What's new

Warner Archive Launches Streaming Service (1 Viewer)

TonyD

Who do we think I am?
Ambassador
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 1, 1999
Messages
24,231
Location
Gulf Coast
Real Name
Tony D.
I figured out how to put the channel on my roku and I can look through the catalog but when I click play a movie it says not available. So apparently even with th channel you still need the invite touse the channel.
 

TonyD

Who do we think I am?
Ambassador
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 1, 1999
Messages
24,231
Location
Gulf Coast
Real Name
Tony D.
ON YOUR COMPUTER 1)Login to your Roku account at roku.com2)Click on My Account. Under Manage Account, click Add a Private Channel. Enter the code: waibeta ON YOUR ROKU 3)Open the Warner Archive Instant channel. (If the channel does not automatically appear, enter and exit the Roku Channel Store).4)You will be prompted to link your Warner Archive Instant account to your Roku. Click Yes, then follow the onscreen instructions.
 

Camps

Screenwriter
Joined
Jul 17, 2010
Messages
1,099
Real Name
Tom
TonyD said:
ON YOUR COMPUTER 1)Login to your Roku account at roku.com2)Click on My Account. Under Manage Account, click Add a Private Channel. Enter the code: waibeta ON YOUR ROKU 3)Open the Warner Archive Instant channel. (If the channel does not automatically appear, enter and exit the Roku Channel Store).4)You will be prompted to link your Warner Archive Instant account to your Roku. Click Yes, then follow the onscreen instructions.
Very easy-to-follow instructions, Tony, with one gaping omission: You still need an invitation code from WB. They haven't seen fit to send me one either :rolleyes: ... so I and anyone else without a code is SOL for now...
 

Joe Karlosi

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2003
Messages
6,008
Michael Elliott said:
1. Old movies are a small priority all around. These films certainly aren't paying the bills (why they're MOD) and some aren't worth the disc so a cheaper route is obviously going to be streaming.
It's nothing new that old movies have always been a smaller priority in Home Video, and that basic fact has been the case since 1978 or so, when Beta and VHS tapes were first being issued. The difference though is, back then the major companies were still willing to release them on official formats, not special-made "On Demand" knockoffs. And do you know what? The major studios are still wealthy and thriving today! I don't think it's a matter of "old movies not paying the bills". I don't think older movies have EVER been the studios' "bread and butter titles"; of course the newest Blockbusters have always drawn more money and interest among modern day consumers. HOWEVER, there was a time where the majors still issued oldies anyway. The thing is, the major studios should still be able to make Big Buck$ off their MegaTitles, and then tossing in smaller interest oldies as well. The problem is not so much that they're losing a ton of money; it's just that the profits in old obscure films aren't big enough for them to bother. They are only interested in making DOLLAR$, and not NICKELS AND DIMES (even though nickels and dimes are still profits). And yes, I am sure that occasionally the major studios might even LOSE some money on older titles -- but heaven knows, not enough to put those million/billion dollar moguls out of business or in the poor house! With MOD dvd-r's, I don't believe that it's the only way to issue older obscure movies. I think the studios realize that they can maximize profits this way, and it's obvious that the diehard film collectors for the most part have taken the bait and have willingly subscribed to the MOD market. I also think the majors can decide which way the market will go, rather than just following the public's lead. Old movies are being issued mainly on MOD dvd-rs and are getting eliminated from store shelves because that's the way the moguls want to steer the market; not because there aren't still a lot of customers out here who want them. It gives a faux impression that there is no interest in older niche stuff, when it's the companies who are turning the market the way they prefer it.
4. TCM has opened the gates to young people who enjoy this stuff. Again, Tarantino and Scorsese have a big following among young film buffs and they are constantly shining a light on older movies. This allows them to get interested in new things, introduce their friends to new movies and this is what keep classic films alive. The "original" fans of these movies are long dead by now. Your generation picked them up on TV(??) and then home video came along to keep them alive.
There's a difference. We grew up with old movies on TV because there were only five or so channels and no Internet or video games, so it was a natural to watch them. Today, kids have a thousand more channels and choices to occupy their time with, and old black and white movies are not part of their daily existence; they have to go out of their way to look for them.
 

Gary OS

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
5,987
Location
Florida
Real Name
Gary
I think a lot of people are talking past one another in this thread, so perhaps a definition and/or general point is in order so we are all at least speaking the same language (so that even if we disagree about the issues, we understand one another). Streaming - When I read about streaming I'm personally thinking about a service that is being piped into my device, for that moment of viewing, from a server - and is staying there on that server unless I have the ability to download the stream onto my device (preferably a computer so that I can then burn a copy for myself onto a physical disc). To me there is a difference between "Streaming" and "Downloading". You can stream and get a download, and you can download something without streaming in the sense that we are talking about. But you can also, a la Netflix, stream a video without ever having the legal and legit ability to download the stream onto your computer and hereby "own" it in any real sense. And this is where I think the disconnect is coming. Michael Elliott keeps talking like streaming equals owning, but that's not always the case. Unless I can actually download the stream I don't own it, no matter what the studio/company says. If it stays on a server, and can be taken off said server when the contract runs out, then I surely don't "own" it. On top of that, if the server goes down for any reason I can't access what I supposedly "own." So I'm really only renting it in these cases. Big, big difference. The bottom line, to me, is that streaming is fine O-N-L-Y as a secondary option. What I think some are concerned with is the possible day when it becomes the only game in town. Some here don't think that day is coming. I'm not necessarily so confident. I've seen too many things change, by way of technology, in my lifetime to dismiss the thought out of hand that streaming might one day literally replace physical media. I don't think it's chicken little to say it's possible the sky is starting to fall in this area. Frankly, it wouldn't shock me if by 2020 physical media was all but gone. I'm not saying it will go that way, and I'm certainly hoping it doesn't go that way. But I wouldn't be shocked if it did go that way. And that would not be cool - says this 47 year old school guy. Gary "definitely want the option to have a physical copy at all times" O.
 

Gary OS

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
5,987
Location
Florida
Real Name
Gary
By the way, as an aside I forgot to mention that instances have occurred where someone actually bought a copy of a film from Amazon Instant Video only to see it removed from the server and unavailable for viewing. Downloading, with the actual ability to then burn physical media copies, is NOT always assured when we are talking about "streaming" things - even when a person supposedly purchases (as opposed to rents) the video in question. And it's that kind of stuff that makes me leary of a streaming only future. Gary "just my two cents" O.
 

Joe Karlosi

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2003
Messages
6,008
Michael Elliott said:
Let's pretend for a second that on 6/6/13 all physical media was going away. Is there really that much that you want that you don't already have? As with most new things, I think once people try it and see what it is, they're going to love it.
To answer your question, I can concede that I own 90% of everything I really want on DVD or Blu-ray at this point. There are very few things I'm still hankering for. However, there may be new films that I'd want on disc (DJANGO UNCHAINED for starters). If I ever try streaming to rent a movie I just want to check out, I'm sure I'll love the convenience. But for me, I would never, ever love streaming or downloading as a replacement for owning a physical item. I am a collector, and I love the medium as much as the movie.
 

gunthertoody

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jan 8, 2008
Messages
69
Real Name
David
MODs certainly are helping pay the bills. I read where George Feltenstein said Warner's Archive break-even point was around 70 DVDs. Yes 70. It' no wonder they keep them coming. And if I had to choose between physical DVDs and streaming - I'd choose streaming. It's a superior format to watch films. It's why Netflix's streaming customer base is triple their DVD-by-mail base. Of course for purchase, I'll take a physical DVD any day over a download.
 

Joe Karlosi

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2003
Messages
6,008
Gary OS said:
What I think some are concerned with is the possible day when it becomes the only game in town.  Some here don't think that day is coming.  I'm not necessarily so confident.  I've seen too many things change, by way of technology, in my lifetime to dismiss the thought out of hand that streaming might one day literally replace physical media.  I don't think it's chicken little to say it's possible the sky is starting to fall in this area.  Frankly, it wouldn't shock me if by 2020 physical media was all but gone.  I'm not saying it will go that way, and I'm certainly hoping it doesn't go that way.  But I wouldn't be shocked if it did go that way.  And that would not be cool - says this 47 year old school guy. Gary "definitely want the option to have a physical copy at all times" O.
Gary, I'll be 51 this year and I wish to have my physical media collection playable to the day I die (which would be 30 -50 years at the most!). I do think that the Chicken Little Syndrome is a little out of control, personally. I think that this whole streaming thing is a fad, or else something that will co-exist with physcial media. However, if you and I were just to purchase two or three more blu-ray players (and maybe another HDTV or two) and store them away, there wouldn't be all that much to worry about. Because even in the worst case scenario where all physical media "was no more", that wouldn't necessitate that it be no more in YOUR world. I am a big vinyl record fan -- I can still buy new turntables and needles to play my records. There is a small but loyal community of vinyl collectors today ranging from ages 13 to 90. Similarly, you can still be a 16mm film collector and find projectors, bulbs, and repairs -- or cassettes or whatever you prefer -- and continue to immerse yourself in these joys until the day you depart this realm. (As we get older, it's not all that much longer anyway).
 

Nebiroth

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
748
Real Name
Richard Gregory
gunthertoody said:
And if I had to choose between physical DVDs and streaming - I'd choose streaming. It's a superior format to watch DVDs. It's why Netflix's streaming customer base is triple their DVD-by-mail base.
No, streaming is a superior format when it comes to renting. It;s no suprise - streaming, after all, has instant delivery, where renting a physical disc doesn't. That's why more people chose it....for renting. There is no way that streaming is a superior format for viewing - not to DVD and espescially not to BluRay.
 

Gary OS

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
5,987
Location
Florida
Real Name
Gary
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Karlosi
Gary, I'll be 51 this year and I wish to have my physical media collection playable to the day I die (which would be 30 -50 years at the most!). I do think that the Chicken Little Syndrome is a little out of control, personally. I think that this whole streaming thing is a fad, or else something that will co-exist with physcial media. However, if you and I were just to purchase two or three more blu-ray players (and maybe another HDTV or two) and store them away, there wouldn't be all that much to worry about. Because even in the worst case scenario where all physical media "was no more", that wouldn't necessitate that it be no more in YOUR world. I am a big vinyl record fan -- I can still buy new turntables and needles to play my records. There is a small but loyal community of vinyl collectors today ranging from ages 13 to 90. Similarly, you can still be a 16mm film collector and find projectors, bulbs, and repairs -- or cassettes or whatever you prefer -- and continue to immerse yourself in these joys until the day you depart this realm. (As we get older, it's not all that much longer anyway).

I completely agree, Joe. When I talk about dvd going away (and it's only a possibility and really just a hypothetical at this point), I'm not thinking of the players. I'm thinking more about the studios not putting things out on physical media, and choosing instead to go more with streaming. Like you, I have no worries that I wouldn't be able to purchase players to continue enjoying my collections for the rest of my life. If I see that even starting to happen, I will indeed go out and purchase several additional players to keep in storage. So I'm not at all concerned about that part of it. I'm really speaking more about the bigger issue (one that frankly won't affect me too much because I am one of those guys that already owns most of my "holy grails") of the future. I wouldn't like the idea of a streaming only world and hope it doesn't ever happen. But it's all just an academic discussion at this point - thankfully.
Gary "having said all that, I do think our generation has seen more technological advances than one could have scarcely imagined just 40 years ago" O.
 

Richard V

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
2,962
Real Name
Richard
oloc said:
LOL, SUPERIOR ? YOU ARE THE EXACT KIND OF FACTUALLY CHALLANGED SHEEPLE THE ELITITIST AND COMPANIES LOVE PHYISCAL DISCS ( DVD or BLU-RAY or CD or RECORDS) ALL HAVE BETTER AUDIO AND VIDEO QUALITY THAN STREAMING - THAT IS ANON-DENIABLE FACT WHEN YOUR STREAMING GOES OFFLINE (AS IT HAS MANY TIMES) & WHEN THAT COMPANY LOOSES THE RIGHTS TO THAT CONTENT ===== YOU CAN NOT WATCH IT ANYMORE WITH LEGALLY OBTAINED HARD PHYISCAL DISCS THE CONSUMER CAN WATCH IT WHEN HE WANTS SIR GO GET AN EDUCATION BASED IN FACTS NOT MARKETING CRAP
Must you always make personal attacks? Having read several of your posts, it is getting annoying to see you repeatedly belittle other members, please confine yourself to giving your opinion without resorting to personal assaults. I am not a mod here, but I think most of the other posters share this sentiment. Thank you.
 

Ed Lachmann

Screenwriter
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
1,733
Real Name
Edmund Lachmann
I'm on the same page as Joe and Gary with this. I've got walls of physical DVDs and BDs, probably about 5K of them. Truthfully, there are a couple thousand I'd still love to own, most as blu-ray additions of films I particularly care about. This Warner announcement got my goat because it made me feel that film collectors were being treated like lepers forced to the back of the bus, the front being reserved for narcissic snarky technobots only, who serve to burnish the studio's image as a hip relevant entity. Oddly, though, the lions share of HD titles are the sort of things people like me would kill to own, the 20's-50's stuff. It just struck me as a strange way to bring a younger crowd into the mix. It seems more tailored to the particularly annoying sector of my own generation who are glued to their cell phones 24/7 and can't take two steps without whipping out their iPads before zoning off into a neo-psychedelic zombi state. Trying my darndest to avoid drinking the kool-aid and becoming that sort of horrid morlock, I still prefer to buy product. A co-worker who also enjoys a virulent strain of heavy blues rock I also adore suggested a new act , whose $9.99 CD I promptly ordered on Amazon. When he found out, he chastised me and said he would have downloaded his download to iTunes for me for free. I think I surprised him when I said "no thanks, these poor young rockers could buy two Snickers bars or 10 minutes of parking at the Staples Center with that $9.99". That's piracy, example one. The second type is more nuanced. Imagine that Goldman Sachs owns the rights to the entire works of Shakespeare, Charles Dickens and Jack London. Imagine, then, that they will no longer offer these works in book form, but for $20 they will read you the first chapter of the book of your choice. Somehow, you figure out a way to actually get the literature in the book form you've grown to love through some nefarious machinations. It's not as if you had a choice, because Moloch has already made that choice for you. It's not hard to understand how morality can fall to the wayside and one ultimately joins Jean Lafitte and hoists up the jolly roger. After all, you are really more Robin Hood than Robert Rizzo, since there is simply no other way around it. If the Great and Powerful Oz doesn't want stuff like this to happen, then offer the people an alternative, take their money, spend the couple hundred bucks to press a few BDs of titles you ALREADY have telecined in 1080 and make everyone happy. For good measure, do the same thing with that rare television show that people have been asking for for years now. What's so hard or economically unfeasible about that? Or, just spend another 20 mil on another Eddie Murphy romantic comedy and see how that turns out.
 

gunthertoody

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jan 8, 2008
Messages
69
Real Name
David
I meant superior in the overall customer experience, not simply viewing a single movie. Renting DVDs by mail means hoping you get what's in your queue, hoping it gets to you unbroken and hoping the postal service doesn't lose it. It was superior to blockbuster 10 years ago because Netflix's selection dwarfed brick and mortars. Now, streaming gives viewers thousands of TV shows and films with the click of a few buttons. For renting, streaming is certainly the way to go.
 

ahollis

Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
8,852
Location
New Orleans
Real Name
Allen
It all depends on what the consumer is comfortable with. My parents would not stream a tile for anything in the world. They don't understand it, but rent by mail through Blockbuster for it is easy on them and they don't care what comes when as long as it is in their que. I have an employee who he and his wife do not have cable but streams what they want to see from Netflix. They are very happy and they will always stream. Me, I have tried streaming and had pleasent results, but my genitic make-up tells me to collect. I look at streaming as just another revenue avenue for the studios. It will be an option for the ones that want to see a WAC title but do not wish to pay $18.99 for it or wait for the sales that seem to pop up with regularity now. One of the concerns I have with streaming is not the content provider for they will charge what the market provides, but the Internet cost that will surely go up due to an increase in streaming. The more you use the bandwidth the more it will eventually cost. That is cost that is not being figured into this argument. I really do think that that there is room for both, just depending what the person is comfortable with. I am not sure any of this comparing apples to apples but this sure is an interesting read as long as it is civil.
 

Michael Elliott

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
8,054
Location
KY
Real Name
Michael Elliott
This thread has been blown all over the place but Gary brought up the difference between streaming and downloading, which, as he said, some are mixing up. The only stuff I've ever bought were the Scooby Doo titles and each of them allowed me to make a DVD-R copy as well as having it play on my systems. Was this important to me buying? Not really but I'm sure many will enjoy having a back-up that they can play in their car, at a babysitter's house or whatever. Not to mention, as a parent he has pretty much ruined all of his store-bought, official discs because he wants to touch them, play with them and so on. I'm sure I'm not the first parent who has had this happen so it's actually quite nice having his Scooby collection somewhere where he can't actually hurt the product. As I said on page one, streaming isn't meant for collectors so I guess it's easy to see why the collectors are the ones being so negative about the format. I still don't see the point until the day comes when studios say they want no more collectors. I doubt that's going to happen and even if it does, I'd say most people have been collecting a while and will find what they want. I think my good friend has been pretty good at buying LPs that were out of print decades ago. I used to buy everything released but those days are long gone so I have no interest in collecting. The only time I buy something is when I want to see a new extra and afterwards I sell the disc. Still, with the number of films I watch, it would be impossible (space and money) to collect them all. I don't see how anyone could call streaming a "fad" when every piece of equipment has it as a selling point and so many studios and companies are jumping in on it. People, in today's high tech world, want something easy. Going to Blockbuster, watching a movie then having to drive it back was killed because it was easier to put titles in a queue, have them mail them and then you mail them back. Something easier has come along and now people are preferring it. Again, if you only want to watch a select group of titles then streaming isn't where it needs to be for you to enjoy it. But for those who like watching a wide variety of things or those who just want to kick back with friends or family members and watch something, it's great fun and easy. Not to mention the fact that you can take 20,000+ movies with you no matter where you go. Calling it a fad somewhat reminds me of people saying cell phones were just a fad. Plus, streaming used to look bad, say three years ago but today I'd say with the right set-up you could fool anyone with a stream compared to Blu-ray or HD stations. Again, I just upgraded to a 60-inch television and I was a little worried about the quality but from what I sampled last night it looks terrific. Again, all of them depend on the source material but all the HD material out there to view, I really don't think most people are going to be able to tell the difference if we did a Pepsi Challenge.
 

Michael Elliott

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
8,054
Location
KY
Real Name
Michael Elliott
TonyD said:
ON YOUR COMPUTER 1)Login to your Roku account at roku.com2)Click on My Account. Under Manage Account, click Add a Private Channel. Enter the code: waibeta ON YOUR ROKU 3)Open the Warner Archive Instant channel. (If the channel does not automatically appear, enter and exit the Roku Channel Store).4)You will be prompted to link your Warner Archive Instant account to your Roku. Click Yes, then follow the onscreen instructions.
Thanks for the directions. Roku sends me daily e-mails but they haven't even mentioned this Warner station yet. I'm curious as to who got the invites and when it's going wide.
 

Cees Alons

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 31, 1997
Messages
19,789
Real Name
Cees Alons
Originally Posted by Richard V
Must you always make personal attacks? Having read several of your posts, it is getting annoying to see you repeatedly belittle other members, please confine yourself to giving your opinion without resorting to personal assaults. I am not a mod here, but I think most of the other posters share this sentiment. Thank you.
Yes, we explicitly shared that sentiment.
Cees
 

Jeff Willis

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
3,386
Location
Dallas TX
I typically am on the pro-physical media side of these debates but I can see some advantages of the streaming era, provided that it doesn't replace dvd releases of the same products. As a collector of primarily older tv series on dvd, that point is what I'm watching as the streaming market expands. I've been told that WBA is good at responding to questions regarding upcoming mod dvd releases. Has anyone asked them about the 2 shows that are being offered as streaming, but not yet released on dvd (Hawaiian Eye, 77 Sunset Strip) ? I'd be interested in reading WBA's reply to that question. Regarding the overall streaming vs physical media debate, well, it's another one of the 'hot button' topics here, along with PAL speedup's, MOD pricepoints, etc. Collectors are passionate about topics such as this one, and in many cases, the best we can achieve is an "agreement to disagree" scenario. However, is should be noted that debates such as the one here are certainly 2-way. I've seen this same scene play out many times over the years at this forum. Where one member sees "negativity" towards the streaming topic, we also see sarcasm originating from that side of the aisle, so just something to consider here. I'm definitely not supportive of the "shouter" poster here, pertaining to the pro-physical media stance, but I also see the other side's sarcasm directed at those of us that are on the same side of the debate. Another point to consider, athough I'm referring to another studio with this example: One of my favorite tv series, the last few seasons (the 1st 2 seasons of this particular show had previously been released on dvd), is only available via streaming. This is one example of some concern that the physical-media collectors see, where we may not see a dvd release of a series due to the advent of the streaming market. Michael, Thanks for providing info on the "owning downloading" part of this discussion. Your point, about being able to burn one's own dvd copy of a purchased download for one's library, is a big point of interest for me as a dvd collector. This is something that I had assumed, given the major studio's history of locking out/encrypting, region-coding, etc, that this would also be prohibited due to imbedded encoding into purchased downloads. My question is, are other studios as supportive of private dvd collectors? In other words, are all purchased downloads (I'm basically interested in tv-series downloads) unlocked for legally-purchased customers to burn their own dvd copies of the purchased downloads? Living in Dallas, I'm not a conspirator, as I didn't believe in multi-shooters in Dealy Plaza in '63 ;), but I also am wary of this topic as it pertains to lockout's, region coding, etc, since I've been around a few years and I recall the "Betamax" Supreme Court case. I don't automatically give major studios the benefit of the doubt when it comes to consumer-friendly pov's when it pertains to options with a legally-purchased product, ie, download. Case in point can also be made for the HDMI / HDCP compliancy. Many home theater enthusiasts know what I'm referring to, that "HDCP" (High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection) issue which has caused headaches among consumers when they're attempting to interface HDMI home theater equipment. I realize that this is off-topic but it does relate to the overall issue, locking out legal purchasers of a studio's products. Bottom line for me here is that, so long as the streaming market doesn't negate dvd releases, and so long as, if one legally purchases a download of a movie or show that's also available streamed, and can burn a copy of said product for their physical collection, then I'm not opposed to the streaming market growth and think that it's great for those that are into the mobile-player scene.
 

ahollis

Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
8,852
Location
New Orleans
Real Name
Allen
Both 77 Sunset Strip, Hawiian Eye along Surfside 6 and Bourbon Street Beat have had WAC responses on Facebook. Those answers were we would love to put these out but there are many music rights issues. We are working on them. Now whether those rights have been cleared up or it they are permissible for streaming is another question.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,710
Messages
5,121,090
Members
144,146
Latest member
SaladinNagasawa
Recent bookmarks
0
Top