Any New Paramount Catalog Titles for 2006? (1 Viewer)

[Craig S]

That is disappointing, Hank. OTOH, A Boy Named Charlie Brown, Reds, and (of course) The African Queen are all VERY high in my list of wants, so I'm at least glad to hear they're all on the way.

 

[John Hodson]

'Low sales.' If Paramount had been a little better at the game, at tacking on some extras, at even promoting such (Ragtime came with a commentary that nobody knew about before it was released), then their sales might not have been so low.

It's not rocket science; follow the Warners template.

 

[JPCinema]

That is very disappointing news. I thought I had heard that "Love With the Proper Stranger" was coming .
Oh well, I am beginning to suspect that at Paramount the people who are making decsions now about the "classic" catalog releases are those of the "Porkys" mindset and have zero passion for film. I guess I wil be saving lots money this year.

:frowning:

 

[Hank E]

Sorry, wasn't familiar with those titles. Looks like these are currently planned for August:

Living It Up/ Three Ring Circus
You're Never Too Young / Artists and Models
Pardners/ Hollywood or Bust

 

[Greg_M]

It isn't just Paramount. DVD sales are down all across the boards. Plus most of the popular catalog titles have already been released.

But Warner has a lot of catalog titles scheduled for next year. All ready announced for January "Ryan's Daughter" "Cabin in the Sky" "Green Pastures" "Hallelujah" "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" "Camara Oscura" (Deadly Cargo), "Hormigas en la Boca" (Ants in the Mouth) "La Ultima Noche" (The Last Night) "Ride the High Country", "Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid" and "The Ballad of Cable Hogue" etc.

 

[Patrick McCart]

Gee, I wonder if Paramount's low sales have to do with putting out nearly every catalog title in a bare-bones edition?

"Johnson, we're not going to put any extra material on our catalog DVD's unless it's something very, very special."
"Ok, sir!"

One year later...

"Clearly, our catalog titles sell poorly because older movies aren't liked anymore! Good thing we didn't spend any money on bonus material."




They released a huge amount of classics this year. It has to be near a hundred, considering how many box sets there were. Just think about all the long awaited titles... like Bringing Up Baby, the Val Lewton films, Film Noir Vol. 2, a dozen Garbos, East of Eden, King Kong, Point Blank, Astaire & Rogers musicals, etc. We're still waiting for more Paramount films from Universal, Paramount's silents (owned by Paramount), more Fox 1930's, etc.

 

[Kevin Martinez]

That's fine news, Hank. At least i now know that Paramount isn't the greedy SOB i've stereotyped them as. I've wantyed Snoopy Come Hoem on DVD for a LONG time

Now if we can only get Rocko's Modern Life on DVD

 

[Greg_M]

I don't think the "extras" on the catalog title DVDs have much effect on the purchasing decisions of the Joe-Six pack/Walmart crowd who seem to make the majority of purchases. HFT members are in the minority and we're the ones who buy DVD's for the extras.

After all, it's the title that sells the DVD.

 

[Jeff_HR]

Well not always with me. On a marginal title the presence of extras, especially a commentary will often give me the motivation to buy that marginal title.

 

[John Hodson]

Hmmmm; and what happened to the the Wayne Batjac titles that Paramount did a terrific job with? Sat on top of Amazon's best sellers list for simply ages. And don't get me wrong, I was grateful that they pumped 'em out very cheaply, but again they could have followed the Warners template of putting a slightly higher price on the individual discs than sticking in a collectable box. I don't mind if Paramount make a few bucks extra profit if it encourages them to put work out of this standard.

You'd think that the penny would drop - but no, for instance, they eschewed the thoughts of a Kirk Douglas box set - The Strange Loves of Martha Ivers, Detective Story (released barebones) and Ace in The Hole which was bumped.

*sigh*.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Since, you buy many of your dvds outside of Region 1, I wouldn't call you an average dvd buyer. It's those Walmart/Best Buy dvd purchasers that drives dvd sales figures to profitability. Anyhow, this is not good news if true.






Crawdaddy

 

[Jaime_Weinman]

Well, that's a relief -- the two Tashlin/Martin/Lewis films ("Artists" and "Hollywood") were at the top of my most-wanted list, along with Ace in the Hole. At least those got onto the schedule.

 

[Paul_Scott]

Jessica is great news if it pans out, but honestly, i expected it this year but as we all know, Paramount decided to take a nap in regards to a Halloween themed promotion.
i really hope to see it next year (i guess the 'remake' is still going thru then?).

But i'm with the original poster- where the hell is Love With the Proper Stranger?!
Natalie Wood and Steve McQueen in one one their most popular films doesn't merit a release?
Yet things like The Adventurers do? good grief. and then they complain that 'catalog titles don't sell'!
as soon as things like The Adventures get announced people like myself invariably chime in and ask "why is ____ getting released when ____ is still a no show" and the inevitable response is "everyone has their personal favorites. why do you have to poo-poo one persons favorite just because yours isn't getting a release yet"
well the answer to that is right here- this thread is why.
because when the majority of people show no interest in a c- grade catalog title, the studio uses it as proof that catlog titles in general don't move.

Warning Shot was a decent movie, and a well executed disc, but it's appeal is fairly limited- why on earth are they using things like this to gauge interest in other catalog material?

y'know i enjoyed Prime Cut and Diabolik but Paramount took a dive on the canvas this year and is still out for the count as far as i'm concerned.
double dip retreads of already anamorphic releases i can easily pass on. they were clueless at the start of the game (msrp's of $25-30 for bare bone releases) and they got wise.
now they've gone back to clueless. hopefully this is just a passing condition with them.


oh, any vitriol this post may seem to contain is only because i know Martin is no longer going to read it.
if he were still a contributing presence, my attitude towards the rock would be a little more mellowed

 

[PattyFraser]

*sigh* The Heiress. Alright, who do I write to? I've been waiting for this title for years. Classics are not being released? I guess that means I'll never have "Far From the Madding Crowd", either. *sigh*

 

[RafaelPires]

Patty, The Heiress is now owned by Universal. So, if you want to write to some company the right one is Universal, though I think it will have no effect at all.
It would be a good choice for an Olivia DeHavilland double feauture along with To Each his own.

 

[John Hodson]

The Heiress is coming from Universal in R2 in the New Year, so there is a chance...

 

[Robert Crawford]

Martin left Paramount almost a year ago. I don't think anybody from Paramount reads this forum on a regular basis.





Crawdaddy

 

[Steve...O]

Consumer awareness of releases probably has played a factor in this. Warners does an excellent job promoting their classic releases via ways that aren't all that expensive by remaining accessible to the media and fans.

George Feltenstein is quoted in major newspapers from time to time. Warners does annual chats with HTF. Since many HTF members belong to other forums, the news from these chats are replicated all over the net. I can already make a pretty sizable list of Warner DVDs I'm planning on getting in 2006.

As Barrie Maxwell has noted in a couple of recent columns, studios such as Fox and Paramount are releasing excellent product to little fanfare. Steve Feldstein did some active promotion for Fox's Noir line which certainly contributed to the success of that line. By contrast, very nice DVDs of "Mr. Hobbs" and "Dressed to Kill" (among others) slipped under the radar. Other than the Chan/Moto collection (news of which was leaked out) I don't have much insight into what other goodies Fox has coming in 2006.

Paramount, in my opinion, made a mistake when they asked one of the former employees who was an active HTF member, to stop participating in this forum. He was a very good advocate for both Paramount and the consumer.

Steve

 

[Thomas T]

The suggestion that Paramount's catalog sales are down because they have no extras borders on the absurd. I think most people buy DVDs because of the movie. Sure, extras are nice but they're gravy. I'm certainly not going to NOT buy Paramount titles like, say, Love With The Proper Stranger or Ace In The Hole, Reds or Samson And Delilah because they're barebones.

I apologize if I'm misreading you, Patrick, but are you saying that consumers ignore Paramount catalog titles like The Rose Tattoo, The Country Girl or Casanova's Big Night but would purchase them if they had extras? If they're not interested in the film, why would they be interested in extras of a film they have no interest in?

 

[Eric Peterson]

Thomas,

I don't think that anyone is making an argument for not buying a disc due to the lack of extras, but in many cases (mine especially), a movie that I might have minimal to moderate interest in gets moved into the buy category with the inclusion of some extras.

Where is the information in this thread coming from? Personally, this all sounds like a bunch of rumor and innuendo. If Paramount really thinks that there is no market for classic films than frankly, they are just plain STUPID.