Yesterday we learned that a bunch of Disney movies will be available for free online, each for a limited time, this summer. Now, because everyone wants in on the streaming video game, Fox Searchlight has also put up three of its own films for free. Sideways, 28 Days Later and Quills can now be watched in full on the studio's website or on Hulu, which is hosting the videos. Hulu, known best as one of the premier streaming sites to watch TV episodes, is also hosting some movies from Searchlight parent Twentieth Century Fox, as well as from Lionsgate, Universal, MGM, Salient Media and FEARnet. To me, the interesting thing about Searchlight's three available titles is that they're each R-rated, yet neither Fox nor Hulu requires proof of age to view the videos. The same goes for a few other titles offered on Hulu, but Searchlight's crop seems particularly adult in content. When I first saw the press release, I immediately thought of it as the antithesis to Disney's offerings. Of course, I don't mind who sees these movies. I'm having more difficulty getting over the idea of watching R-rated material with "limited commercial interruption." The ads make me feel like I'm watching a movie on network television, which of course would only broadcast films reedited or a general audience. But then suddenly I realize I'm not watching network-friendly versions when suddenly I'm seeing full-frontal male nudity in Quills. It's a little disorienting.
What do you think? Should Hulu have the same kind of censored cuts that the networks have to show? Or should these videos at least come with age-restrictive blockers?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-12-2008 @ 1:44PM
chungeez said...
those 3 movies have been on hulu for quite a while now.
and while I don't know if this happens for them specifically, i do know that in the past, things like dave chapelle's block party were flagged as objectionable content and warned me as such when i tried to watch them.
Reply
6-12-2008 @ 1:49PM
DylanG said...
Censoring the films or putting age-restricted blocks on them is pointless. As someone under 18 years of age, I find these measures to be completely ridiculous. I'm constantly denied being able to see "Red-band" trailers online, but if I wished I could find snuff and porno with ease after a simple google search.
I think that if a parent does have a problem with their kids looking at R-rated material, they should place restrictions on their internet that allow their child to go to approved websites. This is a much more suitable alternative then to have movies butchered and poetentially ruined for other people.
Reply
6-12-2008 @ 3:34PM
Jeff said...
Censoring anything is ridiculous. I never watch movies or TV shows that are edited because the Networks have to appease a vocal minority that don't know how to be a parent to their children. Commercials I can deal with as I expect everything from my TV shows to my toilet paper to have commercials.
Getting around "age restrictions" on the internet is a joke. Every teenager knows this.
What ticks me off is the stupid DRM that cripples my enjoyment of this "free" content.
Reply
6-12-2008 @ 4:11PM
FancastAndy said...
These movies are also available on Fancast.com. I'd say that no one wants to see censored cuts of movies, so let us all offer R-rated stuff as well or no one will watch it, and it'll render the whole effort pointless.
Reply