Hell Just Froze Over....

Charles H · 03-11-2008, 09:20 AM

Apparently the release of VILLA RIDES is not pd: if it is, it's a widescreen pd. And the pd company is also releasing on 6/3: KING OF THE GYPSIES. THOSE DARING YOUNG MEN IN THEIR JAUNTY JALOPSIES, STUDENT BODIES, THE ONE AND ONLY, THE OPTOMISTS, THE POSSESSION OF JOEL DELANEY, THE WHOOPEE BOYS, ZPG, SOME KIND OF HERO, THE SKULL, JEKYLL AND HYDE TOGETHER AGAIN, and HOUDINI (George Pal/Tony Curtis). Paramount has risen from the grave. You might want to check out Movies Unlimited for further titles!

**HTF Ads**

MarcoBiscotti · 03-11-2008, 10:33 AM

Wow, I'm shocked... though I still don't quite understand Paramount's thinking in selecting catalog titles.

Surely, they could've done better than the mostly unknown 80s movies here. I have to say that for the most part I'm not all that enthusiastic on the titles. I'll probably pick up The Skull for Peter Cushing's casting alone, though reviews are not all that hot. Being a big Sellers fan, I'll probably add The Optimists to my list as well, though again it looks like a second-rate feature. I've never seen The Possession Of Joel Delaney either but a 70s Paramount horror with Shirley MacLaine interests me. Imdb also doesn't give it much praise. The only title I'm really set on is George Marshall's Houdini with Tony Curtis and Janet Leigh. And Those Daring Young Men is a nostaslgic guilty pleasure for me which I'll also be picking up, though I might have to give some of these rentals first. Surely they could've come up with some better picks from their as of yet unreleased 1960's oputput... or at the very least, revisit some of the mistreated classics like Shane, Barefoot In The Park and so on who's current transfers are abysmal. Anyways, it's nice to know Paramount is in fact a home video company and are releasing movies!!

To be honest, I still won't believe any of this until I see these titles in stores!

MarcoBiscotti · 03-11-2008, 10:44 AM

Could someone please explain Paramount's holdings; is it just the post-1950 catalog titles that they now own and are licensed to distribute?

Would that mean that it's Universal Studios that now controls films like I WALK ALONE and THE BLUE DAHLIA, etc?

What about the Republic library?

Are they responsible for holding back films like JOHNNY GUITAR??

John Hodson · 03-11-2008, 10:47 AM

'The Optimists' is a good Sellers film and I'm stunned it's coming at last.

I'm surprised you think the 'Shane' transfer is abysmal Marco.

Paramount owns its back library of titles dating from 1948 onwards. Pre-1948 titles are owned by Universal Pictures. As I undertstand it, Paramount could have taken all the Republic back catalogue back from Lions Gate last year but chose not to do so, aside from cherry picking certain titles like 'It's a Wonderful Life'.

MarcoBiscotti · 03-11-2008, 10:59 AM

Perhaps abysmal was the wrong adjective, though I would easily say that for Barefoot In The Park. I think Shane needs to undergo a serious restoration as it is undoubtedly not presented adequately for a film of such caliber in it's current DVD edition. It could use a lot of work, I'll say that much.

John Hodson · 03-11-2008, 11:06 AM

I think it's a decent transfer, but there ya go...

dana martin · 03-11-2008, 11:37 AM

Well with Paramount and Universal both feeling the sting of the High def market and what happened, maybe they do need to actually go into the catalogs. Could this mean that eventually we will see a release of The African Queen? Now concerning the transfer on Shane, I hold this western in truly high esteem, and it could almost be a two disc set, one full frame, but the film was released soft matted at 1:66 so a widescreen presentation is warranted, to keep OAR. Also Stevens was so particular that he would wait for the proper cloud formations, to get the right shot. Of course through the years the same thematic thing has played out, and good variations have come along, The Road Warrior comes to mind. Worst mistake in my mind is that Paramount has re-licensed most of its Republic Library back to Lionsgate, which means that it will continue to sit in a vault somewhere, unless it is a John Wayne title, and doesn’t get a new transfer, just repackaged. Such a shame that who is in control of most of these catalogs don’t know what they have, they are more interested on what is going to big at the box office in the next two months so the can get it on the shelf , and make more money out of it.

Now I know the fact that I bring up Shane sounds like I am ok with the other thing that irritates me, the double and triple dip trend. Why is Paramount re-releasing the Indiana Jones, just so in 7 months they can release it all again once the 4th movie is ready for disc with a new box set? Simple ….. Money!

CinéKarine · 03-11-2008, 12:07 PM

The only title I will be getting from that bunch is HOUDINI, but nice to see that Paramount is actually doing something! Bizarre choices, but about time!!!

John Hodson · 03-11-2008, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dana martin

Now concerning the transfer on Shane, I hold this western in truly high esteem, and it could almost be a two disc set, one full frame, but the film was released soft matted at 1:66 so a widescreen presentation is warranted, to keep OAR. Also Stevens was so particular that he would wait for the proper cloud formations, to get the right shot.

'Shane' is framed perfectly for Academy; by comparison, it looks God-awful cropped to 1.66:1, so, at least here, that wouldn't be a come on.

Thomas T · 03-11-2008, 10:00 PM

Dana, as John as correctly pointed out, Shane was shot Academy and never intended to shown in any wide screen format. From Pauline Kael:

"The cinematography by Loyal Griggs won the Academy Award; this must have struck him as a black joke, because Paramount, in order to take advantage of the new fashion for the wide screen, had mutilated the compositons by cutting off the top and bottom."

Steve_Pannell · 03-11-2008, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Apparently the release of VILLA RIDES is not pd: if it is, it's a widescreen pd.

Pardon my ignorance but what is "pd"? I can usually figure out most abbreviations but this one escapes me.

MarcoBiscotti · 03-11-2008, 10:41 PM

a "public domain" property.

Steve_Pannell · 03-11-2008, 10:53 PM

Ah! Thanks.