Is the Classic-Film Blu-ray Market Drawing to a Close? (1 Viewer)

[Rob_Ray]

Predicting doom and gloom for the future of BluRay is not the best way to get fence sitters to buy into the format. As a fan of MGM musicals, I'd be content to continue buying the likes of "I Love Melvin" from the Warner Archive MOD program and save my big bucks for expensively mounted deluxe BluRays of the likes of "Meet Me in St. Louis." I don't need every classic movie ever made on BluRay because, quite frankly, upscaling DVDs *are* good enough for a lot of titles given how short life is and how many classic titles there are. But where does the market draw the line between musts for BluRay like "Casablanca" and "DVD-is-good-enough" titles like, say, "Back to Bataan"?

 

[benbess]

+1 on Meet Me in St. Louis....


That last song is a tear jerker....

 

[Cinescott]

Originally Posted by Luisito34

If a studio doesn't believe certain titles will sell they can always farm them out to Criterion or another label who will do it justice. I have no problem paying upwards of $30 for a great classic release. I also agree with the above poster that certain titles will always do well, especially if done right. Also, we've only just scratched the surface with classic releases - there are still tons of movies to get to. They're already predicting the end?

Herein lies the issue. To do many classics right can involve the expenditure of huge sums of money for which the studio rightfully has an expectation of some profit, if even a small bit. Forward thinking likely does not apply to Hollywood, so the profit motive is what we have. Studios appear to be approaching the whole "what to release" issue with a certain logical predictability. Put out a few previously-released-on-DVD classics, restore them, see how they sell and move on based on that information. The recession has certainly muddied the water, but it's likely that Hollywood is stuck in DVDs "glory days" and is expecting better-than-what's-happening results. Join the club, Hollywood. I doubt there's a business in America that feels differently.


So, we're in a sort-of no-win situation. The studios are slowing down classic releases until the market improves and it's unlikely the market will improve any time soon without more classics. I think we'll see many more, but it could take years. Wait for the economy to improve, wait for the player base to expand, wait for sales pricing to rebound, etc., etc. The wrecked economy slows everything down, not just Blu-ray. Streaming and digital download are affected as well, since that requires big improvements in infrastructure.


I love physical media and the Blu-ray format. I loved the concept and now the reality. To just write it off as obsolete in its infancy is IMO ludicrous. It'll be around for quite a while yet. During that time, there will be ups and downs in sales. Year to year comparisons will see saw. There will be more doom and gloom predictions. In the end, though, the only thing that matters is what actually happens. If Blu-ray can be marketed intelligently (questionable so far) and be brought to light as the great improvement that it is on the proper equipment, then things will go well. Titles will sell as I assume many do already. Titles like "The Wizard of Oz," "Gone With the Wind," etc. are always going to have a market, even with the very young. While I agree it may be necessary to have gargantuan sales on more recent titles to make continuing classics possible on BR, the fact is they'll happen. They're ingrained in our culture. Films that did really well at the box office are going to fare well on BRD, even if they were released 50+ years ago in theaters. Why? Because they're history. They're a part of what shaped our culture today and I refuse to give the modern generation so little credit that this fact isn't recognized. I know many young people who love these films and love to own them on DVD; now, they need some education on Blu-ray. For example, who's fault is it that most people I know still do not know that Blu-ray players can play DVDs as well? Inevitably, when the subject comes up, it's "why should I get a Blu-ray player when I have all my movies on DVD?" "I couldn't play them; it doesn't make sense." These are the simple educational problems that need to be solved and quickly.


Blu-ray players and DVD players are pretty equally priced from what I can tell, maybe within $20 to $50. So, why would anyone not buy a Blu-ray/DVD player today, even if their collection is small? Ignorance and a remaining distrust caused in the HDDVD format war, I suppose. No one even wants to spend $100 and be stuck with a boat anchor. HDDVD players were viewed as exactly that after the format war even though (tada!), they play DVDs as well. There needs to be a bigger comfort level with BR. DVD was easy. Insert disc, hit play. BR isn't much different, but the JAVA load times can be intimidating, even if they're only 10-15 seconds. The whole format has much more of a "computer" feel to it. It intimidates some people.


So, we wait for classics. Wait for a better economy. Wait for a decision one way or another how we'll view media in the future. Hopefully, Blu-ray will be part of it. Not the largest part, but a significant part.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Originally Posted by benbess

If this is true, perhaps it could bring about an expansion of companies like Criterion? Criterion might get to do more titles like Shane...?


Why did that article not mention Warner's George Feltenstein (unless I missed it)?. To me he is one of the heroes when it comes to film restoration for blu-ray. And since WB has about the biggest library on the block, that seems like a good thing.


I agree with the point of the article that the studios can't expect to make their money back on classics right away. Perhaps it's unrealistic, but I think they should have a 5-10 year time horizon for making back the cost of restoration. After a film is not just sold on blu but dvd and shown countless times on TCM, Netflix HD streaming, and other networks, probably it will make back the money put into it. But they can't think of it as a short term profit thing. It needs to be a long term investment for the decades to come in the prime assets of these companies.

Ben makes a good point, but I think we all know that studios don't give a crap about long-term investments. These studio people are only trying to secure their jobs for now--(we all know they'll be gone soon enough anyway). They need to produce products that garner immediate gains for whatever quarter they're nervous about now. They can spend millions to restore a movie in a hi-def format that's going to continue to make money for the studio ten years into the future, but these same people won't keep their jobs long enough to see the return in their investment. And since the film didn't make an immediate return on blu-ray for that quarter means that they'll be called "failures" by their own bosses. Studio dvd producers are probably reluctant to invest money on classic releases since they won't see immediate returns...they're actually risking their jobs! The investment in a proper film restoration is huge, and it's a long-term investment. I doubt most restored films will see a return in less than a decade. It is a good long-term investment, because the studio will then have a good hi-def transfer that can be shown on tv and even re-released to the theaters--forever. But again--these people are not interested in long-term investments for their studios! Maybe the fact that these same studios are always struggling is due to the fact that they're only concerned about short-term returns...


That said--I think we'll continue to see cheap port versions of dvds, if the studios happen to have a decent hi-def transfer available. That's not going to stop; in fact, it's just barely starting. The only time the studios are going to cough up dough for a proper hi-def restoration is if the classic film happens to have been a huge seller on home video in the past. That's also short-sighted, because if the movie was selling well on earlier formats, that assumes that a lot of the buying public already has it, and doesn't necessarily want to upgrade in the current economy. So the studio's complaining that the Wizard of Oz didn't make any money on blu? Well, boo hoo--is there anybody out there who doesn't have an old dvd copy of the Wizard of Oz lying around? It's an acceptable dvd; I don't see millions of people running around feeling the need to suddenly upgrade. Restore a movie that sucks on dvd--then people will want to upgrade. I know I've held off on a few releases simply because I'm more or less satisfied with the old dvds and want to spend my extra money on movies I don't have at all.


Blu-ray, while the best format the studios have ever come up with, still has obstacles. The Format Wars lasted so long, that by the time it was over, people were starting to download everything anyway. And there's always the fact that you have to have a 1080p tv to make use of blu, and those are still expensive and people are making do with what they already have in a sucky economy. The public has been so slow to adopt the blu-ray format along with the investment in a good 1080p television, that by the time they all do, they'll just be used to streaming everything onto their computers and nobody will even want tv's anymore.

 

[Cinescott]

Agreed that we're going to see a lot more cheap port versions of films on Blu-ray. The restorations will be exclusive to the almost-sure bigger sellers. It's sad that movies that would look amaaazing if done right on BR, like "Out of Africa," get a cheap, quick transfer. If BR had been around in the 80s, it would have been at the top of the list. Still, it is better than the DVD and maybe the studios will take advantage of people like me who will settle for better, not great. I suppose it keeps the format going until better titles come along.

 

[benbess]

Ethan: I'm afraid you make some good points.


And yet even right away Criterion seems to be able to sell some pretty obscure titles by doing them right.


It's amazing to me that right now Blow Out, a box office failure, is the top selling blu-ray at amazon. Even more amazing is that The Sweet Smell of Success, a black and white box office bomb from 1957, is at number 11!!


Criterion is making back their investments in these titles almost right away, it looks like, as well as handing over nice checks to the studios.....

 

[GMpasqua]

How many movies have you downloaded?

How do you stored them?

Have you ever accidentally deleted any?

What if your computer crashes are they backed up?


just wondering since i have not even consisdered downloading

 

[benbess]

I have never downloaded a movie.


Buy I do have digital copies that came with some sets that my son installed or downloaded.

 

[Cinescott]

I've put a few on my iPod Touch via my laptop through digital copy.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Originally Posted by GMpasqua

How many movies have you downloaded?

How do you stored them?

Have you ever accidentally deleted any?

What if your computer crashes are they backed up?


just wondering since i have not even considered downloading

My niece, is I think, extremely typical of the American consumer right now. She has two kids--ages 7 and 4. They download and stream movies all the time. And they have lost movies, or movies have become corrupted in the hard drive. I give her kids dvds and blu-ray movies as gifts--you want to give kids a physical gift for their birthdays, right? Not a gift card for downloads? And my niece doesn't really like them because of all the clutter they'll cause. And half the time, they try to access the digital copy and it doesn't even work. And the other day somebody asked her why she doesn't like discs and she replied frankly, "because I'm too lazy to get up and change the dang disc!"

 

[Ethan Riley]

Originally Posted by benbess

Ethan: I'm afraid you make some good points.


And yet even right away Criterion seems to be able to sell some pretty obscure titles by doing them right.


It's amazing to me that right now Blow Out, a box office failure, is the top selling blu-ray at amazon. Even more amazing is that The Sweet Smell of Success, a black and white box office bomb from 1957, is at number 11!!


Criterion is making back their investments in these titles almost right away, it looks like, as well as handing over nice checks to the studios.....

I know, right? I swear I've never even heard of "Blow Out!" It can be done--but one thing I didn't really get into in that post is that a major studio's sales expectations are always too high, and always, always concerned only about the quarter in which the blu-ray is put on sale. It can be profitable some years down the line, but they don't care about that. The Wizard of Oz will always be a good catalog seller, and I've no doubt you'll find it at Target for years to come. It'll always be there. And sooner or later the blu-ray itself will turn a profit. But the persons who put it out on blu-ray will no doubt be long gone by that time, and will never be able to enjoy their investment. It's totally stupid, but that's the way studios are and have always been.

 

[JoHud]

I'm not convinced that Blu-ray's best days are behind us. Especially in the last couple of years, there appears to be a stronger push to increase Blu-ray marketshare. Considering that far fewer home video consumers own Blu-ray players compared to DVD players, it is still seen as a potentially growing market in the long-term. When it comes to classics, the studios are experimenting with different ways of packaging and selling them. Huge collector boxes have been introduced, but it seems that only a select few blockbusters are worthy of that treatment. There has been the DVD/Blu Combo tactic to get more money out of the Blu, which has been used to great success by Disney in particular. Digibooks seem to be the real winner so far, with most of the studios adopting the Digibook in order to sell their Blurays at premium price, compared to average Blu-ray casings that are now pretty much comparable to average DVD prices nowadays.


But its interesting to note that, so far, there has been no notable DVD phase-out now that we are in 2011. Sure, fewer new DVD releases have been released in the last few years, but Blu-ray hasn't really picked up the slack much in comparison, and DVD-only releases still are steadily released (mostly deep catalogue). Like Rob_Ray mentioned earlier, having a movie available on a quality DVD release is usually enough to satisfy general consumer demand for a lesser known title. Even Criterion still occasionally has DVD-only releases.

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by Ethan Riley





I know, right? I swear I've never even heard of "Blow Out!" It can be done--but one thing I didn't really get into in that post is that a major studio's sales expectations are always too high, and always, always concerned only about the quarter in which the blu-ray is put on sale. It can be profitable some years down the line, but they don't care about that. The Wizard of Oz will always be a good catalog seller, and I've no doubt you'll find it at Target for years to come. It'll always be there. And sooner or later the blu-ray itself will turn a profit. But the persons who put it out on blu-ray will no doubt be long gone by that time, and will never be able to enjoy their investment. It's totally stupid, but that's the way studios are and have always been.

Well, in general you are often right and your point is often valid, but....


George Feltenstein was one of the people who convinced WB to invest big in titles like Oz. He himself has said these titles will be (or even are) profitable, but it just takes longer than people think sometimes. I imagine they did take a permanent bath on A Star Is Born, which probably sold a small fraction of what Oz did, plus it probably cost just as much if not more to restore.


Maybe Feltenstein has been fired, but if so haven't I heard about it. Last I head the studio believes in and appreciates the work that he and his team is doing. Warner believes in its library.


But if he is fired (i hope not!) that would be a major support for your theory.


But even though I tend to be somewhat cynical and somewhat pessimistic, your point of view--again while making good points--is even more pessimistic than not only I am but maybe more pessimistic than what reality warrants right now.


Hard to tell. In any case, it's fun to discuss, and I enjoy reading your perceptive thoughts on all this...

 

[GMpasqua]

Originally Posted by Ethan Riley



somebody asked her why she doesn't like discs and she replied frankly, "because I'm too lazy to get up and change the dang disc!"

ah, the America public, and what lies ahead


Good thing she didn't live in the 50's when she would have to get up to change the channel on her black and white TV set (which was still bigger than her iPod)

 

[GMpasqua]

I love the box sets of the big roadshow films : complete with reproductions of the souvenir program and lobby cards etc

Plus these films look great on a big screen - much better than DVD ever did. Next best thing to living in the late 50's-60's when they were playing in theaters


of course, if you watch your films on an iPod you won't see a difference, besides films were not meant to be viewed on a 3" screen

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by benbess

It's amazing to me that right now Blow Out, a box office failure, is the top selling blu-ray at amazon. Even more amazing is that The Sweet Smell of Success, a black and white box office bomb from 1957, is at number 11!!

It's not really that amazing when you realize that Amazon is one of the few places that you can buy Blow Out, they've got it on sale for more than 50% off the MSRP, it's the first day of release and there was virtually no competition from this week's releases.

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by TravisR



It's not really that amazing when you realize that Amazon is one of the few places that you can buy Blow Out, they've got it on sale for more than 50% off the MSRP and it's the first day of release.

All those reasons you state are true--and yet to blow away all the Harry Potter flicks, sci fi flicks, animated films, horror movies, the newly release King's Speech, etc., and even for one day reign at #1. All that with a film that came out 30 years ago and was considered a failure....? Man, you are tough to impress!

 

[TravisR]

^ I'd say that it's pretty good (and I loved the movie forever so it's cool to see other people like it too) but I won't say amazing.

 

[benbess]

What about Sweet Smell of Success at #11 (last I checked), is that one closer to amazing? Just blind bought that one myself...

 

[TravisR]

^ Except that it came out two months ago instead of today, all the same reasons for Blow Out's high Amazon sales apply there too. It's certainly a win for Criterion (and fans) because the more copies they sell, they'll continue to be interested in releasing catalog titles but it's not like those titles aren't anamolies.