Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Wolverine Film Leaked a Month Before Release

Posted by CmdrTaco on Thu Apr 02, 2009 09:43 AM
from the second-the-director-yelled-sniiikt dept.
hansamurai writes "The FBI are investigating the leak of an almost finished copy of X-Men Origins: Wolverine a month before the film's cinema release. The movie was reported to have been downloaded several hundred thousand times and has since been 'removed.' Viewers have called the movie incomplete, missing some special effects and music. Fox and the MPAA are still upset, though, but say the copy is forensically marked and can be traced to the leak. The film is due out May 1st in the United States, and the leaked copy is marked March 2nd."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by eldavojohn (898314) * <my/.username@@@gmail.com> on Thursday April 02 2009, @09:45AM (#27430187) Homepage Journal
    Disclaimer: I do not care for (nor own but a couple) manga, comic books or 'graphic novels.'

    But when I was bored out of my mind one day I picked up the first of a six part series called "Origin" issued by Marvel [wikipedia.org] in 2001.

    The story was good (not great) but the art was phenomenal. I am glad they re-worked Wolverine's origin story from whatever they had alluded to before and I recommend you view this series based purely on its art.

    I can't find any indication of which story they are basing this film on. I only hope the movie can live up to the beautiful imagery and settings in this series.

    I also hold the very unpopular viewpoint that it's basically a slap in the face to an artist to view their work before they're done with it. I also find it laughable that anyone would seek this out aside from people involved in movie production or people interested in this process to study. Do I think it will hurt the movie or cause any amount of financial loss? No, it's merely disrespectful and actually kind of humorous that anyone would ruin the initial exposure of what could amount to a great film.
    • by Spazztastic (814296) <spazztastic@gmai l . com> on Thursday April 02 2009, @09:50AM (#27430295) Homepage

      Do I think it will hurt the movie or cause any amount of financial loss? No, it's merely disrespectful and actually kind of humorous that anyone would ruin the initial exposure of what could amount to a great film.

      Do I think that they will use it as a scapegoat, much like Ubisoft did when an unfinished and buggy copy of Assassins Creed leaked [wikipedia.org]? Yes. If their movie doesn't do well in the box office (Well as in higher than their expectations) this will be a perfect excuse for them to use with the media and to investors.

      • But Honestly... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by StDoodle (1041630) on Thursday April 02 2009, @09:56AM (#27430393)
        Ok, even if I don't agree, I can at least see the logic between "full movie dl's = less ticket sales." But this is a freaking action movie without completed special effects. Can you honestly tell me there are a significant number of people interested in seeing an action movie, minus special effects, who aren't also the fanboy-types who will see it in theatres?
    • by PMuse (320639) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:05AM (#27430535)

      Out of respect for the artistic integrity of the 20th Century Fox corporation? Now, that's funny.

    • by kylemonger (686302) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:24AM (#27430905)
      I also hold the very unpopular viewpoint that it's basically a slap in the face to an artist to view their work before they're done with it.

      I would agree with you about most artistic endeavors but not about the sausageworks that is big studio moviemaking. Artistic integrity left that building long ago. I wouldn't be surprised if this were an intentional leak, done to generate more interest in the movie. I didn't even know there was a Wolverine movie being made, but I do now. News = free publicity. And there's no downside. Nobody who wants to see the real movie is going to be satisfied by a work print with missing effects, sound editing and God knows what else.
  • by srussia (884021) on Thursday April 02 2009, @09:53AM (#27430337)
    It's the latest wrinkle in the marketer's playbook.
  • by MosesJones (55544) on Thursday April 02 2009, @09:58AM (#27430415) Homepage

    the copy is forensically marked

    Ummm if this was true then it wouldn't be an issue of asking the FBI to investigate it would be a matter of telling the FBI which guy to arrest.

    It will be interesting to see how long it takes to secure a conviction in this case and just how truthful the statements on protection are.

  • by Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) on Thursday April 02 2009, @09:59AM (#27430449)

    This probably all has to do with being under paid in an industry that makes ass loads of cash for the few at the top, and hardly any at the bottom.

  • by Xest (935314) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:02AM (#27430489)

    It talks about how the FBI has been called like it's a major disaster.

    I can picture it now:

    FBI: Hello FBI?

    MPAA: THE NEW WOLVERINE FILM HAS BEEN LEAKED

    FBI: SHIT, EVERYONE DROP THEIR RAPE CASES, THEIR KIDDIE PORN CASES, THEIR TERRORIST CASES, THE NEW WOLVERINE FILM HAS BEEN LEAKED WE MUST FIND OUT WHO DID THIS

    It's just the way the leak of a film gets more news coverage than more serious stories. It's like it's an international tragedy. I mean seriously, a film with chunks missing, temporary sound, CGI missing and so on. There are companies every day that have their security breached and IP stolen. Why does it get international coverage when it's a half-finished movie?

    The real response from the FBI should be:

    FBI: Here's your case number, take your ticket and get to the back of the queue

    On a side note the BBC also said that Fox has had the download of the new film taken down now - that baffled me a bit, I doubt very much they've managed to get it removed from the whole internet, if they have they're the first company in history to achieve such a thing!

    • by GrayCalx (597428) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:14AM (#27430691)
      Hehe, I like to think it went down like this...

      MPAA: THE NEW WOLVERINE FILM HAS BEEN LEAKED!!!

      FBI: Okay. [Frank, turn that off] We've made a note of it. [seriously... no they're on the phone. yes the mpaa. What? No, they're on the phone right now!] Just one second. [Damn did you see him just rip that guy open... no, no let it play a bit now] Ahem, yes so we're on the case! [I can't wait to see what the effects are going to look like] We will umm, let you know when we find something.
      • Two things (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Weaselmancer (533834) on Thursday April 02 2009, @11:08AM (#27431741)

        First. I agree with the OP and the BBC. How the hell does this get some sort of express FBI coverage? It's a freaking movie. Not a bomb threat or a kidnapping. So some sweaty fanboy snagged a pre-release copy. So freaking what?

        It's sickening how the government will instantly bend over backwards for big business. Pathetic.

        Second thing.

        But it is reasonable to pursue something like this, because realistically a work print this early will drive down sales in a major way costing the producers millions, easily.

        Prove it.

        How do you know this won't work like an extended commercial, drumming up interest? Studies have shown that people who illegally download music also happen to spend more on music than other people. [musikas.net]

        The FBI may be trying to bust someone who helped, rather than harmed the studio.

        The main problem with crap like this is how do you assess damage? We all know that it's possible to skew the numbers in such a way that a single mp3 download is equal to either thousands of hours worth of free advertising, or thousands of dollars worth of lost sales.

        Until someone resolves that debate, you really can't call this anything more than a single copyright violation. And certainly not worthy of anything more than a raised eyebrow from the FBI, rather than this gigantic government funded reacharound they're giving the MPAA.

  • Removed? (Score:5, Informative)

    by prakslash (681585) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:02AM (#27430503)
    This is not an April Fool's joke. This is real AND no one can remove shit like this from the internet.
    The cat is far out of the bag.

    The movie is still available on most major torrent sites.
    IsoHunt [isohunt.com]
    TPB [thepiratebay.org]
      • Re:Removed? (Score:4, Funny)

        by Whorhay (1319089) on Thursday April 02 2009, @11:04AM (#27431657)

        I never understood the phrase to begin with. It's not like once the cat is out of the bag you can't put it back in.

        My wife has two cats that I routinely track down and punish when they've scratched on something they shouldn't or whatever. Cats are not some ephmereal animaal that's impossible to catch or something. It might mean moving furniture or burning down a stand of vegetation, but they are catchable and it's often entertaining to do so.

  • Article Quotes (Score:4, Interesting)

    by furby076 (1461805) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:03AM (#27430525) Homepage

    20th Century Fox confirmed the copy had now been removed

    Goodluck with that

    The film is not due for release until 29 April in the UK and 1 May in the US.

    This just annoys me. Release it on the same date.

    "Even if you see the workprint you're still going to have to go see it in the theatre to fully experience the full movie with CGI effects fully intact."

    Considering I like action movies on a screen bigger then 48 inches then yes.

    According to its website, Rising Sun Pictures is an Australian visual effects company that worked on the film and is currently working on production of Terminator Salvation.

    So when can I expect an early release of Terminator salvation?

    The Federation Against Copyright Theft said a leak of this kind was extremely unusual as pre-release security had been tightened in recent years.

    I had a full dvd rip of LOTR 3 two months before the movie was released to the movie theatres. By full rip I mean the DVD you would buy in stores when the movie was to be released to stores. This is not unusual/uncommon.

    We are encouraged by the support of fansites condemning piracy and this illegal posting and pointing out that such theft undermines the enormous efforts of the filmmakers and actors and, above all, hurts fans of the film" the studio said.

    Obvioulsy we will condem it, but that won't stop an "estimated several 100,000 times" of downloads from happening.

    In 2007 director Eli Roth blamed an online leak of his horror film Hostel: Part II for reducing box office returns.

    Yes there will be some people who say "meh i saw an early release so no reason to see it in theatres" There will also be people who want to see the completed version on the BIG screen.

    In an interview with MTV he claimed: "You could buy Hostel: Part II for a quarter in Mexico City. As a result, in a lot of countries where the piracy was bad, they just didn't even release it."

    This part is a shame...people who are willing to pay 25 cents for the movie because they want to view it but aren't willing to go to the movie theatre or buy it on legit dvd. These movies aren't free to make.

    In a change from recent years, the adverts move away from the message that piracy is theft. Audiences will instead see a trailer, fronted by Dr Who actor Noel Clarke, thanking them for paying to come and watch a film.

    About time - i would prefer to see someone thanking me when I buy/rent a legit dvd. I understand the need to have the message there, but I have seen it ton of times. I wish they would make it so I could skip over it.

      • Re:Article Quotes (Score:5, Insightful)

        by lewp (95638) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:27AM (#27430947) Journal

        Nothing gets on my nerves more than unskippable DVD chapters. It's bad enough that the stupid MPAA/FBI warning is pretty much always unable to be skipped, but lots of DVDs actually stick commercials and previews at the beginning that you can't skip over either.

        On the other hand, if I pirate the film, I can have it in less than a half hour (less than the time it takes to run to the video store), the movie is never out of stock, I can watch it as many times as I want (making it superior to "on demand"), and all of that annoying crap is removed.

        I only buy a movie on DVD if I really, really like it.

  • by skydude_20 (307538) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:13AM (#27430667) Journal
    my torrent download is screaming fast now
  • by ParadiseBob (1126869) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:14AM (#27430695)
    I had absolutely no interest in this movie and no plans to see it. The opportunity to see a work in progress is intriguing though, and I would be more inclined to go see the finished movie after watching the work print to compare the two. I'm not necessarily saying it's a good thing that this was leaked, but in my case (and maybe a few others), this might change a "not interested" into a potential customer interested in a peak at the film making process.
  • I watched it (Score:4, Interesting)

    by shellster_dude (1261444) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:18AM (#27430781)
    Since I have an interest in CG and filmography I downloaded the workprint just because I wanted to see how they blended the CG with real effects. I will be seeing the movie in theaters as well.
  • by fulldecent (598482) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:23AM (#27430867) Homepage

    I hate to ruin it for you, but he dies in the end.

  • FBI Resources (Score:5, Insightful)

    by joocemann (1273720) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:25AM (#27430909)

    Its a shame the FBI will spend time and resources to investigate civil crimes such as media piracy --- yet the FBI continuously fails to investigate political corruption, vote fraud, and a number of other seriously criminal acts that happen in the US.

    I am somehow reminded (living in CA where it is illegal) of the local police and highway patrol constantly using their Cell Phones while driving...

    I guess the FBI knows not to bite the dirty hands that feed them.

  • by Derosian (943622) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:52AM (#27431457) Homepage Journal
    If the movie is good the positive feedback will bring out more viewers, if the movie sucks then nobody will want to go see it in theaters.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 02 2009, @09:51AM (#27430307)

      Yep, you missed it.

      For the first and only time, something that has "leaked" to the internet has been completely and utterly removed from it. You need to be quicker next time.

    • Re:I missed it? (Score:5, Informative)

      by orkim (238312) on Thursday April 02 2009, @09:55AM (#27430377)

      Then grab a torrent, such as:

      http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4816113/X-Men.Origins.Wolverine.2009.WORKPRiNT.XviD-NoRar

      • by cliffski (65094) on Thursday April 02 2009, @11:05AM (#27431669) Homepage

        So has this site given up all pretence of being 'news for nerds' and become a side-project for the pirate bay now?

        Every story concerning piracy takes the pirates POV, every criticism of thepiratebay is brushed aside, and now top stories are new hollywood movies, complete with +5 modded links to copyrighted material.

        I thought bit-torrent was only used for free speech and linux distros?

        +5 hyprocrites

          • by cliffski (65094) on Thursday April 02 2009, @12:25PM (#27433159) Homepage

            Wow, hip young trendy kid!
            I didn't realise that being able to torrent Hollywood movies was the most important thing the world for nerds.
            Has it ever occurred to you that some nerds really don't mind so much paying for music, software and games that they want to use and enjoy?
            In fact, nerds should be paying for software more than anyone, because we appreciate the effort involved in its production.

            You are confusing nerds with "kids who know how to use a PC."

        • Re:I missed it? (Score:5, Interesting)

          by v1 (525388) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:11AM (#27430647) Homepage Journal

          The MPAA/FOX may very well have their eyes on those seeder and peer lists.

          I'll take anyone's bet to the otherwise. I have absolute confidence that all the peers in that torrent that have a flimsy ISP will get an email in a week.

          • by Spazztastic (814296) <spazztastic@gmai l . com> on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:25AM (#27430925) Homepage

            The MPAA/FOX may very well have their eyes on those seeder and peer lists.

            I'll take anyone's bet to the otherwise. I have absolute confidence that all the peers in that torrent that have a flimsy ISP will get an email in a week.

            Comcast stands their ground, right? Right!?

            /franticly loads up killdisk, shreds burned DVDs.

                • Re:I missed it? (Score:5, Informative)

                  by v1 (525388) on Thursday April 02 2009, @02:39PM (#27435395) Homepage Journal

                  Second, you can set your client to not download anything but the tiny .NFO file for every torrent, and then share it back. Doing this, you get to watch the IPs connected to the tracker, but never share anything dangerous.

                  That doesn't work how you think it does. Files are divided into "pieces", which vary in size but are a tradeoff to keep piece size reasonable (~2mb) yet keep total piece count reasonable. (~1000) Too big of a piece size and it takes too long to get each piece. (and too much to redownload if a hash fails) Too many pieces means more tracker overhead and larger .torrent files.

                  So that .NFO at the front is bundled with perhaps 1.98mb of the start of the next file, in the first piece. There's no way to get (or share) just the .NFO file itself. The torrent pieces are made from a single giant (think TAR) file of the entire torrent. You can see this when you tell your client to download just one specific file. Look at the % complete and you'll notice the file before and after the one you wanted, you have like 2% of. That's because file boundaries rarely match piece boundaries. If you just select the first file, (say its the .NFO) you will download a percentage of the next file also. (you will get all of the first piece) It's totally unavoidable.

                  (and yes, I wrote a bittorrent client)

        • Re:I missed it? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by RiotingPacifist (1228016) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:18AM (#27430779)

          I'd take my chances at not being the on in 60k they choose to sue.
          Seeders: 22425
          Leechers:36869
          total: 59294

          Infact that's a snapshot so you're probably closer to 1 in a million chance of getting sued, IF they choose to sue any of the seeders not just the leak!

        • Re:I missed it? (Score:5, Informative)

          by houstonbofh (602064) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:34AM (#27431089)
          We do Internet for hotels. (In room WiFi) We have about 75 hotels under monitoring. All of them hit bit torrent hard every single night and max out the pipe. We have only ever received 1 MPAA letter. And for the record, the majority of our hotel feeds are from ATT business class DSL or Comcast business Internet. (Also ATT MIS, Logix, Covad, CBeyond, Embarq, and a few others)
    • Damn I wanted a copy of it and to be honest I will still see it in theatres.

      I will never again willingly watch anything in a cinema so long as I live. Poor food, poor seats, poor video quality, and most of all poor company. The only advantage cinemas still retain over my living room is their sound systems, and frankly it's not worth the bother. I will wait for the Blu-Ray of any new film. It costs about as much as trip to the cinema anyway.

      And if the studio refuses to release in my region simultaneously with others, I'll download the film. Tough luck guys. I had the money in my hand, ready to give it to you, but you gave me the finger instead. So guess what I'm giving you.

        • Re:I missed it? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:27AM (#27430961) Homepage Journal

          The new crop of actors are cretinous, pretentious fuckwits who are chosen for their tits and their "real-life" drama which is as manufactured as their movies are.

          I love to be the one to break this to you: the old crop of actors is primarily a bunch of cretinous, pretentious fuckwits who were chosen for their attractiveness to the public. (There are of course limited counterexamples [wikipedia.org].) Their "real-life" drama was as manufactured as their movies were. One seriously great example is Sean Connery, the favorite James Bond [postchronicle.com]. SNL "Celebrity Jeopardy" -- it's funny because it's true! [cnn.com]

            • by gnick (1211984) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:57AM (#27431559) Homepage

              Did you really just log into slashdot and shit-talk Natalie Portman? Really? Sure, she needed some polish back in The Professional and I cried after watching Star Wars: Episode I (and not because of the emotional scenes). But man, I could forgive Natalie for anything.

              That said, overall I agree. I keep trying to like Dollhouse but I just can't get past the acting... Movies recently (Watchmen excepted) have been just as painful.

            • Re:I missed it? (Score:5, Informative)

              by lymond01 (314120) on Thursday April 02 2009, @11:10AM (#27431773)

              You need to watch better movies. :-)

              Highlights of the past few years (for me):

              Dark Knight
              The Reader
              Slumdog Millionaire
              No Country for Old Men
              Serenity
              Pan's Labyrinth
              Love Actually

              Granted, not all of those are Hollywood films but most are. There are plenty of indie films that are likely way better than anything in that list. There was a vampire movie from Sweden, translation: Let the Right One In that had a bunch of hype as the greatest vampire film ever made. I saw it, but I guess my expectations were too high. I still think Fright Night is the best. :-)

                • Re:I missed it? (Score:5, Insightful)

                  by rpillala (583965) on Thursday April 02 2009, @12:15PM (#27432971)

                  The Joker's point throughout the movie is that people are self-serving and will turn on heroes as soon as it suits their whim. When he talks to Batman in the police station, he basically says as much, explaining that Batman's token obedience to his "one rule" counts for shit when the chips are down. To prove his point, he gives the people on the boat the means to save themselves at the expense of breaking what we would hope is each person's "one rule." The fact that they didn't is the movie telling us that there is hope for people and that we're not just a base collection of alienated individuals. The people on the boat are the ones who really defeated Joker in the movie by rejecting his premise. That's why the ending was so comparatively weak. Batman's not really the hero.

        • Re:I missed it? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by santiagodraco (1254708) on Thursday April 02 2009, @10:46AM (#27431315)

          There's plenty of great actors and actresses around. The fact that there are a LOT more movies coming out might give the appearance of low quality, but, frankly, there were a lot of low quality movies "back in the day".

          As for actors being chosen for their "real life drama", come on. We live in a society of the most venomous fans I've ever seen. If an actor has real life drama it's more of a death knell than a sign of success to come.

          • Re:I missed it? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Mishotaki (957104) on Thursday April 02 2009, @11:12AM (#27431803)

            There is nothing wrong with choosing someone for their tits.

            except when it's to watch someone who has no acting talent for 2 hours straight without showing a single nipple...