-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Is "The Time Machine" (1960) ever coming to Blu-ray?

Warner

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

#81 of 128 OFFLINE   Charles Smith

Charles Smith

    Extremely Talented Member

  • 4,210 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 27 2007
  • LocationNor'east

Posted June 26 2012 - 12:57 AM

What the....???


Interesting about the matinee, though.  When I first saw The Time Machine in a theater, it was one of a children's matinee series that a local theater ran every summer.  I always associate this film, and just a couple of others, with those very matinees.



#82 of 128 OFFLINE   Douglas R

Douglas R

    Screenwriter

  • 1,847 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 30 2000
  • Real Name:Doug
  • LocationLondon, United Kingdom

Posted June 26 2012 - 01:04 AM

I stumbled across the "MGM Children's Matinee" reissue poster recently, and found it unintentionally hilarious... Talk about false advertising!

I think we can safely assume that the artist didn't bother to see the film :)

#83 of 128 OFFLINE   Tommy R

Tommy R

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 150 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 17 2011

Posted October 07 2012 - 04:33 PM

The big Warner announcment came and went, and no mention of The Time Machine. Any thought on if it could still get a blu ray release next year?

#84 of 128 ONLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg

  • 7,215 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted October 07 2012 - 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by Tommy R 

The big Warner announcment came and went, and no mention of The Time Machine. Any thought on if it could still get a blu ray release next year?


The Warner 90th announcement definitely did not list all the catalog titles they will release in 2013. I don't know if The Time Machine will make it out, but there's no reason to think it won't because of that press release.


"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#85 of 128 OFFLINE   Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer

  • 11,352 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted October 07 2012 - 05:50 PM

I thought you were saying the announcement came and went that The Time Machine was coming to blu ray and no one took notice or mentioned yet. I hope it is indeed on the list of titles still to come.

#86 of 128 OFFLINE   Tommy R

Tommy R

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 150 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 17 2011

Posted October 08 2012 - 02:18 PM

I guess with the fact that it was an MGM movie originally that it makes sense they wouldn't put it with their Warner 90th Anniversary collection. I'm still hoping it can get a blu ray soon though.

#87 of 128 OFFLINE   Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer

  • 11,310 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted October 08 2012 - 02:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy R 

I guess with the fact that it was an MGM movie originally that it makes sense they wouldn't put it with their Warner 90th Anniversary collection. I'm still hoping it can get a blu ray soon though.
Oh, no, Warners is putting out plenty of MGM films as part of their 90th anniversary celebration.

#88 of 128 OFFLINE   Tommy R

Tommy R

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 150 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 17 2011

Posted October 08 2012 - 04:41 PM

Oh, no, Warners is putting out plenty of MGM films as part of their 90th anniversary celebration.

Ah, I see. I'm not a cinephile enough to have known how many of those films were Warner originals or aquired from MGM. That makes it even a bigger bummer The Time Machine got neglected.:(

#89 of 128 ONLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg

  • 7,215 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted October 08 2012 - 06:16 PM

Again, it could very well still come out in 2013. Warner isn't gonna announce every 2013 release they have planned in a press release in October of 2012.


"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#90 of 128 OFFLINE   cineMANIAC

cineMANIAC

    Screenwriter

  • 1,910 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 03 2008
  • Real Name:Luis
  • LocationNew York City

Posted October 08 2012 - 06:32 PM

It could come out next year. It could also be "back-burned" in favor of the new Paramount titles. As popular a film as it may appear to be I get the impression the studio has no interest in going Blu with TIME MACHINE. 6 years into the format and still nothing...
 

 


#91 of 128 OFFLINE   Nelson Au

Nelson Au

    Executive Producer

  • 11,352 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 1999

Posted October 08 2012 - 07:07 PM

Is it a George Pal estate issue? I know we've recently gotten new remastered DVDs of The War of the Worlds from Paramount when the Tom Cruise version came out. But I don't think a blu ray ever came out of the 1953 version. So hopefully there's no related issue here with Warner. I doubt the estate of George Pal is an issue, but I wondered.

#92 of 128 ONLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg

  • 7,215 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted October 09 2012 - 05:25 AM

Originally Posted by cineMANIAC 

It could come out next year. It could also be "back-burned" in favor of the new Paramount titles. As popular a film as it may appear to be I get the impression the studio has no interest in going Blu with TIME MACHINE. 6 years into the format and still nothing...


Why would you assume that? Warner won't be scheduling/prepping the Paramount titles. That's still Paramount's job.


"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#93 of 128 ONLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg

  • 7,215 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted October 09 2012 - 05:26 AM

Originally Posted by Nelson Au 

Is it a George Pal estate issue? I know we've recently gotten new remastered DVDs of The War of the Worlds from Paramount when the Tom Cruise version came out. But I don't think a blu ray ever came out of the 1953 version. So hopefully there's no related issue here with Warner.
I doubt the estate of George Pal is an issue, but I wondered.


The DVD was re-issued just 2 years ago, so I doubt there are any rights issues. Warner just hasn't got around to it on Blu-ray, just like several other titles. There's only so much they can release at one time.


"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#94 of 128 OFFLINE   cineMANIAC

cineMANIAC

    Screenwriter

  • 1,910 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 03 2008
  • Real Name:Luis
  • LocationNew York City

Posted October 09 2012 - 05:46 AM

There's only so much they can release at one time

Which is what I was talking about. They haven't gotten around to releasing Time Machine on Blu and now they're taking on 600 of another studios' films so they'll have even less time. Even if Paramount are the ones prepping the titles with Warner just distributing, it's still possible some lesser Warner titles will be put on the back burner because of this deal.
 

 


#95 of 128 ONLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    captveg

  • 7,215 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted October 09 2012 - 06:03 AM

Originally Posted by cineMANIAC 


Which is what I was talking about. They haven't gotten around to releasing Time Machine on Blu and now they're taking on 600 of another studios' films so they'll have even less time. Even if Paramount are the ones prepping the titles with Warner just distributing, it's still possible some lesser Warner titles will be put on the back burner because of this deal.


Not really. Warner has its own remastering/authoring schedule that will continue. Their marketing department will have more responsibility in packaging Paramount titles, but that's about it.


If anything, it was the licensing of the ~70 Samuel Goldwyn titles that would have slowed down Warner's release schedule for previously owned titles, but I've seen no evidence of that if Jan/Feb '13 announcements are any indication...


"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#96 of 128 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Join Date: --

Posted October 10 2012 - 05:49 AM

I think a few of us are surprised because its too good of a film to not at least had a Blu release as of yet. It is one of the best if not the best Time Travel movie, and one of the best science fiction films, at least in the top 10. I think it will come sooner or later. If Warner has War of the Worlds now, maybe they will release them both together *Time* will tell :)

#97 of 128 OFFLINE   benbess

benbess

    Screenwriter

  • 1,833 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 07 2009

Posted October 10 2012 - 11:50 AM

I think a few of us are surprised because its too good of a film to not at least had a Blu release as of yet. It is one of the best if not the best Time Travel movie, and one of the best science fiction films, at least in the top 10. I think it will come sooner or later. If Warner has War of the Worlds now, maybe they will release them both together *Time* will tell :)

I agree. The best time travel movie ever made, imho.

#98 of 128 OFFLINE   Hal F

Hal F

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 127 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 05 2005

Posted October 10 2012 - 02:35 PM

I agree. The best time travel movie ever made, imho.

Personally I'd give that honor to Slaughterhouse-Five. In any case, I dearly wish both of these films make it to blu ray soon as thy are both favorites of mine.

#99 of 128 OFFLINE   Ejanss

Ejanss

    Screenwriter

  • 1,454 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 23 2012

Posted October 10 2012 - 04:42 PM

Personally I'd give that honor to Slaughterhouse-Five. .

Nnnno. (I'd say "Best Kurt Vonnegut movie", but that's only because the other movies would melt their projectors.) Time Machine has the most earnestness of any time-travel or HG Wells movie, but the main obstacle to Warner releasing it isn't "importance" or "competition", it's the fact that Warner is no pal of Pal, after "Tom Thumb" and "Seven Faces of Dr. Lao" got heave-ho'ed to the Warner Archive Prison Colony for the crime of being Old and not selling enough on DVD. ("The Power" and "Doc Savage" were there already.) Now, it's just a question of whether Warner considers Time Machine to be "just another outdated George Pal movie", or a viable classic, but that's going to take a long time for them to decide. I'm guessing some time before or after they reach a decision on "Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm", and go get in line over on THAT thread. :(

#100 of 128 OFFLINE   Martin Teller

Martin Teller

    Screenwriter

  • 2,414 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 24 2006

Posted October 11 2012 - 03:34 AM

IMHO, Mother Night > Slaughterhouse Five





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Warner

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users