Jean Harlow Boxed Set???? - Page 4

Raintree County on Blu Ray seems like a no brainer.....Elizabeth Taylor and the anniversary of the Civil War this year.

The Personal Property cover looks good but per the cover the film not being remastered. I have seen it on TCM and as others have said, its not a great film. It seems most Robert Taylor films are Warner archive only these days. I guess he is not well known today.

There are many titles now being released in the Warner Archive which look quite fine without remastering - hopefully, this is also the case with Personal Property.  As most will probably agree, Robert Taylor's best work was made after Personal Property, though he was quite good in Camille with Garbo. PP wasn't very good. I thought Jean was the only good thing about that film, but even this failed to redeem it imho.

 

This was posted over at the Warner Archive Facebook Page after a reader inquired about The Secret Six:

 

Edited by ReggieW - 6/21/11 at 2:37pm

I'm tired of their excuses and their delays. Not just with Harlow, but with the Shemp Vitaphones. I've bought one thing from them over the past few years. They've put out a good chunk of stuff, but most of it is junk in my book. There are a lot of titles they COULD release that I might buy, but those ones aren't available. One example is that Warren William thing they put a few months ago. Seriously, you put a couple of his things, and choose THOSE films? Who makes those decisions? SKYSCRAPER SOULS and EMPLOYEE'S ENTRANCE had to be a part of that set for it to have any real worth. Both were released on VHS. Instead, they put out a collection of William stuff that has his second/third tier stuff on it.

And don't get me started on DVD-R vs factory pressed DVD.

Not holding my breath on this one - although it's great to know that the nitrate negative exists.

 

 

The Shemp Vitapones (including the Joe Palooka ones) should be out.There's also a wealth of Monogram films of all types that should also be released! 

 

There's nothing wrong with DVD-R IF Top notch media and duplication is used. Just what type of media are they using?

 

More nonsense from the people at Warner Archive. To celebrate what would have been Lucille Ball's 100th birthday, they have announced 7 new titles of her's into the Archive. That's not so much the problem, but...

... where was this kind of push back on Harlow's 100th? That's right. There was no such push. Harlow fans can't help but feel royally screwed. Again.

Ball wasn't the only legendary actress born 100 years ago.
Edited by rdf8585 - 7/8/11 at 6:25pm

Maybe, she wasn't, but Ball is much more popular than Harlow for obvious reasons.

 

Ball is much more popular than Harlow, but Harlow is a screen legend in her own right. It isn't like Harlow is some insignificant nobody in terms of film history - anything but. They've sat on their hands for so long that instead of an appropriate and lovingly produced factory pressed set, if we get anything, we'll get bare-bones burned on demand discs. Better than nothing, sure.... but just barely so.

Between her 100th birthday, the well-received Harlow book, the Harlow exhibit at the Hollywood Museum... there was a lot of buzz about Harlow around what would have been her 100th birthday. When was the Harlow book released? March. When did the Harlow exhibit open? March. And what about Harlow's films? Cue the crickets.
Edited by rdf8585 - 7/9/11 at 1:58am

oops, double posted.

I'm not disputing Harlow's status as a screen legend, but just pointing out that Ball is very popular due to her television career and why they think they can sell her films.

 

It can also be a good sign that none of the main Harlow movies have surfaced at the Archive so far - clutching at straws.

Crawdaddy's right about this one.

I think the only classic big-screen star comparable to Ball (who I really like as well) in popularity is probably Marilyn Monroe. I don't even think Warner considers Davis, Taylor or Crawford in Ball's league sales-wise, so 30's stars like Harlow & Garbo - the output of both being confined to the 1930's for the most part, probably aren't considered in the same category.

I also understand Ryan's frustration regarding the absence of WHV's Harlow set. My understanding, from George Feltenstein's comments, are that a Harlow set was on tap years ago - as were other things, but due to changes in the economy and dvd sales plunging, things were placed on the back-burner. It sounds to me like they indeed started work on it and the plug was pulled - probably more than once. George and the rest of the Warner gang have said they have to work hard to convince those above them to release certain titles, and let's face it, Harlow isn't Monroe or Ball, so they (those above George F.) probably are afraid of taking a risk in this economy. I think this is the reason why George F. would not talk about their Harlow plans in his last interview with Lou Lumenick. These plans could very well fall through again, though they have every intention on releasing it...eventually. I can tell you that Mark Vieira went through the same thing in trying to find a publisher for Harlow in Hollywood. Despite being an authority and respected historian on that era, every major publisher turned him down - including Abrams who had published his last several books. He told me that Taschen simply ignored them. Much like the home video industry, the publishing industry is also going through the same shake-up due to the economy and changing delivery methods (Kindle, etc;). Many decision-makers simply are afraid of taking risks in this market.

It's a bummer that it appears that WHV will PROBABLY miss the centennial marketing window. This has me worried more than anything. There will not be a more opportune time to promote and market a Harlow collection, and as Ryan stated, this past March would've been perfect. I believe that George F. and his crew would've made this date, but the realities I explained in the last paragraph likely came into play. I have been happy with the celebrations we've had so far. There was Mark & Darrell's book, the Hollywood museum exhibit, screenings in LA at the Egyptian and New Beverly, a forthcoming retrospective at The Castro in San Francisco in the fall, and possibly a UCLA film archives retro as well. I wish Warner had been a part of these plans in some way, but hopefully they're reading this thread and can use this to see that all of these festivites were made possible by her fans hitting the pavement, not some corporate juggernaut.

Let's just keep hoping........
Edited by ReggieW - 7/9/11 at 9:06am

I still remember quite clearly watching Jeopardy! several years ago and when a photo of Jean Harlow appeared, none of the contestants (all obviously intelligent on a wide range of subjects) could identify her!!! Surely that says something?

http://www.thecinemascopecat.blogspot.com

Yes-- it says that those contestants weren't on the up and up when it came to identifying famous film personalities. They may have been intelligent on a wide range of diverse subjects, but film history obviously wasn't their forte. I don't watch Jeopardy, but I'm pretty sure that if we used this example as a litmus test of what should be released, most of the films we enjoy in our library's today would still be collecting dust in the vaults. I'm sure companies like Criterion and Kino who cater more to the art house crowd would most certainly be out of business if left to these jeopardy contestants (Lucky for us they didn't throw up pictures of Jean Gabin, Claudia Cardinale or Simone Signoret!).

When Elizabeth Taylor died, I had a co-worker ask me what films had she done ---- yes, Dame Elizabeth----and I work in the film industry. You'd be surprised just how ignorant people are about these things, even the people who work in that very industry, so it's no surprise that a few jeopardy contestants were left clueless. I'd be surprised if they were able to identify Carole Lombard, Barbara Stanwyck, Claudette Colbert and a whole host of other golden age actresses as well.

No offense to you Thomas, but I've seen this Jeopardy example hauled out many times over the years, and have always found it a bit short-sighted. The fact that films/stars far more obscure than Harlow have sold well on dvd, doesn't give the Jeopardy analogy much weight in the scheme of things---imho.
Edited by ReggieW - 7/9/11 at 12:12pm

Whatever happened to the notion that sex sells? Harlow was the original Hollywood sex symbol. In some ways, she was Monroe before Monroe.

If they doubt Harlow's selling power, their ideas are very mixed up. For crying out loud, they've put out a George Arliss collection into the Archives. Do they really think Arliss would outsell Harlow? C'mon. Ditto for their Luise Rainer Collection. Throw Warren William in that mix too. I like him, but he isn't nearly in Harlow's league. The point is, they've done Archive collections/sets on personalities that just can't sniff Harlow in terms of importance and stature.

I 'm not sure if WHV themselves know exactly how it will be marketed. They claim that they've spent lots of money on it, but they've already ruled out any sort of blu-ray release. They said in 2007 that it was coming to retail, but that was in 2007 - before the economy tanked and dvd sales went into sharp decline. I think they really only have two alternatives now - Blu-ray or the archives. A classic film boxset released this late in the game will be riskier than the other two options, imho. I think you're far more likely to get them in retail outlets on Blu-ray than a pressed SD set at this juncture. If they've spent what they claim, it would seem that they'd want to see a greater return on their investment than the archives---which would mean blu-ray--which George F. has ruled out.

Well, the Archive is suppose to be for lesser known movie stars and films, so I'm not surprised there. Harlow is suppose to be showing up on DVD sometime in the future but, like the Show Boat Blu-ray collection being planned, is likely running into studio apprehension and interference, leaving it on a sort of limbo. Hopefully the long wait is over soon.

Lucille Ball is in the Archives, as is Barbara Stanwyck, Cagney, Cooper, Grant, Hepburn, B.Davis, and others. If the WA is supposed to be for lesser movie stars, they have an odd way of showing it.

For me, Blu Ray would be the first choice. But that isn't happening. A Jean Harlow "definitive" collection would be second, like that Tracy/Hepburn one from a few months ago. They should have access to her Columbia stuff now. I'd rather avoid burned on demand discs as much as possible.

I'm not so sure that is true as I think it's more to do with major retailers cutting back floor space for DVDs and Warner coming up with another way to market their DVD titles and continue to get revenue streams from them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crawdaddy

 

 

I still think Warner wants to release a Harlow boxset.  Otherwise, some of her titles would've been in the Archive collection by now.

 

But unlike Signoret, Gabin or Cardinale whose films appeal to a niche market of international cinema, they're not expected to sell as well as a Bogart, Hepburn, Grant or Davis. Look, we film buffs can be unrealistic. While Harlow might have been a sure bet in 2005, in 2011 she's iffy. The market has shrunk and while Harlow may ring bells with film geeks, for the general DVD movie buying public there's little interest in her (if they remember her at all). I stand by my point that if a reasonably intelligent and diverse individual couldn't identify Harlow then why do think Joe six pack perusing the aisles of his local DVD shop or browsing thru Amazon's site would know her?

Or are you saying you believe there's enough of fan base among the film buff crowd to turn a profit for Warners in releasing a pressed Harlow boxed set? I consider my self a film geek but I'm not a Harlow fan and I would probably be inclined to buy a Merle Oberon box set (like that would ever happen) before a Harlow box set

http://www.thecinemascopecat.blogspot.com
Edited by Thomas T - 7/9/11 at 5:54pm

Agreed.

On another note: Ryan stated that a "definitive collection" which included the Columbia titles would be great. I say go a step further and include the Universal (The Iron Man) and Fox (Goldie) titles as well. Hells Angel's DESERVES to have it's own elaborate edition. I've been lobbying Criterion to do this one since there's so much extra footage, outtakes, silent footage, etc, on this film, that a special edition of some sort should be a no-brainer. Plus it includes the legacies of both Howard Hughes & Jean Harlow.

I certainly agree with your market analogies on 2005 vs. 2011, but I still find the Jeopardy analogy flawed and short-sighted. I think I've outlined quite clearly why this is, if you don't agree, that's fine. I also have no idea what Warners sales expectations regarding any Harlow boxset would be (do you?) - hopefully it would be realistic. I think it's safe to say that Harlow isn't as popular as Davis, Monroe or Bogart, so I ASSUME they would probably be stunned if a Harlow set sold as well as those did. If I recall, Warner was quite surprised by the sales of the Esther Williams boxsets, so who knows? How many film buffs, joe six-packs or jane six-packs will purchase a Harlow set would just be speculation on my part, so I don't care to get into that. We are living in times where regular consumers can't identify Elizabeth Taylor films, so any pressed dvd collection on ANY golden age star would face an uphill battle in 2011. Harlow's starring vehicles still have not been released into the archives, so they likely are still planning some sort of retail release. Warner has said they have "something special planned" and that "It's really happening this time" on their facebook page, so I'm guessing they probably have more faith in Harlow than many here would like to believe.
Edited by ReggieW - 7/9/11 at 5:06pm

I'll grant you Ball and Monroe, but not sure about Bette Davis. Certainly Harlow is more popular than Esther Williams, so if those sold well, Harlow's would have a good chance.

Harlow's films have crossover appeal. Beyond her fans, Gable fans would be interested in Hold Your Man, Red Dust and Saratoga. Grant fans would want Suzy. Tracy fans would want Riffraff. Three Stooges fans would be interested in Bombshell and Reckless (Ted Healy).

Was this true 5 years ago too? 10 years ago? If not, what has changed? What made Taylor's films (or others they've done Signature sets on) relevant enough then and not now?
Edited by rdf8585 - 7/9/11 at 5:38pm

Hopefully, my final words on Harlow and then I'll try to shut up. Unlike many other Golden Age stars, with the possible exception of Dinner At Eight, Harlow doesn't have any bona fide "Classics" on her resume. Bogart has Casablanca, Maltese Falcon and African Queen, Hepburn has Bringing Up Baby, African Queen, Adam's Rib, Grant has Notorious, Affair To Remember, The Awful Truth, Davis has All About Eve, Whatever Happened To Baby Jane, Dark Victory. I think this may be why the general public has pretty much forgotten Harlow.

And no I'm not saying Red Dust or Libeled Lady aren't terrific movies, they just don't have the "imprimatur" that those other films have (Oscar winners, AFI 100 lists etc.)

http://www.thecinemascopecat.blogspot.com

That and she died just too young at 26 before her career could take her to a different level.  Also, don't forget The Public Enemy which is really considered a Cagney film.  Hell, Mae Clarke getting that grapefruit in her face gets mentioned more than Harlow for that particular film.

 

What's the difference between Harlow and Lombard? Lombard, another great who died young, had own set put out 5 years ago or so... albeit cheaply with double sided discs and not by Warner mind you.

Also, if we want to talk about lists, Harlow was on AFI's Top 25 female legends list.

Let's not forget Thelma Todd, who doesn't have the bulk of her films (Especially her Hal Roach work) out on DVD!