Twilight Time announces Blu-ray releases March/April 2013 (2 Viewers)

[Moe Dickstein]

Russell, From what I've read the 3,000 figure comes from the run of soundtracks which the people behind TT were involved in prior to film releasing. When they presented their business model to the studios and signed contracts, that figure is a key part of it, as they pay for all those copies to the studio up front, taking on all the risk of selling or not selling on themselves. It isn't possible to go back and now change the number on a title by title basis. The other figure is 3 years, so after that time there can be either a re-issue by TT or by the parent studio. This model has been a proven success in soundtrack sales, precisely because there is no variable in the number of copies made.

 

[Lromero1396]

Russell, From what I've read the 3,000 figure comes from the run of soundtracks which the people behind TT were involved in prior to film releasing. When they presented their business model to the studios and signed contracts, that figure is a key part of it, as they pay for all those copies to the studio up front, taking on all the risk of selling or not selling on themselves. It isn't possible to go back and now change the number on a title by title basis. The other figure is 3 years, so after that time there can be either a re-issue by TT or by the parent studio. This model has been a proven success in soundtrack sales, precisely because there is no variable in the number of copies made.

In the grand scheme of things, 3 years isn't *that* long of a wait. We've had to wait longer to see films released on BD (or DVD even). Plus, if the title is a sellout for TT, we might see the studio that holds the rights give it a release. I was not a supporter of this model initially, but I've pushed aside my qualms about the limited quantity and high prices.

 

[Vincent_P]

I'm not referring to any of the relatively mature reactions here on HTF. I'm not going to link to the comments I've seen, because they reside on another Blu-ray forum which I don't wish to promote in any way. There is a giant farcical Christine thread on said forum that is equal parts sad and funny, filled with people who seem to think they are owed something. Again, I think TT has been very restrained in their response. If people kept bugging me about my business model and second guessing how I run my business every 5 minutes, I'd be a lot more forthcoming in telling them to GTFO. In the end, I not only understand the disappointment that some of the more rational fans have been expressing, I even agree with the concept that if you don't like a company, you should make your statement by not purchasing their products. That's the right we have as consumers. But beyond that, the reality is that we are not in any way entitled to any movie. There's a point at which expressing disappointment crosses the line into pointless and uneducated ranting, and that's what I think we're seeing with regards to Christine, and more and more often in each TT thread.

If the website you're referring to is the one I think you're referring to (initials B R), then I still think it's unfair that you singled out horror genre fans, because just about EVERY thread on that particular site, regardless of the genre of film being discussed, is tainted with immature comments and reactions. I'm not saying everybody who posts there is guilty of that, but said site has a number of members who are simply immature and they aren't limited to a single "type" of film fan, i.e. fans of horror movies as you suggested. Vincent

 

[Persianimmortal]

OK, let's just say the Christine - and indeed all TT horror-related threads - on that forum, contain at least 90% certified pure stupid, whereas the FDA cannot guarantee that the stupidity content of the other threads will be as high

 

[Jon Hertzberg]

Russell, From what I've read the 3,000 figure comes from the run of soundtracks which the people behind TT were involved in prior to film releasing. When they presented their business model to the studios and signed contracts, that figure is a key part of it, as they pay for all those copies to the studio up front, taking on all the risk of selling or not selling on themselves. It isn't possible to go back and now change the number on a title by title basis. The other figure is 3 years, so after that time there can be either a re-issue by TT or by the parent studio. This model has been a proven success in soundtrack sales, precisely because there is no variable in the number of copies made.

Also, from what I've read, the 3000 figure represents a cap, at least in the case of soundtracks, that was negotiated with musician trade unions so that the soundtracks could be released at a more affordable rate (rather than not at all). A very informative 2010 Variety article on the practice:

The contemporary soundtrack market, studio execs say, has collapsed. The album for "Titanic," until recently the most popular movie in history, sold 28 million units; "Avatar," from the same filmmaker and composer, and which has surpassed "Titanic" at the box office, has sold about 100,000. And yet the business of marketing movie music from 30 or 40 years ago is booming. In the past few months, film music aficionados have been able to buy -- for the first time -- John Williams' score for "Black Sunday," Bill Conti's Oscar-winning music for "The Right Stuff" and Jerry Goldsmith's "Players." A handful of small California-based labels are now releasing about 150 albums a year of classic (and sometimes not-so-classic) music from, mostly, the '60s, '70s and '80s. It's estimated to be a $10 million business annually, and all are thriving. "It's a great time for collectors," says Douglass Fake, owner of Oakland-based Intrada Records, which is releasing nearly 50 albums a year, mostly catalog material. "Never before could they see all sorts of things they never expected: Alex North, Bernard Herrmann, reissues, expanded editions, newly recorded classics, you name it." These scores appeal to a niche market of 3,000-5,000 film music fans worldwide. Most are mail-order "limited editions" of 1,000 to 3,000 units, although some sought-after scores ("Back to the Future," "The Goonies") merit a 5,000- or even 10,000-unit pressing. "There are about 1,000 fanatical collectors who have to have everything," notes Bruce Kimmel, a veteran producer who now runs the boutique Kritzerland label, which recently released and immediately sold out of 1,500 copies of "Love With the Proper Stranger." This recent bonanza of classic titles is, for the most part, the result of lower rates charged by the American Federation of Musicians for the use of music recorded by its members. Studios pay them once to record a film score, but when that music gets a second use on a soundtrack album, they're paid again -- and until recently, they were paid at their full original rate. "It just wasn't feasible for an archival project," explains Varese Sarabande producer Robert Townson. "In order to do a score from 1950, you were paying exactly the same rate as something recorded last week. It could easily become a six-figure deal. These days, it's not possible to support that." Over the past 20 years, the AFM has gradually modified its rate structure to allow for what it calls "historical releases" -- $1 or $2 per disc depending on the age of the recording, with total sales capped at a specified few thousand and the added proviso that the album include the AFM logo and the names of all the musicians who played on the score. The number of soundtracks released over the past five years has probably quadrupled, says AFM Local 47 vice-president John Acosta. And, while some union members aren't happy about the reduced income, others view it as an acceptable trade-off -- an ongoing advertisement for scoring in L.A. From the studios' viewpoint, "it's a win-win for them, and for us," says La-La Land Records president Michael Gerhard, who has projects brewing with Fox, Paramount, Warners and Universal. "We transfer everything, master everything, hand them back a digital copy and pay for it all. They get an advance plus royalties, and they retain all digital rights." Advances, say insiders, range from $2,500 to $10,000 and in rare cases (usually high-profile projects) $25,000 or more. More significant is the digital restoration that becomes a studio asset capable of generating more income -- via DVD or Blu-Ray use, digital downloads or subsequent licensing for other purposes. Label execs point to Fox as the leader in score restoration, initially for its own, short-lived record label in the early 1990s. The studio has restored more than 700 of its scores -- most of which were recorded on optical film, then magnetic film, long before tape became the recording medium of choice -- with another 300 in the works, according to studio music consultant and producer Nick Redman. The result has been new albums of Fox classics ranging from "Laura" and "The Day the Earth Stood Still" to "Planet of the Apes" and "The Poseidon Adventure," all sought-after by collectors. Film Score Monthly's Lukas Kendall says that Williams, Herrmann and Goldsmith are fan favorites. Multi-disc sets, often pricey, are also popular. Kendall's 200-plus releases include an 8-disc box of "Superman" scores ($120), a 15-CD Miklos Rozsa box featuring "Quo Vadis" ($180) and a 12-disc box of Elmer Bernstein-conducted classics including "To Kill a Mockingbird" ($200). La-La Land is preparing a 4-disc set of "X-Files" music. But, suggests Kendall, the days of physical product still desired by the fans (who like the colorful booklets and detailed notes) may be numbered. "As iTunes becomes more the default way to listen to music, the studios will make it a matter of course to see that their music archives are digitized," says Kendall. "You will always have new generations discovering this music. It's just that the delivery mechanism and business model will change."

 

[MichaelEl]

I've never seen so much childish hullabaloo over a Blu-ray release as I have regarding the TT release of Christine, and to a slightly lesser extent Fright Night and Night of the Living Dead. Even when Hitchcock fans were in full flight with their anger at Universal over the recent Masterpiece Collection debacle, I never once saw people pulling out the immature crap that is being dished out to TT right now.

Hitchcock fans know that Hitchcock films will be released again and again on whatever the latest home video format is. Fans of 80s horror films don't have that assurance, since it's clear that the studios have little or no interest in releasing 80s horror films on home video. It's quite possible in fact that the TT Blu-Rays of CHRISTINE, FRIGHT NIGHT '85, and NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD '90 will be the end of the road for those films on home video. You can therefore understand why fans who missed out would be upset. My opinion is that films like that simply don't belong in a limited edition model. While they no longer have real commercial value to the studios, they do have a built-in fan base, and that base is clearly much larger than 3000 fans. They also don't fit in with the other kinds of films that are sold as "limited editions"; i.e., they have no appeal to cinephiles and they really aren't cult classics either.

 

[Ruz-El]

I agree with MichealEl. I would argue that the soundtrack collecting is far more niche and different than the horror film collecting one and to adopt the same sales model for both is a flat out dumb idea. Especially when their are companies willing and able to do a far more capable job of supplying the fans with genre fair.

 

[ahollis]

Russell, From what I've read the 3,000 figure comes from the run of soundtracks which the people behind TT were involved in prior to film releasing. When they presented their business model to the studios and signed contracts, that figure is a key part of it, as they pay for all those copies to the studio up front, taking on all the risk of selling or not selling on themselves. It isn't possible to go back and now change the number on a title by title basis. The other figure is 3 years, so after that time there can be either a re-issue by TT or by the parent studio. This model has been a proven success in soundtrack sales, precisely because there is no variable in the number of copies made.

Moe you are correct about their agreement and they can not change their number of runs of a title. Also the limited soundtrack CD's is averaging around a 1000 copies now so the 3000 run is more. If the title reverts back to the studio in three years why would the studio want more sold from TT when it's possible for them to put it out and gather those additional sales. One other point, does the 3000 total have anything to do with music rights and amount of residuals that might have to be paid as required for the CDs?

 

[Kevin EK]

The print of The Fury on the TT disc is pretty dirty, but I wouldn't expect anything better than that. The movie was lucky to get onto Blu in the first place - it's not considered a major DePalma movie and watching it again revealed many of its flaws. I'm happy to have it, but it's not his best.

 

[Jon Hertzberg]

One other point, does the 3000 total have anything to do with music rights and amount of residuals that might have to be paid as required for the CDs?

Yes, that's laid out in the Variety article I quoted a few posts above.

 

[ahollis]

Yes, that's laid out in the Variety article I quoted a few posts above.

Yes but my question is are the same deals available for Limited Blu-ray concerning music residuals and that might make limited runs more economical for the producers. Is there some deal similar for actors? Sorry if I was not clear. I am very aware of the music deal for limited CDs.

 

[Robin9]

My opinion is that films like that simply don't belong in a limited edition model. While they no longer have real commercial value to the studios, they do have a built-in fan base, and that base is clearly much larger than 3000 fans. They also don't fit in with the other kinds of films that are sold as "limited editions"; i.e., they have no appeal to cinephiles and they really aren't cult classics either.

Then your quarrel is not with Twilight Time. It's with the original film company who - in your opinion - underestimated the market for these titles.

I agree with MichealEl. I would argue that the soundtrack collecting is far more niche and different than the horror film collecting one and to adopt the same sales model for both is a flat out dumb idea. Especially when their are companies willing and able to do a far more capable job of supplying the fans with genre fair. 

Which companies do you have in mind, and how do you know they are willing to meet the terms laid down by the film companies?

 

[Ruz-El]

Originally Posted by Robin9
Which companies do you have in mind, and how do you know they are willing to meet the terms laid down by the film companies?

Before that question can asked, we need to know if other companies were approached for the horror titles, or did Twilight Time pitch for those titles knowing they would sell out and therefore off put the cost of all those highbrow classic titles that are kicking around on their shelves?
It's all ready been determined that the cap number is based on selling CD soundtracks, not DVDs.
Otherwise Shout/Scream Factory, Anchor Bay, Blue Underground, Lionsgate and others have all been very successful with selling horror titles at regular retail and seem to be able to work with and get the rights.

 

[Jon Hertzberg]

Yes but my question is are the same deals available for Limited Blu-ray concerning music residuals and that might make limited runs more economical for the producers. Is there some deal similar for actors? Sorry if I was not clear. I am very aware of the music deal for limited CDs.

I can only assume that it's a figure also connected to agreements made with various trade unions as to when certain levels of residuals kick in. But, I don't know anything for certain. Just speculating. I would think it would have to be more than just arbitrarily settling on 3000.

 

[Robin9]

Before that question can asked, we need to know if other companies were approached for the horror titles, or did Twilight Time pitch for those titles knowing they would sell out and therefore off put the cost of all those highbrow classic titles that are kicking around on their shelves? It's all ready been determined that the cap number is based on selling CD soundtracks, not DVDs. Otherwise Shout/Scream Factory, Anchor Bay, Blue Underground, Lionsgate and others have all been very successful with selling horror titles at regular retail and seem to be able to work with and get the rights.

I think we all know that other small outfits have been releasing horror titles but that does not guarantee that they are able to meet the terms laid down by Fox and Sony for high quality, high definition masters for a limited release pattern. It will be interesting to see if Fox and Sony now offer the same type of deal to other small companies. Quite possibly they won't. They are doing well out of the present arrangement: money up front with no risk of failure and the release rights reverting to themselves after three years. There is, of course, nothing to prevent companies like Shout and Scream Factory from pitching Fox and Sony with an offer in competition with Twilight Time.

 

[Jon Hertzberg]

Before that question can asked, we need to know if other companies were approached for the horror titles, or did Twilight Time pitch for those titles knowing they would sell out and therefore off put the cost of all those highbrow classic titles that are kicking around on their shelves?

The Twilight Time folks have referred to lists of films that were submitted to them by the studios. Title placement on these lists (at least from Sony) were likely determined to some degree based on what state the film was in and if there was a suitable master ready to go for Blu-ray. You will probably note that FRIGHT NIGHT, for instance, has been and was available on various streaming services and cable networks in HD before and after the Blu-ray release from TT. The HD master was prepared by the studio for various ancillary purposes, which did not include Blu-ray, and so they offered it to TT. They've also mentioned instances where they asked the studios for a particular title and were rebuffed.

It's all ready been determined that the cap number is based on selling CD soundtracks, not DVDs

I don't believe anything like that has "been determined." There has been much speculation about the origin of the cap number and acknowledgment that the limited edition soundtrack model was referenced by the studios and Twilight Time.

 

[Derrick King]

Shout has released a number of Fox titles on Blu-ray (and DVD) and I believe they are still trying to get more titles from them. As for Sony, according to Cliff, their policy of not letting licensees create special features made Shout pass on licensing anything from them.

 

[ahollis]

I can only assume that it's a figure also connected to agreements made with various trade unions as to when certain levels of residuals kick in. But, I don't know anything for certain. Just speculating. I would think it would have to be more than just arbitrarily settling on 3000.

That's what I think also. There are a lot more forces at work in deciding the 3000 number to produce than just basing it off CD sales.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

TT Did not ask for the horror titles. Sony offered them and TT agreed to release them in their model.

 

[JoHud]

As for Sony, according to Cliff, their policy of not letting licensees create special features made Shout pass on licensing anything from them.

Is the upcoming Mr. Magoo Theatrical collection an exception?