The Godfather I (DivX) Al Pacino Diane Keaton - subs

The Godfather is one of the finest movies ever produced by the Hollywood industry in showing off a cultural phenomenon in what exists of mob goings on in folklore as it were and perhaps in some respect with real life dimensions and even actual experiential perspectives from life around these scenes.



Al Pacino's character is clearly not a man of evil as it were. He is a man called upon to defend himself against those that constantly threaten him and his family as they try to get more from themselves of the share of the take in what are underground business dealings. If you recall that prohibition was once a fact of life in the United states, you will have to agree that not all laws that retrain human activity are in fact just or even sane for that matter. A restriction on liqor might well extent to similar views on the over consumption of sugar or what have you as there are risks involved in all competent decisions we must make in our intake as it were. Yet, distillers of alcohol during this period were considered hoods and common criminals. They were hounded, harassed, arrested routinely and even shot at in resulting wars between law enforcement and those that saw themselves in a harmless enough business that required no intervention from the state on some rather dubious pretext of moral indignation that someone was gonna have a drink despite being told they couldn't have one, as the will of the majority prevailed back then in this way on the matter.



There are many with the same views towards prostitution. Yet this is precisely what drives the oldest profession underground and endangers both men and women in what becomes a criminal activity at times and in the cruelest ways especially in respect of violence towards women and men of gentlemanly disposition even as they become targets of criminals and the law equally.

You there fore have to look closely at who the criminals are, based on their motives and their deeds rather than those that have the labels flung at them for being on the wrong side of a "Hitler like" mindset with vagaries in the setting of laws that boggle the mind when considered with sober reflection and due care for genuine human needs free of false bravado that a higher calling is in fact at play in making things unavailable sanely enough or safely enough such as in the way of a galls of wine, for crissakes.



How about in the making available the movies we do here? What would some think of that? I have always been of the mind and disposition that if it costs you nothing to give a benefit to your own, then you should do it. In fact Im all for giving even when it does cost you, because that's normally how it works provided you maintain some balance in the situation. But then there are those who do not have such high moral standards as do men like myself or the great people involved in seeding our competent material of high quality educationally and in proper entertainment selections for our own to grow.



It would cost nothing for example to give away "The last days for disco" at a free website or "White mischief" etc. There are truly great movie offerings that instead have simply been sent into the wastebasket by inane hollywood executives too insane to think that you'd have to have retardation of the brain to make such a decision in such great movies and think that the choice is yours alone to make. culture is a public commodity and its availability and stewardship should be a public matter and when such insane decisions are taken we must set them right or some stupid accountant in Hollywood with no heart or mind will make this sort of a decision instead showing ff a mindset is clearly mean spirited rather than humanely competent.We've seen the same phenomenon in health care availability and many do without even though the system could be restructured to take care of all our own with the dollars already in play by cutting out some paper pushing insurance middleman and having sane litigation policies there on malpractice and on doctors payscales in fact too. So some people simply choose a different type of morality to suit their needs when we could all equally be asked to pay for the air that we breathe as something that falls upon each individual and the ame goes for the cost of defence, the provision of policing and fire stations and what have you. Yet we know that the cost of some things must be shared communally.



Likewise we think great cultural offerings should be widely made available to all in a sensible way. that means sensible choices of material, of delivery methods and of shared costs and of healthy but reasonable profits for those involved in the production to ensure fairness to them and to the community equally. when we see them throw away movies rather than let others have them we must suspect their decisions across the board in this respect as they've already pleaded guilty to being insane to the public good and to the common interests that we must all be on guard for and stand to protect. We see the same phenomenon when they price a movie such as "the sound of music" (which congress should have placed into the public domain based on public needs specifically or generally by altering copyright expiration standards) is set at thirty bucks while a copy of "kill bill" goes for less as they do not consider children as they do the almighty buck that they worship more.



the point is that we bring you great movies to aid our families our children, our communities. They seek to teach, to inform to entertain to edify generally and give us a better lot in life at no cost to anyone who should be concerned as they are happy enough to throw stuff away instead. we see that time and time again. When a copy if the Godfather i sells for ten bucks at the retail store, the retailer gets perhaps two bucks, the wholesaler perhaps a dollar, the cost of making the DVD and the packaging and shipping and overhead etc is perhaps another three. So the industry is looking to make a couple of dollars at the most. Why not simply deliver via internet and charge the same fee - two dollars and you get the real McCoy! Norssir1 they say. We just don't wanna. In my days as a systems analyst in the software development business I often saw many developers take this approach at their own peril and the same goes for the movie industry. It wouldn't cost them any profits to make the movie available on the net for the same profit they make through retail means, yet they choose to resist. They could even sell more and make more money this way. so it aint the money, they just like playing god so it would seem. Regulation is called for whenever abusive practices are the way of an industry in need of reform (Tin Men - great movie).



Since our movie versions dont have chapter selections as do the DVD versions on store shelves or that might be made available via download, full brilliance of all available video and audio settings etc (although we try hard to make sure you dont really notice a difference), id say that what we give you is worth fifty cents. And if they ever come after you looking for donation they dont need, hand them fifty cents and tell them is a straight enough deal and that you wont be took for more. if a guy really has the dough let him pay for more, as for what we give you here, please enjoy, we pick responsibly for the titles involved and what we deliver of it so that we can always say we give out what it is that is the entitlement of wall we serve and its time the industry had on the same sort of thinking cap, if they like to consult me for better decisions than they have made previously when left to their own devices in this regard.



Michael Rizzo (Chessman)DivX 640 X 480 We used a marginally lower video bitrate at 750 rather than our most often used 800 since we want to lower the file size (under a gig in size - we only just made it)on this long movie (although its the Euro cut so its a few minutes less in length due to editing by the studio). Our previous dual language editions had nice enough audio at 80K bitrate (we aren't trying to steal this movie -its a big moneymaker still at present) this rendition has great enough at 96K (many have handed out mp3 songs now and then nicely enough at 80K depending on content) so you really shouldn't find legitimate cause for complaint.