Warner Bros. upsets me

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

These never stopped them before, especially 2 and 3. As for 1, MGM is being sued over Mr. Ed royalties directly related to DVDs.

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

If that's so, then why do we always blame the studios for not selling enough copies and therefore not being profitable enough? Maybe we all need to quit worrying and buy more shows on dvd. We're the ones who pay them, after all.

Nope. We shouldn't blame ourselves, as long as we DID buy the dvds. We should only blame the people who did NOT buy them.

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

I don't expect studios to issue DVD sets that will please me -- Hill Street, St. Elsewhere, Harry O -- when they can make more money releasing something else (How What's Happening!, a series that always struggled in the ratings when it came out, generated enough sales for new seasons is beyond me!). They're going to follow the money, which is exactly what I would do.

But I've always wondered why networks don't, during the summer dog days, run some episodes of the shows where the DVD rights are owned by their homevideo arm. Call it "Classic Saturday" or whatever, but it would be free publicity and sell the shows. If not that, then how about some straight-up ads on their own networks? You can't expect big sales when the product hasn't been advertised or promoted in 25 years.

And say what you will about Warner Brothers, at least they've never put out an abomination like the most recent "Fugitive" set from Paramount!

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

Ethan,
Please see my earlier post about Blu-Ray.

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

I am not dreaming, anymore than I "dreamed" that vhs would eventually be set aside in favor of dvd. You're still thinking that in the future SD and BluRay will necessarily be sold side-by-side. That's not gonna happen. All studios, in a couple years, will only be issuing dvds as BluRay releases. Ergo, all classic tv shows will be released on BluRay. Not because it's the "better" format for these particular shows, but because it's the ONLY dvd format commercially available at that time. Eventually, standard def dvd players will no longer be sold, computers will switch up, etc. What I am saying is that I don't think BluRay is going to exist simply as a superior alternative to SD; I think it's going to take over completely.

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

Thanks. Just wanted to find out what you were talking about.

I think your right, but SD-DVD still has a little life left. With larger storage capacity on the Blu discs, I'm sure they can cram a lot more shows on there.
It will be interesting, and I'm really looking forward to the original Star Trek on Blu-Ray, and also Firefly.

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

I'm not so sure you're right. One reason is simple: VHS players couldn't play DVDs, but Blu-Ray players can play DVDs. So they can co-exist quite cozily for a long time.

But I'm also not certain that Blu-Ray will triumph. Mind you, I recently got a Blu-Ray player, and I love it, much more than I'd expected to. I've fallen into that trap that I now find DVD resolution insufficient!

That said, for a new format to take over, it must offer a tremendous advantage over the existing format. CDs were much better than LPs (despite the complaints of some audiophiles) -- they were more portable, didn't scratch, could access specific songs at the touch of a button, etc. iPods (and the like) offered even greater portability, the capacity to amass your entire music collection in one tiny device, new music could be bought without having to go to a store, and (I regret to say) they were an ideal format for music pirated over the internet.

Similarly, DVDs were very obviously better than VHS -- they looked better even on an average television, they took up less room, you never had to be kind and rewind them, and as with CDs, you could access any part at any time.

Now you don't have to sell me on Blu-Ray, because I'm sold. But you have to have an expensive television (and, for the audio, stereo system) to see and hear the difference between Blu-Ray and standard DVD. The other bells and whistles are really just fancier versions of what's already available on DVD, and those bells and whistles are not what sold DVD en masse, anyway. The failure of the higher resolution audio formats (SACD and DVD-Audio) shows that improved quality is not necessarily the key if everybody's happy enough with the quality we already have. Many of my friends buy DVDs mostly to play for their kids in the mini-van. (Not I! I watch on my big screen, and my kids complain about the lack of DVD in the car!) So 1080p doesn't really mean anything to them.

I hope you're right, because I love my Blu-Ray. But I have my doubts.

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

Oh, and sorry for the topic drift!

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

Actually, What's Happening came in 29th place for the year when it was cancelled, which was because the three stars went on strike for more money. Since ABC felt they could live without it, having even bigger hits around, they cancelled it. In spite of only 65 episodes it did well in syndication. That helped it on DVD.

I always thought the network could be even cheaper than reality shows and show stuff their sister studio owns during the summer, or at least use networks to promote their stuff. Does Paramount advertise their DVD sets on TV Land or Nick at Nite? They should get a discount, and even if they don't it's madness that they wouldn't at least consider that as an advertising venue. What better place to promote old TV shows than a network that shows them?

The Fugitive abomination is bad, but Warner's season 1 of Mama's Family, made up of edited episodes, was right up there. It was an isolated incident for Warner, but I would say any set of any show where all the episodes are missing three minutes is a disgrace.

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

Ah, Beating a dead horse?

Re: Warner Bros. upsets me

Yes, just because he's not a cash cow.