NewTeeVee nails one of the key benefits, even if it's not one that Amazon will not be out front in promoting:

After all, this sounds like a great way to buy a holiday present for someone that you can enjoy yourself as well without having to explain the missing shrink-wrap plastic.

On a bigger picture level, products like the iPod and Kindle and On Demand are fundamentally changing the dynamic of content ownership, from physical commodity to access to electronic data.

And all of that means you can give the original Terminator to your cousin over the holidays and then access it on demand (albeit in standard def) for free. Bonus.

Now let the blogosphere pontificate:

* PC World: Amazon has unveiled a "limited time only" promotion called Disc+ On Demand that has the potential to change the way we consume media. Now when you purchase select DVD or Blu-ray discs, you can download a digital copy of your film for instant viewing via your Mac, PC, Roku, TiVo, and more. This promotion is the perfect way to get a little more out of the Christmas gifts you buy for others; you can watch the movies first.

* Mashable: The downsides: Disc+ on Demand is only available on a very limited number of titles right now, and Amazon is promoting it as a “limited time offer” — we fully expect that demand will be high, and that the service could (and should) become a permanent one.

* MediaMemo: Amazon (AMZN) gets a two-for-one out of this as well: The promotion will (the company hopes) goose disc sales, which are sputtering, while introducing shoppers to the company’s Web streaming offering, which most people don’t yet know about or use.

* Technologizer: Amazon is pitching the offer as a bonus for disc buyers that gives them immediate access to the movie they just purchased. But in some cases the DVD or Blu-Ray costs the same as purchasing the stand-alone streaming version–the Terminator is $9.99 on Blu-Ray or as an on-demand purchase. So you can also think of Disc+ on Demand as providing a nice, permanent copy of the movie you bought in on-demand form.

* TeleRead: You can buy online access to some Amazon titles when you buy the paper editions, last I knew, but not the actual e-files for the Kindle. For the future, let’s hope that could also include ePub files for other machines.

(this post originally appeared on Technorati)

The result, on the webby side at the least, is awfully intriguing.

The Official Avatar Interactive Trailer is an Adobe AIR app that brings the trailer for the lavishly expensive and highly anticipated new film to your desktop, and offers a bunch of interactive and social media features along with it. As Mashable notes, “whenever you watch a trailer, special “hotspots” will come up where you can learn more about the characters. Even cooler though is the integration of Avatar’s Twitter, Flickr, and YouTube feeds. You can get all of the latest news right from the interactive trailer.”

I’m particularly intrigued by the integration of real time subject-specific content feeds that help to enhance the interactive experience, as it relates to my recent piece on digital curation and the future of the Internet. It’s cool to see this kind of content delivery – offering the right content to the right place (people who are excited enough about Avatar to install an AIR app that relates to it) at the right (real) time.

Here’s the Avatar trailer:

(this post originally appeared on Technorati)

Pretty great analysis of Inglourious Basterds (which I haven’t seen yet — but I must and will soon) and Tarantino’s overall body of work.

I do think that Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction are masterpieces both, whereas Tarantino’s followups have been merely good (Kill Bill) to very good (Jackie Brown, the second half of Death Proof).

Really looking forward to seeing where Basterds comes in.

Posted via web from Eric Berlin\’s posterous

I’ve had a lot of problems with this review. More than I’ve had with any film in a very long time. Why? Well, it is very complicated and I’ve been struggling with how to phrase it.

I love every moment of INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS. Every shot, every scene, every performance, every bit of music. I love it.

BUT…

This isn’t the World War II film I really wanted from Tarantino. And the reason has more to do with me, than with Quentin.

I love the WWII genre and its infinite permutations. I love the universe of WWII. A global conflict, perilous intrigue, unforgivable inhumanity, toweringly charismatic leadership, trench heroism, the toughness of being a survivor… the design, imagery, scope… it’s all just so damn awesome.

I grew up worshiping GUNS OF NAVARONE and WHERE EAGLES DARE. Later, I fell desperately in love with THE BIG RED ONE. Then there were all those WWII black and white films that I devoured. I wanted Quentin to craft one of those. A men on a mission flick that was rip-roaring, brutal and personal.

And that isn’t this film. This is the fictionalized history of how WWII came to a close in the European arena, courtesy of Quentin Tarantino’s fevered brain. And it is something unto itself.

It is structured less like a film and more like a novel. Divided up into chapters that you’re not entirely sure how they relate until they begin to build into their explosive conclusion. The film is also crackling with energy in a way that I found unexpected. I didn’t imagine this film from Quentin’s various bite-sized tidbits that he would give us. When he’d speak about the film, it was always about Men On A Mission, and then you read the script and there’s this Shosanna character – and she was beautifully written and even more beautifully portrayed by Melanie Laurent, and she’s integral to the “mission” happening, even though nobody outside that theater would probably ever know that. History would probably canonize Sgt Donny Donowitz, Pfc. Omar Ulmer and Col Hans Landa, but I doubt seriously the world would ever know of Shosanna Dreyfus and her lover Marcel.

But Quentin wanted to underline their part in this unlikely, but fun, “true” history of the end of the war.

Why is that?

Well, a lot of it probably has to do with the fact that Quentin doesn’t seem to pre-structure his films before writing them. It seems he’s the sort of writer that writes a title and then surprises himself as he writes the story under that title. He let’s the story go where it wants to go – and as a result, we get a WWII film that isn’t quite like any other.

The basic elements are still here for a MEN ON A MISSION flick. We have the initial formation of the group. We see them in the field a bit. We see the mission they’re built into begin to crumble and we see the plan fall apart, we see them improvise – and with a bit of dumb luck, chance and help from people they don’t even know… it’ll all work out. But the structure keeps us off balance. Keeps us away from the familiar testosterone fueled sweaty man mess of a film, and instead… we get a uniquely Quentin WWII flick.

One where a Jew named Donnie Donowitz machine guns Hitler’s face into marinara. And it is thrilling. One where the big bad guy for the film, sees his chance at redemption and seizes it. A film where the Bastards mark survivors so the world will know post-war, that this man was a Nazi – and that fucking rules.

At Two and a Half hours, the film feels too brief. I wanted more with these characters. I want to see them being fit for Tuxedos. I want to hear what they say as they gear up for a mission to END THE WAR.

At the CINEMAPOCALYPSE Q&A – Quentin said that he had written at 12 part – Mini-series – and wanted to create that. And when he told Luc Besson, Luc was bummed because he wants to see Quentin on the big screen, not on a television. And while I get that… I also can feel that this is the smallest version of something larger.

Quentin’s film is incredibly satisfying while also being a bit aggravating. Aggravating because I wanted those Basterds roaming the French countryside creating havoc non-stop. Because Shosanna’s story – I want a whole other film exploring her life from the moment her family was killed, her love with Marcel, till the moment she dies. Because I want a film that’s focused exclusively upon Col Hans Landa. I want to see what happened from the moment he sat down with that French farmer and relished his nickname, to the moment where he despised it. What made the change? I get that it isn’t important for this story, but I want it. I can’t help, but not to want more.

This is the stunning blessing and curse of INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS… his characters are so strong, that I can’t help but want more of them. I can’t help it, I’m greedy. And any talk about a sequel/prequel. As Quentin stated himself, he’s promised one for every film he ever made, and has never made one. So we’re likely not to get more. And that’s aggravating.

More than at any other point in Quentin’s career, I left the film wanting MUCH MORE. I want to spend many more hours in his WWII universe. And I’m relatively certain I won’t ever see more.

Quentin will most likely move on to another genre altogether and we’ll be happier for it. I love watching him play with genres. Like Park Chan Wook told Capone… he infects the genres he plays in. Makes them infected with Tarantino. And thank God, they’re infectious as all hell. And I’m among the inflicted.

This is absolutely a Tarantino WWII film – and it is a glimpse at that universe. I dare say, we’re not likely to see a better drawn “villain/hero” as Hans Landa. Christoph’s performance is brilliant. Just amazing to watch and not how you think. He’s extremely complicated and brought to life by an absolutely riveting performance. But then, every performance is riveting. Take Brad Pitt – his performance can’t help, but make me want more. The scar on his neck, his very fun accent, the way he moves and analyzes situations.

The thing is, in this one film, Quentin planted the seeds of larger stories. We only glimpse these characters as they drive the story forward. The entire first chapter is to create Shosanna’s motivation for later. The second chapter is to establish the Basterds and how they’ve begun to change things in the war. The third – is to set up a relationship that leads to everything that happens later. The fourth is to establish the intended operation that the Basterds went on – and the last is what actually went down. Every scene is necessary. Every piece memorable.

Forget any expectations or beliefs of what you’re getting out of INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, it isn’t the movie you think it is. Not the one in trailers, not really even the script. It has a unique life unto itself. I really liked the film on first viewing, on second – those feelings intensified. There’s just something so delightful about the film. It isn’t stuffy, which is a problem that most modern WWII films have going against them. In this, you know that anything can happen. And that’s very refreshing.

Watch it and you’ll see. It truly is its own thing and it kicks ass.

Yeah, I think I\’m going to need to find a way to see Inglourious Basterds. If only to lessen the wait for the next new Mad Men episode!

Posted via web from
inglourious-basterds-spoil\”>Eric Berlin\’s posterous

Such an amazing movies, War Games is. This scene is hilarious… and check out the creepy futuristic early 80s electro vibe that\’s thrown down if you make it past the first scene to when Broderick is doing research.

\”Backdoors are not secrets…\” Classic line on a Friday.

Posted via web from Eric Berlin\’s posterous

But consider this: Perhaps Mr. Potter wasn’t just a heartless Scrooge. Perhaps Mr. Potter, in the absence of sufficient regulatory oversight, was the one voice of sanity keeping the good people of Bedford Falls from over-leveraging themselves.
Perhaps, if we had all taken Mr. Potter a little bit more seriously, we wouldn’t be in this mess to begin with.

And this is all good excuse to provide a clip from the holiday classic:

Happy holidays and merry new year everyone!

I think I could sign on to a full feature recreation of this flick starring robots…

All work and no play makes Jacky 5 a dull robot.

Update: I had to throw this in. God bless the interwebs, genius cracked video editors, and the ‘Tube.