MGM: THE PAN & SCAM OUTRAGE CONTINUES!..I COULD GO ON SINGING Foolscreen ONLY! (1 Viewer)

[Brian PB]

The Cinema Laser maintains an excellent list of mailing and email addresses for all the studios and distributors.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Unfortunately, you're an outsider looking in.

We have been told the scenerio first-hand.

 

[Joe Caps]

I have made calls to mgms programming department who seemed surprised at this news. They are checking but admitted if its already mastered full screen, management will probably not want to spend money to redo it.
BTW- mgm in England announced today the release of a big screen spectacular - Solomon and Sheba - idn't say if its full screen or not.

 

[Greg_M]

I quess MGM equates musicals = children's /family films.

This is kinda sad, especially the titles mention are not the kind of films children sit through (No child is going to watch "I Could Go On Singing" or " Man of La Mancha" and even understand the plot/subtext.

I could see "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" appealing mostly to kids. But Releaseing "Man of LA Mancha" in Pan and Scan is like releasing "Lion in Winter" in Pan and Scan and MGM released that title in widescreen.

Just in case MGM is reading this, I always equate Pan and Scan with bargin bin, you know the B titles that nobody buys that sell for $6.99 at Frys. Many of which are released from MGM.

Now if only the members said they wouldn't buy the "Pink Panther" set (Which is in the OAR) just to show MGM we won't stand for Pan and Scan that might make a difference.

Pan and Scan = No sale.

 

[Greg_M]

"There is. Scorsese and others fought the studios, forcing them to place the "This film has been formatted to fit your screen" warning. The warning also has to state if, when it airs on TV, any scenes are edited, or sped up etc"


The studios conveniently got around this by stating the film has been "formatted to fit your screen" , not saying that 2/3 of the picture has been deleted from you screen - Tell it like it is. Formatted to fit you screen could mean anything, hell, even widescreen films are formatted to fit the tv screen.

Oh, but if people were told 2/3's of the picture was missing they might not buy the DVD.

 

[David Lambert]

Wait...I haven't been reading up about Pink Panther due to my connectivity problems (see The Weekly Roundup for details on that).

Tell me about Pink Panther box sets and not being widescreen!

 

[george kaplan]

Wal-Mart has indeed pressured the studios to release pan & scan only titles. And unfortunately many studios are scared of big old Wal-Mart and give in. Of course, many films still get released OAR only, and being big titles, Wal-Mart carries them. They didn't get to be so big by not carrying popular stuff. So it's doubly stupid of studios to cave to them since they only carry big titles, and aren't going to not carry a big OAR only title, but the pressure from them still resonates with the studios for some reason. :frowning:

 

[Greg_M]

DVDFILE: At last he's back. MGM Home Entertainment will paint April in pink, with the announcement of the long-awaited The Pink Panther Film Collection. This six-disc set will include newly-remastered anamorphic widescreen versions of five films in the series The Pink Panther, A Shot in the Dark, The Pink Panther Strikes Again, Revenge of the Pink Panther and the Peter Sellers-less The Trail of the Pink Panther (not included in this collection are The Curse of the Pink Panther, The Son of the Pink Panther, and the upcoming remake, The Birth of the Pink Panther), plus a bonus disc with the new documentary "The Pink Panther Story" and "The Pink Panther Cartoon Theatre," featuring a collection of six award-winning original cartoons and the featurette "Behind the Feline: The Cartoon Phenomenon." Other extras include an audio commentary by Blake Edwards and a trivia track on the first film. Retail will be $69.95 and street date April 6th

 

[Greg_M]

"Wal-Mart has indeed pressured the studios to release pan & scan only titles. And unfortunately many studios are scared of big old Wal-Mart and give in. Of course, many films still get released OAR only, and being big titles, Wal-Mart carries them. They didn't get to be so big by not carrying popular stuff. So it's doubly stupid of studios to cave to them since they only carry big titles, and aren't going to not carry a big OAR only title, but the pressure from them still resonates with the studios for some reason. "

So why don't the Studios release certain films under a "Wal-Mart" banner. Hey, MGM has the midnight collection, the foreign films, etc, why not start a WAL-MART banner and then release two versions of each film. If a film isn't going to sell many copies - release it only in widescreen.

If Wal-mart customers want cheap why not make it obvious that's what the banner says.

 

[Conrad_SSS]

I could give a rat's ass about the PINK PANTHER. Who cares.
Been there. Done that. Seems all MGM knows how to do is JAMES BOND, PINK PANTHER & ROCKY.

I want I COULD GO ON SINGING and I want it in its 2.35:1 OAR.

If the f*cking VHS from 1989 could be Letterboxed, why on earth has MGM regressed so terribly that their DVD 15 years later is pan and scammed! They must truly be morons over there!

 

[David Lambert]

Well, *I* give a rat's ass about Pink Panther. Don't be insulting, please!

But I'm confused, because the info quoted - unless I'm reading too fast and missed something - makes it sound like it's OAR. But the earlier post made it sound like it wasn't. Which is it?

 

[Malcolm R]

Yes, different titles appeal to different people.

I personally couldn't give a rat's ass about I Could Go On Singing and they can release it, not release it, or release it as a flip-book with cassette accompaniment for all I care.

But I know not everyone feels that way about this title. And I remain concerned that it's yet another PS-only release, even if it's one I don't care about.

 

[Conrad_SSS]

I meant no insults to anyone except MGM. Their flagrant disregard for OAR, especially on a Scope film, is the ultimate issue here.

 

[WillG]

I didn't see Wal*Mart NOT carrying "Pirates of the Carribbean" and "Bad Boys II" Two DVDs in OAR only that are selling incredibly well. It's all a bunch of crap. If the film is popular enough and the studio decides to release it in OAR only, they WILL still sell it. If it is not a hugely popular catalog film, then there is no reason not to do it in OAR because Wal*Mart will probably not carry it anyway.

Also, if there is a effort by Wal*Mart to actually bury OAR presentations instead of just Dual Releases, then I bet grounds can be found for a class action lawsuit against Wal*Mart (Call me idelisitc if you will)

 

[William Miller]

I guess there's no Elvis fans around here because it just dawned on me that Follow That Dream is in the group which are suspected to be P&S. This is a 2.35 Panavision movie and that would be a tragedy if it is full frame. As would the 2.35 Judy film.

Full frame 1.85 DVD's are one thing but full frame 2.35 are not acceptable. Never! Ever!

I predict that they will be 2 sided DVD's with the OAR on one side and the P&S on the other side. In fact, I now remember reading about 6 months ago that MGM was going to start doing this again in 2004. They did this a lot in the early days.

 

[Rick P]

Let's not forget MGM's screwup on the TV Series "Jeremiah".

It was filmed 16:9
It was broadcast 16:9 on Showtime HDTV (I saw it with my own eyes, ok?)
It was broadcast letterboxed on (some showings) on regular Showtime.

so what do they do?

It's coming to DVD FOOLSCREEN
the creator (JMS) was not even CONSULTED on the release (and you'll notice him conspiciously missing on the commentary tracks).

they have an ANAMORPHIC, HDTV MASTER IN HAND and still cropped/chopped it.

MGM = (M)isguided (G)oofball (M)orons

 

[David Von Pein]

Yes...but you're leaving out the first portion of the MAR "disclaimer", which states (most of the time): "THIS FILM HAS BEEN MODIFIED FROM ITS ORIGINAL VERSION. IT HAS BEEN FORMATTED...blah...blah...blah"

The word "Modified" is included on most MAR (i.e.: mangled) releases. Like someone said above, though, evidently not ALL of them however.

But, then again, I wonder how many of the ardent video buyers who must "have it fill my whole screen" ever look at these disclaimers (or even care at all that the purchase they're about to make is a version that's been butchered all to heck by pan-and-scanning [especially a 2.35 film])?

I would advocate (big-time!) the inclusion of a "demonstration grid" on ALL DVD packages that illustrates right in the consumer's face the vast differences between OAR and MAR. Like this excellent example, via Digital Bits. .........




After seeing a simple example (like above) of "Widescreen" vs. "Full Frame" on the very P&S package a Wal-Mart customer is holding in his hand (if such "examples" could become a standard feature on packaging), how could ANYBODY want the FF example of this (or any other) movie?!! Just cannot understand how any *informed* video/DVD buyer (that truly DOES understand WS vs. FF) could possibly in a million eons *prefer* the butchered P&S version(s). :frowning: *shakes head in amazement* :frowning:

I recently re-watched the Widescreen VHS tape of "I Could Go On Singing". It has (IMO) a very "classy" and "polished" look and feel about it. Judy is fantastic in this film (essentially just "playing herself"). One of the opening scenes in Dirk Bogarde's doctor's office is very moving (IMO). Loved the dialogue in that scene.

Just the fact that we KNOW there is more to the film than is being shown on a P&S 2.35 movie is enough to drive you nuts! That fact alone would ruin the film for any Widescreen lover of films.

 

[Jon Martin]

Yes. In fact, whenever it airs on TV, the credits are always letterboxed, even if the rest is fullframe.

 

[Jon Martin]

Well can your insiders tell you why Wal Mart carries countless OAR only titles then? If MGM is so afraid of them to not release these OAR, why can other studios get away with it?

 

[Greg_M]

Bottom line : In the year 2004 we shouldn't have to complain about a title being released to DVD in a Pan and Scan only Edition. Something is terribly wrong in the minds of the folks at MGM/UA - Thank God they are being sold - Here's hoping Warner Bros. purchases the studio and lays off all offending employees.