What do you think of the new Clean Flicks?
133657
Clean Flicks purchases movies on tape, and then edits out all the sex, violence, and "bad" language before renting them out to customers. The rental chain is seeking a court declaration that its practices are perfectly legal - and not a violation of federal copyright law, as the directors reportedly believe.\n\nThe chain has emphasized its First Amendment rights. But the government is not a party to the case, as is generally required under the First Amendment; it is the directors, not the state, who the chain anticipates will try to stop its editing practices. Accordingly, the chain's best defense probably does not come directly from the First Amendment. Rather, it derives from the First-Amendment-inspired "fair use" exception to the copyright law, and similar exceptions to related laws under which the directors can sue.\n\nUnsurprisingly, The Directors' Guild of America believes that what Clean Flicks is doing is far from "fair use." Indeed, it has decried the suit as an effort "to legitimize the unauthorized editing and alteration of movies."\n\nWhich side is correct? Does Clean Flicks have the right to edit properly purchased movies as it sees fit, before renting them out? Or does a director have the right to ensure that a movie remains edited in the ways he or she has approved?\n\nPut another way, what Clean Flicks is doing may be anathema from an artistic point of view (I certainly believe that to be the case), but is it also illegal? I will argue that the legal question is much more difficult than it may seem at first, because Clean Flicks's practices resemble many long-accepted examples of "fair use" in important ways.\n\nThe Directors, Studios, and Actors Have Strong Legal Claims\n\nSince the DGA has not yet filed a countersuit, it is not clear exactly which claims it will bring against Clean Flicks. But it has already raised a number of possible bases for a suit, several of which appear to be strong.\n\nFirst, the DGA can argue that Clean Flicks' business amounts to an ongoing violation of copyright laws. By editing out content from certain movies before renting them out, Clean Flicks arguably exceeds its license to use the copyrighted movies it had purchased.\n\nSecond, the DGA can argue that Clean Flicks, in marketing its edited films, violates trademarks. Phrases such as the studio's name, or a certain tag line used to promote the movie on the video box, are trademarked, and Clean Flicks is arguably using them deceptively if it connects them with a movie edited to be substantially different from the one the studio made.
86855
I loved watching those movies years ago.  I wasn't thrilled when they came out with a new Love Bug film with Lindsay Lohan.  BLAH!
228181
I agree.\n\nBut as long as people continue to watch the substandard movies, things will remain the same.
450728
Both r nice but Mr. Clean 1 is better!!!!
287087
I agree with Dave R-- to paraphrase, remake bad movies that have good premises but were just executed poorly? \n\nOn a tangentally related note, I actually think the Miami Vice (another tv-to-movie) remake looks surprisingly decent. Perhaps it's because Michael Mann broke out with "Heat" and clearly knows that "crime in the night-lit city" genre so well. Perhaps because they aren't tongue-a-cheeking it ala "Dukes" or "Starsky". \n\nBack on topic, maybe this is my age and nostalgia talking, but I wouldn't mind seeing the Dark Crystal done with some *good* cg. Love to see Brian Froud's character/creature designs come to life with some digital assistance (much as I love Henson). And an improved story. I think there's room for more darker, slightly sophisticated animation aimed at kids than just Tim Burton's work.\n\nGetting off my soapbox now...
137032
I did see it - it was just okay, not as good as it could have been. I'll be really honest with you, it's way more of a guy movie with fart jokes, peeing in the shower, vomit scenes, etc. Larry had a few good jokes but he didn't get to live up to his full potential. I'd wait & catch it on dvd or ppv at home!! Git R Done!!
619344
I really like them.  They are definitely different.  I think the one with the man and gun is just perfect, were it on a full skirt.  I'm not much of a bag person, but seriously, that would look so cool on a full skirt that goes just below the knees.  Kind of like a modern poodle-skirt without all the frills and a much darker side.
650423
ohh yea the one on itunes is dirty..wait i guess would be my answer cuz once he comes out with his cd theres gonna be a clean version
224826
Went to see it last night with my children - they loved it but I didn't think it was as good as all of the hype suggested it would be. To be honest, I thought "The Wild" was funnier & the animation was better in that one, too. This one seems to be just for the kids - there aren't as many innuendoes or hidden jokes that grownups would get but kids wouldn't, as in Shrek & Shrek 2. Also a lot of the animation looks the same from Shrek 2. But you go & enjoy it & form your own opinions! It was fine, nothing wrong with it, just not the best I've seen. \np.s. - I'm really looking forward to "Monster House" in July!!
655690
Well....I got a different view point. I feel that it's a movie that deserves multiple viewings.\n\nI will start by saying that this has undeservedly be panned by just about everyone! The fact is it wasn't what anyone was expecting, especially from Guy Ritchie. What everyone was expecting was cockney geezers and good one liners "do ya like dags?" etc, but this is far more mature than his previous works. I would agree that it is confusing but all the facts are there for us we just have to see them and listen harder, this film demands all your attention! Look past the cool and dazzling look of the film, try to listen to the dialogue rather than admire the performances and i think we will all get a more thorough understanding of the whole film.\n\nYes this has its influences from modern classics( fight club, pulp fiction etc ) but it is in the whole original in both direction and pacing with a music score second to none. I feel that if everyone watched this film over and over they would understand it a lot more and maybe appreciate it for the fine piece of modern cinema that it is and i hope also that Ritchie continues in this vain as i far prefer this to his mockney "masterpieces". \n\nThe brief plot outline is.............\n\nJake Green is a hotshot gambler, long on audacity and short on common sense. He's rarely allowed to play in any casino because he is a winner. Jake has taken in so much money over the years, he is the only client of his accountant and older brother Billy. One night, Jake, Billy and their other brother Joe are invited to sit in on a private game, where Jake is expected to lose to Dorothy Macha, a crime boss and local casino owner who can't play for squat, but always wins because people are too scared to beat him. Jake isn't afraid of Macha, and not only beats Dorothy in a quick game of chance, but takes every possible opportunity to insult the man. Jake and his brothers leave the game, and Macha puts out the order for a hit on Jake, who ends up working for and being protected by a pair of brothers, Avi and Zack, who are out to take Macha down.\n\navi and zack create the fictional crimelord mr gold to use in their big con to make macha and lord john destroy eachother without avi and zack having any direct involvement. \n\nthis film is about breaking free from mr gold, its more physcological than physical and thats obvious in the way its made. for once the physical actions in the movie mean so very little, you need to concentrate on whats happening to and IN the characters minds.
148701
i think the new one is better than the 70's version. it is much more exciting, and Adrien Brody is sssoo hot, but the 30's one is a classic so that one is tops.
39510
the mummy\nmummy returns\ncinderella story\nella enchanted\nprincess diary\nprincess diary 2\nmeet the fockers\nmeet the parents\nswat\nthe exorcism of emilie rose .\n\nyou had asked from me that  is this my picture.yes it is.thank u.but i don't think thats beautiful.
180889
I saw it the day it came out.\n\nBasically just like the other 3. Same style of jokes, language, etc. In fact, it's basically the same, just with updated movie plots that take part in it and updated cultural elements.\n\nMeaning, sex references, dirty jokes, and those stupid "people fall down and hit their head" things.
627776
I loved 'Police Rescue'! More recently 'Kath and Kim' and, whisper it, 'Neighbours'! As for films, the ones we get do pretty well. The inventiveness puts our under-funded British film industry to shame. I could go on ...
149726
OMFG HSM!!! my reason to livee. the dance along/sing along back to back showings are on friday!! whoo!! even though i've seen that movie, singalong, and dancealong about a bajillion and 6 times....hehe nerd!! but its otay. i also have the soundtrack...*sigh*\n\n\nanyway..\nfave song-I can't take my eyes off of you (soundtrack...it's not in the movie..bummer)\nscene- when he sings to her outside her window....sooo cute!!\ncharacter- sharpay...her personality is sooo similar to mine..but i love her brother who's like "OMG MAYBE WE'LL GET TO MEET ASHTON!!!" haha i love that moviee
588391
Clint Eastwood is pretty rockin!!\n\n...and the remix of 19-2000 is nice...
204843
I saw RV and it was hilarious! I really wanna see Stick It cause it sounds cool. You should definetley see them. They are hilarious and great to see with family or freinds!