this is the point !
Hmmm, okay. Now does this mean that you do not still agree with your previously stated definition of significance (importance)?
You stated:
"According to the most common definition,
the importance of a movie is to be measured by the amount of people interested in it."
Do you still believe that the importance of something is measured by the amount of people interested in it?
Not "the importance of something",
but the importance of a movie is to be measured this way.
Yes, I still stand with my definition.
so the movie Dumb and Dumber is more significant than Brave New World? Dumb and Dumber was pretty successful and very well known, but is it significant? no not really. A movie's significance is determined not by how much money it makes, but how much the movie makes the viewer feel and think.
If you just personally don't like the movie Brave New World, that's ok. you don't have to like it. However it seems that your measuring its significance by your taste in films or that perhaps you don't understand the point of the film.
There are a lot of independent movies that do not make much at the box office, if the film even makes it to the box office. many of these films are brilliant works of art and very significant. Movies that are considered classics now, weren't necessarily big hits when they premiered. The movie It's a Wonderful Life is considered a holiday classic yet when it first opened it received mixed reviews,
http://www.imdb.com/reviews/100/10020.html
However you might not like It's a Wonderful Life. that doesn't mean that because you don't like it or understand a movie that the general consensus feels the same. the only one you can speak for is yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_BbtXj2P4g