Jump to content

Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Remo Williams DVD - MGM screws up BIG TIME!

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
360 replies to this topic

#21 of 361 OFFLINE   JimmyT


    Stunt Coordinator

  • 54 posts
  • Join Date: May 02 2003

Posted May 25 2003 - 11:48 AM


#22 of 361 OFFLINE   Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted May 25 2003 - 11:56 AM

Another sale lost here. M.
COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists

#23 of 361 OFFLINE   Rodney


    Supporting Actor

  • 565 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 12 2001

Posted May 25 2003 - 12:27 PM

I wish we could get a representative from MGM on here to give us the reason for releasing this film FS. It makes no sense to me. This film has a small following (I remember showing this film when it first came out, and it tanked at the theater), and they are only alienating the ones who would purchase this film. I know I will NOT be buying this one. Thanks MGM, looks like Fox and Paramount will be getting my hard earned ducats!

#24 of 361 OFFLINE   Jacinto


    Second Unit

  • 418 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 08 2002
  • Real Name:Jacinto
  • LocationLittleton, Colorado

Posted May 25 2003 - 12:31 PM

Son of a bitch must pay! This was easily my most anticipated catalog release for this summer. My brother and I absolutely loved this flick in the theater, and I was planning on preordering him a copy for his birthday in July. Now the brilliance of this film will not be passed down to the next generation: both his kids and my kids won't enjoy this one until it's released in its OAR. At least I still have my memory... Thanks MGM.
Chachi Hernandez


#25 of 361 OFFLINE   Rob P S

Rob P S


  • 1,996 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 22 2002
  • Real Name:rob

Posted May 25 2003 - 01:00 PM

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

Oh, well - more money stays in my pocket and out of MGM's.

#26 of 361 OFFLINE   Matthew Brown

Matthew Brown

    Supporting Actor

  • 783 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 19 1999

Posted May 25 2003 - 01:07 PM

I would have picked this one up if it wasn't fullscreen. That's just more money to buy DVD's from any other company but MGM. Matt
Hong Kong DVD Reviews and News

New Jersey Punk Rock

#27 of 361 OFFLINE   Jeremy Anderson

Jeremy Anderson


  • 1,052 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 23 1999

Posted May 25 2003 - 01:52 PM

NO NO NO!!!! ARGH! I have been looking forward to this title since the first hint that it might get released to DVD! Do us a favor, MGM... if you're not going to release it in its original aspect ratio, don't bother releasing it at all. Its existance will only serve to anger those of us for whom the movie is a cult classic.

And I had such high hopes after the fine treatment Buckaroo Banzai received. Posted Image ANOTHER LOST SALE!

#28 of 361 Guest_John Ford_*

Guest_John Ford_*
  • Join Date: --

Posted May 25 2003 - 02:25 PM

ARRGH!!! I hate it when studios do this to my guilty pleasures. First there was "The Shadow" and now "Remo Williams". Who are these people and why are they allowed to breed.
johnfPosted Image Posted Image Posted Image

#29 of 361 OFFLINE   Adam_WM



  • 1,627 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 25 2001

Posted May 25 2003 - 02:28 PM

Well, following Ron's example... F-them.


#30 of 361 OFFLINE   Malcolm R

Malcolm R

    Executive Producer

  • 11,985 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 2002
  • Real Name:Malcolm
  • LocationVermont

Posted May 25 2003 - 02:34 PM

No sale here. While not as big a fan as some here, it was a fun little flick that I was looking forward to picking up. Not anymore. Seems like a massive failure of MGM's market research to me. They obviously don't know their audience.
The purpose of an education is to replace an empty mind with an open mind.

#31 of 361 OFFLINE   ShawnDCarter



  • 21 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 20 2003

Posted May 25 2003 - 02:34 PM

I agree, this is indeed a big letdown. This is one of my HBO favorites that I watched over and over when I was younger. Now the DVD finally arrives...and...FULL FRAME? FULL FRAME? Leave it to MGM to screw it up. MGM certainly does not stand for "Means Great Movies" in my book. They consistently screw things up. This is no exception.
"Thank goodness for THAT!" -Christopher Lee (upon his finding that "The Lord of the Rings" would indeed be a trilogy instead of one or two films)

My DVD CollectionIM: PlaidPhantom

#32 of 361 OFFLINE   Bill Crosthwait

Bill Crosthwait

    Second Unit

  • 279 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 30 2000

Posted May 25 2003 - 03:39 PM

MGM please please reconsider release this movie in its proper OAR. FULLSCREEN = NO SALE

My Collection at DVD Profiler

#33 of 361 OFFLINE   Matt Goddard

Matt Goddard

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 174 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 21 1999

Posted May 25 2003 - 03:50 PM

This has gone from "must-buy" to "must avoid" in a heartbeat.

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

#34 of 361 OFFLINE   Joe Schwartz

Joe Schwartz

    Second Unit

  • 449 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 02 2001

Posted May 25 2003 - 04:05 PM

I already registered my displeasure about this decision on MGM's website a few months ago, but I'll add my comments here. I've been waiting for Remo on DVD for years, but there's no way I'll consider buying it in full screen.

#35 of 361 OFFLINE   Nathan McMahan

Nathan McMahan

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 57 posts
  • Join Date: May 11 1999

Posted May 25 2003 - 04:51 PM

Was the laserdisc widescreen? or is there a widesscreen DVD in another region?

Oh yeah.

Hey MGM.
Bite my shorts!
Morons......Posted Image
It's not my goddamn planet, understand monkeyboy!

#36 of 361 OFFLINE   Greg_D_R


    Stunt Coordinator

  • 221 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 11 2001

Posted May 25 2003 - 04:55 PM

When will MGM realize that catalog titles are NOT for the Joe Six- Pack demographic? This is insane, and it's the same &%#@ they did to Miracle Mile, only that is an even worse offense, because they decided not to use an existing widescreen transfer on "a whim of the marketing department!" Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that MGM was actually in business to MAKE money!

#37 of 361 OFFLINE   Frank Anderson

Frank Anderson


  • 2,670 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 07 1999

Posted May 25 2003 - 07:57 PM

I really like this movie but I am not going to buy a pan and scan version.

Posted Image

#38 of 361 OFFLINE   Inspector Hammer!

Inspector Hammer!

    Executive Producer

  • 11,067 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 15 1999
  • Real Name:John Williamson
  • LocationWilmington, Delaware

Posted May 25 2003 - 07:57 PM

MGM, in the words of Cheun "You move like a babboon...with two clubbed feet!"

You know Cheun don't you, he's one of the characters in the film you just fucked up.

No sale. Posted Image
"That's Jack Bauer!!!!!! He's coming for me!!!!!" - Charles Logan

#39 of 361 OFFLINE   Steve_Knutzen



  • 1,317 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 17 2002

Posted May 25 2003 - 07:59 PM

While I'm as big a fan of the film as a lot of you are, any movie released deserves to be in its OAR. There is no excuse for a full frame transfer of any movie no matter what it is. Movies like Remo Williams are what true movie lovers like everybody here wait patiently for to be released. It is by no means a family title and there are few non-fans that would pick this up without any knowledge of what it is, save for those that get it recommended or J6Ps that see the word "Adventure" in the title. Posted Image Posted Image to MGM for screwing over fans.

Beware MGM. You have incurred the rath of Ron Epstein and the HTF. Watch your back.
"Oh I can hold my breath for a long, long time!"


#40 of 361 OFFLINE   Inspector Hammer!

Inspector Hammer!

    Executive Producer

  • 11,067 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 15 1999
  • Real Name:John Williamson
  • LocationWilmington, Delaware

Posted May 25 2003 - 08:09 PM

What I don't get is why are they so dammed inconsistant!? I mean they make one catalog title OAR, another FOOLSCREEN and then back again.

I don't have Child's Play because they chose to make it FOOLSCREEN only, but then they turn around and do a really great OAR transfer for The Terminator!? (thank God) Posted Image

They also screwed up another of my favorite horror films Pumpkinhead by making it FOOLSCREEN only.

I just thank goodness that Return of the Living Dead is in it's OAR! I guess it was widescreens turn in the rotation with that one. Lucky us. Posted Image

It seems that the only titles they really give the royal treatment to is the James Bond series, probably because those films are MGM's bread and butter franchise, everything else I guess doesn't really matter. Posted Image

They are one schitzo studio that's for certain!
"That's Jack Bauer!!!!!! He's coming for me!!!!!" - Charles Logan

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users