Search results

Is it possible WWIII was shot with a theatrical release in mind (in some part of the world at least) but then ended up being presented on TV? That could explain the decision here. I've never seen it so I honestly don't know - but that was my first thought when reading your post.

They have to pay people to pull any existing elements, then review/QC those elements, then if those elements are rejected they have to do it again. This is especially troublesome if it's a TV show with 20+ episodes in a season. They also pay people to design the package art, then they pay other...

I suspect that one of the reasons for an increase in the WA budget to raise that quality bar has something to do with the better than expected sales.

I'm pretty sure that the titles have all been progressive (outside the initial launch titles).

More than likely Warner doesn't have to worry about the artists themselves, but with the label that licenses the music.

I must agree on the website issues. Warner obviously hired programmers that cannot handle a website intended for user friendly consumerism.

Great post Adam.

That's proof that the titles being released via Warner Archives aren't being restored, not proof that Warner's restoration efforts have been reduced in general. Let's say Warner restored 10 titles a year for each year from 2001-2008. If in 2009 Warner still restores 10 titles and yet also...

No, and I don't have to prove it. I'm making the assumption that the status quo has remained. The onus is on the person claiming a change to the status quo to produce evidence of a change. At best all I've seen is assumptions based on few facts.

Did you honestly just compare safety standards in automobiles to standards of a luxury item such as movies on a disc? And I'd like someone to bring some proof that Warner has reduced their restoration efforts. What's that? Oh yeah, there is none.

Warner has a very extensive restoration program. It's just not always tied to home video releases.

The one thing I don't see changing is going from DVD-Rs to DVDs. It would defeat the entire concept of the program being an on demand service.

And let me be perfectly clear that I did find the post funny. My statement was simply one made out of concern since I thought portraying Mr. Feltenstein - even humorously - as the man who is trying to screw over the consumer was in somewhat poor taste. What concern would that be? Well, Mr...

If history is any indication, it's because nothing is final yet, and to formally state otherwise would cause various hassles that could end up causing problems/delays. They even covered this in the last chat, IIRC.

I know that last post was for the sake of humor, but somehow I don't think the HTF is gonna appreciate portraying Mr. Feltenstein in such a light.

I'm pretty sure these discs have the same CSS copy protection as any regular DVD.

Personally, I have my doubts that regular DVDs will last 30 years. Hell, I have my doubts that I will last 30 years. :P Didn't someone already detail the type of DVDR brand Warner was using earlier in this thread? I seem to recall that, and that the brand/type being used was of high quality.

I can't understand the continued complaints about the DVD-Rs. Everyone that has any technical savvy in this thread has stated they will have no problem lasting.

Are they still interlaced and not progressive? I don't think anyone has reviewed a newer release and stated either way.

No, they're management wouldn't know how. It's like the Federal Government trying to run a small town. As far as a spin off small subsidiary company - why do that when there's a possibility of one you can license to? Why else would they finally be open to licensing to Criterion after a decade...

My argument is that the company is too large to run itself like a smaller company. It simply won't happen. A large business like Warner looks at a business model of a small business like Criterion and they can't decipher how to integrate that type of model into their larger one. Simple as that.

Warner hasn't announced a DVD - traditional or Warner Archive - that I've been interested in for a couple years now. The only ones I'm waiting for are Bachelor Mother and the Vidor silents (Big Parade, The Crowd). I'll buy them via whatever means they release them in, save the amazon.com $29...

From today's Digital Bits update:

I also think it's no coincidence that Warner has changed their stance recently from "We do not license our films to other companies" to "We are in discussion with Criterion".

DVD sales flatlined a couple years ago (2006 I believe) and have now trended downwards. That they were planning the Archive for a couple years shows that they interpreted the trends correctly.

It doesn't work that way. Criterion/Eclipse is a specialty label. They survive on obscure titles, and they would be crucified if they released a substandard disc, risking their entire viability as a company going forward. Warner is a HUGE company, and its Home Video division is only one part...

$19.95 is high, but not absurd, IMO. $29.95 is absurd.

Moral of the story: order over the phone.

The website really needs to be revamped. There's probably a lot of red tape to get it changed in a company so large. It may be above the heads of the home video decision makers.