I'm getting totally DISGUSTED with collecting TV series on DVD (2 Viewers)

[ElijahS]

The risk with waiting for complete, unedited DVDs for some shows is that it might be a one-time shot. Sometimes it is just impossible for an edit to not be made. I'm sure some people on this board remember the La Femme Nikita S2 debacle.

Another example, mentioned many times, is the S1 release of Mary Tyler Moore. The one edit in "Christmas and the Hard-Luck Kid" is why some people (not many, but a few might have been enough) chose not to purchase, which led to the second season set releasing nearly three years later. Sometimes it is out of the hands of the studio in terms of what causes edits. We can't blame the studio in every case, which seems to be the argument of a few people.

 

[george kaplan]

Well I'm one of those who passed on MTM because of the one edit. Yes, the one edit led me to not buy a dvd box that I would have otherwise. And yes, if it's uncut, I will be buying season 2.

Now, if low sales due to people like me meant we had to wait 3 years for season 2, but season 2 is now done right, then Yay! A 3 year wait is a very small price to pay to have something done right.

Now, I am NEVER going to buy the argument that a cut is too minor to matter. "It's only 1 song, or it's only 1 episode, or it's only 1 minute" or whatever.

On the other hand, I am willing to cut a company some slack if there's nothing they could have reasonably done. If I Love Lucy has some cuts made way back in the 50s, and uncut elements don't exist, I'll grin and bear it. But being too cheap to pay for music rights is unacceptable, and I am very proud that I never bought season 1 of MTM. If they ever rerelease it (perhaps on some High Def format), and they do it right (with the Xmas episode intact), I'll gladly buy it, but not now.

And if a company wants me to believe that they had to do music substitution because some copyright holder was being unreasonable, then prove it. Show us how much you did pay for other songs, and how much was being asked for the ones you passed on. Because without that, we have no idea if the copyright holders are being unreasonable in what they're asking, or the companies are being too cheap to pay a reasonable price, and there's no way in hell I'm giving some greedy corporation the benefit of the doubt on this one.

 

[Jon Martin]

But do you understand how much some of those songs cost to get the rights to? It is thousands of dollars, sometimes tens of thousands, just for one song.

You'd have to sell hundreds of copies to JUST pay for the rights of one 15 second snippet.

Economically, it doesn't make sense in many cases.

 

[george kaplan]

It may or it may not. Many people here seem to be willing to give the studios the benefit of the doubt - music replacement = economically unviable, and we should just worship them for giving us the product at all. For myself, I will remain skeptical of their motives, since all too often economic unfeasibility means instead of making a huge profit, they'd only make an extremely large profit.

 

[MatthewA]

I really don't care how much it costs to pay for a song. I, personally, wouldn't pay a dime to license any of the garbage they play on MTV today. But if I were producing these shows I wouldn't license these songs in the first place. But that's beside the point.

The fact is, it is possible to do it right and not charge $100 for it. Fox's animated series all have music intact and go for MSRPs of about $40 to $50, and can be found on-line or in B&Ms for less than that. Ironically, they paid for "White Christmas" on a King of the Hill episode, the very same song they refused to shell out for on MTM S1.

I was able to find Dallas S1/S2 on-line for about $30, and Warner Bros. were kind enough not to replace the songs "People" and "Silver Threads and Golden Needles".

I Love Lucy has a truckload of still-copyrighted songs used on the show, but Paramount still paid anyway.

Buena Vista gladly paid copyright holders Tuesday to use "Moonlight Serenade," "Surfin' Safari," and the NBC News theme on "The Golden Girls" today.

Columbia is inconsistent. While they probably paid a bundle for the Doobie Brothers songs on What's Happening S2 (and didn't jack up the MSRP either), they wouldn't pay for the THEME SONGS to Dawson's Creek or Married with Children.

Universal is good with this...if you only count Miami Vice.

Frankly, I, too, want proof that the music-rights-holders are being unreasonable.

And how much can it really cost to remaster a TV show? And why don't TV shows get a bulk discount?

This TV-on-DVD boom is going to go bust if studios feel they can lower the bar for quality and get away with it.

 

[Linda Thompson]

An article including some input on the issue from our own David Lambert:

http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,66696,00.html

Some things (i.e. the Moonlighting issue) changed even though they seemed set in stone at the time that article was first published.

Who or what is to blame? We may never know the full truth.

 

[Joe Lugoff]

Not at my age!

But, seriously, three year waits between Mary Tyler Moore sets means that Season Seven comes out in 2020. Mary will be 83, Ed Asner 91, Cloris Leachman 93 and Betty White 98 -- maybe their memories will be too fuzzy for a good commentary track!

The OTHER Mary Tyler Moore show, "The Dick Van Dyke Show," came out fast and good -- and it proves that it CAN be done, and it's spoiled me forever.

I might add that, hardcore as I am, cutting out a song doesn't bother me -- at least there's an excuse for it. It might be corporate penny pinching, but at least there's an explanation.

What has disgusted me are the use of syndicated prints, which have big chunks missing, usually with no rhyme or reason as to what was cut -- and those asinine sped up things. Does anyone know the name of the man who thought that speeding up TV shows was a swell idea? I have some interesting things to say to him and the guys who invented panning and scanning and colorizing.

 

[JohnMor]

This is a perfect example. The royaly pie on the KOTH may be smaller and have less pieces that the one for MTM. So the payment for "White Christmas" doesn't cut into it to the degree it does on MTM. The more things that cut into the profit margin, especially on the back end, the more the studios are going to look for a way to minimize their costs.

I'm not saying that it's right or justified, or that the studios can't afford to do something merely for artistic purposes (which, of course they can). It's not right, but it will never change, no matter what the fans do. As for-profit corporations, the studios' responsibilty is to their board or directors and their stockholders, not the fans. Or rather, not to the fans exclusively.

MTM is a perfect example of this. If any studio could have afforded to eat into their profits in order to put out a set with all music rights intact, it's Fox. There are many projects that could have covered the losses they may have incurred to do that, so they would hardly have gone into the poor house. And if any studio could have afforded to put out the following season as originally announced for hostorical merits, and to serve the fans, it's Fox. But they didn't. The fans did not count to the degree that the stockholders did. And sadly, that's not going to change.

 

[JohnMor]

Amen to that!

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

There are cases where the rights are too expensive, there are also cases where the copyright holder can't be found, or cases where the negotiations can't be completed in the assigned timeline, many of which are determined by tie-ins to other releases. So what, delay the release, you may say. In some cases that would make the product too difficult to promote, especially when you have several hundred other products competing for the consumer dollar.

People outside the industry assume that all rights issues are the same, and that if a studio can negotiate something for one release, that all releases are the same. They aren't. Every deal is different. In the case of older recordings, the rights may have changed hands a dozen or more times over the years. They may be tied up in litigation. The companies that hold them may not exist. There may be a half dozen interests involved in securing one song, some of whom may be difficult to negotiate with. How many films have we seen where elements are lost or destroyed? Licensing is a complex issue, always has been, always will be. You can't just claim that because one series came out intact that it's possible for them all to.

Surviving elements are the only excuse for syndicated versions being released. We are not privy to what has remained of many of these shows, and like music rights, these shows may have changed hands over the years, and original elements may not be available anymore, or in such bad shape that the cost to ressurect them would negate any chance at a return on investment. When you consider how many millions of dollars it can take to restore a 2 hour feature film properly, imagine the cost for 100 or more hours of a TV series. Sometimes you just have to take the best source material you have and work with it. Sure, that isn't optimal, but in many cases it may be the only alternative to never releasing the show.

If you want to see how bad time compression can look, find an episode of The Waltons on TNN - it is unwatchable. The DVDs are 1000 times better, despite showing their age.

 

[Dave Scarpa]

It certainly seems that studio have more care putting out a set of Dawson's Creek than in a classic Like Wanted Dead or Alive. But your points are all good, the studio is either unable or from an investment standpoint unwilling to find the best elements. So as Collectors we must judge wether our desire to own and watch these sets outweigh the problems with them. I really like Have Gun will Travel. A series that paramount is actually doing Right by. But even if this set had problems I would probably buy them because what's the alternative to seeing them? These will never be on Cable.

I think the big thing now is hold off buying a TV Set till the reviews come out about the problems and then make an informed buying decision.

 

[Jon Martin]

This is very different, as KOTH was made in an era that TV was beginning to be released on video. The Simpsons were on video, so they most likely cleared any future video rights into the deal to use it the first time. KOTH has a lot of music that made it. I remember one episode where their is a Phish song playing very quietly in the background. I thought for sure that would be cut from the DVD, but it is there.

Meanwhile, MTM came out at a time when video didn't even exist. Cable didn't even exist. So, contracts didn't reflect it. They would have to renegotiate everything.

But like I said earlier, this isn't just a problem for TV. Films also have music changed. The Michael Caine film BILLION DOLLAR BRAIN has never been released on video because at one point, Caine listens to the Sgt Pepper album. When it did get an R2 DVD release, all the music was replaced.

 

[JohnMor]

Jeff U, those are all excellent points.

 

[Tony J Case]

I don’t know the EXACT numbers, but Steve Roberts of the Doctor Who Restoration Team has said that picking up the rights to the music featured in Dr Who would soak up just about all of the budget for the disc (and I think they said they had something like 8-10 thousand pounds per disc to work with). So clearly the cost of music is often prohibitively expensive for DVD clearance. This probably isn’t the case with EVERY studio, but it's probably more common than that.

Also - the artists may simply say "no". That’s what happened with Remembrance of the Daleks. The copyright holders refused to clear two pieces of Beatles music, and the songs had to be replaced with cover versions.

 

[TheLongshot]

I also think what you have to remember is, just because a show is one of your personal favorites and is considered a "classic", doesn't mean that I have even heard of it. It is a problem with a lot of older shows that may not have seen syndication in years. This affects the numbers available for what you can expect for profit.

Also, when you get right down to it, most people wouldn't notice, mainly because, for some shows, they haven't been shown on TV for years. I'd doubt I'd notice any changes in Quantum Leap, for example, because I haven't seen it on TV in years.

That doesn't mean that we let the studios get away with murder, but understanding that there are limitations in what they can do, especially with older shows helps manage expectations.

Jason

 

[george kaplan]

Those syndicated versions, with scenes cut, sped up, etc., also have an explanation. As a matter of fact, basically the same explanation. By cutting out scenes and playing what's left faster, you have more room for commercials which MAKES MORE MONEY. It's the same exact greed that leads them to not pay for music rights that leads them to butcher syndication versions.

The bottom line is, that the ONLY thing that will get them to do it right, is to believe that it will make more money. When they realize that they'll make less money by putting out shoddy product, they'll do it right. Of course, there are going to be times when doing it right will be prohibitively expensive (WKRP), yet they seem to realize that doing it wrong won't make a profit either. So, for now WKRP sits unreleased. Unforunate, but understandable.

But when they're selling trash, and people buy it, they have absolutely no incentive to do it right. :frowning:

 

[Carlos Garcia]

Excellent post, George. I agree with you 100%.

 

[Joe Lugoff]

Exactly -- I understand the reason for it when the shows are in syndication. It's a lousy reason, but there's at least a reason.

I can't think of any good reason why these syndication prints are sold on DVDs -- especially when they claim to be complete and restored.

I thought the whole point -- the original point, at least -- of putting season sets on DVD is that, after years of being butchered in syndication, at last we can see them uncut again, as they were originally shown. With that element missing, I see no reason to pay for DVDs. I could just record the shows off television, as I have been doing for about thirty years now.

If a classic movie were to be released on DVD with scenes cut out, I expect anyone who found out about it would be angry. Why do so many people accept cut TV shows? Just because we were forced to put up with them in syndication? That's bad enough -- but to be asked to pay for cut or sped up syndication prints on DVDs is ridiculous, and that's the MAIN reason I started this thread to announce to this forum that I am DISGUSTED.

And now I read there's all kinds of weird stuff going on with "Bewitched - Season One." It seems NOTHING's going right lately ...

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

I would hardly call a 15+ hour series with a few music edits or a few seconds cut, trash. If that's the case the show doesn't deserve to be seen at all, because what remains can't be of very high quality.

There is no way, for example, that I would sacrifice all the great acting and storylines in Northern Exposure over a couple of music changes that I couldn't even pick out when viewing the set. The same holds true for many other shows that are compromised in one way or another.

For the most part these sets are pretty well done, and even if they aren't completely intact, they are still enjoyable. If you want to miss out over a few minor issues, that is your perogative, but don't expect the majority of people to go along with you. There are more important things to worry about.

 

[george kaplan]

Well Jeff, this is basically the same argument that people have here occasionally about pan & scan discs. Some claim it's better than nothing, at least they have one of their favorite movies. Others, believe that a pan & scan version of movie X, isn't movie X at all. It's the same basic idea, whether you're talking about chopping off the sides, or speeding it up, or cutting out scenes, or replacing music. So, I guess it's "agree to disagree" time. I'm certainly not going to watch these censored versions. Yes, I miss Kung Fu, Mary Tyler Moore, etc. But when I have hundreds and hundreds of great movies (uncut, uncensored) to watch, not to mention countless hundreds (thousands?) of hours of uncut, uncensored television shows like Dick Van Dyke, Twilight Zone, Columbo, Frasier, Simpsons, I Love Lucy, Seinfeld, The Good Life, etc., etc., etc., I can easily do without them until they are done right.

Lots of people still enjoy watching Ben-Hur pan & scanned, and lots don't mind watching Ben-Hur in 10 fewer minutes than it's supposed to take due to PAL speedup, and I guess, lots wouldn't mind watching WKRP in Cincinnati with generic elevator music replacing all of the great classic rock. To each their own, but I'll never understand the idea that a butchered version is better than none at all. At least not while there is so much great material on dvd available that isn't butchered. It's not like we're on a desert island where it's watch censored Quantum Leap or nothing at all.