Oliver (1968) (1 Viewer)

[Robin9]

If you look at what got nominated (or won) over the years, the films, actors, and directors that were passed over have often been the ones we now rate the highest. Certainly no one who loves film and knows film history is so naive as to think the best picture Oscar is always the best movie of the year.

Exactly. I'm puzzled that so many people take the Oscars seriously.

 

[Robin9]

There is no rational business case for Limited Editions.

A very confident, forthright assertion.

Twilight Time - and Sony and 20th Century Fox - obviously disagree with you. So too do those boutique companies who put out limited edition CDs.

How much business experience do you have in the DVD/BRD and CD market to make you so confident that you know better than companies operating successfully in today's depressed environment?

 

[Yorkshire]

What it tells me is that Twilight Time doesn't need to sell out its titles in order to turn a profit. Obviously I am not privy to what the break-even point is, but to date they have sold out only a handful of titles and they are still in business.

Quite tellingly As Good As It Gets is still up for (and presumably still selling at) $30. In comparison, at Amazon USA Bucket List is selling for $10.If you're selling a title for three times as much you only need to sell a third of the copies.I seem to remember (but stand to be corrected) that the deal with TT was that they got a few very high profile titles along with a lot of deep catalogue films. I'm guessing OLIVER! was one of the biggies.And then there's a strange thing going on at Amazon. They have it for sale through Amazon Marketplace at 'From $29.99'. One of the suppliers is...Screen Archives Entertainment. But here's the mad thing - Amazon are selling it themselves (listed in small print as 'Sold by Brand New Rarities and Fulfilled by Amazon') at just short of $50.I think most people buy their Blu-ray Discs through Amazon these days. TT appear to have a model where they'll continue to sell at a full price. If OLIVER! doesn't sell out straight away, I bet it'll still be up at Amazon in 2 years' time at $30+, and still selling slowly but steadilly enough.

Just by sheer numbers, there'll be a half dozen people who'll be browsing Amazon every week who decide to search to see if OLIVER! is on Blu-ray Disc, every week for the next 5 years, on and off.Steve W

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Quite tellingly As Good As It Gets is still up for (and presumably still selling at) $30. In comparison, at Amazon USA Bucket List is selling for $10.If you're selling a title for three times as much you only need to sell a third of the copies.I seem to remember (but stand to be corrected) that the deal with TT was that they got a few very high profile titles along with a lot of deep catalogue films. I'm guessing OLIVER! was one of the biggies.And then there's a strange thing going on at Amazon. They have it for sale through Amazon Marketplace at 'From $29.99'. One of the suppliers is...Screen Archives Entertainment. But here's the mad thing - Amazon are selling it themselves (listed in small print as 'Sold by Brand New Rarities and Fulfilled by Amazon') at just short of $50.I think most people buy their Blu-ray Discs through Amazon these days. TT appear to have a model where they'll continue to sell at a full price. If OLIVER! doesn't sell out straight away, I bet it'll still be up at Amazon in 2 years' time at $30+, and still selling slowly but steadilly enough.Just by sheer numbers, there'll be a half dozen people who'll be browsing Amazon every week who decide to search to see if OLIVER! is on Blu-ray Disc, every week for the next 5 years, on and off.Steve W

That's not Amazon selling it. All of those listings are for third party Marketplace sellers who use Amazon's website. Amazon does payment processing and takes a cut (and ships it for the merchant if its a "Fulfilled by.." Listing), but they are not the seller of record.

 

[Yorkshire]

That's not Amazon selling it. All of those listings are for third party Marketplace sellers who use Amazon's website. Amazon does payment processing and takes a cut (and ships it for the merchant if its a "Fulfilled by.." Listing), but they are not the seller of record.

Peter, I think I covered that in my post (the "...fulfilled by Amazon" bit).

The point is that TT don't have to sell all 3,000 copies at once, and they seem to be able to keep titles at full price for far longer than the majors.

Steve W

 

[Johnny Angell]

I simply feel that NO Best Picture should be at risk of being OOP immediately. (or even after a couple of months). There is no rational business case for Limited Editions. Small initial pressings, sure. But any business plan that has built-in un-met demand is a bad plan. Because of Sony's marketing division's prowess and decision-making, Christine is NOT available on Blu-Ray, Night Of The Living Dead is NOT available on Blu-Ray, Fright Night is NOT available on Blu-Ray. I don't think this should ever be part of the conversation for a Best Picture Winner (regardless of how poorly some list-maker feels). And over the past few days I've looked at some of these lists and the films that are lumped in with Oliver at the 'bottom' - How Green Was My Valley, The Sound Of Music, Titanic, Rocky, Forrest Gump, and Gigi. David

Yeah, what he said.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Peter, I think I covered that in my post (the "...fulfilled by Amazon" bit).

The point is that TT don't have to sell all 3,000 copies at once, and they seem to be able to keep titles at full price for far longer than the majors.

Steve W

Well, you did say this:

But here's the mad thing - Amazon are selling it themselves (listed in small print as 'Sold by Brand New Rarities and Fulfilled by Amazon') at just short of $50.

The point is that Amazon is not selling it themselves.

 

[Yorkshire]

Well, you did say this:


The point is that Amazon is not selling it themselves.

Forgive the shorthand. I thought the rest of the post clarified what I meant.

Steve W

 

[Jefferson]

I will certainly purchase this release. Sadly, though (I believe I am correct) it won an Oscar for sound, every home video release of Oliver! has had very lackluster sound. Perhaps better elements do not exist, but it certainly does not sound crisp and detailed like other Columbia releases of that era (Funny Girl). Not sure if TT will do any audio upgrades from the dvd version. I wish someone would, as I have always enjoyed the score and John Green's arrangements. The dvd release also used what I would assume was the original sound mix (?) which hardly makes use of the surround channels at all. It will be interesting to see...er, hear...how it sounds.

 

[JohnMor]

Count me in as someone who's buying this the minute it goes on pre-order. All the Sony transfers for the TT releases have been top-notch, so I have no hesitation about this one. As for quibbling over Sony licensing a best picture winner to TT, I am very grateful. Obviously that means they had no plans to release it themselves.

Another vote for A Man For All Seasons. And maybe even 1776 and To Sir, With Love.

 

[trajan]

Would very much like to see A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS and LORD JIM .

 

[Ethan Riley]

It features in lots and lots of lists ranking the worst Oscar winners. That's a fact. You will see it in Oscar-related websites, classic movie pages and books about the Oscars. It simply doesn't have a good reputation among cinephiles nowadays. It's OK if you like the film, but you're in the minority.

No.

 

[ahollis]

I will certainly purchase this release. Sadly, though (I believe I am correct) it won an Oscar for sound, every home video release of Oliver! has had very lackluster sound. Perhaps better elements do not exist, but it certainly does not sound crisp and detailed like other Columbia releases of that era (Funny Girl). Not sure if TT will do any audio upgrades from the dvd version. I wish someone would, as I have always enjoyed the score and John Green's arrangements. The dvd release also used what I would assume was the original sound mix (?) which hardly makes use of the surround channels at all. It will be interesting to see...er, hear...how it sounds.

I'm hoping that Sony did a new transfer and improved the audio. As I recall both the laserdisc and DVD had the right and left channels reversed. But I could be totally wrong. Also there are a lot of people that enjoy this film. While not the best musical of the 60's era it is not the worst and did very good business in the Theatres. I still have the Souvenir Program from the Roadshow release and saw the film many times. It was a musical success while other big budget musicals were failing around it.

 

[Dick]

Well, as a few members have pointed out, this is all in the eyes of the beholder -- a total matter of opinion.

I love OLIVER!, yet I avoided it for well over a year because I, too, was pissed that it won the Oscar. I finally caught it on a double bill at a drive-in and was blown away. The design, cinematography and performances won me over completely. I had to hit an indoor venue when the film was re-issued in order to see what I had missed at the drive-in, and was blown away a second time. The choreography is outstanding, the music actually pretty memorable for a 60's musical, and despite a rather lackluster performance by Mark Lester as Oliver, the cast was dynamite. I can't take my eyes off Ron Moody whenever he's onscreen (Oscar well-deserved!), and Shani Wallis is gorgeous and dimensional, making her death all the more resonant. Yes, and this was the zenith of child actor Jack Wild, whose cockney sounded perfect and whose character stood out among many more famous actors. The movie stuck to Dickens rather closely if you ignore the musical numbers. I wondered why in hell I had for so long refused to see this.

For the naysayers: this was a hugely popular hit movie in its day. Maltin's rating (if you mostly tend to agree with him) gives it *** 1/2. God, even Pauline Kael loved it . It has not dated, as it was a period film to start with. What's not to like about this film?

Then came the eventual laser disc and DVD releases, and disappointment set in big-time. The PQ and sound were merely mediocre.

Now comes news of the TT release. I couldn't be happier. Thank you Sony, thank you TT (I know it will look stellar!).

 

[Matt Hough]

Of course, Ron Moody was Oscar nominated for Oliver! but did not win that year (Cliff Robertson did, for Charly). Moody did win the Golden Globe for his performance.

 

[bigshot]

When I was a kid, the worst schoolyard taunt a boy could endure was to have his friends point at him, then pretend to hold hats in their hands and sing "Wheeeeerreeee is love?" in a high airy voice. I think you can guess what that meant.

 

[Ethan Riley]

My statement was the objective one. Of course the lists are compilations of subjective opinions. But I'll rephrase again:

Objectively speaking it is often subjectively judged as being one of the weaker Best Picture winners.

Again, all I'm saying - nothing more, nothing less - is that just because Oliver! is a Best Picture winner doesn't mean it's going to sell out rapidly, because as Best Picture winners go it seems to be less liked in general than most.

I just don't see the rush to buy this release along the lines of the horror films that sold out quickly, or the sci-fi/fantasy films that sold out in 6-9 months. Maybe musicals will also be a genre that sells out quickly, but Bye Bye Birdie seems to have sold about the same as the rest of the non-horror/sci-fi films, and that's really the only title to go by so far for genre comparison.

Objectively speaking, I don't give a damn about someone bitchy else's little lists. They're completely meaningless. I also don't care if it sells out or not, as long as I get my copy. That's also an objective statement.

 

[WilliamMcK]

OK I should backtrack and see who has compiled these lists, but anyone who would put How Green Was My Valley near the bottom of any list is not to be taken seriously as a movie fan/cineaste/fan boy/movie queen/film critic/film scholar or what have you.

As for Oliver!, it's frequently unfairly dismissed because it's based on a stage musical... and yet anyone who is familiar with the piece on stage can tell you that it has been thoroughly re-thought for the screen (while remaining reasonably faithful, unlike say, Cabaret). What Carol Reed achieved (IMO) was a perfect amalgamation of David Lean's earlier non-musical film, and Lionel Bart's musical. I'm sure there were other worthier movies that could have won "Best Picture" for 1968 (there are worthier movies every year than the actual "Best Picture" winner), but Oliver! is one of the best of its kind.

 

[battlebeast]

I don't think ANY Best Picture should be limited...

 

[Dick]

Of course, Ron Moody was Oscar nominated for Oliver! but did not win that year (Cliff Robertson did, for Charly). Moody did win the Golden Globe for his performance.

Whoops, you're right of course. But his was a much more entertaining performance than Robertson's. I will adjust my post.