Home Theater Forum  ›  Forums  ›  Hi-Definition  ›  HT Software - High Definition  ›  Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!
Hey There!

Thanks for checking out our community! We've got lots of great stuff going on around here... why don't you create an account and join the fun? Why?

Forum Nav More Forums | All New Posts | New Thread

Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

#1
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 1:13am
  • Joined: August 1999
  • Post Count: 338
Borrowed from Chris Frost in the comments section at engadget:

Universal exec says studio and HD DVD are moving forward - Engadget HD

Quote:
Another fact that really irritates Blu Ray fanboys:

According to IMDB these exclusive companies have the US distribution rights to the following number of movies:

Universal - 5331
Paramoun - 5753
Dreamworks - 95
Weinstein - 183

Total 11362 films

20th Century Fox - 755
SOny Pictures - 419
Disney Buena Vista - 727
MGM - 3639
Columbia/Tri Star - 4323
Warner Brothers - 4623

Total: 14783

Grand Total of all movies from these companies: 26145
11362/26145 = 43%

Meaning HD DVD has 43% of all catalog titles available for potential release on it's format. It's completely laughable to hear that BDA has 80% of the major studios. Who cares when Fox/Sony/Buena Vista/Disney all acount for less than 2000 movies. That's not even half of Universal's back catalog.

I double-checked a few of Chris' figures at IMDB. He is spot on! The Universal and Paramount catalogs are the biggest in the business! Wow!!

BTW, those IMDB listings include titles coming in 2008, 2009 and 2010 among them. For instance, 84 of Universal's 5331 titles are coming after 2007.

Now, if only Universal and Paramount will grace us with some of those delicious catalog titles on HD DVD! My money is waiting!

Mark

As of July 2009, I own more movies in High-Definition than in Standard-Definition.
http://mydiscs.markshangout.com

Export to Wiki
#2
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 1:26am
  • Joined: May 2007
  • Location: Helsinki
  • Post Count: 2,026

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

You don´t lose faith easily, now do you?

11362 films coming in HD DVD! Hurrah!

Rewind - DVDcompare/Site Administrator
*US PS3 (1080p) - Xbox 360 Elite (HDMI) - Nintendo Wii (Euro) - Sony PSP-2000 - Nintendo DSi
*HD DVD Toshiba XE1 (1080p) - Sony Bravia KDL-40W2000 (1080p) - Yamaha RX-V1800 (HDMI 1.3)

Export to Wiki
#3
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 1:34am
  • Joined: July 1997
  • Location: Amsterdam, Holland
  • Post Count: 16,286

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

This is funny: I wrote that more than a year ago: how many movies are on each side of the fence might be more important than the # of studios.

Of course: of even more importance is the number they will actually release on the chosen format. Warner is much more outspoken in this respect than Fox.

Another problem: catalog titles don't seem to attract enough buyers (collectors) the way recent blockbusters apparently do. So those figures are certainly significant, as they tell us the potential of each format, but not the last word on the potential success of it.


Cees
HTF Rules (uhm ... and has Rules)
Export to Wiki
#4
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 1:35am
  • Joined: August 1999
  • Post Count: 338

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Figures can be manipulated by statisticians to spin them the way they want. But those figures are accurate. Universal and Paramount's catalogs are the biggest in the business and there are a LOT of titles I'd like to see from them in high def!

HD DVD could survive just on Universal and Paramount's releases! Dreamworks and Weinstein are icing on the cake!

I think we are facing a dual format situation for some time to come!

Mark

As of July 2009, I own more movies in High-Definition than in Standard-Definition.
http://mydiscs.markshangout.com

Export to Wiki
#5
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 1:53am
  • Joined: July 1997
  • Location: Amsterdam, Holland
  • Post Count: 16,286

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Mark,

Another difficult question could be: in what shape is that film stock? And would the combined forces (force$$?) of Toshiba, Microsoft and the Studios be enough to preserve and digitize most of them, if they chose to want that?

I say this, because I know Warner has a digital preservation program of some kind going on.


Cees
HTF Rules (uhm ... and has Rules)
Export to Wiki
#6
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 2:23am
  • Joined: December 1998
  • Location: Michigan
  • Post Count: 17,136

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

This has nothing to do with HD DVD versus Blu-ray and all the rest of that garbage. However, I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time believing these catalog numbers. I think some more checking is in order.





Crawdaddy
G.W. McLintock: Camille, you're on your own.
Export to Wiki
#7
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 3:48am
  • Joined: June 2002
  • Post Count: 393

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

With the format war raging you would think that both sides would be bringing out the best catalog titles they can come up with to get as many "gotta have" titles on their side as possible. Neither side is doing all that great, but the HD-DVD side has made some supremely screwy choices. For example, consider these three titles that somebody thought would be the perfect vanguard for a fledgling format:
  • Cat People(1982)
  • Timecop(1994)
  • Dragon's Lair(1983) (Yes, that old arcade cartoon game)

These are bottom-of-the-barrel titles that I might have expected to see out on DVD 9-10 years after the format began when the pickings have gotten a bit slim. To see them out on HD-DVD when the format is just trying to get off the ground is truly bizarre.

Both Bluray and HD-DVD need to be a little more careful in selecting titles for release at this stage in the game. With a little intelligence and the combined catalogs of Paramount and Universal to draw on, HD-DVD could still put up a heckuva struggle. Arguably, a lot of catalog titles would give HD-nuts more of what they want (i.e. awesome visuals) than pretty much all of the crappy low-rent comedies (e.g. Norbit) currently soiling the HD-DVD rack at your local video store. The same goes for Bluray. Who will smarten up first?

Note on Poster Bias: I have a dual format player so I don't care which format wins. I'd actually rather both stuck around for a while to give each other a little competition.
Export to Wiki
#8
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 4:22am
  • Joined: November 2006
  • Location: Phoenix, Arizona
  • Post Count: 3,817

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Just curious as to how it was determined how many titles belonged to which studios. If it was just which studios produced which films, that can be very misleading. For example all of the Hitchcock films that he did at Paramount now belong to Universal and the majority of the pre 1986 MGM library and most of the RKO library belongs to Warner. I really find it hard to believe that MGM has 3639 titles when MGM only has the rights to films they made or acquired after 1986. Also 755 sounds pretty low for Fox. In the 1950s Paramount sold off most of its pre 1950 library.

Does this include television shows? If thats the case it could explain Universal's rather huge number. There was a period of about 8 to 10 years in the 70s and early 80s where the majority of TV shows on American television were made at Universal.

Frankly I would be very surprised if once actual distribution rights or ownership were checked, that Warner didn't have by far the largest library of features and shorts to distribute.

Doug
"I'm in great shape, for the shape I'm in."
Bob Hope in The Ghostbreakers
Export to Wiki
#9
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 4:55am
  • Joined: April 2000
  • Post Count: 9,138

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Quote:
This has nothing to do with HD DVD versus Blu-ray and all the rest of that garbage. However, I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time believing these catalog numbers. I think some more checking is in order.

Just got done spot checking some of these on IMDB (which isn't all that accurate to begin with) and the 'list" is just as half-assed as the person who pulled it.

The MGM, Warner and Disney figures are complete shit.
The numbers for MGM are inverted it should be 3936 (typing to fast by the author I guess) and those pre-1986 MGM titles fall under Warner. Also the RKO titles (2095) Warner holds are unaccounted for, same with the other dozen or so production companies that fall under Warner.

For MGM it should be UA (1948 titles) not pre-1986 MGM plus Orion and all the other production companies that fall under the current MGM.

The Disney numbers don't count any of the Miramax titles before the split with Weinstein.

I don't know why Weinstein who has pretty much dropped HD DVD is even counted in this but I guess it helps with the spin.

BTW the pre 1950 Paramount titles belong to Uni and are inflated by an exorbitant amount of silent films and the vast majority (80%+) is pre-1960 B&W and we all know how popular these would be to the Transformers/X-box crowd.

Now there's no doubt Paramount/Dreamworks and Universal have some great films that I probably still would buy even on a dying format but it's too bad they feel no need to release them on HDM at this time.



The Movie Library
Export to Wiki
#10
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 5:07am
  • Joined: November 2006
  • Location: Phoenix, Arizona
  • Post Count: 3,817

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

MGM doesn't own the complete UA library. Some of it is owned by Warner and some by Universal also.

Doug
"I'm in great shape, for the shape I'm in."
Bob Hope in The Ghostbreakers
Export to Wiki
#11
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 5:17am
  • Joined: April 2000
  • Post Count: 9,138

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Quote:
MGM doesn't own the complete UA library. Some of it is owned by Warner and some by Universal also.


Which titles?
The Movie Library
Export to Wiki
#12
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 5:17am
  • Joined: August 2001
  • Location: New York City Area
  • Post Count: 3,532

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Out of curiosity, I did a simple quick search on DVD Price Search to see how DVD titles are listed for Universal, Paramount and Warner -- to maybe get a better sense of eventual HDM output -- and Warner actually does have a good bit more titles listed (nearly 5900) than both Universal (nearly 2500) and Paramount (slightly over 2300) combined. Of course, there are essentially duplicates due to double-dips and multiple versions on all sides (like DD vs DTS as well as inclusion of insignificantly small numbers of HDM titles), and ownership/rights for titles may have shifted in significant numbers not reflected there, but I would think actual DVD releases would give a better indication of future HDM releases than the vague numbers quoted from IMDB w/out any qualifications.

BTW, Fox has essentially the same number of DVD releases as Paramount, which sounds about right to me. And Sony/Columbia and Disney/BV have roughly 2650 and 1950 respectively. MGM/UA have nearly 1450 listed though I wonder if most of them don't actually belong to Warner (and Universal as Doug mentioned) -- and many of them have probably been rereleased accordingly.

And oh, to complicate the situation, the entire DVD Price Search database lists roughly 83500 titles in all, so none of the majors actually come close to even 10% of all titles released so far.

_Man_

Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

Export to Wiki
#13
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 7:27am
  • Joined: July 2002
  • Post Count: 2,585

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Paramount is by far the worst major studio for releasing catalog titles on DVD, particularly "classics". What makes you think it'll be any better on HD DVD?

Universal, after starting out with a strong crop of catalog titles on HD DVD, many of which were unfortunately released as more expensive Combo Format discs, has taken a serious dive in quality titles announced for the format. For every The Pianist, there are four or five Mobsters, White Noise, etc.

Now that doesn't mean Blu-ray Disc doesn't have it fair share of crap titles, Lord knows it does. But, given what I've seen come out onto the HDM market since inception, I'll take more studios than less, and I think Warner Bros. is easily the equal of two or three studios in terms of HDM output at this point in time.
Export to Wiki
#14
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 7:45am
  • Joined: May 2007
  • Location: Helsinki
  • Post Count: 2,026

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry St
  • Cat People(1982)
  • Timecop(1994)
  • Dragon's Lair(1983) (Yes, that old arcade cartoon game)

These are bottom-of-the-barrel titles that I might have expected to see out on DVD 9-10 years after the format began when the pickings have gotten a bit slim. To see them out on HD-DVD when the format is just trying to get off the ground is truly bizarre.

While I like "Cat People" and "Timecop" can be that "guilty pleasure" (at least for me), I completely see you point.

But - when you have those "red glasses" on (or "blu"..), many titles that are being released on HD are suddenly a bit more interesting.. It´s just the name of the game. Like I said earlier, it´s not (always) really about films, it´s more about formats. For many, at least.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry St
[Both Bluray and HD-DVD need to be a little more careful in selecting titles for release at this stage in the game..

I don´t fully agree on this one (while again I see your point), since personally I would hope that we could get variety of different genres, from indie-films to blockbusters and everything in between. My movie taste is wide, so I would buy many different titles.

I just hope that they would release those damn films more often..

While I agree that HD-titles are lacking on BOTH formats, Blu-ray has still more studios and somewhat more titles. Universal/Paramount should really step up at this point, since they´re now on the losing side. They need several titles for "comeback". The warmth of "Transformers" has faded away some time ago (perhaps "American Gangster" is taking its place?)..

Rewind - DVDcompare/Site Administrator
*US PS3 (1080p) - Xbox 360 Elite (HDMI) - Nintendo Wii (Euro) - Sony PSP-2000 - Nintendo DSi
*HD DVD Toshiba XE1 (1080p) - Sony Bravia KDL-40W2000 (1080p) - Yamaha RX-V1800 (HDMI 1.3)

Export to Wiki
#15
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 8:14am
  • Joined: February 2001
  • Post Count: 2,968

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jari K
You don´t lose faith easily, now do you?

11362 films coming in HD DVD! Hurrah!

Export to Wiki
#16
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 8:45am
  • Joined: November 2006
  • Location: Phoenix, Arizona
  • Post Count: 3,817

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim_K

Which titles?


I don't know. The UA library got broken up over several years. I'm not sure how you would find out who owns which titles, other than to check on a title by title basis.

Doug
"I'm in great shape, for the shape I'm in."
Bob Hope in The Ghostbreakers
Export to Wiki
#17
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 8:57am
  • Joined: November 2006
  • Location: Phoenix, Arizona
  • Post Count: 3,817

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Man-Fai Wong
Out of curiosity, I did a simple quick search on DVD Price Search to see how DVD titles are listed for Universal, Paramount and Warner -- to maybe get a better sense of eventual HDM output -- and Warner actually does have a good bit more titles listed (nearly 5900) than both Universal (nearly 2500) and Paramount (slightly over 2300) combined. Of course, there are essentially duplicates due to double-dips and multiple versions on all sides (like DD vs DTS as well as inclusion of insignificantly small numbers of HDM titles), and ownership/rights for titles may have shifted in significant numbers not reflected there, but I would think actual DVD releases would give a better indication of future HDM releases than the vague numbers quoted from IMDB w/out any qualifications.

BTW, Fox has essentially the same number of DVD releases as Paramount, which sounds about right to me. And Sony/Columbia and Disney/BV have roughly 2650 and 1950 respectively. MGM/UA have nearly 1450 listed though I wonder if most of them don't actually belong to Warner (and Universal as Doug mentioned) -- and many of them have probably been rereleased accordingly.

And oh, to complicate the situation, the entire DVD Price Search database lists roughly 83500 titles in all, so none of the majors actually come close to even 10% of all titles released so far.

_Man_

MGM has managed to pick up the libraries from,

Orion Pictures (which includes American International Pictures, Heatter-Quigley Productions, and Filmways),

the pre-1997 Samuel Goldwyn library,

pre-1996 Motion Picture Corporation of America library,

theatrical rights to most of the Granada International catalog, including their inherited ITC Entertainment, Cannon Films library,

Epic Productions (which includes PolyGram Filmed Entertainment library, Nelson Entertainment),

Embassy Pictures properties,

Atlantic Releasing Corporation,

Scotti Bros. Pictures

Hemdale Film Corporation,

and most of the post-1952 United Artists catalog.

With these acquisitions it seems reasonable that MGM might have almost 2000 titles in its library. But I doubt the nearly 4000 number with out its own pre-1986 library.

Doug
"I'm in great shape, for the shape I'm in."
Bob Hope in The Ghostbreakers
Export to Wiki
#18
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 10:04am
  • Joined: August 1998
  • Location: Othyrworld
  • Post Count: 5,253

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

The number of films is pretty much irrelevant. What will count is the number of films that people will actually buy, and more importantly, which titles are strong enough to sell the hardware.
DVD Reviewer, digitallyOBSESSED.com | Othyrworld
Export to Wiki
#19
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 10:25am
  • Joined: July 2003
  • Location: Lacombe, AB
  • Post Count: 2,561

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

A big deal has been made about the fact that Warner now owns the pre-1986 MGM library (thanks to its acquisition of Turner Entertainment) and the RKO library, and that Universal owns the pre 1948 Paramount library as well as the Hitchcock output with a few exceptions. For the most part, the argument is moot, considering that MGM (now distributed by Fox on video) is BD exclusive, as is Warner as of May, and both Paramount and Uni are HD DVD exclusive. The only real gains made here are the RKO titles.

With respect to UA titles that Warner may own, this strikes at a more interesting issue: while a film may have been distributed by a major studio in North America, that doesn't guarantee that the studio will retain the home media distribution rights. This is exemplified by the Hitchcock films that Universal now controls. Independent production has been a reality for quite some time, and will continue to make home media distribution rights less concrete in years to come.

In short, while the numbers are interesting, they don't tell the whole story.

\"My opinion is that (a) anyone who actually works in a video store and does not understand letterboxing has given up on life, and (b) any customer who prefers to have the sides of a movie hacked off should not be licensed to operate a video player.\"-- Roger Ebert

Export to Wiki
#20
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 10:38am
  • Joined: September 1998
  • Post Count: 1,590

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

What's interesting is that he included Weinstein on the HD-DVD list but left off Lions Gate from the BD side. Lions Gate has a much larger library of films than Weinstein.
Export to Wiki
#21
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 11:17am
  • Joined: September 1999
  • Post Count: 4,630

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Quote:
Another problem: catalog titles don't seem to attract enough buyers (collectors) the way recent blockbusters apparently do.
Cees has hit the nail on the head. It doesn't matter what we think of these movies, it's what Joe Six Pack buys that is the all-important determinant. I agree 100% that some of the early titles have been bizarre [if you're going to bring out something as vanilla as Cat People, why not Citizen Kane? - at least you'd get kudos, and probably, I would guess, about equal sales], but in the main, we have seen the new releases and the bulk of newish catalogue blockbusters leading the way. In other words, Joe Six Pack fodder.

So for the moment it's pretty irrelevant how big the back catalogue is (or isn't). Joe Six Pack has the memory span of a goldfish, and only new and relatively recent titles are going to attract such a person into buying.
Export to Wiki
#22
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 11:47am
  • Joined: August 2001
  • Location: Clearwater, FL
  • Post Count: 2,826

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Quote:
Joe Six Pack

You have no idea in what quantity I buy my beverages. How dare you make those assumptions. In fact, I much prefer 12 packs.
Export to Wiki
#23
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 1:12pm
  • Joined: July 1997
  • Location: Amsterdam, Holland
  • Post Count: 16,286

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

That's exactly why you're a collector!


Cees
HTF Rules (uhm ... and has Rules)
Export to Wiki
#24
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 10:21pm
  • Joined: September 2000
  • Post Count: 516

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

If the HD DVD group had flooded the market with all these titles early on, they might have won the war. They could surely have sold a greater percentage of disks than Blu Ray, before Blu ray swamped the market with all the fire-sales that seem to have convinced the world they were really all that much more popular. I doubt that they will do any better now.
Export to Wiki
#25
Rating: 0
1/23/08 at 11:02pm
  • Joined: July 2005
  • Post Count: 1,294

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Speilberg films would help. It seems, like Lucas, Steven has some control over the release of his films. I can only imagine what would have happened if Bluray released Star Wars while HD DVD released Jurassik Park or even Raiders of the Lost Ark. Not that those films are equal, but, it would have heated things up a bit.

" I think it's time we go to plan B". "What's plan B?" "That's the one where we don't do something stupid".

Export to Wiki
#26
Rating: 0
1/24/08 at 12:55am
  • Joined: July 1997
  • Location: Amsterdam, Holland
  • Post Count: 16,286

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

The real problem, I guess, is that they don't make money on it. That also implies that sales number aren't that interesting, except perhaps for PR purposes. It seems that only Warner made some profit on a few titles.

But more important: if this is true, where's the incentive to bring out many titles? Now the "war" seems to cool down, as many of us believe, we may see less new titles on HD, on a year's basis, for the next future.

You may even view Warner's decision to go exclusive as a means of inconspicuously cutting down on new releases for some more time.


Cees
HTF Rules (uhm ... and has Rules)
Export to Wiki
#27
Rating: 0
1/24/08 at 5:16am
  • Joined: October 1998
  • Location: Boise ID
  • Post Count: 7,206

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Certainly Warners saves money only releasing one HDM item per title rather than two. Their beancounters likely figured prominently in the decision to go one way or the other.

Feline videophiles Susie and Dukie.

Export to Wiki
#28
Rating: 0
1/24/08 at 8:08am
  • Joined: July 2002
  • Post Count: 395

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

guys - catalog titles?

this is just more "HD-DVD is not dead" spin.

Guess what...

Export to Wiki
#29
Rating: 0
1/24/08 at 8:34am
  • Joined: January 2003
  • Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
  • Post Count: 4,163

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cees Alons
That's exactly why you're a collector!


Cees

LOL, god that was funny Cees! Best line in a very funny thread to begin with!
Export to Wiki
#30
Rating: 0
1/24/08 at 11:37am
  • Joined: March 2005
  • Post Count: 356

Re: Universal & Paramount's HUGE Catalog!

"Warners controls the rights to more English-language feature films than any other company in the world -- thousands more than the given figure. The total for Paramount is absurdly, impossibly high for a company that doesn't own its pre-1948 sound catalogue. [Par owns an enormous TV catalogue, of course -- though this is supposedly a "movie" total -- and owns the Republic library, though this is licensed to Lionsgate.] Since Fox has been making pictures since the 'teens, and is pretty careful about hanging on its holdings, I would confidently guess that it owns somewhat more than 755 movies. And, hey -- there's no point in separating the Columbia and Sony totals -- it's the same company! "



"Paramount is by far the worst major studio for releasing catalog titles on DVD, particularly "classics". What makes you think it'll be any better on HD DVD?"

I agree with this,He makes a great piont!! They took forever to release anything thats not Star Trek
on Laser,and for DVD they weren't much better.Their list of older HD Titles is a Joke.

so to count all their films as HD DVDs which will be out soon is insane
Export to Wiki
Forum Nav More Forums | All New Posts | New Thread