Warner may own MGM Update: Sony/Columbia buys MGM (1 Viewer)

[MarcusUdeh]

day-um and it's very likely that they won't use MPEG-4 AVC High Profile
for the Blu-ray counterpart!

 

[Patrick McCart]

They're real covers. No different from the keepcased DVD's Warner is releasing now. If you can find a Blockbuster still reselling Back in Action, I'd go for it. The film is a real "hidden" gem.

(as a side note, Blockbuster was only reselling the widescreen edition )


Also, it would be foolish for Columbia to not keep the DVD and preservation staffs from MGM. They're getting a few thousand films and they need all the help they can get.

 

[Derek Estes]

Everything I have read has stated that Sony purchased MGM on Monday, after Time Warner backed down. This is sad news to film lovers, because Sony which owns Columbia, has been one of the least effective studios, in regards to releasing their classic library. Warner Bros. on the other hand, has been the leader in the quality of their releases. Many of their titles that have yet to see the light of day on DVD have been in desperate need of restoration, and now that these films are being released, they look fantastic and, are available to the public for much less money, than you might pay for films released by other studios. Sony is mostly conserned with re-releasing the James Bond films among others on their new very high-resolution, but ultimatly more expensive ( it has been estimated)format. So Here's to more of what we already have, and Tears to what we might never get. :frowning:

 

[Paul.S]

Further sauce for the ironic goose in this regard is that MGM recently moved its headquarters from Santa Monica to Century City into a newly-constructed (for MGM) high rise known as MGM Plaza. MGM has signage (the lion logo) at the top of the building.

-p

 

[Robert Crawford]

The following is an excerpt taken from an interesting article in Video Business which leaves us with some hope about the future of MGM titles and those already in the Columbia Home Video library. However, such hope should be taken with extreme caution. However, it looks like Columbia's video sales in regard to their catelogue titles is not the best which isn't surprising since prolific collector like myself has been boycotting their titles due to their pricing structure and MAR releases.


http://www.videobusiness.com/article...1&catType=NEWS






Crawdaddy

 

[Jesse Skeen]

Well, here's hoping MGM's good points carry over to Columbia.
The question still remains though WHY has Columbia's quality gone so far downhill (dropping widescreen from many titles really takes the cake!) I never had a problem with their pricing as long as it stayed lower than their laserdiscs (I gladly bought their first DVD releases priced at $29.99), but I certainly won't pay a low price for a pan & scan movie, especially when a widescreen edition USED TO BE available!

 

[Simon Massey]

Someone mentioned this. Here in the UK, they have started to repackage all older DVDs released in snappers. To date, I have purchased The Exorcist (original), Interview With The Vampire, Tin Cup, Last of The Mohicans and Three Kings all in keep cases.

No idea if they will do this in the US.

 

[rich_d]

Gladly bought their releases at $29.99? They must love you.

 

[MichaelSloan]

Will Warner Home Video make dvds of any pre-1986 MGM movies in the future?

 

[Patrick McCart]

Yes, because Warner Bros. owns all surviving MGM films made before 1986.

(Sorry for the annoyingly large font, but this is asked in nearly every thread!)

 

[BarryR]

Which makes me wonder then--what are these 4,000 film titles in the now Sony-owned "massive MGM" library? 4,000 since 1986, or whatever UA also ever had anything to do with? It was the pre-1986 MGM library that WB has that I thought had a 4,000 title inventory.

 

[Brian PB]

See my post earlier in the thread: http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...85#post2379185

 

[MichaelSloan]

Sorry. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

 

[Paul.S]

ScottCor, "late" reply re your post #100:
It's a good point you make IMO. I'm still making my way through the thread but I think the issue is also addressed here:

It has begun - holding off on DVD purchases for HD-DVD

-p

 

[Jesse Skeen]

It was a bargain compared to their laserdiscs which were priced between $34 and $39.