Just because I don’t pay membership fees I am not allowed to have an opinion?
This site is obviously on its way to become another one of the ubiquitous mass of corporate sell-outs that operate with the same sort of film-fan social outlet/film critic and discussion sort of function… First comes the name change (which can’t even be in English so that it can wholeheartedly appeal to the mindless masses), then you’ll see more ads, then there’ll be more of a push towards VOD, then you’ll have membership charges. Mark my words. Don’t be so naive.
It is completely ignorant to make such a comment.
Also, I see that you made what is basically the same comment 6 hours ago.
Didn’t get much response that time did it?
Fishing for laughs while trying to appease the management/get brownie points? Fail.
Dimitris, is that you?
Mason for the win.
First of all, the word ‘auteur’ is NOT fundamental in the greater scheme of things. The auteur theory was a political tool, and, despite the fact that cinephiles still often consider the director to be some sort of author (often exaggeratedly or erroneously), auteurism has been out of vogue in serious film writing for decades.
Second, you wrote: “Moreover, if you aren’t familiar with even the most common English cinema terminology – being that, English is the language spoken by the filmmakers of the most prominent cinema in the world: American cinema – then you shouldn’t be given credence in the first place in a serious community of critics and film fans.”
That is fallaciously Anglocentric. Furthermore, you seem to indicate that the beauty of ‘The Auteurs’ was that the name acted as a sort of gatekeeper to those with privileged knowledge. That IS elitist.
Third, you wrote: “Hypothetically, just because the site is called ‘The Auteurs’ doesn’t mean that the site would have to be barred down to only hosting auteur-driven cinema… it wasn’t restricted like that before in all the time that ‘The Auteurs’ existed before the infamous name change so what makes you think things will be different now? Furthermore, do you think the name of a company, literally, always denotes the type of product or service that they provide? Do you think because ‘Apple’ is named ‘Apple’ that they are forced to sell apples? Didn’t think so. Ok. Moving on.”
I don’t even get it. The name change is bad because the old name worked despite not even accurately fitting the product?
Can’t be Dimitris. This guy thinks English is the end-all.
I will add—— and maybe I’m playing Devil’s Advocate here——- that, under the old site, I would sometimes type the URL mistakenly as “Les Auteurs”. I am Francophone and that’s where my mind just automatically “went”.
I’d sometimes type that into GOOGLE as well.
“MUBI” does in fact circumvent language glitches like that one…
I’ve begun to think that the community here just needs to accept that this is not a democracy; the administrators have reasons behind their decisions that extend beyond power-hunger, and if the will of the administrators conflicts with the will of the active community members, well, we’re not shareholders.
The only legitimate gripe I see people having with the name change is that it flings open the doors of the site, and surely the administrators have the right/interest to do this even if we’d rather keep it a closed, tight-knit community!
And I appreciate Dimitris’ presence as much as anybody, but his muzzlement was REASONABLE. Re-read Efe’s original explanation. There are forum rules to abide by that make this place welcoming for newcomers (remember, the admins want newcomers even if we don’t, and that’s their right!). Dimitris was pushing the rules. He was given fair warning. There you go.
As Swinging Mason keeps reminding us, don’t forget that this place is a gift. We’re not paying (yet, okay) and the profit has to come from somewhere. Let the admins pursue that as they need to without griping, please. That means making the site marketable, and making sure the community remains respectful and welcoming. That does NOT mean sacrificing quality of discussion.
@ Frank P. Tomasulo – IBUM is my new term for MUBI. It is heretofore known as IBUM, or The Auteurs.
Movies Under Biased Interpretation
Movies Usually Become Immortal
Mostly Useless B-grade Imagery
Cant think of anything more… What can you make out of it??? LOL
What’s in a name?
The logo for MUBI always reminds me of the one for Ning http://www.ning.com/ in fact the name has similarities, I wonder if that was the inspiration.
I hate this name. I loved The Auteurs.
It was hard to remember the name, mubi, logging back after a few weeks(muri, muni.. mudi, oh well, finally typed “theauteurs”). I think it’s a wrong move (for more reasons, why I think it is wrong, please see below:) but I am also surprised with the strong response to it. I will be coming back probably but knowing some of the key people channeling their information to this site are leaving, I think my enthusiasm will be lessened. (I am not criticizing them at all for their strong response and for leaving the site. I think I understand.) I sure would have disliked it as much if gmail had decided to use “cimeyl” as their URL in Turkey, even though I’d have probably stuck with gmail anyways.
why i think it’s a wrong move:
other than being a word the only reference you can connect it to in your mind is a baby’s pronunciation of the word “movie”, I think it has a very unappealing sound. If you are relying on some survey, statistics, on making this change, i think this also should have been a part of your investigation, the role of a name in marketing and which sounds really resonate better.
also, i think teaching how to spell “auteurs” to the world is not a bad thing and not a big deal either; people who are cinephiles are already keen on learning new things anyways, how would they remember “apichatpong weerasethakul”’s name otherwise.
“then there’ll be more of a push towards VOD”
Perhaps because IT IS A V.O.D. BUSINESS. GOD FORBID THEY TRY TO PUSH THAT ANGLE!
(I’m going to go open a shoe store, but I shall stock NO shoes….will my business succeed?)
I think most users on the site have been, for the entire past two years, very oblivious to its intentions. It has always been “Your ONLINE CINEMA” (emphasis mine) but I’d be very curious to see what percentage of users have ever watched a film on it. I sure haven’t. My computer BLOWS!
Unrelated, I had not noticed till now that there is now no longer any mention of MUBI on the Criterion site. Was the affiliation broken at the same time as the name change? Or is it just not promoted on the Criterion site?
Is this primarily a VOD business or does this site have other more important functions?
Obviously this is not just a VOD site. Have you heard of the ‘Garage’? Or, perhaps you’d like to tell me what percentage of the most highly rated movies on this site are available streaming?… or, what percentage of the movies listed on this site that are available streaming at all? … In both cases, I’m sure, you’ll find the number very small.
Thus, your analogy is poor.
A shoe store’s sole function is to sell shoes.. People don’t hang around shoe stores and offer critiques and analysis of shoes (old ones and new ones) as we do with films in the forums, lists and fan pages of the various movies on this site.
NO NEED TO WRITE IN CAPS EITHER… but maybe that is your only (ineffective) way to making up for your otherwise poor argument?
BUT I LOVE CAPS!!!!!
What happened to theauteurs.com site? Is it available at a different url?
Rather late on the draw, huh…
I always ridicule people on Facebook who almost start WW3 because a minor change.
But honestly, after the name-change; I’ve been using this site less.
MUBI is like that site you went to all the time when you were 14 yo.
Like some silly braindead online-game from 2003.
I’m still hating on the “MUBI” name, it fills my brain with punches and knife wounds and it hurts
*cries for TheAuteurs.com
Yeah, what ever happened to Country Joe and the Fish?
I first found out about the site after the name change. So to me, the name is as natural as Yahoo or Amazon or any other name that doesn’t really make sense but has a certain familiar feel to it. I like that. When I heard what the original name was, I cringed. I still do. Theauteurs sounds like the name of a stuffy undergrad movie-watching club (a boys-only club, of course). While MUBI feels like something new and fresh and at least, different. I don’t know if I would’ve stuck around if the site was still called Theauteurs. I definitely wouldn’t have been able to tell my friends about it while keeping a straight face.
yahoo was first an american website because americans scream yahoo! and amazon was first a book website selling more paper than the rainforest :O(
they are natural names and mubi is immoral :O)
Yahoo and Amazon have a larger meaning ‘side the word, Mubi means nothing, it’s letters thrown together.
How can Nick keep a straight face while saying Mubi, but not when saying the theauteurs.
Nick, I think you need to work on liking yourself better.
Thanks Uli, I like myself just fine. But I appreciate the concern :)
Well, for me, random letters thrown together beats Theauteurs. It doesn’t matter that MUBI doesn’t mean anything—-it means whatever I want it to mean.
I don’t tell any of my real friends that I use this site, because I’m not interested in trying to explain the name. But whatever…this site is for unreal friends.
I’ve gotten a little rusty it seems….
“I don’t tell any of my real friends that I use this site, because I’m not interested in trying to explain the name.”
But you know, I can’t imagine Ignatiy Vishnevetsky being from “The Auteurs”. I think Mubi fits him fine.
“what ever happened to Country Joe and the Fish?”