Sony to buy out MGM? (1 Viewer)

[Dan Hitchman]

Warner over Sony! Sony double dips, triple dips, quadruple dips, quintuple dips... there's no end to their greed!!

Plus newer Warner discs have a much better overall video transfer quality than Sony. Although, DTS would be nice! But, that's another issue.

Besides, Warner is in the HD-DVD camp which just might have the edge on audio and video quality when it's finally released (even though the discs don't hold quite as much as Blu-Ray): at least they're looking strongly at advanced video codecs, and lossless, high rez. audio formats.

Disney is also throwing some weight behind HD-DVD over Blu-Ray even though they say they aren't taking sides.

Dan

 

[MarcoBiscotti]

Warners already owns the MGM theatrical shorts, right..?

Happy Harmonies, Droopy, Screwy Squirrel, Barny Bear, etc...

Does WB already own licensing rights or is it just the Tex Avery and Tom & Jerry cartoons that were purchased, I believe it was the whole package..?

 

[Manus]

Please God don't let this happen !!!! I am so sick of Sony that I simply will not have a single product of theirs in my house and actively encourage every friend,relative or acquaintance I know to do likewise.

Apart from multiple editions of every movie release of their titles they are doing their best to screw up the adoption of hi-res audio with misrepresentations about SACD.

How can a company which builds Robotic dogs and signs up for every forum of every new format with the sole intention of mucking up any chance of getting industry-wide agreement ( unless of course they invented it and therefore get most royalties) , expect to be taken seriously ?

They join McDonald's and Microsoft in my list of companies who have just gotten to big for their boots.

No Woof Sony !
Manus

 

[Mike_Richardson]

Well, I have no problem with Sony buying MGM. Nobody is forcing you to re-buy movies with "double dips" and "triple dips." Their transfer and sound quality -- generally -- is as good as anyone on new theatrical films and while Warner has done a solid job OF LATE on restorations, I haven't liked everything they've done with the MGM catalog. CLASH OF THE TITANS sounds like garbage and they certainly didn't get that one right.

 

[Patrick McCart]

If it's MGM and before 1986, it's owned by Warner via Turner.

I think the farthest their MGM backlog goes is 1921, with films like The Ace of Hearts and The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. There's a few earlier movies (like 1914's The Squaw Man) that are part of the library, even if they're in the public domain.

 

[AlanBrom]

If MGM was to be sold, let's say tommorrow, how would this effect the DVD schedule that they already have mapped out for the year?

 

[Peter Svensson]

I definately prefer Sony over Warner because I want DTS on my movies and Superbit editions. If you know that there will be several editions of one movie, don´t buy it until the edition you want gets released. I´ll wait until they have released all titles on Superbit.

If Warner could go back to adding fullrate DTS tracks on their movies the choice would be easy, but sice I don´t normally buy a movie without DTS, that would mean a lot of titles I´ll be missing.

Go Sony!

 

[Benjamin.D]

DTS is great, but let us not forget how bad Sony has been (at least in R1) with release quality and MAR (DTS P&S edition of Annie anyone?) Warner has done a far better job with quality relases.

Ben

 

[Marc Colella]

Here's hoping that Warner winds up buying MGM, and not Sony.

Warner offers the best DVDs at great prices, and don't hold back on picture/sound quality just to make another edition look better (ie. Superbit) later on. Plus their 2-disc editions are superior to anything Sony's released.

MGM has ALOT of foreign and independant titles under their World Film and Avante Garde monikers that weren't given the proper treatment.
I'm drooling at the remote possibility of re-releases for Jean de Florette, Manon of the Spring, Small Change, Fellini's Roma and Satyricon and more.

 

[Peter Svensson]

Well, Annie is anamorphic widescreen on R2, but it only has DD 5.1. I can´t really complain about Sony´s releases on R2, although they could add DTS to more editions. And let´s not forget how Warner screwed up Matrix Revolutions on R2. It sounded just awful.

 

[MatthewA]

They can do a 2-pack: the P&S disc of "Annie" with the P&S disc of "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang."

 

[Joshua Clinard]

That's very funny Matthew. I too hope that Warner ends up buying MGM, rather than Sony. I like Sony Electroincs, but I don't own very many CT discs at all, and I would own a lot more if they would release more of them in widescreen. Here's just a few that come to mind.

Annie Special Anniversary Edition (1982) (2.35:1)
The Karate Kid (1984)
Look Who's Talking Now (1993)
Matilda (1996) (2.35:1)
Masters of Disguise (2.25:1) (R2 DVD)
My Girl (1991) (1.85:1)
My Girl 2 (1994) (1.85:1)
The New Adventures of Pippi Longstocking (1988) (1.85:1)

 

[DaViD Boulet]

I could see it now...

standing in front of the shelf at Best Buy and trying to figure out which of the five DVD versions of the Bond film to buy... the regular WS version, or the P/S version, or the superbit with DTS but no extras, or the "speical edition" with loads of extras but no DTS...or the "collectors edition" with different extras and no DTS...


Personally, I think this battle is really about BluRay vs HD-DVD. Sony knows if they can get the Bond films on BluRay, it will go well for promoting the format. Warner no doubt understands the same advantage for their HD-DVD format.

Much like many folks kept putting off buying a DVD player saying "I'll wait until they put Star Wars out on DVD", the Bond films carry a lot of "format-adoptor weight" for many consumers.

-dave

 

[Carlo_M]

In a sense (with all the MGM releases, re-releases, remasters, and box sets) isn't that what we're already doing now?

 

[Jason Seaver]

Can we vote for some other company, preferably one that doesn't already own a film studio? Somehow I doubt either Sony would have MGM or UA operate autonomously for very long before absorbing it, with the end result being one less company making movies.

 

[MatthewA]

These days, one less company making movies only means less crap. We don't get to vote unless we own stock. I own approximately 7 shares of MGM, and I used to own AOLTW, and if it came to a vote, I would choose Time Warner.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

True.

My interest is making sure that healthy catalog of classic titles gets the proper treatment on DVD.

Still waiting for a 16x9 OAR Secret of NIHM and still waiting for a decent Black Stallion! (the current disc isn't 16x9 and is truly horrible...loads of EE and no detail and WAAAY too much grain).

 

[oscar_merkx]

Hi ya

Just read with interest this very thread and I would go to say that my vote goes to WB for getting even more great back catalogue titles out there

 

[Mike_Richardson]

I'm still waiting for a corrected EXORCIST III that includes the actual Dolby Stereo soundtrack and not the over-processed, surround-free version Warner included on their DVD...

 

[David_Blackwell]

I just read Comcast is eyeing to buy MGM.