James Bond Blu-ray Collection Three-Pack, Vol. 4?? - Page 7

The DVD distribution deal with Sony on the new Bonds is over.  Now it is just wait and see who will own MGM and the Bonds.  We should know in four weeks.  With the MGM turmoil I would not see any more Bond releases or older films released for several months.

You'd have thought that Sony was involved given how many Sony products Bond uses in Casino Royale!  But I know this has nothing to do with blu-ray releases and are handled by different entities.

Sony did put up some of the production money and distributed the film to theatres.  The DVD rights were with MGM.  This deal could go on depending on who will own MGM.  If Warner gets it, which I understand is Warner's to lose, then Bond will be a Warners release, just as NEVER SAY NEVER was.  Things just keep coming back in circles.

Well, Never Say Never was acquired by MGM, which released it in MGM packaging but not as part of the Ultimate series collection since those were only of the EON series.

I suspect that MGM will simply bought out of its distribution deal with Danjac (which by many accounts actually owns the Bond films outright) by Sony, in exchange for forgiving some corporate debt. Sony is already for all intents and purposes the new corporate home of the Bond films. Its just a matter of getting MGM out of the way, which at this point shouldn't be to hard.

Doug

Not sure that is correct.  The bankers hold the key and Sony has a non-secured interest.  The main value of the MGM is the Bond agreement with Danjac.  All indications have been that Sony is not in the top 5 bidders for the assets.

MGM bought Never Say Never from Warners at the same time they purchased Casino Royale (first one) from Sony (Columbia).  This was to secure all rights and remake rights to the Bond Films and have complete control.  The Casino Royale purchase was part of a lawsuit that MGM filed against Sony several years ago when Sony announced a remake of the film.  MGM did win the lawsuit and offered to purchase the film and all rights Sony owned concerning it.  They made the same overtures to Warners which agreed since they had no thoughts of making a Bond film.  There are a couple of books concerning the MGM/Sony lawsuits against each other along with third parties that ls great in trying to understand the complicated mess.

I agree that Sony is not the top bidder for the MGM assets, with the exception of the Bond films. Sony already has a foot hold in the Bond business, and I suspect they can make a fairly good argument, with those that are over seeing the break up of MGM that they can best administrate the future of Bond. In addition I don't see Sony, now that they have a taste, letting Bond slip through their fingers. After all Sony put up 70% of the budget for the last 2 films.

I think its likely the rest of the library will probably go to Warner.

Doug

Just received some new news, in regards to the James Bond library from MGM. According to the MI6: James Bond website, apparently, they are trying to line up bidders to purchase MGM and that it could fetch between $1.4 and $1.7 billion but that there's a possibility that it could go as low as $1 billion.

According to the site:


This means that another studio could get the rights to the "Bond" library and could see the re-release of the Bond series on Blu-ray with new packaging art. Additionally, whoever wins the bid for MGM would get the rights to the "Bond" library through what's left of the license that MGM has with Danjac, who owns the rights to the "Bond" films.

http://www.mi6.co.uk/news/index.php?itemid=8378&catid=4&t=mi6&s=news

This is why I have been holding off buying the original films on Blu-ray. Currently, only half of the library has been released and there are no further releases on the schedule for the near future. MGM's future survival is hinging on if any bidders are interested in the studio and its extensive library of titles.

The only two movies I have purchased are Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, both on Blu-ray. ;)

I still think the conventional wisdom is that whoever takes over control of the Bond franchise for Blu ray, they'll use the existing and likely already completed menu designs for the discs and artwork for the packaging. Why waste all the effort and incur the costs to start over and create new menus and packaging.

I doubt it. The studio  who does end up getting the rights to the Bond libary will undoubtedly want to  examine the HD transfers and decide what to do with them. More than likely, the studio will end up commissioning work for each film, much in the same way that MGM did.You need to remember that fans of the Bond series aren't going to rebuy the new versions if they are idneitical to what has come before and the studio who gets that license will undoubtedly create new versions of the Blu-ray releases in order to entice fans of the series to buy their versions.

Say that NBC Universal gets the library, they will, more than likely, redesign the Blu-ray menus, the DVD art and commission new bonus features in order to sell more copies because NBC Universal won't make any money on the MGM/Fox releases that have come before. I could see something along the lines of exclusive content related to the upcoming 23rd Bond movie or other new features that would entice consumers to buy NBC's versions of the BR releases.

Just take a look at the various re-releases of the Superman movies, Batman movies, Star Trek movies, Star Wars movies and so on. Everytime such films have been re-released, (when it was just DVD), there have always been new bonus features added to each subsequent re-release. Star Wars has seen several releases, and each time with new bomnus features / bonus content or other enhancements. There was the THX version releases, then the special edition releases, then the latest releases were the thinpack or slimpack releases.

I would normally agree with your argument, but in this case, they're more then halfway into a release. It is incomplete. In those other examples you cited, they more then likely had a complete release. All the Star Trek films are out on Blu Ray. There is likely another issue coming out soon with directors cuts. So that's a justifiable move.

The new company who takes over must know that a good number of people have already invested into the current release. They, us, are waiting for the rest of the films to come out. This group would likely be upset if they changed the new releases from the current ones with new art, menus and supplements.

And if they did go ahead with that totally new release, the current crop of owners could buy them if they are individual releases to complete their collection, or they'd be really upset because they don't match the current release and not buy them. That would cost them some sales possibly.

And if the new company did a new major box set with all the films at once, that could also alienate the current owners.

So whoever is running this new group that will issue new blu rays, one nice thing they can do is make a generous offer to allow trade-ins or some incentive to make-up for the early adaptors. Like Warners is doing for HD-DVD owners, allowing trade-ins for the blu-rays of the same titles. That could make everyone happy.

Or they continue with the current art, menus and content that is possibly all ready to go.

Danjac may very well have something to say about how the remaining films are released to blu-ray.

Doug

I think a new owner of the Bond films will be thrilled to see what great work has been done on the as-yet unreleased Blu-rays and will happily release them without having to commission and add extra content. There may be different configurations of box sets, but the content will likely be the same.

 As long as I can get the ones I don't already have on BD, I don't care what the packaging looks like (I collect the movies, not the boxes they come in).  The only thing that will annoy me is if I cannot get some of them without re-buying titles I already have on BD.

The problem that nobody is understanding is that if a new studio gets the MGM company and the MGM library, there really isn't a whole lot lot Danjac can say. If a new studio bids on MGM and win, all it means is that the studio is just under new management. Now, if the new owner decides to change the new of MGM to something else, then Danjac could legally revoke the license or add new restrictions to the license. Danjac definitely would not have anything to say about how the Bond movies are released to Blu-ray or DVD, since that is up to the company who has the license, as long as they are adhering to the content of their license with Danjac.

The other problem is that if the new studio decides to absorb the MGM name into its new company structure, they are more than likely going to want to make money from the Bond library which means that they would re-commission new Bond Blu-ray releases for every film. That means that they would end their distribution deal with 20th Century Fox, as well. I would imagine that new releases would include better audio remixing, possibly new features such as a digital download copy of each film, maybe even packaged in a box set, at first, in order to stimulate Bond fans to buy the new releases.

My understanding is that the current holders of MGM's debt are planning to break up the company and sell its parts. The library goes here, the other properties go there etc.

I don't know for sure but Danjac's distribution deal maybe like Lucasfilm's with Fox. They may have the right of approval of the final product. As I said before I suspect that the Bond films distribution deal, likely MGM's biggest single asset, will be sold by its self. In addition that distribution deal may come with strings attached to both Sony and Fox as the current partners in the distribution of these films. Ultimately however, who ever ends up with Bond, can't do a thing with out Danjac's approval. They may have as much to say as to where the Bond films end up as anyone.

Doug

Douglas, as far as content for the disks goes, you may be correct. However, Danjac doesn't have the say on how and when the studio releases those films on home video, whether that be on DVD or on Blu-ray. Danjac simply has the right to agree or disagree on what content is added to the BR releases.

Such as, if the new studio decides they want to include a digital download copy with the BR release, Danjac could tell the studio that they don't want such a feature added to a release. Things like that. If Danjac disagrees with certain added content, they could refuse to allow the new studio who has the rights to the Bond library and deny them the right to release a BR release with certain content they object to. 

As the Library goes, so does James Bond.  The MGM library has over 4000 titles in it and is one of the largest and sits between Warner Brothers and Lionsgate.  The greatest asset of the library is the James Bond franchise. Anyone biding on the library would want the Bond movies and the Danjac agreement.  At this point there are four entities in the running with Warner Brothers in the lead and from what I have heard it is theirs to lose and includes James 007 Bond.  There is another studio and two investment companies also still in the running, but do not have the cash available as Warner does.

We should know the answer in three weeks.

After the winner is announced, it will be several months before any Bond is released on Blu-ray from the new owners.  They will have to first understand what they have and where it is, each of the 4000+ films and television shows.  That is a vast undertaking, then they will have to discover the best way to use the assets.

That's all I'm saying. There's no contention that the Bond library is going to sought by a lot of companies and whoever gets it will end up releasing all new prints of each film. I would rather see the film series released, initially in the form of boxed sets and then later see them released individually. This way, the new studio can look forward to making money back on the Blu-ray releases because they would, undoubtedly, package those Blu-ray Bond films with those which have been previously released. Hopefully, they'll release the Blu-rays in order of their release, per boxed set.

While there are a few gems in the MGM vault, a majority of the 40,000 titles are completely forgettable. Just watch THiS and see films that have zero value on DVD or outside the subchannel's package deal. Maybe 400 of those titles have any real value in the marketplace. The better titles have been exploited on DVD at various price points. How much more money is there in Pink Panther and 9 Bond Blu-rays? Is it really worth a billion?

I was told that they will never release any Bond videos boxsets in order of release since they know that a majority of fans are rather loyal to their favorite Bond. Connery fans might watch a Moore film on TV, but they won't buy them. Thus they shuffle the titles so if you want the Connery, you have to buy the Dalton and the Moore.

While I agree with everyone that the new studio would release the films out of their original chronology, I think the new studio would stagger the unreleased James Bond BR's with those "films" that had been previously released by MGM. I think we'll see new pressings of the BR movies, with new artwork design, but packaged with those unreleased films that haven't seen a release yet. It would be an incentive by current owners to purchase the unreleased films.

Actually, that was probably the statement from MGM. If another studio grabs the rights to the series library, you can bet money on it that they won't be obligated to follow that ideology. The new studio will release it in whichever way they feel like releasing it. Remember, the new studio would be in the market to make money from whatever they pay for, in regards to the rights to the Bond library.

The one thing I can say is that if I were in charge of the studio that gained the rights to the Bond library from MGM that I would examine how they were released previously and I would want to maximize the profits on the new Bond BR releases. I would also stagger the Bond films that haven't been released and package them in boxed sets with those films that had been released previously under MGM. This would allow the company to cater to those fans who are waiting for the missing films and would prove to be a motivating factor ini getting current JB BR consumers into buying the new releases of those films from the new company.

I would also package the James Bond BR movies, initially, in the form of boxed sets. Eventually, the individual movies would be released as standalone BR titles. However, those single releases would be scheduled for release after the second boxed set release. maybe, 3-4 movies per boxed set.

If the new owners choose to re-release box sets that try to "force" me to re-buy films I've already purchased, then they will simply be disappointed.  I will wait for the single title releases in that case.

Same here. I've waited this long for the remaining films to be released, so a while longer will not kill me.

I know there's some hardcore Bond fans out there that would rebuy the movies on Blu-ray in box sets to get the unreleased ones but that number is so small that they'd be shooting themselves in the foot if they didn't make them available individually too.

I agree.  Plus, I would not rebuy any of the previously released titles with new extras.  I purchase a title because it's the movie I watch, not the bonus features.

Edited by Terry Hickey - 3/14/10 at 6:01pm

Maybe you understand the situation than I do but would they really need to make new prints of the films if really can't be improved materially from the current transfers? I just don't see whoever buys MGM will make new prints unless there is a material difference in the PQ and AQ. However, I could see them giving them new cover art and menus since those were designed by a different company. I could even see some of the other Bond Blu-ray's which are currently available to be re-released with new cover art and maybe menus but I can't seem them redoing the transfer's at all since I don't know if that would really be cost effective if there isn't a material difference. Plus as a fan it would mean waiting even more. If I were to head the new ownership I would actually release the rest of the Bond titles individually on the same release date or maybe in two phases individually and in a big box set with all of the Bond films. I would have cover art that is more individualized for each film and the same goes for the menus, personally I would love to see something along the lines of the Special Edition menus since I felt those were perfect. Also if I were WB I would release some in a Blu-ray Book packaging for the more famous/popular Bond films, Goldfinger, The Spy Who Loved Me, Thunderball, and possibly On Her Majesty's Secret Service come to mind. Releasing unreleased titles with those that are already available could be a bad idea since people who just want the new titles would most likely wait until their available individually since why would someone want to buy titles they already own on Blu-ray again if they are relatively the same Blu-ray's. This could effect the sales and my not be worth going with this strategy. Plus, I don't understand spreading releases like the Bond titles since does it really increase sales because I know some people who will not by any Bond Blu-ray's until everyone of them is available.

whomever buys the vault has no need to create all new transfers for the Blu-ray. Have you not watched the bonus features about the 8K transfers of all the prints and the walls of G-5s they used?

does anyone have the numbers on how many copies of the last batch of Blu-rays sold?

The James Bond "Ultimate Edition" DVDs looked very good overall, but had some specific issues.  As far as I know, all of those issues were corrected for the Blu-ray releases, but what about those that affected the unreleased-on-Blu-ray films?  I don't remember all of the problems, but wasn't there a missing "camera shake" in one scene of A View to a Kill?  And Goldeneye was just a mess from beginning to end, and apparently taken from a print prepared for pan-and-scan presentation.

As long as these kinds of issues are addressed as they were on the films that have already been released on Blu-ray, I think the existing UE transfers will suffice.

I believe one of the problems with the UE of OHMSS was the fact that a blue filter was used in the pre-title sequence which made this squence more blue than compared to the Special Edition DVD. Since I have the iTunes HD version I can say this problem was fixed and the entire movie has better colors to the point where they really pop and make the colors of the UE look rather flat. I believe the last time I saw Goldeneye in HD on G4 it seemed the cropping issues may have been fixed but since the sides were still cropped due to G4's HD channel trying to crop it to the HDTV aspect ratio. Despite this on one shot of the computer graphic when Bond is looking at Onatopp through binoculors it seemed G4 cropped a lot of the right side of the frame but the left side was hardly cropped at all and I could actually see more of the computer graphic than on the UE. I think A View to Kill was on AMC some time ago and they did the same as G4 as to cropping but the top and bottom of the framing showed more image than the heavily cropped UE. All in all I believe they have fixed all of the issues with the UE DVD's. 

Here are some screenshots of my iTunes HD version of On Her Majesty's Secret Service to give a taste of how it doesn't need a new transfer from this HD version:

Very nice OHMSS screenshots. One of the remaining films I am looking forward to on BD.

FWIW, I do not think there is any way that any new owner of the Bond films is going to commission new prints, not when such incredible work has already been done on them.